an.tsouchlos/ba-thesis
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases 1 Wiki Activity

Removed invalid reference from comparison chapter

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Andreas Tsouchlos 2023-04-11 18:11:26 +02:00
parent 327ad3934e
commit b9d2227b02
1 changed files with 4 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
latex/thesis/chapters/comparison.tex
View File

@ -113,15 +113,13 @@ time, with \ac{ADMM} each parity check is
considered separately and in a more local context (line 4 in both algorithms).
This difference means that while with proximal decoding the alternating
minimization of the two parts of the objective function inevitably leads to
oscillatory behaviour (as explained in section \ref{subsec:prox:conv_properties}), this is not the
case with \ac{ADMM}, which partly explains the disparate decoding performance
of the two methods.
oscillatory behaviour (as explained in section
\ref{subsec:prox:conv_properties}), this is not the case with \ac{ADMM}, which
partly explains the disparate decoding performance of the two methods.
Furthermore, while with proximal decoding the step considering the constraints
is realized using gradient descent - amounting to an approximation -
with \ac{ADMM} it reduces to a number of projections onto the parity polytopes
$\mathcal{P}_{d_j}$ (see
\ref{chapter:LD Decoding using ADMM as a Proximal Algorithm}),
which always provide exact results.
$\mathcal{P}_{d_j}$ which always provide exact results.
The contrasting treatment of the constraints (global and approximate with
proximal decoding, local and exact with \ac{ADMM}) also leads to different