On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Andreas Weller
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Bruce Perens <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hm. Or stay with the lower bit-rate implementation and add LDPC?
>
> I agree on that. This way the interaction of codec, FEC and modem
> could be optimized.
>
> May be one of these LFPC GPL projects could be used to prevent David
> from reinventing wheel:
> http://planete-bcast.inrialpes.fr/article.php3?id_article=16
> http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~radford/ldpc.software.html


The planete-bcast stuff is erasure codes, not really want you want
here.  The software at the second link is useful.

A fun thing to do that wouldn't require too much thought would be to
generate random LDPC matrixes (constrained to ones that will actually
work),  and then test them with the actual modem, a path simulator,
and the codec2 decoder and measure the resulting quality with
something like PESQ (hmm, does PESQ work on codec2?).  Then just brute
force search for the check matrix that gives the best results.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Freetel-codec2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2

Reply via email to