5(1)crc-chechsum-hamming.ppt

10.
Chapter 10
Error Detection
and
Correction
Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.

10.
The Hamming distance between two
words is the number of differences
between corresponding bits.
Note

10.
Let us find the Hamming distance between two pairs of
words.
1. The Hamming distance d(000, 011) is 2 because
Example 10.4
2. The Hamming distance d(10101, 11110) is 3 because

10.
The minimum Hamming distance is the
smallest Hamming distance between
all possible pairs in a set of words.
Note

10.
Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding
scheme in Table 10.1.
Solution
We first find all Hamming distances.
Example 10.5
The dmin in this case is 2.

10.
Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding
scheme in Table 10.2.
Solution
We first find all the Hamming distances.
The dmin in this case is 3.
Example 10.6

10.
To guarantee the detection of up to s
errors in all cases, the minimum
Hamming distance in a block
code must be dmin = s + 1.
Note

10.
The minimum Hamming distance for our first code
scheme (Table 10.1) is 2. This code guarantees detection of
only a single error. For example, if the third codeword
(101) is sent and one error occurs, the received codeword
does not match any valid codeword. If two errors occur,
however, the received codeword may match a valid
codeword and the errors are not detected.
Example 10.7

10.
Our second block code scheme (Table 10.2) has dmin = 3.
This code can detect up to two errors. Again, we see that
when any of the valid codewords is sent, two errors create
a codeword which is not in the table of valid codewords.
The receiver cannot be fooled.
However, some combinations of three errors change a
valid codeword to another valid codeword. The receiver
accepts the received codeword and the errors are
undetected.
Example 10.8

10.
Figure 10.8 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error detection

10.
Figure 10.9 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error correction

10.
To guarantee correction of up to t errors
in all cases, the minimum Hamming
distance in a block code
must be dmin = 2t + 1.
Note

10.
A code scheme has a Hamming distance dmin = 4. What is
the error detection and correction capability of this
scheme?
Solution
This code guarantees the detection of up to three errors
(s = 3), but it can correct up to one error. In other words,
if this code is used for error correction, part of its capability
is wasted. Error correction codes need to have an odd
minimum distance (3, 5, 7, . . . ).
Example 10.9

10.
10-3 LINEAR BLOCK CODES
Almost all block codes used today belong to a subset
called linear block codes. A linear block code is a code
in which the exclusive OR (addition modulo-2) of two
valid codewords creates another valid codeword.
Minimum Distance for Linear Block Codes
Some Linear Block Codes
Topics discussed in this section:

10.
In a linear block code, the exclusive OR
(XOR) of any two valid codewords
creates another valid codeword.
Note

10.
Let us see if the two codes we defined in Table 10.1 and
Table 10.2 belong to the class of linear block codes.
1. The scheme in Table 10.1 is a linear block code
because the result of XORing any codeword with any
other codeword is a valid codeword. For example, the
XORing of the second and third codewords creates the
fourth one.
2. The scheme in Table 10.2 is also a linear block code.
We can create all four codewords by XORing two
other codewords.
Example 10.10

10.
In our first code (Table 10.1), the numbers of 1s in the
nonzero codewords are 2, 2, and 2. So the minimum
Hamming distance is dmin = 2. In our second code (Table
10.2), the numbers of 1s in the nonzero codewords are 3,
3, and 4. So in this code we have dmin = 3.
Example 10.11

10.
A simple parity-check code is a
single-bit error-detecting
code in which
n = k + 1 with dmin = 2.
Even parity (ensures that a codeword
has an even number of 1’s) and odd
parity (ensures that there are an odd
number of 1’s in the codeword)
Note

10.
Table 10.3 Simple parity-check code C(5, 4)

10.
Figure 10.10 Encoder and decoder for simple parity-check code

10.
Let us look at some transmission scenarios. Assume the
sender sends the dataword 1011. The codeword created
from this dataword is 10111, which is sent to the receiver.
We examine five cases:
1. No error occurs; the received codeword is 10111. The
syndrome is 0. The dataword 1011 is created.
2. One single-bit error changes a1 . The received
codeword is 10011. The syndrome is 1. No dataword
is created.
3. One single-bit error changes r0 . The received codeword
is 10110. The syndrome is 1. No dataword is created.
Example 10.12

10.
4. An error changes r0 and a second error changes a3 .
The received codeword is 00110. The syndrome is 0.
The dataword 0011 is created at the receiver. Note that
here the dataword is wrongly created due to the
syndrome value.
5. Three bits—a3, a2, and a1—are changed by errors.
The received codeword is 01011. The syndrome is 1.
The dataword is not created. This shows that the simple
parity check, guaranteed to detect one single error, can
also find any odd number of errors.
Example 10.12 (continued)

10.
A simple parity-check code can detect an
odd number of errors.
Note

10.
All Hamming codes discussed in this
book have dmin = 3 (2 bit error detection
and single bit error correction).
A codeword consists of n bits of which k
are data bits and r are check bits.
Let m = r, then we have: n = 2m -1
and k = n-m
Note

10.
Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.
Table 10.4 Hamming code C(7, 4) - n=7, k = 4

10.
Modulo 2 arithmetic:
r0 = a2 + a1 + a0
r1 = a3 + a2 + a1
r2 = a1 + a0 + a3
Calculating the parity bits at the transmitter
:
Calculating the syndrome at the receiver:
s0 = b2 + b1 + b0
s1 = b3 + b2 + b1
s2 = b1 + b0 + b3

10.
Figure 10.12 The structure of the encoder and decoder for a Hamming code

10.
Table 10.5 Logical decision made by the correction logic analyzer

10.
Let us trace the path of three datawords from the sender to
the destination:
1. The dataword 0100 becomes the codeword 0100011.
The codeword 0100011 is received. The syndrome is
000, the final dataword is 0100.
The received codeword is: 0011001. The syndrome is
011. After flipping b2 (changing the 1 to 0), the final
dataword is 0111.
The syndrome is 101. After flipping b0, we get 0000,
the wrong dataword. This shows that our code cannot
correct two errors.
Example 10.13

10.
We need a dataword of at least 7 bits. Calculate values of k
and n that satisfy this requirement.
Solution
We need to make k = n − m greater than or equal to 7, or
2m − 1 − m ≥ 7.
1. If we set m = 3, the result is n = 23 − 1=7 and k = 7 − 3,
or 4, which is < 7.
2. If we set m = 4, then n = 24 − 1 = 15 and k = 15 − 4 =
11, which satisfies the condition k>7. So the code is
Example 10.14
C(15, 11)

Burst Errors
 Burst errors are very common, in particular in
wireless environments where a fade will
affect a group of bits in transit. The length of
the burst is dependent on the duration of the
fade.
 One way to counter burst errors, is to break
up a transmission into shorter words and
create a block (one word per row), then have
a parity check per word.
 The words are then sent column by column.
When a burst error occurs, it will affect 1 bit
in several words as the transmission is read
back into the block format and each word is
checked individually.

10.
Figure 10.13 Burst error correction using Hamming code

10.
10-4 CYCLIC CODES
Cyclic codes are special linear block codes with one
extra property. In a cyclic code, if a codeword is
cyclically shifted (rotated), the result is another
codeword.
Cyclic Redundancy Check
Hardware Implementation
Polynomials
Cyclic Code Analysis
Advantages of Cyclic Codes
Other Cyclic Codes

10.
Table 10.6 A CRC code with C(7, 4)

10.
Figure 10.14 CRC encoder and decoder

10.
Figure 10.15 Division in CRC encoder

10.
Figure 10.16 Division in the CRC decoder for two cases

10.
Figure 10.17 Hardwired design of the divisor in CRC

10.
Figure 10.18 Simulation of division in CRC encoder

10.
Figure 10.19 The CRC encoder design using shift registers

10.
Figure 10.20 General design of encoder and decoder of a CRC code

Using Polynomials
 We can use a polynomial to represent a
binary word.
 Each bit from right to left is mapped onto a
power term.
 The rightmost bit represents the “0” power
term. The bit next to it the “1” power term,
etc.
 If the bit is of value zero, the power term is
deleted from the expression.

10.
Figure 10.21 A polynomial to represent a binary word

10.
Figure 10.22 CRC division using polynomials

10.
The divisor in a cyclic code is normally
called the generator polynomial
or simply the generator.
Note

10.
In a cyclic code,
If s(x) ≠ 0, one or more bits is corrupted.
If s(x) = 0, either
a. No bit is corrupted. or
b. Some bits are corrupted, but the
decoder failed to detect them.
Note

10.
In a cyclic code, those e(x) errors that
are divisible by g(x) are not caught.
Received codeword (c(x) + e(x))/g(x) =
c(x)/g(x) + e(x)/gx
The first part is by definition divisible the
second part will determine the error. If
“0” conclusion -> no error occurred.
Note: that could mean that an error went
undetected.
Note

10.
If the generator has more than one term
and the coefficient of x0 is 1,
all single errors can be caught.
Note

10.
Which of the following g(x) values guarantees that a
single-bit error is caught? For each case, what is the error
that cannot be caught?
a. x + 1 b. x3 c. 1
Solution
a. No xi can be divisible by x + 1. Any single-bit error can
be caught.
b. If i is equal to or greater than 3, xi is divisible by g(x).
All single-bit errors in positions 1 to 3 are caught.
c. All values of i make xi divisible by g(x). No single-bit
error can be caught. This g(x) is useless.
Example 10.15

10.
Figure 10.23 Representation of two isolated single-bit errors using polynomials

10.
If a generator cannot divide xt + 1
(t between 0 and n – 1),
then all isolated double errors
can be detected.
Note

10.
Find the status of the following generators related to two
isolated, single-bit errors.
a. x + 1 b. x4 + 1 c. x7 + x6 + 1 d. x15 + x14 + 1
Solution
a. This is a very poor choice for a generator. Any two
errors next to each other cannot be detected.
b. This generator cannot detect two errors that are four
positions apart.
c. This is a good choice for this purpose.
d. This polynomial cannot divide xt + 1 if t is less than
32,768. A codeword with two isolated errors up to
32,768 bits apart can be detected by this generator.
Example 10.16

10.
A generator that contains a factor of
x + 1 can detect all odd-numbered errors.
Note

10.
❏ All burst errors with L ≤ r will be
detected.
❏ All burst errors with L = r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r–1.
❏ All burst errors with L > r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r.
Note

10.
Find the suitability of the following generators in relation
to burst errors of different lengths.
a. x6 + 1 b. x18 + x7 + x + 1 c. x32 + x23 + x7 + 1
Solution
a. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length
less than or equal to 6 bits; 3 out of 100 burst errors
with length 7 will slip by; 16 out of 1000 burst errors of
length 8 or more will slip by.
Example 10.17

10.
b. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length
less than or equal to 18 bits; 8 out of 1 million burst
errors with length 19 will slip by; 4 out of 1 million
burst errors of length 20 or more will slip by.
c. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length
less than or equal to 32 bits; 5 out of 10 billion burst
errors with length 33 will slip by; 3 out of 10 billion
burst errors of length 34 or more will slip by.

10.
A good polynomial generator needs to
have the following characteristics:
1. It should have at least two terms.
2. The coefficient of the term x0 should
be 1.
3. It should not divide xt + 1, for t
between 2 and n − 1.
4. It should have the factor x + 1.
Note

10.
Table 10.7 Standard polynomials

10.
10-5 CHECKSUM
The last error detection method we discuss here is
called the checksum. The checksum is used in the
Internet by several protocols although not at the data
link layer. However, we briefly discuss it here to
complete our discussion on error checking
Idea
One’s Complement
Internet Checksum

10.
Suppose our data is a list of five 4-bit numbers that we
want to send to a destination. In addition to sending these
numbers, we send the sum of the numbers. For example, if
the set of numbers is (7, 11, 12, 0, 6), we send (7, 11, 12, 0,
6, 36), where 36 is the sum of the original numbers. The
receiver adds the five numbers and compares the result
with the sum. If the two are the same, the receiver assumes
no error, accepts the five numbers, and discards the sum.
Otherwise, there is an error somewhere and the data are
not accepted.
Example 10.18

10.
We can make the job of the receiver easier if we send the
negative (complement) of the sum, called the checksum.
In this case, we send (7, 11, 12, 0, 6, −36). The receiver
can add all the numbers received (including the
checksum). If the result is 0, it assumes no error;
otherwise, there is an error.
Example 10.19

10.
How can we represent the number 21 in one’s
complement arithmetic using only four bits?
Solution
The number 21 in binary is 10101 (it needs five bits). We
can wrap the leftmost bit and add it to the four rightmost
bits. We have (0101 + 1) = 0110 or 6.
Example 10.20

10.
How can we represent the number −6 in one’s
complement arithmetic using only four bits?
Solution
In one’s complement arithmetic, the negative or
complement of a number is found by inverting all bits.
Positive 6 is 0110; negative 6 is 1001. If we consider only
unsigned numbers, this is 9. In other words, the
complement of 6 is 9. Another way to find the complement
of a number in one’s complement arithmetic is to subtract
the number from 2n − 1 (16 − 1 in this case).
Example 10.21

10.
Let us redo Exercise 10.19 using one’s complement
arithmetic. Figure 10.24 shows the process at the sender
and at the receiver. The sender initializes the checksum to
0 and adds all data items and the checksum (the
checksum is considered as one data item and is shown in
color). The result is 36. However, 36 cannot be expressed
in 4 bits. The extra two bits are wrapped and added with
the sum to create the wrapped sum value 6. In the figure,
we have shown the details in binary. The sum is then
complemented, resulting in the checksum value 9 (15 − 6
= 9). The sender now sends six data items to the receiver
including the checksum 9.
Example 10.22

10.
The receiver follows the same procedure as the sender. It
adds all data items (including the checksum); the result is
45. The sum is wrapped and becomes 15. The wrapped
sum is complemented and becomes 0. Since the value of
the checksum is 0, this means that the data is not
corrupted. The receiver drops the checksum and keeps
the other data items. If the checksum is not zero, the
entire packet is dropped.

10.
Figure 10.24 Example 10.22

10.
Sender site:
1. The message is divided into 16-bit words.
2. The value of the checksum word is set to 0.
3. All words including the checksum are
added using one’s complement addition.
4. The sum is complemented and becomes the
checksum.
5. The checksum is sent with the data.
Note

10.
Receiver site:
1. The message (including checksum) is
divided into 16-bit words.
2. All words are added using one’s
complement addition.
3. The sum is complemented and becomes the
new checksum.
4. If the value of checksum is 0, the message
is accepted; otherwise, it is rejected.
Note

10.
Let us calculate the checksum for a text of 8 characters
(“Forouzan”). The text needs to be divided into 2-byte (16-
bit) words. We use ASCII (see Appendix A) to change each
byte to a 2-digit hexadecimal number. For example, F is
represented as 0x46 and o is represented as 0x6F. Figure
10.25 shows how the checksum is calculated at the sender
and receiver sites. In part a of the figure, the value of
partial sum for the first column is 0x36. We keep the
rightmost digit (6) and insert the leftmost digit (3) as the
carry in the second column. The process is repeated for
each column. Note that if there is any corruption, the
checksum recalculated by the receiver is not all 0s. We
leave this an exercise.
Example 10.23

10.
Figure 10.25 Example 10.23

5(1)crc-chechsum-hamming.ppt

More Related Content

Similar to 5(1)crc-chechsum-hamming.ppt (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

5(1)crc-chechsum-hamming.ppt