Computer Networks (W-7)

Course Instructor:
Dr. Fawad Salam Khan

Assistant Professor
Email:
fawad.salam@mail.au.edu.pk
 Chapter 10
Error Detection
and
Correction

10.2 Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.
 Note

Data can be corrupted

during transmission.

Some applications require that

errors be detected and corrected.

10.3
 10-1 INTRODUCTION

Let us first discuss some issues related, directly or

indirectly, to error detection and correction.

Topics discussed in this section:

Types of Errors
Redundancy
Detection Versus Correction
Forward Error Correction Versus Retransmission
Coding
ModularArithmetic

10.4
 Note

In a single-bit error, only 1 bit in the data

unit has changed.

10.5
 Figure 10.1 Single-bit error

10.6
 Note

A burst error means that 2 or more bits

in the data unit have changed.

10.7
 Figure 10.2 Burst error of length 8

10.8
 Note

To detect or correct errors, we need to

send extra (redundant) bits with data.

10.9
 Figure 10.3 The structure of encoder and decoder

10.10
 Note

In modulo-N arithmetic, we use only the

integers in the range 0 to N −1,
inclusive.

10.11
 Figure 10.4 XORing of two single bits or two words

10.12
 10-2 BLOCK CODING

In block coding, we divide our message into blocks,

each of k bits, called datawords. We add r redundant
bits to each block to make the length n = k + r. The
resulting n-bit blocks are called codewords.

Topics discussed in this section:

Error Detection
Error Correction
Hamming Distance
Minimum Hamming Distance

10.13
 Figure 10.5 Datawords and codewords in block coding

10.14
 Error Detection

◼ Enough redundancy is added to detect

an error.
◼ The receiver knows an error occurred
but does not know which bit(s) is(are)
in error.
◼ Has less overhead than error correction.

10.15
 Figure 10.6 Process of error detection in block coding

10.16
 Example 10.2

Let us assume that k = 2 and n = 3. Table 10.1 shows the

list of datawords and codewords. Later, we will see
how to derive a codeword from a dataword.

Assume the sender encodes the dataword 01 as 011 and

sends it to the receiver. Consider the following cases:

1. The receiver receives 011. It is a valid codeword. The

receiver extracts the dataword 01 from it.

10.17
 Example 10.2 (continued)

2. The codeword is corrupted during transmission, and

111 is received. This is not a valid codeword and is
discarded.

3. The codeword is corrupted during transmission, and

000 is received. This is a valid codeword. The receiver
incorrectly extracts the dataword 00. Two corrupted
bits have made the error undetectable.

10.18
 Table 10.1 A code for error detection (Example 10.2)

10.19
 Note

An error-detecting code can detect

only the types of errors for which it is
designed; other types of errors may
remain undetected.

10.20
 Figure 10.7 Structure of encoder and decoder in error correction

10.21
 Example 10.3

Let us add more redundant bits to Example 10.2 to see if

the receiver can correct an error without knowing what
was actually sent. We add 3 redundant bits to the 2-bit
dataword to make 5-bit codewords. Table 10.2 shows the
datawords and codewords. Assume the dataword is 01.
The sender creates the codeword 01011. The codeword is
corrupted during transmission, and 01001 is received.
First, the receiver finds that the received codeword is not
in the table. This means an error has occurred. The
receiver, assuming that there is only 1 bit corrupted, uses
the following strategy to guess the correct dataword.

10.22
 Example 10.3 (continued)
1. Comparing the received codeword with the first
codeword in the table (01001 versus 00000), the
receiver decides that the first codeword is not the one
that was sent because there are two different bits.

2. By the same reasoning, the original codeword cannot

be the third or fourth one in the table.

3. The original codeword must be the second one in the

table because this is the only one that differs from the
received codeword by 1 bit. The receiver replaces
01001 with 01011 and consults the table to find the
dataword 01.
10.23
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.24
 Note

The Hamming distance between two

words is the number of differences
between corresponding bits.

10.
 Example 10.4

Let us find the Hamming distance between two pairs of

words.

1. The Hamming distance d(000, 011) is 2 because

2. The Hamming distance d(10101, 11110) is 3 because

10.
 Note

The minimum Hamming distance is the

smallest Hamming distance between
all possible pairs in a set of words.

10.
 Example 10.5

Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding

scheme in Table 10.1.
Solution
We first find all Hamming distances.

The dmin in this case is 2.

10.
 Example 10.6

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.

10.
 Note

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.

10.
 Example 10.7

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.

10.
 Example 10.8

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.

10.
 Note

To guarantee correction of up to t errors

in all cases, the minimum Hamming
distance in a block code
must be dmin = 2t + 1.

10.
 Example 10.9

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, . . . ).

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.

Topics discussed in this section:

Minimum Distance for Linear Block Codes
Some Linear Block Codes

10.
 Note

In a linear block code, the exclusive OR

(XOR) of any two valid codewords
creates another valid codeword.

10.
 Example 10.10

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.
10.
 Example 10.11

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.

10.
 Note

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)

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

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

10.
 Example 10.12

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.
10.
 Example 10.12 (continued)

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.

10.
 Note

A simple parity-check code can detect an

odd number of errors.

10.
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

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

10.
 Calculating the parity bits at the transmitter
:

Modulo 2 arithmetic:

r0 = a2 + a1 + a0
r1 = a3 + a2 + a1
r2 = a1 + a0 + a3
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.
 Example 10.13

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.
2. The dataword 0111 becomes the codeword 0111001.
The received codeword is: 0011001. The syndrome is
011. After flipping b2 (changing the 1 to 0), the final
dataword is 0111.
3. The dataword 1101 becomes the codeword 1101000.
The syndrome is 101. After flipping b0, we get 0000,
the wrong dataword. This shows that our code cannot
correct two errors.
10.
 Example 10.14

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
C(15, 11)

10.
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.
 Figure 10.13 Burst error correction using Hamming code

10.
Readings

◼ Chapter 10 (B.A Forouzan)

57