Error Floor Analysis of LDPC Column Layered Decoders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this letter, we analyze the error floor of column layered decoders, also known as shuffled decoders, for low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes under saturating sum-product algorithm (SPA). To estimate the error floor, we evaluate the failure rate of different trapping sets (TSs) that contribute to the frame error rate in the error floor region. For each such TS, we model the dynamics of SPA in the vicinity of the TS by a linear state-space model that incorporates the information of the layered message-passing schedule. Consequently, the model parameters and the failure rate of the TS change as a result of the change in the order by which the messages of different layers are updated. This, in turn, causes the error floor of the code to change as a function of scheduling. Based on the proposed analysis, we then devise an efficient search algorithm to find a schedule that minimizes the error floor. Simulation results are presented to verify the accuracy of the proposed error floor estimation technique.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".