MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892912714 · doi:10.1109/tit.2018.2872053

A Joint Typicality Approach to Compute–Forward

2018· article· en· W2892912714 on OpenAlexafffund
Sung Hoon Lim, Chen Feng, Adriano Pastore, Bobak Nazer, Michael Gastpar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDecoding methodsComputer scienceEncoding (memory)GaussianJoint (building)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmContext (archaeology)Channel (broadcasting)MathematicsTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a joint typicality framework for encoding and decoding nested linear codes in multi-user networks. This framework provides a new perspective on compute-forward within the context of discrete memoryless networks. In particular, it establishes an achievable rate region for computing a linear combination over a discrete memoryless multiple-access channel (MAC). When specialized to the Gaussian MAC, this rate region recovers and improves upon the lattice-based compute-forward rate region of Nazer and Gastpar, thus providing a unified approach for discrete memoryless and Gaussian networks. Furthermore, our framework provides some valuable insights on establishing the optimal decoding rate region for compute-forward by considering joint decoders, progressing beyond most previous works that consider successive cancellation decoding. Specifically, this paper establishes an achievable rate region for simultaneously decoding two linear combinations of nested linear codewords from K senders.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207