Linear Mimo Receivers vs. Tree Search Detection: A Performance Comparison Overview

Michalke, Clemens; Zimmermann, Ernesto; Fettweis, Gerhard

doi:10.1109/pimrc.2006.254377

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These BER results confirm the capacity-based observation that there is no universal (i.e., rate-and SNR-independent) demodulator performance ranking. We note that the block error rate results in [51] imply similar conclusions, even though not explicitly mentioned in that paper.…”

Section: Ber Performancesupporting

confidence: 75%

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators Based on Mutual Information

Fertl

Jaldén

Matz³

2012

IEEE Trans. Signal Process.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We provide a comprehensive performance comparison of soft-output and hard-output demodulators in the context of non-iterative multiple-input multiple-output bit-interleaved coded modulation (MIMO-BICM). Coded bit error rate (BER), widely used in literature for demodulator comparison, has the drawback of depending strongly on the error correcting code being used. This motivates us to propose the mutual information of the equivalent modulation channel (comprising modulator, wireless channel, and demodulator) as a code-independent performance measure. We present extensive numerical results for spatially independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) ergodic and quasi-static fading channels under perfect and imperfect channel state information. These results reveal that the performance ranking of MIMO demodulators is rate-dependent and provide new insights regarding MIMO-BICM system design, i.e., the choice of antenna configuration, symbol constellation, and demodulator for a given target rate.Index Terms-Bit-interleaved coded modulation (BICM), loglikelihood ratio, multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO), mutual information, performance limits, soft demodulation.

show abstract

Section: Ber Performancesupporting

confidence: 75%

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators Based on Mutual Information

Fertl

Jaldén

Matz³

2012

IEEE Trans. Signal Process.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These BER results confirm the capacity-based observation that there is no universal (i.e., rate-and SNR-independent) demodulator performance ranking. We note that the block error rate results in [50] imply similar conclusions, even though not explicitly mentioned in that paper.…”

Section: Ber Performancesupporting

confidence: 75%

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators based on System Capacity

Fertl¹,

Jaldén²,

Matz³

2009

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We provide a comprehensive performance comparison of soft-output and hard-output demodulators in the context of non-iterative multiple-input multiple-output bit-interleaved coded modulation (MIMO-BICM). Coded bit error rate (BER), widely used in literature for demodulator comparison, has the drawback of depending strongly on the error correcting code being used. This motivates us to propose a code-independent performance measure in terms of system capacity, i.e., mutual information of the equivalent modulation channel that comprises modulator, wireless channel, and demodulator. We present extensive numerical results for ergodic and quasi-static fading channels under perfect and imperfect channel state information. These results reveal that the performance ranking of MIMO demodulators is rate-dependent. Furthermore, they provide new insights regarding MIMO-BICM system design, i.e., the choice of antenna configuration, symbol constellation, and demodulator for a given target rate.

show abstract

“…Linear algorithms like zero-forcing(ZF) [11], or Minimum Mean Squared Error(MMSE) [11] are low complexity but incur high penalty in BER/FER performance. Non-linear detectors like Successive Interference Cancellation(SIC) [11] are low complexity too, but provide only modest gain over their linear counterparts. Moreover, neither ZF nor SIC based receivers do well in a wireless channel with limited diversity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, neither ZF nor SIC based receivers do well in a wireless channel with limited diversity. Authors in [11,14] provide excellent comparative study of various detectors in different channel conditions. It is clear that more sophisticated algorithms (tree search based) need to be considered for practical systems due their superior BER/FER performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamically reconfigurable soft output MIMO detector

Bhagawat

Dash

Choi

2008

2008 IEEE International Conference on Computer Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-MIMO systems (with multiple transmit and receive antennas) are becoming increasingly popular, and many next-generation systems such as WiMAX, 3-GPP LTE and IEEE802.11n wireless LANs rely on the increased throughput of MIMO systems with up to four antennas at receiver and transmitter. High throughput implementation of the detection unit for MIMO systems is a significant challenge. This challenge becomes still harder, because the above mentioned standards demand support for multiple modulation and coding schemes. This implies that the MIMO detector must be dynamically reconfigurable. Also, to achieve required Bit Error Rate(BER) or Frame Error Rate (FER) performance, the detector has to provide soft values to advanced Forward Error Correction (FEC) schemes like Turbo Codes. This paper presents an ASIC implementation of a novel MIMO detector architecture that is able to reconfigure on the fly and provides soft values as output. The design is implemented in 45nm predictive technology library [16], and has a parallelism factor of four. The detector has many qualities of a systolic architecture and achieves a continuous throughput of 1Gbps for QPSK, 500Mbps for 16-QAM, and 187.5Mbps for 64-QAM. The total area is estimated to be approximately 70KGates equivalent, and power consumption is estimated to be 114mW.

show abstract

Linear Mimo Receivers vs. Tree Search Detection: A Performance Comparison Overview

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators Based on Mutual Information

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators Based on Mutual Information

Performance Assessment of MIMO-BICM Demodulators based on System Capacity

Dynamically reconfigurable soft output MIMO detector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About