- 2076 Chaitra (CS II) · 3+8 marks
Types of noise; Shannon-Fano and Huffman coding efficiency
Short answer
Three noise types: thermal (Johnson) noise from electron motion, shot noise from random carrier arrival, and flicker (1/f) noise in semiconductors at low frequencies. For the six-symbol source with probabilities {0.36, 0.18, 0.18, 0.12, 0.09, 0.07}, entropy is 2.3695 bits/symbol. Both Shannon-Fano and Huffman coding yield average length 2.44 bits/symbol, efficiency 97.11%, redundancy 2.89%.
Define any three types of noises. Calculate coding efficiency of a six symbol source with probabilities P = {0.36, 0.18, 0.12, 0.09, 0.07} using Shannon Fano and Huffman's coding techniques.
Three types of noise
- Thermal (Johnson) noise: caused by random motion of free electrons in a conductor due to temperature. It is white and Gaussian, with power ( J/K).
- Shot noise: caused by the random arrival of charge carriers crossing a junction in diodes and transistors. Its mean-square current is .
- Flicker () noise: found in semiconductor devices at low frequencies (below a few kHz); its power spectral density varies as , due to surface and contact irregularities.
(Others: partition noise, transit-time noise, atmospheric and man-made external noise.)
Coding efficiency
Only five probabilities are given, and they add to 0.82, so the missing sixth probability is (the standard form of this problem is ).
Take , , , , and the missing symbol .
Entropy:
| Symbol | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| x1 | 0.36 | 1.4739 | 0.5306 |
| x2 | 0.18 | 2.4739 | 0.4453 |
| x3 | 0.12 | 3.0589 | 0.3671 |
| x4 | 0.09 | 3.4739 | 0.3127 |
| x5 | 0.07 | 3.8365 | 0.2686 |
| x6 | 0.18 | 2.4739 | 0.4453 |
| Total | 1 | 2.3695 |
Shannon–Fano coding (split into groups of nearly equal probability: {0.36, 0.18} = 0.54 vs {0.18, 0.12, 0.09, 0.07} = 0.46, and so on):
| Symbol | Step 1 | Step 2 | Step 3 | Step 4 | Code | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x1 | 0.36 | 0 | 0 | 00 | 2 | ||
| x2 | 0.18 | 0 | 1 | 01 | 2 | ||
| x6 | 0.18 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 2 | ||
| x3 | 0.12 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 110 | 3 | |
| x4 | 0.09 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1110 | 4 |
| x5 | 0.07 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1111 | 4 |
Huffman coding (combine the two lowest each time, move the sum as high as possible; 0 to upper, 1 to lower):
Reduction (sum of two lowest moved up as high as possible):
| Stage | Probabilities (descending) | Combined |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.36, 0.18, 0.18, 0.12, 0.09, 0.07 | 0.09 + 0.07 = 0.16 |
| 2 | 0.36, 0.18, 0.18, 0.16, 0.12 | 0.16 + 0.12 = 0.28 |
| 3 | 0.36, 0.28, 0.18, 0.18 | 0.18 + 0.18 = 0.36 |
| 4 | 0.36, 0.36, 0.28 | 0.36 + 0.28 = 0.64 |
| 5 | 0.64, 0.36 | 0.64 + 0.36 = 1 |
| Symbol | Huffman code | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| x1 | 0.36 | 00 | 2 |
| x2 | 0.18 | 10 | 2 |
| x6 | 0.18 | 11 | 2 |
| x3 | 0.12 | 011 | 3 |
| x4 | 0.09 | 0100 | 4 |
| x5 | 0.07 | 0101 | 4 |
| Method | (bits/symbol) | Efficiency | Redundancy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shannon–Fano | 2.44 | 97.11 % | 2.89 % |
| Huffman | 2.44 | 97.11 % | 2.89 % |
| Fixed length (3 bits) | 3 | 78.98 % | 21.02 % |
Answer: both Shannon–Fano and Huffman give bits/symbol and efficiency 97.11 % for this source (Huffman is never worse than Shannon–Fano; here they are equal).
✓ Answer checked by Claude Opus 5.5 (high effort)
Related questions
- Coding efficiency: binary, Shannon-Fano and Huffman · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Importance of source coding; Shannon-Fano vs fixed length (seven symbols) · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Shannon-Fano and Huffman codes for six messages · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Huffman and Shannon-Fano coding of A0–A4 · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Importance of source coding; fixed vs Shannon-Fano (five symbols) · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Importance of source coding; Shannon-Fano vs BCD (four symbols) · Communication Systems, chapter 6
- Shannon-Fano code for six symbols · Data Communication, chapter 8
- Shannon-Fano code for eight symbols · Data Communication, chapter 8
- Huffman code for six symbols (0.04, 0.1, ...) · Data Communication, chapter 8
- Huffman coding of a sentence (Khoji Rahechha) · Data Communication, chapter 8