Paper detail

Design and Analysis of LT Codes with Decreasing Ripple Size

In this paper we propose a new design of LT codes, which decreases the amount of necessary overhead in comparison to existing designs. The design focuses on a parameter of the LT decoding process called the ripple size. This parameter was also a key element in the design proposed in the original work by Luby. Specifically, Luby argued that an LT code should provide a constant ripple size during decoding. In this work we show that the ripple size should decrease during decoding, in order to reduce the necessary overhead. Initially we motivate this claim by analytical results related to the redundancy within an LT code. We then propose a new design procedure, which can provide any desired achievable decreasing ripple size. The new design procedure is evaluated and compared to the current state of the art through simulations. This reveals a significant increase in performance with respect to both average overhead and error probability at any fixed overhead.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.