MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Channel Measurements at 6.4 GHz for IEEE 802.11be WLAN

2024· article· en· W4405975302 on OpenAlexaff
Nida Chaudhry, Simon L. Cotton, Nidhi Simmons, Claudio R. C. M. da Silva, Okan Yurduseven, Paschalis C. Sofotasios, Michail Matthaiou, Trung Q. Duong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsIEEE 802Computer scienceComputer networkChannel (broadcasting)Wireless lanIEEE 802.11IEEE 802.11w-2009TelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present the results of a set of channel measurements conducted within the 6 GHz band used in IEEE 802.11be based wireless local area networks (WLANs). A range of indoor and outdoor client to access point (AP) communication scenarios were considered for both line-of-sight (LOS) and non-LOS (NLOS) channel conditions. We have investigated the path loss, large-scale, and small-scale fading across 256 frequency points between 6.425 and 6.445 GHz. To model the large-scale fading we have utilized the lognormal and gamma distributions, while for the small-scale fading this was the Rayleigh, Rician, and Nakagami-m distributions. The information loss incurred when encoding the empirical distributions with the aforementioned theoretical ones was determined using the resistor-average distance (RAD). It was found that the gamma distribution provided a better fit to the large-scale fading, while the Rician and Nakagami-m distributions observed the lowest RAD values for the small-scale fading. To ascertain the temporal stability of the considered channels, the coherence time was inferred using an analysis of the autocorrelation. Our results indicate that the coherence time for the large-scale fading was typically longer than for small-scale fading.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Body Area NetworksFrench-language works237,207