Being associated with people who have spent a career in automating/computerizing "copy" of human directly generated communication, they will tell you that the human mind has some abilities to "fill", "connect," and "decode" in a manner that are simply not understood by anyone, anywhere...only envied. In other instances, the difficulty is that long running algorithms can decode, but the processing and hardware cost makes it unmarketable for the general public or useless in response-time-critical situations, such as a ham contest.
They are working on it, because there is HUGE money in it for the breakthroughs. The amount of R&D money spent on these kinds of things is staggering. >From their perspective, you are lucky to have the degree of copy that you do. Conspiracy theories abound that breakthroughs have been made but are top secret, in use by military, CIA for monitoring voice channels for "trigger" phrases. I tend to discount it because the end results seem not to have the improvements such would bring. Given the success that Skimmer is having, it would seem that export of that function to a PC would garner resource levels to the problem not available internally to the K3, if you are not satisfied with the most recent K3 improvements. 73, Guy. On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Bill VanAlstyne W5WVO <w5...@cybermesa.net> wrote: > So that begs the question, I suppose -- is CW sent by a keyer with paddle > machine-sent or hand-sent? It's actually both, of course. Some of the > metrics are controlled by logic (hardware and/or software), but > inter-character and inter-word spacing are controlled by the human operator. > In my experience, this is usually enough to screw up the K3's decoding > algorithm. And of course once you start talking about bug-sent or > straight-key-sent code, that's another planet altogether. > > Developing a really "brainy" hand-sent CW decoder would be very challenging, > to say the least -- and even if you could do it, it would almost certainly > require way more number-crunching horsepower than is available in the K3's > processor. It's one of those things that fall under the label, > "Theoretically possible, but why bother?" There are many much more useful > machine-generated digital encoding methods available today. I think Morse > code decoding should probably be allowed to remain in the wetware domain. If > you "need" a CW decoder, let me suggest that PRACTICE has been known to work > very well when applied consistently. :-) > > Bill W5WVO > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Don Wilhelm" <w3...@embarqmail.com> > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:06 PM > To: "Joe Reaves" <w7...@yahoo.com> > Cc: "elecraft mail" <elecraft@mailman.qth.net> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 CW Decoder, Not very good > >> Joe. >> >> If you are trying to decode hand sent CW. you will likely have to >> provide a lot of "fills" unless the sending operator is quite skilled at >> timing and spacing. Machine sent (keyboard or computer) CW should be >> easily decoded. >> >> 73, >> Don W3FPR >> >> Joe Reaves wrote: >>> Hello friends, >>> I have been trying to get my K3 decoder to work better by trying, >>> cutting back on the RF gain, using narrow filtering, to limit noise. >>> tuning back and forth across the signal to find a good copy spot. >>> Just can't seem to get it to read very well no matter what I try...? >>> Even strong signals don't seem to read very well... Is there a way to >>> improver the cw code reader / decoder in the K3 ? >>> Thanks, Best 73' Joe R. / W7Joe >>> >>> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> >> > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
