loading...
Analysis of Errors and Erasures in Parity Sharing RS Codecs
DOI Bookmark: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/TC.2007.70773December 2007 (vol. 56 no. 12) pp. 1721-1726
 This Article 
 
PDF
HTML
 
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Reed Solomon (RS) codes are widely used to protect the information from errors in transmission and storage systems. The RS codes popularity is not only related to its multiple error correcting capability but also to its superb information rate for extremely long wordlength. Most of the RS coders are based on GF(2^8) Galois fields and uses a byte to encode a symbol and provides codewords up to 255 symbols. Codewords with more than 255 symbols can be constructed by using GF(2^m) Galois Fields with m > 8. This choice increases the complexity of the basic arithmetic operations in the field and also the complexity of the encoding and decoding algorithms. In fact, the algorithm complexity grows with the number of symbols in the codeword. This limitation, can be superseded introducing Parity Sharing (PS) RS codes that are characterized by a greater flexibility in terms of design parameters. Consequently, a designer can choose between different PS codes implementations in order to meet requirements such as Bit Error Rate (BER), hardware complexity, speed and throughput. This paper analyzes the performance of PS codes in terms of obtainable error rate with respect to the code parameters and provides a performance evaluation of the related hardware implementations. The BER evaluation has been carried out taking into account either the random error and the erasure rates as two independent probabilities. This approach provides an evaluation that is independent by the communication channel characteristics and extends the results to memory systems in which permanent faults and transient faults can be modeled respectively as erasures and random errors.

[1] 1721 O. Collins, “Exploiting the Cannibalistic Traits of Reed-Solomon Codes,” IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 2696-2703, Nov. 1995.
[2] M.K. Cheng and P.H. Siegel, “List-Decoding of Parity-Sharing Reed-Solomon Codes in Magnetic Recording Systems,” Proc. 2004 IEEE Int'l Conf. Comm., vol. 2, pp. 640-644, June 2004.
[3] G. Cardarilli, F. Lombardi, M. Ottavi, S. Pontarelli, M. Re, and A. Salsano, “Comparative Evaluation of Designs for Reliable Memory Systems,” J.Electronic Testing: Theory and Applications, Aug. 2005.
[4] W.E. Ryan and P. Conoval, “A Method of Analysis for Interleaved Reed-Solomon Coding with Erasure Decoding on Burst Error Channels,” IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 430-434, Mar. 1993.
[5] L.L. Joiner and J.J. Komo, “Errors and Erasures Decoding of BCH and Reed-Solomon Codes for Reduced M-Ary Orthogonal Signaling,” IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 57-62, Jan. 2003.
[6] R.E. Blahut, Theory and Practice of Error Control Codes. Addison-Wesley, 1983.
[7] M.B. Pursley, “Reed-Solomon Codes in Frequency-Hop Communications,” Reed-Solomon Codes and Their Applications, S.B. Wicker and V.K. Bhargava, eds., pp. 150-174, IEEE Press, 1994.
[8] Xilinx Logic Core Reed-Solomon Encoder v5.0, data sheet, 2004.
[9] K. Sato, M. Hattori, N. Ohya, M. Sasano, and N. Shirota, “ARSDES: An Automated Reed-Solomon Decoder and Encoder Synthesis System,” Proc. IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conf., pp. 611-614, May 1995.

Index Terms:
Reliability, Testing, and Fault-Tolerance, Error control codes
Citation:
Gian Carlo Cardarilli, Salvatore Pontarelli, Marco Re, Adelio Salsano, "Analysis of Errors and Erasures in Parity Sharing RS Codecs," IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 1721-1726, July 2007, doi:10.1109/TC.2007.70773
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.