MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973580796 · doi:10.1002/ett.1185

Estimating the minimum distance of large‐block turbo codes using iterative multiple‐impulse methods

2007· article· en· W1973580796 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Transactions on Telecommunications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbo codeAlgorithmComputer scienceDitherTurboImpulse (physics)Minimum distanceTurbo equalizerConcatenated error correction codeBlock codeMathematicsDecoding methodsMathematical optimizationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A difficult problem for turbo codes is the efficient and accurate determination of the distance spectrum, or even just the minimum distance, for specific interleavers. This is especially true for large blocks, with many thousands of data bits, if the distance is high. This paper compares a number of recent distance estimation techniques and introduces a new approach, based on using specific event impulse patterns and iterative processing, that is specifically tailored to handle long interleavers with high spread. The new method is as reliable as two previous iterative multiple‐impulse methods, but with much lower complexity. A minimum distance of 60 has been estimated for a rate 1/3, 8‐state, turbo code with a dithered relative prime (DRP) interleaver of length K = 65 536. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it