Performance analysis of variable rate multicarrier transmission schemes over LMS channel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increasing demand for increased coverage area, higher QoS, ubiquitous availability, flexibility and expandability, Land Mobile Satellite (LMS) multimedia communication is gaining popularity over existing Land Mobile Terrestrial (LMT) communication. This paper presents a comparative study of GO-OFDMA and VSL MC-CDMA variable rate transmission scheme over L and Ka-band LMS channel. For both the schemes, four variable rate classes employing 15 users are considered. It is shown that, for both the frequency bands, the BER performance of GO-OFDMA scheme is better than that of VSL MC-CDMA for all the different data rate class of users. Though, for Ka-band, the performance of both the schemes is relatively poor than L-band. Also, the performance of both the schemes for different elevation angles are illustrated and analyzed. Later, the composite signal PAPR performance of both the transmission schemes is shown and compared. It is observed that, the PAPR performance of GO-OFDMA scheme is better than VSL MC-CDMA. Hence GO-OFDMA scheme is a suitable candidate for variable rate communication over LMS channel.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".