Difference between revisions of "Aufgaben:Exercise 1.13Z: Binary Erasure Channel Decoding again"
(15 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | {{quiz-Header|Buchseite= | + | {{quiz-Header|Buchseite=Channel_Coding/Decoding_of_Linear_Block_Codes}} |
− | [[File:P_ID2541__KC_Z_1_13.png|right|frame| | + | [[File:P_ID2541__KC_Z_1_13.png|right|frame|Code table of the $\rm HC (7, 4, 3)$]] |
− | + | We consider as in the [[Aufgaben:Exercise_1.13:_Binary_Erasure_Channel_Decoding|"Exercise 1. 13"]] the decoding of a [[Channel_Coding/Examples_of_Binary_Block_Codes#Hamming_Codes|"Hamming Codes"]] after transmission over an erasure channel ⇒ [[Channel_Coding/Channel_Models_and_Decision_Structures#Binary_Erasure_Channel_. E2.80.93_BEC|"Binary Erasure Channel"]] $\rm (BEC)$. | |
− | + | The (7,4,3)-Hamming code is fully described by the adjacent code table u_i→x_i which can be used to find all solutions. | |
− | + | Hints: | |
− | * | + | * This exercise belongs to the chapter [[Channel_Coding/Decodierung_linearer_Blockcodes|"Decoding of Linear Block Codes"]]. |
− | |||
− | |||
+ | * In contrast to [[Aufgaben:Exercise_1.13:_Binary_Erasure_Channel_Decoding|"Exercise 1.13"]] the solution is here not to be found formally, but intuitively. | ||
+ | |||
− | === | + | |
+ | ===Questions=== | ||
<quiz display=simple> | <quiz display=simple> | ||
− | + | What is the minimum distance dmin of the present code? | |
|type="{}"} | |type="{}"} | ||
dmin = { 3 } | dmin = { 3 } | ||
− | { | + | {Is the code systematic? |
|type="()"} | |type="()"} | ||
− | + | + | + YES. |
− | - | + | - NO. |
− | { | + | {Up to how many erasures $($maximum number: $e_{\rm max})$ is successful decoding guaranteed? |
|type="{}"} | |type="{}"} | ||
emax = { 2 } | emax = { 2 } | ||
− | { | + | {The received word is $\underline{y} = (1, 0, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0, 1, 0). What is the sent information word \underline{u}$? |
|type="()"} | |type="()"} | ||
- u_=(1,0,0,0), | - u_=(1,0,0,0), | ||
− | + u_=(1,0,0,1), | + | + u_=(1,0,0,1), |
- u_=(1,0,1,0), | - u_=(1,0,1,0), | ||
- u_=(1,0,1,1). | - u_=(1,0,1,1). | ||
− | { | + | {Which of the following received words can be decoded? |
|type="[]"} | |type="[]"} | ||
+ y_A=(1,0,0,1,E,E,E), | + y_A=(1,0,0,1,E,E,E), | ||
Line 47: | Line 48: | ||
</quiz> | </quiz> | ||
− | === | + | ===Solution=== |
{{ML-Kopf}} | {{ML-Kopf}} | ||
− | '''(1)''' | + | '''(1)''' The (7,4,3) Hamming code is considered here. Accordingly, the minimum distance is dmin =3_. |
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | '''(2)''' The first k=4 bits of each code word x_ match the information word u_. Correct is therefore <u>YES</u>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''(3)''' If no more than emax=dmin−1 =2_ bits are erased, decoding is possible with certainty. | ||
+ | *Each code word differs from every other in at least three bit positions. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *With only two erasures, therefore, the code word can be reconstructed in any case. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
+ | '''(4)''' In the code table, one finds a single code word starting with "10" and ending with "010", namely \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0). | ||
+ | *Since this is a systematic code, the first k = 4 bits describe the information word \underline{u} = (1, 0, 0, 1) ⇒ <u>answer 2</u>. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | '''(5)''' | + | '''(5)''' Correct are the <u>suggested solutions 1 and 2</u>. |
− | * \underline{y}_{\rm D} = (1, 0, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0) | + | * \underline{y}_{\rm D} = (1, 0, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0) cannot be decoded because less than k = 4 bits (number of information bits) arrive. |
− | *\underline{y}_{\rm C} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 1, 0, 1, 0) | + | *\underline{y}_{\rm C} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 1, 0, 1, 0) is not decodable because \underline{x} = (0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0) and \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0) are possible outcomes. |
− | *\underline{y}_{\rm B} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0, {\rm E}, 0, 1, 0) | + | *\underline{y}_{\rm B} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0, {\rm E}, 0, 1, 0) is decodable, since of the 16 possible code words only \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0) matches \underline{y}_{\rm B} in positions 3, 5, 6, 7. |
− | *\underline{y}_{\rm A} = (1, 0, 0, 1, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}) | + | *\underline{y}_{\rm A} = (1, 0, 0, 1, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}) is decodable. Only the m = 3 parity bits are missing. Thus, the information word \underline{u} = (1, 0, 0, 1) is also fixed (systematic code). |
{{ML-Fuß}} | {{ML-Fuß}} | ||
− | [[Category: | + | [[Category:Channel Coding: Exercises|^1.5 Linear Block Code Decoding |
^]] | ^]] |
Latest revision as of 19:00, 1 November 2022
We consider as in the "Exercise 1. 13" the decoding of a "Hamming Codes" after transmission over an erasure channel ⇒ "Binary Erasure Channel" \rm (BEC).
The (7, 4, 3)-Hamming code is fully described by the adjacent code table \underline{u}_{i} → \underline{x}_{i} which can be used to find all solutions.
Hints:
- This exercise belongs to the chapter "Decoding of Linear Block Codes".
- In contrast to "Exercise 1.13" the solution is here not to be found formally, but intuitively.
Questions
Solution
(2) The first k = 4 bits of each code word \underline{x} match the information word \underline{u}. Correct is therefore YES.
(3) If no more than e_{\rm max} = d_{\rm min}- 1 \ \ \underline{ = 2} bits are erased, decoding is possible with certainty.
- Each code word differs from every other in at least three bit positions.
- With only two erasures, therefore, the code word can be reconstructed in any case.
(4) In the code table, one finds a single code word starting with "10" and ending with "010", namely \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0).
- Since this is a systematic code, the first k = 4 bits describe the information word \underline{u} = (1, 0, 0, 1) ⇒ answer 2.
(5) Correct are the suggested solutions 1 and 2.
- \underline{y}_{\rm D} = (1, 0, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0) cannot be decoded because less than k = 4 bits (number of information bits) arrive.
- \underline{y}_{\rm C} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 1, 0, 1, 0) is not decodable because \underline{x} = (0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0) and \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0) are possible outcomes.
- \underline{y}_{\rm B} = ( {\rm E}, {\rm E}, 0, {\rm E}, 0, 1, 0) is decodable, since of the 16 possible code words only \underline{x} = (1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0) matches \underline{y}_{\rm B} in positions 3, 5, 6, 7.
- \underline{y}_{\rm A} = (1, 0, 0, 1, {\rm E}, {\rm E}, {\rm E}) is decodable. Only the m = 3 parity bits are missing. Thus, the information word \underline{u} = (1, 0, 0, 1) is also fixed (systematic code).