This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
March 1979 (vol. 28 no. 3)
pp. 257-258
J. En, Advanced Technology, Cubic Corporation
Without proof Paaske3states that "... En1cannot be true." Paaske's statement is based on his qualitative assumption that channel error is "much more likely" to occur than a hardware error in the decoder. The author will show that En's statements are still true under Paaske's assumption. Previous correspondence was cited by Paaske and claimed to be "the best way..." to judge a
Index Terms:
majority logic decoder, Catastrophic error propagation, convolution code, feedback decoder, infinite error propagation
Citation:
J. En, "Author's Reply2," IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 257-258, March 1979, doi:10.1109/TC.1979.1675330
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.