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

IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics Communications and Computer Sciences

Sufficient Conditions for a Regular LDPC Code Better than an Irregular LDPC Code

MiyamotoShinya, KasaiKenta, SakaniwaKohichi

Published Feb 1, 2007• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Decoding performance of LDPC (Low-Density Parity-Check) codes is highly dependent on the degree distributions of the Tanner graphs which define the LDPC codes. We compare two LDPC code ensembles, o...
DOI
10.5555/1226834.1226867

Related papers

Irregular codes from regular graphs

Pascal O. Vontobel, Hans‐Andrea Loeliger

It has been recognized that appropriately chosen irregular low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes have a remarkable performance advantage compared to regular LDPC codes and that their threshold is much better. Starting with regular graphs, we construct codes consisting of more sophisticated subcodes (compared to simple XORs) and show that performance gains can be achieved by optimizing the proportions of the high-degree bit nodes and the different subcodes being used.

IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)•Jun 25, 2003•5 citations

Irregular low-density parity-check lattices

Ihn-Jung Baik, Sae-Young Chung

We construct lattices with high coding gains based on nested low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes by Construction D′.We generalize the LDPC lattices [1] to have irregular degrees and call them irregular LDPC lattices. To construct good irregular LDPC lattices, we optimize the degree distributions by using density evolution and a modified sequential quadratic programming (SQP) and show our optimized irregular LDPC lattice has a threshold 0.48dB from the capacity, which is about 0.6dB better than the regular one in [1]. To construct a Tanner graph corresponding to LDPC lattices, we generalize the progressive-edge growth (PEG) algorithm and show a lower bound on the girth of the graph. Simulation is performed using the sum-product algorithm. Also, we compare the performance of joint decoding and multi-stage decoding [2] and show the advantage of joint decoding.

IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)•Jul 1, 2008•13 citations

Search for Good Irregular Low-Density Parity-Check Codes Via Graph Spectrum

Dawei Yin, Xiaojing Zhang, Xichao Shu +2 more

Research on the expander code shows that for a regular low-density parity-check (LDPC) code, the Tanner graph’s spectrum determines its properties, such as the minimum distance and the size of stopping sets. In this study, we demonstrate theoretically and experimentally that the performance of irregular LDPC codes is related to the graph spectrum. Our observations may provide an efficient metric to search for good irregular LDPC codes.

IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC)•Sep 13, 2021•0 citations

Degree-Matched Check Node Decoding for Regular and Irregular LDPCs

Sheryl L. Howard, Christian B. Schlegel, Vincent Gaudet

This brief examines different parity-check node decoding algorithms for low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes, seeking to recoup the performance loss incurred by the min-sum approximation compared to sum-product decoding. Two degree-matched check node decoding approximations that depend on the check node degree dcare presented. Both have low complexity and can be applied to any degree distribution. Simulation results show near sum-product decoding performance for both degree-matched check node approximations for regular and irregular LDPCs

IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II Analog and Digital Signal Processing•Oct 1, 2006•22 citations

Low-density parity-check codes: properties and constructions

Sarah J. Johnson

Introduction The construction of binary low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes simply involves replacing a small number of the values in an all-zeros matrix by 1s in such a way that the rows and columns have the required degree distribution. In many cases, randomly allocating the entries in H will produce a reasonable LDPC code. However, the construction of H can affect the performance of the sum–product decoder, significantly so for some codes, and also the implementation complexity of the code. While there is no one recipe for a “good” LDPC code, there are a number of principles that inform the code designer. The first obvious decisions are which degree distribution to choose and how to construct the matrix with the chosen degrees, i.e. pseudo-randomly or with some sort of structure. Whichever construction is chosen, the features to consider include the girth of the Tanner graph and the minimum distance of the code. In this chapter we will discuss those properties of an LDPC code that affect its iterative decoding performance and then present the common construction methods used to produce codes with the preferred properties. Following common practice in the field we will call the selection of the degree distributions for an LDPC code code design and the methods to assign the locations in the parity-check matrix for the 1 entries code construction .

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 19, 2009•0 citations

Low-Density Parity-Check Codes

W.E. Ryan, Shu Lin

Low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes are a class of linear block codes with implementable decoders, which provide near-capacity performance on a large set of data-transmission and data-storage channels. LDPC codes were invented by Gallager in his 1960 doctoral dissertation and were mostly ignored during the 35 years that followed. One notable exception is the important work of Tanner in 1981, in which Tanner generalized LDPC codes and introduced a graphical representation of LDPC codes, now called a Tanner graph. The study of LDPC codes was resurrected in the mid 1990s with the work of MacKay, Luby, and others [3–6], who noticed, apparently independently of Gallager's work, the advantages of linear block codes with sparse (low-density) parity-check matrices. This chapter introduces LDPC codes and creates a foundation for further study of LDPC codes in later chapters. We start with the fundamental representations of LDPC codes via parity-check matrices and Tanner graphs. We then learn about the decoding advantages of linear codes that possess sparse parity-check matrices. We will see that this sparseness characteristic makes the code amenable to various iterative decoding algorithms, which in many instances provide near optimal performance. Gallager of course recognized the decoding advantages of such low-density parity-check codes and he proposed a decoding algorithm for the BI-AWGNC and a few others for the BSC. These algorithms have received much scrutiny in the past decade, and are still being studied.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Sep 17, 2009•6 citations
We construct lattices with high coding gains based on nested low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes by Construction D′.We generalize the LDPC lattices [1] to have irregular degrees and call them irregular LDPC lattices. To construct good irregular LDPC lattices, we optimize the degree distributions by using density evolution and a modified sequential quadratic programming (SQP) and show our optimized irregular LDPC lattice has a threshold 0.48dB from the capacity, which is about 0.6dB better than the regular one in [1]. To construct a Tanner graph corresponding to LDPC lattices, we generalize the progressive-edge growth (PEG) algorithm and show a lower bound on the girth of the graph. Simulation is performed using the sum-product algorithm. Also, we compare the performance of joint decoding and multi-stage decoding [2] and show the advantage of joint decoding.
This brief examines different parity-check node decoding algorithms for low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes, seeking to recoup the performance loss incurred by the min-sum approximation compared to sum-product decoding. Two degree-matched check node decoding approximations that depend on the check node degree dcare presented. Both have low complexity and can be applied to any degree distribution. Simulation results show near sum-product decoding performance for both degree-matched check node approximations for regular and irregular LDPCs
Introduction The construction of binary low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes simply involves replacing a small number of the values in an all-zeros matrix by 1s in such a way that the rows and columns have the required degree distribution. In many cases, randomly allocating the entries in H will produce a reasonable LDPC code. However, the construction of H can affect the performance of the sum–product decoder, significantly so for some codes, and also the implementation complexity of the code. While there is no one recipe for a “good” LDPC code, there are a number of principles that inform the code designer. The first obvious decisions are which degree distribution to choose and how to construct the matrix with the chosen degrees, i.e. pseudo-randomly or with some sort of structure. Whichever construction is chosen, the features to consider include the girth of the Tanner graph and the minimum distance of the code. In this chapter we will discuss those properties of an LDPC code that affect its iterative decoding performance and then present the common construction methods used to produce codes with the preferred properties. Following common practice in the field we will call the selection of the degree distributions for an LDPC code code design and the methods to assign the locations in the parity-check matrix for the 1 entries code construction .
Low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes are a class of linear block codes with implementable decoders, which provide near-capacity performance on a large set of data-transmission and data-storage channels. LDPC codes were invented by Gallager in his 1960 doctoral dissertation and were mostly ignored during the 35 years that followed. One notable exception is the important work of Tanner in 1981, in which Tanner generalized LDPC codes and introduced a graphical representation of LDPC codes, now called a Tanner graph. The study of LDPC codes was resurrected in the mid 1990s with the work of MacKay, Luby, and others [3–6], who noticed, apparently independently of Gallager's work, the advantages of linear block codes with sparse (low-density) parity-check matrices. This chapter introduces LDPC codes and creates a foundation for further study of LDPC codes in later chapters. We start with the fundamental representations of LDPC codes via parity-check matrices and Tanner graphs. We then learn about the decoding advantages of linear codes that possess sparse parity-check matrices. We will see that this sparseness characteristic makes the code amenable to various iterative decoding algorithms, which in many instances provide near optimal performance. Gallager of course recognized the decoding advantages of such low-density parity-check codes and he proposed a decoding algorithm for the BI-AWGNC and a few others for the BSC. These algorithms have received much scrutiny in the past decade, and are still being studied.