Re: [Idnet] Seminar from Andrea Goldsmith (Stanford) on AI and Communication Systems

Pedro Martinez-Julia <> Mon, 02 April 2018 01:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6609126CE8 for <>; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 18:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AtBMU5k3K9sT for <>; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 18:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:df0:232:300::2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86AF5126C89 for <>; Sun, 1 Apr 2018 18:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id w321hpjl016759; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:43:51 +0900 (JST)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id w321hpfo016753; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:43:51 +0900 (JST)
Received: from spectre (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (NICT Mail Spool Server2) with ESMTPS id 13E0DD3CB; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:43:51 +0900 (JST)
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 10:43:50 +0900
From: Pedro Martinez-Julia <>
To: Marie-Jose Montpetit <>
Message-ID: <20180402014349.GC10148@spectre>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.3 at zenith2
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idnet] Seminar from Andrea Goldsmith (Stanford) on AI and Communication Systems
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The IDNet \(Intelligence-Defined Network\) " <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 01:43:55 -0000

Dear Marie-Jose,

Thank you for sharing the report but, IMHO, without some backing slides
or similar, such information just makes us anxious of more details about
the solution :-D. Please, if possible, share the slides, a more detailed
report, a video of the event, or something that we can use to study such
solution. Thank you very much.


On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 04:48:59PM -0400, Marie-Jose Montpetit wrote:
> Andrea was in MIT yesterday and she presented a seminar entitiled: Can machine learning beat theory in communication system design?”
> (fo those of you who do not know Andrea I suggest you Google her but in any case she is a highly reknowned wireless researcher from Stanford)
> She first explained why communications theory may not be enough to analyse next gen networks (she called them nG) because time-variance or lack of a real channel model (molecular communication which is like diffusion) and the need maybe to design new PHY especially for cellular for example questioning the frequency re-use model still used to define the cells and deal with interference.
> SHe went on to describe how her team use subject specific knowledge to define a new type of neural networks with sliding windows (a reference actually to coding where sliding window codes usually have the best performance).
> She applied the new ML to 2 cases: one estimation and the other for words recognition in the presence of noise (the famous source-destination joint coding problem) and 2 channels: a traditional Poisson channel and a molecular channel with base/acid representing 0s and 1s (another model BTW is the “vodka model where 1 shot is 1 and water is 0).  The comparison on the Poisson channel was of course with the Viterbi Algorithm which is optimal when the channel is perfectly known. 
> The results (to be published) show that of course when there is no uncertainty on the channel Viterbi is good. But the ML is consistently as much as good as optimal even as the uncertainty increases (like in a fast varying channel) and when under that uncertainty the Viterbi estimation degrades rapidly.
> With the pure molecular channel of course ML is the only solution and the results with the word recognition were excellent (next is imaging and video) because ML allows to dd semantics not just bit detection. Molecular channels BTW are considered for in-body communications.
> The conclusion was that with the nG communications ML may provide better results than traditional methods given that they are driven by subject experts not just a generic ML algorithm. Questions that remain include timing and repeating of the neural network training that of course would be system dependent.
> mjm
> Marie-Jose Montpetit, Ph.D.
> +1-781-526-2661
> @SocialTVMIT
> _______________________________________________
> IDNET mailing list

Pedro Martinez-Julia
Network Science and Convergence Device Technology Laboratory
Network System Research Institute
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT)
4-2-1, Nukui-Kitamachi, Koganei, Tokyo 184-8795, Japan
*** Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem ***