MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168973490 · doi:10.1109/iscc.2005.80

Hybrid Methods for Blind Adaptive Equalization: New Results and Comparisons

2005· article· en· W2168973490 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlind equalizationComputer scienceAdaptive equalizerAlgorithmWeightingHybrid algorithm (constraint satisfaction)QAMConstellationEqualization (audio)Quadrature amplitude modulationDecoding methodsArtificial intelligenceBit error rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes two new hybrid blind algorithms based on a new radius-adjusted approach for QAM signal constellations and presents a comprehensive survey of hybrid methods for blind adaptive equalization. The proposed hybrid blind algorithms define static circular regions around symbol points that correspond to a specific weighting factor and stepsize, which optimize the equalizer tap update based on the adaptation phase. Hybrid methods are discussed for the constant modulus algorithm (CMA), improved transfer to the decision-directed (DD) algorithm, and dual-mode hybrid algorithms. Comparisons are made between the proposed algorithms and related hybrid methods, and it is shown that the new algorithms lead to enhanced performance with minimal added complexity.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207