To compress or not to compress?

Author

Buch, Gabriele ; Burkert, Frank ; Hagenauer, Joachim ; Kukla, Bernhard

Author_Institution

Tech. Univ. Munchen, Germany

fYear

1996

fDate

18-22 Nov 1996

Firstpage

198

Lastpage

203

Abstract

For practical communications which transmit finite blocks of source data over noisy channels, we question the common practice to compress (C) the source and then to add redundancy for error control. Rather we exploit the redundancy of the non-compressed source (NC) at the channel decoder by source-controlled channel-decoding. For a simple binary Markov source and a Rayleigh fading channel we simulated in a fair comparison the 2 systems (C and NC) using an ARQ/FEC scheme with rate-compatible punctured convolutional (RCPC) codes, Lempel-Ziv compression and a modified Viterbi decoder. We indicate parameter regions where it is better not to compress

Keywords

Markov processes; Rayleigh channels; Viterbi decoding; automatic repeat request; channel coding; convolutional codes; data compression; error correction codes; forward error correction; redundancy; source coding; ARQ/FEC scheme; Lempel-Ziv compression; RCPC codes; Rayleigh fading channel; binary Markov source; channel decoder; communications; error control; modified Viterbi decoder; noisy channels; non-compressed source; rate-compatible punctured convolutional codes; redundancy; source-controlled channel-decoding; Automatic repeat request; Channel coding; Data engineering; Decoding; Entropy; Forward error correction; Image coding; Image storage; Redundancy; Viterbi algorithm;

fLanguage

English

Publisher

ieee

Conference_Titel

Global Telecommunications Conference, 1996. GLOBECOM '96. 'Communications: The Key to Global Prosperity

Conference_Location

London

Print_ISBN

0-7803-3336-5

Type

conf

DOI

10.1109/GLOCOM.1996.586808

Filename

586808