Joint Source–Channel Coding Error Exponent for Discrete Communication Systems With Markovian Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the error exponent, EJ, for reliably transmitting a discrete stationary ergodic Markov (SEM) source Q over a discrete channel W with additive SEM noise via a joint source-channel (JSC) code. We first establish an upper bound for EJin terms of the Renyi entropy rates of the source and noise processes. We next investigate the analytical computation of EJby comparing our bound with Gallager's lower bound (1968) when the latter one is specialized to the SEM source-channel system. We also note that both bounds can be represented in Csiszar's form (1980), as the minimum of the sum of the source and channel error exponents. Our results provide us with the tools to systematically compare EJwith the tandem (separate) coding exponent EJ. We show that as in the case of memoryless source-channel pairs EJles 2Erand we provide explicit conditions for which EJ> ET. Numerical results indicate that EJap 2ETfor many SEM source-channel pairs, hence illustrating a substantial advantage of JSC coding over tandem coding for systems with Markovian memory.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".