Noisy Density Evolution With Asymmetric Deviation Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers low-density parity-check (LDPC) decoders affected by deviations introduced by the electronic device on which the decoder is implemented. Noisy density evolution (DE) that allows to theoretically study the performance of these LDPC decoders can only consider symmetric deviation models due to the all-zero codeword assumption. A novel DE method is proposed that admits the use of asymmetric deviation models, thus widening the range of faulty implementations that can be analyzed. DE equations are provided for three noisy decoders: belief propagation, Gallager B, and quantized min-sum (MS). Simulation results confirm that the proposed DE accurately predicts the performance of LDPC decoders with asymmetric deviations. Furthermore, asymmetric versions of the Gallager B and MS decoders are proposed to compensate the effect of asymmetric deviations. The parameters of these decoders are then optimized using the proposed DE, leading to better ensemble thresholds and improved finite-length performance in the presence of asymmetric deviations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".