Chapter 10

Error Detection
and
Correction

10.1 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.

10.2
 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
Modular Arithmetic

10.3
 Note

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

unit has changed.

10.4
 Types of
Errors

Single Multi Burst

Bit Bit Error

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.
This is called Redundant Bit.

10.9
 Detection versus Correction

 The correction of errors is more difficult

than the detection.
 In detection, only check is made if error is
present? Answer is simple, yes or no.
 In correction, once the check is made and
error is detected, it also locates the error.
Answer is additional information of
location of error to perform correction.

10.10
 Coding
 Redundancy is achieved through various coding
schemes.
 We can divide coding schemes into two broad
categories: block coding and convolution coding.
 Our concentration will be on block coding only.
 To perform coding, we need encoding and decoding
which is shown in next figure.
 The receiver can detect error/ a change in the original
codeword, if it follows these two conditions:
1. The receiver has (or can find) a list of valid
codewords.
2. The original codeword has changed to an invalid one

10.11
 Figure 10.3 The structure of encoder and decoder

10.12
 Figure 10.4 XORing of two single bits or two words

10.13
Detection Methods:

 Detection methods
 VRC(Vertical Redundancy Check)
 LRC(Longitudinal Redundancy Check)
 CRC(Cyclical redundancy Check)
 Checksum
VRC

 VRC(Vertical Redundancy Check)

 A parity bit is added to every data unit so that
the total number of 1s(including the parity bit)
becomes even for even-parity check or odd
for odd-parity check
 VRC can detect all single-bit errors.
 It can detect multiple-bit or burst errors only
the total number of errors is odd.
 Even parity VRC concept is given in next
fig
VRC
LRC
 LRC(Longitudinal Redundancy Check)
 Parity bits of all the positions are assembled into a new data unit,

which is added to the end of the data block

VRC & LRC
CRC Generator

 CRC generator
 uses modular-2 division.

Binary Division
in a CRC Generator
CRC Checker

Binary Division
in a
CRC Checker
One more example

Calculation of
the polynomial
code checksum.
Checksum:
 Checksum is used by the higher layer protocols
 And is based on the concept of redundancy(VRC, LRC,
CRC …. Hamming code)
 To create the checksum the sender does the following:
– The unit is divided into K sections, each of n bits.
– Section 1 and 2 are added together using one’s
complement.
– Section 3 is added to the result of the previous step.
– Section 4 is added to the result of the previous step.
– The process repeats until section k is added to the result of
the previous step.
– The final result is complemented to make the checksum.
Checksum Example
Hamming code and Error
 Redundancy for error handling
 m data bits and r redundant bits
 for m + r bits only one correct value of r for
a given m
 one correct bit pattern requires m + r
incorrect patterns
 m + r + 1 < 2r
7 bit data 4 bit redundant bits makes it
11
Hamming code calculations
R1,R2,R3 and R4 calculations

 R1 represents the parity of M1, M2, M4, M5, and

M7 = M1 + M2 + M4 + M5 + M7 =
1+0+0+1+0+0=0
 R2 represents the parity of M1, M3, M4, M6, and
M7 = 1 + 1 + 0 + 0 =0
 R3 represents the parity of M2, M3, and M4=1
 R4 represents the parity of M5, M6, and M7=0
Error Correction Using
Hamming Code
Can be handled in two ways:
• when an error is discovered, the receiver can have the
sender retransmit the entire data unit.
• a receiver can use an error-correcting code, which
automatically corrects certain errors.
• Hamming Code
~ developed by R.W. Hamming
• positions of redundancy bits in Hamming code, lets see
how.
• each r bit is the VRC bit for one combination of data bits
r1 = bits 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11
r2 = bits 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11
r4 = bits 4, 5, 6, 7
r8 = bits 8, 9, 10, 11
Redundant Bit Position
Calculating the r values
Calculating Even Parity
Example:
Error Detection Using Hamming Code:
 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

10.34
 Figure 10.5 Datawords and codewords in block coding

10.35
 Figure 10.6 Process of error detection in block coding

10.36
 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.

10.37
 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.

10.38
 Table 10.1 A code for error detection (Example 10.2)

10.39
 Note

An error-detecting code can detect

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

10.40
 Figure 10.7 Structure of encoder and decoder in error correction

10.41
 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.

10.42
 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.
10.43
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.44
 Note

The Hamming distance between two

words is the number of differences
between corresponding bits.

10.45
 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

10.46
 Note

The minimum Hamming distance is the

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

10.47
 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.

10.48
 Example 10.6

Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding

scheme in Table 10.2. How many errors it can detect?

Solution
We first find all the Hamming distances.

The dmin in this case is 3. So, it can detect up to 2 errors.

10.49
 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.

10.50
 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.

10.51
 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.

10.52
 Figure 10.8 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error detection

10.53
 Figure 10.9 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error correction

10.54
 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.

10.55
 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, . . . ).

10.56
 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

10.57
 Note

In a linear block code, the exclusive OR

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

10.58
 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.
10.59
 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.

10.60
 Note

A simple parity-check code is a

single-bit error-detecting
code in which
n = k + 1 with dmin = 2.

10.61
 Table 10.3 Simple parity-check code C(5, 4)

10.62
 Figure 10.10 Encoder and decoder for simple parity-check code

10.63
 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.
10.64
 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.

10.65
 Note

A simple parity-check code can detect

an odd number of errors.

10.66
 Note

All Hamming codes discussed in this

book have dmin = 3.

The relationship between m and n in

these codes is n = 2m − 1.

10.67
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.68
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.69
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

10.70
 Table 10.4 Hamming code C(7, 4)

10.71
 Figure 10.12 The structure of the encoder and decoder for a Hamming code

10.72
 Table 10.5 Logical decision made by the correction logic analyzer

10.73
 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 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.
10.74
 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 and k = 7 − 3,
or 4, which is not acceptable.
2. If we set m = 4, then n = 24 − 1 = 15 and k = 15 − 4 =
11, which satisfies the condition. So the code is
C(15, 11)

10.75
 Figure 10.13 Burst error correction using Hamming code

10.76
 10-4 CYCLIC CODES

Cyclic codes are special linear block codes with one

extra property. In a cyclic code, if a codeword is
cyclically shifted (rotated), the result is another
codeword.

Topics discussed in this section:

Cyclic Redundancy Check
Hardware Implementation
Polynomials
Cyclic Code Analysis
Advantages of Cyclic Codes
Other Cyclic Codes
10.77
 Table 10.6 A CRC code with C(7, 4)

10.78
 Figure 10.14 CRC encoder and decoder

10.79
 Figure 10.15 Division in CRC encoder

10.80
 Figure 10.16 Division in the CRC decoder for two cases

10.81
 Figure 10.17 Hardwired design of the divisor in CRC

10.82
 Figure 10.18 Simulation of division in CRC encoder

10.83
 Figure 10.19 The CRC encoder design using shift registers

10.84
 Figure 10.20 General design of encoder and decoder of a CRC code

10.85
 Figure 10.21 A polynomial to represent a binary word

10.86
 Figure 10.22 CRC division using polynomials

10.87
 Note

The divisor in a cyclic code is normally

called the generator polynomial
or simply the generator.

10.88
 Note

In a cyclic code,
If s(x) ≠ 0, one or more bits is corrupted.
If s(x) = 0, either

a. No bit is corrupted. or
b. Some bits are corrupted, but the
decoder failed to detect them.

10.89
 Note

In a cyclic code, those e(x) errors that

are divisible by g(x) are not caught.

10.90
 Note

If the generator has more than one term

and the coefficient of x0 is 1,
all single errors can be caught.

10.91
 Example 10.15

Which of the following g(x) values guarantees that a

single-bit error is caught? For each case, what is the
error that cannot be caught?
a. x + 1 b. x3 c. 1
Solution
a. No xi can be divisible by x + 1. Any single-bit error can
be caught.
b. If i is equal to or greater than 3, xi is divisible by g(x).
All single-bit errors in positions 1 to 3 are caught.
c. All values of i make xi divisible by g(x). No single-bit
error can be caught. This g(x) is useless.

10.92
 Figure 10.23 Representation of two isolated single-bit errors using polynomials

10.93
 Note

If a generator cannot divide xt + 1

(t between 0 and n – 1),
then all isolated double errors
can be detected.

10.94
 Example 10.16

Find the status of the following generators related to two

isolated, single-bit errors.
a. x + 1 b. x4 + 1 c. x7 + x6 + 1 d. x15 + x14 + 1
Solution
a. This is a very poor choice for a generator. Any two
errors next to each other cannot be detected.
b. This generator cannot detect two errors that are four
positions apart.
c. This is a good choice for this purpose.
d. This polynomial cannot divide xt + 1 if t is less than
32,768. A codeword with two isolated errors up to
32,768 bits apart can be detected by this generator.
10.95
 Note

A generator that contains a factor of

x + 1 can detect all odd-numbered
errors.

10.96
 Note

❏ All burst errors with L ≤ r will be

detected.
❏ All burst errors with L = r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r–1.
❏ All burst errors with L > r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r.

10.97
 Example 10.17

Find the suitability of the following generators in relation

to burst errors of different lengths.
a. x6 + 1 b. x18 + x7 + x + 1 c. x32 + x23 + x7 + 1

Solution
a. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length
less than or equal to 6 bits; 3 out of 100 burst errors
with length 7 will slip by; 16 out of 1000 burst errors of
length 8 or more will slip by.

10.98
 Example 10.17 (continued)

b. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length

less than or equal to 18 bits; 8 out of 1 million burst
errors with length 19 will slip by; 4 out of 1 million
burst errors of length 20 or more will slip by.

c. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length

less than or equal to 32 bits; 5 out of 10 billion burst
errors with length 33 will slip by; 3 out of 10 billion
burst errors of length 34 or more will slip by.

10.99
 Note

A good polynomial generator needs to

have the following characteristics:
1. It should have at least two terms.
2. The coefficient of the term x0 should
be 1.
3. It should not divide xt + 1, for t
between 2 and n − 1.
4. It should have the factor x + 1.

10.100
 Table 10.7 Standard polynomials

10.101
 10-5 CHECKSUM

The last error detection method we discuss here is

called the checksum. The checksum is used in the
Internet by several protocols although not at the data
link layer. However, we briefly discuss it here to
complete our discussion on error checking

Topics discussed in this section:

Idea
One’s Complement
Internet Checksum

10.102
 Example 10.18

Suppose our data is a list of five 4-bit numbers that we

want to send to a destination. In addition to sending these
numbers, we send the sum of the numbers. For example,
if the set of numbers is (7, 11, 12, 0, 6), we send (7, 11, 12,
0, 6, 36), where 36 is the sum of the original numbers.
The receiver adds the five numbers and compares the
result with the sum. If the two are the same, the receiver
assumes no error, accepts the five numbers, and discards
the sum. Otherwise, there is an error somewhere and the
data are not accepted.

10.103
 Example 10.19

We can make the job of the receiver easier if we send the

negative (complement) of the sum, called the checksum.
In this case, we send (7, 11, 12, 0, 6, −36). The receiver
can add all the numbers received (including the
checksum). If the result is 0, it assumes no error;
otherwise, there is an error.

10.104
 Example 10.20

How can we represent the number 21 in one’s

complement arithmetic using only four bits?

Solution
The number 21 in binary is 10101 (it needs five bits). We
can wrap the leftmost bit and add it to the four rightmost
bits. We have (0101 + 1) = 0110 or 6.

10.105
 Example 10.21

How can we represent the number −6 in one’s

complement arithmetic using only four bits?

Solution
In one’s complement arithmetic, the negative or
complement of a number is found by inverting all bits.
Positive 6 is 0110; negative 6 is 1001. If we consider only
unsigned numbers, this is 9. In other words, the
complement of 6 is 9. Another way to find the
complement of a number in one’s complement arithmetic
is to subtract the number from 2n − 1 (16 − 1 in this case).

10.106
 Example 10.22

Let us redo Exercise 10.19 using one’s complement

arithmetic. Figure 10.24 shows the process at the sender
and at the receiver. The sender initializes the checksum
to 0 and adds all data items and the checksum (the
checksum is considered as one data item and is shown in
color). The result is 36. However, 36 cannot be expressed
in 4 bits. The extra two bits are wrapped and added with
the sum to create the wrapped sum value 6. In the figure,
we have shown the details in binary. The sum is then
complemented, resulting in the checksum value 9 (15 − 6
= 9). The sender now sends six data items to the receiver
including the checksum 9.
10.107
 Example 10.22 (continued)

The receiver follows the same procedure as the sender. It

adds all data items (including the checksum); the result
is 45. The sum is wrapped and becomes 15. The wrapped
sum is complemented and becomes 0. Since the value of
the checksum is 0, this means that the data is not
corrupted. The receiver drops the checksum and keeps
the other data items. If the checksum is not zero, the
entire packet is dropped.

10.108
 Figure 10.24 Example 10.22

10.109
 Note

Sender site:
1. The message is divided into 16-bit words.
2. The value of the checksum word is set to 0.
3. All words including the checksum are
added using one’s complement addition.
4. The sum is complemented and becomes the
checksum.
5. The checksum is sent with the data.

10.110
 Note

Receiver site:
1. The message (including checksum) is
divided into 16-bit words.
2. All words are added using one’s
complement addition.
3. The sum is complemented and becomes the
new checksum.
4. If the value of checksum is 0, the message
is accepted; otherwise, it is rejected.

10.111