Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Robert T. Lynch Jr.

dblp:09/3710 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1992
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Computer networks · 2 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Storage systems · 100%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Coding theory · 100%
Computer networks
2 papers
Physical-layer communications · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Storage systems › optical storage
magnetooptical recording
0.021992
Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Trellis Codes for Partial-Response Magnetooptical Direct Overwrite Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Physical-layer communications › signal detection
data detection
0.011992
Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Storage systems › optical storage
optical recording
0.011992
Trellis Codes for Partial-Response Magnetooptical Direct Overwrite Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Storage systems
optical storage
0.011992
Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Coding theory › error-correcting codes
coded modulation
0.011992
Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Coding theory › constrained coding
runlength-limited codes
0.011992
Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Coding theory
trellis codes
0.011992
Trellis Codes for Partial-Response Magnetooptical Direct Overwrite Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992
Physical-layer communications › channel modeling › channel with memory
partial-response channel
0.011992
Trellis Codes for Partial-Response Magnetooptical Direct Overwrite Recording · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1992

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

maximum-likelihood sequence detection · 0.0euclidean distance analysis · 0.0channel modeling · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1992 Trellis Codes for Partial-Response Magnetooptical Direct Overwrite Recording
abstract
The authors present conditions on the error sequences between channel input sequences which guarantee certain lower bounds on the free Euclidian distance at the output of a partial-response (PR) class I or II channel. From these expressions, trellis codes are derived which improve performance of binary signaling over noisy PR channels with reduced complexity maximum-likelihood sequence detection. They are shown to be compatible with the input restriction caused by the magnetooptical resonant coil direct overwrite recording scheme. The codes achieve high signal-to-noise ratio coding gains of 3 dB (on PR class I) and 2.2 dB (on PR class II) with rates as close to, but strictly less than, the capacity of the initial input restriction as desired. The performance of these codes is analyzed with an optical channel simulation system which shows that one code has the rare but highly desirable property that its maximum-likelihood sequence detector (MLSD) is less complex than the MLSD of the reference system and still achieves an error rate performance gain of 1.8 dB.>
Reinhold Häb-Umbach, Robert T. Lynch Jr.
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.2
1992 Channels and Codes for Magnetooptical Recording
abstract
The author outlines the technology used in the optical recording channel concentrating on magnetooptical recording and describes some of the major formats, codes, and data detection methods which are being developed. A sophisticated model of the optical recording channel was used as a way to make fair comparisons of these candidates, without skewing the results because of different disk or drive quality, degrees of hardware development, test procedures, etc. The author describes strengths and weaknesses of some of the leading contenders for current and future optical recording channels.>
Robert T. Lynch Jr.
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.1