Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.comsoc.org/pubs/surveys
18
1553-877X
As in many other coherent digital wireless receivers, channel estimation is also an integral part of the receiver designs
in coherent MIMO-OFDM systems [13]. In wireless systems,
transmitted information reaches to receivers after passing
through a radio channel. For conventional coherent receivers,
the effect of the channel on the transmitted signal must be
estimated to recover the transmitted information [14]. As long
as the receiver accurately estimates how the channel modifies
the transmitted signal, it can recover the transmitted information. Channel estimation can be avoided by using differential
modulation techniques, however, such systems result in low
data rate and there is a penalty for 34 dB SNR [15 19]. In
some cases, channel estimation at user side can be avoided if
the base station performs the channel estimation and sends a
pre-distorted signal [20]. However, for fast varying channels,
the pre-distorted signal might not bear the current channel
distortion, causing system degradation. Hence, systems with a
channel estimation block are needed for the future high data
rate systems.
Channel estimation is a challenging problem in wireless
systems. Unlike other guided media, the radio channel is highly dynamic. The transmitted signal travels to the receiver by
undergoing many detrimental effects that corrupt the signal
CFR
DFT/IDFT
Coefficients
Coefficients
CIR
Tap index
Subcarrier index
n Figure 1. Time and frequency domain channels representation for OFDM based systems.
and often place limitations on the performance of the system.
Transmitted signals are typically reflected and scattered, arriving at receivers along multiple paths. Also, due to the mobility
of transmitters, receivers, or scattering objects, the channel
response can change rapidly over time. Most important of all,
the radio channel is highly random and the statistical characteristics of the channel are environment dependent. Multipath
propagation, mobility, and local scattering cause the signal to
be spread in frequency, time, and angle. These spreads, which
are related to the selectivity of the channel, have significant
implications on the received signal. Channel estimation performance is directly related to these statistics. Different techniques are proposed to exploit these statistics for better
channel estimates. There has been some studies that cover
these estimation techniques, however these are limited to the
comparison of few of the channel estimation techniques
[2124]. This paper focuses on an extensive overview of the
channel estimation techniques commonly applied to OFDM
based multi-carrier wireless systems.
19
Cyclic
prefix
X1
S
/
P
IFFT
Kpoint
Remove
Cyclic prefix
P
/
S
Ant #1
Y1
IFFT
Kpoint
P
/
S
K
Wireless
channel
Data
bits
Ant #1
S
/
P
Deinterleaving,
demodulation,
decoding
Coding,
modulation,
interleaving
Remove
Cyclic prefix
Cyclic
prefix
XNtx
S
/
P
IFFT
Kpoint
P
/
S
Ant #Ntx
Ant #Nrx
S
/
P
IFFT
Kpoint
Output
bits
K
P
/
S
CSI
YNrx
NOTATION
Matrices and the vectors are denoted with boldface letters,
where the upper/lower letters will be used for frequency/time
20
SYSTEM MODEL
A generic block diagram of a basic baseband-equivalent
MIMO-OFDM system is given in Fig. 2. A MIMO-OFDM
system with Ntx transmit and Nrx receive antennas is assumed.
The information bits can be coded and interleaved. The coded
bits are then mapped into data symbols depending on the
modulation type. Another stage of interleaving and coding
can be performed for the modulated symbols. Although the
symbols are in time domain, the data up to this point is considered to be in the frequency domain. The data is then demultiplexed for different transmitter antennas. The serial data
symbols are then converted to parallel blocks, and an IFFT is
applied to these parallel blocks to obtain the time domain
OFDM symbols. For the transmit antenna, tx, time domain
samples of an OFDM symbol can be obtained from frequency
domain symbols as
(1) [ n, m ] =
xtx
IFFT { Xtx [ n, k ]}
(1)
K 1
= Xtx [ n, k ]e j 2 mk / K 0 k, m K 1
(2)
k =0
h(t , ) = l (t ) ( l ),
(3)
l =0
H (t , f ) =
N tx
h(t , )e j 2 f d .
(4)
Yrx =
H [ n, k ] H (nT f , k f ) = h[ n, l ]F ,
kl
K
(5)
l =0
(6)
(7)
+ irx [ n, m ] + wrx [ n, m ],
where rx =1, , Nrx, the time domain effective CIR,
l],
over an OFDM symbol is given as time-variant linear filter
depending on the time selectivity of the channel. Please note
that n represents OFDM symbol number, while m denotes the
m
sampling index in time domain so that h rxtx[n, l] is the CIR at
the sampling time index m for the symbol n. When the CIR is
m
constant over an OFDM symbol duration, then h rxtx[n, l] will
be the same for all m values, and hence the superscript m can
be dropped. Moreover, i rx [n, m] is the term representing
external interference, w rx [n, m] is the AWGN sample with
2
zero mean and variance of w. After taking FFT of the time
domain samples of Eq. 7, the received samples in frequency
domain can be expressed as,
2 km
K
(8)
m=0
1
m
= xtx [ n, m l ]hrxtx [ n, l ]
K m =0 tx =1 l =0
K 1 N tx L 1
+ irx [ n, m ] + wrx [ n, m ]] e
N tx
1
tx =1 K
2 km
K
[ n, k ] e j 2 ( m l ) k / K
tx
m = 0 l = 0 k = 0
h [ n, l ] e
m
rxtx
K 1 L 1 K 1
2 km
K
(12)
tx =1
ej2mk/KK with m and k being the row and column index and
= F rxtx F H , which can be considered as the equivalent
channel between each received and all the transmitted subcarriers. Moreover Xtx denotes the column vector for transmitted
symbols from txth transmit antenna, Irx is the column vector
for interferers, Wrx is the column vector for noise, and rxtx is
the matrix containing the channel taps at each m index. The
entries of are given by
rxtx
h 0 [ n, 0 ]
0
rxtx
1
1
hrxtx [ n,1]
hrxtx [ n, 0 ]
=
L 1
L 1
hrxtx [ n, L 1] hrxtx [ n, L 2 ]
0
0
0
hrxtx [ n, 2 ]
m
h rxtx[n,
K 1
N tx
L 1
1
K
(11)
tx =1
Yrx [ n, k ] =
(9)
(10)
+ I rx [ n, k ] + Wrx [ n, k ]
1
hrxtx [ n, 2 ]
(13)
0
hrxtx [ n,1]
1
hrxtx [ n, 3]
K
K
hrxtx1[ n, L 1] hrxtx1[ n, 0 ]
21
Frequency
Frequency
Time
Training symbols
Time
Data symbols
Data subcarriers
Pilot subcarriers
(a)
(b)
(14)
where H [n, k] is the estimate of equivalent channel at kth subcarrier of nth OFDM symbol. Although MSE is used extensively, sometimes, other measures like BER performance are
also used [43, 44]. BER performance is mainly used when the
performance of OFDM system with the channel estimation
error is to be evaluated [45, 46].
Before introducing the estimation techniques, it is worthwhile to look at the data aided channel estimation in general
and the pilot allocation mechanisms.
22
(15)
(16)
or
Y[n, k] = H[n, k] X[n, k] + W[n, k].
(17)
Here H and W are the column vectors representing the channel and the noise at each subcarrier for the nth OFDM symbol, respectively.
In data aided channel estimation, known information to
the receiver is inserted in OFDM symbols so that the current
channel can be estimated. Two techniques are commonly
used: sending known information over one or more OFDM
symbols with no data being sent, or sending known information together with the data. The previous arrangement is usually called channel estimation with training symbols while the
latter is called pilots aided channel estimation (Fig. 3).
Channel estimation employing training symbols periodically sends training symbols so that the channel estimates are
updated [29]. In some cases training symbols can be sent
once, and the channel estimation can then be followed by
decision directed type channel estimation. The details of the
decision directed will be given later in the article.
In the pilots aided channel estimation, the pilots are multiplexed with the data. For time domain estimation, the CIR is
estimated first. The estimate of the CIR are then passed
through a FFT operation to get the channel at each subcarrier
for the equalization in frequency domain. For frequency
domain estimation, the channel at each pilot is estimated, and
then these estimates are interpolated via different methods.
Pilots Allocation for Data Aided Channel Estimation
For the pilot aided channel estimation, the pilot spacing needs
to be determined carefully. The spacing of pilot tones in frequency domain depends on the coherence frequency (channel
frequency variation) of the radio channel, which is related to
the delay spread. According to the Nyquist sampling theorem,
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0
10
20
30
40
Subcarrier index
50
60
70
the number of subcarrier spacing between the pilots in frequency domain, Dp, must be small enough so that the variations of the channel in frequency can be all captured, that is,
1
Dp
(18)
max df
where max is the maximum excess delay of channel. When the
above is not satisfied, then the channel available at the pilot
tones does not sample the actual channel accurately. In this
case, an irreducible error floor in the estimation technique
exists since this causes aliasing of the CIR taps in the time
domain [47].
When the channel is varying across OFDM symbols, in
order to be able to track the variation of channel in time
domain, the pilot tones need to be inserted at some ratio that
is a function of coherence time (time variation of channel),
which is related to Doppler spread. The maximum spacing of
pilot tones across time is given by
1
Dt
(19)
2 fdmaxTf
where f d max is the maximum Doppler spread and T f is the
OFDM symbol duration. For comb-type pilot arrangements,
the pilot tones are often inserted for every OFDM symbols.
When the spacing between the pilot tones does not satisfy the
Nyquist criteria, then the pilots can still be exploited in a combined pilot-plus DDCE [48].
The pilots can be sent continuously for each OFDM symbol. Since the channel might be varying both in time and frequency domains, for the reconstruction of the channel, this
2-D function needs to be sampled at least a Nyquist rate.
Hence, the rate of insertion of pilots in frequency domain and
from one OFDM symbol to another cannot be set arbitrarily.
The spacing of pilots should be according to Eq. 18 and Eq.
19. In general, within an OFDM symbol the number of pilots
in frequency domain should be greater than the CIR length
(maximum excess delay), which is related to the channel delay
spread. Over the time, the Doppler spread is the main criteria
for the pilot placement.
Many studies are performed in order to get the optimum
pilot locations in time-frequency grid given a minimum number of pilots that sample the channel in 2-D at least Nyquist
rate. This optimality is in general based on the MSE of the LS
estimates [6, 49]. It should be noted that an optimum pilot
allocation is a trade-off between wasted energy in unnecessary
pilot symbols, the fading process not being sampled sufficient-
ly, the channel estimation accuracy, and the spectral efficiency of the system [50]. Hence, an optimum pilot allocation for
a given channel might not be optimal for another channel as
the fading process will be different.
In addition to minimizing MSE of the channel estimates,
pilots also need to simplify the channel estimation algorithms
so that the system resources are not wasted. For example, it
is noted that the use of constant modulus pilots simplify the
channel estimation algorithms as matrix operations become
less complex [38, 51].
Some other important elements for pilot arrangements
are the allocation of power to the pilots with respect to the
data symbols, the modulation for the pilot tones etc. In many
cases, the power for pilot tones and data symbols are equally
distributed. The channel estimation accuracy can be improved
by transmitting more power at the pilot tones compared to
the data symbols [52]. For a given total power, this reduces
the SNR over the data transmission. As for the pilot power
at different subcarriers, studies show that based on the MSE
of the LS estimates pilots should be equipowered [6, 53].
Moreover, due to the lack of the pilot subcarriers at the
edge of OFDM symbols, the estimation via the extrapolation
for the edge subcarriers results in a higher error [54, 55]. Simulations also reveal that the channel estimation error at the
edge subcarriers are higher than those at the mid-bands due
to this extrapolation [5658]. One quick solution would be to
increase the number of pilot subcarriers at the edge subcarriers [58], however this would decrease the spectral efficiency of
the system [57]. Due to the periodic behavior of the Fourier
Transform, the subcarriers at the beginning and the end of
the OFDM symbol are correlated, and this can be used to
improve the channel estimates at the edge subcarriers (Fig. 4).
Simulations exploiting this property are reported to enhance
the estimation accuracy of the edge subcarriers [57].
Another issue related to pilot arrangement is the pattern
of the pilots, that is, how to insert the pilots to efficiently
track the channel variation both in time and frequency
domains. The selection of a pilot pattern may affect the channel estimation performance, and hence the BER performance
of the system.
Equation 18 states that the pilot spacing in frequency
domain needs to satisfy the Nyquist criteria. More insight into
Eq. 18 reveals that the number of required pilots in frequency
domain can be taken as the CIR length. At a first glance, this
does not pose any restriction on the pilot spacing that a sufficient number of pilots can be inserted in adjacent subcarriers.
However, when the MSE of the time domain LS estimation,
which is covered in the next subsection, is analyzed, it is
observed that the minimum MSE is obtained when the pilots
are equispaced with maximum distance [6, 31, 39]. This is due
to the reason that when the pilots are inserted in adjacent
subcarriers, then the FFT matrix used in the time domain LS
estimation approaches to an ill conditioned matrix, making
the system performance vulnerable to the noise effect [39].
Hence, from the MSE of LS estimation, the pilots in frequency domain need to be equipowered, equispaced, and their
number should not be less than the CIR length. Since the use
of pilots is a trade-off between extra overhead and the accuracy of the estimation, adaptive allocation of pilots based on the
channel length estimation can offer a better trade-off [52, 56,
59]. As will be seen later in the article, with MIMO and ICI
additional requirements will be observed on the pilot subcarriers spacing and properties.
When it comes to the pilot allocation for subsequent
OFDM symbols, either the set of subcarriers chosen in a previous OFDM symbol or a different set of pilots can be used
(Fig. 3). The use of the same subcarriers as the pilots is a
23
24
can be utilized for the channel estimation. In such a case, correlators at the receiver can be used for the expected samples
of the OFDM symbols [6870]. However, it is shown that
superimposing training with data is not optimal for channel
estimation [71].
Having reviewed the pilot schemes employed in OFDM
systems, it is time to look at the channel estimation techniques. Starting from the methods using the least a priori
information, in this article we will review channel estimation
methods such as LS estimation, ML, transform domain techniques, and LMMSE. Simple interpolation techniques will be
covered along with LS estimation technique.
LS ESTIMATION
Before going into the details of the estimation techniques, it is
necessary to give the LS estimation technique as it is needed
by many estimation techniques as an initial estimation. Starting from system model of SISO-OFDM given in Eq. 17 as[72]
Y[n, k] = X[n, k]H[n, k] + W[n, k],
(20)
H LS [ n,k ] =
= H [n,k ]+
.
X[ n,k ]
X[ n, k]
(21)
In matrix notations,
^
H LS = diag(X)1Y + diag(X)1W.
(22)
^
K
E H SNR
(23)
H = QLSFH diag(X)HY
(25)
where
QLS = (FH diag(X)Hdiag(X)F)1.
(26)
H
H
HML = (Fp Fp)1Fp diag(X)HY
(27)
H = QHLS
(28)
25
l =0
1
(1 1){ R f [l ]} + (1 2 ){ R f [ D p ]}
3
(29)
26
basis functions are determined such that they are unity at the
pilot locations at which they are defined for, and vanishes at
the other pilot locations. The channel at non-pilot subcarriers
can then be found as
Np
H [ n, k ] =
(30)
Tap coefficients
-1
0
10
20
30
40
Tap index
50
60
70
H FT = K / N p FD FT FP H LS
(31)
where
K / Np
is for the normalization, Fp is the Fourier matrix with the rows
corresponding to the subcarrier index of the pilot tones, and
DFT is given by
DL
D FT =
0 ( K L L )
0( L K L )
.
0( K L K L )
(32)
The expression for DFT given above is applied in many transform domain based approaches using Fourier Transform,
which in general neglects the correlation between CIR taps.
By incorporating the CIR tap correlation and appropriately
choosing the coefficients of DL, a full matrix that can result in
lower channel estimation MSE can be obtained [76].
When the channel statistics are not available, then DL = IL
can be used. In this case, Eq. 31 can be expressed as [76],
H
H FT = K / N p FL FLp H LS
(33)
27
Non-sample spaced
Sample spaced
5
4
Tap coefficients
0
0
10
20
30
40
Tap index
50
60
70
10
15
20
Tap index
25
30
35
n Figure 7. Equivalent CIR taps from CFR when the real taps
written as
H FT = K / N p F H D FT 2 Fp H LS ,
(34)
where the entries of the DFT2 are the cyclically shifted entries
of DFT along its diagonal elements.
Studies are performed to compare the performance of
both of the Fourier Transform approaches. When the number
of significant taps are estimated correctly, both methods perform the same. However, since in the second Fourier Transform approach three regions need to be identified, in the
presence of noise it is more prone to errors [59, 114].
In both of the Fourier Transform approaches, the noise
within the significant taps is not eliminated. If the noise in the
transform domain is completely independent, then there is
not much to be done for removing the noise within the taps.
However, if the noise in the transform domain is correlated,
then by using the information about the noise in the non-tap
locations, the noise in tap locations can be reduced. Studies
show that this additional processing provides further improvement in the MSE of the channel estimation [115].
The Fourier Transform approach assumes the knowledge
of the tap location. It is assumed that the taps are equally
spaced with sampling time of the OFDM symbol. When the
IFFT of the CFR is taken, the equivalent CIR is given by,
L 1
h( , t ) =
l (t )
l =0
sin( BW ( l ))
,
( l )
(35)
28
Analysis showed that SNR improvement can be achieved, suggesting its application to MIMO-OFDM systems.
Practical systems such as WLAN and WiMAX introduce
guard bands in OFDM symbols via the elimination of the use
of the subcarriers at the edge of the OFDM symbols. The
transform domain techniques suffer from these unused subcarriers or suppressed subcarriers as this corresponds to rectangular windowing in frequency domain that results in sinc
convolution in transform domain or equivalent time domain.
Hence, the taps are leaked to one another due to sinc interpolation, and the taps orthogonality is lost. Since the transform
domain techniques assume a certain channel length, L, K L
taps are zeroed out during time windowing. When this windowing in time domain is applied for reducing the noise plus
interference, it will cause Gibbs phenomenon when the signal
in the transform domain is transferred back to the frequency
domain. In other words, the channel frequency response will
have ripples around the edge carriers. The reason for this is
the truncation of the sinc function in time domain. Although
no studies have been reported to overcome this issue, simple
extrapolation via the use of correlation properties of the subcarriers (Fig. 4) can be employed before any transform
domain approach.
Although different transform domain techniques are studied, it should be noted that since the noise is assumed to be
AWGN in the original domain, it will have its AWGN characteristic in the transform domain. The equivalent channel taps
will be concentrated only in a small region. Therefore, as long
as the equivalent taps are correctly identified in all the transform domain methods, the same performance will be achieved.
Since the Fourier Transform approach utilizes fast algorithms
in the OFDM transceiver structure, the use of Fourier Transform offers a better trade-off among the transform domain
channel estimation techniques.
When the CFR samples are also available over several
OFDM symbols at the pilot subcarriers, 2-D Fourier Transform technique can be used [111, 118]. Here, the CFR samples at the pilot subcarriers are passed through a 2-D Fourier
Transform. The transform domain signal is expected to have a
diamond shape concentrated in a 2-D subregion. By zeroing
out the signal values outside this subregion, noise reduction
can be achieved. The resultant signal can then be transformed
into the original domain via an inverse 2-D Fourier Transform. The performance of 2-D transform domain approaches
depends on the appropriate transform domain filtering, which
is related to the channel statistics.
The transform domain techniques have been successfully
applied to the cases where impairments to the system are
modelled as Gaussian noise. For example, an OFDM system
with significant PAPR can be improved via clipping, where
the large peaks are replaced with a pre-defined envelope, A.
The system model can then be modified as [119]
Y = (cr diag(X) + )H + W
A/x,
(36)
ever, the first case is more critical than the second, as and
hence in practice the CIR length is usually taken to be the
length of the CP [36, 120, 121].
For more accurate results, algorithms are also developed
to estimate the number of significant channel taps. This is
needed especially in high data rate communication where the
channel length can be long but the number of channel taps
can be smaller, that is, sparse channel. The corresponding
channel taps and their location can be searched based on a
cost function assuming channel tap locations and the corresponding coefficients [122125]. In many cases, since the
problem is similar to finding the tones of a signal, ESPRIT
and MDL algorithms are employed to get the number and the
location of the channel taps [11, 124126]. However, these
approaches can yield degraded performance when the number
of taps increases. Hence, other approaches based on iterative
ML are proposed both to reduce the computational complexity and to get accurate estimation [123]. Moreover, taps
searching based on the energy of the taps is also studied [102,
113, 127, 128]. Iterative algorithms like Newton-Lapsons
method can also be utilized to get the channel taps [129, 130].
The use of PN codes superimposed with the data to reveal
the channel taps is also widely applied [70]. The output of
these correlators is related to CIR, which can be averaged further when the correlators result in multiple CIR copies. However, the performance of this approach suffer from the
influence of the transmitted data that suggests an increase in
the power of the PN sequence or time-consuming iterative
methods [31]. Hence, transmitting data and the pilots over
different subcarriers, and then using the correlators before the
FFT block at the receiver is proposed [131]. In this method, a
time domain signal obtained via the IFFT of the pilot signal is
utilized to be correlated with the received signal. Ideally, the
output of the correlator are the delayed impulses whose
amplitude and delay are related to CIR.
Having realized that the performance of the transform
domain techniques are heavily dependent on the CIR tap
locations, an inaccurate assumption or calculation of CIR tap
locations can degrade any of the transform domain techniques
drastically. Hence, a transform domain method which inherently uses the information of the channel taps is expected to
provide better results. For this purpose, unitary transform
based on the eigenmatrices of the auto-correlation of CFR of
different channel PDPs is shown to give better results than
the transform domain techniques presented above [107].
When the exact channel PDP is not available, then a channel
PDP can be assumed and the transformation can be done
accordingly. However, if the exact PDP is known then eigendecomposition of auto-correlation matrix of CFR can provide
the optimum transform. In the following section, this optimum transform, a special form of LMMSE, is presented in
detail.
(37)
29
1
= Ryx Ryy y
(38)
HLMMSE = RHHp
^
2
(RHpHp + w (diag(X) diag(X)H)1)1 HLS
(39)
SNR
(40)
|2},
E{1/|Xk
with Xks being the constelwhere = E{|Xk
lation points. Then, Eq. 39 becomes,
H LMMSE = R HH p R H p H p +
I N p H LS .
SNR
(41)
It is recommended in some studies that such an approximation should not be assumed for the whole OFDM subcarriers,
as the noise level can be different for various portions of the
symbol [132]. In this case, a windowing approach can be
applied to suppress the noise so that over the whole symbol
the noise level is almost constant. The advantages of this
approach comes at the expense of SNR estimation for each
subcarrier and the additional filtering. Since it is observed via
simulations that the approximation given in Eq. 40 has negligible performance degradation for the OFDM channel estimation, the SNR estimation for each subcarrier or subcarrier
block is usually omitted [36, 120].
Although the expression in Eq. 41 is simpler, it still needs
to be updated with the changing operating SNR. Moreover,
the expression in Eq. 41 needs to be recalculated whenever
30
H LMMSE = R H p H p R H p H p +
I K H LS .
SNR
(42)
(43)
HLMMSE = UUHHLS,
(44)
i
i =
,
i +
SNR
i = 0,1,, K 1.
(45)
MSE LMMSE
1
=
K
+
1
K
K 1
i (1 i ) + SNR i2
i =0
^r
Hlmmse
K 1
i
i =r
i = 0,1,, r 1
,
(47)
i = r,, K 1
where r represents the number of the significant singular values. The above is nothing but the result obtained from the
low-rank approximation of the R H p H p . With the low-rank
approximation, the number of required multiplications
reduces from the order O(K3) to O(rK2).
Although the low-rank approximation via a SVD of the
auto-covariance matrices reduces the number of multiplication for the channel estimation, obtaining the SVD of the
auto-covariance matrices by itself is computationally very
complex and is in the order of O(K3) [137]. Therefore, it will
be no use to exploit the low-rank approximation if the SVD is
to be performed for every estimation process. Although, the
auto-covariance matrix, R HpHp, is a function of the channel
PDP that can be assumed to be constant for a good number
of OFDM symbols [138], when the channel PDP changes the
re-computation of SVD of RHpHp can be non-practical especially when the number of the subcarriers is large.
For this reason different approaches are proposed in order
to eliminate the need for SVD operation. The so called robust
channel estimation methods are developed for this purpose
[36, 139, 140]. In these methods, a channel PDP is assumed
for the system under the consideration, and the auto-covariance matrix and its SVD are then pre-calculated for the
assumed channel PDP. The most common assumed channel
PDPs are uniform and exponential, with uniform PDP being
used more extensively [13, 126]. Simulation results show that
robust LMMSE channel estimation results in acceptable performance degradation for certain systems when compared to
the LMMSE with perfect channel knowledge [13, 111]. The
degree of degradation increases as the true channel deviates
significantly from the assumed channel. By pre-calculating the
SVD of the auto-covariance matrices for more possible channel PDPs, this degradation can be mitigated. In this case, by
looking at the delay spread of the channel, the closest channel
PDP for which the SVD is pre-calculated can be used. With
additional computational complexity needed for the delay
spread estimation, this approach is found to improve the MSE
performance of the robust LMMSE channel estimator by a
factor of 2 dB [139].
The low-rank approximation for LMMSE channel estimation has also been investigated for the pilot symbol aided
channel estimation [24, 36, 136]. It is shown that for the pilot
symbols similar simple expressions to those of all pilot case
are also possible [120]. For the pilot case,
(48)
r
(46)
In the decomposition of Eq. 44, the number of multiplication is still in the order of O(N3). The number of multiplication can be reduced if only significant singular values of or
are considered.
It should be noted that the number of significant singular
values is related to the number of long-term significant taps.
The relationship between these two will be given shortly.
Since the number of significant taps is much lower than the
number of the subcarriers, there will be only a few significant
singular values in or . Therefore, the entries of matrix
can be approximated as
i
i = i +
SNR
= Prr(Qr)HHLS,
K
i
Dp
i = K +
D p i SNR
i = 0,1,, r 1
.
(49)
i = r,, N p 1
1 r 1
MSE (r ) = K i 1 i
K i =0
Dp
1
K
K 1
2
+ i2
SNR
(50)
K i .
i =r
31
32
100
BRSK
QAM-4
QAM-18
QAM-84
10-1
BER
10-2
10-3
10-4
-10
-5
10
SNR [dB]
15
20
25
30
33
Coherent
detection
Channel
estimator
Deinterleaver
Decoder
Output
Channel
estimator
Replica
generator
34
EM ALGORITHM
Among the DDCE channel estimation of COFDM, the EM is
one of the most attractive methods. Mostly because EM algorithm also utilizes the error probabilities that are already
being utilized by the decoders. For example, the maximum a
posteriori (MAP) decoder used in turbo decoding can provide
the probabilities of the transmitted symbols, which is exactly
what the EM algorithm is looking for the channel estimation
[193195]. Hence, computational complexity of EM algorithm
is reduced significantly, making EM a good match for the
COFDM channel~estimation.
The EM algorithm consists of two steps: an expectation
and a maximization step. The motive of the expectation step
is to estimate the corresponding component of the transmit
signal in the received signal, whereas the motive of the maximization step is to estimate the channel given the transmitted
signals, which can either be the pilots or the detected symbols.
With the pilots being available more accurate results can be
obtained [196].
In the above description, the detected signal can come
from a decoder. The decoder itself however, requires channel
estimate (Fig. 9). This chicken-and-the-egg problem can be
solved iteratively with some initial values either assigned to
the channel or the detected signals. While it is common to
employ EM algorithm in the channel estimation part, for the
data detection part different decoders can be employed. For
example, in parallel to the mostly applied turbo coding and
the corresponding decoders, it was shown that EM algorithm
can also be integrated with a QRD-M algorithm using CC
[197]. Iteratively performing the channel estimation and data
detection with sufficient number of iterations are shown to
give very close BER performances to the ideal case [193].
The inherent iterative approach of EM does not necessarily need the channel statistics. With a sufficient number of iterations, EM algorithm converges to the ML algorithm [40],
which was shown in the previous sections to be equivalent to
LS. However, due to EMs iterative nature, the computational
complexity is relatively less [40]. For the EM algorithms to
converge rapidly, the initial assumed/estimated values are critical.
The above iterative scheme described for the EM algorithms can also be generalized as joint and iterative channel
estimation (Fig. 9). Joint and iterative channel estimation
techniques are introduced when the conventional DDCE
channel estimation techniques are unable to estimate the
channel in fast fading, when it is desired to reduce the pilot
overhead, or when the non-linear distortions like power
amplifier non-linearities make the conventional approaches
ineffective [153, 154]. For example, by using relatively less
number of pilots (less than the Nyquist rate), it is shown that
the joint iterative approaches can detect the symbols, and estimate the channel simultaneously with more computational
complexity [48]. For non-linear distortions, iterative methods
can extract the distortion, and the channel estimates can be
improved accordingly [153].
Based on Fig. 9, different combination of the coherent
detection, channel estimator, and the decoder algorithms are
proposed. For example, Kalman filtering is employed to esti-
102
(52)
(53)
(54)
10-1
10-2
10-3
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
SNR [dB]
10
15
20
Rhh = FnVK(FnV)H,
where
Fn
= F/K. Let
RHH =
HLMMSE = F
2
[(FHdiag(X)Hdiag(X)FRhh)1w + IK]1
Hdiag(X)Hdiag(X)F)1FHdiag(X)HY
(F
can be obtained. The LS estimation was given by [75],
100
(56)
(57)
HLMMSE = FRhh
2
[(FHdiag(X)Hdiag(X)F)1w + Rhh]1
(FHdiag(X)Hdiag(X)F)1
FHdiag(X)HY
101
Hp = Fph,
LS
Linear
Transform domain
LMMSE
MSE
FnV
PKPH.
(58)
= P, then
(59)
K
Q H
Dp
(60)
RH pH p = Q
K
Q H ,
Dp
(61)
n
where Q = F p V and pilot spacing is chosen to be D p . With
35
(62)
=
|
,
0
( K L ) L | 0( K L )( K L )
Since it is assumed that Np > L, by truncating to the size
K N p to form N p , and Q to the size of N p N p to form
QNp. Then,
R HH p = P
K
N pQ H p ,
N
Dp
K
= QN p
N pQ H p .
N
Dp
RH pH p
(63)
(64)
H
HLMMSE = PQNpHLS,
(65)
K
i +
Dp
SNR
(66)
In case of low-rank approximation, only r significant singular values of Rhh will be considered. Then,
^r
HLMMSE
= PrGr(Qr)HHLS,
(67)
diagonals being Dp. Moreover, when the CIR taps are uncorrelated and there are only L number of significant taps, then
R hh is a diagonal matrix. In this case, V matrix becomes an
identity matrix, making P and Q matrices simply F and F p ,
respectively. Moreover, the SVD of Rhh results in L number
of significant singular values, making r = L. For equal spaced
comb-type pilots
H
H FT = D p FDFp H LS .
(68)
36
(69)
Y = Spdiag(X)H + W,
(70)
sin ( m n + p ) j ( m n+ p )
e
.
K sin ( m n + p )
K
(71)
CIR
taps
ICI
I
Noise
K
Transform domain
(72)
37
0.8
Channel coefficient
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-2
Subcarriers
38
W [ n, k ] = W [ n, k ] + I q [ n, k ]
(73)
q =1
Pilots
Space
Ant #1
Ant #2
Ant #3
Ant #4
Frequency
Pilot subcarriers
Data subcarriers
Subcarriers
MIMO-OFDM
CHANNEL ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES
MIMO-OFDM channel estimation is a challenging task as the
received signal is the superposition of the signals from multiple transmit antennas, (Eq. 12). For the methods to be presented in this section, the ICI and other types of interference
are folded into the AWGN term for the sake of simplicity.
The MIMO-OFDM system model then becomes,
N tx
Yrx =
(74)
tx =1
(75)
where k Ptx with Ptx holding the pilot subcarrier indices for
the transmit antenna tx. With the pilot subcarrier of each
transmit antenna being disjoint, the received signal for disjoint
pilot subcarrier indices results in as many SISO-OFDM equations as the number of pilot subcarriers. From that point on,
the methods described in the previous sections can be applied
for the channel estimation. For example, Transform domain
Ntx Dp K/L.
(76)
If WLAN standards are to be employed in a MIMO system, then the pilot allocation in two of the long OFDM symbol in the preamble for the channel estimation can be
designed for a better performance [12]. Since in a typical
WLAN environment, the channel varies very slowly, it can be
assumed that the channel is constant over training OFDM
symbols [103]. In this case, the pilots arranged for the first
OFDM symbol can be cyclically shifted so that the CFR is
sampled uniformly at more points [54, 103, 223, 224]. Such an
arrangement can also mitigate for the edge subcarrier errors
since each antenna can transmit at least one pilot subcarrier
close to the edge subcarriers. Figure 14 shows this scenario
for Ntx = 4. In general, the pilots can be cyclically shifted by
Ntx/NO,where NO is the number of OFDM symbols over which
the channel is assumed to be constant. With the assumption
of the channel being constant over the training phase, noise
reduction can also be achieved via averaging [12]. During the
averaging, better performance can be achieved if the channel
samples are weighted according to their MSE performance or
their noise [54. 91].
Although the comb-type pilots given in Fig. 13 for MIMOOFDM symbols simplify the channel estimation process, they
introduce some drawbacks. Clearly, they reduce the spectral
efficiency since many of the subcarriers are assigned to pilots,
with most of them being the silent pilots. Moreover, the use
of silent pilots increases the PAPR [60], a critical parameter
for the power amplifier block in the transmitters. Hence, in
contrast to the pilot scheme in Fig. 13, the transmission of the
pilots for the same set of subcarriers are proposed (Fig. 15).
When CFR estimation is to be performed over such a pilot
arrangement, Ntx * Np unknowns are at present with only Np
equations being available. Hence, instead of direct CFR estimation, CIR estimation of each MIMO channel is proposed.
A receiver antenna then needs to estimate N tx CIR, each
assumed to have the same L. It should be noted that this is a
valid assumption for MIMO downlink as the transmit and
receive antennas are co-located and hence are expected to
39
K 1
qtx1tx2 [ n, l ] =
*
Xtx1 [n, k ]Xtx2 [n, k ]FK kl .
(83)
ncy
k =0
Freq
ue
Space
p1
p
p =
p Ntx
(84)
where
Time
Pilot subcarriers
Data subcarriers
K 1
ptx [ n, l ] =
N tx L 1
k =0
tx =1 l = 0
kl
(77)
*
FK kl Xv [ n, k ] = 0
where Xtx and Xv are the pilot subcarriers for the txth and vth
transmit antennas with v = 1,, N tx . By rearranging the
terms, at the time instant n in matrix notation
^
Qh = p
(78)
or
^
h = Q1p.
(79)
^
rx 1
h=
rx Ntx
(80)
Q=
Q
Ntx 1
Q1Ntx
Q Ntx Ntx
(81)
Qtx1tx2
and
40
qtx1tx2 [ n, L + 1]
qtx1tx2 [ n, 0 ]
(86)
where
qtx tx [ n, 0 ]
1 2
=
q
tx1tx2 [ n, L 1]
*
Yrx [n, k ]Xtx [n, k ]FK kl .
k =0
have the same channel PDP [3, 225]. With this, the number of
unknowns that a receiver antenna has to estimate is Ntx * L.
In CIR estimation, the pilots in the frequency domain now
occupy the same subcarriers, and hence there is interference.
Figure 15 shows the overlapped pilots.
By assuming that the CFR for a given transmit antenna
can be expressed as in Eq. 5, minimization of MSE in Eq. 74
with respect to CIR coefficients for a given receive antenna rx
can be expressed as [77, 226],
K 1
(85)
(82)
2 kL
K
(87)
*
s2
*
s1
(88)
Baseband
modulator
IFFT
CP
DK/2
CP
sity due to the delay spread is exploited [35]. In the application of space-frequency Alamouti coding, a group of subcarriers by as many as the number of transmit antennas are
assigned to a group of Alamouti codes. The key assumption is
that the CFR is constant over the group of the subcarriers.
Such a scheme results in Ntx equations with Ntx unknowns per
CFR for each subcarrier block.
Depending on the system environment either STBC or
SFBC coding scheme can be used. When the length of CIR is
very small, then the use of SFBC can result in a good performance since the assumption of constant CFR over a number
of subcarriers holds. However, for more frequency selective
channels since the assumption of the constant channel no
longer holds, performance degradation will result in. In this
case, if the channel is less time selective, then the STBC can
be applied in time domain.
Similar to the SFBC, by assuming that the channel is constant by as many subcarrier as the number of transmit antennas, the pilot sequence after the IFFT of a transmit antenna is
shifted by K/Ntx, and CP is added thereafter as shown in Fig.
16 [236, 237]. With such a scheme, only one block of IFFT
can be used instead of Ntx IFFT blocks.
The shift by K/N tx results in the symbols with different
phase shifts in the frequency domain, which are used to separate the channel for each transmit antenna. Considering the
two transmit and one receive antenna system, the received signal can be written as,
Y[n, k] = [H11[n, k] + H12ejk] X[n, k] + W[n, k]
(89)
where X[n, k] is the only pilot symbol used for both antennas. With the assumption that the CFR is constant by as
many subcarriers as the number of transmitter antennas, Eq.
89 can be written for two consecutive subcarriers, with two
unknowns H11[n, k] and H12[n, k], which can be solved with
two equations. As can be seen such an approach is nothing
but some special version of the SFBC. This approach is also
simulated for many transmit antennas, and it is observed
that as long as the channel is not too frequency selective,
then the performance of the estimation is acceptable [238,
239]. Similar to Alamouti coding, rate-one non-orthogonal
space-time codes based on Hadamard codes are found to
give accurate channel estimation with the latter offering less
complexity [240].
41
No spatial filtering
=0.99
=0.95
=0.90
=0.85
MSE
10-1
10-2
10
12
SNR [dB]
14
16
18
20
CONCLUSION
In this article, we present the most common methods applied
in the channel estimation of SISO and MIMO-OFDM systems. The SIMO and MISO systems are not covered separately as the methods for SISO and MIMO can be easily modified
to be applicable to SIMO and MISO systems. Throughout the
analysis it is seen that there are three basic blocks affecting
the performance of the channel estimation. These are the
pilot patterns, the estimation method, and the signal detection
part when combined with the channel estimation. As in many
systems, each block can promise an improved performance at
the cost of additional resources. Hence, the best combination
of these three parameters depends on the typical application
[60, 241]. Although the estimation techniques presented in
this article are shown to be a subset of LMMSE channel estimation technique, instead of promoting one of the channel
estimation techniques, the methods are presented for the scenarios they perform the best. Thus, a fully adaptive system can
be developed by using each block when necessary.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
With OFDM now standing as a solid technology for future
wireless systems, OFDM channel estimation techniques can
be improved by incorporating the features of new technologies. It is well-known that one of the promising technologies is
MIMO. However, channel estimation methods studied for
MIMO-OFDM systems mostly overlook the effect of ICI due
to high speed mobile and external interferers. The models
that approximate ICI and external interferers as AWGN
might simplify the estimation process but better results can be
obtained by developing more accurate modelings.
Moreover, the standards such as WLAN and WiMAX do
not use certain subcarriers known as guard subcarriers. The
use of transform domain techniques do not provide better
42
performance with guard bands since transform domain techniques introduce CIR path leaks due to the suppression of
unused subcarriers. Methods can be developed to eliminate
the leakage problem by extrapolating the channel for the
unused subcarriers, followed by a transform domain technique. Such an approach can reduce the path leaking significantly. An elegant combination of an extrapolation method
and a transform domain technique can be developed so that a
practical estimation method can be realized for WLAN or
WiMAX systems.
As adaptation is key to many systems, channel estimation
techniques can be made adaptive by using the information
from other physical layer blocks. For example, the information available at blocks such as timing offset estimation, frequency offset estimation, and the output of the decoder can
all be used to determine the most appropriate channel estimation technique.
Lastly, mobile version of WiMAX uses OFDMA in its
uplink direction. The subcarriers in a given OFDMA symbol
are distributed among different users based on a given tile
structure and subchannels [177]. The pilot subcarriers for different tiles are no longer adjacent and the subcarrier spacing
between tiles can vary. Although linear interpolation can easily
be used for the channel estimation, utilization of long term
channel statistics can improve the channel estimation performance. With the tile assignment changing continuously during
the uplink transmission of OFDMA, the application of the
existing OFDM channel estimation methods is not straightforward. Research can be performed on how to practically incorporate long term channel statistics on the uplink channel
estimation of OFDMA systems for a better performing system.
REFERENCES
[1] G. J. Foschini And M. J. Gans, On Limits of Wireless Communications in a Fading Environment When Using Multiple Antennas, Wireless Pers. Commun., vol. 6, no. 3, Mar. 1998, pp.
31135.
[2] L. J. Cimini, Analysis and Simulation of a Digital Mobile Channel Using Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 33, no. 7, July 1985, pp. 66575.
[3] Y. Li, J. H. Winters, and N. R. Sollenberger, Mimo-Ofdm For
Wireless Communications, Signal Detection With Enhanced
Channel Estimation, IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 50, no. 9,
Sept. 2002, pp. 147177.
[4] M. Engels, Wireless OFDM Systems: How To Make Them
Work?, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.
[5] I. Koffman and V. Roman, Broadband Wireless Access Solutions Based on OFDM Access in IEEE 802.16, IEEE Commun.
Mag., vol. 40, no. 4, Apr. 2002, pp. 96103.
[6] I. Barhumi, G. Leus, and M. Moonen, Optimal Training Design
For MimoOfdm Systems in Mobile Wireless Channels, IEEE
Trans. Signal Processing, vol. 51, no. 6, June 2003, pp.
161524.
[7] P. W. Wolniansky et al., V-Blast: An Architecture for Realizing
Very High Data Rates Over the RichScattering Wireless Channel, Proc. ISSSE98, vol. 1, Pisa, Italy, Sept. 1998.
[8] G. D. Golden et al., Detection Algorithms and Initial Laboratory Results Using V-Blast Space-Time Communication Architecture, IEE Electron. Lett., vol. 35, no. 1, Jan. 1999.
[9] W. Tong and B. Johnson, Views on IEEE 802.16 Evolution:
IEEE 802.16 Broadband Wireless Access Working Group, Apr.
2004, Available: Http://IEEE802.Org/16.
[10] P. J. Sartori, K. L. Baum, and F. W. Vook, Impact of Spatial
Correlation on the Spectral Efficiency of Wireless OFDM Systems Using Multiple Antenna Techniques, Proc. IEEE Vehic.
Tech. Conf., vol. 3, Birmingham, AL, May 2002, pp. 115054.
[11] R. Chen and K. B. Letaief, Channel Estimation for SpaceTime Coded OFDM Systems in Non-Sample-Spaced Multipath
Channels, Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. and Networking
Conf., vol. 1, Orlando, FL, Mar. 2002, pp. 6166.
43
44
Channel Estimation Algorithm for OFDM: Combined EM Algorithm and Polynomial Fitting, Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. Acoust.,
Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 4, Hong Kong, China, Apr.
2003, pp. 68083.
[94] M. X. Chang and Y. T. Su, 2D Regression Channel Estimation
for Equalizing OFDM Signals, Proc. IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf.,
vol. 1, Tokyo, Japan, May 2000, pp. 24044.
[95] T. M. Lehmann, C. Gnner, and K. Spitzer, Survey: Interpolation Methods in Medical Image Processing, IEEE Trans. Med.
Imag., vol. 18, no. 11, Nov. 1999, pp. 104975.
[96] X. Zhou and X. Wang, Channel Estimation for OFDM Systems Using Adaptive Radial Basis Function Networks, IEEE
Trans. Vehic. Tech., vol. 52, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 4859.
[97] L. Tong, B. M. Sadler, and M. Dong, Pilot-Assisted Wireless
Transmissions General Model, Design Criteria, and Signal
Processing, IEEE Signal Processing Mag., vol. 21, no. 6, Nov.
2004, pp. 1225.
[98] M. Kiessling et al., Statistical Prefiltering for MMSE and ML
Receivers with Correlated MIMO Channels, Proc. IEEE Wireless
Commun. and Networking Conf., vol. 2, New Orleans, LA,
Mar. 2003, pp. 91924.
[99] J. S. Chow, J. M. Cioffi, and J. A. C. Bingham, Equalizer
Training Algorithms for Multicarrier Modulation Systems,
Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. Commun., vol. 2, Geneva, Switzerland,
May 1993, pp. 76165.
[100] A. V. Oppenheim, R. W. Schafer, and J. R. Buck, DiscreteTime Signal Processing, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall, 1999.
[101] M. J. F. G. Garcia, J. M. Paez-Borrallo, and S. Zazo,
DFTBased Channel Estimation in 2D-Pilot-Symbol-Aided
OFDM Wireless Systems, Proc. IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 2,
Rhodes, Greece, May 2001, pp. 81014.
[102] C. W. Wong, C. L. Law, and Y. L. Guan, Channel Estimator
for OFDM Systems with 2-Dimensional Filtering in the Transform Domain, Proc. IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 1, Rhodes,
Greece, May 2001, pp. 71721.
[103] S. Sun et al., Training Sequence Assisted Channel Estimation for MIMO OFDM, Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun. and Networking Conf., vol. 1, New Orleans, LA, Mar. 2003, pp. 3843.
[104] Y. Zhao and W. L. and W. Wu, An Efficient Channel Estimation Method for OFDM Systems with Multiple Transmit
Antennas, Proc. Intl. Conf. Info-Tech and Info-Net, vol. 2,
Beijing, China, Nov. 2001, pp. 33539.
[105] A. A. Tahat and D. R. Ucci, An Extrapolated Matched-Filter
Approach to Multi-User Channel Estimation for OFDM in
SDMA, Proc. IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Conf., vol. 2,
San Antonio, TX, June 2002, pp. 63639.
[106] Y. Li and N. R. Sollenberger, Clustered OFDM with Channel
Estimation for High Rate Wireless Data, Proc. IEEE Intl. Wksp.
Mobile Multimedia Commun., vol. 1, San Diego, CA, Nov.
1999, pp. 4350.
[107] Y. Li and N. R. Sollenberger, Clustered OFDM with Channel
Estimation for High Rate Wireless Data, IEEE Trans. Commun.,
vol. 49, no. 12, Dec. 2001, pp. 207176.
[108] Y. H. Yeh and S. G. Chen, Efficient Channel Estimation
Based on Discrete Cosine Transform, Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf.
Acoust., Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 4, Hong Kong,
China, Apr. 2000, pp. 67679.
[109] Y. H. Yeh and S. G. Chen, DctBased Channel Estimation
for OFDM Systems, Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. Commun., vol. 4,
Paris, France, June 2004, pp. 24426.
[110] M. Stege, P. Zillmann, and G. Fettweis, MIMO Channel
Estimation with Dimension Reduction, Proc. Intl. Symp.Wireless Personal Multimedia Commun., vol. 2, Honolulu, HI, Oct.
2002, pp. 41721.
[111] Y. Li, Pilot-Symbol-Aided Channel Estimation for OFDM in
Wireless Systems, Proc. IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 2, Houston, TX, May 1999, pp. 113135.
[112] S. He and M. Torkelson, Computing Partial DFT for Comb
Spectrum Evaluation, IEEE Signal Processing Lett., vol. 3, no.
6, June 1996, pp. 17375.
[113] Y. Zhao and A. Huang, A Novel Channel Estimation
Method for OFDM Mobile Communication Systems Based on
Pilot Signals and Transform-Domain Processing, Proc. IEEE
Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 3, Phoenix, AZ, May 1997, pp.
208993.
45
46
[174] J. Ha et al., LDPC Coded OFDM with Alamouti/SVD Diversity Technique, Proc. Intl. Symp.Wireless Personal Multimedia
Commun., vol. 3, Aalborg, Denmark, Sept. 2001, pp. 134550.
[175] Y. Kim, K. Kim, and J. Ahn, Iterative Estimation and Decoding for an LDPCCoded OFDMA System in Uplink Environments, Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. Commun., vol. 4, Paris, France,
June 2004, pp. 247882.
[176] K. Y. Kuan, S. Suthaharan, and A. Nallanathan, An Adaptive Channel Estimation Scheme for OFDM System with Transmitter Diversity, Proc. IEEE Globecom Conf., vol. 2, San
Francisco, CA, Dec. 2003, pp. 87377.
[177] I. S. for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Part 16, Air
Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems Amendment 2: Physical and Medium Access Control Layers for Combined Fixed and Mobile Operation in Licensed
Bands and Corrigendum 1, IEEE Std 802.16e2005 and IEEE
Std 802.162004/Cor 12005 (Amendment and Corrigendum
to IEEE Std 802.162004) Std., 2004, available:
Http://IEEE802.Org/16
[178] L. Lin et al., Comparison of Convolutional and Turbo Codes
for OFDM with Antenna Diversity in High-Bit-Rate Wireless
Applications, IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 4, no. 9, Sept. 2000,
pp. 27779.
[179] L. Sichao and Y. Dongfeng, Reducing Papr of OFDM with
Convolutional Code and 8-Ask Mapping, Wireless Commun.
and Mobile Comput., vol. 1, Montreal, Canada, Sept. 2005,
pp. 25356.
[180] G. Ungerboeck, Channel Coding with Multilevel/Phase Signals, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 28, no. 1, Jan. 1982, pp.
5567.
[181] MIT, Introduction to Lattice and Trellis Codes, 2005, MIT
Opencourseware, http://Ocw.Mit.Edu.
[182] S. Liu and J. W. Chong, Improved Design Criterion for
Space-Frequency Trellis Codes in MIMO-OFDM Systems, Proc.
IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 2, Los Angeles, CA, Sept. 2004,
pp. 139195.
[183] R. Roberts et al., Performance of Space-Diversity Trellis
Codes in Hiperman and 802.16a Broadband Wireless Access
Systems, Proc. IEEE Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 2, Milan, Italy,
May 2004, pp. 86670.
[184] C. Berrou, A. Glavieux, and P. Thitimajshima, Near Shannon
Limit ErrorCorrecting Coding: Turbo Codes, Proc. IEEE Intl.
Conf. Commun., vol. 1, Geneva, Switzerland, May 1995, pp.
106470.
[185] C. E. Shannon, A Mathematical Theory of Communications, Bell System Tech. J., vol. 27, Oct. 1948, pp. 379423
and pp. 62356.
[186] A. G. Burr and G. P. White, Performance of Turbo-Coded
OFDM, Turbo Codes in Digital Broadcasting Could It Double
Capacity? IEE Electron. Lett., no. 165, Nov. 1999, pp. 8/18/8.
[187] R. G. Gallager, Low-Density Parity-Check Codes, Ph.D. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
MA, 1961.
[188] K. I. Ahmed, C. Tepedelenlioglu, and A. Spanias, Performance of Precoded OFDM with Channel Estimation Error,
IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, vol. 54, no. 3, Mar. 2006, pp.
116571.
[189] A. A. Hutter, E. De Carvelho, and J. M. Cioffi, On the
Impact of Channel Estimation for Multiple Antenna Diversity
Reception in Mobile OFDM Systems, Proc. Asilomar Conf. Signals, Systems and Computers, vol. 1, Pacific Grove, CA, Nov.
2000, pp. 182024.
[190] S. Takaoka, H. Gacanin, and F. Adachi, Impact of Imperfect
Channel Estimation on OFDM/Tdm Performance, Proc. IEEE
Vehic. Tech. Conf., vol. 1, Stockholm, Sweden, June 2005, pp.
44246.
[191] A. Leke and J. M. Cioffi, Impact of Imperfect Channel
Knowledge on the Performance of Multicarrier Systems, Proc.
IEEE Globecom Conf., vol. 2, Sydney, Australia, Nov. 1998, pp.
95155.
[192] P. Chen and H. Kobayashi, Maximum Likelihood Channel
Estimation and Signal Detection for OFDM Systems, Proc. IEEE
Intl. Conf. Commun., vol. 3, New York, NY, May 2002, pp.
164045.
[193] X. Zhuang and F. W. Vook, Iterative Channel Estimation
47
48
BIOGRAPHIES
KEMAL OZDEMIR (kemal.ozdemir@gmail.com )received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from Middle East Technical
University, Ankara, Turkey in 1996 and 1998, respectively, and the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from Syracuse University,
Syracuse, NY in 2005. He has worked for Philips between 2000
and 2003 and Triverity Inc., between 2004-2005. He was a visiting
scholar at University of South Florida between 2003-2004. Currently, he is with Logus Broadband Wireless Solutions working on
fixed/mobile WiMAX base stations. His research interest are the
development of Signal Processing algorithms and their efficient
implementation on FPGA's, development of MAC algorithms, and
the signal integrity issues for the next generation wireless systems.
HUSEYIN ARSLAN [SM] (arslan@eng.usf.edu) has received his PhD.
degree in 1998 from Southern Methodist University (SMU), Dallas,
Tx. From January 1998 to August 2002, he was with the research
group of Ericsson Inc., NC, USA, where he was involved with several project related to 2G and 3G wireless cellular communication
systems. Since August 2002, he has been with the Electrical Engineering Dept. of University of South Florida. He has alsobeen
working for Anritsu Company, Morgan Hill, CA (as a visiting professor during the summers of 2005 and 2006) as a part-time consulting since August 2005. His research interests are related to
advanced Signal Processing techniques at the physical layer, with
cross-layer design for networking adaptivity and Quality of Service
(QoS) control. He is interested in many forms of wireless technologies including cellular, wireless PAN/LAN/MANs, fixed wireless
access, and specialized wirelessdata networks like wireless sensors
networks and wireless telemetry. The current research interests
are on UWB, OFDM based wireless technologies with emphasis on
WIMAX, and cognitive and software defined radio. He has served
as technical program committee member, session and symposium
organizer in several IEEE conferences. He is editorial board member for Wireless Communication and Mobile Computing journal,
and was technical program co-chair of IEEE wireless and
microwave conference 2004.