MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588162691 · doi:10.1109/lcomm.2017.2669319

On-Line Fountain Codes With Unequal Error Protection

2017· article· en· W2588162691 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

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersBeijing Council of Science and Technology
KeywordsFountain codeComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)AlgorithmEncoding (memory)Line (geometry)Luby transform codeScheme (mathematics)Decoding methodsFountainProperty (philosophy)Theoretical computer scienceBlock codeError floorMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new encoding scheme for on-line fountain codes is proposed to provide unequal error protection (UEP) for source symbols. Both the weighted-selection strategy and the expanding-window strategy are used to achieve the UEP property. We analyze the bound of overhead to demonstrate the performance. We also make comparisons with on-line fountain codes that provide equal error protection. Simulation results show that with the proposed scheme, UEP is achieved, where the most important symbols are recovered faster than the least important symbols.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.238 · 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