An Overview of the ATSC 3.0 Physical Layer Specification

Fay, Luke; Michael, Lachlan; Gómez-Barquero, David; Ammar, Nejib; Caldwell, M. Winston

doi:10.1109/tbc.2015.2505417

Cited by 248 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For the audio, the AC-4 audio codec and the MPEG-H audio system are used [3][4][5], [7][8][9][10][11].…”

Section: A Input Formattingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ATSC 3.0 uses the state-of-the-art technologies to achieve the goal of efficient use of the spectrum such as the LowDensity Parity Check (LDPC) codes along with Bose, RayChaudhuri, and Hocquenghem (BCH) codes, the nonuniform constellations (NUC), and the Layered Division Multiplexing (LDM) that provide a way to transmit different signals, separated by layers, at the same time and frequency [3], [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The system also incorporates the video compression standard H.265, the Dynamic Adaptive Stream over Hypertext Transfer Protocol (DASH) and the MPEG Media Transport (MMT) technologies [3], [4], [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Terrestrial DTV Systems: ISDB-TB and ATSC 3.0

Dionísio

Akamine²

2017

SET IJBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This review discusses the ISDB-TB and ATSC 3.0 systems, comparing the differences between the Input Formatting, passing by video compression, data multiplexing and encapsulation, the Channel coding, Interleavers, Constellation Mappers, Multiplexing methods, Framing, Waveform generation and synchronism. Finally, a performance comparison, using similar parameters, between bitrate and required Carrier-to-Noise ratio is presented. Index Terms-Digital

show abstract

“…For the audio, the AC-4 audio codec and the MPEG-H audio system are used [3][4][5], [7][8][9][10][11].…”

Section: A Input Formattingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Terrestrial DTV Systems: ISDB-TB and ATSC 3.0

Dionísio

Akamine²

2017

SET IJBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The state-of-the-art terrestrial broadcasting standard, ATSC -Third Generation (ATSC 3.0), tries to solve this problem. It focuses on shortening the gap to Shannon limit through more efficient constellations and very-low coding rates, the aggregation of multiple RF channels in which is known as Channel Bonding (CB), or the combined provision of fixed and mobile services, among others [15]. Fig.…”

Section: Next-generation Digital Terrestrial Broadcastingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a drawback, BIL affects the hardware implementation. In this dissertation, a 3-stage BIL is used, which has been defined in ATSC 3.0 [15] and DVB-NGH [14] specifications. This BIL consists of a parity interleaver, a group-wise interleaver and a block interleaver.…”

Section: Bit-interleavingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Uniform Constellations for Next-Generation Digital Terrestrial Broadcast Systems

Muela¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, the digital terrestrial television (DTT) market is characterized by the high capacity needed for high definition TV services, and the limited spectrum available. There is a need for an efficient use of the broadcast spectrum, which requires new technologies to guarantee increased capacities. NonUniform Constellations (NUC) arise as one of the most innovative techniques to approach those requirements. These constellations have been implemented in next-generation broadcast systems such as DVB-NGH (Digital Video Broadcasting -Next Generation Handheld) or ATSC 3.0 (Advanced Television Systems Committee -Third Generation). NUCs reduce the gap between uniform Gray-labelled Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) constellations and the theoretical unconstrained Shannon limit. With these constellations, symbols are optimized in both in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) components by means of signal geometrical shaping, considering a certain signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and channel model.There are two types of NUC, depending on the number of real-valued dimensions considered in the optimization process, i.e. one-dimensional and two dimensional NUCs (1D-NUC and 2D-NUC, respectively). 1D-NUCs maintain the squared shape from QAM, but relaxing the distribution between constellation symbols in a single component, with non-uniform distance between them. These constellations provide better SNR performance than QAM, without any demapping complexity increase. 2D-NUCs also relax the square shape constraint, allowing to optimize the symbol positions in both dimensions, thus achieving higher capacity gains and lower SNR requirements. However, the use of 2D-NUCs implies a higher demapping complexity, since a 2D-demapper is needed, i.e. I and Q components cannot be separated.In this dissertation, NUCs are analyzed from both transmit and receive point of views, using either single-input single-output (SISO) or multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna configurations. In SISO transmissions, 1D-NUCs and 2D-NUCs are optimized for a wide range of SNRs, several channel models and different constellation orders, using the Nelder-Mead optimization 3 ABSTRACT algorithm. The optimization of rotated 2D-NUCs is also investigated, including the rotation angle as an additional variable in the optimization. Even though the demapping complexity is not increased, the SNR gain of these constellations is not significant. The highest rotation gain is obtained for low-order constellations and high SNRs. However, with multi-RF techniques such as Channel Bonding (CB) or Time-Frequency Slicing (TFS), the SNR gain is drastically increased, since I and Q components are transmitted in different RF channels. In this thesis, multi-RF gains of NUCs with and without rotation are provided for some representative scenarios.At the receiver, two different implementation bottlenecks are explored. First, the demapping complexity of all considered constellations is analyzed. Afterwards, two complexity reduction algorithms for 2D-NUCs are proposed. Both algor...

show abstract

3GPP Enhancements for Television Services: LTE‐Based 5G Terrestrial Broadcast

Gómez-Barquero

Giménez

Beutler

2020

Wiley Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The provision of terrestrial broadcast services using 3GPP technologies was enabled for the first time in LTE Advanced Pro Release (Rel‐) 14, in which the evolved Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (eMBMS) technology was enhanced to fulfill a wide set of requirements input by the broadcast industry. During the Enhancements for Television (EnTV) work item in Rel‐14, several modifications were realized affecting system architecture, core, and radio access, which include, an interface to grant control to broadcasters to establish audiovisual services, an application programming interface for developers to simplify access to eMBMS procedures, or a transparent delivery mode with native content formats, among others. At the radio layer, dedicated carriers with 100% broadcast content allocation, and also new OFDM numerologies to support larger intersite distances in Single Frequency Networks (SFNs), were enabled. The most significant change was the so‐called receive‐only mode which enables devices receiving broadcast content without the need for uplink capabilities, SIM cards, or network subscriptions, i.e. free‐to‐air reception.In Rel‐16, 3GPP carried out a study item to evaluate EnTV Rel‐14 against the terrestrial broadcast requirements for 5G defined in 3GPP TR 38.913. Two requirements were detected as not met: the ability to support SFNs with cell radii of up to 100 km and mobile reception with speeds up to 250 km h−1. A Rel‐16 work item standardized further improvements while taking into account practical considerations such as implementation complexity and performance. The improved system is known as LTE‐based 5G Terrestrial Broadcast, and also with the popular name 5G Broadcast.

show abstract

An Overview of the ATSC 3.0 Physical Layer Specification

Cited by 248 publications

References 26 publications

Comparison of Terrestrial DTV Systems: ISDB-TB and ATSC 3.0

Comparison of Terrestrial DTV Systems: ISDB-TB and ATSC 3.0

Non-Uniform Constellations for Next-Generation Digital Terrestrial Broadcast Systems

3GPP Enhancements for Television Services: LTE‐Based 5G Terrestrial Broadcast

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About