MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046031489 · doi:10.1364/ol.395631

Cost-minimizing distribution matching supporting net 800  Gbit/s PS-PAM transmission over 2  km using a 4-λ EML TOSA

2020· article· en· W3046031489 on OpenAlexaff
Xueyang Li, Zhenping Xing, Md Samiul Alam, Maxime Jacques, Ping-Chiek Koh, David V. Plant

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsTransmission (telecommunications)TransceiverTransmitterWavelength-division multiplexingThroughputGigabitComputer scienceBlock (permutation group theory)WavelengthPhysicsTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Probabilistic shaping (PS) allows tunable spectral efficiency that is suitable for realizing high throughput intra-data center transceivers. In this Letter, we integrate the cost-minimizing distribution matching (CMDM) in the probability amplitude shaping scheme to generate PS-PAM signals with ultra-short symbol block lengths for reduced serial processing delay. We detail the principle of CMDM and present two different methods of implementation. We demonstrate that CMDM enables the transmission of single wavelength net 200 Gbit/s PS-PAM-8 over 2 km of single-mode fiber (SMF). We show that similar performance is achievable using a constant composition distribution matcher, yet requiring 10 times longer symbol block lengths. We also report, to the best of our knowledge, the first demonstration of net 800 Gbit/s transmission over 2 km of SMF using a packaged 4 - λ electro-absorption modulated laser transmitter optical sub-assembly (TOSA).

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207