# Simultaneous Spreading Factor (SF) demodulation

**URL:** <https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/forum/t/simultaneous-spreading-factor-sf-demodulation/73754>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [June 2, 2026, 4:11pm UTC](https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/forum/t/simultaneous-spreading-factor-sf-demodulation/73754 "2026-06-02T16:11:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![clv](https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/forum/user_avatar/www.thethingsnetwork.org/clv/32/46568_2.png) [@clv](https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/forum/u/clv)\
**Post date:** [June 2, 2026, 4:11pm UTC](https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/forum/t/simultaneous-spreading-factor-sf-demodulation/73754/1 "2026-06-02T16:11:49Z")

</div>

Today I had the idea that human eye is easy to decode LoRa signal with bigger gap on SF. So, for human eye, it’s easier to decode together SF7 and SF9 (+2 SF gap) signals than SF7 and SF8 signals (+1SF gap). I had a chat with the AI and it confirmed my view with this paper [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1808.01761](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1808.01761) although I don’t understand where the paper tested the inference between +1 SF gap and +2 SF gap.

Anyone have tested this theory? So in the case of having collisions it’s better to have signals with + 2 gap on SF than +1 gap?