MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158410938 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2010.2080295

OFDM With Iterative Blind Channel Estimation

2010· article· en· W2158410938 on OpenAlexaff
S. Alireza Banani, Rodney G. Vaughan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingSubcarrierChannel (broadcasting)Robustness (evolution)AlgorithmKalman filterComputer scienceBit error rateElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)StatisticsEngineeringMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new blind channel estimation technique is presented for uncoded orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) systems. Instead of using pilots to sound the channel, a decision algorithm first makes primary estimates of the data symbol for each subcarrier based on a constrained linear minimum mean square error (MMSE) criterion. Then, these estimates are applied to optimal MMSE channel estimation. The technique requires only one value from the time–frequency correlation of the channel transfer function. Performance is evaluated by simulation so that comparison can be made with known optimal coherent/differential detection. Compared with known decision-directed Kalman-based estimation and two pilot-aided OFDM schemes (block pilots and comb pilots), the presented technique performs better for regions with mid to high signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Its robustness to the time variation of the channel is also quantified by simulation, showing only small degradation in performance relative to the quasistatic case of wireless local area network (WLAN) systems. Finally, the impact of covariance assumptions in the channel modeling is quantified using simulation, offering a feel for the performance with mismatch between the channel model and the receiver assumptions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207