MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913164447 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2019.2896190

Log-Likelihood Ratio Calculation for Pilot Symbol Assisted Coded Modulation Schemes With Residual Phase Noise

2019· article· en· W2913164447 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersHuawei Technologies
KeywordsQuadrature amplitude modulationResidualAdditive white Gaussian noiseAlgorithmModulation (music)Bit error ratePhase-shift keyingSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Computer sciencePhase noiseMathematicsElectronic engineeringStatisticsDecoding methodsWhite noisePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel log-likelihood ratio (LLR) calculation for high order coded modulation schemes over an additive white Gaussian noise channel at the presence of residual phase noise (RPN). Residual phase noise is known to significantly degrade the error rate performance of such systems, particularly at lower error rates, resulting in an early error floor. To model RPN, we consider the commonly used pilot symbol assisted modulation schemes for carrier recovery. We derive the exact formula for the calculation of LLR for such systems. To simplify the implementation, we also derive an approximation of LLR which reduces the complexity significantly with almost no loss in performance. The simulation results are presented for coded modulation schemes based on quadrature amplitude modulations and low-density parity-check codes. The simulations demonstrate significant performance improvement in the error rate as a result of using the new LLR calculation instead of the conventional calculation of LLR which ignores the RPN.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.273 · 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