MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137892166 · doi:10.1109/isit.2010.5513605

Lowering the error floor of LDPC codes using cyclic liftings

2010· article· en· W2137892166 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Asvadi, Amir H. Banihashemi, Mahmoud Ahmadian‐Attari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeAdditive white Gaussian noiseError floorDecoding methodsAlgorithmCode (set theory)Concatenated error correction codeDegree (music)MathematicsDegree distributionComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Block codeCombinatoricsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclic liftings are proposed to lower the error floor of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes. The liftings are designed to eliminate dominant trapping sets of the base code by removing the short cycles which form the trapping sets. We derive a necessary and sufficient condition for the cyclic permutations assigned to the edges of a cycle c of length ℓ(c) in the base graph such that the inverse image of c in the lifted graph consists of only cycles of length strictly larger than ℓ(c). The proposed method is universal in the sense that it can be applied to any LDPC code over any channel and for any iterative decoding algorithm. It also preserves important properties of the base code such as degree distributions. The proposed method is applied to both structured and random codes over the binary symmetric channel (BSC). The error floor improves consistently by increasing the lifting degree, and the results show significant improvements in the error floor compared to the base code, a random code of the same degree distribution and block length, and a random lifting of the same degree. Similar improvements are also observed when the codes designed for the BSC are applied to the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel.

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)0.002
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207