MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313306425 · doi:10.1109/lcomm.2022.3233524

Outage Probability Analysis of LR-FHSS in Satellite IoT Networks

2022· article· en· W4313306425 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Maleki, Ha H. Nguyen, Robert Barton

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpread spectrumFrequency-hopping spread spectrumChirp spread spectrumComputer scienceAlohaLPWANComputer networkFadingCommunications satelliteNakagami distributionRange (aeronautics)Channel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsWirelessSatelliteThroughputDirect-sequence spread spectrumEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-range frequency-hopping spread spectrum (LR-FHSS) is a promising solution for long-range and dense deployment of Internet of Things (IoT) networks since it can provide a significant capacity improvement compared to the conventional Aloha-based chirp spread spectrum (CSS). In this letter, we present an analytical approach for deriving the outage probability of LR-FHSS in a satellite-based IoT network taking into account the noise, channel fading impairments, and more importantly, the capture effect. The obtained analytical expressions are validated with computer simulations and show that for a typical target outage probability of 10−2, exploiting LR-FHSS in the considered system model can serve up to 60, 000 and 120, 000 end devices per hour for 48 bytes of information using two specified data rates in the North America region. These numbers present significant capacity increases over the conventional low-power long-range (LoRa) network.

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)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications LettersSame topicIoT Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207