fails to detect the presence of errors or fails to determine the exactlocations of theerrors.Ineither case, an erroneous wordisdelivered to theuser.

Sinceno retransmission is required in an FEC error-control system, no feedback channel is needed. The throughput of the system is constant, and is equal to the rate of the code used by the system. FEC error-control systems, however, do have some drawbacks. When a received word is detected in error, it must be decoded, and the decoded word must be delivered to the user regardless of whetheritiscorrect or incorrect. Since the probability of adecodingerrorismuch greater than the probability of anundetected error, it isharder to achieve high system reliability with FEC schemes. In order to attain high reliability, a long, powerful error-correcting code must be used andalargecollection of errorpatternsmust be corrected. This makes decoding hard to implement and expensive. For these reasons, ARQ schemes are often preferred over FEC schemes for control error in data communications systems such as packet-switching data networks and computer communications networks. However, incommunications(ordatastorage)systems wherefeedback channels not are available or retransmissionisnot suitable for some reason, FEC is the only choice. This paper surveys a number of ARQ schemes. They represent alternative solutions to the design of retransmission protocols, particularly the mode in which the transmitterstores,orders,andretransmitsthecodewords which have been received in error. These different schemes have arisen primarily in an attempt to combat the problem that, when the channel error rate increases, the throughput of an ARQ error-control system may deteriorate very rapidly. This is caused bythetimewastedinretransmittingthe codewords detected in error. This problem becomes particularly severe if there is significant round-trip delay between the transmission of a codeword and the receipt of its error statusinformationbackat the transmitter. Long delayis inevitable when satellites or longterrestrialchannels are being used. Anotherapproach to error control is through theuse of hybrid ARQ schemes which incorporate both FEC and retransmission.Hybrid ARQ schemes offerthepotentialforbetter performance if appropriate ARQ and FEC schemes are properly combined. Either block or convolutional codes may

be used for FEC. This paper also discusses different classes of hybrid ARQ schemes and their performance.

Basic ARQ Schemes

Based on retransmission strategies, there are three basic types of ARQ schemes: stop-and-wait ARQ, g o - b a c k 4 ARQ, and selective-repeat ARQ [3, 16-21]. The stop-and-wait scheme represents the simplest ARQ procedure and was implemented in early error-control systems. The IBM Binary Synchronous Communication (BISYNC) procedure, exfor ample, was of the stop-and-wait type [22]. In a stop-and-wait ARQ error-control system, the transmitter sends a codeword to the receiver and waits for an acknowledgment, as shown in Fig. 1. A positive acknowledgment (ACK) from the receiver indicatesthatthetransmittedcodewordhas been successfully received, and the transmitter sends the next codeword in the queue. Anegativeacknowledgment (NAK) fromthe receiverindicatesthat the transmittedcodewordhas been detected in error; the transmitter then resends the codeword andagainwaitsforanacknowledgment.Retransmissions continue until the transmitter receives an ACK. This scheme is simple but inherently inefficient because of the idle time spent waiting for an acknowledgment of each transmitted codeword. One possible remedy is to make the block (or code) length n extremely long. However, the use of a very long block length does not really provide a solution, since the probability that a block contains errors increases with block the length. Hence, usinglong length a block reduces the time increases frequency idle but the of retransmissions for each codeword. Moreover, a long block length may be impractical in many applications because of restrictions imposed by the data format. By the 1970's, ARQ systems were in extensive use in packet-switched and other data networks. Higher data rates and utilization of satellite channels long with round-trip delays established the need for continuous transmission strategies to replacethestop-and-waitprocedures.Internationalstandardsorganizations suchas CCITT (the International Telegraph and Telephone ConsultativeCommittee) began making efforts protocol for standardization. This resultedin the high-level data link. control (HDLC) and the CCITT X.25 standards. These envisaged the use of a go-back-

December 1984-Vo1.22, No. 1 2 IEEE Communications Magazine

N ARQ system on full duplex links. This remains the standard for packet-switching networks. The basicgo-back-N ARQ scheme is illustrated in Fig. 2. The transmitter continuously transmits codewords in order andthenstoresthempendingreceipt of anACKlNAKfor each. The acknowledgment for a codeword arrives after a round-tripdelay,definedasthetimeintervalbetweenthe transmission of a codeword and the receipt of an acknowledgment for that codeword. During this interval, N - 1 other codewordsarealsotransmitted. Wheneverthe transmitter receivesa NAK indicating that a particular codeword, say codeword i , was received in error, it stops transmitting new codewords. Then it goes back to codeword i and proceeds to retransmit codeword the that and N - 1 succeeding codewordswhichweretransmittedduring one round-trip delay. At receiving the the end, receiver discards the erroneouslyreceivedword i and all N - 1 subsequently received words, whether they are error-free or not. Retransmissioncontinuesuntilcodeword i ispositivelyacknowledged. In each retransmission for codeword i , the transmitter resends same the sequencecodewords. of As soon as codeword i is positively acknowledged, transmitter the proceeds to transmit new codewords. The main drawback of go-back-N ARQ is that, whenever a received word is detected in error, the receiver also rejects the next N - 1 received words, even though many of them may be error free. As a result, they must be retransmitted. This represents a waste of transmissions, which can result in severe deterioration of throughput performance large if round-trip is delay involved. For example, consider a satellitechannelwitharound-tripdelay of approximately 700 ms. If the codeword length n is 1000 bits long and the bit rate is 1 Mb/s, in then one round-trip delay, N = 700 codewordsaretransmitted. Therefore, when one received word is detected in error, 700 received words are rejected. If errors occur often enough, the system throughput may fall off very rapidly. The go-back4 ARQ scheme becomes quite ineffective for communications systems high rates large with data and round-trip delays. ineffectiveness This is caused by the retransmission of manyerror-freecodewordsfollowinga codeword detected in error. This can be overcome by using the selective-repeat ARQ protocol. In a selective-repeat ARQ error-controlsystem,codewordsarealsotransmittedcon-

tinuously. However, transmitter the only resends those codewords that are negatively acknowledged (NAKed). After resending a NAKed codeword, transmitter the continues transmittingnewcodewordsinthetransmitterbuffer(as illustratedin Fig. 3). Withthis scheme, abuffermust be provided at the receiver to store the error-free codewords following received detected a word in error, because, ordinarily, codewords must be delivered to the end user in correct order, for example, in point-to-point communications. When the first NAKed codeword is successfully received, the receiver then releases any error-free codewords in consecutive order from the receiver buffer until the next erroneously received is word encountered. Sufficient receiver buffer storage must be provided in a selective-repeat ARQ system; otherwise, buffer overflow may occur and codewords may be lost. Reliability and Throughput Efficiencies of the Basic ARQ Schemes The performance of an ARQ error-control system is normally measured by its reliability and throughput .efficiency.Inan ARQ system,thereceivercommitsadecoding error whenever it accepts a received word with undetected errors. Such an event is called an error event. Let P(E) denote the probability of an error event. Clearly, for an ARQ system to be reliable, the P(E) should be made small. very The throughput efficiency (simple throughput) of an ARQ system is defined as the ratio of the average number of information

December 1984-Vol. 22, No. 12 IEEE Communications Magazine

bits successfully accepted by the receiver per unit time to the total number of bits that could be transmitted per unit time. All basic three ARQ schemes achieve the same system reliability, but they provide different throughput efficiencies. Suppose that an ( n , k ) linear block code C is used for error detectioninan ARQ system. Let usdefinethefollowing probabilities: PC = probabilitythata received n-bitwordcontains no error; P = probability that a received word contains a detectable d error pattern; and Pe = probability that a received word contains anundetectable error pattern. Obviously, PC+ Pd + Pe = 1. The probability PCdepends on the channel statistics, the error and probabilities Pd and Pe depend on both the channel statistics and the choice of the (n,k) error-detecting code C. Pe is normally called the probability of undetected error of the code. A received word is accepted by the receiver only if it either contains no errors or contains an undetectable error pattern. Since an undetectable error pattern can occur on the initial transmission of a word or on any retransmission, the P(E) thatthereceivedwordin an ARQ systemisacceptedand that a decoding error is made is given by

c and the that feedback channel noiseless. is First, we consider the stop-and-wait ARQ scheme. Let A be the idle time of the transmitter between two successive transmissions. Let 6 be the bit rate of the transmitter. Even though the transmitter does nottransmitduringtheidleperiod,the effect of the idle period on the throughput must be taken into consideration.In one round-trip delay time, the transmitter couldtransmit n+hs bitsif it didnotremainidle. For a codeword to be receivedcorrectly,theaverage numberof bits that the transmitter could have transmitted is

Tsw = (n

+ A6)Pc + 2(n + AS)Pc(I - PC) + 3(n + AS)P, (1 + . . . + (n + As) PC (1 - PC)'-'+ . . . = (0 + AS)PC(1 4- 2(1 PC) + 3 (1 PC)' + . . .)
-

Therefore, the throughput of a stop-and-wait ARQ system is

P(E) = p + PdPe + Pd2 Pe + . . . e

= Pe (1

+ Pd + Pd2 + . . .)

(1)

If theerror-detecting code C isproperly chosen, Pe can be made very small relative to PC, and hence P ( E ) can be made very small. If the received word contains a detectable error pattern, it isnotacceptedbythereceiverandaretransmission is requested. For a random error channel with bit error rate t, P C
=

(1 - E ) " .

(2)

It has been provedthatlinearblock codes existwith the probability of undetectederror Pe satisfyingthefollowing upper bound [6, 7 , 101:

where k / n is the rate of the code used by the system. For data communications systems with high data rates and large round-tripdelays, A 6 / n becomes verylarge because it is impractical to use a very large n. In this case, the throughput performance of the stop-and-wait ARQ scheme becomes unacceptable. For example, consider a satellite communications system with a data rate of 1 Mbls. Assume the roundtrip delay for a satellite channel to be 700 ms. Then ~6 = 0.7 X l o 6 . To make ASln small compared to one, n should be chosen in the range ofone million bits! It is impractical to use suchalong code.Suppose that we choose n =10000 bits. Then A6/n = 70. Inthis case, thethroughput of the system becomes negligible. Ina g o - b a c k 4 (GBN)ARQ system, retransmission of an NAK'ed codeword always involves resending N codewords. Consequently,foracodeword to be successfully received, the average number of transmissions is
TGBN

[ Pe I l - (1 - , ) k ] 2 - ( " - k ' .

(3)

+ (N + 1)Pc(1 PC)+ (2N + 1)Pc(1 - P c ) ~ + . . . + (QN + l ) P c ( l - Pc)Q+ . . .

1 ' PC
-

Codes satisfying the above bound have been found and will be discussedinalatersection. If sucha code is used for error detection and if the number of parity bits, n-k, is sufficiently large, P, can be made very small relative to PC and hence P ( E ) << 1. For example, let C be the (2047,2014) triple-error-correcting primitive BCH code. This code satisfies the bound given by (3) [14]. Suppose that this code is used for detection an error in ARQ system. Let E = (a very high bit error rate).Then PC- 1.25 X lo-', and Pe 5 lo-''. From ( l ) , have we

= 1 + N(1 - PC) P C and the throughput of a GBN ARQ system is

P(E) I x 8
From this example we see that high system reliability can be achievedbyan ARQ error-control scheme usingverylittle parity overhead. Now we examine the throughput performance of the three basic ARQ schemes. For simplicity, we assume that the forward channel is a random-error channel with bit error rate
December 1984-VOl. 22, No. 1 2 IEEE Communications Magazine

We see thatthethroughput dependson boththechannel errorrateandtheround-tripdelay N. The term (1 - Pc)N represents the effect of the channel rate error and the round-tripdelay. For communicationssystemswherethe data rate is not too high and the round-trip delay is small, N can be made small by choosing a reasonably long code. In this case, theeffect of the round-trip delay is insignificant and the GBNARQ scheme provides high throughput performance. However, for a communications system with a high data rate and a long round-trip delay, N may become very large. As aresult, (1 - Pc)N becomes significantlylarge, especially when thechannelbiterrorrate E ishigh. This

would the make throughput performance of GBN ARQ inadequate. For example,considerasatellitecommunications system with a data rate of 1 M b l s andaround-trip delay of 700 ms. If we choose n = 10000 bits, then N = 70. For E = lb4,we have PC = 0.886 and (1 - Pc)N 8. This gives a thro,ughput of less than 10% of the code rate k / n . Figure 4 shows how vGBNvaries with bit error rate E for various values of code block length n. Throughput values are computed for two values of round-trip delay, namely 30 ms, such as might be the case for a long terrestrial line, and 700 ms, which is typical for a satellite channel. In both cases, the bit rate is 64 kb/s. Each code block is assumed to contain 32 bits ofoverhead, including parity and control bits. We see that, for such a low data rate, the GBN ARQ system does provide satisfactory throughput performance when the round-tripdelayisnot too large,suchas inaterrestrial system. For a satellite system, however, throughput the becomes very low for a bit error rate of t > Now consider a selective-repeat (SR) ARQ system for which the receiver has an infinite buffer to store the errorfreecodewords when a received word is detected in error. We will call such a system an ideal SR ARQ system. For a codeword to be successfully accepted bythereceiver,the average number of transmissions needed is

r,,

1 . PC

+ 2 . P,(1

- PC)+ 3 . Pc(l - Pc)2 f . . .

+ P . Pc(l - Pc)Q-' + . .
- -1 PC
'

Hence, the throughput of an ideal SR ARQ system is

We see that the throughput does not depend on the roundtrip delay. As a result, SR ARQ offers significant benefits for satelliteandlongterrestrialchannels.Figure 5 presentsa comparison of ideal SR and GBN ARQ's for a satellite channel with a data rate of 1.5 M b / s and a round-trip delay of 700

ms. Wesee that SR ARQ significantly outperforms GBNARQ, and provides acceptable throughput even at a bit error rate of = 10-4. The high throughput performance of ideal SR ARQ is achieved at the expense of extensive buffering (theoretically infinite buffering) and more complex logic at both transmitter and receiver. If a finite buffer is used at the receiver (as is thecase inpracticalsystems),bufferoverflowmayoccur which reduces thethroughputperformance of the system. However,ifasufficientlylongbufferis usedand if buffer overflowproperly is handled, even with a reduction in throughput, SR ARQ still significantly outperforms the other two ARQ schemes, especiallyforsystemswherethedata rate is high and the round-trip delay is large. There are two methods for handling buffer overflow in an SR ARQ system with a finite receiver buffer: one is to devise retransmissionstrategies so thatbufferoverflowcan be prevented, andtheotheris to deviseamechanismforthe transmitter to detect theoccurrence of areceiverbuffer overflow event so that the lost codewords can be properly retransmitted. The first method is usually simpler, but the second provides better throughput performance. Finite receiver buffer SR ARQ schemes which do not allow buffer overflow are reported in Metzner [23], Miller and Lin [24], and Weldon [25]. These schemes employmixed-mode retransmission strategies. One such scheme is the selectiverepeat plus go-back-N (SR+GBN) ARQ scheme [24]. When the transmitter first receives a NAK for a given codeword (say codeword i ) , it retransmits that codeword and then continues transmitting other new codewords, as in the basic SR mode (see Fig. 6). If another NAK is received codeword for i, indicating that its second transmission attempt was unsuccessful, the transmitter switches to the GBN retransmission mode. That is, it sends no more new codewords but backs up

December 1984-VOl. 22, No. 12 IEEE Communications Magazine

to codeword i and resends thatcodeword andthe N - 1 succeeding codewords that were transmitted the after previous transmission attempt of codeword i (see Fig. 6). The transmitter in staysthe GBN mode until codeword i is positivelyacknowledged. At the receiver, whenthesecond transmission attempt of codeword i is detected in error, the subsequent N - 1 received words are discarded, regardless of whether they were received error-free or not. This scheme achievessuperiorthroughputperformance comparedwith GBN ARQ, because of the benefits gained fromthe use of the SR mode forthefirstretransmission attempt. The use of thesecondary mode (GBN) guarantees that buffer overflows cannot occur at the receiveras long as a buffer is provided for storing N codewords. The scheme can have an even higher throughput if more buffer storage is provided at the receiver, and the transmitter is designed to permitmorethan one retransmissionattemptforagiven NAKed codewordinthe SR mode beforeswitching to the GBN mode. If v retransmissions in the SR mode are allowed before transmitter the switchesthe to GBN mode, the receiver buffer must be able to store Y (N - 1) 1 codewords to prevent buffer overflow. The throughput for Y retransmissions in the SR mode is given by

transmit other codewords waiting in the transmitter buffer in sequence from where it left off. The number 91 can be chosen to provide maximum throughput for a given error rate and delay.Typically, 91 = 3 provides,goodresults. If all q1 retransmissions of a codeword are received with detectable errors,thenthetransmitterreverts to the GBN mode. For Q I = 1, Weldons scheme becomes SR+GBN ARQ with Y = 1. Actually, Weldonsscheme isaclevercombination of the SR+GBN and SR+ST ARQ schemes. It can be generalized to have multilevel repetitions of a NAKed codeword before the transmitterswitches to the GBN mode. As thenumber of levels increases, the throughput performance approaches the ideal case, and of course the size of the receiver buffer also increases. Weldons scheme provides higher throughput than the SR+GBN ARQ scheme for high error very bit rates. However, it is also more complex. A selective-repeat ARQ scheme with a finite receiver buffer which allows buffer overflow has recently been reported by

Figure 7 showshowthethroughput of the SR+GBN ARQ scheme varies with bit error rate for several values Y . As v of increases, throughput the performance of the SR+GBN approaches the ideal case. Another mixed-mode scheme is called the selective-repeat plus stutter (SR-tST) ARQ scheme [24]. This is the same as the SR+GBN scheme except that, instead of using the GBN mode after v retransmission attempts of a given NAKed codeword, the transmitter switches to the ST mode in which it repeatedly retransmits that codeword until it receives an ACK.TheSR+STARQ scheme issimplerbut less efficient than the SR+GBNARQ scheme. Avariation of theabovemixed-mode ARQ scheme was suggested by Weldon [25]. When the transmitter is in the SR mode following receipt the of a NAK, it retransmits the NAKed codeword 91 times (stuttering). Then it proceeds to
December 1 9 8 4 - V O I . 22, NO. 12 IEEE Communications Magazine

10

Yu and Lin [26]. In this scheme, a mechanism is devised for the transmitter to detect the occurrence of a receiver buffer overflow event so that the lost words can be properly retransmitted. This scheme provides better throughput performancethanthemixed-mode schemes for high bit error rates; however, it is more complicated to implement.

Hybrid ARQ Error-Control Schemes Drawbacks of the ARQ and FEC schemes can be overcome if the two basicerror-control schemes areproperlycombined. Such acombination of thetwobasicerror-control schemes is referred to as hybrid ARQ [3, 19, 28,291. A hybrid ARQ system consists of an FEC subsystem contained in an ARQ system. The function of the FEC system is to reduce the frequency of retransmission by correcting the error patterns which occur frequently. most This increases the system throughput performance. However, when a less-frequent error pattern occurs and is detected, the receiver requests a retransmissionratherthanpassing the unreliably decoded message to the user. This increases the system reliability. A s aresult,apropercombination of FEC and ARQ provides higher reliability an than FEC system alone and higher throughput than a system with ARQ alone. Hybrid ARQ schemes can be classified into two categories, namely type-l and type-I1 schemes [3, 291. A straightforward type-l hybrid ARQ scheme uses a code which is designed for simultaneouserrordetectionandcorrection [l-51. When a received word is detected in error, the receiver first attempts to correct the errors. If the number of errors (or the length of an error is burst) within the designed error-correcting capability of the code, the errors will be corrected and the decoded message will be delivered to the user or saved in thebufferuntil it isready to be passed to the user. If an uncorrectable error pattern is detected,the receiver rejects the received and word requests retransmission. a The retransmissionisthe same codeword. When the retransmitted codeword is received, the receiver again attempts to correct the errors (if any). If the decoding is not successful, the receiveragainrejectsthe received word andrequests another retransmission. This continues until the codeword is eithersuccessfullyreceivedorsuccessfully decoded. Error correction may be included in any type of ARQ scheme. Since a code is used for both error correction and detection in a type-l hybrid ARQ system, it requires more parity-check bits thanacode used onlyforerrordetectioninapure ARQ system. As a result, the overhead for each transmission is increased. When the channel error rate is low, a type-l hybrid ARQ systemhaslowerthroughputthanitscorresponding ARQ system. However, when the channel error rate is high, a type-l hybrid ARQ system provides higher throughput than its corresponding ARQ system, because its error-correction capability reduces theretransmissionfrequency, as illustrated in Fig. 8. Type-l hybrid ARQ schemes are best suited for communications systems in which a fairly constant level of noise and interference anticipated the is on channel. this In case, enough error correction can be designed into the system to correct the vast majority of received words, thereby greatly reducing the number of retransmissions and enhancing the system performance. However, for a nonstationary channel where the bit error rate changes, a type-l hybridARQ scheme has some drawbacks. When the channel bit error rate is low (for example, a satellite channelgood in weather), the transmission is smooth andno (or little) error correction is needed. A aresult, the extraparity-checkbitsforerror s correction included in each transmission represent a waste. When the channel noisy, very the is designed errorcorrectingcapabilitymay become inadequate. As aresult, the frequency of retransmission increases and hence reduces

Linear Block Codesfor Error Detection The reliability of an A R Q system depends on the choice of the used code for detection. error If the code for error detection is properly chosen, the probability that the receiver commits a decoding error can be very small. Consider error detection linear with block codes on a random error channel with bit error rate Korzhik [6] proved that there exist (n,k) linear codes with probability Pe of an undetected error satisfying the bound Pe 52-("-k' (1
-

(1 - t ) k )

(8)

for all n and k and all t , 0 I 1/2. He proved this result by t 5 averaging Pe over all the systematic (n,k) linear block codes. It is an existence proof and no method has been found for constructing codes to satisfy bound by the given (8). However,afewsmall classes of known codeshave been proved to satisfy a weaker bound,
p, 5 2-Wi

(9)

for 0 5 t 5 1/2. These are the linear perfect codes (such as Hamming codes and the (23,12) Golay code), their dual codes,and thedistance4primitive BCH codes [8, 91. If a code satisfying the bound of (9) is used for error detection in an ARQ system,the P(E) of thesystemcan be made very small by using a moderate number of parity bits, say 32. Recently, Kasami,Klove,andLin [13, 141 consideredthe ensemble of alleven-weight (n,k) linear codes andproved that there exist codes with Pe satisfying the following bound,

P, 52-("-k' { 1

+ (1 - 24" - 2(1 y )
-

(10)

for 0 i e 5 1/2. This bound is tighter than.the bounds given by (8) and (9). They also established sufficient conditio,ns for codes to satisfy bound. their Based on the sufficient conditions, they were able to prove that the following classes of codes satisfy the bound given by (10): 1) distance-8 (24, 12) Golay code; 2) distance-4 Hamming codes of lengths 2" - 1 and 2m; 3) distance-6 primitive BCH codesof length 2m - 1 with m L 5 ( X 1 is a factor of the generator polynomial); 4) distance-6 extended primitive BCH codes of length 2"; 5) distance-8 primitive BCH codes of length 2" - 1 with m odd and m L 5; 6) distance-8 extended primitive BCH codes of length 2m with m odd and m 1 5 .

Of course, these classes of codes alsosatisfythebounds given by (8) and (9), and they are good for error detection. For example,the CCITT recommendation X.25 forpacketswitched data networks [27] adoptsadistance-4Hamming code with 16 paritybitsforerrordetection. The natural length of this code is 32767 bits long. In practice, the length of a data packet is no more than a few thousand bits long, which is much shorter than the natural length of the code. Consequently, a shortened version of the code is used.

11

December 1 9 8 4 - V O 1 . 2 2 , No. 12 IEEE Communications Magazine

thethroughput.Severaltype-lhybrid ARQ schemes using either block or convolutional codes have been proposed and analyzed [28, 30-361. For achannelwithanonstationarybiterrorrate, one would like to design an adaptive hybrid ARQ system. When the channel is quiet, the system behaves just like a pure ARQ system, with only parity-check bits for error detection being included in each transmission. Therefore, the throughput performanceisthe same as that of apure ARQ system. However, when channel the becomes noisy,extraparitycheck bits are needed. This concept forms the basis of the type-ll hybrid ARQ schemes. A message in its first transmission is coded with parity-check bits for error detection only, asinapure ARQ scheme. When thereceiverdetectsthe presence of errors in a received word, it saves the erroneous word in a buffer, and at the same time requests a retransmission. The retransmission is not the original codeword but ablock of parity-check bits which is formed based onthe original message and an error-correcting 'code. When this block of parity-check bits is received, it is used to correct the errors in the erroneous word stored in the receiver buffer. If errorcorrectionisnotsuccessful,thereceiverrequestsa second retransmission of the NAK'ed word. The second retransmissionmay be eitherarepetition of theoriginal codeword or another block of parity-check bits. This depends on retransmission the strategy the and type of errorcorrecting code to be used. The concept of parity retransmission for error correction wasfirstintroducedbyMandelbaum [37]. The first type-ll hybrid ARQ using parity-retransmission a strategy was proposedbyMetzner [38, 391. Metzner's scheme waslater extended andmodifiedbymanyothers [29, 40-491. Among all the type-ll hybrid ARQ schemes that have been reported, the scheme proposed by Lin and Yu [29] is the most analyzed and forms the basis for the schemes reported in [41-491. The Lin-Yu scheme provides both high system reliability and high throughput performance. WithLin-Yu'stype-llhybrid ARQ scheme, two codes are used; one is a high rate (n,k) code Co which is designed for errordetectiononly, and the other is a half-rate invertible ( 2 k , k ) code C1 whichisdesignedforsimultaneouserror
December 1984-Vol. 22, No. 1 2 IEEE Communications Magazine

correction and error detection [l-51, for instance, Correcting t or fewer errors and simultaneously detecting d (d > t) or fewer errors. A (2k,k) code is said to be invertible if, knowing only the k parity-check bits of a codeword, correthe sponding k information bits can be uniquely determined by aninversionoperation [3, 291. That istosay,theparitycheck section contains the same amount of information as the message section. When a message D of k informationbitsisreadyfor transmission, it is encoded into a codeword (D,Q) of n bits basedonthe error-detecting code CO,where Q denotes the n-k parity-check bits. The codeword (D,Q) is then transmitted. Atthe same time,thetransmittercomputesthe k paritycheck bits, denoted P(D), based onthe message D andthe half invertible rate (2k,k) code C1. Thus, (D,P(D)) is a codeword in CI. k-bit parity block P(D) is not transmitted The but stored in the retransmission buffer of the transmitter for later use. Let (b.0) denote the received corresponding word to (D,Q). When isreceived,thereceivercomputesthe syndrome of (0.4) basedon CO. If thesyndromeiszero, then b is assumed to be error free and will be accepted by thereceiver. If thesyndromeisnonzero,the presenceof errors in (b,d)is detected. The erroneous message b is then saved in the receiver buffer, a and NAK is sent to the transmitter.Uponreceivingthis NAK, thetransmitter encodes the k-bit parity block P(D) into a codeword (P(D),Q(')) of n bitsbasedontheerror-detecting code CO, where Q(') denotes the n-k parity-check digits for P(D). Then the parity word (P(D),Q(')) is transmitted. Let ( P ( D ) , @ l ) ) denote the received word correspondingto ( P ( D ) , Q ( l ) )When ( P ( D ) , @ l ) ) is , received, syndrome computed its is based on CO. If the syndrome is zero, then P(D) is assumed to be error free and themessage D isrecoveredfrom P(D) byinversion. If the syndrome is nonzero, then P(D) and the erroneous message b (stored in the receiver buffer) together are used for error correctionbasedonthehalf-ratecode CI.If the errors in (b,p(D)) form a correctable pattern, will error they be corrected. The decoded message D is then accepted by the receiver and an ACK is sent to the transmitter. If the errors in (b,P(D)) form a detectable but noncorrectable error pattern, then is discarded, the erroneous parity block P(D) is stored in the receiver buffer, and a NAK is sent to the transmitter. Upon receivingthe second NAK forthe message D, the transmitter resends codeword the (D,Q). When (b,a) is received, its syndrome is again computed based on CO. the If syndromeiszero, b isassumed to be errorfree and_ is accepted by the receiver, and the erroneous parity blockP(D) is then discarded. If the s ndrome is nonzero, then D and the (0) (stored in the receiverbuffer) erroneous parity block If together are used for error correctio_n based on CI. elror P(D) isdiscarded, D is correctionisnotsuccessful,then stored the in receiver buffer, a and NAK is sent to the transmitter. The next retransmission will be the parity word (P(D).Qfl)). Therefore, the retransmissionsalternate are repetitions of the parity word (P(D),Q")) and the information_ codeword (D,Q). The receiver stgres the received message D and the received parity block P(D) alternately. The retransmissions continue until themessage D is finally recovered either by inversion or by decoding. The throughput behavior of the above type-ll hybridARQ scheme in the selective-repeat mode is illustrated in Fig. 8. The alternateparity-dataretransmissionstrategycan be incorporated any with of the basic three types of ARQ schemes and their variations. It is particularly effective when

@.a)

12

it is used in conjunction with SR ARQ. Type-ll SR hybrid ARQ schemes using the parity-data transmission strategy and a finite receiver buffer have been proposedandanalyzedby Lin and Yu [29] and Wang and Lin [43]. Lin and Yu showed that, even with a receiver buffer of size N , their type-ll SR hybrid ARQ scheme achieve same can the throughput performance as the ideal SR ARQ with an infinite receiver buffer, usinghalf-rate by a invertible code C1 which is designed for correcting only a few errors, say t = 4 or 5. If C is designed to correct more than 5 errors,theirscheme 1 can provide much higher throughput than the ideal SR ARQ with an infinite receiver buffer, as shown in Fig. 9. We see that there is a substantial trade-off between a small amount of error correction and a large amount of buffer storage. For largervalues of t, the throughputcurveswillfollow the general characteristic for the type-ll hybrid ARQ illustrated in Fig. 8. Linand Yu alsoshowedthattheirhybridscheme provides the same order of reliability as a pure ARQ scheme. The decoding complexity for the type-ll hybrid ARQ scheme usingalternateparity-dataretransmissionandahalf-rate invertible is slightly code only greater that than of a corresponding type-l hybrid ARQ scheme with .the same designed error-correcting capability. The extra circuits needed are an inversion circuit basedthe on half-rate invertible code C1, which is simply a linear sequential circuit, andanerror-detectioncircuitbased on the error-detecting code CO.

Type-ll Hybrid ARO Schemes Using Convolutional Codes

The alternate parity-data retransmission type-ll hybrid ARQ schemecan be incorporated with a rate-112 convolutional codeusingeitherViterbiormajority-logic decoding [44, 45,47-49].The error-detectingcode CO is still an (n,k) block code. However, the error-correcting code C1 is a halfrate (2,l,m) convolutional code with memory order m [3]. In the following, we will describe a scheme Viterbi using decoding. Let G1(X) and G2(X) be the two generator polynomials of the half-rate convolutional code C1. When a data sequence of k bits is ready for transmission, it is first encodedintoa codeword /(X) in Co. The information sequence /(X) is then transformed into two sequences, P1(X) = I(X)G1(X) and Pz(X) = /(X)G2(X), each n+m bits long. Note that the2.(n+m)-bit sequence obtained by interleaving PI (X) and &(X) is a code sequence for /(X) based on the half-rate convolutional code C1.The sequence Pl(X) = I(%)Gl(X) is then transmitted to the receiver and the sequence P2(%) is stored in the transmitter buffer for possible retransmission at a later time. Let Pl(X) denote the received sequence corresponding to Pl(X). When /?(X) is received, it is divided byGI(%). Let ~ L ( X and fi$t) be ) the quotient and remainder, respectively. If R1(X) = 0, /1(X) is checked onerror-detecting based the code CO. If its syndrome S l ( X ) is zero, r l ( X ) is assumed to be error-free and identical to the transmitted information sequence /(X). The receiver then accepts r1(X) (with n-k parity bits deleted).If &(X) # 0 or S1(X) # 0, errors are detected in Pt(X). Pl(X) is then saved in the receiver buffer for reprocessing at a later time. A t the time, same the receiver sends a NAK to the transmitter. Upon receiving this NAK, the transmitter sends the sequence PZ(X) = /(%)G2(X) to the receiver (first retransmission for /(X)). Let &(X) be the received sequence

corresponding to P2(X). When A(%) is received, it is divided by G2(X). Let T2(X) and &(10 be the quotient and remainder, respectively. If /%(X) = 0, /z(X) is then checked based on the error-detecting code Co. If its syndrome &(X) is zero, then rz(X) is assumed to be e u o r free identical and to the transmitted sequence /(X). In this case, the receiver accepts h ( X ) and discards the sequence A(%). If /%(X) # 0 or SdX) # 0, then &(X) togetherwith Pl(X) (whichisstoredin the receiverbuffer)arethendecodedbased on thehalf-rate convolutional code CI using a Viterbi decoder. Let T*(X) be thedecodedsequence. p(X) isthencheckedbased on the error-detecting code CO. Ifthe syndrome Sf%) is zero,then the receiver accepts p(X).If its syndrome S(X) is not zero, then A ( X ) is discarded, &(X) is stored in the receiver buffer, and the receiver sends another NAK to the transmitter. The next retransmission .will be PI(%). The alternate retransmissionsof &(X) and P2(X) continueuntil /(X) isfinally recovered. For receiver buffer size N, the throughput efficiencies of the above hybrid ARQ scheme for block length n = 1024 and various memory orders m are shown in Fig. 10. We see that the scheme offers significantly better throughput performance than pure SR ARQ with infinite receiver buffers when the channel bit error rate is high. One disadvantage of the above scheme the is that throughput efficiency drops rapidly to 0.5 when the channel is noisy enough to require retransmissions. A refinement of the above scheme, first introduced by Lugand and Costello [45], uses higher-rate convolutional codes to achieve a higher throughput when the channel is noisy, at a cost of some increased receiver complexity.

13

December 1984-Vol. 22, No. 12 IEEE Communications Magazine

error-detecting code CO. If bothsyndromesare zero, the receiver accepts I*(%) and J*(%). If both syndromes are nonzero, &(X) is discarded, &(X) and &(X) are stored, and the receiver sends a NAK3 message to the transmitter. This instructs the transmitter to resend PI(%). Retransmissions of Pl(X), &(X), and P3(X) continue until both /(X) and ,/(X) are finally recovered. If only one syndrome is zero, several options are available. These include subtracting the effect of the decoded sequence from A(%), and then trying to decode the other sequence based on one of the half-rate codes CI or CE. A full discussion and analysis ofthese options can be found in [49]. Although the above scheme requires complex a more retransmissionprotocol,amorecomplex decoder (for the same undetectederrorprobability),andalongerreceiver bufferthanthehalf-rate scheme, itsthroughputefficiency drops to only 0.66 when the channel becomes noisy enough to requireretransmissions.Asimilar scheme usingthreefourths-rate convolutional codes maintains a throughput efficiency of at least 0.75 [49]. The throughput efficiencies of the three schemes discussed,allusingamemoryorder3 code, are compared in Fig. 11. In the Lugand-Costello scheme, the error-detecting code CO isstillan (n,k) block code. However,theerror-correcting code isa (3,2,rn) convolutional code [3], denoted C3 with generator matrix G(X) = Type-l Hybrid ARO SchemesUsingConvolutional Codes

pr

61 ( 8 3

GE( x ) 6 2 (X) 3

After a data sequence of k bits is encoded into a codeword /(X) in Co,/(X) is transformed into two sequences PI(%) = I(X)Gl(X) and P31(X) = /(%)G31(%). Note thatthe sequence obtained interleaving by Pl(X) and is code sequence a for /(X) based onthehalf-rateconvolutional code CI with generator polynomials G1(X) and G31 (X). The sequence PI (X) is then transmitted to the receiver, while P31(X) is stored in the transmitter buffer for possible use at a later time. When ?I(%) is received, the same procedure is followed as in the half-ratecase. If errorsare detected in h ( X ) , then A ( X ) is saved in the receiver buffer, and the receiver sends a NAKl message to the transmitter. Upon receiving a NAKl message, the transmitter switches to transforming codewords J(X) in CO intothetwo sequences &(X) = J(X)Gz(X) and P32 = J(X)G32(X). These sequences, when interleaved, form a code sequence for J(X) based on the half-rate convolutional code C2 with generator polynomials G2(X) and &(X). The sequence P2(X) istransmitted to thereceiver,and &(X) is stored in the transmitter buffer. When &(X) is received, the same procedure is again followed. If errors are detected in h ( X ) , a NAK2 message is sent to the transmitter and &(X) is stored. Upon receivinga NAK2, thetransmitter sends the sequence P d X ) =. P31(X) P3E(X) = /(%)G31(%) J(X)G32(X) to the receiver (the first retransmission for both /(X) and J(X)). Note that the sequence obtained by interleaving &(X), Pz(X), and &(X) is a code sequence for /(X) and J(X) based on the two-thirds-rate convolutional code C3. When &(X) is received,then &(X) togetherwith &(X) and &(X) (whichare stored in the receiver buffer) are decoded based on the code C3 using a Viterbi decoder. Let T*(X) and p(X)be the decoded sequences. 'They then checked are both based on the

On channels fairly where constant level a noise is anticipated, type-l hybrid ARQ schemes can offer a throughput advantage over type-ll schemes (see Fig. 8).as well as a simpler protocol. Type-l schemes using convolutional codes have been proposedbyseveralauthors [33, 34, 50-521. In thissection, we will review two recent type-l schemes for use inpacket-switchingnetworks [34, 521. Both of these make use of convolutional codes withsequentialdecoding [2, 3,51. In conventional sequential decoding of convolutional codes, decoding proceeds the until received message is completely decoded or an erasure is declared. Erasures are normally declared when decoding time becomes excessive.

December 1984-Vol.

22, 1 No. 2 IEEE Communications Magazine

14

In type-I hybrid ARQ sequential decoding, time-out this condition can be used as a signal to request a retransmission. Assume that a data sequence /(X), ready for transmission, is encoded into codeword a V(X) in an (n,k,m) convolutional code CI.V(X) isthentransmittedoverthe channel,andthereceived sequence P(X) is decoded bya sequential decoder. If decoding is completed within the timeout limit,the decoded sequence P(X) is accepted by the receiver.Otherwise,aretransmissionisrequested.Thisis called t h e time-out algorithm (TOA) [52].The time required to decode providesanaturalerror-detectingmechanismwith sequential decoding. When the received sequence is not very noisy, is it decoded quickly, and no retransmission is necessary. When thereceived sequence isnoisy,however, decoding takes a longer time due to the tree-searching rules of the decoder. If the time-out is limit exceeded, a retransmission is requested. Since each decoded branch in the code results in k data bits being delivered to the user, the throughput efficiency of the TOA assuming an ideal SR protocol is defined as

where CA is the average number of computations the decoder performs per decoded branch, including retransmissions. In thenoiselesscase, Ca = 1 and qToA= k / n , thecode rate. Note that, since the number of computations performed by a sequential decoder is a random variable which depends on the noisiness of the received sequence, CA must be computed as a statistical average. The existence of the optimum timeout limit which minimizes CA and hence maximizes TOA has been shown analytically, and has also been verified by computer simulations [34].When the optimum time-out limit is used, CA increases slightly increasing only with code memory order m. Since theundetectederrorprobability Pe is exponentially an decreasing function of m [34], large memory orders can be used to achieve extremely small undetected error probabilities without reducing the throughput. A more sophisticated approach to detecting errors can be used to further improve the throughput efficiency. The metric of the best path in a sequential decoder is monitored. When theslope of this metric becomes too negative, that is, the metric of the best path is decreasing too rapidly, decoding stops and a retransmission is requested. As in the TOA, the metric of thebestpathprovidesanaturalerror-detecting capability.If the received sequence isnotverynoisy,the metric along the best path will tend to increase at a fairly uniformrate,withonlyoccasionaldips. The slope of this metric,averagedoveranappropriatenumber of branches, will then remain positive. However, if the received sequence isnoisy,the decoder may follow an incorrect path whose metric declines several over branches. The slope of the metric will then turn negative, and may exceed a threshold, thereby triggering a retransmission request. This is called the slope control algorithm (SCA) [34].The advantage the of SCA is it recognizenoisy thatcan a received sequence as soon as erroneous bits are processed .by the decoder, rather than waiting for the time-out limit to be exceeded. This reduces C A , and hence increases throughput efficiency,compared to the TOA. The existence of an optimum thresholdthe of metric, on slope the which minimizes CA and hence maximizes the throughput efficiency SCA of the SCA, has been shown analytically and verified by

computer simulation [34].Figure 12 compares the throughput efficiency of the TOA and SCA, both operating under optimumconditions,overarangeofbit-errorratescorrespondingtoaverynoisychannel. The code used in the comparison was a (2,1,11) convolutional code with optimum distance properties for sequential decoding. Clearly, the SCA hasasmaller Ca, and hence a larger throughput, than the TOA. Therefore, the SCA provides a very efficient means of obtaininghigh a throughput and a low undetected error probability on noisy channels with relatively constant error statistics.

References
[l] R. Berklekamp, Algebraic Coding Theory, New York: McGrawE. Hill, 1968. [2] G. C. Clark, Jr., and J. B. Cain, Coding for Error Control, New Jersey: Plenum, 1981. Coding: Funda[3] S. Linand 0. J. Costello, Jr.. Error Control mentals and Applications, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1983. [4] F. J. MacWilliams, and N. J. A. Sloane, Theory of ErrorCorrecting Codes, Amsterdam: North Holland, 1977. [5] W. W. Petersonand E. J. Weldon, Jr.,.rror-Correcting Codes, 2nded., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1972. "Bounds on undetected probability error and [6] V. I. Korzhik, optimum group codes in a channel feedback," with Radiotecknika, no. 20, vol. 1, pp. 27-33, 1965. (Englishtranslation: Telecommun. and Radio ng., vol. 2, pp. 87-92, Jan. 1965.) "Bounds the on probability of undetected [7] V. I. Levenshtein, error," Problemy Perdachi Informatsii, vol. 13, no. 1 , pp. 3-18, 1977. (Englishtranslation: ProblemofInformationTransmission, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 1978.) M. E. Hellman, "Concerning a [8] S. K. Leung-Yan-Cheong and bound undetected probability." on error I Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-22, no. 2, pp. 235-237, March 1976. [9] S. K. Leung-Yan-Cheong, E. R. Barnes, and 0. U. Friedman, "Some properties of undetected error probability of linear codes," /E Trans. lnform. Theory. IT-25, no. 1, pp. 110-112, Jan. 1979.

15

December 1 9 8 4 - V O l . 22, No. 12 WEE Communications Magazine

[ ] Massey, Coding techniques for digital data networks, Proc. I J. O Conf. Inform.Theory and Syst., vol. 65, Berlin, Germany: NTG-Fachberichte, Sept. 18-20,1978. [ I l l J. K. Wolf, A. M. Michelson, and A. H. Levesque, On the probability of undetectederrorforlinearblock codes, I Trans. Commun.. COM-30, no. 2, pp. 317-324,Feb.1982. and J. K. Wolf, Data transmission using error [I21 R. Padovani detectioncodes, GLOBECOM 82 Conf. Rec., C6.2, Miami, FL, Nov. 29-Dec.2,1982. S. Lin, On the probability of [I31 T. Kasami, T. Klove, and undetectederror of linearblock codes, GLOBECOM 82, Conf. Rec., E7.4, Miami, FL, Nov. 29-Dec. 2, 1982. Error detection withlinear [I41 T. Kasami, T. Klove,and S. Lin, block codes, /E Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-29, no. 1, pp. 131-136, Jan. 1983. [I51 T. Fujiwara, A. Kitai, S. Yamamura, T. Kasami, and S. Lin, On the probability of undetected for error shortened cyclic Hamming codes, Proc. Fifth Conf. Inform. Theory and Its Application, Hachimantal, Japan, Oct. 1982. [I61 J. J. Metznerand K. C. Morgan, Coded feedback communication systems, Proc. Nat. Nectron. Conf., Chicago, 11, 1960. [17] B.Reiffen, W. G. Schmidt, and H.L. Yudkin, The design of an error-free transmission data system telephone for circuits, AI Trans. Commun. Nectron., vol. 80, pp. 224-231,1961. [18] W. R. Cowell and H. 0. Burton, Computer simulation of the use of a group code with retransmission on a Gilbert burst channel, A/ Trans. Commun. Nectron., pt. 1. pp. 577-580, Jan. 1962. [I91 R. J. Benice and A.H. Frey, Jr., An analysis of retransmission systems,. I Trans. Commun. Syst., CS-12, pp. 135-144, 1964. [20] J. J. Metzner and K. C. Morgan, Word Selection Procedures for Error-Free Communication Systems, New York University, New York, 2nd Sci. Rep., Contract AF 19 (628)-4321, June 19651 H. 0. Burton and D. D. Sullivan, Errors and error control, Proc. I, vol. 60, no. 11, pp. 1293-1310, Nov. 1972. General Information: Binary Synchronous Communication, IBM Publication GA27-3004, White Plains, NY: IBM Corp., 1969. J. J. Metzner, A study of an efficient retransmission strategy for data links. NTC77 Conf. Rec., pp. 3B:1-1-36:1-5. M. J. Miller and S. Lin, The analysis of some selective-repeat ARQ schemes with finite receiver buffer, /E Trans. Commun., COM-29, pp. 1307-1315, Sept. 1981. E. J. Weldon, Jr., An improved selective-repeat ARQ strategy, I Trans. Commun. COM-30. no. 3, pp. 480-486, March 1982. P. S. Yu and S. Lin, An efficient selective-repeat ARQ scheme for satellite channels and its throughput analysis, /E Trans. Commun., COM-29, pp. 353-363, March 1981. CCITT: Recommendation X.25, Interface between data terminal equipment (DTE) and data circuit-terminating equipment (DCE) for terminals operating the in packet mode public on data networks, with Plenary Assembly, Doc. No. 7, Geneva, 1980. L. An of the E. Y. Rocher and R. Pickholtz,analysis effectiveness of hybrid transmission schemes, IBM J. Res. Dev., pp. 426-433, July 1970. [29] S. Lin and P. S. Yu, A hybrid ARQ scheme with parity /E retransmission error for control satellite of channels, Trans. Commun.. COM-30, no. 7, pp. 1701-1719, July 1982. [30] K. Brayer, Error control techniques using binary symbol burst codes, /E Trans. Commun., COM-16. pp. 199-214, April 1968. [31] A. R. K. Sastry,Performance of hybrid error control schemes on satellite channels, /E Trans. Commun., COM-23, pp. 689-694, July 1975. [32] A. R. K. Sastryand L. N. Kanal,Hybriderrorcontrolusing retransmission generalized and burst-trapping codes, I Trans. Commun., COM-24, pp. 385-393, April 1976. [33] H. Yamamoto and K. Itoh, Viterbi decoding algorithm for /E Trans. Inform. convolutional codes with repeat requests, Theory, IT-26, pp. 540-547, Sept. 1980. [34] A. Drukarev and D. J. Costello, Jr., Hybrid ARQ error control

[35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44]

[45]

[46] [47] [48] [49]

[50] [51]

[52]

usingsequentialdecoding, ITrans.Inform.Theory, IT-29, Pp. 521-535, July 1983. A. Drukarev and D. J. Costello, Jr., A comparison of block and convolutional codes in ARQ error control schemes, I Trans. Commun., COM-30, no. 11, pp. 2449-2455, Nov. 1982. C. S. K. Leungand A. Lam,Forwarderrorcorrectionforan ARQ scheme, /E Trans. Commun., COM-29, no. IO, pp. 1514-1519, OCt. 1981. D. M.Mandelbaum,Adaptive-feedbackcoding scheme using incremental redundancy, I Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-20, pp. 388-389, May 1974. J. J. Metzner, Improvements in Block-Retransmission Schemes, presentedat IEEE Int.Symp.Inform.Theory,Ithaca, NY, Oct. 10-14,1977. J. J. Metzner, Improvements in block-retransmission schemes, /E Trans. Commun., COM-27, pp. 525-532,Feb.1979. T. C. Ancheta,ConvolutionalParity Check Automatic Repeat Request,presentedat 1979 IEEE Int.Symp.Inform.Theory, Grignano, Italy, June 25-29, 1979. S. Lin and J. S. Ma, A Hybrid ARQ System Parity with Retransmission for Error Correction, IBM Res. Rep. 7478(32232), Jan. 11,1979. S. Lin and P. S. Yu,SPEC-An Effective Hybrid-ARQ Scheme, IBM Res.Rep. 7591(32852), April 4, 1979. Y.-M. Wang and S. Lin,Amodifiedselective-repeattype-ll hybrid ARQ system and its performance analysis, /E Trans. Commun., COM-31, no. 5, pp. 593-608, May 1983. Y.-M. Wangand S. Lin, A parity-retransmissionhybrid ARQ using a convolutional and code Viterbi decoding error for control, GiOBECOM 82, Conf. Rec., E7.1, Miami, FL, Nov. 29-Dec.2,1982. L. R. Lugandand D. J. Costello, Jr., A comparisonofthree hybrid ARQ schemes using convolutional codes a onnonstationary channel, GLOBECOM 82 Conf. Rec., C8.4, Miami, FL, Nov. 29-Dec.2,1982. R. A. Comroeand D. J.Costello,Jr., ARQ schemes for data transmission in mobile radio systems, I Trans. Commun., COM-32, June 1984. S. Lin. Parity retransmission ARQ using M.Miller J. and convolutional codes, submitted to I Trans. Inform. Theory, 1982. M. J. Miller, ARQ Systems, Ph.D. Dissertation, Electrical Engineering Department, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, 1982. L. R. Lugand, ARQ Schemes UsingConvolutional Codes and Viterbi Decoding Non-Stationary over Channels, Elec. Engr. Dept. Tech. Rept. EE8212-32-02, 111. Inst. of Tech., Chicago, IL, 1982. K. E. Perry and J. M. Wozencraft, SECO: a self-regulating error correctingcoder-decoder, IRE Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-8, pp. 128-135, Sept. 1962. R. J. Fang,Lowerboundsonreliabilityfunctions of variable lengthnonsystematicconvolutionalcodesforchannelswith noiseless feedback, /E Trans. Inform. Theory, IT-17, pp. 161-171, March 1971. R. E. Kahn, S. A. Gronemeyer, J. Burchfiel, and R. C. Kunzelman, Advances in packet radio technology, Proc. I, vol. 66, pp. 1468-1496, NOV.1978.

Shu Lin was born in Nanking, China, on May 20,1937.He received the B.S.E.E. degree from National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, China, in 1959, and the M S . and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering from Rice University,Houston, TX, in 1964 and 1965, respectively. From 1965 to 1981, he waswiththeDepartment of Electrical Engineering,University of Hawaii,Honolulu.In 1982 he joinedthe

December 1984-Vol. 22, No. 1 2 IEEE Communications Magazine

16

Department of Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station. In 1983, he rejoined the University of Hawaii where he is a professor. He spent the 1978-1979 academic asvisiting year a scientist at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY, where he workedonerror-controlprotocolsfordata communications systems. From 1976 to 1978 he served as associate editorfor Algebraic Coding Theory. He has published numerous technicalpapers in IEEE Transactionsandotherrefereedjournals. An lntroduction frror-Correcting to Codes He is author the of (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970). He also coauthored (with D. J. Costello)thebook, Error ControlCoding:fundamentalsand Applications (EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982). Hiscurrent researchinterestsincludechannelcoding,error-controlprotocols, and satellite communications. Dr. Lina ismember of the Board Governors of of the IEEE Information Theory Group, is a member of Sigma Xi, and is a Fellow of the IEEE. Daniel J. Costello, Jr.. was born in Seattle, WA, on August 9,1942. He received the B.S.E.E. degree from Seattle University, Seattle, WA, in 1964, andthe M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in ElectricalEngineering from the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, in 1966 and 1969, respectively. In summer the of 1966, he served an as associate research engineer at the Boeing Aerospace Division, Seattle, WA. In 1969,he joined the faculty of the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, as an assistant professor of Electrical Engineering. He was promoted to associate professor in 1973, and to full professor in 1980. He spent the summer of 1971 as a research associate at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, and was a visiting professor at the University of Notre Dame during the 1983-84 academic year. In addition, he has served as a professional consultant for Western Electric, Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute, Motorola Communications, and Digital Transmission Systems. Dr. Costello has been a Member of the IEEE since 1969, and was electedaSeniorMember in 1978. He belongstotheInformation Theory Group and the Communications Society. Since 1983, he has been a member of the Information Theory Group Board of Governors, BOG. He has and in 1984 was elected second vice-president of the served as an associate editor of Communication Theory for the /E Transactions Communications, on and since 1983 has been an associate editor for Coding Techniques for the /E Transactions on Information Theory. Dr. Costello's research interests are in the area of digital communications, with special emphasis on coding theory, information theory, multiuser systems, communications networks, error control, spread-spectrum and communications. He has authored over 50 technical publications in his field, and in 1983 coauthored (with Shu Lin)atextbookentitled Error ControlCoding:fundamentals and Applications. He has served as principal investigator on twelveresearchgrants,andasanassociateinvestigatorontwo others. He has also supervised ten Ph.D. dissertations at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

At TRW, where our systems engineering capabilities are world renown, we are particularly committed to the design and delivery of major C3 hardware systems. Because of this commitment, we have experienced phenomenal growth, and the demand for highly motivated professionals continues. To meet these demands, we are seeking individuals who have the necessary qualifications and the desire to work in an environment dedicated to reaching the limits of excellence. Our current needs include the following: H HF Design Engineers (Spread Spectrum Techniques) HIW Integration and Test Engineers Communications Systems Engineers Design Engineers (Mobile or Transportable Equipment) ILS EngineerslAnalysts Production Control/ Manufacturing Engineers Commit your expertise to a company committed to the quality of the future. Tommorow is taking shape at a company called TRW. For immediate consideration and more information, send your resume, in confidence to: R. Cunningham, TRW Defense Systems Group, Skyline Four/Suite 444, 5113 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041. Equal opportunity employer. U.S. Citizenship required. Background investigation may be required.
,

Michael J. Miller received the B.E. honors and the graduate Dip.Ed. degrees from the University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia in 1961, and the M.Sc.(Eng.) degree from Queen's University, Kingston, Ont., Canada in 1973. He received the Ph.D. degree from the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, in 1981. He was with the Australian Postmaster General's Department from 1956-1966, initially as a cadet engineer and subsequently as a radio engineer responsibleradio system for relay development and operations.Since 1966, he has been onthefaculty of theSouth Australian Institute of Technology, Adelaide, Australia, where he is currently an associate professor. In 1980 he spent six months as a visiting research colleague at the University of Hawaii. His current research interests are in the fields of error control coding and digital radio transmission. e of Fellowa Dr. Miller is IEE.

A Company Called TRW

17