Fast Simplified Successive-Cancellation List Decoding of Polar Codes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polar codes are capacity achieving error correcting codes that can be decoded through the successive-cancellation algorithm. To improve its error-correction performance, a list-based version called successive-cancellation list (SCL) has been proposed in the past, that however substantially increases the number of time-steps in the decoding process. The simplified SCL (SSCL) decoding algorithm exploits constituent codes within the polar code structure to greatly reduce the required number of time-steps without introducing any error-correction performance loss. In this paper, we propose a faster decoding approach to decode one of these constituent codes, the Rate-1 node. We use this Rate-1 node decoder to develop Fast-SSCL. We demonstrate that only a list-size-bound number of bits needs to be estimated in Rate-1 nodes and Fast-SSCL exactly matches the error-correction performance of SCL and SSCL. This technique can potentially greatly reduce the total number of time-steps needed for polar codes decoding: analysis on a set of case studies show that Fast-SSCL has a number of time- steps requirement that is up to 66.6% lower than SSCL and 88.1% lower than SCL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it