MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139336231 · doi:10.1109/icc.2004.1312610

Bi-directional soft-output M-algorithm for iterative decoding

2004· article· en· W2139336231 on OpenAlexaff
K.K.Y. Wong, P.J. McLane

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomaTurbo equalizerDecoding methodsTurboTrellis (graph)Computer scienceTurbo codeSoft-decision decoderEqualization (audio)AlgorithmViterbi algorithmConvolutional codeConcatenated error correction codeEngineeringBlock code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method to produce soft-outputs is proposed for the M-algorithm. The soft-output M-algorithm (SOMA) reduces the complexity of trellis decoding by retaining only M states per trellis depth. Its complexity increases with M rather than with the number of states in the trellis. We also propose an improved SOMA that is based on bi-directional decoding. The performance of the SOMA and the bi-directional SOMA (bi-SOMA) are assessed in decoding a turbo code and in turbo equalization. Simulation results show negligible performance loss when a 16-state turbo code is decoded by the SOMA with M = 12. For turbo equalization, near-optimal performance can be achieved by retaining only a small number of equalizer states as long as the. number of states retained by the decoder is sufficiently large. For a BPSK turbo equalization system with 16 states in both trellises, a SOMA-equalizer with M = 4 and a bi-SOMA decoder with M = 8 suffices. For a QPSK system with 256 equalizer states and 16 decoder states, a SOMA-equalizer with M = 16 and a SOMA-decoder with M = 12 suffices.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207