Search Results for « Reed-Solomon codes »
Some sources are temporarily unavailable. Results may be incomplete; please try again shortly.
<p>The application of Reed-Solomon (RS) codes in distributed storage systems is widespread. A lot of literature have proposed repair schemes for RS codes with one or multiple failed symbols, which can reduce communication cost during repair (i.e. repair bandwidth).</p> <p> …
Read the full abstract
<p>The application of Reed-Solomon (RS) codes in distributed storage systems is widespread. A lot of literature have proposed repair schemes for RS codes with one or multiple failed symbols, which can reduce communication cost during repair (i.e. repair bandwidth).</p> <p> However, for repair schemes of RS codes with multiple failed symbols, the existing distributed repair schemes can only repair $e=2,3$ erasures. In this paper, by intelligently dividing the set of evaluation points corresponding to failed symbols, a distributed repair scheme for RS codes with $e\geq 4$ erasures are proposed.</p> <p><br></p>
The application of Reed-Solomon (RS) codes in distributed storage systems is widespread. A lot of literature have proposed repair schemes for RS codes with one or multiple failed symbols, which can reduce communication cost during repair (i.e. repair bandwidth). However, …
Read the full abstract
The application of Reed-Solomon (RS) codes in distributed storage systems is widespread. A lot of literature have proposed repair schemes for RS codes with one or multiple failed symbols, which can reduce communication cost during repair (i.e. repair bandwidth). However, for repair schemes of RS codes with multiple failed symbols, the existing distributed repair schemes can only repair e = 2, 3 erasures. In this paper, by intelligently dividing the set of evaluation points corresponding to failed symbols, a distributed repair scheme for RS codes with e ≥ 4 erasures are proposed.
Last time we defined the Hamming code. We also saw that it meets the Hamming bound, which is a measure of how densely a code can be packed inside an ambient space and still maintain a given distance. This time …
Read the full abstract
Last time we defined the Hamming code. We also saw that it meets the Hamming bound, which is a measure of how densely a code can be packed inside an ambient space and still maintain a given distance. This time we'll define the Reed-Solomon code which optimizes a different bound called the Singleton bound, and then generalize them to a larger class of codes called Reed-Muller codes.
Last time we defined the Hamming code. We also saw that it meets the Hamming bound, which is a measure of how densely a code can be packed inside an ambient space and still maintain a given distance. This time …
Read the full abstract
Last time we defined the Hamming code. We also saw that it meets the Hamming bound, which is a measure of how densely a code can be packed inside an ambient space and still maintain a given distance. This time we'll define the Reed-Solomon code which optimizes a different bound called the Singleton bound, and then generalize them to a larger class of codes called Reed-Muller codes.