Coding for Errors and Erasures in Random Network Coding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of error-control in random linear network coding is considered. A “noncoherent” or “channel oblivious” model is assumed where neither transmitter nor receiver is assumed to have knowledge of the channel transfer characteristic. Motivated by the property that linear network coding is vector-space preserving, information transmission is modeled as the injection into the network of a basis for a vector space$V$and the collection by the receiver of a basis for a vector space$U$. A metric on the projective geometry associated with the packet space is introduced, and it is shown that a minimum-distance decoder for this metric achieves correct decoding if the dimension of the space$V \cap U$is sufficiently large. If the dimension of each codeword is restricted to a fixed integer, the code forms a subset of a finite-field Grassmannian, or, equivalently, a subset of the vertices of the corresponding Grassmann graph. Sphere-packing and sphere-covering bounds as well as a generalization of the Singleton bound are provided for such codes. Finally, a Reed–Solomon-like code construction, related to Gabidulin's construction of maximum rank-distance codes, is described and a Sudan-style “list-1” minimum-distance decoding algorithm is provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".