Construction of Irregular Protograph-Based QC-LDPC Codes With Low Error Floor
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we design finite-length irregular protograph-based quasi-cyclic (QC) low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes with good waterfall performance and low error floor. To achieve a low error floor, we eliminate a targeted set of dominant elementary trapping sets (ETS) £ in the Tanner graph of the code. For a given rate and girth, the codes are designed to be free of the largest set of problematic ETSs for a given block length, or to have the shortest block length while a given set of ETSs is avoided. The design is based on a search algorithm that identifies whether any instance of any structure within £ exists in the Tanner graph of the constructed code or not. The search algorithm performs this task with minimal complexity, making it feasible to construct practical codes by running the search algorithm a large number of times. Simulation results are provided to demonstrate the superior performance of designed codes compared to similar state-of-the-art irregular QC-LDPC codes.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it