Selecting the best coding scheme

HI All

Thanks a lot for all the valuable comments.

Chintan

On Aug 3, 7:04=A0am, "cpshah99" <cpshah99@n_o_s_p_a_m.rediffmail.com>
wrote:
> Hello All
>
> Given the task to design a receiver which should operate reasonably well
> under moderate to severe channel conditions, which coding scheme you will
> select from hardware implementation point of view: Turbo code or LDPC?
>
> Your opinion matters a lot.
>
> Chintan

Didn't we all go through a very similar
exercise almost exactly two years ago
based on a similar question from the
same OP, and come to the same
conclusion:  "It depends?"

((http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/browse_thread/thread/
883b3aed77347eb/fdb2e95ac172d92d?lnk=3Dgst&q=3Dcpshah99#fdb2e95ac172d92d))

Remember that TURBO code is an acronym for
Transfinite Uniform Redundancy Binary Orthogonal code.....

On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 18:33:24 -0700 (PDT), dvsarwate
<dvsarwate@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Aug 3, 7:04=A0am, "cpshah99" <cpshah99@n_o_s_p_a_m.rediffmail.com>
>wrote:
>> Hello All
>>
>> Given the task to design a receiver which should operate reasonably well
>> under moderate to severe channel conditions, which coding scheme you will
>> select from hardware implementation point of view: Turbo code or LDPC?
>>
>> Your opinion matters a lot.
>>
>> Chintan
>
>Didn't we all go through a very similar
>exercise almost exactly two years ago
>based on a similar question from the
>same OP, and come to the same
>conclusion:  "It depends?"

Proabably.   It did sound pretty familiar.

It keeps us on our toes to see if we say the same thing the next
time...  ;)


>((http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/browse_thread/thread/
>883b3aed77347eb/fdb2e95ac172d92d?lnk=3Dgst&q=3Dcpshah99#fdb2e95ac172d92d))
>
>Remember that TURBO code is an acronym for
>Transfinite Uniform Redundancy Binary Orthogonal code.....

Who came up with that acronym?   Never heard that one before.

At least LDPC really does stand for something.  ;)


Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com

Eric Jacobsen <eric.jacobsen@ieee.org> wrote:

><dvsarwate@gmail.com> wrote:

>>Remember that TURBO code is an acronym for
>>Transfinite Uniform Redundancy Binary Orthogonal code.....

>Who came up with that acronym?   Never heard that one before.

Nor had I.  I suspect it's a backcronym.

Steve

>On Aug 3, 7:04=A0am, "cpshah99" <cpshah99@n_o_s_p_a_m.rediffmail.com>
>wrote:
>> Hello All
>>
>> Given the task to design a receiver which should operate reasonably
well
>> under moderate to severe channel conditions, which coding scheme you
will
>> select from hardware implementation point of view: Turbo code or LDPC?
>>
>> Your opinion matters a lot.
>>
>> Chintan
>
>Didn't we all go through a very similar
>exercise almost exactly two years ago
>based on a similar question from the
>same OP, and come to the same
>conclusion:  "It depends?"
>
>((http://groups.google.com/group/comp.dsp/browse_thread/thread/
>883b3aed77347eb/fdb2e95ac172d92d?lnk=3Dgst&q=3Dcpshah99#fdb2e95ac172d92d))
>
>Remember that TURBO code is an acronym for
>Transfinite Uniform Redundancy Binary Orthogonal code.....
>

Hello Prof. Sarwate

Thanks for reminding me. 

Hi Eric, I did not mean to see if you guys give same answer or not :-).

Discussion on this forum has always been helpful.

Regards

Chintan

On Aug 4, 1:10=A0am, eric.jacob...@ieee.org (Eric Jacobsen) demanded:

> Who came up with that acronym? =A0 Never heard that one before.

I did, last night, which accounts for Eric not having it heard before.

All serious stuff requires an acronym (e.g. BCH, RS,
CRC, TCM, CC, not to mention FIR, IIR, FFT etc), else
people dismiss it as unimportant and don't pay attention.
For example, rake receivers were invented in the
early 1950s, but were ignored until someone thought
to re-name them as RAKE receivers, and now everyone
uses them....  For what it's worth, RAKE stands for
Recursive and Adaptive Kernel Estimation, heh, heh.

--Dilip Sarwate

>On Aug 4, 1:10=A0am, eric.jacob...@ieee.org (Eric Jacobsen) demanded:
>
>> Who came up with that acronym? =A0 Never heard that one before.
>
>I did, last night, which accounts for Eric not having it heard before.
>
>All serious stuff requires an acronym (e.g. BCH, RS,
>CRC, TCM, CC, not to mention FIR, IIR, FFT etc), else
>people dismiss it as unimportant and don't pay attention.
>For example, rake receivers were invented in the
>early 1950s, but were ignored until someone thought
>to re-name them as RAKE receivers, and now everyone
>uses them....  For what it's worth, RAKE stands for
>Recursive and Adaptive Kernel Estimation, heh, heh.
>
>--Dilip Sarwate

RAKE receiver and rake receiver are different things.

A RAKE receiver is a piece of electronics.

A rake receiver is a keen gardener at Christmas.

Steve

On Aug 4, 9:48=A0pm, "steveu" <steveu@n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote:

>
> RAKE receiver and rake receiver are different things.
>
> A RAKE receiver is a piece of electronics.
>
> A rake receiver is a keen gardener at Christmas.



According to the great oracle Google, the Gospel
according to St Wikipedia says it's a rake receiver
while the Gospel according to St MATLAB calls it
a RAKE receiver.  In this instance, I think God wants
us to not rely on literal interpretations of the
written Word but to think for ourselves.  My belief is
that when implemented in the time domain, it is a
rake receiver, while when implemented in the frequency
domain or MATLAB, it is a RAKE receiver.  After all,
everyone knows the Fourier transform of x(t) is X(f),
and not the other way around, right?  So, the time
domain implementation is a rake receiver, the
frequency domain implementation is a RAKE receiver
and hybrid implementations are rAkE receivers, or
more commonly, Rake receivers.

Steveu's grateful gardeners at Christmas time are on
their own in this theory...

--Dilip Sarwate
President, AMBIT Corporation


AMBIT =3D Acronym May Be Ignored Totally

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 05:52:55 -0700 (PDT), dvsarwate
<dvsarwate@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Aug 4, 9:48=A0pm, "steveu" <steveu@n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> RAKE receiver and rake receiver are different things.
>>
>> A RAKE receiver is a piece of electronics.
>>
>> A rake receiver is a keen gardener at Christmas.
>
>
>
>According to the great oracle Google, the Gospel
>according to St Wikipedia says it's a rake receiver
>while the Gospel according to St MATLAB calls it
>a RAKE receiver.  In this instance, I think God wants
>us to not rely on literal interpretations of the
>written Word but to think for ourselves.  My belief is
>that when implemented in the time domain, it is a
>rake receiver, while when implemented in the frequency
>domain or MATLAB, it is a RAKE receiver.  After all,
>everyone knows the Fourier transform of x(t) is X(f),
>and not the other way around, right?  So, the time
>domain implementation is a rake receiver, the
>frequency domain implementation is a RAKE receiver
>and hybrid implementations are rAkE receivers, or
>more commonly, Rake receivers.
>
>Steveu's grateful gardeners at Christmas time are on
>their own in this theory...
>
>--Dilip Sarwate
>President, AMBIT Corporation
>
>
>AMBIT =3D Acronym May Be Ignored Totally
>

As usual, Dilip's logic is flawless.     ;)



Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com