GRAND for Rayleigh Fading Channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guessing Random Additive Noise Decoding (GRAND) is a code-agnostic decoding technique for short-length and high-rate channel codes. GRAND attempts to guess the channel-induced noise by generating Test Error Patterns (TEPs), and the sequence of TEP generation is the primary distinction between GRAND variants. In this work, we extend the application of GRAND to multipath frequency non-selective Rayleigh fading communication channels, and we refer to this GRAND variant as Fading-GRAND. The proposed Fading-GRAND adapts its TEP generation to the fading conditions of the underlying communication channel, outperforming traditional channel code decoders in scenarios with L spatial diversity branches as well as scenarios with no diversity. Numerical simulation results show that the Fading-GRAND outperforms the traditional Berlekamp-Massey (B-M) decoder for decoding BCH code (127, 106) and BCH code (127, 113) by $0.5\sim 6.5\mathrm{dB}$ at a target FER of $10^{-7}$. Similarly, Fading-GRAND outperforms GRANDAB, the hard-input variation of GRAND, by $0.2\sim 8\mathbf{d B}$ at a target FER of $10^{-7}$ with CRC (128, 104) code and RLC (128,104). Furthermore the average complexity of Fading-GRAND, at $\frac{E_{b}}{N_{0}}$ corresponding to target FER of $10^{-7}$, is $\frac{1}{2}\times\sim\frac{1}{46}\times$ the complexity of GRANDAB.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".