Fibre optic-VLC versus laser-VLC: a review study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The exponential increase in the demand for a fast and reliable wireless mobile network motivates the need for researchers to engage more actively in visible light communication (VLC) technology. This increase happens in parallel with the augmentation of the population to be accommodated. As a result, the radio frequency spectrum is overcrowded. VLCs, which are part of optical wireless communications, are unregulated ultra-wideband spectrums that offer an alternative to solve RF bandwidth exhaustion. The OWC has demonstrated, among others, a throughput of 100 Gbps and is capable of offloading large data traffic from RF networks. One of the VLC main backdrops is the distance for which light signals can be transmitted, which is generally short in nature. However, this is overcome by its combination with other technologies, such as fibre optics (FO) and laser technologies, to mention only a few, which form a cascaded system with VLC. The data offloaded is fed to the cascaded system of FO-VLC and laser-VLC. In this paper, we provide a comparative review of cascaded FO-VLC and laser-VLC systems. We survey the technology that can provide optimized communication and high bandwidth. The choice of cascaded system to be used or considered is dependent on the area of application. A comparison is conducted from the simulated results of both cascaded systems considering parameters such as the gain and throughput. The FO-VLC cascaded system shows that system gain always decreases as distance increases for a range of reflection coefficient, $$\rho$$ ρ , and slightly decreases with attenuation coefficient, $$\alpha$$ α . The gain of the laser-VLC cascaded system decreases with an increase in transmission distance for a given range of floor and ceiling reflection coefficient and decreases slightly with attenuation intensity, $$\gamma$$ γ . From our investigation, it is clear that FO-VLC and laser-VLC are outstanding optical cascaded systems, which can be exploited in applications with a harsh environment. This research also highlights standardization efforts, advanced modulation schemes and coding techniques so far for VLC, FO and laser system and their promising 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".