Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the technical trends for the next-generation wireless network significantly extend the near-field region, a performance reevaluation of integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) with an appropriate channel model to account for the effects introduced by the near field becomes essential. In this paper, a near-field ISAC framework is proposed for both downlink and uplink scenarios based on an accurate channel model. A uniform planar array is equipped at a base station, where the impacts of the effective aperture and polarization of antennas are considered. For the downlink case, three distinct designs are studied: a communications-centric (C-C) design, a sensing-centric (S-C) design, and a Pareto optimal design. Regarding the uplink case, the C-C design, the S-C design and a time-sharing strategy are considered. Within each design, sensing rates (SRs) and communication rates (CRs) are derived. To gain further insights, high signal-to-noise ratio slopes and rate scaling laws concerning the number of antennas are examined. The attainable near-field SR-CR regions of ISAC and the baseline frequency-division S&C are also characterized. Numerical results reveal that, as the number of antennas in the array grows, the SRs and CRs under our accurate model converge to finite values, while those under conventional far- and near-field models exhibit unbounded growth, highlighting the importance of precisely modeling the channels for near-field ISAC.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it