Integrating Physics-Based Wireless Propagation Models and Network Protocol Design for Train Communication Systems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physics-based wireless propagation modeling and network protocol design have evolved over decades as orthogonal areas in communication systems research. This fragmented approach does not exploit available efficiencies when planning and deploying communication systems. In an attempt to integrate the two areas, we harness the understanding of the underlying physics of electromagnetic propagation to enhance the robustness of network protocol design by deriving physics-based network-level performance metrics. We use ray-tracing and parabolic equation models of 2.4 GHz propagation along tunnel and open-air sections of London Underground to evaluate the performance of a communications-based train control system. For comparison, we consider existing path loss models for tunnel environments and investigate whether they can provide sufficient accuracy to be used for network protocol design. We show that physics-based models lead to reliable predictions at the network level, similar in fidelity to using measured data and unlike using simplified channel models of the path loss exponent type.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it