Any luck? I have been looking at the code again, but can't still figure out which of the functions is causing that error and thus affecting all the results.
----- Original Message ----
From: Steve Thompson <address@hidden>
To: Dmitri A. Sergatskov <address@hidden>
Cc: Freddie Hamatanga <address@hidden>; address@hidden
Sent: Thursday, 2 August, 2007 8:22:20 PM
Subject: Re: simulation results from octave wrong!!!
On 8/2/07, Dmitri A. Sergatskov <address@hidden> wrote:
> The results actually not that different. As you can see, the
> sum of Octave's output and Matlab's output (for BER parameter)
> is 1.
That is a great observation! I was blind to it.
octave_ber =
[0.808694;
0.902395;
0.957872;
0.986852;
0.996711;
0.999372;
0.998905;
0.999678;
0.999145];
matlab_ber =
[0.203326;
0.100329;
0.037475;
0.011161;
0.003115;
0.001631;
0.000990;
0.000976;
0.000889];
octave:3> [1-octave_ber, matlab_ber]
ans
=
1.9131e-01 2.0333e-01
9.7605e-02 1.0033e-01
4.2128e-02 3.7475e-02
1.3148e-02 1.1161e-02
3.2890e-03 3.1150e-03
6.2800e-04 1.6310e-03
1.0950e-03 9.9000e-04
3.2200e-04 9.7600e-04
8.5500e-04 8.8900e-04
So it seems the Matlab result is the BER, while the Octave result
is the complement to the BER, the bit-not-in-error rate. Maybe
Freddie can figure out why this might be.
Steve