2011
DOI: 10.1590/s2179-10742011000100011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between known propagation models using least squares tuning algorithm on 5.8 GHz in Amazon region cities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
(1 reference statement)
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An efficient method for estimating the accuracy of path loss model is the RMS error, which is the difference in dB between the measured path loss and estimated path loss [13][14] [15].…”
Section: Root Mean Square Error (Rms Error)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An efficient method for estimating the accuracy of path loss model is the RMS error, which is the difference in dB between the measured path loss and estimated path loss [13][14] [15].…”
Section: Root Mean Square Error (Rms Error)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar results were presented by Faruk et al (2013b), who concluded that tuning of Hata-Davidson's model, which is one of the models that show better fits, at least along some selected routes, is necessary to minimise the RMSE values within the acceptable ranges. Fernández et al (2012) (2010), Castro et al (2011), and Medeisis and Kajackas (2007). In all these, measurements were conducted in given areas and optimisation techniques were employed to tune the model parameters to decrease the prediction errors.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In other words, the actual wireless IoT performance differs when used in environments other than where they were developed. Furthermore, the ongoing expansion of wireless networks needs further signal propagation studies to assure an effective postplanning phase service coverage and efficiency [2].…”
Section: A Problem Formulation and Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%