MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801011149 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2018.8351832

Low-Complexity Software Stack Decoding of Polar Codes

2018· article· en· W2801011149 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 scienceAlgorithmComputational complexity theorySortingSequential decodingError detection and correctionList decodingCode (set theory)Concatenated error correction codeComputer engineeringTheoretical computer scienceBlock code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polar codes are a recent class of linear error-correcting codes that asymptotically achieve the channel capacity at infinite code length. The Successive Cancellation List (SCL) algorithm yields very good error-correction performance, at the cost of high implementation complexity. The Stack (SCS) decoding algorithm provides similar error-correction performance at a lower complexity. In this work, we propose an efficient software implementation of the SCS decoding algorithm, along with techniques to further reduce its computational complexity. In particular, we reduce the SCS memory requirements through efficient path switching, replace the stack sorting with a linear search, and explore the use of a partial CRC along with an early termination criterion. Using the proposed methods, we are able to reduce the computational complexity of the SCS decoder, reducing the number of estimated bits up to 97% with respect to SCL, while maintaining similar error-correction performance as 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 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 score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207