Hi Steve I played with your mr2 insertion code a bit. I agree that the second-best symbols don't seem to help us much.
I posted two new plots of decodes vs. ntrials here: http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/decodes_vs_ntrials.pdf http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/decodes_vs_ntrials3.pdf The first one is like before, but extended out to ntrials=1,000,000. Interestingly, only 10 more good decodes (plus 5 bad ones) were found at trial numbers above 156,000. However, 44 good decodes (and no bad ones_ were found between 10,000 and 100,000. The second plot compares results with erasures only (solid line) and with erasures and mr2 substitutions (dotted line). As you had noticed, with substitutions we get to a stated number of decodes in a smaller number of trials, up to around ntrials=1000. Above ntrials=10,000 there seems to be no gain. Moreover, the substitutions code is 1.6 times slower. It seems we're better off using erasures only, with the soft information used to compute a soft distance for each potential codeword. -- Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
