MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894160901 · doi:10.1364/ao.57.008314

Experimental study of the turbulence effect on underwater optical wireless communications

2018· article· en· W2894160901 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Vali, Zabih Ghassemlooy, Masood Omoomi, David G. Michelson

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceScintillationOpticsUnderwaterFree-space optical communicationOptical linkOptical communicationPhysicsSpan (engineering)Probability density functionRange (aeronautics)Transmission (telecommunications)Optical wirelessLog-normal distributionUnderwater acoustic communicationTelecommunicationsWirelessMechanicsComputer scienceOptical fiberStatisticsAerospace engineeringMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater optical wireless communications (UOWC) performance is affected by turbulence. However, not much research has been carried out to estimate the probability density function (PDF) of the received optical power. In this paper, we investigate the effect of turbulence on the UOWC system using a new experimental setup with a variable link span in a water pool. Different turbulence levels are created by changing the temperature and the rate of an injected water flow in the pool water to obtain the PDF. Results show that lognormal distribution closely matches the measured PDF for a range of link spans. In UOWC systems, the link span is one of the main factors influencing fluctuations of the received optical power, and it has not been thoroughly investigated. In this work, the scintillation index and turbulence-induced power loss are obtained for a range of turbulence strengths and transmission link spans. Finally, we show that there is a good agreement between the experimental and simulated results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations87
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207