Suggestions(1)
Exact(5)
The design of DSTBC in our paper is inspired by the idea of linear dispersion codes where each column of the code matrix is a linear summation of transmit data and their conjugations [17].
For each column of the code matrix, one or several classes are denoted as positive, and the remainder is designated as negative.
Why then was the recognition via the major groove side assigned to the second column of the code table, i.e. central C in codons (G in anticodons), and not to the complementarily symmetric fourth column?
Further inspection reveals that it is amino acids in the same column of the code (i.e. same second base) that are similar, whereas those in the same row show no particular similarity.
If hydrophobic amino acids were allocated on a given column of the code (first column), then the majority of hydrophobic amino acids biosynthetically originating in the various rows would have the possibility to be allocated on the code's first column, and so on.
Similar(55)
Here, we assume that the direct link from BS to destination is available to transmit the first column of the codes to the destination (SS s) = cA1 s)).
This makes it clear that amino acids in the first and second columns of the code form two tight clusters in property space.
By the time Arg, Cys and Trp were added to the code, there was not much alternative but to join column 4 because all the prime positions in the other columns of the code were already taken.
Furthermore, the four column code explains why amino acids with similar physicochemical properties end up in the same columns of the code whereas amino acids in the same row (same first codon base) do not have similar properties.
It was shown that amino acids in the 1st and 2nd columns of the code vary substantially under mutation pressure, whereas those in the 3rd and 4th columns vary much less.
It can be further described as follows: assume the NAND flash memory controller can support s different LDPC codes, C 1, C 2, …, C s. Let w i represent the column weight of the code C i, and we have w s >ws−1 > ⋯ > w1.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com