Reed–Muller code
Reed–Muller codes are a family of linear error-correcting codes used in communications. They are named after their discoverers, Irving S. Reed and D. E. Muller. Muller discovered the codes, and Reed proposed the majority logic decoding for the first time. A first order Reed–Muller code is equivalent to a Hadamard code. Reed–Muller codes are listed as RM(d, r), where d is the order of the code, and r is parameter related to the length of code, n = 2 r. RM codes are related to binary functions on field GF(2 r) over the elements [0, 1].
RM(0, r) codes are repetition codes of length n = 2 r, rate
and minimum distance dmin = n.
RM(1, r) codes are parity check codes of length n = 2 r, rate
and minimum distance
.
RM(r − 1, r) codes are parity check codes of length n = 2 r.
RM(r − 2, r) codes are the family of extended Hamming codes of length n = 2 r with minimum distance dmin = 4.1
Contents |
Construction
A generating matrix for a Reed–Muller code of length n = 2d can be constructed like this. Let us write:
Note that each member of the set X is a point in
. We define in n-dimensional space
the indicator vectors
on subsets
by:
together with, also in
, the binary operation
referred to as the wedge product. Here,
and
are points in
, and the operation
is the usual multiplication in the field
.
is a d-dimensional vector space over the field
, so it is possible to write

We define in n-dimensional space
the following vectors with length n: v0 = (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1) and
where the Hi are hyperplanes in
(with dimension d −1):
The Reed–Muller RM(d, r) code of order r and length n = 2d is the code generated by v0 and the wedge products of up to r of the vi (where by convention a wedge product of fewer than one vector is the identity for the operation).
Example 1
Let d = 3. Then n = 8, and
and
The RM(1,3) code is generated by the set
or more explicitly by the rows of the matrix
Example 2
The RM(2,3) code is generated by the set:
or more explicitly by the rows of the matrix:
Properties
The following properties hold:
1 The set of all possible wedge products of up to d of the vi form a basis for
.
2 The RM (d, r) code has rank
3 RM (d, r) = RM (d − 1, r) | RM (d − 1, r − 1) where '|' denotes the bar product of two codes.
4 RM (d, r) has minimum Hamming weight 2d − r.
Proof
1
- There are
- such vectors and
has dimension n so it is sufficient to check that the n vectors span; equivalently it is sufficient to check that RM(d, d) =
.
- Let x be an element of X and define
- Then

- Expansion via the distributivity of the wedge product gives
. Then since the vectors
span
we have RM(d, d) =
.
2
- By 1, all such wedge products must be linearly independent, so the rank of RM(d, r) must simply be the number of such vectors.
3
- Omitted.
4
- By induction.
- The RM(d, 0) code is the repetition code of length n =2d and weight n = 2d−0 = 2d−0. By 1 RM(d, d) =
and has weight 1 = 20 = 2d−d.
- The article bar product (coding theory) gives a proof that the weight of the bar product of two codes C1 , C2 is given by
-
- min{2w(C1),w(C2)}
- If 0 < r < d and if
- i) RM(d − 1, r) has weight 2d−1−r
- ii) RM(d-1,r-1) has weight 2d−1−(r−1) = 2d−r
- then the bar product has weight
Alternative construction
A Reed–Muller code RM(r,m) exists for any integers
and
. RM(m, m) is defined as the universe (2m,2m,1) code. RM(−1,m) is defined as the trivial code (
). The remaining RM codes may be constructed from these elementary codes using the length-doubling construction
From this construction, RM(r,m) is a binary linear block code (n, k, d) with length n = 2 m, dimension k(r,m) = k(r,m − 1) + k(r − 1,m − 1) and minimum distance d = 2m − r for
. The dual code to RM(r,m) is RM(m-r-1,m). This shows that repetition and SPC codes are duals, biorthogonal and extended Hamming codes are duals and that codes with k=n/2 are self-dual.
Table of Reed–Muller codes
The table below lists the RM(r, m) codes of lengths up to 32.
| RM(m,m) (2m,2m,1) |
universe codes | ||||||
| RM(5,5) (32,32,1) |
|||||||
| RM(4,4) (16,16,1) |
RM(m − 1, m) (2m,2m − 1,2) |
SPC codes | |||||
| RM(3,3) (8,8,1) |
RM(4,5) (32,31,2) |
||||||
| RM(2,2) (4,4,1) |
RM(3,4) (16,15,2) |
RM(m − 2, m) (2m,2m − m − 1,4) |
ext. Hamming codes | ||||
| RM(1,1) (2,2,1) |
RM(2,3) (8,7,2) |
RM(3,5) (32,26,4) |
|||||
| RM(0,0) (1,1,1) |
RM(1,2) (4,3,2) |
RM(2,4) (16,11,4) |
|||||
| RM(0,1) (2,1,2) |
RM(1,3) (8,4,4) |
RM(2,5) (32,16,8) |
self-dual codes | ||||
| RM(−1,0) (1,0, ) |
RM(0,2) (4,1,4) |
RM(1,4) (16,5,8) |
|||||
| RM(-1,1) (2,0, ) |
RM(0,3) (8,1,8) |
RM(1,5) (32,6,16) |
|||||
| RM(-1,2) (4,0, ) |
RM(0,4) (16,1,16) |
RM(1,m) (2m,m + 1,2m − 1) |
biorthogonal codes | ||||
| RM(−1,3) (8,0, ) |
RM(0,5) (32,1,32) |
||||||
| RM(−1,4) (16,0, ) |
RM(0,m) (2m,1,2m) |
repetition codes | |||||
| RM(−1,5) (32,0, ) |
|||||||
| RM(-1,m) ( ) |
trivial codes |
Decoding RM codes
RM(r, m) codes can be decoded using the majority logic decoding. The basic idea of majority logic decoding is to build several checksums for each received code word element. Since each of the different checksums must all have the same value (i.e the value of the message word element weight), we can use a majority logic decoding to decipher the value of the message word element. Once each order of the polynomial is decoded, the received word is modified accordingly by removing the corresponding codewords weighted by the decoded message contributions, up to the present stage. So for a rth order RM code, we have to decode iteratively r+1, times before we arrive at the final received code-word. Also, the values of the message bits are calculated through this scheme; finally we can calculate the codeword by multiplying the message word (just decoded) with the generator matrix.
One clue if the decoding succeeded, is to have an all-zero modified received word, at the end of (r + 1)-stage decoding through the majority logic decoding. This technique was proposed by Irving. S. Reed, and is more general when applied to other finite geometry codes.
See also
Notes
- ^ Trellis and Turbo Coding, C. Schlegel & L. Perez, Wiley Interscience, 2004, p149.
References
Research Articles:
- D. E. Muller. Application of boolean algebra to switching circuit design and to error detection. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 3:6–12, 1954.
- Irving S. Reed. A class of multiple-error-correcting codes and the decoding scheme. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 4:38–49, 1954.
Textbooks:
- Shu Lin; Daniel Costello (2005). Error Control Coding (2nd ed ed.). Pearson. ISBN 0130179736. Chapter 4.
- J.H. van Lint (1992). Introduction to Coding Theory. GTM. 86 (2nd ed ed.). Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-54894-7. Chapter 4.5.
External links
- MIT OpenCourseWare, 6.451 Principles of Digital Communication II, Lecture Notes section 6.4
- GPL Matlab-implementation of RM-codes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Return to Fuhz Home - This article covering Reed–Muller code is enhanced for the visually impaired.
Article from Wikipedia. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License - Our Privacy Policy - Thanks Auto Blog Commenter








![\begin{matrix}
v_0 & = & (1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1) \\[2pt]
v_1 & = & (1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0) \\[2pt]
v_2 & = & (1,1,0,0,1,1,0,0) \\[2pt]
v_3 & = & (1,1,1,1,0,0,0,0). \\
\end{matrix}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/3/3/43333a43b3ef7770e7b995f2bce95696.png)









)