MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991523744 · doi:10.1109/tit.2013.2253596

Effects of the LLL Reduction on the Success Probability of the Babai Point and on the Complexity of Sphere Decoding

2013· article· en· W1991523744 on OpenAlexaff
Xiao-Wen Chang, Jinming Wen, Xiaohu Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPermutation (music)Decoding methodsReduction (mathematics)Integer (computer science)CombinatoricsAlgorithmEstimatorDiscrete mathematicsPoint (geometry)Computer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common method to estimate an unknown integer parameter vector in a linear model is to solve an integer least squares (ILS) problem. A typical approach to solving an ILS problem is sphere decoding. To make a sphere decoder faster, the well-known LLL reduction is often used as preprocessing. The Babai point produced by the Babai nearest plane algorithm is a suboptimal solution of the ILS problem. First, we prove that the success probability of the Babai point as a lower bound on the success probability of the ILS estimator is sharper than the lower bound given by Hassibi and Boyd [1]. Then, we show rigorously that applying the LLL reduction algorithm will increase the success probability of the Babai point and give some theoretical and numerical test results. We give examples to show that unlike LLL's column permutation strategy, two often used column permutation strategies SQRD and V-BLAST may decrease the success probability of the Babai point. Finally, we show rigorously that applying the LLL reduction algorithm will also reduce the computational complexity of sphere decoders, which is measured approximately by the number of nodes in the search tree in the literature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207