Talk:Binary symmetric channel

$k$ $\leq$ $\lfloor$ $(1-H(p+\epsilon )n)$ $\rfloor$

Is that last ')' misplaced? 68.239.116.212 (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unclear proof in "Capacity of BSC_p" section

Capacity of BSC

The capacity of the channel is 1 − H(p), where H(p) is the binary entropy function.

The converse can be shown by a sphere packing argument. Given a codeword, there are roughly 2n H(p) typical output sequences. There are 2n total possible outputs, and the input chooses from a codebook of size 2nR. Therefore, the receiver would choose to partition the space into "spheres" with 2n / 2nR = 2n(1 − R) potential outputs each. If R > 1 − H(p), then the spheres will be packed too tightly asymptotically and the receiver will not be able to identify the correct codeword with vanishing probability.

Converse -- What is intended here? A statement that two things are equal does not have a converse.

sphere packing argument -- It is not a sphere-packing argument, since the geometry of the pieces is not used.

Given a codeword, there are roughly 2n H(p) typical output sequences. -- What is a codeword in this context? A binary sequence of length n? What does a "typical output sequence" mean? A possible damaged version of the original sequence? Then why not 2^n?

There are 2n total possible outputs -- What is the difference between an "output" and an "output sequence"? I suppose they can't be the same since there's a factor of H(p).

the input chooses from a codebook of size 2nR -- What is the definition of the variable R? How do we deduce it has size 2nR, or is this a hypothesis? What is a codebook? A list of possible encodings of one desired message? That sounds like only one entry, a tiny fraction of the whole codebook.

the receiver will not be able to identify the correct codeword with vanishing probability -- I think there's a double negative here. 178.38.132.253 (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I rewrote the capacity section and used a proof which is as far as a know well known. Further improvements or feedback is welcome.

BBC89 (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Statement of Theorem 1 was incoherent

I've attempted to clarify the (previously incoherent) statement of this theorem to something plausible, but it still has the following defect: δ is not quantified. 178.38.132.253 (talk) 14:40, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Binary symmetric channel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160217105359/http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/mackay/itila/book.html to http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/mackay/itila/book.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:44, 20 July 2017 (UTC)