MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127615372 · doi:10.18280/i2m.240602

Analysis of Varied Ambient Conditions on Energy Detection-Based Spectrum Sensing Using RTL SDR 2832U

2025· article· W7127615372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. I. Shamini, V. J. K. Kishor Sonti

Bibliographic record

VenueInstrumentation Mesure Métrologie · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy (signal processing)Spectrum (functional analysis)Signal processingEnergy consumptionNoise (video)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient utilization of spectrum has become increasingly important in the last few decades.This trend is due to the expansion of communication applications and users.This has given scope for the shift to explore technologies such as cognitive radio and software defined radio (SDR) for dynamic access.By utilizing SDR architectures to provide a programmable environment with novel detection schemes, such as energy detection (ED).Energy detection using SDR makes it appealing for real-world sensing, yet its performance is susceptible to low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), noise uncertainty, and fading.This experiment evaluates energy detection using a Realtek-based software defined radio (RTL SDR) in six diverse environments-moderately noisy urban, high-noise industrial, suburban or mixed-rural, interference-prone, deep-fading, and rural sparse signal contexts-by measuring detection probability (Pd) and false alarm probability (Pfa).The findings reveal that differences over environments, with the obtained Pd ranging from 1.37% to 67.84%, and Pfa from 8.86% to 68.32%, and the SNR ranging from -10.72 dB to -32.75 dB.These results demonstrate the detection probability in six diverse environments and the comparative study of various SNR.The results gained a better balance with the high detection rate and a reasonably low false alarm rate and a suitable SNR value of -15.69 dB in the 'Interference Prone' environment.The real-time signals were extracted using RTL SDR 2832U hardware in six diverse environments using the energy detection spectrum sensing method.Further, the results have been simulated in Matrix Laboratory 2024b, and pd and pfa performance parameters have been plotted for different SNR values obtained by the experimental analysis.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstrumentation Mesure MétrologieSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207