Link Budget Analysis for Backscatter-Based Passive IoT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Massive connectivity of billions of communicating devices for fifth-generation (5G) and beyond networks requires the deployment of self-sustaining, maintenance-free, and low-cost communication paradigms. Could passive Internet of Things (IoT) solve these challenges? Passive IoT can be realized with the backscatter communication (BackCom) paradigm, which uses ultra-low power, inexpensive passive tags to support massive connectivity. However, a comprehensive link budget analysis for BackCom networks has not yet been available. It is something that is necessary for practitioners and researchers to evaluate the potential of BackCom. This survey is organized as follows. First, we describe the BackCom configurations, passive IoT design targets, backscatter channel statistics, and the different components and operations of the backscatter tag. Second, we develop the forward link budget and the overall link budget. All the relevant parameters are described in detail. Third, we give numerical and simulation results to get insights on the achievable performance of BackCom networks. Since additive path losses and excess fading can limit the performance of BackCom networks, we examine potential solutions to overcome the resulting limitations, enabling massive IoT networks. We also discuss integrating BackCom with existing wireless technologies. We further highlight some applications and address open issues, challenges, and future research directions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".