MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000217762

Energy-efficient decoding of low-density parity-check codes

2014· dissertation· en· W7000217762 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchematicLow-density parity-check codeDecoding methodsData flow diagramBlock diagramNode (physics)Transmission (telecommunications)Signal-flow graphBlock code
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes are a type of error correcting code that are frequently used in high-performance communications systems, due to their ability to approach the theoretical limits of error correction. However, their iterative soft-decision decoding algorithms suffer from high computational complexity, energy consumption, and auxiliary circuit implementation difficulties. It is of particular interest to develop energy-efficient LDPC decoders in order to decrease cost of operation, increase battery life in portable devices, lessen environmental impact, and increase the range of applications for these powerful codes.In this dissertation, we propose four new LDPC decoder designs with the primary goal of improving energy efficiency over previous designs. First, we present a bidirectional interleaver based on transmission gates, which reduces wiring complexity and associated parasitic energy losses. Second, we present an iterative decoder design based on pulse-width modulated min-sum (PWM-MS). We demonstrate that the pulse width message format reduces switching activity, computational complexity, and energy consumption compared to other recent LDPC decoder designs. Third, wepresent decoders based on differential binary (DB) algorithms. We also propose an improved differential binary (IDB) decoding algorithm, which greatly increases throughput and reduces energy consumption compared to recent decoders ofsimilar error correction capability. Finally, we present decoders based on gear-shift algorithms, which use multiple decoding rules to minimize energy consumption. We propose gear-shift pulse-width (GSP) and IDB with GSP (IGSP) algorithms, and demonstrate that they achieve superior energy efficiency without compromising error correction performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207