The present invention relates generally to communication systems, and more particularly to multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) communication systems.
MIMO communication systems come in a variety of different types, including, for example, point-to-point systems and multi-user systems. In a typical point-to-point MIMO communication system, a multi-antenna array in one terminal transmits to a multi-antenna array in another terminal, thereby achieving throughput gains relative to a single-antenna link having similar power and spectral bandwidth. In a typical multi-user MIMO communication system, a multi-antenna array in a base station sends multiple data streams selectively and simultaneously to autonomous single-antenna terminals, again achieving throughput gains relative to a set of single-antenna links. Multi-user systems of this type are sometimes referred to as “broadcast” MIMO systems. The converse to broadcast MIMO is sometimes referred to as “multi-access” MIMO, and it entails the autonomous single-antenna terminals sending multiple data streams simultaneously to the multi-antenna array in the base station.
Multi-user MIMO has a number of advantages relative to point-to-point MIMO. For example, terminals in multi-user MIMO systems can be simple and inexpensive. Also, point-to-point MIMO can fail to deliver the desired high throughput in line-of-sight propagation conditions, while under the same conditions multi-user MIMO continues to provide high throughput as long as the angular separation of the terminals exceeds the Rayleigh resolution of the transmit array. Furthermore, multi-user MIMO seamlessly handles the transition between line-of-sight and rich-scattering propagation.
The principle drawback of multi-user MIMO is that the base station has to know the propagation characteristics of the forward channel. The process through which the base station obtains this information is generally referred to as training. See, for example, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0265290 to Hochwald et al. entitled “Feedback Method For Channel State Information of a Wireless Link,” which is commonly assigned herewith and incorporated by reference herein.
It is recognized that the acquisition of such forward channel information is facilitated by time-division duplex (TDD) operation. In the TDD context, the principle of reciprocity implies that the reverse channel matrix is equal to the transpose of the forward channel matrix, so the base station can readily obtain the required forward channel information by processing pilot signals transmitted by the terminals on the reverse link.
Unfortunately, conventional approaches to multi-user MIMO communication may not be optimally configured for high terminal mobility situations. For example, under propagation conditions associated with high mobility, conventional approaches may not allow enough time before the channel changes to transmit reverse pilots and then transmit the forward data streams. Also, under low signal to interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) conditions, an excessive number of pilot symbols may be required to obtain a channel estimate of sufficiently good quality to enable selective transmission of the data streams. Thus, systems based on these conventional approaches may be unable to obtain the full throughput advantages of multi-user MIMO communication.
A need therefore exists for improved approaches to multi-user MIMO communication, particularly in terms of providing improved system throughput in the presence of high terminal mobility.
The present invention in an illustrative embodiment provides improved throughput in a MIMO system through the use of a variable slot structure.
In accordance with an aspect of the invention, a MIMO system is configured to utilize a variable slot structure. The system includes multiple terminals and at least one base station configured to communicate with the terminals. The base station is operative to determine mobilities for respective ones of the terminals, to arrange the terminals into groups based on the determined mobilities, and to utilize at least first and second different slot structures for communicating with the terminals of at least respective first and second ones of the groups. A priority may be established for serving the groups, and the groups are then served by the base station in accordance with the established priority.
The mobilities of the respective terminals may be determined, for example, based on channel measurements or satellite-based measurements. The terminal mobilities may be specified as respective velocity indicators, or using other types of information indicative of terminal mobility.
If a given one of the groups includes more terminals than can be served in a single slot, the given group may be separated into two or more smaller groups based on relative angular positions of the terminals in the given group.
The system in the illustrative embodiment is a multi-user MIMO system in which the multiple terminals comprise autonomous single-antenna terminals. More specifically, in the multi-user MIMO system of the illustrative embodiment, the base station communicates with the multiple terminals via an antenna array comprising M antennas and the multiple terminals comprise K single-antenna terminals, where M≧K. In other embodiments, one or more of the terminals may each comprise multiple antennas.
Optimal slot structures may be determined for communicating with the terminals of respective ones of the groups. A given such slot structure may be specified by a slot length, a number of terminals to be served in the slot over a forward link and a number of reverse link pilots. Preferably, the slot length of the given slot structure is less than or equal to an interval of time over which the terminals of that group move some specified fraction of a wavelength at the communication frequency. Such an interval of time is also referred to herein as a coherence interval, and may have a duration specified as a particular number of communication symbols within the system.
By way of example, the coherence interval may be specified as having a duration of T symbols, with a first portion comprising τrp reverse pilot symbols transmitted by the terminals of the corresponding group to the base station, a second portion comprising a training computation interval with a duration of a single symbol, and a third portion comprising (T−1−τrp) forward symbols which are transmitted by the base station to respective ones of the terminals of the corresponding group.
An optimal slot structure for communicating with the terminals of a given one of the groups may be identified by simultaneously determining a number of terminals to serve in a slot and a number of reverse link pilots for the slot, based on maximization of a throughput measure given a specified number of base station antennas. The throughput measure may comprise, for example, a lower bound on a sum-capacity of the system.
Advantageously, the variable slot structure of the illustrative embodiment provides significantly improved throughput in a multi-user MIMO communication system, compared to a system utilizing a fixed slot structure. For example, even in short coherence intervals and with low SINRs, a base station comprising sixteen or more antennas can both learn the channel and transmit, with high aggregate throughput, simultaneous multiple data streams to multiple single-antenna terminals. Higher or lower numbers of base station antennas may be used in other embodiments.
These and other features and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from the accompanying drawings and the following detailed description.
The present invention will be illustrated below in conjunction with exemplary multi-user MIMO systems and associated variable slot structures. It should be understood, however, that the invention is not limited to use with any particular type of MIMO system or variable slot structures. The disclosed techniques are suitable for use with a wide variety of other MIMO systems and variable slot structures, and in numerous alternative applications. For example, aspects of the present invention may be implemented in cellular communication systems, as well as in wireless networks such as Wi-Fi or WiMax.
The term “base station” as used herein is therefore intended to be construed broadly so as to encompass, by way of example, a cellular system base station, or an access point of a wireless network.
In other embodiments, one or more of the terminals 104 may each comprise multiple antennas, rather than a single antenna as in the present illustrative embodiment. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the techniques disclosed herein can be adapted in a straightforward manner for use with one or more such multi-antenna terminals.
Also, as indicated above, the disclosed techniques can be adapted for use in MIMO systems in which the above-noted reciprocity does not apply, such as frequency-division duplex (FDD) systems.
The base station 102 is shown in simplified form in
Referring now to
The slot structure of
The MAC process begins in step 400 with an identified set of candidate terminals. The candidate terminals are those terminals that are candidates for service in the current slot. These candidates can be identified using any of a number of well-known conventional techniques, such as, for example, techniques typically applied in MAC layers of conventional communication systems.
In step 402, the candidate terminals are grouped according to terminal mobility, using velocity indicators 404. The resulting set of groups is denoted {G1, G2, . . . }, and the particular number of groups in the set is a variable that may be adjusted. The velocity indicators could be, for example, measurements of how rapidly the channels between the base station and the terminals change, as obtained from received pilot signals or using other channel measurement techniques. As another example, a direct measurement of velocity could be obtained for those terminals that are equipped with global positioning satellite (GPS) capability.
The term “mobility” as used herein is to be construed generally so as to encompass, by way of example, any type of information indicative of the speed at which a given terminal is moving within the system. It is to be appreciated that velocity indicators need not be obtained for all terminals of a given system. For example, other types of mobility determinations may be used for certain terminals, while velocity indicators are used for just a subset of the terminals, or the MAC process may only be applied to certain system terminals.
In step 406, the process determines, for each group, the slot length, the number of terminals to serve in each slot, and the number of reverse link pilot symbols to employ in each slot. Exemplary techniques for making such determinations subject to certain assumptions will be described in greater detail below. The slot length for a given group is preferably no longer than an interval of time over which the terminals of that group move some specified fraction of a wavelength at the communication frequency, for example, one-eighth of a wavelength, although other techniques can be used to define the slot length.
Some of the groups established in step 402 may contain more terminals than can be served in one slot. A given group of this type may be split into two or more smaller groups as indicated in step 408. More particularly, in this embodiment, information concerning the relative angular positions of the terminals is used to determine the splitting of the given group into smaller groups. Generally, the given group is split into smaller groups such that each of the smaller groups contains terminals that are well-separated in angle. The angular position information in this embodiment is in the form of angular position indicators 410 for the respective terminals, and can be obtained using well-known conventional techniques, such as GPS measurements. The group splitting operation of step 408 results in a new set of groups denoted {G1′, G2′, . . . }. This set may include one or more groups that are not split into multiple groups in step 408, and any such groups remain the same as those resulting from the initial grouping operation in step 402.
In step 412, the process determines the order in which to serve the groups of terminals by prioritizing the groups. This prioritization for service may be based on well-known conventional MAC techniques involving fairness, demand or other factors. The groups are then served in accordance with their respective priorities as indicated in step 414. Thus, each group of terminals is served in one or more slots that have a structure, in terms of slot length, number of terminals to be served and number of reverse link pilots, that is specifically optimized for that group. In typical practical implementations, it is expected that the duration of the data streams to be transmitted from the base station to the terminals may require the use of two or more slots per group.
The MAC process as shown in
The power amplifier arrangement shown in
It is to be appreciated that the particular system configuration, variable slot structure, operation and other characteristics of the illustrative embodiment of
Detailed examples of the manner in which the slot structure may be determined for particular groups of terminals in step 406 of the
As described above, base station 102 in the illustrative embodiment comprises M antennas that communicate with K autonomous single-antenna terminals 104. For purposes of the following examples, it is assumed that the forward link propagation is characterized by a K×M propagation matrix H. No distinction is made between a flat-fading channel and a frequency-dependent channel. In the latter case H is a function of frequency typically handled by OFDM. Rayleigh fading is assumed such that the elements of H are independent identically distributed (iid) CN(0,1) (i.e., zero-mean, circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian). Again, TDD operation is assumed so that the reverse link propagation matrix is the transpose of the forward propagation matrix via reciprocity as previously described.
On the forward link the signal received by the k-th terminal is
The components of the additive noise are iid, CN(0,1), and there is an average power constraint
so that the total forward transmitted power is independent of the number of base station antennas. The constant ρf is the forward SINR at each terminal.
On the reverse link the signal received by the m-th base station antenna is
Again the components of the additive noise are iid, CN(0,1). The power constraint is
E{|srk|2}=1, k=1, . . . , K, (4)
which differs from the forward power constraint: note that the total reverse link power increases with the number of terminals. The constant ρr is the SINR which each terminal by itself is capable of producing at each base station antenna.
Typical base station powers are ten watts, while typical terminal powers are one-hundred milliwatts, although other power levels may be used. In a thermal noise-limited environment, the reverse SINR would be twenty dB smaller than the forward SINR. For purposes of the present examples, an interference-limited environment is assumed and it is further assumed that the reverse SINR is ten dB smaller than the forward SINR.
The terminals 104 transmit, on the reverse link, a sequence of known pilot signals of duration τrp≧K symbols in the manner shown in
Yr=√{square root over (ρrτrp)}HT·ψH+Vr, (5)
where Vr is the additive noise, which, after de-spreading, yields the minimum-mean-square linear estimator for the channel matrix,
The estimate, Ĥ, is independent of the estimation error, {tilde over (H)}≡Ĥ−H. The components of H are iid,
and the components of {tilde over (H)} are iid,
Note that the minimum required number of pilot symbols is equal to the number of terminals, and is independent of the number of base station antennas. Likewise the mean-square estimation error is independent of the number of base station antennas.
The base station transmits QAM symbols on the forward link selectively and simultaneously to the terminals through a M×K pre-conditioning matrix, A, that is proportional to the pseudo-inverse of the estimate for the forward channel,
The pre-conditioning ostensibly diagonalizes the forward channel. The normalization is chosen so that tr(AHA)=1.
As shown in
From the standpoint of the reverse link pilot, extra base station antennas are cost-free. It will be demonstrated heuristically, in the asymptotic region where M/K>>1, that there is a positive benefit in having extra base station antennas. Note that the elements of Ĥ are iid and proportional to CN(0,1) random variables. Therefore
so the pre-conditioning matrix (7) is proportional to the conjugate-transpose of the channel estimate. Note in (8) that the effective forward channel is a K×K matrix that is equal to the product of the actual propagation matrix and the pre-conditioning matrix,
G≡H·A. (9)
In the asymptotic regime, M/K>>1, so
Also, H·HH→M·IK, while the elements of H·V*rΨ* are uncorrelated with standard deviation equal to √{square root over (M)}. Hence
where the elements of Z are zero-mean, and uncorrelated with unit-variance. Consequently the channel information can be arbitrarily bad, but the use of more and more antennas in the base station will produce a better and better approximation to the ideal diagonal effective channel. In addition, the effective gain increases and more terminals can be served.
The channel characterized by (8) has a lower throughput than does the ideal multi-user MIMO channel. There are three sources of impairment: the pre-conditioning matrix is computed from an imperfect channel estimate, the use of a pseudo-inverse is suboptimal, and the terminals do not precisely know the effective channel (9). A rigorous lower bound on the sum-capacity of the multi-user MIMO system will now be derived. The sum-capacity is a measure of the throughput of the system. The derivation of the lower bound on the sum-capacity follows an approach described in B. Hassibi and B. M. Hochwald, “How much training is needed in multiple-antenna wireless links?,” IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 4, April 2003, which is incorporated by reference herein.
Although the terminals do not know the effective channel, they do know its mean. One can substitute (9) into (8), and add and subtract the mean of the effective channel as follows,
where
where {tilde over (H)}≡Ĥ−H, and having substituted the expression for the precoding matrix (7). Recall that Ĥ is independent of {tilde over (H)}, so {tilde over (H)} is independent of A. Also, the effective noise
φ(tr[(ZZH)−1])−1/2, (12)
where Z is a K×M random matrix whose elements are iid, CN(0,1). Let
where ēk is the K×1 vector whose k-th element is equal to one, and all other elements are equal to zero.
It can be shown that the k-th terminal receives the following signal
where the effective noise, uncorrelated with the QAM signal, is zero-mean with variance
Using the approach of the above-cited B. Hassibi et al. reference, the lower bound of the sum-capacity can be determined as follows. First, the QAM symbols are made CN(0,1) which provides a lower bound. Further, the mutual information is lower bounded by assuming that the effective noise is complex Gaussian. The end result is the following lower bound on sum-capacity,
where φ is defined by (12). When the number of base station antennas grows large compared with the number of terminals, suitable approximations for the mean and variance of φ can be substituted to obtain
For a fixed ratio of the number of base station antennas to the number of terminals, the sum-capacity increases linearly with the number of terminals.
A number of observations can be made from the plots of
As previously noted in conjunction with
Given a number of base station antennas, M, and given values for the forward and reverse SINRs, ρf and ρr, one can simultaneously choose the number of terminals to serve, and the number of reverse link pilots, to maximize the net throughput,
where Csum(·) is given by (17).
Again for the same scenarios,
The examples described above in the context of the plots of
It should be noted that, in the foregoing examples, it is generally always advantageous to increase the number of base station antennas. This activity does not increase the required number of reverse link pilots. The matrix-valued channel estimate increases in dimensionality, and, although the estimates for the individual channel coefficients do not improve, the effectiveness of the pseudo-inverse of the forward channel does improve.
As previously noted, the configuration of the multi-user MIMO system 100 may vary to suit the needs of a particular application. The foregoing examples indicate that one possible configuration for a high-throughput application is one in which the base station 102 has sixteen or more antennas, each driven by its own power amplifier as shown in
Although illustrated in the context of a particular type of multi-user MIMO system, the disclosed techniques are also applicable to other types of MIMO systems. For example, it was noted above that another type of multi-user MIMO system, sometimes referred to as multi-access MIMO, involves autonomous single-antenna terminals sending multiple data streams simultaneously to a multi-antenna array in the base station. In such a system, reverse link pilots may be used to inform the base station of the propagation characteristics of the reverse channel, and the base station can process its received data streams by computing and applying the pseudo-inverse of the channel matrix to the signals that it receives from its antennas. One possible combination of broadcast and multi-access MIMO would utilize alternate broadcast and multi-access slots. Such slots can be configured to have a variable structure using the techniques disclosed herein.
Again, it is to be appreciated that the particular assumptions, configurations and other characteristics of the illustrative embodiments described above are presented by way of example only. Accordingly, the particular MIMO system configuration shown in
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6058105 | Hochwald et al. | May 2000 | A |
6307882 | Marzetta | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6327310 | Hochwald et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6330460 | Wong et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6684086 | Miya | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6757272 | Abeta et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6937592 | Heath et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7463601 | Lee et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
20040081131 | Walton et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040082311 | Shiu et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040087275 | Sugar et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040131025 | Dohler et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040162083 | Chen et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040192216 | Marzetta et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050226173 | Strawczynski et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050265290 | Hochwald et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060098754 | Kim et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060146867 | Lee et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070155387 | Li et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070177494 | Tomizawa | Aug 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1 063 780 | Dec 2000 | EP |
2001169326 | Jun 2001 | JP |
2003259430 | Sep 2003 | JP |
2006270339 | Oct 2006 | JP |
1020050072772 | Jul 2005 | KR |
WO 9959269 | Nov 1999 | WO |
2004040800 | May 2004 | WO |
2004056022 | Jul 2004 | WO |
2006077842 | Jul 2006 | WO |
2006082637 | Aug 2006 | WO |
PCTUS2007022395 | Mar 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Goldsmith, Andrea; Wireless Communications, 2005, pp. 463-464. |
Viterbi, Andrew; CDMA Principles of Spread Spectrum Communication, 1995, p. 199. |
Caire et al., “On the Achievable Throughput of a Multiantenna Gaussian Broadcast Channel,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Jul. 2003, pp. 1691-1706, vol. 49, No. 7. |
Hassibi et al., “How Much Training is Needed in Multiple-Antenna Wireless Links?” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Apr. 2003, pp. 951-963, vol. 49, No. 4. |
Thomas L. Marzetta, “BLAST Training: Estimating Channel Characteristics for High Capacity Space-Time Wireless,” Proceedings 37th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, Sep. 22-24, 1999, 9 pages, Monticello, IL. |
Muriel Medard, “The Effect Upon Channel Capacity in Wireless Communications of Perfect and Imperfect Knowledge of the Channel,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, May 2000, pp. 933-946, vol. 46, No. 3. |
Vishwanath et al., “Duality, Achievable Rates, and Sum-Rate Capacity of Gaussian MIMO Broadcast Channels,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Oct. 2003, pp. 2658-2668, vol. 49, No. 10. |
Viswanath et al., “Sum Capacity of the Vector Gaussian Broadcast Channel and Uplink-Downlink Duality,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Aug. 2003, pp. 1912-1921, vol. 49, No. 8. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080101310 A1 | May 2008 | US |