MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893192565 · doi:10.1109/lwc.2018.2871677

Double Shadowing the Rician Fading Model

2018· article· en· W2893192565 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilKhalifa University of Science, Technology and ResearchQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastDepartment for the Economy
KeywordsNakagami distributionRician fadingNotationInverseFadingMathematicsEnvelope (radar)AlgorithmComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsTelecommunicationsArithmeticGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, we consider a Rician fading envelope which is impacted by dual shadowing processes. We conveniently refer to this as the double shadowed Rician fading model which can appear in two different formats, each underpinned by a different physical signal reception model. The first format assumes a Rician envelope where the dominant component is fluctuated by a Nakagami- <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> random variable (RV) which is preceded (or succeeded) by a secondary round of shadowing brought about by an inverse Nakagami- <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> RV. The second format considers that the dominant component and scattered waves of a Rician envelope are perturbed by two different shadowing processes. In particular, the dominant component experiences variations characterized by the product of a Nakagami- <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> and an inverse Nakagami- <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> RV, whereas the scattered waves are subject to fluctuations influenced by an inverse Nakagami- <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${m}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> RV. Using the relationship between the shadowing properties of the two formats, we develop unified closed-form and analytical expressions for their probability density function, cumulative distribution function, moment-generating function and moments. All derived expressions are validated through Monte Carlo simulations and reduction to a number of special cases.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.230 · 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