Joint Component Design for the JSCC System Based on DP-LDPC Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The joint base matrix BJof the joint source-channel coding (JSCC) system based on double protograph low-density parity-check (DP-LDPC) codes consists of four components, namely, the source code Bs, the channel code Bc, the type1 connection edge BL1and the type-2 connection edge BL2, each having a non-negligible influence on the system performance. Different from the traditional component-specific design approach, we propose a joint design and optimization algorithm based on the idea of multi-objective differential evolution (MODE). Specifically, we consider the optimization of the DP-LDPC JSCC system through joint design of three components Bs, Bc, BL1and all four components Bs, Bc, BL1, BL2, respectively. The proposed algorithm has low search complexity due to the reduction in size and element value of base matrices. The joint protograph extrinsic information transfer (JPEXIT) analyses and the simulation results demonstrate that the resulting JSCC system is free from a high error floor, requires fewer number of iterations for reaching the same bit error rate (BER) and achieves significant coding gains as compared to the state-of-the-art. Our DP-LDPC JSCC system is also shown to outperform its separation-based counterpart by a wide margin.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".