MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737081313

Optimization criteria for joint communication and positioning networks

2017· other· en· W2737081313 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Markel Arizabaleta

Bibliographic record

VenueTampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)Computer scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current mobile system, namely 4G, has limitations in applications where low latency and high data rates are needed. In addition, new applications require a very precise user positioning, which 4G is not able to provide with high availability. In order to face these problems, a new mobile system is being developed, namely 5G. The 5G system is likely to be designed as a joint communication and positioning system. This thesis focuses on a couple of performance criteria in the context of 5G systems, namely the accuracy of the estimation of time-delay, which is directly proportional to the positioning accuracy, and the Quality of Service (QoS) of the communications, measured here in terms of the Bit Error Rates (BER). Our studies are based on three different waveforms proposed in the context of future 5G and mmWave frequencies (3-300GHz). The analysis is performed in two different scenarios, outdoor and indoor, and with different modulation orders. For each scenario, a channel model has been developed. The outdoor channel model is based on the channel model created for the 5G system in the European METIS project. For the indoor scenarios, the indoor maps of one multi-floor building in Tampere University of Technology are used. The results show that the modulation order has no influence on the positioning accuracy, but it is very important in the communication QoS. In addition, minor differences are observed from the selected three waveforms in terms of the joint positioning and communication performance, in such a way that there is no clear advantage in terms of positioning accuracy of one waveform over the other, among the three considered cases. The performance difference is better on the communication side, where a difference of 1dB between the waveforms is obtained to achieve the same BER value, the best being CP-OFDM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University)Same topicMillimeter-Wave Propagation and ModelingFrench-language works237,207