research

Efficiently decoding Reed-Muller codes from random errors

Abstract

Reed-Muller codes encode an mm-variate polynomial of degree rr by evaluating it on all points in {0,1}m\{0,1\}^m. We denote this code by RM(m,r)RM(m,r). The minimal distance of RM(m,r)RM(m,r) is 2mr2^{m-r} and so it cannot correct more than half that number of errors in the worst case. For random errors one may hope for a better result. In this work we give an efficient algorithm (in the block length n=2mn=2^m) for decoding random errors in Reed-Muller codes far beyond the minimal distance. Specifically, for low rate codes (of degree r=o(m)r=o(\sqrt{m})) we can correct a random set of (1/2o(1))n(1/2-o(1))n errors with high probability. For high rate codes (of degree mrm-r for r=o(m/logm)r=o(\sqrt{m/\log m})), we can correct roughly mr/2m^{r/2} errors. More generally, for any integer rr, our algorithm can correct any error pattern in RM(m,m(2r+2))RM(m,m-(2r+2)) for which the same erasure pattern can be corrected in RM(m,m(r+1))RM(m,m-(r+1)). The results above are obtained by applying recent results of Abbe, Shpilka and Wigderson (STOC, 2015), Kumar and Pfister (2015) and Kudekar et al. (2015) regarding the ability of Reed-Muller codes to correct random erasures. The algorithm is based on solving a carefully defined set of linear equations and thus it is significantly different than other algorithms for decoding Reed-Muller codes that are based on the recursive structure of the code. It can be seen as a more explicit proof of a result of Abbe et al. that shows a reduction from correcting erasures to correcting errors, and it also bares some similarities with the famous Berlekamp-Welch algorithm for decoding Reed-Solomon codes.Comment: 18 pages, 2 figure

    Similar works

    Full text

    thumbnail-image

    Available Versions