OpenCores

OpenCores

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes

no use

no use

1/1

no use

no use

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes by jiwaniaziz on Aug 26, 2008			jiwaniaziz Posts: 2 Joined: Aug 22, 2008 Last seen: Sep 12, 2008
Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes by Unknown on Aug 26, 2008			Not available!
May be this doc can help you: <A HREF="http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf">http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf</A> Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">jiwaniaziz at gmail.com</A> escreveu: [q] Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores</A> [/q] May be this doc can help you: http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes by Unknown on Aug 27, 2008			Not available!
Well they are a lot different, based on same mathematical background Abstract Algebra, but completely different, BCH are for binary streams, while RS is used mainly for galois field streams, the math, background is the same, but RS you have 4 or 5 equations sets to decode something while the BCH .... too, but the set of equations are different, that is the main difference, anyway look my paper of IEEE of a RS implementation for aerospacial systems, search on IEEExplore. Bonne Cahnce. Le 08-08-26 Ã 09:12, <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">jiwaniaziz at gmail.com</A> a Ã©crit : [q] Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores</A>[/q] Luis Vitorio Cargnini IEEE member Well they are a lot different, based on same mathematical background Abstract Algebra, but completely different, BCH are for binary streams, while RS is used mainly for galois field streams, the math, background is the same, but RS you have 4 or 5 equations sets to decode something while the BCH .... too, but the set of equations are different, that is the main difference, anyway look my paper of IEEE of a RS implementation for aerospacial systems, search on IEEExplore. Bonne Cahnce. Le 08-08-26 Ã 09:12, jiwaniaziz at gmail.com a Ã©crit : Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores Luis Vitorio Cargnini IEEE member

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes by jiwaniaziz on Aug 29, 2008			jiwaniaziz Posts: 2 Joined: Aug 22, 2008 Last seen: Sep 12, 2008
Hi, I have gone through the spansion article you have mentioned long back. It gives the overview of RS and BCH codes. I have read in several articles that RS codes are most efficient for burst errors while BCH are efficient for random errors. And i remember reading somewhere that two algorithms are required in BCH codes if you want to correct both burst and random errors, so is it true? And what are those algorithms? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jardel Silveira<<A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">jardel at l...</A>> To: Date: Tue Aug 26 19:48:27 CEST 2008 Subject: [oc] comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes [q] May be this doc can help you: [/q] <A HREF="http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf">http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf</A> [q] Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: [q]> Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the [/q] error [q]> correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. > > I know basic differences like > RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they [/q] require [q]> large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding [/q] and [q]> decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. > > I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any [/q] conclusion. [q]> > Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS [/q] codes? [q]> > Please help...thanks in advance > _______________________________________________ > <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores</A> > [/q] [/q] Hi, I have gone through the spansion article you have mentioned long back. It gives the overview of RS and BCH codes. I have read in several articles that RS codes are most efficient for burst errors while BCH are efficient for random errors. And i remember reading somewhere that two algorithms are required in BCH codes if you want to correct both burst and random errors, so is it true? And what are those algorithms? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jardel Silveirajardel at l...> To: Date: Tue Aug 26 19:48:27 CEST 2008 Subject: [oc] comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes May be this doc can help you: http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: > Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error > correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. > > I know basic differences like > RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require > large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and > decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. > > I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. > > Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? > > Please help...thanks in advance > _______________________________________________ > http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores >

comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes by Unknown on Aug 29, 2008			Not available!
Dear, IN fact, I donÂ´t know very about these codes. As IÂ´ve understood from wikipedia (<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCH_code">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCH_code</A>), reed solomon is particular case of BCH: "A narrow-sense BCH code with /n/ = /q/ âˆ’ 1 is called a /Reed-Solomon code <<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed-Solomon_code">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed-Solomon_code</A>>/." Tks, Jardel. <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">jiwaniaziz at gmail.com</A> escreveu: [q] Hi, I have gone through the spansion article you have mentioned long back. It gives the overview of RS and BCH codes. I have read in several articles that RS codes are most efficient for burst errors while BCH are efficient for random errors. And i remember reading somewhere that two algorithms are required in BCH codes if you want to correct both burst and random errors, so is it true? And what are those algorithms? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jardel Silveira<<A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">jardel at l...</A>> To: Date: Tue Aug 26 19:48:27 CEST 2008 Subject: [oc] comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes [q] May be this doc can help you: [/q] [q] <A HREF="http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf">http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf</A> [q] Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: [q] Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the [/q] error [q] correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they [/q] require [q] large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding [/q] and [q] decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any [/q] conclusion. [q] Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS [/q] codes? [q] Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ <A HREF="http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores">http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores</A> [/q] [/q] Dear, IN fact, I donÂ´t know very about these codes. As IÂ´ve understood from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCH_code), reed solomon is particular case of BCH: "A narrow-sense BCH code with /n/ = /q/ âˆ’ 1 is called a /Reed-Solomon code http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed-Solomon_code>/." Tks, Jardel. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: Hi, I have gone through the spansion article you have mentioned long back. It gives the overview of RS and BCH codes. I have read in several articles that RS codes are most efficient for burst errors while BCH are efficient for random errors. And i remember reading somewhere that two algorithms are required in BCH codes if you want to correct both burst and random errors, so is it true? And what are those algorithms? ----- Original Message ----- From: Jardel Silveirajardel at l...> To: Date: Tue Aug 26 19:48:27 CEST 2008 Subject: [oc] comparison between BCH and Reed Solomon codes May be this doc can help you: http://www.spansion.com/application_notes/Types_of_ECC_Used_on_Flash_AN_01_e.pdf Simple Hamming codes can only correct single bit errors. Reed-Solomon code can correct more errors and is used on many of the current controllers. BCH (Bose, Ray-Chaudhuri, Hocquenghem) codes can also correct multiple bit errors and are becoming popular because of their improved efficiency over Reed-Solomon. jiwaniaziz at gmail.com escreveu: Can anyone please help me with the comparison between the error correction codes BCH and Reed Solomon. I know basic differences like RS codes provide robust error correction ability but they require large amount of system resources. On the other hand encoding and decoding technique are simpler in BCH codes, etc. I went through several articles but i couldn't reach any conclusion. Is the error correcting capability of BCH codes same as RS codes? Please help...thanks in advance _______________________________________________ http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores

no use

no use

1/1

no use

no use

© copyright 1999-2026 OpenCores.org, equivalent to Oliscience, all rights reserved. OpenCores®, registered trademark.