Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Series on coding theory and cryptology

Codes for Error Detection

Torleiv Kløve

Published Apr 1, 2007• 137 citations
Publisher

Abstract

There are two basic methods of error control for communication, both involving coding of the messages. With forward error correction, the codes are used to detect and correct errors. In a repeat request system, the codes are used to detect errors and, if there are errors, request a retransmission. Error detection is usually much simpler to implement than error correction and is widely used. However, it is given a very cursory treatment in almost all textbooks on coding theory. Only a few older books are devoted to error detecting codes. This book begins with a short introduction to the theory of block codes with emphasis on the parts important for error detection. The weight distribution is particularly important for this application and is treated in more detail than in most books on error correction. A detailed account of the known results on the probability of undetected error on the q-ary symmetric channel is also given.

DOI
10.1142/6400

Related papers

Error detection, correction and decoding

San Ling, Chaoping Xing

We saw in Chapter 1 that the purpose of channel coding is to introduce redundancy to information messages so that errors that occur in the transmission can be detected or even corrected. In this chapter, we formalize and discuss the notions of error-detection and error-correction. We also introduce some well known decoding rules, i.e., methods that retrieve the original message sent by detecting and correcting the errors that have occurred in the transmission. Communication channels We begin with some basic definitions. Definition 2.1.1 Let A = { a 1 , a 2 , …, a q } be a set of size q , which we refer to as a code alphabet and whose elements are called code symbols . (i) A q-ary word of length n over A is a sequence w = w 1 w 2 … w n with each w i ∈ A for all i . Equivalently, w may also be regarded as the vector ( w 1 , …, w n ). (ii) A q-ary block code of length n over A is a nonempty set C of q -ary words having the same length n . (iii) An element of C is called a codeword in C . (iv) The number of codewords in C , denoted by ∣ C ∣, is called the size of C . (v) The (information) rate of a code C of length n is defined to be (log q ∣ C ∣)/ n . (vi) A code of length n and size M is called an (n, M)-code .

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Feb 12, 2004•0 citations

The probability of undetected error when a code is used for error correction and detection (Corresp.)

Torleiv Kløve

We study the probability of having an undetected error when a linear block code is used to correct up toterrors on a symmetric channel, and the remaining power of the code is used for error detection.

IEEE Transactions on Information Theory•Mar 1, 1984•10 citations

Using codes for error correction and detection (Corresp.)

Torleiv Kløve

A linear codeCover GF(q)is good fort-error-correction and error detection ifP(C,t;\epsilon) \leq P(C,t;(q - 1)/q)for all\epsilon, 0 \leq \epsilon \leq (q - 1)/q, whereP(C, t; \epsilon)is the probability of an undetected error after a codeword inCis transmitted over aq-ary symmetric channel with error probability\epsilonand correction is performed for all error patterns withtor fewer errors. A sufficient condition for a code to be good is derived. This sufficient condition is easy to check, and examples to illustrate the method are given.

IEEE Transactions on Information Theory•Nov 1, 1984•6 citations

Codes

Edward F. Assmus, Jennifer D. Key

Introduction Error-correcting codes were introduced in the 1940s in order to implement a theorem of Shannon's [260] which guaranteed that virtually error-free communication could be obtained even over a noisy channel. The message to be communicated is first “encoded”, i.e. turned into a codeword, by adding "redundancy". The codeword is then sent through the channel and the received message is “decoded” by the receiver into a message resembling, as closely as possible, the original message. The degree of resemblance will depend on how good the code is in relation to the channel. The usual pictorial representation of this communication link is shown in the schematic diagram Figure 2.1. Here a message is first given by the source to the encoder that turns the message into a codeword, i.e. a string of letters from some alphabet, chosen according to the code used; the encoded message is then sent through the channel, where it may be subjected to noise and hence altered; this possibly-altered message, when it arrives at the decoder belonging to the receiver, is, first of all, equated with the most likely codeword, i.e. the one (should that exist) that, in a probabilistic sense depending on the channel, was probably sent; finally this “most likely” codeword is decoded and the message is passed on to the receiver. Example 2.1.1 Suppose we use an alphabet of just two symbols, 0 and 1, and we have only two messages, for example “no” corresponding to 0, and "yes” corresponding to 1. We wish to send the message “no”, and we add redundancy by simply repeating the message five times. Thus we encode the message as the codeword (00000). The channel interferes, perhaps, with the message and could, for example, change it to (01100). The decoder assesses the message and decides that of the two possible codewords, i.e. (00000) and (11111), the former is the more likely, and hence the message is decoded, correctly, as “no”. Notice that we have made several assumptions here: for example we have assumed that the probability of an error at any position in the word is less than, that each codeword is equally likely to be sent, and that the receiver is aware of the code used.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 28, 1992•0 citations

Linear block codes for error detection (Corresp.)

Tadao Kasami, Torleiv Kløve, Shu Lin

The probability of undetected error of linear block codes for use on a binary symmetric channel is investigated. Upper hounds are derived. Several classes of linear block codes are proved to have good error-detecting capability.

IEEE Transactions on Information Theory•Jan 1, 1983•37 citations

Necessary and sufficient conditions on block codes correcting/detecting errors of various types

Jos H. Weber, Cornelis de Vroedt, Dick E. Boekee

Necessary and sufficient conditions are given for block codes to be capable of correcting up to t/sub 1/ symmetric errors, up to t/sub 2/ unidirectional errors, and up to t/sub 3/ asymmetric errors, as well as detecting from t/sub 1/+1 up to d/sub 1/ symmetric errors that are not of the unidirectional type, from t/sub 2/+1 up to d/sub 2/ unidirectional errors that are not of the asymmetric type, and from t/sub 3/+1 up to d/sub 3/ asymmetric errors. Many known conditions on block codes concerning error correction and/or detection appear as special cases of this general result. Further, some codes turn out to have stronger error correcting/detection capabilities than they were originally designed for.>

IEEE Transactions on Computers•Jan 1, 1992•18 citations
There are two basic methods of error control for communication, both involving coding of the messages. With forward error correction, the codes are used to detect and correct errors. In a repeat request system, the codes are used to detect errors and, if there are errors, request a retransmission. Error detection is usually much simpler to implement than error correction and is widely used. However, it is given a very cursory treatment in almost all textbooks on coding theory. Only a few older books are devoted to error detecting codes. This book begins with a short introduction to the theory of block codes with emphasis on the parts important for error detection. The weight distribution is particularly important for this application and is treated in more detail than in most books on error correction. A detailed account of the known results on the probability of undetected error on the q-ary symmetric channel is also given.
We saw in Chapter 1 that the purpose of channel coding is to introduce redundancy to information messages so that errors that occur in the transmission can be detected or even corrected. In this chapter, we formalize and discuss the notions of error-detection and error-correction. We also introduce some well known decoding rules, i.e., methods that retrieve the original message sent by detecting and correcting the errors that have occurred in the transmission. Communication channels We begin with some basic definitions. Definition 2.1.1 Let A = { a 1 , a 2 , …, a q } be a set of size q , which we refer to as a code alphabet and whose elements are called code symbols . (i) A q-ary word of length n over A is a sequence w = w 1 w 2 … w n with each w i ∈ A for all i . Equivalently, w may also be regarded as the vector ( w 1 , …, w n ). (ii) A q-ary block code of length n over A is a nonempty set C of q -ary words having the same length n . (iii) An element of C is called a codeword in C . (iv) The number of codewords in C , denoted by ∣ C ∣, is called the size of C . (v) The (information) rate of a code C of length n is defined to be (log q ∣ C ∣)/ n . (vi) A code of length n and size M is called an (n, M)-code .
A linear codeCover GF(q)is good fort-error-correction and error detection ifP(C,t;\epsilon) \leq P(C,t;(q - 1)/q)for all\epsilon, 0 \leq \epsilon \leq (q - 1)/q, whereP(C, t; \epsilon)is the probability of an undetected error after a codeword inCis transmitted over aq-ary symmetric channel with error probability\epsilonand correction is performed for all error patterns withtor fewer errors. A sufficient condition for a code to be good is derived. This sufficient condition is easy to check, and examples to illustrate the method are given.
Introduction Error-correcting codes were introduced in the 1940s in order to implement a theorem of Shannon's [260] which guaranteed that virtually error-free communication could be obtained even over a noisy channel. The message to be communicated is first “encoded”, i.e. turned into a codeword, by adding "redundancy". The codeword is then sent through the channel and the received message is “decoded” by the receiver into a message resembling, as closely as possible, the original message. The degree of resemblance will depend on how good the code is in relation to the channel. The usual pictorial representation of this communication link is shown in the schematic diagram Figure 2.1. Here a message is first given by the source to the encoder that turns the message into a codeword, i.e. a string of letters from some alphabet, chosen according to the code used; the encoded message is then sent through the channel, where it may be subjected to noise and hence altered; this possibly-altered message, when it arrives at the decoder belonging to the receiver, is, first of all, equated with the most likely codeword, i.e. the one (should that exist) that, in a probabilistic sense depending on the channel, was probably sent; finally this “most likely” codeword is decoded and the message is passed on to the receiver. Example 2.1.1 Suppose we use an alphabet of just two symbols, 0 and 1, and we have only two messages, for example “no” corresponding to 0, and "yes” corresponding to 1. We wish to send the message “no”, and we add redundancy by simply repeating the message five times. Thus we encode the message as the codeword (00000). The channel interferes, perhaps, with the message and could, for example, change it to (01100). The decoder assesses the message and decides that of the two possible codewords, i.e. (00000) and (11111), the former is the more likely, and hence the message is decoded, correctly, as “no”. Notice that we have made several assumptions here: for example we have assumed that the probability of an error at any position in the word is less than, that each codeword is equally likely to be sent, and that the receiver is aware of the code used.
Necessary and sufficient conditions are given for block codes to be capable of correcting up to t/sub 1/ symmetric errors, up to t/sub 2/ unidirectional errors, and up to t/sub 3/ asymmetric errors, as well as detecting from t/sub 1/+1 up to d/sub 1/ symmetric errors that are not of the unidirectional type, from t/sub 2/+1 up to d/sub 2/ unidirectional errors that are not of the asymmetric type, and from t/sub 3/+1 up to d/sub 3/ asymmetric errors. Many known conditions on block codes concerning error correction and/or detection appear as special cases of this general result. Further, some codes turn out to have stronger error correcting/detection capabilities than they were originally designed for.>