Extended-Serial Decoding for Turbo-Coded Data Gathering Sensor Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a specific type of data gathering sensor networks that can be modeled by a binary chief executive officer problem. We apply turbo codes to encode sensors observations and transmit them to a fusion center over independent binary symmetric channels. It is shown in the literature that the fusion center can exploit the correlation between sensors observations to design a soft-input soft-output (SISO) global decoder. Then the fusion center iterates extrinsic information between the global decoder and the SISO decoder of the applied error correcting code to jointly estimate the source. Since we consider turbo codes, the joint decoding problem is generalized to the problem of exchanging extrinsic information between three SISO modules. In this paper, we first apply the sum-product algorithm to derive the rules that update extrinsic information for the global decoder. Then, we apply extended-serial decoding that is the best known structure for decoders consisting of three concatenated SISO modules. We compare the bit error rate achieved by extended-serial decoding with the one achieved by a separate decoding strategy, where the fusion center separately decodes each sensor's observation and then decides based on the majority of the outputs. Our simulations show that extended-serial decoding performs significantly better than separate decoding.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it