Question

Hamming codes, used for error detection and correction, are useful for burst errors (where we could reasonably expect multiple adjacent bits to be incorrect); Reed-Solomon coding is more useful for random errors (where one can reasonable expect errors to be rare events).

A) True
B) False

Answer 1

The statement is false because Hamming codes are suited for single-bit errors, while Reed-Solomon codes are effective for both burst and random errors due to their block coding nature.

Step-by-step explanation:

The statement that Hamming codes are useful for burst errors and Reed-Solomon coding is more useful for random errors is false. In fact, it is the opposite:

Hamming codes are typically more effective for correcting single-bit errors or detecting double-bit errors, but they are not designed to handle burst errors. On the other hand, Reed-Solomon codes are particularly well-suited for dealing with burst errors, which are sequences of errors in a row, as well as random errors, due to their block coding nature and ability to correct multiple errors within a block of data. These codes have proven extremely effective in many applications, such as in QR codes and data transmission where burst errors can be common.