Low Power Low-Density Parity Check Encoder Using Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low-Density Parity Check (LDPC) codes are viewed as one of the best error correction coding (ECC) methods in terms of correction efficiency.They have been used in several modern data transmission standards, where the codecs are often built inside specialized integrated circuits (ICs).On the other hand, Complementary Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (CMOS) circuits have evolved as a critical design characteristic that the designer must consider such as power, which has been overlooked by many researchers.For that reason, in this paper, a research work that reduces LDPC encoder power consumption is presented using a well-known power reduction method named Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling (DVFS), which is one of the most powerful power reduction strategies in CMOS circuits.The proposed system includes a fuzzy logic controller with the DVFS technique to control and select the optimum level of voltage that enters the encoder to reduce its total power consumption.This combination of these two techniques showed significant power reduction and control while causing no impact on the LDPC efficiency, flexibility, and performance.Comparisons with other studies covering power reduction in LDPC codes have shown that the purposed system has the best performance over similar systems in the literature.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".