MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963743441 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2015.7417028

Bounds on the Capacity of ASK Molecular Communication Channels with ISI

2015· article· en· W2963743441 on OpenAlexaff
Siavash Ghavami, Raviraj Adve, Farshad Lahouti

Bibliographic record

Venue2015 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMolecular Communication and Nanonetworks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomnessUpper and lower boundsInterference (communication)Ask priceGaussianNoise (video)Gaussian noiseIntersymbol interferenceComputer scienceAlgorithmAmplitude-shift keyingMathematicsStatistical physicsTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsCombinatoricsTelecommunicationsDecoding methodsStatisticsPhase-shift keyingChannel (broadcasting)Mathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are now several works on the use of the additive inverse Gaussian noise (AIGN) model for the random transit time in molecular communication (MC) channels. The randomness invariably causes inter- symbol interference (ISI) in MC, an issue largely ignored or simplified. In this paper we derive an upper bound and two lower bounds for MC based on amplitude shift keying (ASK) in presence of ISI. The Blahut-Arimoto algorithm (BAA) is modified to find the input distribution of transmitted symbols to maximize the lower bounds. Our results show that over wide parameter values the bound are close.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2015 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM)Same topicMolecular Communication and NanonetworksFrench-language works237,207