MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330545593 · doi:10.1109/lawp.2015.2487381

60-GHz Statistical Channel Characterization for Wireless Data Centers

2015· article· en· W2330545593 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Zakarya Zaaimia, R. Touhami, Larbi Talbi, Mourad Nedil, M.C.E. Yagoub

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPath lossExtremely high frequencyChannel (broadcasting)Interference (communication)Radio propagation modelLog-distance path loss modelLink budgetComputer scienceWirelessShadow mappingDelay spreadSoftware deploymentElectronic engineeringRadio propagationComputer networkFadingTelecommunicationsEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter presents 60-GHz radio channel measurements and characterization in a productivity data center. Path loss and delay spread are statistically modeled for possible use-cases corresponding to potential deployment scenarios in a wireless data center (WDC). Models behaviors are then used to highlight the propagation differences across use-cases. It was found that most use-cases are characterized by a rich scattering channel and sub-free-space path loss exponent values. Compared to common indoor environments, delay spread and path loss values suggest a better link budget at higher distances and possibly higher interference in dense deployment scenarios. The reported models and key propagation behaviors are useful for practical system design and evaluation of WDC millimeter-wave links.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation LettersSame topicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and ModelingFrench-language works237,207