MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156019666 · doi:10.1109/issse.2007.4294542

Binary Chirp Signals in - Mixture Noise: Coherent and Noncoherent Detection

2007· article· en· W2156019666 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Kadri, Raveendra K. Rao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaussian noiseChirpNoise (video)Binary numberAdditive white Gaussian noiseSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Probability density functionAlgorithmDetection theoryModulation (music)SIGNAL (programming language)GaussianComputer scienceSpeech recognitionMathematicsAcousticsPhysicsStatisticsDetectorTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceWhite noiseOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The detection of weak binary chirp signals in isin-mixture noise environment is addressed. Both coherent and noncoherent reception cases are treated. Optimum weak signal receiver structures are derived and analyzed. Closed-form expressions for bit error probabilities of these receivers are derived, and the theoretical bit error rates are illustrated as a function of the modulation parameters, signal-to-noise ratio, detection sample size, and parameters of the first-order probability density of the noise. A comparison of the performances of coherent and noncoherent receivers is also presented. The noise environment is modeled as Gaussian-Gaussian mixture model.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207