Finding Leafless Elementary Trapping Sets and Elementary Absorbing Sets of LDPC Codes is Hard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leafless elementary trapping sets (LETSs) are known to be the problematic structures in the error floor region of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes over the additive white Gaussian (AWGN) channel under iterative decoding algorithms. While problems involving the general category of trapping sets, and the subcategory of elementary trapping sets (ETSs), have been shown to be NP-hard, similar results for LETSs, which are a subset of ETSs, are not available. In this paper, we prove that, for a general LDPC code, finding a LETS of a given size α with minimum number of unsatisfied check nodes b is NP-hard to approximate with any guaranteed precision. We also prove that finding the minimum size a of a LETS with a given b is NP-hard to approximate. Similar results are proved for elementary absorbing sets, a popular subcategory of LETSs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".