The present invention relates to a data processing technique that permits identification of reliable symbols in the presence of Inter-Symbol Interference (“ISI”) and other data correlated noise (collectively, “ISI”). Data correlated noise refers to a variety of phenomena in data processing systems in which a data signal interferes with itself at a destination. The present invention also relates to the use of reliable symbols to determine values of source symbols that are corrupted by ISI. The present invention finds application in systems where source symbols are members of high-order constellations. Previously, such systems have required the use of training symbols for operation in the presence of real-world ISI phenomenon.
ISI phenomena may be modeled mathematically. In the case where the data signal X is populated by a number of data symbols xn, captured signals yn at the destination 120 may be represented as:
yn=a0·xn+f(xn−K
where a0 represents a gain factor associated with the channel 130, f(xn−K
where a−K
ISI may arise from a variety of real-world phenomena. Multipath is an example of ISI that occurs in wireless and other communication systems. In a wireless system 200, shown in
ISI is seen as a serious impediment to the use of high-order constellations for data processing systems. A “constellation” represents a set of unique values that may be assigned to data symbols. Several examples are shown in
The problem is that, when using high-order constellations, blind equalization (equalization without either an initial training sequence, or ‘refresher’ training sequences) is very hard to achieve because the detrimental effects of ISI increase with increasing constellation order.
There is a need in the art for a data transmission system that, in the presence of realistic levels of ISI, uses blind techniques to decode symbols from a high-order constellation.
Embodiments of the present invention identify reliable symbols from a sequence of captured signal samples at a destination. Although the ISI effects associated with high-order symbol constellation transmissions impose large signal corruption on average, some samples suffer relatively low levels of ISI. These samples are the reliable symbols. Having identified reliable symbols from a sequence of captured signal samples, it is possible to reliably estimate the actual source symbols for all captured signal samples.
Identification Of Reliable Symbols
A “reliable symbol” is a captured sample yn that is very likely to be located within a decision region of a corresponding source symbol xn transmitted from the source 110 at time n. At a destination 120, each constellation symbol is associated with a decision region that represents a set of all points that are closer to the respective symbol than to any other symbol in the constellation.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, identification of a signal yn as “reliable” may be carried out using a reliability factor Rn given by:
where the ci are constants representing any priori knowledge of the ISI effect that may be available. Generally, if nothing is known about the ISI, then the cl's may all be set equal to 1. In other situations, additional information as to the nature of the channel 130 may be known and the ci's may be given values reflecting this information. If the reliability factor of a sample yn is less than a predetermined limit value, designated “dlim” herein, the sample may be designated as a “reliable symbol.”
Where samples on only one side of a candidate sample yn contribute to the ISI, the reliability factor of the sample yn may be determined using:
where K=K2 in equation 3. In respect to the forgoing reliability factors (equations (3) and (4)) the yn's may be real for one-dimensional signal structures or complex for two-dimensional signal structures.
For systems using two-dimensional constellations, such as the QAM constellations shown in
where y1
In another embodiment, the reliability factor Rn may be calculated based on the constellation symbols that are closest to the captured samples. Each captured sample yn will be closest to one constellation point pn from the constellation
pn={CPp:min(CP−yn)} (6)
where CP is the set of all possible received constellation points.
In this embodiment, reliability factors may be determined from the constellation points pn according to one of:
These formulae simply are an extension of equations 3–5 substituting pn−i for yn−i.
The predetermined threshold dlim may be determined based on the applications for which the identification method is to be used. In one embodiment, the threshold may be set to the value dlim=(K1+K2)·dmin where dmin is half the distance between two constellation points that are closest together. This threshold is appropriate for the case where
Experiments have shown, however, that operation can be maintained using the same threshold when
The threshold dlim also may vary over time. If the predetermined threshold is increased, then an increased number of samples will be accepted as reliable symbols though, of course, all of these symbols will not be of the same reliability. Similarly, by decreasing the threshold dlim, the number of samples that are designated as reliable symbols will decrease. These symbols will be those symbols with lower reliability factors. During operations of a reliable symbol detection method, the threshold dlim may be varied to maintain a rate of detected reliable symbols at a desired value. For example, if a rate of detected symbols falls below a first rate threshold, the dlim value may be increased. Or, if the rate of detected symbols exceeds a second rate threshold, the dlim value may be decreased.
In other embodiments, samples may be identified as reliable symbols based not only on reliability factors of the samples Rn but also may be based on the values of the sample itself (yn, pn). In a given application, reliability factors of a plurality of candidate samples (say, y1, y2, y3) each may be at or near the threshold (Rn(yn)≈dlim, ∀n=1,2,3). In this case, the candidate samples may be prioritized according to the magnitude of the samples themselves, sorting either in ascending order of sample value or descending value of sample value as may be appropriate in a given application. Similarly, after equalization has begun and estimated source symbols {circumflex over (x)}n become available, prioritization among candidate samples may be made according to the magnitude of the estimated symbols. Additionally, identification of reliable symbols may be based not only upon reliability factors Rn but also on the sample values yn or estimated symbol values {circumflex over (x)}n themselves. In this embodiment, a sample may be designated as a reliable symbol if the reliability factor is less than a first threshold dlim and if the sample value yn (or symbol value {circumflex over (x)}n) is less than a second threshold value. In this embodiment, these two conditions are required to be met before a sample is designated as a reliable symbol.
If at box 2030 the reliability counter Rn does not exceed the predetermined limit, the method may continue. The index value i may be incremented (box 2050). If i=0, if n-i points to the candidate symbol yn itself (box 2060), the index value may be incremented again. Otherwise, the method 2000 may determine whether i is greater than K2 (box 2070). If so, then the candidate sample yn is a reliable symbol (box 2080). Otherwise, the method may return to the operation at box 2020 and add to the reliability counter based on the value of the next sample yn−i.
The foregoing description of the method 2000 has presented operation when no a priori knowledge of the channel is available at the destination 120 (e.g., ci=1 for all i). When knowledge of the channel is available and cl values may be determined for one or more i, then at box 2020 the reliability counter Rn may increment according to Rn=Rn+ci·|yn−i| (shown as bracketed text in box 2020).
In this way, the method of operation 2000 examines the neighboring samples of yn (K1 precursors and K2 postcursors) to see if yn meets the criterion for being a reliable symbol.
When a destination captures a plurality of samples yn, each sample may be considered according to the method of
Additionally, the surrounding samples may be selected, as a sub-set of the full range i=−K1 to K2 and the associated surrounding samples be examined. If a sequence of, say, three samples yj to Yj+2 have values that would cause the reliability limit dlim to be exceeded, then any sample yl having the sequence of samples within the −K1 to K2 window need not be considered under the method 2000 of
An alternate embodiment finds application where ISI corruption is expected to be linear and caused by symbols from only one side of a candidate symbol, according to:
In such an embodiment, the iterative scan illustrated in
In QAM systems, there are several alternatives to detect reliable symbols. As shown in
The method of
In an embodiment, the methods of
Alternatively, reliable symbols may be identified according to one or more of the techniques described in the Applicant's co-pending PCT patent application PCT/GB00/02634, entitled “Adaptive Blind Equaliser,” filed Jul. 10, 2000, the subject matter of which is incorporated herein by reference.
The foregoing discussion has described various embodiments for identification of reliable symbols in a captured signal stream. Reliable symbols may be decoded immediately without further processing. Thus, for the set YRS of reliable symbols, Yn∈YRS, a data decoder in a destination 120 may generate decoded symbols {circumflex over (x)}n to be the constellation point closest to yn. The decoded symbol {circumflex over (x)}n may be the destination's estimate of the source data symbol xn.
The foregoing embodiments find application in applications in which captured samples yn do not exhibit phase offset with respect to the source symbols xn. Of course, in some applications, it may be expected that the captured samples yn will exhibit a phase offset with respect to their source symbols xn. Where captured samples yn exhibit a phase rotation with respect to the source symbols xn, a “reliable symbol” may be defined alternately as a sample yn that is likely to be observed in the annular constellation ring of its source symbol xn. Restated, ISI corruption is unlikely to push the source symbol xn from its constellation ring when observed as the captured sample yn at the destination 120. The reliability factor of equation 3 may be applied in this embodiment, using observed power levels of the captured samples:
and, equation 5 may be used.
Exemplary annular constellation rings are shown in
The methods of
In one embodiment a subset of the total range of power levels of yn may be used.
Use Of Reliable Symbols
In further embodiments of the present invention, reliable symbols may be used as a basis for decoding transmitted symbols xn from received non-reliable captured samples that are not reliable symbols (yn∉YRS). A description of these embodiments follows.
Adaptation and symbol correction techniques per se are known. In communication applications, such techniques often are provided within channel equalizers. A variety of channel equalization techniques are known, including both time-domain equalizers and frequency-domain equalizers. At a high level, adaptation refers to the process by which the equalizer learns of the ISI corruption effects and symbol correction refers to a process by which the equalizer reverses the ISI effects to determine from the sequence of captured samples Y what the source symbol sequence X is most likely. However, for these existing techniques to work, in the presence of realistic level of ISI when operating with high-order constellations, it would be necessary to use an initializing training sequence and thereafter to use training sequences that are transmitted periodically. The use of the reliable symbols method overcomes this need. Any of a variety of known equalizers may be used with the reliable symbols technique and the adaptation process—the process by which the equalizer learns—can be rendered blind. Having learned what the ISI effects are based on the reliable symbols YRS, the equalizer may decode symbols {circumflex over (x)}n from all of the captured samples yn.
Perhaps the simplest embodiment of equalizer is the subtractive equalizer. In the subtractive equalizer, the adaptation unit 320 estimates the channel ISI coefficients âi. Using the estimated coefficients âi the symbol decoder 330 may estimate source symbols, {circumflex over (x)}n, by decoding y′n where:
in which {circumflex over (x)}n−i represent prior decoded symbols. The equalizer may generate a decoded symbol {circumflex over (x)}n as the constellation symbol that is closest to y′n.
As noted, different types of equalizers can be used. A decision feedback equalizer (also “DFE”) may be incorporated within the symbol decoder 410 of the system 400 shown in
In this embodiment shown in
The foregoing embodiments have described use of reliable symbols to extend application of known adaptation processes to ISI estimation for high-order constellations in the presence of realistic levels of ISI without the use of training sequences. By extension, this use of reliable symbols permits data decoders to estimate high-constellation source symbols X from a sequence Y of captured samples. Advantageously, this use of reliable symbols may be made non-invasive in that it can be employed without changing known adaptation and symbol decoding processes in prior art equalization systems.
Estimation of Channel Coefficients Based on Reliable Symbols and Reliability
By way of illustration, a way in which reliable symbols can be used in ISI coefficient estimation will now be described briefly. Consider the estimation of one-dimensional ISI coefficients. After a sufficient number of reliable and their related surrounding samples have been identified, the estimation of the ISI coefficients may be obtained as the solution of a standard matrix equation:
â=(HTH)−1HTδ (11)
where: â is a vector of the ISI coefficient estimates; H is an N×M matrix, with N>M, in which each row contains the M surrounding symbol estimates or alternatively, the corresponding M surrounding sample values for each reliable symbol, and N is the number of related detected reliable symbols (a larger N is required for lower signal to noise ratios); and δ is an N×1 vector that contains the distances of the N reliable symbols from their estimated origin points.
By way of example, consider the following situation: The ISI length is assumed to have two coefficients (K1=0,K2=2) and the estimation is based on four reliable symbols. Let it be assumed that they correspond to time indexes: 100, 250, 300 and 320. Then,
Optionally, however, the performance of the ISI adaptation can be improved by integrating a reliability weight factor into the calculation of ISI metrics. Consider the case of a subtractive equalizer. In such an equalizer, an adaptation unit 320 may estimate channel coefficients a1 and generate an estimate of source symbols according to equation 11 above.
In an embodiment, an estimate â of a may include a weighting based on reliabilities associated with received signal values. In this embodiment an estimate â of a may proceed according to:
â=(HtWH)−1HTWδ (14)
where W is a diagonal N×N matrix of reliability weights wi,i (wi,i=0 for all i≠j). In one such embodiment, the reliability weights wi,i may be obtained as:
wi,i=f(Ri) (15)
where Ri is the reliability factor associated with an ith sample value, i being a member of the set of N sample values being used in the estimation process, and f(.) is a function that increases inversely with the associated reliability factor (e.g. as defined in equation 3).
Thus, symbols of varying degrees of reliability can be used with an appropriate reliability weighting.
In an embodiment, a destination may store captured samples in a buffer memory while reliable symbols are detected and while ISI estimation occurs. Thereafter, when the ISI metrics are available, the stored samples may be read from the memory and decoded. In this regard, provided the buffer memory is appropriately sized, all captured samples may be decoded.
Estimation of Constellation Symbols In View of Channel Gain
Successful signal detection in communication systems requires a-priori knowledge of the location of the received constellation points. Hard-decision and soft-decision detection processes use a distance between a received signal point and its associated received constellation point to decode symbols. Communication in the presence of an ISI channel results with the received extreme points being affected to such degree that they cannot be used simply to detect the position of the received constellation points. In fact, the received extreme points can reach as far as
times their nominal distance from the origin. In addition, with gaussian noise from other sources taken in account, this maximum distance from the origin can be increased further. The location of the received constellation points is the product of the location of transmitted constellation points and the channel gain.
In many communication applications, upon initial start up, a destination may have no a-priori knowledge of ISI coefficients (ai, i=·K1 to K2, i≠0) and also no a priori knowledge of the channel gain (a0). Under this condition, the estimation of received constellation points may be carried out in two stages. In a first stage, an initial estimation of the received constellation points may be made based on a small set of reliable symbols. In a second stage, a final estimation of received constellation points may be made using a larger set (possibly all) of the reliable symbols. These two stages are described below.
Initial Estimation of the Received Constellation Points
As described above, reliable symbols have the property that, when observed at the destination, they are closer to the source constellation point than to any other point in the constellation. This implies that the maximum distance from the reliable symbol to the source constellation point is at most half the distance between adjacent points in the received constellation.
The channel gain estimation may be made from reliable symbols. From a plurality of reliable symbols, those reliable symbols having the maximum magnitude along the constellation axes (e.g. the I and Q axes of a QAM constellation) may be chosen to be the initial maximum received constellation point in each axis. An initial constellation size may be determined from the magnitude of these maximally sized reliable symbols.
Let {circumflex over (P)}1max be the initial estimation of the value of the maximum of the received constellation point along an axis. For a regular constellation, one having the same number of symbols in each axis, an initial estimation {circumflex over (P)}i1 of the received constellation is:
where M is the number of points in the constellation and q is an integer index along an axis of the constellation. Equation 16 is appropriate for use when the constellation is square and the constellation points are regularly spaced. In general, when different symmetrical constellation shapes are used, the denominator in Equation 16 may be the number of constellation points for each axis, minus one, and q may be an appropriately valued index.
In an embodiment using a general constellation, the denominator in Equation 16 may be adjusted according to the number of constellation points for each axis:
where MJ is the number of points along the Jth axis of the constellation and qJ is the index along a Jth axis of the constellation.
Revising the Estimated Constellation Points
Returning to the regular case, an improved, {circumflex over (p)}2q, can be obtained from:
and where s is the number of detected reliable symbols, sq is a set of reliable symbols that are associated with the constellation point q as defined by Equation 18 and {ynq } are the set of sample values which are reliable symbols and are associated with the qth estimated constellation point. Equation 18 defines a set of constellation point estimates for use in channel gain estimation. The channel gain a0 may be estimated as a ratio of the first constellation point estimate {circumflex over (p)}21 to the magnitude of a smallest transmitted constellation point, e.g. +1. The estimation method described above can be generalized to the situation in which the constellation may be non symmetrical and the separation between points may be non-uniform.
The demodulator 510 captures a signal Y from the channel and generates captured samples yn therefrom. The channel may be an electric, magnetic, acoustic, or optical propagation medium. Demodulators 510 for capturing such signals are well-known. On account of the ISI, samples from the captured signal stream generally will have no detectable correspondence to the transmitted constellation. It may take any number of values between the constellation points (e.g. 6.3, 6.5, −3.1). Captured sample data may be stored in a buffer 522 in the memory 520.
The memory system 520 may be logically organized to perform storage functions that may be necessary for operation of the structure 500 as an equalizer. A first area 522 of the memory may store captured samples y′n for further processing. This area may double as the frame memory 250 and buffer 270 illustrated in
As dictated by the instructions, operation of the processor 530 may be divided into logical units such as a reliable symbol detector 532, an adaptation unit 534 and a symbol decoder 536. The processor 530 may be a general purpose processor, a digital signal processor, an application-specific integrated circuit or a collection of processing elements. The processor 530 may generate data representing estimated source symbols {circumflex over (x)}n. These estimated source symbols may be output from the receiver structure 500 or, in an alternate embodiment, be returned to the memory 520 in a decoded symbol buffer 524 to await further processing, or both.
The foregoing discussion has presented techniques for identifying, from a sequence of captured samples, reliable symbols—samples that are likely to remain within the decision region of source symbols notwithstanding the presence of ISI corruption. Further, various data decoding techniques have been presented that permit ISI estimation to be carried out based on the identified reliable symbols and, therefore, permits decoding of all captured samples to occur. Additionally, the reliable symbol techniques permit equalization to occur as a “blind” process, without requiring use of training symbols to estimate the channel effect. The inventors have simulated transmission using 64-level QAM, 256-level QAM and 4096-level QAM. Use of these transmission constellations provides a 3 to 6-fold increase respectively in data transmission rates over 4-level QAM. Thus, the present invention contributes to data transmission systems having increased throughput without incurring expense in communication bandwidth.
Although the foregoing discussion refers to intersymbol interference as a source of data corruption affecting a source signal X, application of the present invention is not so limited. The present invention finds application in any situation in which data correlated noise occurs. References herein to “ISI” should be so construed.
Several embodiments of the present invention are specifically illustrated and described herein. However, it will be appreciated that modifications and variations of the present invention are covered by the above teachings and within the purview of the appended claims without departing from the spirit and intended scope of the invention.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
9926167.9 | Nov 1999 | GB | national |
16938.3 | Jul 2000 | GB | national |
00/02634 | Jul 2000 | WO | international |
00/02648 | Jul 2000 | WO | international |
This application is a continuation-in-part of the following applications: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/836,281, filed Apr. 18, 2001, PCT/GB00/02634, filed Jul. 10, 2000 (which benefits from the priority of UK application 16938.3, also filed Jul. 10, 2000), and PCT/GB00/02648, filed Jul. 10, 2000 (which benefits from the priority of UK application 9926167.4, filed Nov. 4, 1999), the disclosures of which is incorporated herein by reference. Certain claims may benefit from the priority of these applications.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4847797 | Picchi et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
5214675 | Mueller et al. | May 1993 | A |
5229767 | Winter et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5444712 | Betts et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5533048 | Dolan | Jul 1996 | A |
5533050 | Isard et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5541964 | Cohen et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5550924 | Helf et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5553102 | Jasper et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5694423 | Larsson et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5742642 | Fertner | Apr 1998 | A |
5793807 | Werner et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5809074 | Werner et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5818876 | Love | Oct 1998 | A |
5825832 | Benedetto | Oct 1998 | A |
5835731 | Werner et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5867539 | Koslov | Feb 1999 | A |
5887035 | Molnar | Mar 1999 | A |
5901185 | Hassan | May 1999 | A |
5940440 | Werner et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
6075816 | Werner et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6115433 | de Lantremange | Sep 2000 | A |
6259743 | Garth | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272171 | Okunev et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6275990 | Dapper et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278730 | Tsui et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304593 | Alouini et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6304594 | Salinger | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6310909 | Jones | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6347125 | Dent | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6421394 | Tanrikulu | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6426972 | Endres et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6438174 | Isaksson et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6456669 | Sakoda | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6477215 | Temerinac | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487244 | Betts | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6490270 | Krishnamoorthy et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6549584 | Gatherer et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556634 | Dent | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6560272 | Komatsu | May 2003 | B1 |
6567475 | Dent et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6577683 | Waldron et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6581179 | Hassan | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6603752 | Saifuddin et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6618451 | Gonikberg | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6661837 | Abdelilah et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6665308 | Rakib et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6704324 | Holmquist | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6717934 | Kaasila et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6804267 | Long et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6842495 | Jaffe et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
20020196862 | Dill et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030123595 | Linsky et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 625 829 | Nov 1984 | EP |
0 845 891 | Jun 1998 | EP |
1 024 631 | Aug 2000 | EP |
WO 9923795 | May 1999 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020037062 A1 | Mar 2002 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09836281 | Apr 2001 | US |
Child | 09899852 | US |