MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Capacity-Achieving Distributions for the Discrete-Time Poisson Channel—Part II: Binary Inputs

2014· article· en· W2166346249 on OpenAlexaff
Jihai Cao, Steve Hranilovic, Jun Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinary numberPoisson distributionChannel (broadcasting)Current (fluid)Channel capacityMathematicsApplied mathematicsBinary Independence ModelTopology (electrical circuits)Work (physics)Probability mass functionMathematical optimizationComputer scienceProbability distributionStatistical physicsAlgorithmPhysicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discrete-time Poisson (DTP) channels exist in many scenarios including space laser communication systems which operate over long distances and which can be corrupted by reflected and scattered light. Through simulation, binary-input distributions have been observed to be optimal in many cases, however, little analytical work exists on conditions for optimality or the form of optimal signalling. In this second part, the general properties of Part I are extended to the case of DTP channels where binary-inputs are optimal. Necessary and sufficient conditions on the optimality of binary (i.e. two mass point) distributions are presented by leveraging the general properties of DTP capacity-achieving distributions. Closed-form expressions of the capacity-achieving distributions are derived in several important special cases including zero dark current and for high dark current. Numerical results are presented to elucidate the developed analytical work.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207