MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981592399 · doi:10.3788/col201917.100010

Absorption and scattering effects of Maalox, chlorophyll, and sea salt on a micro-LED-based underwater wireless optical communication [Invited]

2019· article· en· W2981592399 on OpenAlexaff
Pengfei Tian, Honglan Chen, Peiyao Wang, Xiaoyan Liu, Xinwei Chen, Gufan Zhou, Shuailong Zhang, Jie Lu, Pengjiang Qiu, Zeyuan Qian, Xiaolin Zhou, Zhilai Fang, Lirong Zheng, Ran Liu, Xugao Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Optics Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttenuationAttenuation coefficientAbsorption (acoustics)OpticsMaterials scienceScatteringOptoelectronicsWavelengthPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a blue gallium nitride (GaN) micro-light-emitting-diode (micro-LED)-based underwater wireless optical communication (UWOC) system was built, and UWOCs with varied Maalox, chlorophyll, and sea salt concentrations were studied. Data transmission performance of the UWOC and the influence of light attenuation were investigated systematically. Maximum data transmission rates at the distance of 2.3 m were 933, 800, 910, and 790 Mbps for experimental conditions with no impurity, 200.48 mg/m3 Maalox, 12.07 mg/m3 chlorophyll, and 5 kg/m3 sea salt, respectively, much higher than previously reported systems with commercial LEDs. It was found that increasing chlorophyll, Maalox, and sea salt concentrations in water resulted in an increase of light attenuation, which led to the performance degradation of the UWOC. Further analysis suggests two light attenuation mechanisms, e.g., absorption by chlorophyll and scattering by Maalox, are responsible for the decrease of maximum data rates and the increase of bit error rates. Based on the absorption and scattering models, excellent fitting to the experimental attenuation coefficient can be achieved, and light attenuation by absorption and scattering at different wavelengths was also investigated. We believe this work is instructive apply UWOC for practical applications.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Optics LettersSame topicOptical Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207