DNA Information Storage Technology Based on Raptor Code

Fig. 5. Encoding and decoding performance of LT code and Raptor code. (a) Change curves of degree value and frequency; (b) change curves of redundancy and decoding success rate

Download full size

Fig. 6. Information symbol frequency of two plans. (a) DNA-Raptor code; (b) DNA fountain code

Download full size

Fig. 7. Frequency of information symbols in DNA fountain code

Download full size

Table 1. Results of quaternary RS error correction code
View table
Table 1. Results of quaternary RS error correction code
Redundancy /% Errorprobability /% Error rateafter decoding /%
13.33 0.02 0
0.04 0
0.10 0.003
0.20 0.011

Table 2. Comparison of screening plan performance
View table
Table 2. Comparison of screening plan performance
Plan A B
Coding efficiency per basic /bit 1.46 1.46
Time /s 0.56 0.61

Table 3. Performance parameters of DNA-Raptor storage framework
View table
Table 3. Performance parameters of DNA-Raptor storage framework
File Inputdata /KB Coding efficiencyper basic /bit Time /s
Text 9 1.463 0.556
Video 523 1.501 127.729
Picture 53 1.493 2.113
Average - 1.486 -

Table 4. Performance of different DNA information storage plans

View table

Table 4. Performance of different DNA information storage plans

Plan	Ref. [6]	Ref. [5]	Ref. [15]	Ref. [4]	Ref. [16]	Ref. [7]	Proposed
Coding efficiency per basic /bit	0.83	0.33	1.14	0.88	0.92	1.57	1.49
Redundancy /%	17.00	79.11	35.96	44.30	42.50	20.71	23.52
Error correction	No	Repetition	RS	No	Repetition	RS	Quaternary RS
Full recovery	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes

Table 5. Performance comparison between DNA-Raptor code and DNA fountain code
View table
Table 5. Performance comparison between DNA-Raptor code and DNA fountain code
Plan Coding efficiencyper basic /bit Time /s
DNA-Raptor 1.46 0.55
DNA-LT 1.54 0.84