MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

High-Throughput VLSI Architecture for GRAND

2020· preprint· en· W3043302671 on OpenAlexaff
Syed Mohsin Abbas, Thibaud Tonnellier, Furkan Ercan, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCode wordComputer scienceBCH codeDecoding methodsCode (set theory)AlgorithmThroughputCode rateAdditive white Gaussian noiseParallel computingChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guessing Random Additive Noise Decoding (GRAND) is a recently proposed universal decoding algorithm for linear error correcting codes. Since GRAND does not depend on the structure of the code, it can be used for any code encountered in contemporary communication standards or may even be used for random linear network coding. This property makes this new algorithm particularly appealing. Instead of trying to decode the received vector, GRAND attempts to identify the noise that corrupted the codeword. To that end, GRAND relies on the generation of test error patterns that are successively applied to the received vector. In this paper, we propose the first hardware architecture for the GRAND algorithm. Considering GRAND with ABandonment (GRANDAB) that limits the number of test patterns, the proposed architecture only needs$2+{\sum}_{i=2}^n \ \left\lfloor\frac{i}{2} \right\rfloor$time steps to perform the${\sum}_{i=1}^3 \ \binom{n}{i}$queries required when AB = 3. For a code length of 128, our proposed hardware architecture demonstrates only a fraction (1.2%) of the total number of performed queries as time steps. Synthesis result using TSMC 65nm CMOS technology shows that average throughputs of 32 Gbps to 64 Gbps can be achieved at an SNR of 10 dB for a code length of 128 and code rates rate higher than 0.75, transmitted over an AWGN channel. Comparisons with a decoder tailored for a (79, 64) BCH code show that the proposed architecture can achieve a slightly higher average throughput at high SNRs, while obtaining the same decoding performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCooperative Communication and Network Coding→French-language works237,207→