Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) codes are usually decoded by running an iterative belief-propagation (BP), or message-passing, algorithm over the factor graph of the code. The message-passing schedule of the BP algorithm significantly affects the performance of the LDPC decoder. The authors recently presented a novel message-passing schedule, called Informed Dynamic Scheduling (IDS), that selects the message-passing schedule according to the observed rate of change of the messages. IDS yields a lower error-rate performance than traditional message-passing schedules (such as flooding and LBP) because it solves traditional trapping-set errors. However, for short-blocklength LDPC codes, IDS algorithms present non-trapping-set errors in the error floor region. This paper presents a careful analysis of those errors and proposes mixed scheduling strategies, combining LBP with IDS, that solve these non-trapping-set errors. Also, we will show that some lower-complexity techniques, such as mixed scheduling, perform close to the best IDS strategies for larger-blocklength codes.
Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) codes are usually decoded by running an iterative belief-propagation (BP), or message-passing, algorithm over the factor graph of the code. The message-passing schedule of the BP algorithm significantly affects the performance of the LDPC decoder. The authors recently presented a novel message-passing schedule, called Informed Dynamic Scheduling (IDS), that selects the message-passing schedule according to the observed rate of change of the messages. IDS yields a lower error-rate performance than traditional message-passing schedules (such as flooding and LBP) because it solves traditional trapping-set errors. However, for short-blocklength LDPC codes, IDS algorithms present non-trapping-set errors in the error floor region. This paper presents a careful analysis of those errors and proposes mixed scheduling strategies, combining LBP with IDS, that solve these non-trapping-set errors. Also, we will show that some lower-complexity techniques, such as mixed scheduling, perform close to the best IDS strategies for larger-blocklength codes.
Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) codes are usually decoded by running an iterative belief-propagation (BP), or message-passing, algorithm over the factor graph of the code. The traditional message-passing scheduling, called flooding, consists of updating all the variable nodes in the graph, using the same pre-update information, followed by updating all the check nodes of the graph, again, using the same pre-update information. Recently, several studies show that sequential scheduling, in which messages are generated using the latest available information, significantly improves the convergence speed in terms of number of iterations. Sequential scheduling introduces the problem of finding the best sequence of message updates. We propose Informed Dynamic Scheduling (IDS) strategies that select the message-passing schedule according to the observed rate of change of the messages. In general, IDS strategies require computation to select the message to update but converge in fewer message updates because they focus on the part of the graph that has not converged. Moreover, IDS yields a lower error-rate performance than either flooding or sequential scheduling because IDS strategies overcome traditional trapping-set errors. This paper presents IDS strategies that address several issues including performance for short-blocklength codes, complexity, and implementability.
Low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes are usually decoded by running an iterative belief-propagation, or message-passing, algorithm over the factor graph of the code. The traditional message-passing schedule consists of updating all the variable nodes in the graph, using the same pre-update information, followed by updating all the check nodes of the graph, again, using the same pre-update information. Recently several studies show that sequential scheduling, in which messages are generated using the latest available information, significantly improves the convergence speed in terms of number of iterations. Sequential scheduling raises the problem of finding the best sequence of message updates. This paper presents practical scheduling strategies that use the value of the messages in the graph to find the next message to be updated. Simulation results show that these informed update sequences require significantly fewer iterations than standard sequential schedules. Furthermore, the paper shows that informed scheduling solves some standard trapping set errors. Therefore, it also outperforms traditional scheduling for a large numbers of iterations. Complexity and implementability issues are also addressed.
Abstract — Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) codes are usually decoded by running an iterative belief-propagation, or message-passing, algorithm over the factor graph of the code. The traditional message-passing schedule consists of updating all the variable nodes in the graph, using the same pre-update information, followed by updating all the check nodes of the graph, again, using the same pre-update information. Recently several studies show that sequential scheduling, in which messages are generated using the latest available information, significantly improves the convergence speed in terms of number of iterations. Sequential scheduling raises the problem of finding the best sequence of message updates. This paper presents practical scheduling strategies that use the value of the messages in the graph to find the next message to be updated. Simulation results show that these informed update sequences require significantly fewer iterations than standard sequential schedules. Complexity and implementability issues are also addressed. Index Terms — Belief propagation-algorithm, messagepassing schedule, error-control codes, low-density paritycheck codes. I.
The simultaneous flooding scheduling is popular for Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) Belief Propagation (BP) decoding. Non-simultaneous sequential scheduling is superior to the flooding scheduling, and asynchronous dynamic scheduling has better FER performance than the sequential scheduling. However, all strategies encounter the trouble of locating the error variable node. This paper proposes an informed dynamic scheduling strategy, which utilizes the instability of the variable node and the residual of the variable-to-check message to locate the message to be updated first. The informed dynamic scheduling overcomes the trapping sets effectively. This paper also designs an informed dynamic scheduling strategy with adaptivity to pass more messages in parallel, which effectively postpones the influence of cycles in the Tanner graph. In some sense, the strategy lengthens cycles. Simulation results show that the two informed dynamic scheduling strategies outperform other algorithms.
The simultaneous flooding scheduling is popular for Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) Belief Propagation (BP) decoding. Non-simultaneous sequential scheduling is superior to the flooding scheduling, and asynchronous dynamic scheduling has better FER performance than the sequential scheduling. However, all strategies encounter the trouble of locating the error variable node. This paper proposes an informed dynamic scheduling strategy, which utilizes the instability of the variable node and the residual of the variable-to-check message to locate the message to be updated first. The informed dynamic scheduling overcomes the trapping sets effectively. This paper also designs an informed dynamic scheduling strategy with adaptivity to pass more messages in parallel, which effectively postpones the influence of cycles in the Tanner graph. In some sense, the strategy lengthens cycles. Simulation results show that the two informed dynamic scheduling strategies outperform other algorithms.
The best known practical algorithm for the decoding of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes is the iterative sum-product or belief propagation algorithm, operating on a Tanner graph (TG) of the code. Conventionally, in each iteration, all the symbol nodes and subsequently all the check nodes in the TG pass new messages to their neighbors (the so-called "flooding schedule"). We propose a new message-passing schedule, called "probabilistic schedule". Unlike flooding, the probabilistic schedule operation is based on the structure of the TG, and probabilistically balances the frequency at which different symbol nodes update their outgoing messages in accordance with their girths. Our results show that, particularly for short block lengths, the new schedule offers a much better performance/complexity trade-off. For a particular example of a (1268, 456) code, at no cost in complexity, the probabilistic schedule not only decreases both the bit and message error rates by an order of magnitude, but also reduces the number of undetected errors considerably. This work shows the importance of scheduling in the performance of iterative decoding algorithms and suggests that a schedule which matches the structure of the TG can substantially improve the performance/complexity trade-off in the decoding of short LDPC codes.