MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162615671 · doi:10.1109/isit.2003.1228409

A subspace-based active user identification scheme for cdma ad hoc networks

2003· article· en· W2162615671 on OpenAlexaff
De Xu Lin, Teng Joon Lim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Communication Networks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIdentifierCode (set theory)Wireless ad hoc networkNetwork packetTransmitterNode (physics)Code division multiple accessComputer networkHadamard codeWirelessTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel spreading code scheme, Transmitter-Receiver-Based Code, for wire- less ad hoc networks. A subspace-based active user identification algorithm based on the proposed spreading code design is introduced. The perfor- mance of the active user identifier is also studied by investigating the false alarm rate Pj and miss rate P, with respect to the identifier threshold value dth. I. INTRODUCTION In a non-centralized CDMA ad hoc network where trans- missions between any pairs of nodes are allowed, designing a good spreading code scheme is challenging. Simple code schemes such as receiver-based code or transmitter-based code are either susceptible to packet collisions or require high com- plexity receivers (l). We propose a novel spreading code de- sign, the Transmitter-Receiver-Based Code (TRBC), that is collision free and also enables each receiver to identify and de- code the packets transmitted to itself, while suppressing the interfering packets blindly. For the TRBC code, each node in the network is assigned two unique binary (fl's) spreading codes wm and pm (m = 1, . . . , M) of processing gain N. The transmission from node i to j uses spreading code s,,j = wi 0 p3, where o denotes the Hadamard (or element-wise) product of two matrices.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Networks ResearchFrench-language works237,207