Cited by 12Error Correcting Code TechniquesCoding theory and cryptographyAdvanced Data Storage Technologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On Construction of Low-Density Parity-Check Codes for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications

Zou, Linqi, Yan, Hao, Dong, Jie, Li, Yong, Chen, Pingping, Lau, Francis C. M.·2024·IEEE Transactions on Communications

Abstract

Low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes with protograph-based raptor-like (PBRL) structure have been chosen as the data channel coding scheme for the fifth-generation (5G) enhanced mobile broad band (eMBB) services. However, these 5G LDPC codes are not optimized for the scenarios of Ultra Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) and massive Machine Type Communications (mMTC) in which small transport block sizes are usually used. In this paper, a new method is proposed to construct PBRL LDPC codes for URLLC and mMTC. This method incorporates degree-distribution optimization, base matrix derived from parity-check matrix of quadratic residue codes, masking technique and modified progressive-edge-growth (PEG) algorithm. Simulation results show that the proposed PBRL LDPC codes outperform 5G LDPC short codes in terms of error-correcting performance.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tcomm.2024.3392774

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 2018, Study on Scenarios and Requirements for Next Generation Access
  2. 2018, NR; Multiplexing Channel Coding (Release 15)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zou, L., Yan, H., Dong, J., Li, Y., Chen, P., & Lau, F. C. M.
Affiliations
  • Chongqing University (CN)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Singapore University of Technology and Design (SG)
  • Fuzhou University (CN)
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Communications
Published
2024-09
Volume
72
Issue
9
Pages
5290-5301
ISSN
  • 0090-6778 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-0857
OpenAlex
W4395056537
Cited by
12
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Communications (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • China Natural Science Foundation (61771081, 62171135, 62071131)
  • Fujian Distinguised project (2022J06010)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Error Correcting Code Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics › Coding theory and cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Data Storage Technologies
Keywords
LDPC codes, ultra-reliable low-latency communication, massive machine-type communications, degree distribution optimization, quadratic residue codes, parity check matrix, masking technique, error correction performance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review