Belief-Propagation Decoding of LDPC Codes With Variable Node–Centric Dynamic Schedules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Belief propagation (BP) decoding of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes with various dynamic decoding schedules have been proposed to improve the efficiency of the conventional flooding schedule. As the ultimate goal of an ideal LDPC code decoder is to have correct bit decisions, a dynamic decoding schedule should be variable node (VN)-centric and be able to find the VNs with probable incorrect decisions and having a good chance to be corrected if chosen for update. We propose a novel and effective metric called conditional innovation (CI) which serves this design goal well. To make the most of dynamic scheduling which produces high-reliability bit decisions, we limit our search for the candidate VNs to those related to the latest updated nodes only. Based on the CI metric and the new search guideline separately or in combination, we develop several highly efficient decoding schedules. To reduce decoding latency, we introduce multi-edge updating versions which offer extra latency-performance tradeoffs. Numerical results show that both single-edge and multi-edge algorithms provide better decoding performance against most dynamic schedules and the CI-based algorithms are particularly impressive at the first few decoding iterations.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".