The present invention generally relates to equalization, and more particularly relates to equalization based on serial localization with indecision.
MLSE (Maximum Likelihood Sequence Estimation) is a demodulation technique that also suppresses ISI (Inter-Symbol Interference) from a signal which is modulated in accordance with a particular constellation and transmitted over a channel. ISI causes the equalization complexity to increase as a power of the constellation size. Relatively large signal constellations such as 16-, 32- and 64-QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) have been adopted in EDGE (Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution), HSPA (High Speed Packet Access), LTE (Long Term Evolution) and WiMax (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access). In HSPA, multi-code transmission creates even larger effective constellations. Also, MIMO (Multiple-Input, Multiple-Output) schemes with two or more streams have been adopted in HSPA, LTE and WiMax. MIMO implementations also yield relatively large effective constellations. ISI causes equalization complexity to further increase when any of these techniques occur in combination, e.g. multi-code and MIMO.
In the ISI context, the ideal equalization scheme is MLSE, in the sense of maximizing the probability of correctly detecting the transmitted sequence of symbols, or sequences of symbols in the MIMO case. However, the complexity of MLSE increases substantially as a function of the size of the modulation constellation and/or because of the exponential effects of MIMO or multi-codes to the point where MLSE becomes impractical. Less complex solutions are available such as, DFSE (Decision-Feedback Sequence Estimation), DFE (Decision-Feedback Equalization), etc. Each of these solutions attempts to strike a balance between accuracy and complexity.
For a symbol-spaced channel model with memory M in a MIMO environment, the system model is given by:
r
k
=H
M
s
k-M
+ . . . +H
1
s
k-1
+H
0
s
k
+V
k (1)
Here the element Hm, i, j of Hm describes the channel from transmit antenna j to receive antenna i at a delay of m symbols. The channel matrices are assumed to be constant over the duration of a burst of data, which will be equalized in one shot. The signal sk has symbol constellation Q of size q. The noise vk is white and Gaussian.
The general ISI scenario includes MIMO. Without much loss of generality, consider the case of a single transmitted signal. For a channel with memory M, MLSE operates on the standard highly regular ISI trellis with qM states, and qM+1 branches per stage. The storage complexity of MLSE is roughly driven by the number of states, and the computational complexity by the number of branches. As either M or q grows large, the complexity explodes. Stage k of the trellis describes the progression from state (ŝk-M . . . ŝk-1) to state (ŝk-M+1 . . . ŝk). The branch from (ŝk-M . . . ŝk-1) to (ŝk-M+1 . . . ŝk) represents the symbol ŝk. Note that for the ISI trellis, all branches ending in (ŝk-M+1 . . . ŝk) share the same symbol. For notational simplicity, the states at each stage are labeled 0 to qM−1. Each index represents a distinct value of (ŝk-M+1 . . . ŝk). A branch is labeled by its starting and ending state pair (j′,j). For each state j, the fan-in I(j) and the fan-out O(j) are the set of incoming and outgoing branches, respectively. For the ISI trellis, all fan-in and fan-out sets have the same size q.
The branch metric of a branch (j′,j) at step k in the MLSE trellis is given by:
e
k(j′,j)=|rk−HMŝk-M+ . . . +H0ŝk|2 (2)
Without much loss of generality, the trellis is assumed to start at time 0 in state 0. The state metric computation proceeds forward from there. At time k, the state, or cumulative, metric Ek(j) of state j is given in terms of the state metrics at time k−1, and the branch metrics at time k is given by:
In addition, the state in I(j) that achieves the minimum is the so-called predecessor of state j, and denoted πk-1(j). Also, the oldest symbol ŝk-M in the corresponding M-tuple (ŝk-M, . . . , ŝk-1) is the tentative symbol decision looking back from state j at time k. It is possible to trace back a sequence over the different states to time 0, by following the chain πk-1(j), πk-2(πk-1(j)), etc. The corresponding symbols ŝk-M, ŝk-M−1, etc, are the tentative decisions of MLSE looking back from state j at time k. In general, looking back from different states at time k, the decisions tend to agree more the older the symbols. That is, the longer the delay for a decision, the better. Typically, there is a chosen delay D, and the final decision about symbol ŝk-M-D is made by tracing back from the state (ŝk-M+1 . . . ŝk) with the smallest state metric. We note again, however, that MLSE has exploding complexity, whether due to the size of the modulation itself, or to the exponential effect of ISI.
Another conventional equalization technique is MSA (Multi-Stage Arbitration). MSA involves sifting through a large set of candidates in multiple stages, where each stage rejects some candidates until a single candidate is left after the final stage. One specific example of MSA is generalized MLSE arbitration where the first stage is a linear equalizer. The second stage implements MLSE based on a sparse irregular trellis over a reduced state space. Iterative Tree Search (ITS) has also been used for performing equalization in MIMO QAM environments. ITS exploits the triangular factorization of the channel. In addition, ITS uses the M-algorithm for reducing the search for the best candidate. ITS breaks down the search further, by dividing the QAM constellation in its four quadrants, and representing each quadrant by its centroid in intermediate computations. The selected quadrant itself is subdivided again into its 4 quadrants, and so on. This results in a quaternary tree search. Other conventional approaches give particular attention to the additional error introduced by the use of centroids instead of true symbols. The error is modeled as Gaussian noise whose variance is determined and incorporated in likelihood computations. However, a tight connection is typically made between the centroid representation and the bit mapping from bits to symbols. That is, if a so-called multi-level bit mapping is employed, then identifying a quadrant is equivalent to making a decision on a certain pair of bits. Such constraints place a restriction on bit mappings, restricting the design of subsets.
Equalization is performed in a series of stages for suppressing ISI. Each stage attempts to further localize the search for a solution for the benefit of the next stage, based on input from the previous stage. The equalization structure is generally referred to herein as serial localization with indecision (SLI). SLI is a lower complexity alternative to MLSE in the ISI scenario. Viewed in isolation, a given SLI equalization stage can be quite indecisive, but makes progress and avoids an irreversible wrong decision. A given equalization stage localizes the solution by inputting a subset representative of the constellation and outputting a further reduced subset. Each stage makes a choice among candidate reduced subsets. Indecision arises from representing the modulation constellation with overlapping subsets. Indecision is beneficial in a multi-stage structure, because indecision discourages an irreversible bad decision in an early stage.
According to an embodiment of a method for equalizing inter-symbol interference (ISI) in a received signal corresponding to a transmitted signal carried over a channel, the method includes grouping points of a constellation associated with a transmitted signal into a plurality of subsets. At least two adjacent ones of the subsets have one or more common constellation points so that the at least two adjacent subsets overlap. A centroid-based value is determined for each of the subsets of constellation points and the centroid-based values are grouped into one or more sets for input to an equalizer having a plurality of stage. An equalizer is used to equalize the ISI. Each stage of the equalizer except for the last stage localizes the search for a final symbol decision using the set of centroid-based values input to or selected by the stage as constellation points. The last equalization stage determines the final symbol decision using the subset of constellation points input to or selected by the last stage.
Of course, the present invention is not limited to the above features and advantages. Those skilled in the art will recognize additional features and advantages upon reading the following detailed description, and upon viewing the accompanying drawings.
The multi-stage SLI equalizer 150 includes a plurality of stages 152, 154 for suppressing ISI and demodulating a received signal. Each of the equalization stages 152 except for the last stage 154 localizes the search for a final sequence decision using the set of centroid-based values input to or selected by the stage 152 as constellation points. The last equalization stage 154 finalizes the decision using a subset of the initial constellation points. This way, each of the equalization stages 152 except for the last stage 154 further localizes the search for a solution using a set of the centroid-based values as constellation points, reducing the overall complexity of the equalizer. The last stage 154 outputs the final solution based on a subset of the actual constellation. The constellation processing module 140 ensures that at least two adjacent subsets of constellation points overlap to reduce the likelihood of demodulation errors, particularly for the earlier equalization stages as will be described in more detail later herein.
The first stage 210 of the SLI structure 200 demodulates the received signal rk and suppresses ISI using the alternative constellation Q′. That is, the first equalization stage 210 uses the centroid-based values included in Q′ as constellation points to perform sequence estimation. Each point in Q′ represents a subset of clustered points in Q. In one embodiment, each centroid-based value included in Q′ is the actual centroid for the points of a particular subset of Q. In another embodiment, the centroids are approximated as integer values. In yet another embodiment, each centroid-based value included in Q′ is the constellation point of Q located closest to the corresponding centroid value. Still other types of values may be used which are derived based on the centroids determined from the different subsets of Q.
The first equalization stage 210 outputs a symbol decision sk′[1], which belongs to Q′. The second equalization stage 220 accepts sk′[1] and uses sk′[1] to choose a localized subset Q″ of Q as its own constellation. The decision sk′[1] output by the first equalization stage 210 can be interpreted to be the representative of Q″ in the first equalization stage 210. The second equalization stage 220 outputs the final symbol decision ŝk, which belongs to Q″. The final symbol decision ŝk output by the second stage 220 is determined based on the original received signal rk and subset Q″, which is selected based on the localized symbol decision sk′[1] output by the first stage 210. In one embodiment, both equalization stages 210, 220 implement MLSE over their respective alphabets, e.g. as previously described herein. Alternatively, the equalization stages 210, 220 implement other types of equalization schemes such as DFSE, DFE, M-algorithm, tree searching, etc.
In one embodiment, the first equalization stage 210 outputs the complete sequence of symbol decisions sk′[1] in one block, before the second stage 220 begins its operation. In another embodiment, the first equalization stage 210 outputs its symbol decisions sk′[1] sequentially, based on a decision delay D, as discussed earlier. Then the second stage 220 can begin its operation as it sequentially accepts the symbols from the first stage 210.
The performance of the 2-stage SLI structure 200 of
Ensuring at least two adjacent subsets have overlap smoothes the decision boundary discrepancy. In particular, in the two stage SLI, including nearest neighbor symbols pairs in the overlap of adjacent subsets of the first demodulation stage means that the first demodulation stage does not have to make a decision about those symbols. That decision will be made in the second stage.
With SLI, the search is further localized from one stage to the next, but the final decision is not made until the last stage. In particular, by making nearest neighbor symbols belong to multiple subsets, a later equalization stage (e.g. second stage 220 in
Q={−7,−5,−3,−1,+1,+3,+5,+7} (4)
The three overlapping subsets shown in
Q′={−4,0,±4} (5)
The overlap means that the second equalization stage 220 of the SLI structure 200 of
{circumflex over (r)}
k′[1]=HMŝk-M′[1]+ . . . +H0ŝk′[1] (6)
where H0 represents the channel 120 with ISI.
The first equalization stage 510 removes the re-modulated signal {circumflex over (r)}k′[1] from rk to generate a modified signal rk[1] for input to the second equalization stage 520 as given by:
r
k
[1]
=r
k
−{circumflex over (r)}
k′[1] (7)
The modified signal rk[1] is then fed to the second stage 520 instead of the original signal rk. The second equalization stage 520 determines the final symbol decision ŝk by performing sequence estimation on the signal rk[1] output by the first stage 510 using the subset Q′[2] of constellation points input to or selected by the last stage 520, generating a localized symbol decision ŝk′[2] associated with the second stage 520. A summer 530 included in or associated with the second equalization stage 520 sums ŝk′[1] and ŝk′[2] to generate the final symbol decision ŝk as given by:
ŝ
k
=ŝ
k′[1]+ŝk′[2] (8)
To account for change to the input of the second equalization stage 520, constellation Q′[2] is the subset of Q centered so its centroid is equal to 0. With regard to the subset embodiment shown in
In this case as well, the first stage may output the complete sequence of symbol decisions in one block, the second stage begins its operation. In another embodiment, the first demodulation stage outputs its symbol decisions sequentially, based on a decision delay D, as discussed earlier. Then the second stage can begin its operation as it sequentially accepts the symbols from the first stage.
{circumflex over (r)}
k′[i]=HMŝk-M′[i]+ . . . +H0ŝk′[i] (9)
A signal subtractor component 630 of the i-th stage 600 subtracts {circumflex over (r)}k′[i] from rk[i-1] to yield a modified received signal rk[i], which is fed to the next equalization stage (not shown in
ŝ
k
=ŝ
k′[1]+ . . . +ŝk′[N] (10)
In one embodiment, each intermediary stage 720 of the N-stage SLI equalizer 700 has the same structure as the i-th equalization stage 600 shown in
The i-th intermediary stage 720 also generates a re-modulated signal {circumflex over (r)}k′[i] as a function of the channel 120 and the localized symbol decision generated by the stage 720. The re-modulated signal {circumflex over (r)}k′[i] is removed from the modified version of the received signal rk[i-1] output by the immediately preceding stage, e.g. as shown in
Broadly, there is no restriction on how the overlapping subsets used for SLI equalization are defined. Subset size can vary, the number of available subsets can change from stage to stage, etc. For the case of ASK, overlapping subsets can be defined in a way that yields a nested structure and a three subset representation. Consider the general case of 2L ASK, having the constellation given by:
Q={−2L+1, . . . ,−1,+1, . . . ,+2L−1} (11)
Three overlapping subsets are defined, where the first subset contains the 2L-1 negative points. The second includes the 2L-1 middle points {−2L-1+1, . . . , +L-1−1}, corresponding to 2L-1 ASK. The third subset includes the 2L-1 positive points. The centroids for each of the three subsets are −2L-1, 0 and +2L-1, respectively. The same technique can be used to generate three overlapping subsets for 2L-1 ASK, and so on. An N-stage SLI equalization structure can be designed using these subsets with N≦L. Except for the last stage of the N-stage SLI equalizer, the set of centroids input to or selected by the i-th stage is given by:
Q′
[i]={−2N-i,0,+2N-i} (12)
The last stage of the N-stage SLI equalizer has the constellation of 2L-N+1 ASK. In particular, for N=L−1, Q′[N]={−3, −1, +1, +3}. If the maximum number of stages N=L is used, then Q′[N]={−1, +1}. The 8-ASK example described above yields a nested subset construction, with L=3 and N=2 stages.
The SLI embodiments described herein can be readily adapted to other modulation schemes such as QAM. The extension of SLI from ASK to QAM is straightforward. Again, in principle, there is no restriction on how the overlapping subsets are defined. In one embodiment, the nested subset design of 2′-ASK can be generalized to 22L-QAM. Just as QAM can be viewed as taking the product of two ASK constellations to produce the complex QAM constellation, the product of the ASK subsets can be taken to produce the subsets of QAM.
The design of overlapping subsets need not be based on the component ASK constellation.
Storage complexity of MLSE is driven by the number of states, and the computational complexity by the number of branches. The states are referred to next as s and the branches as b. For a conventional MLSE structure, an estimate of complexity is given by:
qMs+qM+1b (13)
The complexity of the SLI equalization structures described herein can be estimated by adding the number of states and the number of branches from the multiple stages. This estimate proves to be over-conservative when memory is re-used because the number of states need no be included in the analysis. Regardless, for N-stage SLI-based equalization, the complexity estimate is given by:
For 16-QAM, a 2-stage SLI structure may be used based on the ASK-based overlapping subsets derived as previously described herein. Such a 2-stage SLI structure yields q′[1]=9 and q′[2]=4. For memory M=1, the complexity estimate is then given by:
(9s+81b)+(4s+16b)=13s+97b (15)
In contrast, conventional MLSE requires 16s+256b. As M grows, the complexity advantage of SLI-based equalization becomes even more evident.
For 64-QAM, either a 2-stage or a 3-stage SLI equalization structure may be used. The 2-stage SLI structure is based on the 8-ASK example previously described herein, with q′[1]=9 and q′[2]=16. For M=1, the complexity estimate for the 64-QAM 2-stage SLI structure is given by:
(9s+81b)+(16s+256b)=25s+337b (16)
The 3-stage SLI equalization structure uses a 3-level partition for 64-QAM, with q′[1]=9 and q′[2]=16. The complexity estimate for the 64-QAM 3-stage SLI structure is given by:
2(9s+81b)+(4s+16b)=22s+178b (17)
In contrast, conventional MLSE requires 64s+4096b. The complexity advantage of SLI is now evident even for M=1, due to the large constellation size.
The SLI-based equalization structures described herein tend to work more efficiently when the self-interference from lagging channel taps is relatively small. Accordingly, it is useful to combine SLI with a pre-filter, whose job is to push the energy of the channel towards the leading tap(s). Doing so increases the total effective channel memory. However, SLI still provides a large complexity advantage over MLSE, even with the larger memory. A DFSE structure based on SLI, which is discussed later herein, further takes advantage of the pre-filter effect while trimming memory size.
As described previously herein, individual SLI equalization stages may implement MLSE to perform ISI suppression and demodulation. Alternatively, individual SLI equalization stages can implement DFSE or other types of sequence estimation techniques. DFSE is a very effective approximation to MLSE, offering suitable tradeoff between complexity and performance.
In order to produce the older (M−M′) symbols, tentative symbol decisions are made, e.g. as explained earlier with regard to MLSE. That is, the DFSE component 900 traces back from the truncated state (ŝk-M′, . . . , ŝk-1) by following the chain of predecessor states to produce tentative decisions, denoted as (
With regard to the SLI equalization structures described herein, in a given stage, MLSE can be replaced with DFSE, with or without a pre-filter. This way, DFSE can be flexibly chosen for certain stages, but not others. For instance, a certain stage may have a relatively large effective constellation, and DFSE would help control the complexity of that stage.
With the above range of variations and applications in mind, it should be understood that the present invention is not limited by the foregoing description, nor is it limited by the accompanying drawings. Instead, the present invention is limited only by the following claims, and their legal equivalents.