1 / 52

Preliminary Results

Mitigation of Radio Frequency Interference from the Computer Platform to Improve Wireless Data Communication. Preliminary Results. Last Updated May 31, 2007. Outline. Problem Definition Noise Modeling Estimation of Noise Model Parameters Filtering and Detection Conclusion Future Work.

Download Presentation

Preliminary Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Mitigation of Radio Frequency Interferencefrom the Computer Platform to ImproveWireless Data Communication Preliminary Results Last Updated May 31, 2007

  2. Outline • Problem Definition • Noise Modeling • Estimation of Noise Model Parameters • Filtering and Detection • Conclusion • Future Work

  3. I. Problem Definition • Within computing platforms, wireless transceivers experience radio frequency interference (RFI) from computer subsystems, esp. from clocks (harmonics) and busses • Objectives • Develop offline methods to improve communication performance in the presence of computer platform RFI • Develop adaptive online algorithms for these methods Approach • Statistical modeling of RFI • Filtering/detection based on estimation of model parameters We’ll be using noise and interference interchangeably

  4. Common Spectral Occupancy

  5. II. Noise Modeling • RFI is a combination of independent radiation events, and predominantly has non-Gaussian statistics • Statistical-Physical Models (Middleton Class A, B, C) • Independent of physical conditions (universal) • Sum of independent Gaussian and Poisson interference • Models nonlinear phenomena governing electromagnetic interference • Alpha-Stable Processes • Models statistical properties of “impulsive” noise • Approximation to Middleton Class B noise

  6. [Middleton, 1999] Middleton Class A, B, C Models Class ANarrowband interference (“coherent” reception) Uniquely represented by two parameters Class BBroadband interference (“incoherent” reception) Uniquely represented by six parameters Class CSum of class A and class B (approx. as class B)

  7. Middleton Class A Model Probability densityfunction (pdf) Envelope statistics Envelope for Gaussian signal has Rayleigh distribution

  8. Probability Density Function Middleton Class A Statistics As A → , Class A pdf converges to Gaussian Example for A = 0.15 and G = 0.1 Power Spectral Density

  9. Symmetric Alpha Stable Model Characteristic Function: Parameters Characteristic exponent indicative of the thickness of the tail of impulsiveness of the noise Localization parameter (analogous to mean) Dispersion parameter (analogous to variance) No closed-form expression for pdf except for α = 1 (Cauchy), α = 2 (Gaussian), α = 1/2 (Levy) and α = 0 (not very useful) Approximate pdf using inverse transform of power series expansion of characteristic function

  10. Symmetric Alpha Stable Statistics Example: exponent a = 1.5, “mean” d = 0and “variance” g = 10 ×10-4 Probability Density Function Power Spectral Density

  11. III. Estimation of Noise Model Parameters • For the Middleton Class A Model • Expectation maximization (EM) [Zabin & Poor, 1991] • Based on envelope statistics (Middleton) • Based on moments (Middleton) • For the Symmetric Alpha Stable Model • Based on extreme order statistics [Tsihrintzis & Nikias, 1996] • For the Middleton Class B Model • No closed-form estimator exists • Approximate methods based on envelope statistics or moments

  12. Estimation of Middleton Class A Model Parameters • Expectation maximization • E: Calculate log-likelihood function w/ current parameter values • M: Find parameter set that maximizes log-likelihood function • EM estimator for Class A parameters[Zabin & Poor, 1991] • Expresses envelope statistics as sum of weighted pdfs • Maximization step is iterative • Given A, maximize K (with K = AΓ). Root 2nd-order polynomial. • Given K, maximize A. Root4th-order poly. (after approximation).

  13. PDFs with 11 summation terms 50 simulation runs per setting Convergence criterion: Example learning curve Normalized Mean-Squared Error in A ×10-3 Results of EM Estimator for Class A Parameters Iterations for Parameter A to Converge

  14. Estimation of Symmetric Alpha Stable Parameters • Based on extreme order statistics [Tsihrintzis & Nikias, 1996] • PDFs of max and min of sequence of independently and identically distributed (IID) data samples follow • PDF of maximum: • PDF of minimum: • Extreme order statistics of Symmetric Alpha Stable pdf approach Frechet’s distribution as N goes to infinity • Parameter estimators then based on simple order statistics • AdvantageFast / computationally efficient (non-iterative) • Disadvantage Requires large set of data samples (N ~ 20,000)

  15. Results for Symmetric Alpha Stable Parameter Estimator Data length (N) was 10,000 samples Results averaged over 100 simulation runs Example on this slide (which is continued on next slide) uses g = 5 and d = 10 Mean squared error in estimate of characteristic exponent α

  16. Results for Symmetric Alpha Stable Parameter Estimator g = 5 d = 10 Mean squared error in estimate of dispersion (“variance”) g Mean squared error in estimate of localization (“mean”) d

  17. Results on Measured RFI Data • Data set of 80,000 samples collected using 20 GSPS scope • Measured data represents "broadband" noise • Symmetric Alpha Stable Process expected to work well since PDF of measured data is symmetric • Middleton Class A will model PDF beyond a certain point • Middleton Class B envelope PDF has same form as Middleton Class A envelope PDF beyond an envelope value (inflection point) • we expect the envelope PDF to match closely to Middleton Class A envelope PDF beyond the inflection point.

  18. Results on Measured RFI Data • Modeling PDF as Symmetric Alpha Stable process fX(x) - PDF x – noise amplitude

  19. Results on Measured RFI Data • Modeling envelope PDF using Middleton Class A model Expected: Envelope PDF’s match beyond a certain envelope Envelope computed via non-linear lowpass filtering obtained via Teager operator, z[n] = (x[n])2 – x[n-1]x[n+1] fZ(z) – Envelope PDF z – noise envelope

  20. IV. Filtering and Detection • Wiener filtering (linear) • Requires knowledge of signal and noise statistics • Provides benchmark for non-linear methods • Other filtering • Adaptive noise cancellation • Nonlinear filtering • Detection in Middleton Class A and B noise • Coherent detection [Spaulding & Middleton, 1977] • Incoherent detection[Spaulding & Middleton, 1977] Hypothesis Filtered signal Corrupted signal Filter Decision Rule We assume perfect estimation of noise model parameters

  21. ^ d(n) ^ d(n): desired signald(n): filtered signale(n): error w(n): Wiener filter x(n): corrupted signalz(n): noise d(n): ^ d(n) z(n) d(n) x(n) w(n) d(n) x(n) e(n) w(n) Wiener Filtering – Linear Filter • Optimal in mean squared error sense when noise is Gaussian • Model • Design Minimize Mean-Squared Error E { |e(n)|2 }

  22. Wiener Filtering – Finite Impulse Response (FIR) Case • Wiener-Hopf equations for FIR Wiener filter of order p-1 • General solution in frequency domain desired signal: d(n)power spectrum:F(e j w)correlation of d and x:rdx(n)autocorrelation of x:rx(n)Wiener FIR Filter:w(n) corrupted signal:x(n)noise:z(n)

  23. Raised Cosine Pulse Shape n Transmitted waveform corrupted by Class A interference n Received waveform filtered by Wiener filter n Wiener Filtering – 100-tap FIR Filter Pulse shape10 samples per symbol10 symbols per pulse ChannelA = 0.35G = 0.5 × 10-3SNR = -10 dBMemoryless

  24. Wiener Filtering – Communication Performance Pulse shapeRaised cosine10 samples per symbol10 symbols per pulse ChannelA = 0.35G = 0.5 × 10-3Memoryless Bit Error Rate (BER) Optimal Detection RuleDescribed next -10 10 SNR (dB) -40 -20 0 -30

  25. Coherent Detection • Hard decision • Bayesian formulation [Spaulding and Middleton, 1977] corrupted signal Decision RuleΛ(X) H1 or H2

  26. Coherent Detection • Equally probable source • Optimal detection rule N: number of samples in vector X

  27. Coherent Detection in Class A Noise with Γ = 10-4 A = 0.1 Correlation Receiver Performance SNR (dB) SNR (dB)

  28. Coherent Detection – Small Signal Approximation • Expand pdf pZ(z) by Taylor series about Sj = 0 (for j=1,2) • Optimal decision rule & threshold detector for approximation • Optimal detector for approximation is logarithmic nonlinearity followed by correlation receiver (see next slide) We use 100 terms of the series expansion ford/dxi ln pZ(xi) in simulations

  29. Correlation Receiver Coherent Detection –Small Signal Approximation AntipodalA = 0.35G = 0.5×10-3 • Near-optimal for small amplitude signals • Suboptimal for higher amplitude signals Communication performance of approximation vs. upper bound[Spaulding & Middleton, 1977, pt. I]

  30. V. Conclusion • Radio frequency interference from computing platform • Affects wireless data communication subsystems • Models include Middleton noise models and alpha stable processes • RFI cancellation • Extends range of communication systems • Reduces bit error rates • Initial RFI interference cancellation methods explored • Linear optimal filtering (Wiener) • Optimal detection rules (26 dB gain for coherent detection)

  31. VI. Future Work • Offline methods • Estimator for single symmetric alpha-stable process plus Gaussian • Estimator for mixture of alpha stable processes plus Gaussian (requires blind source separation for 1-D time series) • Estimator for Middleton Class B parameters • Quantify communication performance vs. complexity tradeoffs for Middleton Class A detection • Online methods • Develop fixed-point (embedded) methods for parameter estimation • Middleton noise models • Mixtures of alpha-stable processes • Develop embedded implementations of detection methods

  32. References • [1] D. Middleton, “Non-Gaussian noise models in signal processing for telecommunications: New methods and results for Class A and Class B noise models”, IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1129-1149, May 1999 • [2] S. M. Zabin and H. V. Poor, “Efficient estimation of Class A noise parameters via the EM [Expectation-Maximization] algorithms”, IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 60-72, Jan. 1991 • [3] G. A. Tsihrintzis and C. L. Nikias, "Fast estimation of the parameters of alpha-stable impulsive interference", IEEE Trans. Signal Proc., vol. 44, Issue 6, pp. 1492-1503, Jun. 1996 • [4] A. Spaulding and D. Middleton, “Optimum Reception in an Impulsive Interference Environment-Part I: Coherent Detection”, IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 25, no. 9, Sep. 1977 • [5] A. Spaulding and D. Middleton, “Optimum Reception in an Impulsive Interference Environment-Part II: Incoherent Detection”, IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 25, no. 9, Sep. 1977 • [6] B. Widrow et al., “Principles and Applications”, Proc. of the IEEE, vol. 63, no.12, Sep. 1975.

  33. BACKUP SLIDES

  34. Potential Impact • Improve communication performance for wireless data communication subsystems embedded in PCs and laptops • Extend range from the wireless data communication subsystems to the wireless access point • Achieve higher bit rates for the same bit error rate and range, and lower bit error rates for the same bit rate and range • Extend the results to multiple RF sources on a single chip

  35. Symmetric Alpha Stable Process PDF • Closed-form expression does not exist in general • Power series expansions can be derived in some cases • Standard symmetric alpha stable model for localization parameter d = 0

  36. Middleton Class B Model Envelope Statistics Envelope exceedance probability density (APD) which is 1 – cumulative distribution function

  37. Class B Envelope Statistics

  38. Parameters for Middleton Class B Noise

  39. Accuracy of Middleton Noise Models Magnetic Field Strength, H (dB relative to microamp per meter rms) ε0 (dB > εrms) Percentage of Time Ordinate is Exceeded P(ε > ε0) Soviet high power over-the-horizon radar interference [Middleton, 1999] Fluorescent lights in mine shop office interference [Middleton, 1999]

  40. Class B Exceedance Probability Density Plot

  41. Class A Parameter Estimation Based on APD (Exceedance Probability Density) Plot

  42. e2 = e4 = e6 = Class A Parameter Estimation Based on Moments • Moments (as derived from the characteristic equation) • Parameter estimates Odd-order momentsare zero[Middleton, 1999] 2

  43. Expectation Maximization Overview

  44. Maximum Likelihood for Sum of Densities

  45. Results of EM Estimator for Class A Parameters

  46. Extreme Order Statistics

  47. Estimator for Alpha-Stable 0 < p < α

  48. Incoherent Detection • Bayes formulation[Spaulding & Middleton, 1997, pt. II] Small signal approximation

  49. Incoherent Detection • Optimal Structure: Incoherent Correlation Detector The optimal detector for the small signal approximation is basically the correlation receiver preceded by the logarithmic nonlinearity.

  50. Coherent Detection – Class A Noise • Comparison of performance of correlation receiver (Gaussian optimal receiver) and nonlinear detector [Spaulding & Middleton, 1997, pt. II]

More Related