On the design of LDPC code ensembles for BIAWGN channels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing design methods for irregular Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) codes over the additive white Gaussian noise channel are based on using asymptotic analysis tools such as density evolution in an optimization process. Such a process is computationally expensive particularly when a large number of constituent variable node degrees are involved in the design. In this paper, we propose a systematic approach for the design of irregular LDPC codes. The proposed method, which is based on a pre-computed upper bound on the fraction of edges connected to variable nodes of degree 3, is considerably less complex than the conventional optimization approach. Through a number of examples, we demonstrate that using our method, ensembles with performance very close to those devised based on optimization, can be designed. In addition to having very good performance, the number of constituent variable node degrees in the designed ensembles is only three or four. This, in some cases, is much smaller than the corresponding number for optimization-based designs with similar performance.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it