MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977557067 · doi:10.1109/tsp.2019.2944738

Rate-Flexible Fast Polar Decoders

2019· article· en· W2977557067 on OpenAlexafffund
Seyyed Ali Hashemi, Carlo Condo, Marco Mondelli, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSimons Institute for the Theory of Computing, University of California BerkeleyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill UniversitySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceSignal processingAlgorithmDigital signal processingComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polar codes have gained extensive attention during the past few years and recently they have been selected for the next generation of wireless communications standards (5G). Successive-cancellation-based (SC-based) decoders, such as SC list (SCL) and SC flip (SCF), provide a reasonable error performance for polar codes at the cost of low decoding speed. Fast SC-based decoders, such as Fast-SSC, Fast-SSCL, and Fast-SSCF, identify the special constituent codes in a polar code graph off-line, produce a list of operations, store the list in memory, and feed the list to the decoder to decode the constituent codes in order efficiently, thus increasing the decoding speed. However, the list of operations is dependent on the code rate and as the rate changes, a new list is produced, making fast SC-based decoders not rate-flexible. In this paper, we propose a completely rate-flexible fast SC-based decoder by creating the list of operations directly in hardware, with low implementation complexity. We further propose a hardware architecture implementing the proposed method and show that the area occupation of the rate-flexible fast SC-based decoder in this paper is only 38% of the total area of the memory-based base-line decoder when 5G code rates are supported.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations25
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Signal ProcessingSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207