MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113587209 · doi:10.1109/tcsi.2008.925813

Efficient Implementation of Low-Density Parity-Check Convolutional Code Encoders With Built-In Termination

2008· article· en· W2113587209 on OpenAlexaff
Zhengang Chen, T.L. Brandon, Stephen Bates, D.G. Elliott, B.F. Cockburn

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular Papers · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeEncoderComputer scienceAlgorithmSerial concatenated convolutional codesConvolutional codeCode (set theory)Parallel computingBlock codeComputer hardwareConcatenated error correction codeDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-density parity-check convolutional codes (LDPC-CCs) have demonstrated comparable error-correcting performance to LDPC block codes (LDPC-BCs). However, the LDPC-CC encoder requires termination when applied to finite-length data frames to ensure that the trailing information bits are fully protected. In this paper, the LDPC-CC encoder design is investigated, and a novel termination scheme is proposed. Starting from any encoder state, the proposed scheme is capable of generating a termination sequence in hardware without padding, thus minimizing the rate loss due to termination. A high-speed architecture for LDPC-CC encoders with built-in termination is proposed. Synthesis results for LDPC-CCs of code memory size up to 512 demonstrate maximum encoding throughputs of around 1 Gb/s for a 90-nm CMOS technology. The implementation cost for such encoders is shown to be reasonably low for average-sized LDPC-CCs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular PapersSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207