Channel codding techniques
In telecommunication, information theory, and coding theory, forward error correction (FEC) or channel
coding[1][2] is a technique used for controlling errors in data transmission over unreliable or noisy
communication channels. The central idea is the sender encodes the message in a redundant way, most
often by using an error-correcting code (ECC).
A large challenge of wireless communications is that received signals are typically different to transmitted
signals due to interference, poor signal or other noise . In order to address this, we use channel coding. The
end result of channel coding is to ensure that the receiver identifies the original bits / message of the
transmitted signal
Types of channel codding
Turbo Code Design
A turbo code has two parts: the encoder used in the transmitter and the decoder used in the
receiver. The design of the turbo encoder dictates the error correction capability of a compatible
turbo decoder. However, rather than optimising the design to achieve the best error correction
capability, the design of turbo encoders typically focusses on meeting the constraints that allow the
conventional approach to turbo decoder design to support parallel processing. However, this
approach does not achieve the high degrees of parallel processing that are required to meet
the performance demands of next-generation wireless communication systems.
The AccelerComm turbo decoder takes a different approach to support parallel processing. Our
approach can support arbitrarily high degrees of parallel processing, no matter how the turbo
encoder is designed. In addition to meeting the multi-Gbps throughputs and sub-microsecond
latencies that are demanded by next-generation wireless communication systems, this approach
allows the turbo encoder to be designed to optimise error correction capability.
LDPC Code Design
The AccelerComm team has published dozens of papers and completed several PhDs on LDPC code
design. They have gained unique insights and developed unparalleled solutions for overcoming the
greatest challenge in the hardware acceleration of LDPC decoding: namely delivering the correct
information to the correct processing elements at the correct time. This expertise is particularly
timely, because 3GPP New Radio has adopted the most flexible and most capable LDPC code ever
standardised. This flexibility allows New Radio to meet the requirements of the diverse 5G use cases,
but makes the implementation of flexible LDPC decoders with high throughput, low latency and high
hardware efficiency more challenging than ever. AccelerComm is uniquely positioned to address
these challenges.
Polar Code Design
Compared with turbo and LDPC codes, polar codes are far less mature and a conventional approach
to their implementation has not yet emerged. The encoder and decoder of a polar code have regular
but intricate structures. During polar decoding, the information bits are decoded one at a time, with
each successive bit informing the decoding of the next. However, the complexity associated with
decoding each successive bit varies considerably, depending on its position in the block and the
design of the corresponding polar encoder. This makes it difficult to implement flexible, high
performance polar decoders.
Over the last seven years, AccelerComm has developed a sixth sense for the intricate structure of
polar codes. By harnessing this intuition and expertise, AccelerComm is uniquely positioned to
exploit the regularity of the polar code structure, in order to offer polar encoders and decoders with
unmatched flexibility and performance.
AccelerComm has fully 3GPP compliant versions of polar encode and decode IP available for
Software, ASIC & FPGA implementations.
There are three major types of channel coding, as described with their relative benefits and
challenges in the table below:
Turbo code LDPC code Polar code
Proven in 3G & 4G, will be Proven in IEEE standards,
Selected for 5G NR
Maturity used in 3GPP rel 14 & NB- selected for data channel in
control channel
IoT 5G NR
Error correction
Similar Similar Similar
capability
Achievable with the
Very flexible frame length Achievable with the
Flexibility AccelerComm
& coding rate AccelerComm approach
approach
Computational Higher for most coding Lower for most coding
Lower for most coding rates
complexity rates rates
Interconnect
Lower Higher Lower
complexity
Proven by
Throughput latency Proven by AccelerComm Proven for fully-parallel
AccelerComm
Flexible high-
Achievable with the
throughput Lower, particularly at low Higher, particularly at low
AccelerComm
implementational coding rates coding rates
approach
complexity
Synergy with 3G &
Yes No No
4G
