Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
I. I NTRODUCTION
ODING schemes for the three-node relay network can be
broadly classified into the Decode and Forward (DF),
Amplify and Forward (AF), and the Compress and Forward
(CF) categories [1]. In DF, relay decodes before forwarding it
to the destination. Its performance is dictated by the quality
of the source to relay channel; a decoding failure at the relay
results in poor performance overall. On the other hand, in
AF and CF, the relay does not attempt to decode. In AF, the
signal received at the relay is simply amplified before being
transmitted to the destination. On the other hand, in CF, the
relay compresses the signal that it receives by exploiting its
correlation with the signal received at the destination. The
compressed signal is then transmitted to the destination. Unlike
DF, CF always outperforms direct transmission regardless of
the source to relay channel quality, and has been shown to
have optimal asymptotic performance for cooperative ad-hoc
networks [2].
There are only a few existing works on practical CF coding
schemes in the literature. A CF coding scheme over a halfduplex Gaussian relay channel was first proposed in [3], [4]. A
fixed-rate CF relaying scheme using low-density parity-check
(LDPC) and irregular repeat-accumulate (IRA) codes with
binary modulation for the half-duplex Gaussian relay channel
was presented in [5]. It was shown that for practical purposes,
a binary quantizer at the relay was sufficient to obtain nearoptimal performance. The scheme was later extended to fading
relay channels under a rateless coded setting in [6]. A CF
coding scheme that implemented Slepian Wolf (SW) coding
[7] at the relay using polar codes was presented in [8]. A CF
4536
(1)
M
X
1
fg (y xi S xk I).
M
k=1
(3)
4537
message
LDPC Code
1
P2S
LDPC Code
2
P2S
Xs1
Xs2
LDPC Code
m
Ps1
P2S
M-PAM
Modulator
Ps 2
Fig. 3. Encoding at the Source node using m LDPC codes. The P2S blocks
indicate parallel to serial conversion.
A. Message Encoding
A block diagram of multi-level message encoder at the
Source node is shown in Fig. 3. The message to be transmitted
to the destination is partitioned into m bit-streams. Each bitstream is encoded with a length-N LDPC code of rate Ri ,
i = 1, . . . , m so that the length of the ith message bit-stream
is N Ri . The sum of the individual
Pmcode rates gives the overall
transmission rate in b/s, i.e.
i=1 Ri = R. The resulting
codewords are serially fed m bits at a time into a unit energy
4538
1N
Yd1
Pr
P2S
1N
W1
.N
1N
P2S
W
W
i 1
1
Xr1
IRA
LLR Calculation
1N
P2S
M-PAM
Modulator
systematic
nodes(.N)
D
2N
Xr2
=
2N
P2S
IRA
Scalar
Quantizer
P2S
Yr
.N
W2
Pr
P2S
2N
M-PAM
Modulator
2N
check
nodes
parity
nodes(miN)
Le
mN
Pr
P2S
Wl
Xrl
Yd2
IRA
mN
Fig. 4.
mN
P2S
.N
Soft Demodulation
mN
P2S
M-PAM
Modulator
Fig. 5.
l
X
i=1
l
X
i=1
(5)
4539
demodulator) Le = 0.
1, . . . , W
i1 to calculate the a-priori
3: Use Yd1 and W
LLRs for the systematic nodes.
4: While (stopping criterion not met)2
4:
(Soft demodulation) Use Yd2 and Le to calculate the
a-priori LLRs for the parity nodes.
5:
Run one iteration of belief propagation (BP) algorithm
on the IRA decoding graph (Le is updated).
6: end while
i by hard-thresholding the a-posteriori LLRs
7: Obtain W
from the systematic nodes.
After decoding all bit-planes, the DJSCC decoder passes the
1, . . . , W
l to the message decoder.
estimates W
C. Message Decoding
Destination uses MSD on the m LDPC decoding graphs to
recover the corresponding codewords, and hence the original
message sequence. We have two types of variable nodes at
each stage of the LDPC decoder. The first type correspond
to the symbols received during T1 . The a-priori LLRs for
1, . . . , W
l,
these type of nodes are calculated using Yd1 , W
and the decoded codewords corresponding to the previous
stages. The second type of variable nodes are those which
correspond to T2 . For these nodes Yd2 and the decoded
codewords corresponding to the previous stages are used to
evaluate the a-priori LLRs.
D. Code Design
For optimizing the degree distributions of the LDPC and
IRA codes, we first use the information-theoretic analysis of
Section III to evaluate (for given relay position and power Pr )
the optimum parameters , q, Ps1 and Ps2 that are required
to achieve a target transmission rate of R b/s. The analysis
also yields the target rates Ri , i = 1, . . . , m for the individual
LDPC codes, as well as i , i = 1, . . . , l, that govern the target
rates of the individual IRA codes.
The degree distributions for the multi-level LDPC and IRA
codes are designed using the EXIT chart strategy [17] with
Gaussian approximation [13]. The approach we use is a direct
consequence of chain rule of mutual information/entropy, i.e.,
we assume perfect knowledge of prior bit-planes, and no
information about subsequent ones. This simplifies the design
process in the sense that the individual codes can be designed
one by one, in a serial fashion. For each LDPC level, we take
into account the fact that there are two types of variable nodes
with different SNR characteristics: the first type corresponding
to T1 and the other to T2 . The design process is similar to the
one in [5], so we do not include details in this paper. In the
following, we briefly explain how degree distributions of a
single level of IRA codes are optimized; the procedure has
to be repeated for all l levels. Each IRA code has two types
of variable nodes, the systematic and the parity nodes. The
Ich
I ipo1 d
Iciop
IV:F
IF:V
i
pod
Idi op
I ipoc
I ipo1 d
systematic nodes
Fig. 6.
check nodes
soft
demodulator
parity nodes
2 In
4540
i=1
+2J
i
1 Ipc
dsr
TABLE I
O PTIMIZED PARAMETERS FOR 4-PAM CF RELAYING WITH
= 0.95, drd = 0.2 M AND Pr = 6 D B. A LL POWERS ARE SPECIFIED
IN D B AND RATES IN B / S .
Rate
1.0
1.5
0.57
0.65
0
0.26
0.28
1
0.17
0.09
Ps1
4.63
8.65
Ps2
2.61
7.25
q
1.55
2.44
R1
0.63
0.37
R2
0.83
0.67
4541