Performance Improvement of Polar Codes via UEP Product Coding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aiming to improve the error correction performance of polar codes, researchers have proposed employing the product coding structure involving RS codes of different rates in the horizontal direction and the short polar codewords along the vertical direction. However, there is no efficient algorithm optimizing the rate allocation of RS codes. In order to address this problem, this paper provides an analytical formulation by maximizing the number of correctly decoded information bits. The proposed rate allocation formulation takes the channel statistics into consideration, and we further find that the number of different RS code rates could be limited to a small value. By doing so, the complexities of both the rate allocation optimization and the iterative product decoding could be reduced. Simulation results demonstrate the superiority of RS-polar product codes with the proposed rate allocation method over both additive white Gaussian noise channels and Gilbert–Elliott channels. When the inner polar codes of rate 1/2 are utilized, the optimized RS-polar product codes of low-to-medium rates significantly outperform the successive cancellation decoding of long polar codes, in the regime of a frame error rate ≥10−3.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".