MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547363301 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726832

Implementation of decoders for symmetric low density parity check codes on parallel computation platforms using OpenCL

2016· article· en· W2547363301 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Maier, B.F. Cockburn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerParallel computingField-programmable gate arrayLow-density parity-check codeComputationDecoding methodsEmbedded systemAlgorithmProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenCL is a high-level language that allows mixed hardware/software systems to be specified and compiled to run on heterogeneous parallel computing platforms. The hardware parallelism can take the form of multi-core central processing units (CPUs), massively parallel graphics processing units (GPUs), and, most recently, field-programmable gate array (FPGA) fabrics. OpenCL compilers for CPUs and GPUs have been available for over 6 years, but only recently has compiler support been extended to include FPGAs. This paper investigates OpenCL designs for the computationally demanding standard iterative decoding algorithm for low-density parity check (LDPC) codes. The LDPC decoding algorithm offers several kinds of potentially exploitable parallelism. Our objective was to investigate the design trade-offs in OpenCL that will produce the best performance when compiled by the Altera Offline Compiler (AOC v15.1) for OpenCL-to-FPGA. Within a relatively short design time we were able to implement a decoder that achieved 5.12 Mbps with a length-1024 (3,6)-regular code.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207