2014 Underwater Communications and Networking (UComms) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/ucomms.2014.7017133
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A performance comparison between DSSS, M-FSK, and frequency-division multiplexing in underwater acoustic channels

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The remainder of this section gives a brief description of the schemes, starting with the parts that they have in common, and continuing with details of the parts that differ. Note that some signal parameters were changed after the study described in [28].…”
Section: The Physical Layersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The remainder of this section gives a brief description of the schemes, starting with the parts that they have in common, and continuing with details of the parts that differ. Note that some signal parameters were changed after the study described in [28].…”
Section: The Physical Layersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We remark that this requires both error control (to ensure reliable transmission from the trusted nodes to the sink) and medium access control (to regulate the access of the trusted nodes to the UWAC channel). Since the amount of information exchanged from the trusted nodes to the sink is small and limited to the value R φ,n in (16), the above controls can be implemented using reliable communication schemes[32].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…JANUS is an incoherent scheme that uses frequency-shift keying, whereas DSSS is a coherent scheme with a much more computationally expensive receiver. More details on the two schemes and a comparison of their performances can be found in [24].…”
Section: B Prediction Of Communications Performancementioning
confidence: 99%