Fixed captions

latex/thesis/chapters/comparison.tex

@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ return $\tilde{\boldsymbol{c}}$
     \end{subfigure}%
     
 
-    \caption{Comparison of the proximal gradient method and \ac{ADMM}}
+    \caption{Comparison of proximal decoding and \ac{LP} decoding using \ac{ADMM}}
     \label{fig:ana:theo_comp_alg}
 \end{figure}%
 %
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ return $\tilde{\boldsymbol{c}}$
     \end{subfigure}%
     
 
-    \caption{The proximal gradient method and \ac{LP} decoding using \ac{ADMM}
+    \caption{Proximal decoding and \ac{LP} decoding using \ac{ADMM}
         as message passing algorithms}
     \label{fig:comp:message_passing}
 \end{figure}%
@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ Nevertheless, the run time of both the proximal decoding and the \ac{LP}
 decoding using \ac{ADMM} implementations is similar, and both are
 reasonably performant, owing to the parallelizable structure of the
 algorithms.
-%
+
 \begin{figure}[h]
     \centering
 
@@ -582,7 +582,7 @@ algorithms.
         \end{tikzpicture}
     \end{subfigure}
 
-    \caption{Comparison of decoding performance of the different decoder
+    \caption{Comparison of the decoding performance of the different decoder
         implementations for various codes}
     \label{fig:comp:prox_admm_dec}
 \end{figure}

latex/thesis/chapters/lp_dec_using_admm.tex

@@ -812,7 +812,7 @@ the $\tilde{\boldsymbol{c}}$ update can then be rewritten as%
 %
 This modified version of the decoding process is depicted in algorithm \ref{alg:admm:mod}.
 
-\begin{genericAlgorithm}[caption={\ac{LP} decoding using \ac{ADMM} algorithm with rewritten
+\begin{genericAlgorithm}[caption={The \ac{LP} decoding using \ac{ADMM} algorithm with rewritten
                          update steps}, label={alg:admm:mod},
         basicstyle=\fontsize{11}{16}\selectfont
         ]
@@ -1172,7 +1172,7 @@ of one another.
     
     \caption{Comparison of datapoints from Barman et al. with own simulation results.
         ``Margulis'' \ac{LDPC} code with $n = 2640$, $k = 1320$
-        \cite[\text{Margulis2640.1320.3}]{mackay_enc}\protect\footnotemark{}}
+        \cite[\text{Margulis2640.1320.3}]{mackay_enc}}
     \label{fig:admm:results}
 \end{figure}%
 %
@@ -1239,6 +1239,11 @@ with linear behavior.
 Nonetheless, the simulation results roughly match the expected behavior
 following from the theoretical considerations.
 
+\begin{figure}[H]
+    \centering
+    \vspace*{5cm}
+\end{figure}
+
 \begin{figure}[H]
     \centering
 
@@ -1433,11 +1438,15 @@ following from the theoretical considerations.
 
     \end{subfigure}
 
-    \caption{Dependence of average number of iterations required on the parameters
+    \caption{Dependence of the average number of iterations required on the parameters
-        $\mu$ and $\rho$ for various codes}
+        $\mu$ and $\rho$ for $E_b / N_0 = \SI{4}{dB}$ for various codes}
     \label{fig:admm:mu_rho_multiple}
 \end{figure}
 
+\vfill
+
+\newpage
+
 \begin{figure}[H]
     \centering
     

latex/thesis/chapters/proximal_decoding.tex

@@ -1510,6 +1510,8 @@ the code as well as the chosen parameters.
     \caption{Comparison of the timing requirements of the implementations of proximal
         decoding and the improved algorithm}
     \label{fig:prox:time_complexity_comp}
+
+    \vspace*{10cm}
 \end{figure}
 
 
@@ -2276,8 +2278,8 @@ the code as well as the chosen parameters.
         \end{tikzpicture}
     \end{subfigure}
 
-    \caption{Comparison of improvement in decoding performance for various
+    \caption{Comparison of the decoding performance of proximal decoding
-        codes}
+        and the improved algorithm for various codes}
     \label{fig:prox:improved:comp} 
 \end{figure}
 

latex/thesis/chapters/theoretical_background.tex

@@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ Figure \ref{fig:theo:tanner_graph} shows the Tanner graph for the
         \draw (cn3) -- (c7);
     \end{tikzpicture}
 
-    \caption{Tanner graph for the (7,4)-Hamming-code}
+    \caption{Tanner graph for the (7,4) Hamming code}
     \label{fig:theo:tanner_graph}
 \end{figure}%
 %