Talk:A Mathematical Theory of Communication

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Books (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
WikiProject Systems (Rated Stub-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Control theory.
 

Article & Book[edit]

should create a disambiguation page? A Mathematical Theory of Communication is a book too written by Warren Weaver in collaboration with Claude Shannon. Publisher: University of Illinois Press (October 1963) ISBN: 0252725484

  • JA: No, I think that keeping the current title to discuss both is okay. Simply use "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" for the article and A Mathematical Theory of Communication for the book, per usual conventions. Jon Awbrey 16:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

i think that i can not find good meterial on it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.186.52 (talk) 09:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree that we both the article and book need to be mentioned, so I added that to this entry. And just to be clear, the book title is The Mathematical Theory of Communication, so that would be a seperate wikipedia page. I'm not familiar enough with the book to start that page, or if it's even needed. -- I also removed the word 'digital' to clarify that his article is about all communication, not just digital communication. (The article itself has separate sections about discrete (digital) signals (Parts I-III) and continuous signals (part IV).) Lastly, I added the famous diagram from this paper. I re-created it myself in Illustrator rather than copy-n-paste the original. I've seen this diagram re-created in lots of other information theory academic papers, so I'm assuming that this is not a copyright violation. (Does anyone know the rules on this?) wanderingstan 17:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Destination[edit]

Is it necessary to have a destination? It seems to me as though the receiver could, in principle, be considered the destination to which the signal is transmitted. This receiver then transforms the signal and processes it as information. Perhaps either the destination part could be omitted or changed with another word.24.219.29.168 (talk) 07:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

  • The distinction between destination and receiver is important. According to the article, "The receiver ordinarily performs the inverse operation of that done by the transmitter, reconstructing the message from the signal." Any "processing" of this message is beyond the scope of the receiver, and is part of the destination. But in any case, this article is about Shannon's paper so it makes no sense to change his model or rename the components. wanderingstan (talk) 03:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)