# Deepcode and Modulo-SK are Designed for Different Settings

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.07997 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.07997/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 18 Aug 2020.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [AttentionCode: Ultra-Reliable Feedback Codes for Short-Packet Communications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14955/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We respond to [1] which claimed that "Modulo-SK scheme outperforms Deepcode [2]". We demonstrate that this statement is not true: the two schemes are designed and evaluated for entirely different settings. DeepCode is designed and evaluated for the AWGN channel with (potentially delayed) uncoded output feedback. Modulo-SK is evaluated on the AWGN channel with coded feedback and unit delay. [1] also claimed an implementation of Schalkwijk and Kailath (SK) [3] which was numerically stable for any number of information bits and iterations. However, we observe that while their implementation does marginally improve over ours, it also suffers from a fundamental issue with precision. Finally, we show that Deepcode dominates the optimized performance of SK, over a natural choice of parameterizations when the feedback is noisy.