Jump to content

Talk:Trellis coded modulation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Piotroxp (talk | contribs) at 07:06, 18 June 2009 (Discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Added some discussion. The details of TCM are rather complex for a reader who lacks a PHD in data communications, so I opted to provide a readable (and hopefully understandable) overview.

user:jlpayton 9-Nov-2005

The article uses the term Convolutional code. No one except a telecom expert will know what that word means. Consider having an expert rewrite this article in simpler terms. Invitatious 02:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


18 - July - 2006

Article is fine, if anything it's too simplistic. Anybody who searches for trellis modulation has to know some background. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.203.212.185 (talkcontribs) 19:22, 18 Jul 2006 (UTC)

This link here seems to be offering a description that makes sense to those who don't understand what convolution means: https://sciencegrants.dest.gov.au/SciencePrize/Pages/Doc.aspx?name=previous_winners/Aust1997Ungerboeck.htm (anonymous)

It was CCITT, not ITU in 1980's

Before the ITU, CCITT was the one the standardized the V. standards. Also, there was no CCITT/ITU standard of 19.2 Kbps -- that's a Telebit propritary standard (PEP). Mdrejhon 22:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Channel Capacity ?

If the channel in question is the twisted pair cable, I hardly think that the Shannon Channel capacity is 35 kBits/s, considering that standard residential ADSL links utilize the same twisted pair wiring as the POTS line. The Shannon channel capacity for twisted pair wires is much higher, depending on several factors, such as noise power on the channel, length of the twisted pair. It can be as high as a Gbit/s over short runs of cable (several meters) with only thermal noise present. (Anonymous)

Too simplistic

Most definetly too simplistic. Ungerboeck centered rather than topic centered.