Near Optimal Viterbi Decoders for Convolutional Codes in Symmetric Alpha-Stable Noise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design of Viterbi decoders for signals in noise modeled using the symmetric α-stable distribution is considered. The traditional Viterbi decoder, which has a branch metric optimized for Gaussian noise, performs poorly in symmetric α-stable noise. Since the optimal maximum likelihood branch metric is impractically complex, many suboptimal metrics have been proposed, such as the hard decision, p-norm and absolute (1-norm) metric. A Viterbi decoder that uses the absolute branch metric has better performance and lower complexity, however, its performance degrades when α decreases. In this paper, the effects of the suboptimal metrics on the performance of the Viterbi decoder are analyzed, and a clear justification for the performance of the decoder that uses the Gaussian and absolute metrics is provided. Moreover, this analysis is used to design a low complexity suboptimal branch metric that improves the performance of the Viterbi decoder by about 0.75 to 2 dB compared to the absolute branch metric for different values of α, at almost no additional complexity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".