MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727434010 · doi:10.1049/iet-opt.2016.0132

Use of Gaussian beam divergence to compensate for misalignment of underwater wireless optical communication links

2017· article· en· W2727434010 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Vali, David G. Michelson, Zabih Ghassemlooy, Masood Omoomi, Hamed Noori

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Optoelectronics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeam divergenceUnderwaterOffset (computer science)Optical wirelessBandwidth (computing)OpticsTransmitterMonte Carlo methodGaussianOptical powerGaussian beamCollimated lightDivergence (linguistics)Channel (broadcasting)Optical communicationTransmission (telecommunications)Computer sciencePhysicsWirelessBeam (structure)Beam diameterTelecommunicationsLaserGeologyLaser beamsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast majority of underwater wireless optical communication systems use collimated blue/green laser beams to deliver high‐speed data over a transmission range of a few metres to tens of metres. However, such systems are extremely susceptible to misalignment of the transmitter and the receiver. The mitigation techniques for misalignment reported in the literature are complex and costly at times. In this study, the authors consider the simple approach of increasing the divergence angle of the transmitted Gaussian beam to mitigate misalignment. Both plane and spherical beams are considered as the limitation cases. Using Monte Carlo simulations, the authors show that an optimum divergence angle for the maximum acceptable lateral offset exists with respect to the receiver sensitivity in clear waters while this is not an efficient method in harbour waters. Results demonstrate that there is a design trade‐off between acceptable lateral offset, power loss and channel bandwidth. Furthermore, the authors show how the proposed scheme of beam divergence affects the maximum allowed link span as well as the channel bandwidth for a given distance.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET OptoelectronicsSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207