Talk:Noisy-channel coding theorem

message: This article should be moved to Noisy-channel coding theorem.  The hyphen becomes necessary when "noisy channel" is used as an adjective. Otherwise we descrive the theorem itself as noisy, which is certainly not the intent here. -- 130.94.162.61 16:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

message: The english article doesn't match the french one. And the french article is linked with 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem , witch is the real match.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.199.254.14 (talk) 20:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error with the french link 

message: I agree with the comment above. "Noisy channel" should be hyphenated when used as an adjective (as it is, inconsistently, in the body text). 38.113.17.3 19:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyediting error in page title 

message: Before the change I just made, the statement of the theorem implied that when rate equaled capacity, error could never be made arbitrarily small.  This is clearly wrong; a lossless channel can achieve its capacity rate and, in spite of its being somewhat degenerate, does fall within this framework.  The 1 December 2005 "fix" was wrong (though what it attempted to correct was also wrong).  I've fixed this so that it's clear that the R=C case is not addressed in the noisy-channel coding theorem, but someone might want to double-check my wording on this (which is also in Shannon–Hartley theorem) and redraw the math PNG. Calbaer 23:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in noisy-channel coding theorem 

message: There is a lot of overlap between this article and the Shannon–Hartley theorem.  Should these pages be merged?  Please contribute your thoughts on the Talk:Shannon–Hartley theorem discussion page. -- technopilgrim 20:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with Shannon–Hartley theorem article?

message: I'm a student civil engineering, and in information coding class, we saw a variation of the shannon theorem. It states that, on a non-discrete memory-less channel, the shannon capacity [math]C_{shannon} = B log_2(1 + P_u / P_n)[/math]. Can this be added to the article?
:Take a look at Shannon-Hartley theorem. And the merge discussion mentioned above.--LutzL 15:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about non-discrete channels? 

message: Something like: "You have a finite bandwidth, so at some point you can't switch any faster, and you have a finite signal-to-noise level, so at some point you can't go to increased multi-level signaling."  But better worded of course!
It would be nice for the non-math-majors plus those who are first learning about it to get an intuitive feel for why it exists.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.9.240 (talk) 06:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about a simple intuitive/non-mathematical explanation? 

message: At a university level this is generally known as 'Shannon's capacity formula', not 'Noisy-channel coding theorem'.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.153.87 (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: In the definition, it is amusing to read "...it is possible to communicate discrete data (digital information) nearly error-free..."  without bothering to define or hint at what is meant by 'discrete data'. Admittedly, such definition poses several difficulties, as the very word 'discrete' has different connotations in Mathematics and Statistics, to name just a couple of fields. Anyone can help? Help! --SciCorrector (talk) 18:34, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Discrete in time and amplitude. But you are right, it is a strange word combination.--LutzL (talk) 14:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loose definition 

message: Can't find the definition of this function, anyone can help?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doru001 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  I(X;Y)