MIMO Communication Systems

So far in this course

We have considered wireless communications with
only one transmit and receive antenna- SISO
However there are a lot advantages to be had if we
extend that to multiple transmit and multiple
receive antennas

MIMO
MIMO is short for multiple input multiple output
systems
The multiple refers to multiple transmit and
receiver antennas
Allows huge increases in capacity and performance
MIMO became a hot area in 1998 and remains
hot

Motivation
Current wireless systems
Cellular mobile phone systems, WLAN, Bluetooth,
Mobile LEO satellite systems,

Increasing demand
Higher data rate ( > 100Mbps) IEEE802.11n
Higher transmission reliability (comparable to wire
lines)
4G

Physical limitations in wireless systems

Multipath fading
Limited spectrum resources
Limited battery life of mobile devices

Multiple-Antenna Wireless Systems

Time and frequency processing hardly meet
new requirements
Multiple antennas open a new signaling
dimension: space
Create a MIMO channel

Higher transmission rate

Higher link reliability
Wider coverage

General Ideas
Digital transmission over Multi-Input MultiOutput (MIMO) wireless channel
Tx
coding
info. bits
modulation
weighting/mapping

Rx
weighting/demapping
detected bits
demodulation
decoding

Objective: develop Space-Time (ST) techniques

with low error probability, high spectral
efficiency, and low complexity (mutually
conflicting)
4

Possible Gains: Multiplexing

Multiple antennas at both Tx and Rx
Can create multiple parallel channels
Multiplexing order = min(M, N), where M
=Tx, N =Rx
Transmission rate increases linearly
Tx

R
x

Tx
Spatial
Spatial Channel
Channel 1
1
Spatial
Spatial Channel
Channel 2
2
5

R
x

Possible Gains: Diversity

Multiple Tx or multiple Rx or both
Can create multiple independently faded
branches
Diversity order = MN
Link reliability improved exponentially
Tx

R
x

Tx

Rx
Fading
Fading Channel
Channel 1
1
Fading
Fading Channel
Channel 2
2
Fading
Fading Channel
Channel 3
3
Fading
4
Fading Channel
Channel
4
6

Key Notation- Channels

Assumeflatfadingfornow
AllowsMIMOchanneltobewrittenasamatrixH
Tx
R
y1 h11 x1 h12 x2
x
h11
x1
y1
y 2 h21 x1 h22 x2
h12
h21
h11 h12
y2
h22
y Hx H h21 h22
x2
GeneralizetoarbitrarynumberofinputsMandoutputsNso
HbecomesaNxMmatrixofcomplexzeromeanGaussian
randomvariablesofunityvariance
Canunderstandthateachoutputisamixtureofallthe
differentinputsinterference
WeassumeUNCORRELATEDchannelelements7

Key Decomposition- SVD

SVDsingularvaluedecomposition
AllowsHofNxMtobedecomposedintoparallelchannelsas
follows
H

H USV

WhereSisaNxMdiagonalmatrixwithelementsonlyalongthe
diagonalm=nthatarerealandnonnegative
UisaunitaryNxNmatrixandVisaunitaryMxMmatrix
ThesuperscriptHdenotesHermitianandmeanscomplextranspose
AMatrixisUnitaryifAH=A1sothatAHA=I
TherankkofHisthenumberofsingularvalues
Thefirstkleftsingularvectorsformanorthonormalbasisforthe
rangespaceofH
ThelastrightNkrightsingularvectorsofVformanorthogonal
basisforthenullspaceofH
WhatdoesSVDmean?
8

Key Decomposition- SVD

Whatdoesitmean?
ImpliesthatUHHV=Sisadiagonalmatrix
ThereforeifwepreprocessthesignalsbyVatthe
transmitterandthenpostprocessthemwithUHwe
willproduceanequivalentdiagonalmatrix
Thisisachannelwithoutanyinterferenceand
channelgainss11ands22forexample
Tx

R
x

Tx
Spatial
Spatial Channel
Channel 1
1
Spatial
Spatial Channel
Channel 2
2
9

R
x

Key Decomposition- SVD

Whatarethesingularvalues?
Youcanremembereigenvaluesandeigenvectors Ae e
IfAisanysquarematrixthenitcandiagonalizedusing
E1AE=DwhereEisthematrixofeigenvectors
NotewecangenerateasquareMxMmatrixas
HHH=(USVH)H(USVH)=V(SHS)VH
LettingA=HHHsothatE1AE=D=VHHHHV=SHS
AlternativelywecangenerateasquareNxNmatrixas
HHH=(USVH)(USVH)H=UH(SSH)U
Thereforewecanseethatthesquareofthesingular
valuesaretheeigenvaluesofHHH
AlsonotethatVisthematrixofEigenvectorsofHHH
SimilarlyUisthematrixofeigenvectorsofHHH
10

Capacity
ForaSISOchannelcapacityCisgivenby
C log 2 (1 | h |2 ) b/s/Hz

whereistheSNRatareceiverantennaandhisthe
normalizedchannelgain
ForaMIMOchannelwecanmakeuseofSVDto
producemultipleparallelchannelssothat
M min

C log 2 (1
i ) b/s/Hz
M min min( M , N )
M min
1
WherearetheeigenvaluesofW
i

HH H
W H
H H

NM
M N

11

Capacity
WecanalsoalternativelywritetheMIMOcapacity

C log 2 det( I N
HH H )
M

b/s/Hz

ItcanbedemonstratedforRayleighfadingchannelsthatif
N<MthentheaveragecapacitygrowslinearlywithNas
N

C N log 2 1
M

b/s/Hz

Thisisanimpressiveresultbecausenowwecanarbitrarily
increasethecapacityofthewirelesschanneljustbyadding
moreantennaswithnofurtherpowerorspectrumrequired
Inthesecalculationsitisalsoassumedthetransmitterhasno
knowledgeaboutthechannel
12

Note on SNR
ThedefinitionoftheSNRusedpreviouslyissimplythe
receiverSNRateachreceiverantenna
Inthisdefinitionthechannelmustbenormalizedratherthan
betheactualmeasuredchannel
Thisapproachisusedsinceitismoreusualtospecifythings
intermsofreceivedSNR
Howeverincalculationsitisperhapseasiertothinkoftotal
transmitpower,unnormalizedchannelGandthereceived
noisepowerperreceiveantenna,a,socapacitybecomes
P

C log 2 det( I N T GG H )
aM

b/s/Hz
13

Example

14

Example

15

Special Cases
TakeM=NandH=Inandassumenoisehascrosscorrelation
Inthen C N log 2 1 P / N b/s/Hz
LetHij=1sothatthereisonlyonesingularvaluegivenby
NM andassumenoisehascrosscorrelationIn
ThefirstcolumnofUandVis
1
1

1
1

C log 2 1 NP b/s/Hz

N
1N

M
1M

Thus
EachtransmitterissendingapowerP/Mandeachissending
thesamesignalHx
TheseMsignalscoherentlyaddateachreceivertogive
powerP
ThereareNreceiverssothetotalpowerisNP
16

Example
Consider the following six wireless channels
G1 1

1 1
G4

1 1

G 2 1 1

1 0
G5

0 1

1
G3
1

4/3 0
G6
2 / 3
0

Determine the capacity of each of the six channels above,

assuming the transmit power is uniformly distributed over
the transmit antennas and the total transmit power is 1W
while the noise per receive antenna is 0.1W.
Note which channels are SIMO and MISO
17

Example

18

Example

19

Example

20

Capacity
Thesecapacityresultsarehoweverthe
theoreticalbestthatcanbeachieved
Theproblemishowdowecreatereceiversand
transmittersthatcanachieveclosetothese
capacities
Thereareanumberofmethodsthathavebeen
suggested

Zeroforcing
MLD
BLAST
STcoding

21

MIMO Dectection
Consider a MIMO system with M transmit and N
receive antennas (M,N)
where

y Hx n

x is the Mx1 transmit vector with constellation Q

H is a NxM channel matrix
y is Nx1 received vector
n is a Nx1 white Gaussian complex noise vector
Energy per bit per transmit antenna is Eb

Our basic requirement is to be able to detect or receive

our MIMO signals x
22

MIMO MLD
Lets first consider optimum receivers in the sense of
maximum liklihood detection (MLD)
In MLD we wish to maximize the probability of p(y|x)
To calculate p(y|x) we observe that the distribution must
be jointly Gaussian and we can use previous results
from M-ary to write it as
1 | y Hx | 2

p( y | x)
exp
2

N0
(2N 0 ) N

23

MIMO MLD
That is we need to find an x from the set of all
possible transmit vectors that minimizes

| y Hx |

If we have Q-ary modulation and M transmit

antennas then we will have to search through QM
combinations of transmitted signals for each
transmit vector and perform N QM multiplications
Because of the exponent M the complexity can get
quite high and sub-optimal schemes with less
complexity are desired
24

MIMO Zero-Forcing
In zero-forcing we use the idea of minimizing
| y Hx |

However instead of minimizing only over the

constellation points of x we minimize over all possible
complex numbers (this is why it is sub-optimum)
We then quantize the complex number to the nearest
constellation point of x
The solution then becomes a matrix inverse when N=M
and we force | y Hxto|2 zero (zero-forcing)
What about when M does not equal N?
25

Key Theorem- Psuedoinverse

WhenHissquareonewaytofindthetransmittedsymbolsx
fromHx=yisbyusinginverse.
WhathappenswhenHisnotsquare?Needpsuedoinverse
NotethatHHHisasquarematrixwhichhasaninverse
H
1 H
H
1 H
ThereforeHHHx=HHysothat(H
H)
H
Hx=(H
H)
H y
|
andthepsuedoinverseisdefinedasH+=(HHH)1HH
Thepsuedoinverseprovidestheleastsquaresbestfitsolution
totheminimizationof||Hxy||2withrespecttox

26

Example
If we use a zero-forcing receiver in the previous example
what is the receiver processing matrix we need for each of
the 6 channels?
G1- none needed
1
1
1
G2-Inverse not possible- not needed 1 1 1 1


G3- [1,1]
G4- Inverse not possible- just MRC weights
G5 1 0
In

0 1

G6-

4 / 3 0
0 2 / 3

27

Performance analysis of ZF
The zero-forcing estimate of the transmitted
x can be written as:
signal ~
~
x Gy

where G (H H H) 1 H H (with elements g i , j ) is known as the

pseudo-inverse of the channel H and the superscript H
denotes conjugate transpose
Substituting :
~
x x Gn

the ith row element of Gn is equal to a zero mean

Gaussian random variable with variance:
wi | g i1 | 2 | g i 2 | 2 | g iL | 2
28

Performance analysis of ZF
The noise power is scaled by wi which is the
square 2-norm of the ith row of G
The diagonal elements of GG however are the
square 2-norm of the rows of G
In addition we can show that
GG ' (H ' H ) 1 H ' ((H ' H ) 1 H ' )'
(H ' H ) 1 H ' H ((H ' H ) 1 )'
(H ' H ) 1 I (H ' H ) 1

Which is equal to the the diagonal element of (H ' H ) 1

29

Performance analysis of ZF

Since all wi are all identically distributed so we

drop its subscript
w follow the reciprocal of a Chi-Square random
variable with 2(N-M+1) degrees of freedom
The probability density function (PDF) of w
w ( D 2) e 1 / w
f W ( w)
( D 1)! 2( D 1)

w0

where D=N-M
30

Why Chi-Square?
Checkout

H. Winters, J. Salz and R. D. Gitlin, The Impact of antenna Diversity on the

Capacity of Wireless Communication Systems, IEEE Trans. Commun.,
VolCOM-42, pp. 1740-1751, Feb./March/April.
24. J. H. Winters, J. Salz and R. D. Gitlin, The capacity increase of wireless
systems with antenna diversity, in Proc. 1992 Conf, Inform. Science Syst.,
Princeton, NJ, Mar. 18-20, 1992

For a N=M it is easy to show as follows

|
Matrix G, the inverse of H can then be written as

| A11 |

| A12 |

1
|H |

1 N

(1)

| A1N |

(1) N 1 | AN 1 |

| A21 |

(1) j i | A ji |
(1)

N N

| ANN |

WhereAijisthesubmatrixofHwithoutrowiandcolumnj
31

Why Chi-Square?
The square of the 2-norm for the i row of G is therefore equal to
N

((1) j i | A ji |) 2
wi

Noticing that

j 1

|H |

| H |

the jequation
above becomes
i

hij (1)
j 1

for i 1 to N

| A ji |

((1) j i | A ji |) 2

wi

j 1
N

( hij (1) j i | A ji |) 2

for i 1 to N

j 1
Since |Aji| is independent
of hij we can condition on it so the
equationcanbefurthersimplified

Remember hij are random variables (like noise so independent and add up)
32

Why Chi-Square?
The square of the 2-norm for the i row of G is therefore
equal to
N

| (1) j i A ji |2
wi

j 1

| h' | 2

for i 1 to N

(1) j i | A ji |2
2 j 1
N

Where h is a random variable following the same

distribution as hij
Canceling common terms we get
wi

Re( h' ) 2 Im(h' ) 2

2

for i 1 to N

33

Why Chi-Square?
h is a random variable with the same distribution as hij
The weights, w are therefore distributed as the reciprocal
of the sum of the square of two Gaussian random
variables with zero mean and variance /2
That is the weights are distributed as the reciprocal of a
chi-squared random variable with 2 degrees of freedom
This turns out to be the reciprocal of a Rayleigh fading
variable for this special case
|

34

Performance analysis of ZF
To obtain the error probabilities when w is
random, we must average the probability of error
over the probability density function ,

BER Pb f w ( w)dw
0

where Pb is the probability of error in AWGN

channel with depend on the signal constellation.
35

Performance of BPSK and

QPSK
For BPSK and QPSK

Pb Q

2 Eb
wi N 0

Performing the integral and define b 2 Eb / N 0 as the

SNR per bit per channel (see Proakis 4th ed, p825)
1

BER (1 )
2

where

D 1 D

Dk 1

(
1

k 2

k 0

b
1 b
36

Performance of BPSK and

QPSK using ZF
0

10

4-QAM
4-QAM
4-QAM
4-QAM

-1

10

(2,2)
(3,4)
(4,6)
(1,4)

-2

BER

10

-3

10

-4

10

-5

10

-6

10

8
10
12
14
SNR per bit per channel (dB)

16

18

20

Exact BER expression for QPSK compared with Monte

Carlo simulations
37

Performance of M-PSK
For M-PSK:
min( 2 , M / 4 )
2
Pb
Q

max(log 2 M ,2) i 1

BERPSK

2 E b log 2 M
(2i 1)
sin
wi N 0
M

min( 2 , M / 4 )
2
1

(
1

)

i
max(log 2 M ,2) i 1 2

where

D 1 D

Dk

k
k 0

(
1

)
i
2

(log 2 M ) sin 2(i 1) / M b

i
2
1 (log 2 M ) sin 2(i 1) / M b
2

38

Performance of M-QAM
For M-QAM:
4
1
Pb
1

log 2 M
M
BERQAM

4
1

log 2 M
M

where
i

min( 2 , M / 2 )

i 1

min( 2 , M / 2 )

i 1

3E b log 2 M
Q (2i 1)
( M 1) wi N 0

(1 i )
2

D 1 D

Dk

k
k 0

(
1

)
i
2

3(log 2 M )(2i 1) 2 b
2( M 1) 3(log 2 M )(2i 1) 2 b

39

Comparison with simulation (ZF)

0

10

16-PSK (analysis)
16-PSK (simulation)
16-QAM (analysis)
16-QAM (simulation)

-1

10

-2

BER

10

(3,3)

-3

10

(4,6)

-4

10

(8,12)

-5

10

-6

10

8
10
12
14
SNR per bit per channel (dB)

16

18

20

BER approximations for 16-PSK and 16-QAM compared

with Monte Carlo simulations for (3,3), (4,6) and (8,12)
antenna configurations.
40

Comparison with simulation

0

10

64-PSK (analysis)
64-PSK (simulation)
64-QAM (analysis)
64-QAM (simulation)

-1

10

-2

BER

10

-3

10

-4

10

-5

10

-6

10

8
10
12
14
SNR per bit per channel (dB)

16

18

20

BER approximations for 64-PSK and 64-QAM compared

with Monte Carlo simulations for (8,12) antenna
configurations.
41

Performance of MLD
-1

10

zero-forcing
SB-MLD (P=16)
SB-MLD (P=24)
ESS-NMLD (P=16)
ESS-NMLD (P=24)
MLD

-2

10

-3

BER

10

-4

10

-5

10

-6

10

11
13
SNR per receive antenna (dB)

15

17

BER of zero-forcing and MLD for a (4,6) system using 4QAM.

42

Performance of MLD

BER of zero-forcing and MLD for a (3,3) system using 8QAM and 16-QAM.
43

Performance of MLD
0

10

8-QAM zero-forcing
8-QAM ESV-NMLD (P=40)
8-QAM MLD
16-QAM zero-forcing
16-QAM ESV-NMLD (P=300)
16-QAM MLD

-1

10

-2

BER

10

-3

10

-4

10

-5

10

14

16

18

20
22
24
SNR per receive antenna (dB)

26

28

30

BER of zero-forcing and MLD for a (3,3) system using 8QAM and 16-QAM.
44

MIMO V-BLAST
It turns out the performance of ZF is not good enough
while the complexity of MLD is too large
Motivate different sub-optimum approaches
BLAST is one well known on (Bell Laboratories
Layered Space Time)
Based on interference cancellation
A key idea is that when we perform ZF we detect all the
transmitted bit streams at once

45

MIMO V-BLAST
Generally we would expect some of these bit streams to
be of better quality than the others
We select the best bit stream and output its result using
ZF
We then also use it to remove its interference from the
other received signals
We then detect the best of the remaining signals and
continue until all signals are detected
It is a non-linear process because the best signal is
always selected from the current group of signals
46

MIMO V-BLAST
Basically layers of interference cancellation
Stage 1

Stage (M-1 )

Stage M

Linear
Detector

Linear
Detector

Linear
Detector

Interference
Cancellation

Interference
Cancellation

47

Performance of V-BLAST
-1

10

zero-forcing
V-BLAST
ESV-NMLD (P=7)
ESV-NMLD (P=24)
MLD

-2

10

-3

BER

10

-4

10

-5

10

-6

10

11
13
SNR per receive antenna (dB)

15

17

BER of zero-forcing, V-BLAST and MLD for a (4,6)

system using 4-QAM.
48