Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A class of decoding algorithms using encoding-and-comparison is considered for error-correcting code spaces. Code words, each of which agrees on some information set for the code with the word <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">r</tex> to be decoded, are constructed and compared with <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">r</tex> . An operationally simple algorithm of this type is studied for cyclic code spaces <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">A</tex> . Let <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">A</tex> have length <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">n</tex> , dimension <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">k</tex> over some finite field, and minimal Hamming distance <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">m</tex> . The construction of fewer than <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">n^2/2</tex> code words is required in decoding a word <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">r</tex> . The procedure seems to be most efficient for small minimal distance <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">m</tex> , but somewhat paradoxically it is suggested on operational grounds that it may prove most useful in those cases where <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">m</tex> is relatively large with respect to the code length <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">n</tex> .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eugene Prange (1962) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: