MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321848620 · doi:10.1109/twc.2015.2505315

Novel Compressed Sensing-Based Channel Estimation Algorithm and Near-Optimal Pilot Placement Scheme

2015· article· en· W2321848620 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Zhang, R. Venkatesan, Octavia A. Dobre, Cheng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingMutual coherenceAlgorithmComputer scienceOrthogonal frequency-division multiplexingComputational complexity theoryChannel (broadcasting)Matching pursuitMean squared errorCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Bit error rateMatrix (chemical analysis)MathematicsDecoding methodsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel recovery algorithm based on sparsity adaptive matching pursuit (SaMP) and a new near-optimal pilot placement scheme, for compressed sensing (CS)-based sparse channel estimation in orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) communication systems. Compared with other state-of-the-art recovery algorithms, the proposed algorithm possesses the feature of SaMP of not requiring a priori knowledge of the sparsity level, and moreover, adjusts the step size adaptively to approach the true sparsity level. Furthermore, we focus on the pilot pattern design in sparse channel estimation. Although a brute-force search guarantees the optimal pilot pattern, it is prohibitive to examine all possibilities due to high computational complexity. It is known that by minimizing the mutual coherence of the measurement matrix when the signal is sparse on the unitary discrete Fourier transform (DFT) matrix, the optimal set of pilot locations is a cyclic difference set (CDS). Based on this, we propose an efficient near-optimal pilot placement scheme in cases where CDS does not exist. Simulation results show that the proposed channel estimation algorithm, with the new pilot placement scheme, offers a better tradeoff between the performance-in terms of mean-squared-error (MSE) and bit-error-rate (BER)-and complexity, when compared to other estimation algorithms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations55
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207