MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Baseband data transmission

2009· book-chapter· en· W575340868 on OpenAlexaff
Ha H. Nguyen, E. Shwedyk

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSensor Technology and Measurement Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasebandTransmission (telecommunications)Computer scienceBandwidth (computing)Data transmissionElectronic engineeringChannel (broadcasting)Binary numberWaveformElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsComputer hardwareEngineeringArithmeticMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction As pointed out in the previous chapter, binary digits (or bits) “0” and “1” are used simply to represent the information content. They are abstract (intangible) quantities and need to be converted into electrical waveforms for effective transmission or storage. How to perform such a conversion is generally governed by many factors, of which the most important one is the available transmission bandwidth of the communication channel or the storage media. In baseband data transmission, the bits are mapped into two voltage levels for direct transmission without any frequency translation. Such a baseband data transmission is applicable to cable systems (both metallic and fiber optics) since the transmission bandwidth of most cable systems is in the baseband. Various baseband signaling techniques, also known as line codes, have been developed to satisfy a number of criteria. Typical criteria are: (i) Signal interference and noise immunity Depending on the signal sets, certain signaling schemes exhibit superior performance in the presence of noise as reflected by the probability of bit error. (ii) Signal spectrum Typically one would like the transmitted signal to occupy as small a frequency band as possible. For baseband signaling, this implies a lack of high-frequency components. However, it is sometimes also important to have no DC component. Having a signaling scheme which does not have a DC component implies that AC coupling via a transformer may be used in the transmission channel. (iii) […]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.062

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicSensor Technology and Measurement SystemsFrench-language works237,207