MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885763478 · doi:10.1109/twc.2018.2861733

Performance Analysis of Energy-Based RFI Detector

2018· article· en· W2885763478 on OpenAlexafffund
Tilahun M. Getu, Wessam Ajib, René Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsDetectorFalse alarmKurtosisMonte Carlo methodEnergy (signal processing)Likelihood-ratio testComputer scienceElectromagnetic interferenceDetection theoryAlgorithmStatisticsPhysicsElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As radio frequency interference (RFI) affects many systems operating radio frequencies, RFI detection is essential for excising such RFI efficiently. For this reason, here we investigate an energy-based RFI detector for wireless communication systems suffering from RFI. For this detector, its average probability of RFI detection is studied and approximated, and asymptotic closed-form expressions are derived. Besides, an exact closed-form expression for its average probability of false alarm is derived. Monte-Carlo simulations validate the derived analytical expressions and corroborate that the investigated energy detector (ED) outperforms a kurtosis detector (KD)-even under the scenario that KD intercepts the received signal for a longer interval-and a generalized likelihood ratio test detector (GLRT). At last, the performance of ED is also assessed using real-world RFI contaminated data.

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 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 score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207