On the Effects of Colored Noise on the Performance of LDPC Codes
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
The class of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes includes some of the most powerful capacity-approaching codes reported to date. As a result, LDPC codes have been considered for many new communication applications. However, a better understanding of the effects of the signal impairments that exist in such applications is required. In this paper, the performance of various LDPC codes, including recent candidate LDPC codes for 10GBASE-T Ethernet, in the presence of colored noise is evaluated and compared with the effects of conventional additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN). The colored noise models in this study include high-frequency and low-frequency additive colored Gaussian noise (ACGN), and 1/f noise. The results show that LDPC codes are more vulnerable to colored noise than to AWGN and as the correlation between noise samples becomes stronger, their performance becomes more degraded. However, at the same level of colored noise power, the performance is increasingly degraded as noise correlation is spread over more noise samples
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it