MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413359259 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2025.3600568

Performance Analysis and Enhancement of P-LDPC Codes for Lossy Compression of Binary Sources

2025· article· en· W4413359259 on OpenAlexaff
Sanya Liu, Xinfeng Wu, Yi Fang, Jun Chen, Chen Chen, Lin Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeLossy compressionElectronic engineeringComputer scienceBinary numberCompression (physics)Decoding methodsAlgorithmMaterials scienceMathematicsEngineeringArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the duality between source coding and channel coding, high-performance channel codes are often adopted for addressing source coding problems. In this paper, we investigate the design and analysis of protograph low-density parity-check (P-LDPC) codes in lossy source coding systems. First, we propose a novel lossy source coding architecture based on P-LDPC codes, and empirically verify that although high-performance channel codes perform exceptionally well in their intended domain, they are not inherently optimal for lossy compression. To facilitate analysis, we introduce the lossy compression protograph extrinsic information transfer (LC-PEXIT) algorithm, which aids in evaluating the rate-distortion (RD) performance of P-LDPC codes. Additionally, the LC-PEXIT algorithm allows for the prediction of key parameters, such as the prior coefficientPand the reinforcement rateR, both of which critically influence system performance. We further propose a design algorithm for lossy P-LDPC codes and provide two sets of design examples. Experimental results show strong alignment between the predicted and actual values ofPandRf, with the designed P-LDPC codes exhibiting superior RD performance compared to classical P-LDPC and state-of-the-art ultra-sparse LDPC (US-LDPC) codes. In particular, the designed P-LDPC codes over benchmark codes increases the system coding efficiency of up to approximate 70% and achieves a performance gain of 1.69 ~ 3.26 dB, making it highly effective for lossy compression applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207