MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963477777 · doi:10.1109/tit.2016.2554598

ADMM LP Decoding of Non-Binary LDPC Codes in <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$ \mathbb {F}_{2^{m}}$ </tex-math> </inline-formula>

2016· article· en· W2963477777 on OpenAlexafffund
Xishuo Liu, Stark C. Draper

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Computing and Communication FoundationsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsDecoding methodsBinary numberLow-density parity-check codeNotationDiscrete mathematicsArithmeticBinary codeCombinatoricsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop efficient decoders for non-binary low-density parity-check codes using the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM). We apply ADMM to two decoding problems. The first problem is linear programming (LP) decoding. In order to develop an efficient algorithm, we focus on non-binary codes in fields of characteristic two. This allows us to transform each constraint in F2m to a set of constraints in F2that has a factor graph representation. Applying ADMM to the LP decoding problem results in two types of non-trivial sub-routines. The first type requires us to solve an unconstrained quadratic program. We solve this problem efficiently by leveraging new results obtained from studying the above factor graphs. The second type requires Euclidean projections onto polytopes that are studied in the literature. Such projections can be solved efficiently using off-the-shelf techniques, which scale linearly in the dimension of the vector to project. ADMM LP decoding scales linearly with block length, linearly with check degree, and quadratically with field size. The second problem we consider is a penalized LP decoding problem. This problem is obtained by incorporating a penalty term into the LP decoding objective. The purpose of the penalty term is to make non-integer solutions (pseudocodewords) more expensive and hence to improve decoding performance. The ADMM algorithm for the penalized LP problem requires Euclidean projection onto a polytope formed by embedding the constraints specified by the non-binary single parity-check code, which can be solved by applying the ADMM technique to the resulting quadratic program. Empirically, this decoder achieves a much reduced error rate than LP decoding at low signal-to-noise ratios.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207