MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145121981 · doi:10.1109/isit.2008.4594998

Quantum serial turbo-codes

2008· article· en· W2145121981 on OpenAlexaff
David Poulin, Jean–Pierre Tillich, H Ollivier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbo codeSerial concatenated convolutional codesQuantum convolutional codeConvolutional codeConcatenated error correction codeComputer scienceBlock codeAlgorithmLinear codeTheoretical computer scienceLow-density parity-check codeBCJR algorithmDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a theory of quantum serial turbo-codes and study their performance numerically on a depolarization channel. These codes can be considered as a generalization of classical serial turbo-codes. As their classical cousins, they can be iteratively decoded and with well chosen constituent convolutional codes, we observe an important reduction of the word error rate as the number of encoded qubits increases. Our construction offers several advantages over quantum LDPC codes. First, the Tanner graph used for decoding can be chosen to be free of 4-cycles that deteriorate the performances of iterative decoding. Secondly, the iterative decoder makes explicit use of the code's degeneracy. Finally, there is complete freedom in the code design in terms of length, rate, memory size, and interleaver choice. We address two issues related to the encoding of convolutional codes that are directly relevant for turbo-codes, namely the character of being recursive and non-catastrophic. We define a quantum analogue of a state diagram that provides an efficient way to verify these properties on a given quantum convolutional encoder. Unfortunately, we also prove that all recursive quantum convolutional encoder have catastrophic error propagation. In our constructions, the convolutional codes have thus been chosen to be non-catastrophic and non-recursive. While the resulting families of turbo-codes have bounded minimum distance, from a pragmatic point of view the effective minimum distances of the codes that we have simulated are large enough for not degrading iterative decoding performance up to reasonable word error rates and block sizes.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations32
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207