MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410358688 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3569559

A Comprehensive Survey on Machine and Deep Learning for Optical Communications

2025· article· en· W4410358688 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Ali Amirabadi, S. Alireza Nezamalhosseini, Mohammad Hossein Kahaei, Lawrence R. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing complexity of optical communication systems and networks necessitates advanced methodologies for extracting valuable insights from vast and heterogeneous datasets. Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) have emerged as pivotal tools in this domain, revolutionizing data analysis and enabling automated self-configuration in optical communication systems. Their adoption is fueled by the growing intricacy of systems and links, driven by numerous adjustable and interdependent parameters. This complexity is particularly evident in areas such as coherent transceivers, advanced digital signal processing, optical performance monitoring, cross-layer network optimizations, and nonlinearity compensation. While ML and DL offer immense potential, their application in optical communications is still in its early stages, with significant opportunities remaining unexplored. Many algorithms have yet to be fully deployed in practical settings, underscoring the emerging nature of this research area. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of ML and DL applications across optical fiber communication (OFC), optical wireless communication (OWC), and optical communication networking (OCN), highlighting the challenges, current advancements, and future potential of these approaches. To address the identified gaps, this survey evaluates and compares ML and DL algorithms in terms of their performance, complexity, objectives, input data, metrics, and applications in optical communication. Specific emphasis is placed on identifying how these algorithms enhance system performance and optimization. Furthermore, the advantages and limitations of existing methods are analyzed, offering a clear perspective on the role of ML and DL in this domain. The survey also includes updated visual representations and domain-specific examples to elucidate the practical applications of ML and DL in OFC, OWC, and OCN. It concludes by discussing the open challenges, proposing potential solutions, and identifying promising future research directions to foster advancements in intelligent optical communication systems.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations18
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207