Differential Amplitude Pulse-Position Modulation for Indoor Wireless Optical Communications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a novel differential amplitude pulse-position modulation (DAPPM) for indoor optical wireless communications. DAPPM yields advantages over PPM, DPPM, and DH-PIM in terms of bandwidth requirements, capacity, and peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR). The performance of a DAPPM system with an unequalized receiver is examined over nondispersive and dispersive channels. DAPPM can provide better bandwidth and/or power efficiency than PAM, PPM, DPPM, and DH-PIM depending on the number of amplitude levels and the maximum length of a symbol. We also show that, given the same maximum length, DAPPM has better bandwidth efficiency but requires about and more power than PPM and DPPM, respectively, at high bit rates over a dispersive channel. Conversely, DAPPM requires less power than DH-PIM . When the number of bits per symbol is the same, PAM requires more power, and DH-PIM less power, than DAPPM. Finally, it is shown that the performance of DAPPM can be improved with MLSD, chip-rate DFE, and multichip-rate DFE.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".