An Ultrasonic Power Splitting Receiver With Improved Complexity-Reliability Trade-Off for Intra-Body Communications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data transmission that is reliable and relies on low-complexity transceiver techniques is of practical importance for ultrasonic intra-body communications (IBCs). Considering the trade-off between reliability and computational complexity, this paper proposes an ultrasonic dynamic power splitting (UDPS) scheme. UDPS consists of statistic power splitting (SPS) and time switching (TS), where SPS splits the received signal to coherent detection (CD) and energy detection (ED) with an adjustable power splitting ratio, and TS switches between CD and ED with an adjustable power coefficient. Therefore, the proposed UDPS can exploit the reliability of CD and meanwhile benefit from the low complexity of ED. We also derive the theoretical bit-error rate (BER) of UDPS. Both theoretical and simulated results demonstrate that due to the linear noise in CD and non-linear noise in ED, the optimal power splitting ratio of SPS is 1 and the optimal power coefficient of TS is within (0, 1). More importantly, UDPS can achieve much lower complexity than CD at the cost of a slight BER loss for IBCs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".