Reliability of many valued electronic signals.

  • Thread starter Thread starter mooncrater
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electronic Signals
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the reliability of many-valued electronic signals compared to binary signals in digital systems. The original poster questions why many-valued circuits are considered less reliable and seeks clarification on the implications of this statement.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the differences between binary and many-valued signals, particularly in the context of noise interference and signal integrity. There is a focus on how noise affects the ability to distinguish between multiple signal levels in many-valued systems compared to the clear distinction in binary systems.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide insights into the nature of analog versus digital signals, discussing how noise impacts signal quality. There is an ongoing exploration of the reliability of different signal types, with some guidance offered on how digital signals can maintain integrity despite noise.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of signal representation and the impact of noise, as well as the constraints of the original poster's source material regarding signal reliability.

mooncrater
Messages
215
Reaction score
18

Homework Statement


In this book of mine , I saw this statement,"The digital-system designer is restricted to the use of binary signals because of the lower reliabilty of many-valued electronic circuits." . Why is so? How can we say that the many-valued electronic circuits are not reliable?

Homework Equations


~nil~

The Attempt at a Solution


A binary signal has 0s and 1s. A hexal signal has 0s, 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s, and 5s.
Therefore a hexal signal has more discrete input signals than a binary signal.
But the thing I don't understand is that why do they say the other signals are unreliable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe it means "versus analog signals." For instance, any hex digit can be represented by 4 binary digits, so that's no problem. The issue is that noise interferes with analog signals, causing them to lose quality. Sure, digital signals have noise added to them too, but as long as the signal stays in the correct "zone", there is no loss in quality, because a 1 is a 1 is a 1 and likewise for a 0.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mooncrater
axmls said:
I believe it means "versus analog signals." For instance, any hex digit can be represented by 4 binary digits, so that's no problem. The issue is that noise interferes with analog signals, causing them to lose quality. Sure, digital signals have noise added to them too, but as long as the signal stays in the correct "zone", there is no loss in quality, because a 1 is a 1 is a 1 and likewise for a 0.
So, since there are many signals , noise (disturbances) would make nearby signals approximately the same, because of which we would not be able to differentiate anyone of those signals . Whereas , in the case of a binary signal , a 0 and 1 are too different , that noise would not affect them enough make them unrecognisable. Am I right?
 
Well, almost.

In the case of an analog signal, we may need some quite accurate values to produce a quality product. For instance, let's say we need the signal to equal 1.7 when x = 3.5. Then we had better hope no noise comes in and interferes with the signal right there, because it could easily change that value, and that messes with the quality.

For a digital (in this case, binary) signal, however, let's say a 1 is 5 volts and a 0 is 0 volts. Then what we do is, we set a range around 5 volts and a range around 0 volts, and declare anything in those ranges to be 1 or 0, respectively. So if we send out a signal that equals 5V at some point, and some noise gets in and changes it to 5.3V or 4.32V, then the receiver looks at it, decides it's closer to 5V, and declares it a 1, just like the transmitter intended. So we literally can get data that is as high-quality as the transmitter intended.

This is also why people who spend large amounts of money for "high quality" digital cables instead of a cheap 10$ cable have gotten scammed. With digital, you either have the correct value, or you don't. It is impossible to increase the quality. If the cable gets a 1 when it needs a 1 and a 0 when it needs a 0, then the quality cannot be improved.

Combine this with some clever error-correcting codes that detect when there's been a bit error, and digital transmission can be quite reliable.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mooncrater
Now its clear , thanks...:)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
11K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K