MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551106978 · doi:10.1109/allerton.2012.6483266

Faulty Gallager-B decoding with optimal message repetition

2012· article· en· W2551106978 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecoding methodsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)List decodingAlgorithmFault toleranceSoft-decision decoderMessage passingSequential decodingChannel (broadcasting)Parallel computingDistributed computingComputer networkConcatenated error correction codeBlock code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the decoding of regular low density parity-check codes with a Gallager-B message-passing algorithm built exclusively from faulty computing devices. We propose an extension of the Gallager-B algorithm where messages can be repeated to provide increased fault tolerance, and use EXIT functions to derive its average performance. Thresholds are obtained both for the channel quality and the faultiness of the decoder. We argue that decoding complexity is central to the analysis of faulty decoding and compare the complexity of decoding with a faulty decoder instead of a reliable decoder, for a fixed channel condition and residual error rate. Finally, we show that when the message repetitions in the extended Gallager-B algorithm are scheduled optimally, a small complexity overhead with respect to a reliable decoder provides large gains in fault tolerance.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207