Improved Bit-Flipping Algorithm for Successive Cancellation Decoding of Polar Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interest in polar codes has been increasing significantly since their adoption for use in the 5$^{\rm th}$ generation wireless systems standard. Successive cancellation (SC) decoding algorithm has low implementation complexity, but yields mediocre error-correction performance at the code lengths of interest. SC-Flip algorithm improves the error-correction performance of SC by identifying possibly erroneous decisions made by SC and re-iterates after flipping one bit. It was recently shown that only a portion of bit-channels are most likely to be in error. In this work, we investigate the average log-likelihood ratio (LLR) values and their distribution related to the erroneous bit-channels, and develop the Thresholded SC-Flip (TSCF) decoding algorithm. We also replace the LLR selection and sorting of SC-Flip with a comparator to reduce the implementation complexity. Simulation results demonstrate that for practical code lengths and a wide range of rates, TSCF shows negligible loss compared to the error-correction performance obtained when all single-errors are corrected. At matching maximum iterations, TSCF has an error-correction performance gain of up to $0.45$ dB compared with SC-Flip decoding. At matching error-correction performance, the computational complexity of TSCF is reduced by up to $40\%$ on average, and requires up to $5\times$ lower maximum number of iterations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".