Hybrid Hard-Decision Iterative Decoding of Irregular Low-Density Parity-Check Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time-invariant hybrid (HscrTI) decoding of irregular low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes is studied. Focusing on HscrTIalgorithms with majority-based (MB) binary message-passing constituents, we use density evolution (DE) and finite-length simulation to analyze the performance and the convergence properties of these algorithms over (memoryless) binary symmetric channels. To apply DE, we generalize degree distributions to have the irregularity of both the code and the decoding algorithm embedded in them. A tight upper bound on the threshold of MB HscrTIalgorithms is derived, and it is proven that the asymptotic error probability for these algorithms tends to zero, at least exponentially, with the number of iterations. We devise optimal MB HscrTIalgorithms for irregular LDPC codes, and show that these algorithms outperform Gallager's algorithm A applied to optimized irregular LDPC codes. We also show that compared to switch-type algorithms, such as Gallager's algorithm B, where a comparable improvement is obtained by switching between different MB algorithms, MB HscrTIalgorithms are more robust and can better cope with unknown channel conditions, and thus can be practically more attractive.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".