MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150790806 · doi:10.1109/cnsr.2005.51

Rapid Prototyping Hardware Platforms for the Development and Testing of OFDM Based Communication Systems

2005· article· en· W2150790806 on OpenAlexaff
C Jamieson, Scott H. Melvin, Jacek Ilow

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBasebandSoftware-defined radioDigital signal processingField-programmable gate arrayTransceiverEmbedded systemOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingComputer hardwareFPGA prototypeWirelessSoftwareComputer architectureTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implementation of modern digital transceivers requires an expertise in numerous fields. Conventional transceiver design methods are no longer sufficient to guarantee a fast conversion from initial concept to final product. Moreover, in the testing phase, system simulations alone cannot provide the full insight into the system parameters and performance, especially at the RF stages, where the modeling of power amplifier non-linearities is a highly complex task. To address these design gaps, this paper utilizes software radio solutions. Specifically, it elaborates on transceiver architectural methods at the baseband involving hardware/software partitioning, as well as automatic digital signal processing (DSP) coding strategies that allow for rapid prototyping, testing and verification of algorithms developed in the design simulation stages. In particular, DSP processor and field programmable gate array (FPGA)-based testbeds are described that offer different advantages in the transceiver rapid prototyping methodology. These testbeds were designed to eventually be used in experiments geared towards demonstrating the effectiveness of compensation algorithms for wireless systems like wireless local area network (WLAN) and digital audio broadcasting (DAB), where orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (OFDM) signaling is deployed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207