The DOI matches its Crossref record.
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
Abstract
In this paper, we present a comprehensive study of the monotonicity and log-concavity of the generalized Marcum and Nuttall Q-functions.More precisely, a simple probabilistic method is firstly given to prove the monotonicity of these two functions.Then, the log-concavity of the generalized Marcum Q-function and its deformations is established with respect to each of the three parameters.Since the Nuttall Q-function has similar probabilistic interpretations as the generalized Marcum Q-function, we deduce the log-concavity of the Nuttall Q-function.By exploiting the log-concavity of these two functions, we propose new tight lower and upper bounds for the generalized Marcum and Nuttall Q-functions.Our proposed bounds are much tighter than the existing bounds in the literature in most of the cases.The relative errors of our proposed bounds converge to 0 as b → ∞.The numerical results show that the absolute relative errors of the proposed bounds are less than 5% in most of the cases.The proposed bounds can be effectively applied to the outage probability analysis of interference-limited systems such as cognitive radio and wireless sensor network, in the study of error performance of various wireless communication systems operating over fading channels and extracting the log-likelihood ratio for differential phase-shift keying (DPSK) signals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Towards a general-purpose foundation model for computational pathology
Chen, R. J., Ding, T., Lu, M. Y., Williamson, D. F. K., Jaume, G., Song, A. H., Chen, B., Zhang, A., Shao, D., Shaban, M., et al. (2024) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-02857-3 · Cited by 1,560
Zheng, Y. (1997) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/bfb0052234 · Cited by 1,250
Risk bounds for model selection via penalization
Barron, A., Birgé, L., & Massart, P. (1999) · Probability Theory and Related Fields · doi:10.1007/s004400050210 · Cited by 657
Review of advanced techniques for the estimation of brain connectivity measured with EEG/MEG
Sakkalis, V. (2011) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2011.06.020 · Cited by 637
Sun, Q., Zhou, W.-X., & Fan, J. (2020) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2018.1543124 · Cited by 312
Metadata
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
- Published
- 2023-10-10
- ISSN
- 0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9654
- OpenAlex
- W4200283578
- Cited by
- 1,856
- References
- 0
- Type
- paratext
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tit.18
- The paper
- IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. (2023). IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/tit.18
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.