MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098702051

4 The ADMM penalized decoder for LDPC codes∗

2014· article· en· W3098702051 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeComputer scienceForward error correctionDecoding methodsAlgorithmTurbo codeTheoretical computer scienceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear programming (LP) decoding for low-density parity-check codes was introduced by Feldman et al. and has been shown to have theoretical guarantees in several regimes. Furthermore, it has been reported in the literature-via simulation and via instanton analysis-that LP decoding displays better error rate performance at high signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) than does belief propagation (BP) decoding. However, at low SNRs, LP decoding is observed to have worse performance than BP. In this paper, we seek to improve LP decoding at low SNRs while maintaining LP decoding's high SNR performance. Our main contribution is a new class of decoders obtained by applying the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) algorithm to a set of non-convex optimization problems. These non-convex problems are constructed by adding a penalty term to the objective of LP decoding. The goal of the penalty is to make pseudocodewords, which are non-integer vertices of the LP relaxation, more costly. We name this class of decoders-ADMM penalized decoders. For low and moderate SNRs, we simulate ADMM penalized decoding with ℓ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub> and ℓ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub> penalties. We find that these decoders can outperform both BP and LP decoding. For high SNRs, where it is difficult to obtain data via simulation, we use an instanton analysis and find that, asymptotically, ADMM penalized decoding performs better than BP but not as well as LP. Unfortunately, since ADMM penalized decoding is not a convex program, we have not been successful in developing theoretical guarantees. However, the non-convex program can be approximated using a sequence of linear programs; an approach that yields a reweighted LP decoder. We show that a two-round reweighted LP decoder has an improved theoretical recovery threshold when compared with LP decoding. In addition, we find via simulation that reweighted LP decoding significantly attains lower error rates than LP decoding at low SNRs.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207