MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510608886 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2016.7538902

Matrix reordering for efficient list sphere decoding of polar codes

2016· article· en· W2510608886 on OpenAlexaff
Seyyed Ali Hashemi, Carlo Condo, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolar codeDecoding methodsComputer scienceList decodingAlgorithmGenerator matrixPolarMatrix (chemical analysis)Error detection and correctionFrame (networking)Sequential decodingCode (set theory)Computational complexity theoryParity-check matrixConcatenated error correction codeLow-density parity-check codeBlock codeTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Successive-Cancellation List (SCL) algorithm is one of the best polar code decoding algorithms in terms of trade-offs between complexity and error correction performance. The List-Sphere Decoding (List-SD) algorithm has been recently proposed: it yields a better complexity/performance trade-off than SCL in the decoding of short polar codes, that can be used as component codes for larger polar codes. We exploit the structure of the generator matrix of polar codes to propose a matrix reordering technique which allows to significantly reduce the List-SD complexity without degrading its error correction performance, further improving the aforementioned trade-off. The proposed technique is implemented on hardware and it is shown that at the same Frame Error Rate (FER) and Bit Error Rate (BER), the matrix reordering can reduce the resource requirements of List-SD of up to 73%. Furthermore, FER and BER curves are plotted for case studies, showing that at the same complexity cost, matrix reordering improves the performance of List-SD of up to 0.75 dB at FER=10-2.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207