![]() |
Noise figure paradox
Hi Jim,
"Jim Lux" wrote in message ... Actually, state of the art is probably Low Density Parity Check (LDPC) codes, as far as approaching the limit. I hadn't heard of them; thanks for the link. Can you comment on how they compare to Reed-Solomon codes? I have just enough background in error-correcting codes to spout off the right keywords in nearly-coherent Usenet posts and wait for people to point out my errors. :-) ---Joel |
Noise figure paradox
Dear Joel - KE7CDV:
Sounds as if Jim has you pointed to a source. When you are in the library, do find the follow-up comments. They are a big window, as I recall, into the mind-set of the time. 73, Mac N8TT -- J. McLaughlin; Michigan, USA Home: "Jim-NN7K" . wrote in message ... Joel-- think you might be impressed with the collection in K.Fall's (Oregon Institute of Technology) they run EE course's there! Jim NN7K Joel Koltner wrote: Thanks Mac, I'll take a look next time I'm near a university library. (I'm in southern Oregon and there aren't any engineering schools down here...) ---Joel (KE7CDV) |
Noise figure paradox
On Mar 26, 9:35*am, "Joel Koltner"
wrote: Hi Jim, "Jim Lux" wrote in message ... Actually, state of the art is probably Low Density Parity Check (LDPC) codes, as far as approaching the limit. I hadn't heard of them; thanks for the link. *Can you comment on how they compare to Reed-Solomon codes? I have just enough background in error-correcting codes to spout off the right keywords in nearly-coherent Usenet posts and wait for people to point out my errors. :-) Much longer block length than typical R-S. Also, the way the check bits are generated is different. Each check bit isn't formed by combining ALL the source bits, just some of them (obviously a different "some" for each of the check bits), hence the name Low Density. Both are usually roughly rate 1/2. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:44 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com