论文标题
DeepCode和Modulo-SK专为不同的设置而设计
Deepcode and Modulo-SK are Designed for Different Settings
论文作者
论文摘要
我们回应[1]，该[1]声称“ Modulo-Sk方案优于deepcode [2]”。我们证明了此陈述不是真的：这两个方案是针对完全不同的设置设计和评估的。 DeepCode是针对AWGN通道设计和评估（可能延迟的）未编码的输出反馈。 Modulo-SK通过编码反馈和单位延迟在AWGN通道上进行评估。 [1]还声称实施了Schalkwijk和Kailath（SK）[3]，在数值上，对于任何数量的信息位和迭代都是稳定的。但是，我们观察到，尽管他们的实施确实对我们的实施确实有所改善，但它也遇到了精确的基本问题。最后，我们表明，当反馈嘈杂时，在自然选择的参数选择方面，深编码主导了SK的优化性能。
We respond to [1] which claimed that "Modulo-SK scheme outperforms Deepcode [2]". We demonstrate that this statement is not true: the two schemes are designed and evaluated for entirely different settings. DeepCode is designed and evaluated for the AWGN channel with (potentially delayed) uncoded output feedback. Modulo-SK is evaluated on the AWGN channel with coded feedback and unit delay. [1] also claimed an implementation of Schalkwijk and Kailath (SK) [3] which was numerically stable for any number of information bits and iterations. However, we observe that while their implementation does marginally improve over ours, it also suffers from a fundamental issue with precision. Finally, we show that Deepcode dominates the optimized performance of SK, over a natural choice of parameterizations when the feedback is noisy.
