MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009853277 · doi:10.1155/asp/2006/98738

Near-Capacity Coding for Discrete Multitone Systems with Impulse Noise

2006· article· en· W2009853277 on OpenAlexaff
Masoud Ardakani, Frank R. Kschischang, Wei Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueEURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeComputer scienceImpulse noiseErasureAlgorithmDigital subscriber lineGaussian noiseCoding (social sciences)Additive white Gaussian noiseCoding gainConstant-weight codeConcatenated error correction codeTheoretical computer scienceDecoding methodsTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)MathematicsBlock codeArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the design of near-capacity-achieving error-correcting codes for a discrete multitone (DMT) system in the presence of both additive white Gaussian noise and impulse noise. Impulse noise is one of the main channel impairments for digital subscriber lines (DSL). One way to combat impulse noise is to detect the presence of the impulses and to declare an erasure when an impulse occurs. In this paper, we propose a coding system based on low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes and bit-interleaved coded modulation that is capable of taking advantage of the knowledge of erasures. We show that by carefully choosing the degree distribution of an irregular LDPC code, both the additive noise and the erasures can be handled by a single code, thus eliminating the need for an outer code. Such a system can perform close to the capacity of the channel and for the same redundancy is significantly more immune to the impulse noise than existing methods based on an outer Reed-Solomon (RS) code. The proposed method has a lower implementation complexity than the concatenated coding approach.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207