MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166280974 · doi:10.1504/ijaacs.2013.056618

On the contribution of power variance in PAPR reduction for OFDM signals

2013· article· en· W2166280974 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Autonomous and Adaptive Communications Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPAPR reduction in OFDM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingReduction (mathematics)Computer sciencePower (physics)Variance (accounting)Argument (complex analysis)TelecommunicationsElectronic engineeringMathematicsEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In various literatures, it has been argued that the power variance (PV) can be used as a sound model of peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) for decisions aimed at reducing the power of the transmitted orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) signals. Hence, it has been argued in the past that the PV is a good measure when it comes to power efficiency of OFDM signals. We argue that this may not be always true and that the PV-based power reduction may give misleading results in efforts aimed at PAPR reduction. We support our argument using simulation results. Furthermore, we show that the PV-based comparison in selected mapping reduction technique gives a degraded PAPR performance compared to the actual PAPR-based comparison.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.240 · 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