2008
DOI: 10.1109/icact.2008.4493784
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic Modulation Recognition of Digital Signals using Wavelet Features and SVM

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 95 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
45
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…FB-based algorithms provide robust performance with low complexity [17] by exploiting the signal statistical features efficiently and translating them into classification parameters. In many exiting studies different statistical features have been employed for wireless signal format classification, such as cyclic features [18], wavelet transforms [19], [20], higher-order statistics and cumulants [21]- [23]. The classification subsystem in FB-methods categorizes the correct target groups based on these distinct input features extracted from the dataset.…”
Section: A Brief Review Of Wireless Signal Classification Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FB-based algorithms provide robust performance with low complexity [17] by exploiting the signal statistical features efficiently and translating them into classification parameters. In many exiting studies different statistical features have been employed for wireless signal format classification, such as cyclic features [18], wavelet transforms [19], [20], higher-order statistics and cumulants [21]- [23]. The classification subsystem in FB-methods categorizes the correct target groups based on these distinct input features extracted from the dataset.…”
Section: A Brief Review Of Wireless Signal Classification Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hidden layers maybe one layer or multilayer, and each layer consists of several nodes. The [26,37] (ii) KNN [38,91] (iii) SVM [6,27,47,48,92] (iv) Naïve Bayes [39] (v) HMM [46] (vi) Fuzzy classifier [93] (vii) Polynomial classifier [40,94] (i) DNN [24,30,31,61] (ii) DBN [49,63] (iii) CNN [17, 19-21, 54, 64, 65, 70, 73-76, 79, 81, 82, 95, 96] (iv) LSTM [29,69] (v) CRBM [53] (vi) Autoencoder network [50,62] (vii) Generative adversarial networks [66,67] (viii) HDMF [71,72] (ix) NFSC [78] Pros (i) works better on small data (ii) low implementation cost (i) simple pre-processing (ii) high accuracy and efficiency (iii) adaptive to different applications Cons (i) time demanding (ii) complex feature engineering (iii) depends heavily on the representation of the data (iv) prone to curse of dimensionality (i) demanding large amounts of data (ii) high hardware cost node presented in Figure 3 is the basic operational unit, in which the input vector is multiplied by a series of weights and the sum value is fed into the activation function . These operational units contribute to a powerful network, which could realize complex functions such as regression and classification.…”
Section: Definition Of DL Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, these feature extraction-based AMR methods are considered as instantaneous realization scenarios, such as instantaneous features, wavelet transform-based features, high-order statistics-based features, cyclic spectrum analysis-based features, and so on. To classify the modulation types by extracted features [11], [12], they usually adopt various classifiers, such as high-order cumulants (HOC), support vector machine (SVM), decision tree (DT), k-nearest neighbor (KNN) and multilayer perception (MLP). According to aforementioned discussion, one may find that here traditional AMR methods require instantaneous information and real-time computational computing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%