A Comparison Study of Three Power-Line Communication Techniques in Low Signal-to-Noise Ratio Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this research is on the fundamental noise performance properties of three modern power-line communication (PLC) techniques: direct-sequence spread spectrum (DSSS), orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) and the recently proposed Ergodic Chaotic Parameter Modulation (ECPM). The ubiquitous power-line has been utilized as a physical layer for building communications mainly because of the availability of a pre-installed infrastructure. However, the power-line channel can be significantly corrupted by both multipath distortion and external interference in the form of narrowband noise. As a result, the three proposed PLC techniques mentioned above have been specifically suggested due to their ability to perform in difficult channel conditions. In this study, we assess DSSS, OFDM and ECPM in low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions using three noise types: additive white Gaussian noise and two forms of narrowband noise which can be attributed to radio frequency ingress and switching devices connected to the power-line.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".