The sensitivity of joint source-channel coding based on double protograph LDPC codes to source statistics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the joint source and channel coding (JSCC) systems constructed from double protograph low-density parity-check (DP LDPC) codes has been demonstrated to possess good performance, especially when they are applied into the transmission of radiography images, where the frameworks of both transmitter and receiver still need to be further optimised for the sake of achieving bit error rate (BER) performance under 10 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">-6</sup> over wireless transmission environment. This paper focuses on the perspective of transmitting terminal to investigate what factors will affect the performance of DP LDPC schemes so that the new transmitting models can be further designed. Specifically, this paper mainly concentrates on the sensitivity of DP LDPC scheme to source statistics. The simulation results show that the entropy of source information is a dominate factor for sources with low entropy while the correlated side information plays a vital role in sources with large entropy, which provides explicit directions for further JSCC coding structures optimisation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".