MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116941076 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564647

A new criterion to compare different LDPC codes for hardware implementation

2008· article· en· W2116941076 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amir Hosein Harati Nejad Torbati, Mahmoud Ahmadian Attari, Amir Moosavinia

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeComputer scienceForward error correctionParallel computingComputer architectureComputer hardwareComputer engineeringDecoding methodsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a new combinational criterion as a mean for comparison between different LDPC codes in terms of complexity and efficiency. The main idea behind the proposed criterion is to merge different aspects of a code to a unique number. We will show that the new criterion, named “Goodness Number” or GN, is applicable, and in some circumstances it is preferred to other criteria such as complexity and error probability criteria and at the same time it maintains computational simplicity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207