Multi User Detection

Dec.
06, 2004 Mohit Garg ISTE-STTP, TSEC First Prev Next Last Go To Full Screen Quit
Multiuser Detection
Mohit Garg
(mohitgarg@iitb.ac.in)
Under the guidance of Prof. U. B. Desai
SPANN Lab
Department of Electrical Engineering
IIT-Bombay
Group Members: Prof. S. N. Merchant
Aditya Dua, Ritesh Sood, Prateek Dayal, Umesh Nimbhorkar
Dec. 06, 2004 Mohit Garg ISTE-STTP, TSEC First Prev Next Last Go To Full Screen Quit
Outline . . .
Recapitulating CDMA
Standard single user detector
Optimum multiuser detector
Non-optimal multiuser detectors
An adaptive Minimum Probability of Error based multiuser detector pro-
posed by our group
Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)
All users transmit at the same time and across the entire frequency band
Users separated on the basis of their signature waveforms s
k
(t)
The signature waveforms may be
Orthogonal
Non-orthogonal
Orthogonal CDMA does not give any capacity improvement over TDMA
or FDMA in a cellular system
No. of orthogonal signature waveforms is limited!
Non-orthogonal CDMA is therefore used
DS-CDMA Signal Model
Consider a DS-CDMA communication system with K users
The signal for the k
th
user is
x
k
(t) = A
k
b
k
(i)s
k
(t iT
b
), iT
b
t < (i + 1)T
b
(1)
where,
s
k
(t) =
1
N
N
n=1
s
kn
rect(t (n 1)T
c
) (2)
ij
=
_
T
b
0
s
i
(t)s
j
(t)dt (3)
b
k
(i) 1, +1
s
k
(N 1) vector is the chip spreading sequence for the k
th
user
Received Signal
Consider a simple AWGN channel
The received signal can be written as
r(t) =
K
k=1
x
k
(t) + n(t) (4)
=
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
(i)s
k
(t iT
b
) + n(t), iT
b
t < (i + 1)T
b
(5)
where, n(t) is the AWGN noise with zero mean and variance
2
The objective of the receiver is to estimate the vector
b(i) = [b
1
(i), . . . , b
K
(i)]
T
of transmitted symbols for all time intervals i
The Single User Detector . . .
The simplest way: Apply a bank of matched lters, one for each user, to the
received signal
Demodulate all users independent of each other
Consider the rst time interval (i = 0) and the j
th
user,
r(t) = A
j
b
j
s
j
(t)
. .
+
K
k=1
k,=j
A
k
b
k
(i)s
k
(t)
. .
+ n(t)
..
, 0 t < T
b
= Signal + MAI + Noise
(6)
Multiple Access Interference (MAI)
In-band interference unlike noise which is wideband
Cannot be rejected through a band-pass lter
Occurs in different forms in other systems also e.g. Multi-Carrier in-
terference in OFDM
Single User Correlator Detector
Correlating with user js chip sequence (matched lter detector),
y
j
=
_
T
b
0
r(t)s
j
(t)dt (7)
= A
j
b
j
+
K
k=1
k,=j
A
k
b
k
(i)
kj
+ n
j
(8)
Hence,
b
j
= sign(y
j
) (9)
Similarly, other users can be demodulated
Figure 1: Schematic of Single User Detector
Issues with the Single User Detector
+ Simple to implement
+ Does not require knowledge of the channel or the user amplitudes
Multiple Access Interference (MAI)

K
k=1
k,=j
A
k
b
k
(i)
kj
Gives non-zero probability of error even with zero noise due to MAI
Near-Far Effect: Strong users overwhelm the weak ones. Thus stringent
power control is necessary
The single user detector forms the core of almost all CDMA handsets currently in use
Optimality of the Single User Detector
The matched lter is optimum only for AWGN interference
The MAI term is not Gaussian in general
But can be approximated by a Gaussian random variable for large no.
of users Central Limit Theorem
Even if the MAI was Gaussian, the single user detector is still not optimum
y
j
is not a sufcient statistic for b
j
But [y
1
, . . . , y
K
]
T
is a sufcient statistic for [b
1
, . . . , b
K
]
T
The single user detector would have been optimum
If
ij
= 0 i, j
Therefore,
Multiuser Detection!
Multiuser Detection
It is clear that the single user detector is not optimum
The optimum detector should take into account the information available in
all y
k
s to estimate the bit of a particular user
This is known as Multiuser Detection and was proposed by Sergio Verd u in
early 1980s.
Any multiuser detector will utilise the information available in the MAI
term to demodulate the user and will not treat it like a noise term
Processing the interference term to extract useful information
Ideologically similar to utilising multipaths for diversity!
Individually Optimum Multiuser Detector
Consider the simple 2-user case
r(t) = A
1
b
1
s
1
(t) + A
2
b
2
s
2
(t) + n(t), 0 t < T
b
(10)
The optimum estimate of b
1
will minimise the probability of error
It is obtained by choosing b
1
1, +1 such that the aposteriori proba-
bility P(b
1
[r(t), 0 t < T
b
) is maximised.
Similarly for user 2, i.e. we need to choose b
2
such that P(b
2
[r(t), 0 t <
T
b
) is maximised
This detector can be termed as an Individually Optimum detector
Jointly Optimum Multiuser Detector
The individually optimum detector is not optimum since b
1
and b
2
are not
independent conditioned on the received signal r(t)
Thus, we need to maximise the joint aposteriori probability
P(b
1
, b
2
[r(t), 0 t < T
b
)
This detector can be termed as a Jointly Optimum detector
This is also the globally optimum multiuser detector
Jointly Optimum Multiuser Detector . . .
Now consider the general K-user case
r(t) =
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
s
k
(t) + n(t), 0 t < T
b
(11)
For equal apriori probabilities of all b = [b
1
, . . . , b
K
]
T
, maximising
P(b[r(t), 0 t < T
b
), is equivalent to maximising
f(r(t), 0 t < T[b) = exp
_
_
1
2
2
_
T
b
0
_
r(t)
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
s
k
(t)
_
2
dt
_
_
(12)
Choosing

b such that

K
k=1
A
k

b
k
s
k
(t) is closest to the received signal in
the mean square sense
Which corresponds to the noise realisation of minimum energy
. . . Jointly Optimum Multiuser Detector
+ The jointly optimum multiuser detector minimises the probability of error
+ It gives zero probability of error in the absence of noise
+ It does not suffer from the near-far resistance problem
Needs knowledge about the channel charateristics at the receiver
Finding the optimum solution is an exponentially complex task O(2
K
),
even for the AWGN channel (K - no. of users)
No polynomial time algorithm is known. Moreover, the problem has been
shown to be NP-complete [Verd u, 89]
Thus, there is a need to look for sub-optimal approximations to the optimum multiuser detector
Sub-optimal Multiuser Detectors
Linear Multiuser Detectors
Apply a linear transformation to the matched lter (single user detec-
tor) outputs
Non-linear Multiuser Detectors
Apply non-linear processing to the matched lter outputs
Adaptive Multiuser Detectors
Can adapt to unknown and time-varying channel conditions
Linear Multiuser Detectors
The output of the matched lter can be written in matrix form as
y
MF
= RAb + n (13)
where, R = S
T
S is the correlation matrix of the user chip sequences
Decorrelating receiver applies the inverse of the correlation matrix to
the output of the matched lter in order to decouple the data

b =
sign(R
1
y
MF
)
+ Completely eliminates the MAI, hence is near-far resistant
+ Does not require estimates of the channel parameters
Enhances the noise
MMSE detector implements a linear mapping L which minimises the mean
squared error E([b Ly
MF
[
2
) and

b = sign(Ly
MF
)
+ Better than the decorrelating detector since it takes noise into account
Requires channel estimates
Non-linear Multiuser Detectors . . .
Successive Interference Cancellation (SIC) serially cancels the interfering
users from the ouputs of the matched lters in order of decereasing power.
Thus
b
j
= sign
_
y
j

K
k=j+1
A
k
kj
b
k
_
(14)
where the users have been ranked 1 to K according to increasing received
signal strength
+ Implementation ease
Error Propagation
. . . Non-linear Multiuser Detectors
Parallel Interference Cancellation (PIC) parallely cancels the estimates of
the MAI from the outputs of the matched lters. It follows an iterative
process. Thus, for j = 1, . . . K
b
(m+1)
j
= sign
_
y
j

K
k,=j
A
k
kj
b
(m)
k
_
(15)
The bit decisions need not converge
The performance depends heavily on the initial bit estimates
Adaptive Multiuser Detectors
Can adapt to changing channel conditions either through training or other
blind mechanisms
Training Based MMSE
LMS
RLS
Blind Adaptive MMSE
Gradient descent based optimisation
So Far . . .
Recapitulating CDMA
Standard single user detector
Optimum multiuser detector
Non-optimal multiuser detectors
Minimum Probability of Error based Algorithms
for Multiuser Detection
Multiuser Detection . . .
We have proposed three schemes :
MJPOE : Minimum Joint Probability of Error
Efcient MJPOE : Efcient Minimum Joint Probability of Error demodu-
lation
MCPOE : Minimum Conditional Probability of Error
in a space-time framework
DS-CDMA Received Signal Model
Each user assigned a unique spreading waveforms
k
(t) - supported on [0, T
b
]
and normalized to 1
s
k
(t) =
1
N
N
n=1
s
kn
(t (n 1)T
c
)
where:
s
kn
is a spreading sequence of length N with entries 1
(t) is rectangular waveform with unit amplitude in [0, T
c
]
Baseband transmitted signal of k
th
user in i
th
bit interval:
x
k
(t) = A
k
b
k
(i)s
k
(t iT), iT
b
t < (i + 1)T
b
where:
b
k
(i) is the bit transmitted by the k
th
user in the i
th
interval
A
k
is the transmission amplitude of the k
th
user
DS-CDMA Received Signal Model . . .
Baseband signal between k
th
users transmitter and base station receiver
(with P receive antennas) can be modeled as SIMO channel with following
impulse response:
h
k
(t) =
M
m=1
a
km
g
km
(t
km
)
where:
M is the number of multipaths
g
km
is complex gain along m
th
path of k
th
user

km
is delay along m
th
path of k
th
user
a
km
= [a
km,1
, . . . , a
km,P
]
H
is the array response vector corresponding
to m
th
path of k
th
users signal
DS-CDMA Received Signal Model . . .
Baseband received signal given by:
r(t) =
i
K
k=1
x
k
(t) h
k
(t) + n(t)
=
i
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
(i)
M
m=1
a
km
g
km
s
k
(t iT
km
) + n(t)
where:
denotes the convolution operation
n(t) = [n
1
(t), . . . , n
P
(t)]
H
is a P 1 vector of zero mean complex Gaus-
sian noise processes

2
is variance of ambient noise at each antenna element
Discrete Time Signal Model
The received baseband signal at each antenna (in the i
th
interval) after
sampling at chip rate can be expressed as an N 1 vector r
p
(i):
r
p
(i) =
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
(i 1)
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kL
. .
ISI
+
K
k=1
A
k
b
k
(i)
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kR
. .
MAI
+n
p
The objective is to determine b
k
(i), for k = 1, . . . , K using r
p
(i), p =
1, . . . P
For simplicity, we have assumed ISI to be limited to 1 term
where n
km
=
km
/T
c
, and the shifted spreading code s
(n
km
)
k
given by
s
(n
km
)
kL
= [s
kNn+1
, . . . , s
kN
. .
, 0, . . . , 0
. .
]
T
n
km
N n
km
s
(n
km
)
kR
= [0, . . . , 0
. .
, s
k1
, . . . , s
kNn
. .
]
T
n
km
N n
km
Discrete Time Signal Model . . .
For ease of representation dene the following:
kp,L
=
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kL
kp,R
=
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kR
S
pL
= [
1p,L
. . .
Kp,L
] (N K)
S
pR
= [
1p,R
. . .
Kp,R
] (N K)
Thus, r
p
(i) can now be expressed as:
r
p
(i) = S
pL
Ab(i 1) + S
pR
Ab(i) + n
p
For synchronous single path DS-CDMA, the above reduces to:
r(i) = SAb(i) + n
where S = [s
1
, . . . , s
K
]
T
.
MPOE Based Multiuser Detection
MPOE : Minimum Probability of Error
Adaptive multiuser detector
Linear FIR lter bank; one lter for each user
Tap weights adapted using stochastic gradient descent
Three proposed schemes :
MJPOE : Minimum Joint Probability of Error
Efcient MJPOE: Efcient Implementation of MJPOE
MJPOE: Minimum Joint Probability of Error
Minimizes joint probability of error for all users
Blind scheme - no training sequence required
BER performance superior to non-adaptive MMSE
Extremely fast convergence rate compared to LMS, RLS
High computational complexity
Efcient MJPOE: Reducing the computation of
MJPOE
Minimizes joint probability of error for all users
Estimate of the ISI term is subtracted to reduce the per symbol computation
Weight computation is done at the channel variation timescale rather than
symbol timescale
Also gives better BER performance than MJPOE
Thus, we have signicant gains in computation
MCPOE: Minimum Conditional Probability of
Error
Minimizes probability of error for each user individually, conditioned on
transmitted bit vector
Both training based and blind schemes
BER performance close to non-adaptive MMSE
Extremely fast convergence, comparable to MJPOE
Linear computational complexity
Better than RLS performance at LMS like complexity
Probability of Error
Let w
k
denote FIR lter used to detect bits transmitted by the k
th
user
w
k
operates on the augmented signal vector r = [r
H
1
, . . . , r
H
P
]
H
(NP 1
vector)
Let w
k
= [w
k1
H
, . . . , w
kP
H
]
H
Soft output of lter for k
th
user in i
th
interval given by:
y
k
(i) = w
H
k
r(i)
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
r
p
(i)
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pL
Ab(i 1) +
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab(i) + w
H
k
n
Probability of Error . . .
Bit decisions given by:
b
k
(i) = sgn[1(y
k
(i))]
Since b(i 1) has been detected in the (i 1)
th
interval, it can be replaced
by its estimate
b(i 1). Thus,

y
k
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pL
A
b(i 1) +
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab + w
H
k
n
=
k
+
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab + w
H
k
n
Probability of Error . . .
Let y = [y
1
, . . . , y
K
]
T
. Conditioned on transmitted bit vector b, the deci-
sion statistic vector 1(y) is Gaussian with mean and
covariance matrix C, such that:
k
= 1
_
k
+
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab
_
C
kl
=
2
1
_
w
H
k
w
l
_
=
_

2
k
if k = l
kl
l
if k ,= l
where
2
k
=
2
|w
k
|
2
and
kl
=
1(w
H
k
w
l
)
|w
k
||w
l
|
Joint Probability of Error
Joint Probability of Error is given by :
P
E
=
b
Pr
_
b ,= b[b
_
Pr (b)
=
b
_
1 Pr
_
b = b[b
__
1
2
K
= 1
1
2
K
b
Pr
_
b = b[b
_
= 1 P
C
where P
C
denotes joint probability of correct detection
Joint Probability of Error . . .
Probability density of 1(y) conditioned on b is Gaussian with mean and
covariance matrix C. Thus,
f
1(y)[b
(y[b) =
1
_
(2)
K
[C[
exp
_
1
2
(y )
T
C
1
(y )
_
Conditional probability of correct detection Pr
_
b = b[b
_
can be ex-
pressed as the integral of a multivariate Gaussian distribution with appro-
priate integration limits. For instance, when b = [1, . . . , 1]
T
:
Pr
_
b = b[b
_
=
1
_
(2)
K
[C[
_

0
. . .
_

0
exp
_
1
2
(y )
T
C
1
(y )
_
dy
1
. . . dy
K
Joint Probability of Error . . .
Thus, P
E
can be expressed as follows:
P
E
= 1
1
2
K
_
(2)
K
[C[
b
_
u
1
l
1
. . .
_
u
K
l
K
e
(
1
2
(y)
T
C
1
(y)
)
dy
1
. . . dy
K
where :
l
k
= 0,u
k
= if b
k
= 1
l
k
= ,u
k
= 0 if b
k
= 1
The problem is to design the lters w
kp
such that P
E
is minimized.
Figure 2: Schematic of the MJPOE Adaptive Detector
MJPOE Adaptive Algorithm
Minimizes joint probability of error, or equivalently maximizes joint prob-
ability of correct detection (P
C
)
No training sequence required for adaptation
Gradient descent based adaptation of lter weights
Computational complexity (O(2
K
))
MJPOE Adaptive Algorithm . . .
Observation : From simulations it was observed that at convergence lters
of various users were nearly orthogonal to each other, i.e., w
H
k
w
l
0
Intuitively expected. We want the lters to be well separated, or else they
will detect the same user
Can be incorporated as apriori into the optimization problem
If lters are orthogonal, C becomes a diagonal matrix - the decision statis-
tics of various users y
k
become uncorrelated
Joint Probability of Error (P
E
) can now be expressed as :
P
E
= 1
1
2
K
b
K
k=1
Q
_
b
k
k
_
Reduction in computational costs due to the proposed modication (though
the order remains the same, (O(2
K
)) due to
b
)
MJPOE Adaptive Algorithm . . .
Can execute orthogonality of lter weights at each step using Gram-Schmidt
orthogonalization
Gradient Descent based adaptation of lter weights :
w
(i+1)
k
= w
(i)
k

k
P
E
w
k
w
k
= w
(i)
k
P
E
w
k
=
1
2 2
K
b
_
_
_
b
k
e
2
k
/2
2
k
k
K
i=1
i,=k
Q
_
b
i
i
_
_
_
_

kp
=
1
k
_
1(S
pL
A
b(i 1)) + 1(S

pR
Ab)

k
w
k
w
H
k
w
k
_
such that
k
= [
H
k1
, . . . ,
H
kP
]
H
.
Orthogonalized lter weights given by:
w
k
= w
k
k1
i=1
T(w
k
[ w
k
)
where: T(x[y) =
_
< x, y >
[[y[[
2
_
y
Reducing Complexity Further . . .
To further reduce the computational cost we consider:
MPOE Implementation using ISI Cancellation: Efcient MJPOE
Minimizing the probability of error for each user separately MCPOE
Efcient MJPOE
A proposed modication to the MJPOE algorithm proposed will now be dis-
cussed which
Reduces the computation allowing pre-computation of weights
Weight computation is now done on channel variation timescales rather than
symbol timescales
Improves the BER performance
Using the same signal model as before, the received signal at the p
th
antenna
can be written as
r
p
(i) = S
pL
Ab(i 1) + S
pR
Ab(i) + n
p
Demodulation
The receiver structure consists of a linear lter.
Augmented received vector r = [r
T
1
, . . . , r
T
P
]
T
(NP 1)
Weights for the k
th
user, w
k
= [w
T
k1
, . . . , w
T
kP
]
T
(NP 1) .
Filter Output at the i
th
bit interval is
y
k
(i) = w
H
k
r(i)
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
r
p
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pL
Ab(i 1) +
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab(i) + w
H
k
n
The Decision Rule is
b
k
= sgn[1(y
k
)]
Modication
E(1[y
k
]) = 1[
k
] ,= 0
Hence, a threshold of 0 is not optimum
Subtracting an estimate of this term from y
k
, we obtain the proposed deci-
sion statistic z
k
z
k
= y
k
k
where,
k
=
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pL
A
b(i 1)
Since, E(1[z
k
]) = 0, we get the proposed decision rule as
b
k
= sgn[1(z
k
)]
Modication . . .
Some observations on the proposed demodulation scheme
Does not involve any ISI term. Thus, we can pre-compute the weights
for MJPOE
(Cannot pre-compute for MCPOE since it requires training)
E(1[z
k
]) = 0, which is the decision threshold. Thus, reduction in
BER is expected
Simulation results support the claim
MCPOE: Conditional Probability of Error
If bits +1 and -1 are equiprobable, the probability of error for the k
th
user,
conditioned on the transmitted bit vector b given by :
P
k[b
=
1
2
P(1(y
k
) < 0[b
k
= 1) +
1
2
P(1(y
k
) 0[b
k
= 1)
Density function of y
k
conditioned on b given by:
f
1(y
k
)[b
(y[b) =
1
2
exp
_
(y
k
)
2
2
2
k
_
where:

k
= 1
_
k
+
P
p=1
w
H
kp
S
pR
Ab
_

k
=
_
w
H
k
w
k
Conditional Probability of Error . . .
Let
k
=
k[1
when b
k
= 1 and
k
=
k[1
when b
k
= 1
k|1
= 1
_
_
_
k
+
P
p=1
w
H
kp
_
_
K
i=1
i=k
A
i
b
i
M
m=1
a
im,p
g
im
s
iL
(n
im
)
+ A
k
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
kL
(n
km
)
_
_
_
_
_
k|1
= 1
_
_
_
k
+
P
p=1
w
H
kp
_
_
K
i=1
i=k
A
i
b
i
M
m=1
a
im,p
g
im
s
iL
(n
im
)
A
k
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
kL
(n
km
)
_
_
_
_
_
The conditional probability of error can be expressed as :
P
k[b
=
1
2
_
0
2
exp
_
(y
k[1
)
2
2
2
k
_
dy
+
1
2
_

0
1
2
exp
_
(y
k[1
)
2
2
2
k
_
dy
The above expression can be simplied to obtain :
P
k[b
=
1
2
+
1
2
Q
_
k[1
k
_
1
2
Q
_
k[1
k
_
Minimize P
k[b
with respect to w
k
Figure 3: Schematic of the Space-Time MCPOE Adaptive Detector
MCPOE Adaptive Algorithm
Minimizes probability of error for each user (conditioned on
transmitted bit vector) individually
Training sequence required for adaptation
Gradient descent based adaptation of lter weights
If w
(i)
k
denotes the lter for detecting the k
th
user during the i
th
bit interval,
then :
w
(i+1)
k
= w
(i)
k

P
k[b
w
k
w
k
=w
(i)
k
MCPOE Adaptive Algorithm . . .
Derivative of P
k[b
w.r.t w
k
can be computed using:
P
k[b
w
k
=
1
2
exp
_
2
k[1
2
k
_

w
k
_
k[1
k
_
2
exp
_
2
k[1
2
k
_

w
k
_
k[1
k
_
Dene u
kp
=

k[1
w
kp
and v
kp
=

k[1
w
kp
u
k
= [u
H
k1
, . . . , u
H
kP
]
H
and v
k
= [v
H
k1
, . . . , v
H
kP
]
H
u
kp
= 1
_
_
_
_
S
pL
A
b(i 1) +
K
j=1
j=k
A
j
b
j
M
m=1
a
jm,p
g
jm
s
(n
jm
)
jR
+ A
k
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kR
_
_
_
_
v
kp
= 1
_
_
_
_
S
pL
A
b(i 1) +
K
j=1
j=k
A
j
b
j
M
m=1
a
jm,p
g
jm
s
(n
jm
)
jR
A
k
M
m=1
a
km,p
g
km
s
(n
km
)
kR
_
_
_
_
w
k
_
k[1
k
_
=
|w
k
|
2
u
k
k[1
w
k
|w
k
|
3/2
w
k
_
k[1
k
_
=
|w
k
|
2
v
k
k[1
w
k
|w
k
|
3/2
Blind Version
MCPOE requires a training sequence in adaptation mode
We tried to make it blind by conditioning the probability of error
expression on the output of a matched lter rather than on the
training bits
Convergence rate not affected by the modication
Slight degradation in BER performance
Similar modication works poorly for other training based adaptive
detectors such as LMS and RLS
Figure 4: Schematic of the Blind MCPOE Adaptive Detector : Output of Matched lter Bank used as training bits
Simulation Results
Results for both synchronous and asynchronous multipath channels (with
multiple antennas)
BER performance compared with non-adaptive MMSE
Convergence rates compared with training based LMS and RLS
Flat Rayleigh faded channel assumed for simulations
Figure 5: Convergence curves for training based LMS and RLS (Multipath)
Figure 6: Convergence Curves for MJPOE (Multipath)
0 50 100 150
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Convergence Curves at 15dB Transmit SNR
No. of Iterations
P
r
o
b
.

o
f

E
r
r
o
r

(
o
n

l
o
g
s
c
a
l
e
)
Theoretical Probability of Error: MJPOE
Theoretical Probability of Error: Efficient MJOPE
Figure 7: Convergence performance comparison of MJPOE and Efcient MJPOE, K = 4, M = 3, N = 15, P = 4
Figure 8: Schematic of the Diversity Combining MCPOE Adaptive Detector
Figure 9: Convergence Curves for Training Based MCPOE (Multipath)
Figure 10: Comparison of MCPOE and Non-Adaptive MMSE (Multipath)
Figure 11: BER performance comparison of MJPOE, MCPOE and MMSE
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
10
4
10
3
10
2
10
1
10
0
Transmit SignaltoNoise Ratio (SNR) (in dB)
P
r
o
b
.

o
f

E
r
r
o
r

(
o
n

l
o
g
s
c
a
l
e
)
Prob. of Error Vs. SNR
Simulated Recursive Least Squares (RLS)
Theoretical Prob. of Error: MJPOE
Theoretical Prob. of Error: Efficient MJPOE
Simulated Prob. of Error: Efficient MJPOE
Figure 12: BER performance comparison of MJPOE and Efcient MJPOE, K = 4, M = 3, N = 15, P = 4
Figure 13: Effect of number of antennas on performance of MJPOE, for a xed number of multipaths
Conclusion
+ MPOE based adaptive multiuser detection algorithms were proposed
+ Performance better than MMSE based approaches
+ Similar to the optimum multiuser detector without the overhead of expo-
nential computation at each bit interval
High computational complexity
Work has been extended to OFDM-SDMA and MC-CDMA with encourag-
ing results
References
Sergio Verd u, Multiuser Detection, Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Aditya Dua, U.B. Desai and R.K. Mallik, Minimum probability of error-
based methods for adaptive multiuser detection in multipath DS-CDMA
channels, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, May 2004.
R. Sood and U. B. Desai, Minimum probability of error demodulation for
multipath OFDM-SDMA systems, IEEE International Conference on Com-
munications, Jun. 2004.
P. M. Dayal, U. B. Desai and A. Mahanta, Minimum conditional probabil-
ity of error detection for MC-CDMA, IEEE International Symposium on
Spread Spectrum Techniques and Applications, Aug. 30-Sept. 2 2004.
Mohit Garg, Umesh Nimbhorkar, U. B. Desai and S. N. Merchant, Efcient
minimum probability of error demodulation for DS-CDMA systems, To ap-
pear in IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, Mar.
2005.
Prof. U. B. Desai
ubdesai@ee.iitb.ac.in
SPANN Lab
Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology - Bombay
Mumbai 400076
Mohit Garg
mohitgarg@iitb.ac.in
Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology - Bombay
Mumbai 400076

Multi User Detection

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Multi User Detection

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Dec.

b(i 1). Thus,

b(i 1)) + 1(S

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen