Equalizers are an important element in many diverse digital information applications, such as voice, data, and video communications. These applications employ a variety of transmission media. Although the various media have differing transmission characteristics, none of them is perfect. That is, every medium induces variation into the transmitted signal, such as frequency-dependent phase and amplitude distortion, multipath reception, other kinds of ghosting, such as voice echoes, and Rayleigh fading. In addition to channel distortion, virtually every sort of transmission also suffers from noise, such as additive white gausian noise (“AWGN”). Equalizers are therefore used as acoustic echo cancelers (for example in full-duplex speakerphones), video deghosters (for example in digital television or digital cable transmissions), signal conditioners for wireless modems and telephony, and other such applications.
One important source of error is intersymbol interference (“ISI”). ISI occurs when pulsed information, such as an amplitude modulated digital transmission, is transmitted over an analog channel, such as, for example, a phone line or an aerial broadcast. The original signal begins as a reasonable approximation of a discrete time sequence, but the received signal is a continuous time signal. The shape of the impulse train is smeared or spread by the transmission into a differentiable signal whose peaks relate to the amplitudes of the original pulses. This signal is read by digital hardware, which periodically samples the received signal.
Each pulse produces a signal that typically approximates a sinc wave. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that a sinc wave is characterized by a series of peaks centered about a central peak, with the amplitude of the peaks monotonically decreasing as the distance from the central peak increases. Similarly, the sinc wave has a series of troughs having a monotonically decreasing amplitude with increasing distance from the central peak. Typically, the period of these peaks is on the order of the sampling rate of the receiving hardware. Therefore, the amplitude at one sampling point in the signal is affected not only by the amplitude of a pulse corresponding to that point in the transmitted signal, but by contributions from pulses corresponding to other bits in the transmission stream. In other words, the portion of a signal created to correspond to one symbol in the transmission stream tends to make unwanted contributions to the portion of the received signal corresponding to other symbols in the transmission stream.
This effect can theoretically be eliminated by proper shaping of the pulses, for example by generating pulses that have zero values at regular intervals corresponding to the sampling rate. However, this pulse shaping will be defeated by the channel distortion, which will smear or spread the pulses during transmission. Consequently, another means of error control is necessary. Most digital applications therefore employ equalization in order to filter out ISI and channel distortion.
Generally, two types of equalization are employed to achieve this goal: automatic synthesis and adaptation. In automatic synthesis methods, the equalizer typically compares a received time-domain reference signal to a stored copy of the undistorted training signal. By comparing the two, a time-domain error signal is determined that may be used to calculate the coefficient of an inverse function (filter). The formulation of this inverse function may be accomplished strictly in the time domain, as is done in Zero Forcing Equalization (“ZFE”) and Least Mean Square (“LMS”) systems. Other methods involve conversion of the received training signal to a spectral representation. A spectral inverse response can then be calculated to compensate for the channel distortion. This inverse spectrum is then converted back to a time-domain representation so that filter tap weights can be extracted.
In adaptive equalization the equalizer attempts to minimize an error signal based on the difference between the output of the equalizer and the estimate of the transmitted signal, which is generated by a “decision device.” In other words, the equalizer filter outputs a sample, the decision device determines what value was most likely transmitted, and the adaptation logic attempts to keep the difference between the two small. The main idea is that the receiver takes advantage of the knowledge of the discrete levels possible in the transmitted pulses. When the decision device quantizes the equalizer output, it is essentially discarding received noise. A crucial distinction between adaptive and automatic synthesis equalization is that adaptive equalization does not require a training signal.
Error control coding generally falls into one of two major categories: convolutional coding and block coding (such as Reed-Solomon and Golay coding). At least one purpose of equalization is to permit the generation of a mathematical “filter” that is the inverse function of the channel distortion, so that the received signal can be converted back to something more closely approximating the transmitted signal. By encoding the data into additional symbols, additional information can be included in the transmitted signal that the decoder can use to improve the accuracy of the interpretation of the received signal. Of course, this additional accuracy is achieved either at the cost of the additional bandwidth necessary to transmit the additional characters, or of the additional energy necessary to transmit at a higher frequency.
A convolutional encoder comprises a K-stage shift register into which data is clocked. The value K is called the “constraint length” of the code. The shift register is tapped at various points according to the code polynomials chosen. Several tap sets are chosen according to the code rate. The code rate is expressed as a fraction. For example, a ½ rate convolutional encoder produces an output having exactly twice as many symbols as the input. Typically, the set of tapped data is summed modulo-2 (i.e., the XOR operation is applied) to create one of the encoded output symbols. For example, a simple K=3, ½ rate convolutional encoder might form one bit of the output by modulo-2-summing the first and third bits in the 3-stage shift register, and form another bit by modulo-2-summing all three bits.
A convolutional decoder typically works by generating hypotheses about the originally transmitted data, running those hypotheses through a copy of the appropriate convolutional encoder, and comparing the encoded results with the encoded signal (including noise) that was received. The decoder generates a “metric” for each hypothesis it considers. The “metric” is a numerical value corresponding to the degree of confidence the decoder has in the corresponding hypothesis. A decoder can be either serial or parallel—that is, it can pursue either one hypothesis at a time, or several.
One important advantage of convolutional encoding over block encoding is that convolutional decoders can easily use “soft decision” information. “Soft decision” information essentially means producing output that retains information about the metrics, rather than simply selecting one hypothesis as the “correct” answer. For an overly-simplistic example, if a single symbol is determined by the decoder to have an 80% likelihood of having been a “1” in the transmission signal, and only a 20% chance of having been a “0”, a “hard decision” would simply return a value of 1 for that symbol. However, a “soft decision” would return a value of 0.8, or perhaps some other value corresponding to that distribution of probabilities, in order to permit other hardware downstream to make further decisions based on that degree of confidence.
Block coding, on the other hand, has a greater ability to handle larger data blocks, and a greater ability to handle burst errors.
The decision device 226 is typically a hard decision device, such as a slicer. For example, in an 8VSB system, the slicer can be a decision device based upon the received signal magnitude, with decision values of 0,±2, 4, and ±6, in order to sort the input into symbols corresponding to the normalized signal values of ±1, ±3, ±5, and ±7. For another example, the slicer can be multi-dimensional, such as those used in quadrature amplitude modulation (“QAM”) systems.
The controller 228 receives the input data and the output data and generates filter coefficients for both the FIR filter 222 and the decision feedback filter 224. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that there are numerous methods suitable for generating these coefficients, including LMS and RLS algorithms.
Typically, the trellis decoder 350 uses a Viterbi algorithm to decode the signal encoded by the 8 VSB trellis encoder 400. Typically, the trellis decoder 350 has a large number of stages—most often 16 or 24. The decoded output 229 is de-interleaved by the de-interleaver 140, and then sent to the outer decoder 150.
It will be appreciated that the equalizer 120 cannot converge if the decision device 226 makes too many errors. For example, it is believed that if a slicer 226 has an error rate greater than about 0.1 the equalizer will not converge. Therefore, at start up, when there are large channel distortions, equalizer 120 cannot start to work. It has to use training signals, if available, to compensate for the channel distortion, or use a different type of algorithm, such as blind equalization, to converge. Using the training signals alone, or in combination with blind equalization may still not be sufficient to converge. Even if they are sufficient, it can be difficult to determine this fact, or at what point the compensation becomes acceptable. Furthermore, in blind equalization methods the feedback portion of the equalizer 120 is not based on decisions from the decision device 226, and therefore a much higher resolution is required. Consequently, hardware that is substantially more complex may be required.
Those skilled in the art will also appreciate that during operation of an equalizer 120 it is desirable to reduce the step size when the signal-to-noise ratio is lower. To achieve that end, a stop-and-go algorithm could be used to stop the DFE 224 when the signal-to-noise ratio falls below some threshold. However, it can be difficult to determine the signal-to-noise ratio from instant to instant during operation. Therefore, most systems employing such an algorithm improve performance only under certain circumstances, and at the cost of poorer performance under other conditions.
What is needed is an equalizer in which the step size is adjusted in relation to the error rate from the decision device. The present invention is directed towards meeting these needs, as well as providing other advantages over prior equalizers.
A first embodiment adaptive equalizer comprises: a decision device; a decision feedback equalizer coupled to the decision device; an FIR filter coupled to the decision device; and a trellis decoder coupled to the decision device, adapted to provide a reliability output and a decoded output. An error signal is generated by subtracting an output of the decision feedback equalizer from an output of the decision device, the error signal being used to update coefficients of the taps of the FIR filter and the decision feedback equalizer. A magnitude of the change to the coefficients is selected based at least in part the reliability output of the trellis decoder.
A second embodiment adaptive equalizer comprises: a slicer; a decision feedback equalizer coupled to the slicer; an FIR filter coupled to the decision device; and a Viterbi decoder coupled to the decision device, adapted to provide a eliability output and a decoded output. The Viterbi decoder determines the reliability output by generating a soft output from each decoding stage of the Viterbi decoder, each soft output being equal to the difference between an accumulated metric of a survive path and a deleted path for the decoding stage, the soft output of a final decoding stage being used as the reliability output. An error signal is generated by subtracting an output of the equalizer from an output of the decision device, the error signal being used to update coefficients of the taps of the FIR filter and the decision feedback equalizer. A magnitude of the change to the coefficients is selected based at least in part the reliability output of the trellis decoder.
A third embodiment adaptive equalizer comprises: a decision device; an FIR filter coupled to the decision device; a decision feedback equalizer coupled to the decision device; and a trellis decoder coupled to the decision device and adapted to produce a reliability output and a decoded output. The error signal is generated by subtracting a delayed output of the equalizer from an output of the trellis decoder. A magnitude of change in the coefficients is selected based at least in part upon the reliability output.
A fourth embodiment adaptive equalizer comprises: a slicer; an FIR filter coupled to the slicer; a DFE coupled to the slicer; a Viterbi decoder coupled to the decision device and adapted to produce a reliability output and a decoded output; and a mapper coupled to receive the decoded output of the Viterbi decoder and to generate a mapped and scaled output. The error signal is generated by delaying an output of the DFE by a number of cycles equal to a number of cylces the Viterbi decoder uses to generate the reliability output and subtracting the delayed output of the DFE from an output of the Viterbi decoder. A magnitude of change in the coefficients is selected based at least in part upon the reliability output and at least in part upon the error signal.
For the purposes of promoting an understanding of the principles of the invention, reference will now be made to the embodiment illustrated in the drawings and specific language will be used to describe the same. It will nevertheless be understood that no limitation of the scope of the invention is thereby intended, and alterations and modifications in the illustrated device, and further applications of the principles of the invention as illustrated therein are herein contemplated as would normally occur to one skilled in the art to which the invention relates. In particular, although the invention is discussed in terms of an 8VSB system, it is contemplated that the invention can be used with other types of modulation coding, including, for example, QAM and offset-QAM.
In certain embodiments, the trellis decoder 350 is a Viterbi decoder. As is known in the art, a Viterbi decoder compares two possible state transitions at each bit and determines which is the more likely to correspond to the originally transmitted signal. In the equalizers 700 employing a Viterbi decoder 350, at each decoding stage the decoding output is coupled with a soft output corresponding to the difference between the accumulated metric of the survive path and the deleted path. When the decoder reaches the last decoding stage, the decoded output 229 is determined along with the final soft output, which is used as the reliability signal 717.
It will be appreciated that there are many possible soft decoding algorithms available for decoding a trellis encoded signal, and that any of these soft decoding algorithms can be used to generate a reliability signal 717. It will also be appreciated that the reliability signal can be generated from any stage in the trellis decoder, though, generally, the later the stage used, the fewer decoding errors that will remain, so the more precisely the reliability signal 717 will correspond to the decoding quality.
It will be appreciated that by giving a lower weight to an unreliable error signal 723, such as is experienced at start up, the DFE 224 in the equalizer 700 can converge (albeit more slowly) due to the smaller step size, which permits averaging over a larger number of symbols. Conversely, when the reliability is higher, the error signal will be weighted more heavily, permitting faster convergence.
It will also be appreciated that the benefits of adjusting the step size can permit these improvements without the need to stop the DFE 224 entirely during periods of low reliability. In other words, the variable step size is an alternative to a start-and-stop algorithm in which the DFE 224 need not be hard-switched. Thus, the DFE 224 always works with decisions from the decision device 226. The DFE 224 in the equalizer 700 can therefore use a lower resolution and simpler hardware than would be necessary in an equalizer 120 employing a stop-and-go algorithm.
In certain other embodiments, an equalizer 700 according to the present invention employs a stop-and-go algorithm triggered by the value of the reliability signal 717. In certain of these embodiments, the DFE 224 and FIR filter 222 update their coefficients when the reliability signal 717 corresponds to a value above a pre-selected threshold. Such alternative embodiments are well suited for coping with impulse noise and severe but instantaneous channel distortions, since they can prevent the coefficients from being updated when the decision error rate is high enough to cause divergence, yet require little additional hardware relative to prior adaptive equalizers. Furthermore, even at startup, the equalizer 700 will converge, since the error signal generated from unreliable symbols will be ignored.
It will be appreciated that some encoding schemes have multiple independent encoders running in parallel. For example, in the 8 VSB system, there are typically 12 encoders. Typically, trellis code intrasegment interleaving is used in such systems. This uses a corresponding number of identical trellis encoders and precoders operating on interleaved data symbols. In a system with 12 parallel encoders, for example, the code interleaving is accomplished by encoding the 0th, 12th, 24th . . . symbols as on group, the 1st, 13th, 25th . . . symbols as a second group, the 2nd, 14th, 26th . . . symbols as a third group, and so on for a total of 12 groups.
While the invention has been illustrated and described in detail in the drawings and foregoing description, the same is to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive in character, it being understood that only the preferred embodiment has been shown and described and that all changes and modifications that come within the spirit of the invention are desired to be protected.
This application is a continuation of Ser. No. 09/875,720 Jun. 6, 2001 U.S. Pat. No. 6,829,297.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4567599 | Mizoguchi | Jan 1986 | A |
4712221 | Pearce et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4815103 | Cupo et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4833693 | Eyuboglu | May 1989 | A |
4856031 | Goldstein | Aug 1989 | A |
4866395 | Hostetter | Sep 1989 | A |
4989090 | Campbell et al. | Jan 1991 | A |
5052000 | Wang et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5056117 | Gitlin et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5058047 | Chung | Oct 1991 | A |
5127051 | Chan et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5134480 | Wang et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5142551 | Borth et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5210774 | Abbiate et al. | May 1993 | A |
5278780 | Eguchi | Jan 1994 | A |
5311546 | Paik et al. | May 1994 | A |
5453797 | Nicolas et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5471508 | Koslov | Nov 1995 | A |
5506636 | Patel et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5508752 | Kim et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5532750 | De Haan et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5537435 | Carney et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5568098 | Horie et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568521 | Williams et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5588025 | Strolle et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5619154 | Strolle et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5648987 | Yang et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5668831 | Claydon et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5692014 | Basham et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5757855 | Strolle et al. | May 1998 | A |
5781460 | Nguyen et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5789988 | Sasaki | Aug 1998 | A |
5802461 | Gatherer | Sep 1998 | A |
5805242 | Strolle et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5828705 | Kroeger et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5835532 | Strolle et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5862156 | Huszar et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5870433 | Huber et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872817 | Wei | Feb 1999 | A |
5877816 | Kim | Mar 1999 | A |
5894334 | Strolle et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5995154 | Heimburger | Nov 1999 | A |
6005640 | Strolle et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012421 | Kusche et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6034734 | De Haan et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6034998 | Takashi et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044083 | Citta et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6069524 | Mycynek et al. | May 2000 | A |
6133785 | Bourdeau | Oct 2000 | A |
6133964 | Han | Oct 2000 | A |
6141384 | Wittig et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6145114 | Crozier et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154487 | Murai et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6178209 | Hulyalkar et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6195400 | Maeda | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6198777 | Feher | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6219379 | Ghosh | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6222891 | Liu et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226323 | Tan et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233286 | Wei | May 2001 | B1 |
6240133 | Sommer et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249544 | Azazzi et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6260053 | Maulik et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272173 | Hatamian | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275554 | Bouillet et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278736 | De Haan et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304614 | Abbaszadeh et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6307901 | Yu et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6333767 | Patel et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6356586 | Krishnamoorthy et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363124 | Cochran | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6411341 | De Haan et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6411659 | Liu et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415002 | Edwards et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6421378 | Fukuoka et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6438164 | Tan et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6452639 | Wagner et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6466630 | Jensen | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6483872 | Nguyen | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490007 | Bouillet et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493409 | Lin et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6507626 | Limberg | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6535553 | Limberg et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6570919 | Lee | May 2003 | B1 |
6573948 | Limberg | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6611555 | Smith et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6665695 | Brokish et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6724844 | Ghosh | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6734920 | Ghosh et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6829298 | Abe et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
20010048723 | Oh | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020024996 | Agazzi et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020051498 | Thomas et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020136329 | Liu et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020154248 | Wittig et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020172275 | Birru | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020172276 | Tan et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020186762 | Xia et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020191716 | Xia et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030058967 | Lin et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030206600 | Vankka | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040057538 | Sathiavageeswaran et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0524559 | May 1997 | EP |
0752185 | Jul 2002 | EP |
WO 0027033 | May 2000 | WO |
WO 0027066 | May 2000 | WO |
WO 0101650 | Jan 2001 | WO |
WO 0113516 | Feb 2001 | WO |
WO 0143310 | Jun 2001 | WO |
WO 0143384 | Jun 2001 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040091039 A1 | May 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09875720 | Jun 2001 | US |
Child | 10701047 | US |