MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005241596 · doi:10.1109/bsc.2008.4563211

Raptor codes for hybrid error-erasure channels with memory

2008· article· en· W2005241596 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu Cao, Steven D. Blostein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRaptor codeOnline codesComputer scienceTornado codeFountain codeErasureLuby transform codeForward error correctionBinary erasure channelChannel (broadcasting)Concatenated error correction codeComputer networkDecoding methodsAlgorithmBlock codeChannel capacity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raptor codes are a class of rateless codes which have been used as application layer forward error correction (FEC) codes for broadcasting over wireless channels. Raptor codes provide promising performance in both erasure channels and noisy channels. This paper investigates the transmission of Raptor codes over hybrid error-erasure channels with and without memory. Performance of Raptor codes over binary symmetric channels with erasures (BSCE) is analyzed. It has been found that the average overhead of Raptor codes is independent of the erasure rate of BSCE channels. Simulation results of BER performance also show similar behavior. When channel memory is considered, performance of Raptor codes over Gilbert-Elliott (GE) channels is investigated via simulation. The results show that memory degrades the performance of Raptor codes whether or not channel state information is available.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207