MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297571017 · doi:10.3390/electronics11162619

A QoS Classifier Based on Machine Learning for Next-Generation Optical Communication

2022· article· en· W4297571017 on OpenAlexaff
Somia A. Abd El-Mottaleb, Ahmed Métwalli, Abdellah Chehri, Hassan Yousif Ahmed, Medien Zeghid, Akhtar Nawaz Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Photonic Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPearson product-moment correlation coefficientComputer scienceCorrelationArtificial intelligenceDecision treeMulticollinearityPopulationBit error rateVariance inflation factorRandom forestMachine learningReceiver operating characteristicClassifier (UML)AlgorithmStatisticsMathematicsRegression analysisDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Code classification is essential nowadays, as determining the transmission code at the receiver side is a challenge. A novel algorithm for fixed right shift (FRS) code may be employed in embedded next-generation optical fiber communication (OFC) systems. The code aims to provide various quality of services (QoS): audio, video, and data. The Q-factor, bit error rate (BER), and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) are studied to be used as predictors for machine learning (ML) and used in the design of an embedded QoS classifier. The hypothesis test is used to prove the ML input data robustness. Pearson’s correlation and variance-inflation factor (VIF) are revealed, as they are typical detectors of a data multicollinearity problem. The hypothesis testing shows that the statistical properties for the samples of Q-factor, BER, and SNR are similar to the population dataset, with p-values of 0.98, 0.99, and 0.97, respectively. Pearson’s correlation matrix shows a highly positive correlation between Q-factor and SNR, with 0.9. The highest VIF value is 4.5, resulting in the Q-factor. In the end, the ML evaluation shows promising results as the decision tree (DT) and the random forest (RF) classifiers achieve 94% and 99% accuracy, respectively. Each case’s receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves are revealed, showing that the RF outperforms the DT classification performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Photonic Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207