Development and Evaluation of Waveforms for EMI Radiated Susceptibility Testing of Avionic Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recommended waveforms used for electromagnetic interference (EMI) susceptibility testing of military avionic systems date to 1967, and are not representative of modern telecommunication standards: characteristics such as the bandwidth and the peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) are not emulated. Although more recent studies have evaluated the use of filtered white Gaussian noise for susceptibility testing, and compared the effects of the PAPR on EMI susceptibility, the results were inconclusive. This paper proposes a parameter reduction process for the development of candidate waveforms that are representative of long term evolution (LTE) communication signals. The waveforms were evaluated by comparing the measured EMI response of avionic equipment that was exposed to the waveforms in an anechoic chamber. The measured data was analyzed to determine whether the bandwidth and the PAPR had significant effects on the measured EMI compared to real LTE signals. The proposed method can be used to evaluate the suitability of test waveforms for other communication standards.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".