1 / 51

Processing Along the Way: Forwarding vs. Coding

Processing Along the Way: Forwarding vs. Coding. Christina Fragouli Joint work with Emina Soljanin and Daniela Tuninetti. Do credit cards work in paradise?. A field with many interesting questions…. Problem Formulations and Ongoing Work. If the min-cut to each receiver is h.

gordon
Download Presentation

Processing Along the Way: Forwarding vs. Coding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Processing Along the Way:Forwarding vs. Coding Christina Fragouli Joint work with Emina Soljanin and Daniela Tuninetti

  2. Do credit cards work in paradise? A field with many interesting questions… • Problem Formulations and Ongoing Work

  3. If the min-cut to each receiver is h 1. Alphabet size and min-cut tradeoff • Directed graph with unit capacity edges, coding over Fq. • What alphabet size q is sufficient for all possible configurations with h sources and N receivers? Sufficient for h=2

  4. An Example Source 2 Source 1 k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1

  5. An Example Source 2 Source 1 Network Coding: assign a coding vector to each edge so that each receiver has a full rank set of equations k 2 1 3 Coding vector: vector of coefficients RN R2 R3 R1

  6. An Example Source 2 Source 1 For h=2, it is sufficient to consider q+1 coding vectors over Fq: k 2 1 3 Any two such vectors form a basis of the 2-dimensional space RN R2 R3 R1

  7. An Example Source 2 Source 1 For h=2, it is sufficient to consider q+1 coding vectors over Fq: k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1

  8. An Example Source 2 Source 1 For h=2, it is sufficient to consider q+1 coding vectors over Fq: k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1

  9. An Example Source 2 Source 1 For h=2, it is sufficient to consider q+1 coding vectors over Fq: k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1

  10. An Example Source 2 Source 1 For h=2, it is sufficient to consider q+1 coding vectors over Fq: k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1

  11. Source 2 Source 1 R3 k k 2 2 1 1 3 3 R2 R1 Connection with Coloring RN R2 R3 R1

  12. Source 2 Source 1 R3 k k 2 2 1 1 3 3 R2 R1 Fragouli, Soljanin 2004 Connection with Coloring RN R2 R3 R1

  13. Source 2 Source 1 R2 k 2 1 3 R1 If min-cut >2 4 k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1 Each receiver observes a set of vertices Find a coloring such that every receiver observes at least two distinct colors

  14. R2 R1 Coloring families of sets A coloring is legal if no set is monochromatic. Erdos (1963): Consider a family of N sets of size m. If N<q m-1 then the family is q-colorable. 4 k 2 1 q > N 1/(m-1) 3

  15. R2 R1 Coloring families of sets A coloring is legal if no set is monochromatic. Erdos (1963): Consider a family of N sets of size m. If N<q m-1 then the family is q-colorable. 4 k 2 1 3

  16. Source 2 Source 1 k 2 1 3 RN R2 R3 R1 2. What if the alphabet size is not large enough? • N receivers • Alphabet of size q • Min-cut to each receiver m

  17. R2 R1 2. What if the alphabet size is not large enough? If we have q colors, how many sets are going to be monochromatic? There exists a coloring that colors at most Nq1-m sets monochromatically 4 k 2 1 3

  18. Source 2 Source 1 R2 k 2 1 3 R1 RN R2 R3 R1 And if we know something about the structure? Erdos-Lovasz 1975: If every set intersects at most qm-3 other members, then the family is q-colorable. 4 k 2 1 3

  19. R2 R1 And if we know something about the structure? Erdos-Lovasz 1975: If every set intersects at most qm-3 other members, then the family is q-colorable. 4 • If m=5 and every set intersects 9 other sets, • three colors – a binary alphabet is sufficient. k 2 1 3

  20. What if links are not error free?

  21. 1-p 0 0 p p 1 1 1-p Network of Discrete Memoryless Channels Source Receiver Binary Symmetric Channel (BSC) Edges Capacity

  22. 1-p 0 0 p p 1 1 1-p Network of Discrete Memoryless Channels Source Receiver Min Cut = 2 (1-H(p)) Binary Symmetric Channel (BSC) Edges Capacity

  23. 1-p 0 0 p p 1 1 1-p Network of Discrete Memoryless Channels Source Receiver Binary Symmetric Channel (BSC) Edges Terminals that have processing capabilities in terms of complexity and delay Vertices

  24. 1-p 0 0 p p 1 1 1-p Network of Discrete Memoryless Channels Source Receiver Binary Symmetric Channel (BSC) Edges Capacity We are interested in evaluating possible benefits of intermediate node processing from an information-theoretic point of view.

  25. 1-p 0 0 p N p 1111010001001111000 1 1 1-p Network of Discrete Memoryless Channels N Source Receiver N N Binary Symmetric Channel (BSC) Edges Terminals that have processing capabilities Vertices Complexity - Delay

  26. Two Cases: allow intermediate nodes finite Partial Processing Perfect Processing Perfect and Partial Processing N Receiver Source N N

  27. Perfect Processing Source Receiver We can use a capacity achieving channel code to transform each edge of the network to a practically error free link. For a unicast connection: we can achieve the min-cut capacity

  28. X X X X 1 2 1 2 Network Coding Receiver 1 + Source Receiver 2 Employing additional coding over the error free links allows to better share the available resources when multicasting Network Coding: Coding across independent information streams

  29. Partial Processing N Source Receiver N N We can no longer think of links as error free.

  30. Partial Processing We will show that: Network and Channel Coding cannot be separated without loss of optimality.

  31. Partial Processing We will show that: Network and Channel Coding cannot be separated without loss of optimality. Network coding can offer benefits for a single unicast connection. That is, there exist configurations where coding across information streams that bring independent information can increase the end-to-end achievable rate.

  32. Partial Processing We will show that: Network and Channel Coding cannot be separated without loss of optimality. Network coding can offer benefits for a single unicast connection. That is, there exist configurations where coding across information streams that bring independent information can increase the end-to-end achievable rate. For a unicast connection over the same network, the optimal processing depends on the channel parameters.

  33. Partial Processing We will show that: Network and Channel Coding cannot be separated without loss of optimality. Network coding can offer benefits for a single unicast connection. That is, there exist configurations where coding across information streams that bring independent information can increase the end-to-end achievable rate. For a unicast connection over the same network, the optimal processing depends on the channel parameters. There exists a connection between the optimal routing over a specific graph and the structure of error correcting codes.

  34. Each edge: 1-p 0 0 p • Nodes B, C and D can process N bits • Nodes A and E have infinite complexity processing C A B E D p 1 1 1-p Simple Example Source Receiver

  35. E B C D E A C B A D N infinite X1 Source Source Receiver Receiver X2 Min Cut = 2 (1-H(p)) X1, X2 iid

  36. E B C E D A B A D C N=0: Forwarding X1 Source Source Receiver Receiver X2

  37. E B C E D A B A D C N=0: Forwarding X1 Source Source Receiver Receiver X2

  38. A C B A E D D C B E N=0: Forwarding X1 Source Source Receiver Receiver X2 Path diversity: receive multiple noisy observations of the same information stream and optimally combine them to increase the end-to-end rate X1, X2 iid

  39. Each edge: 1-p 0 0 p • Nodes B, C and D can process one bit • Nodes A and E have infinite complexity processing C A B E D p 1 1 1-p N=1 Source Receiver

  40. Each edge: 1-p 0 0 p • Nodes B, C and D can process one bit • Nodes A and E have infinite complexity processing E C D A B p 1 1 1-p N=1 X1 Source Receiver

  41. Each edge: 1-p 0 0 p • Nodes B, C and D can process one bit • Nodes A and E have infinite complexity processing C B A D E p 1 1 1-p N=1 X1 Source Receiver

  42. Each edge: 1-p 0 0 p • Nodes B, C and D can process one bit • Nodes A and E have infinite complexity processing E C D A B p 1 1 1-p N=1 X1 Source Receiver X2

  43. X1 X2 A B C D E Optimal Processing at node D? Source Receiver Three choices to send through edge DE: f1) X1 f2) X1+X2 f3) X1 and X2

  44. C A B D E All edges: BSC(p) X1 X1 X1 X2 X2 X2 Network coding offers benefits for unicast connections

  45. C A B D E All edges: BSC(p) X1 X1 X1 X2 X2 X2 The optimal processing depends on the channel parameters

  46. A B C D E Edges BD and CD: BSC(0) All other edges: BSC(p) X1 X1 X1 X2 X2 X2 Network and channel coding cannot be separated

  47. A B C D E Edges AB, AC, BD and CD: BSC(0) Edges BE, DE and CE: BSC(p) X1 X1 X1 X2 X2 X2

  48. A B C D E Edges AB, AC, BD and CD: BSC(0) Edges BE, DE and CE: BSC(p) X1 X1 X1 X2 X2 X2

  49. Y1 X1 Y3 X2 Y2 A B C D E Linear Processing Choose matrix A to maximize

  50. Connection to C oding “Equivalent problem”: maximize the composite capacity of a BSC(p) that is preceded by a linear block encoder Determined by the weight distribution of the code Choose matrix A to maximize

More Related