MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078724035 · doi:10.1109/infcom.2013.6567095

Streaming codes for channels with burst and isolated erasures

2013· article· en· W2078724035 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Badr, Ashish Khisti, Wai-Tian Tan, John Apostolopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceErasureUpper and lower boundsChannel (broadcasting)AlgorithmBlock codeCode (set theory)Tornado codeColumn (typography)Luby transform codeConcatenated error correction codeOnline codesLinear codeDecoding methodsMathematicsTelecommunicationsSet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study low-delay error correction codes for streaming recovery over a class of packet-erasure channels that introduce both burst-erasures and isolated erasures. We propose a simple, yet effective class of codes whose parameters can be tuned to obtain a tradeoff between the capability to correct burst and isolated erasures. Our construction generalizes previously proposed low-delay codes which are effective only against burst erasures. We establish an information theoretic upper bound on the capability of any code to simultaneously correct burst and isolated erasures and show that our proposed constructions meet the upper bound in some special cases. We discuss the operational significance of column-distance and column-span metrics and establish that the rate 1/2 codes discovered by Martinian and Sundberg [IT Trans. 2004] through a computer search indeed attain the optimal column-distance and column-span tradeoff. Numerical simulations over a Gilbert-Elliott channel model and a Fritchman model show significant performance gains over previously proposed low-delay codes and random linear codes for certain range of channel parameters.

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)0.004
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations53
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207