Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Srinivasan Surendran
dblp:31/10899
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Computer networks · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer networks
1 paper |
Physical-layer communications · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Physical-layer communications
channel coding and estimation |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Symbol rate timing recovery for higher order partial response channels · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2001 |
Physical-layer communications › channel modeling › channel with memory
partial-response channel |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Symbol rate timing recovery for higher order partial response channels · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2001 |
Physical-layer communications › receiver design › detector design
phase detector design |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Symbol rate timing recovery for higher order partial response channels · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2001 |
Physical-layer communications › synchronization
timing recovery |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | Symbol rate timing recovery for higher order partial response channels · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2001 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
simulation · 0.0mueller and muller timing function · 0.0minimum mean-square error criterion · 0.0maximum-likelihood criterion · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | Symbol rate timing recovery for higher order partial response channelsabstractThis paper provides a framework for analyzing and comparing timing recovery schemes for higher order partial response (PR) channels. Several classes of timing recovery schemes are analyzed. Timing recovery loops employing timing gradients or phase detectors derived from the minimum mean-square error (MMSE) criterion, the maximum likelihood (ML) criterion, and the timing function approach of Mueller and Muller (1976) (MRI) are analyzed and compared. The paper formulates and analyzes MMSE timing recovery in the context of a slope look-up table (SLT), which is amenable for an efficient implementation. The properties and performance of the SLT-based timing loop are compared with the ML and MM loops. Analysis and time step simulations for a practical 16-state PR magnetic recording channel show that the output noise jitter of the ML phase detector is worse than that of the SLT-based phase detector. This is primarily due to the presence of self-noise in the ML detector. Consequently, the SLT-based phase detector is to be preferred. In comparing the SLT and MM based timing loops, it is found that both schemes have similar jitter performance. Pervez M. Aziz, Srinivasan Surendran |
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. | 2 |