Abstract
The powerful channel coding schemes, namely, those based on turbo codes with different type of interleaver design and iterative scheme of decoding. The Shannon’s predictions to optimal codes would imply random like codes and intuitively implying that the decoding operation on these codes would be prohibitively complex in nature. A brief comparison of Turbo codes with different type interleaver will be given in this section, both in term of actual performance and complexity of codes. In order to give to different comparison of the codes, we use codes of the different input word length when comparing. The rate of both codes is R = 1/2 and 1/3. However, the Berrou’s coding scheme could be constructed by combining two or more than two simple codes. These codes could then be decoded separately in coding scheme, while exchanging the probabilistic, uncertainty and information about the quality of the decoding of each bit to other bits. This implied that all the complex codes had now become practical. This discovery triggered to a series of new, focused research programmers, and prominent researchers devoted their time to this new area of research. Leading on the work from Turbo codes design, the University of Cambridge revisited some 35-year-old work [5], who had constructed a different class of codes with different interleaver design. Building on the increased understanding of iterative decoding scheme and probability propagation on graphs that led on the work from Turbo codes, As a review, this paper will consider both these classes of codes, and compare the bit error rate performance and the interleaver of these codes.
References
Bahl L, Cocke J, Jelinek F, Raviv J. Optimal decoding of linear codes for minimizing symbol error rate (corresp.). IEEE Transactions on information theory. 1974 Mar; 20(2):284–7.
Divsalar DD. Weight Distribution for Turbo codes report. 1995; 2–122:56–65.
Fagervik K. Iterative decoding of concatenated codes. University of Surrey (UNIS);1998.
MacKay DJ, Neal RM. Near Shannon limit performance of low-density parity check codes. Electronics letters. 1996 Aug 29;32(18):1645–6.
Bahl L, Cocke L, Jelinek F, Raviv J. Optimum decoding on Inf. Theory. 1974; 20: 284–287.
Blackert WJ, Hall EK, Wilson SG. Turbo code termination and interleaver conditions. Electronics Letters. 1995 Nov 23;31(24):2082–4.
Barbulescu AS, Peitrobon SS. Terminating the trellis of turbo-codes in the same state. Electronics Letters. 1995; 31: 22–23. 8. Reed MC and Peitrobon SS. Turbo code termination chemes nation Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Communications; 1996. Of linear codes for minimizing symbol errorrate,” IEEE Trans. And interleaver conditions,” Electronics Letters, vol and anovel alternative for short frames,” Seventh IEEE.