![]() ![]() Is it possible someone has hacked the code? That I have no idea. ![]() But there's no reason why one could not be written. Of course, this approach works only if the received message is one of those in the list but there's no reason why a decoder must be equally sensitive to all possible received messages.Ī detailed description of JT65 and its implementation was published in 2005: "The JT65 Communications Protocol" (QEX, September-October 2005)Īs far as I am aware, no present decoder for JT9 includes a correlation-type algorithm. The correlation algorithm can help to determine which message (from a list of plausible or likely messages) has been received, even when the signal is several dB too weak to be decoded by a fully general algorithm. These decoders also include a correlation-type algorithm sometimes known as "deep search". Present decoders for JT4 and JT65 (two modes implemented in WSJT) include a provision for "message averaging", effectively combining repeated transmissions of the same message when a single transmission is too weak to decode. How best to do this is up to the algorithm designer. The decoder's task in any digital mode is to determine the content of a received message. > - Decoded callsign summary tooltip now includes Distance (km) and the > Bearing (short-path) to Station if the Gridsquare is known. > (Important Note: Only JT65-Log, the default, is supported) > - Right-click context menu (same as callsign slots) on QSO partner callsign. " Is it "safe" to use the Deep Search function on JT9/JT65? Works with new 0.9.90 version of JT65-HF HB9HQX Edition. Click to expand.I actually emailed with Joe Taylor himself a while back on that very topic and here's what Joe Taylor, K1JT himself said about "deep search".
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |