MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134762287 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3065067

Synchronization of Variable-Length Constrained Sequence Codes

2021· article· en· W3134762287 on OpenAlexafffund
Congzhe Cao, I.J. Fair

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCellular Automata and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsSynchronization (alternating current)Sequence (biology)Computer scienceConstraint (computer-aided design)AlgorithmConstruct (python library)Variable (mathematics)Code wordTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsDecoding methodsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the ability of recently developed variable-length constrained sequence codes to determine codeword boundaries in the received sequence upon initial receipt of the sequence and if errors in the received sequence cause synchronization to be lost. We first investigate construction of these codes based on the finite state machine description of a given constraint, and develop new construction criteria to achieve high synchronization probabilities. Given these criteria, we propose a guided partial extension algorithm to construct variable-length constrained sequence codes with high synchronization probabilities. With this algorithm we construct new codes and determine the number of codewords and coded bits that are needed to recover synchronization once synchronization is lost. We consider a large variety of constraints including the runlength limited (RLL) constraint, the DC-free constraint, the Pearson constraint and constraints for inter-cell interference mitigation in flash memories. Simulation results show that the codes we construct exhibit excellent synchronization properties, often resynchronizing within a few bits.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicCellular Automata and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207