MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168020874 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2004.840639

High-Rate Punctured Convolutional Self-Doubly Orthogonal Codes for Iterative Threshold Decoding

2005· article· en· W2168020874 on OpenAlexaff
David Haccoun, Christian Cardinal

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional codePuncturingSequential decodingSerial concatenated convolutional codesAlgorithmDecoding methodsTurbo codeViterbi decoderConcatenated error correction codeComputer scienceList decodingLinear codeMathematicsBlock codeTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The puncturing technique allows obtaining high-rate convolutional codes from low-rate convolutional codes used as mother codes. This technique has been successfully applied to generate good high-rate convolutional codes which are suitable for Viterbi and sequential decoding. In this paper, we investigate the puncturing technique for convolutional self-doubly orthogonal codes (CSO/sup 2/C) which are decoded using an iterative threshold-decoding algorithm. Based on an analysis of iterative threshold decoding of the rate-R=b/(b+1) punctured systematic CSO/sup 2/C, the required properties of the rate-R=1/2 systematic convolutional codes (SCCs) used as mother codes are derived. From this analysis, it is shown that there is no need for the punctured mother codes to respect all the required conditions, in order to maintain the double orthogonality at the second iteration step of the iterative threshold-decoding algorithm. The results of the search for the appropriate rate-R=1/2 SCCs used as mother codes to yield a large number of punctured codes of rates 2/3/spl les/R/spl les/6/7 are presented, and some of their error performances evaluated.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207