2023
DOI: 10.1109/tvt.2022.3229238
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Fluctuating Two-Ray Fading Model With Independent Specular Components

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Proof: See Appendix A. Note that, in contrast to the PDF and CDF expressions given in [5], ( 8) and ( 9) are valid for arbitrary values of m 1 and m 2 , and therefore this is also true for all the performance metrics derived from them.…”
Section: New Representation Of the Iftr Fading Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Proof: See Appendix A. Note that, in contrast to the PDF and CDF expressions given in [5], ( 8) and ( 9) are valid for arbitrary values of m 1 and m 2 , and therefore this is also true for all the performance metrics derived from them.…”
Section: New Representation Of the Iftr Fading Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In spite of the apparent similitude in the formal definition of the FTR and IFTR fading models, there are major differences between them, both in terms of the fitting results to experimental measurements and in the involved mathematical derivations. On the one hand, the IFTR fading model has been shown to provide a (sometimes remarkable) better fit than FTR fading (as well as other generalized fading models such as κ-µ shadowed [10] and two-wave with diffuse power -TWDP- [9]) to experimental data in very different environments, including line-of-sight (LOS) millimeter-wave, land-mobile satellites (LMS), and underwater acoustic communications (UAC) [5]. On the other hand, the independence of the two specular components in the IFTR model imposes new mathematical challenges, as now a two-fold nested integration always appear in its statistical characterization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the latter, the received signal is structured into clusters of waves, where each cluster is composed by groups of scattered waves with similar delays. Ray-based formulations include popular fading models in the literature suc as Durgin's Two-Wave with Diffuse Power (TWDP) [10] and other generalizations [11][12][13][14]. On the other hand, clusterbased models include Yacoub's κ-µ and η-µ models [6], ans subsequent extensions [8,[15][16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, the independent fluctuating two-ray (IFTR) [8] channel model has been presented to characterize multipath propagation, which includes several well-known distributions, namely Rayleigh, Rician, Hoyt (Nakagami-q), Rician Shadowed, and Nakagami-m, as special or limiting cases. The IFTR model consists of two dominant (specular) waves plus a diffuse component, due to the aggregation of multiple low-power scattered waves, modeled as a complex Gaussian random variable (RV), where the specular components are assumed to fluctuate independently following Nakagami-m fading.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%