MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414603913 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2025.3615774

Full-Diversity Construction-D Lattices: Design and Decoding Perspective on Block-Fading Channels

2025· article· en· W4414603913 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Sadeghi, Hassan Khodaiemehr, Chen Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecoding methodsLattice (music)Algebraic numberAdditive white Gaussian noiseError detection and correctionCoding (social sciences)Generator matrixList decodingConcatenated error correction code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel framework for constructing full-diversity algebraic lattices based on Construction-D, utilizing nested linear codesC1⊂ · · · ⊂Ca⊆ FpNand prime ideals from algebraic number fields of degree n. Focused on block-fading (BF) channels, this approach yields a semi-systematic generator matrix suited for high-dimensional lattice design. The resulting Construction-D lattices achieve full diversity, significantly enhancing error performance. Additionally, we develop a decoding algorithm tailored for these full-diversity lattices, achieving linear complexity relative to the lattice dimension. Simulations indicate that the proposed lattices notably enhance error performance compared to full-diversity Construction-A lattices in diversity-2 cases. Interestingly, unlike AWGN channels, the expected performance enhancement of Construction-D over Construction-A, resulting from an increased number of nested code levels, was observed only in the two-level and diversity-2 cases. This phenomenon is likely due to the compounded error propagation during successive cancellation at higher levels, further amplified by higher diversity orders. The omission of parity-check enforcement at the final code level—aimed at simplifying our decoding—restricts the diversity order from the maximum ofn·dmin(Ca) ton, limiting performance gains. Unraveling the core reasons behind this decoding behavior remains an open challenge. Nevertheless, these findings highlight the promise of full-diversity Construction-D lattices as an effective coding strategy for BF channels.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207