Bit-Interleaved Coded Modulation with Mismatched Decoding Metrics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bit-interleaved coded modulation (BICM) has become the de facto coding standard for communication systems. Recently, BICM has been cast as a mismatched decoding scheme due to the assumption of independent bit metrics. In addition to this inherent mismatch, practical demodulators may produce mismatched decoding metrics because of implementation constraints, such as clipping and metric approximation to reduce computational complexity. In this paper, we investigate BICM with such metrics. In line with recent works on this topic, we adopt the generalized mutual information (GMI) as the pertinent performance measure. First, we show that level-dependent scaling of logarithmic bit metrics can improve the BICM GMI. Second, we propose a uniform metric scaling which can lead to an improved performance of mismatched sum-product symbol-by-symbol decoding, even if the GMI is not changed. Third, we investigate general metric-mismatch correction methods and analyze their effects in terms of the GMI. By means of three application examples, we illustrate that metric-mismatch correction, including metric scaling, can significantly increase BICM rates.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it