ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Hardware-Efficient Phase Demodulation for Digital
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Inversion ofSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper presents hardware-efficient phase demodulation schemes for FPGA-based digital phase-sensitive optical time-domain reflectometry (ϕ-OTDR) receivers. We first derive a signal model for the heterodyne ϕ-OTDR frontend, then propose and analyze three demodulation methods: (1) a baseband reconstruction approach via zero-IF downconversion, (2) an analytic signal generation technique using the Hilbert transform (HT), and (3) a wavelet transform (WT)-based alternative for analytic signal extraction. Algorithm-hardware co-design implementations are detailed for both RFSoC and conventional FPGA platforms, with resource utilization comparisons. Additionally, we introduce an incremental DC-rejected phase unwrapper (IDRPU) algorithm to jointly address phase unwrapping and DC drift removal, minimizing computational overhead while avoiding numerical overflow. Experiments on simulated and real-world ϕ-OTDR data show that the HT method matches the performance of zero-IF demodulation with simpler hardware and lower resource usage, while the WT method offers enhanced robustness against fading noise (3.35-22.47 dB SNR improvement in fading conditions), albeit with slightly ambiguous event boundaries and higher hardware utilization. These findings provide actionable insights for demodulator design in distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) applications and advance the development of single-chip DAS systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.