MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886346030 · doi:10.1109/icc.2018.8422433

On Integrated Stochastic Channel Model for Underwater Optical Wireless Communications

2018· article· en· W2886346030 on OpenAlexaff
Huihui Zhang, Julian Cheng, Zhaocheng Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringUnderwaterUnderwater acoustic communicationFadingOptical wirelessBit error rateChannel (broadcasting)Free-space optical communicationPhysicsMIMOOpticsAbsorption (acoustics)TurbulenceElectronic engineeringWirelessOptical communicationComputer scienceTelecommunicationsEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Absorption, scattering and turbulence are the three main characteristics for underwater optical wireless communications (UOWC). Among these three factors, absorption and scattering, respectively, characterize the energy loss and direction change when photons propagate through underwater wireless channels interacting with water molecules or suspended particles. In recent years, several analytical methods originated from free space optical communications are used to model various underwater channels, while only statistical models are employed to consider the effects of absorption and scattering containing all the scattering components. To facilitate in-depth theoretical analysis, we propose an expression to model the spatial probability density function of optical intensity for all scattering components in UOWC links in this paper. After that, we model the photodiode receiving process and give a clear explanation on the related parameters. Numerical results indicate that the bit-error rate performance deteriorates as the turbulence gets stronger, and larger multiple-input multiple-output array can alleviate the negative effect caused by fading. Besides, the effect of turbulence on BER is more important than that of the link geometry, and the increase in transmitted power will weaken the diversity gain from MIMO configuration.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.278
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 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207