MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321374037 · doi:10.3390/e25020382

Analysis and Optimization of a General Linking Matrix for JSCC Scheme Based on Double LDPC Codes

2023· article· en· W4321374037 on OpenAlexaff
Qiwang Chen, Zhiping Xu, Huihui Wu, Guofa Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesJimei UniversityHuaqiao UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeParity-check matrixAlgorithmDecoding methodsComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceIdentity matrixConcatenated error correction codeMathematicsBlock codeEigenvalues and eigenvectors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key component of the joint source-channel coding (JSCC) scheme based on double low-density parity-check (D-LDPC) codes is the introduction of a linking matrix between the source LDPC code and channel LDPC code, by which the decoding information including the source redundancy and channel state information can be transferred iteratively. However, the linking matrix is a fixed one-to-one mapping, i.e., an identity matrix in a conventional D-LDPC code system, which may not take full advantage of the decoding information. Therefore, this paper introduces a general linking matrix, i.e., a non-identity linking matrix, connecting the check nodes (CNs) of the source LDPC code and the variable nodes (VNs) of the channel LDPC code. Further, the encoding and decoding algorithms of the proposed D-LDPC coding system are generalized. A joint extrinsic information transfer (JEXIT) algorithm is derived for calculating the decoding threshold of the proposed system with a general linking matrix. In addition, several general linking matrices are optimized with the aid of the JEXIT algorithm. Finally, the simulation results demonstrate the superiority of the proposed D-LDPC coding system with general linking matrices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207