4.6 Article

Improved Belief Propagation List Decoding for Polar Codes

Journal

ELECTRONICS
Volume 11, Issue 15, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics11152458

Keywords

polar codes; belief propagation list; belief propagation flip; permuted factor graph; path extension; path pruning

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2020YFB1807203]
  2. Ericsson
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61871032]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes an improved decoding algorithm for polar codes, which achieves comparable bit error ratio performance to the successive cancellation list decoding scheme while maintaining low decoding latency and high parallelism.
Polar codes have become the channel coding scheme for control channel of enhanced mobile broadband in the 5G communication systems. Belief propagation (BP) decoding of polar codes has advantages of low decoding latency and high parallelism but achieves worse bit error ratio (BER) performance compared with the successive cancellation list (SCL) decoding scheme. In this paper, an improved BP list (IBPL) decoding algorithm is proposed with comparable BER performance to SCL algoritm. Firstly, the optimal permuted factor graph is analyzed for polar codes, which improves the performance of the BP decoder without path extension. Furthermore, based on the optimal graph, the bit metric and decoding path metric are proposed to extend and prune the decoding path. The proposed IBPL decoder is focused on not only the permutation of polar codes but also the reliabilities of decoded codewords during each iteration of BP decoding, which has a more accurate decoding path list. The simulation results show that the proposed IBPL decoder improves the BER performance compared with the original BP decoder significantly, and can approach the performance of the SCL decoder at low signal to noise ratio regions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available