MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338352961 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2016.2592519

Bandlimited Optical Intensity Modulation Under Average and Peak Power Constraints

2016· article· en· W2338352961 on OpenAlexafffund
Dingchen Zhang, Steve Hranilovic

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBandlimitingClipping (morphology)AmplitudeBandwidth (computing)Intensity modulationMathematicsPulse-amplitude modulationSpectral densityAmplitude modulationOptical communicationOpticsPhysicsPhase modulationFrequency modulationComputer scienceMathematical analysisFourier transformTelecommunicationsStatisticsPulse (music)Detector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bandlimited optical intensity channels, arising in applications such as visible light communications, require that all signals satisfy a bandwidth constraint as well as average, peak, and non-negativity amplitude constraints. In this paper, a 2-D signal space for bandlimited optical intensity channels is presented. A novel feature of this model is that the non-negativity and peak constraints are relaxed, and the signal space parameterizes the probability of the negative or peak amplitude excursions in the output. Although the intensity channel only supports non-negative amplitudes, the impact of clipping on system performance is shown to be negligible if the likelihood of the negative excursion is small. A tractable approximation using finite series is used to accurately compute the probability of clipping under average and peak optical power constraints. The optical power and spectral efficiencies using hexagonal lattice constellations are computed. Schemes designed in this paper have higher average and peak optical power gains than $M$ -ary pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) using previously established techniques for spectral efficiencies greater than 2.5 and 3.5 bits/s/Hz, respectively. For high spectral efficiency, e.g., greater than 6 bits/s/Hz, the proposed scheme attains a more than 2-dB average and peak optical power gain over 16-PAM using the previous approaches.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207