Forward Error Correction Based on Block Turbo Code With 3-Bit Soft Decision for 10-Gb/s Optical Communication Systems

Nonbinary LDPC codes for optical communication systems

“…Moreover, from a practical point of view, the block-circulant code facilitates the implementation since the nonzero entries need not be memorized. Block-circulant code of rate 0.864 (with 15.7% redundancy) over GF(8) provides a coding gain of 8.3 dB at , outperforming the turbo product code proposal in [4] (with 24.6% redundancy) by 0.9 dB (see [4, (8) curve from Fig. 3, we conclude that the nonbinary LDPC code with 15.7% redundancy actually outperforms the turbo code with 24.6% redundancy by 1.5 dB at BER of .…”

Ultra-dense, transparent and resilient ring-tree access network using coupler-based remote nodes and homodyne transceivers

“…To compare with the other cases, in RN 1 BER of 10 -6 was measured at -48.1 dBm, whereas in RN2 it was measured at -46.3 dBm. A Forward Error Correction (FEC) coding scheme, with only 7% overhead, is able to recover (quasi) error-free data for a raw BER below 10 -3 [8]. So, FEC strategies should be applied to…”

Replacing the Soft-Decision FEC Limit Paradigm in the Design of Optical Communication Systems

“…Other early studies of SD include block turbo codes [20], [21] and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [22]- [24]. Another concatenated code suitable for SD decoding was defined for optical submarine systems by the ITU in the G.975.1 standard [25].…”

“…Tables and plots of BER post vs. BER pre were presented in, e.g., [21], [24], [25], under specific choices for the chan-nel, modulation format, and symbol rate. Although this was not suggested when these tables and plots were originally published, the existence of such data has subsequently been adopted to avoid the need for including FEC in system simulations and experiments.…”