MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947190950 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2919502

Multiple-Block Combined Decoding for Cell Search With Polar Codes

2019· article· en· W2947190950 on OpenAlexaff
Xinyi Wang, Congzhe Cao, Ce Sun, Dai Jia, Zesong Fei

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBlock Error RateDecoding methodsComputer scienceAlgorithmList decodingSequential decodingBlock (permutation group theory)Encoding (memory)Transmission (telecommunications)Theoretical computer scienceBlock codeMathematicsConcatenated error correction codeTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polar codes have been applied in many applications due to the excellent decoding performance as well as relatively low encoding and decoding complexity. In the cell search procedure for the fifth generation (5G) systems, part of the common information bits (CIBs) is transmitted in successive transmission blocks. In this paper, multiple-block combined decoding (MBCD) schemes are proposed for both non-systematic and systematic polar codes to enhance cell search. In the proposed MBCD schemes, the log-likelihood ratios (LLRs) of the CIBs are combined to improve the reliabilities of the corresponding sub-channels. The common information sets are further optimized. For both schemes, low-complexity optimization methods are proposed. Meanwhile, the closed-form expression of block error rate (BLER) performance is derived, which is verified by simulation results. The simulation results show that the proposed MBCD schemes can significantly improve the BLER performance, leading to a latency reduction in cell search.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207