1 / 36

Multipe-Symbol Sphere Decoding for Space-Time Modulation

Multipe-Symbol Sphere Decoding for Space-Time Modulation. Vincent Hag March 7 th 2005. Why MIMO?. Limited radio resources Need for higher data rate (3G services and beyond)

woods
Download Presentation

Multipe-Symbol Sphere Decoding for Space-Time Modulation

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. Multipe-Symbol Sphere Decoding for Space-Time Modulation Vincent Hag March 7th 2005

  2. Why MIMO? • Limited radio resources • Need for higher data rate (3G services and beyond) •  Make the best possible use of the spectrum in order to further increase throughput as well as user-capacity MIMO antennas is a key technology

  3. Why Multiple-Symbol Detection? • N received symbols are jointly processed • to estimate N-1 symbols • Better evaluation of the channel statistics yields improved performances

  4. Why Non-coherent Detection? • Phase estimation difficult or costly • Develop (de)modulation techniques that do not require CSI Extend DPSK to MIMO systems

  5. Problem Formulation Performance (exploit space and time dimensions) Complexity (exponential in space and time dimensions)  Need for fast-algorithm based detection

  6. Talk Outline • Transmission • Channel Model • Reception: Sphere Decoder • Simulation Results • Conclusions and Further Works

  7. Transmission Non-coherent Detection  Differential Transmission Diagonal codes (= extension of DPSK signals to STC)

  8. Differential Encoding Code matrices are differentially encoded such as

  9. Diagonal Codes

  10. Channel Model • AWGN • Rayleigh fading • Multi-channel action:

  11. Communication link

  12. Catch-up slide

  13. Talk Outline • Transmission • Channel Model • Reception: Sphere Decoder • Simulation Results • Conclusions and further Works

  14. Reception: Metric Metric: ML decision rule:

  15. Sphere Decoding: Concept Fix and examine signals such that • Search of signals lying inside a sphere of radius instead of the whole space

  16. Sphere Decoding with U upper triangular • can be determined component-wise, starting from and tracking up to

  17. Sphere Decoding

  18. Sphere Decoding Partial distance criterion: choose that minimizes to keep it as small as possible:

  19. Sphere Decoding radius updated to Then, restart the sphere decoding algorithm with the new radius value

  20. Sphere Decoding • Phase ambiguities: fix and start sphere decoding at • Search strategy: Zigzag procedure: hypothetical symbols (examined for the ith component) are ordered according monotically increasing distance

  21. Zigzag for 8-PSK constellation

  22. Representation in a tree

  23. DFDD Attractive low-complexity algorithm performing differential detection Linear predictor making decision on based on and

  24. Talk Outline • Transmission • Channel Model • Reception: Sphere Decoder • Simulation Results • Conclusions and further Works

  25. Simulation Results • Simulation setup • BER performances • Computational Complexity • BER vs. Complexity

  26. Simulation Setup • bit/channel use, • Spatially independent Rayleigh continuous fading channels • Detect at least 1000 bit errors to assess the BER at any SNR • Number of multiplications as a measure of the complexity

  27. BER performances Single Antenna System Error floor removed

  28. BER performances MSDSD vs DFDD

  29. BER performances Mismacth of the Doppler rate 4dB shift Robust?

  30. Computational Complexity Average Number of Real Multiplications done to estimate a 10-length sequence

  31. Computational Complexity

  32. BER vs Complexity Restrict the number of multiplications for practical reasons

  33. BER vs Complexity

  34. Conclusion • SD outperforms DFDD, a good low-complexity algorithms • Excellent performance versus complexity trade-off: • ML performances • But orders of magnitudes below that of brute-force search (ML detection) • Gains in power efficiency almost for free

  35. Further Works • Investigate other STC, possibly with other search strategy for PDP • Take interference into account

  36. Questions?

More Related