This invention relates generally to communication systems, and more particularly to a system and method for decreasing cross-talk effects in time-domain modulation (TDM) digital subscriber line (DSL) systems.
Communication systems are configured to provide a pathway in which information may be transmitted from one site (i.e., a source site) to another site (i.e., a sink site). Typically, the information is conveyed in the form of signals that are transmitted through communication channels. In ideal systems, each transmitted piece of information from the source site is received at the sink site without any corruption. In other words, a signal received at the sink site is an exact replica of the transmitted signal from the source site.
Unfortunately, due to system characteristics, actual communications systems corrupt the transmitted signal so that the received signal is not an exact replica of the transmitted signal. The signal corruption may be represented using a system error variance after channel equalization, which reflects the degree of corruption that is introduced into a system. In view of the relationship between signal corruption and system error variance, a need exists in the art to reduce system error variance, thereby reducing signal corruption.
The present invention provides a system and method for decreasing signal corruption in a communications system. In one embodiment, a secondary sensor is coupled to a communications system, which alters system characteristics, thereby reducing signal corruption.
In architecture, one embodiment of the system comprises a receiver that is characterized by a receiver error variance, which is proportional to a degree of signal corruption. A secondary sensor is coupled to the receiver, and the secondary sensor generates a filtered slave signal that is used to decrease the receiver error variance to produce a decreased system error variance.
In accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, a method is provided for reducing signal corruption in a communications system. The method can be broadly conceptualized as generating a filtered slave signal and decreasing a system variance using the filtered slave signal.
Other systems, methods, features, and advantages of the invention will be, or become, apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of the following figures and detailed description. It is intended that all such additional systems, methods, features, and advantages be included within the scope of the invention, and be protected by the accompanying claims.
The above and further features, advantages, and benefits of the present invention will be apparent upon consideration of the following detailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like reference characters refer to like parts throughout.
Having summarized various aspects of the present invention, reference will now be made in detail to the description of the invention as illustrated in the drawings. While the invention will be described in connection with these drawings, there is no intent to limit it to the embodiment or embodiments disclosed therein. On the contrary, the intent is to cover all alternatives, modifications, and equivalents included within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.
(ν). A disturbance signal 118 having a disturbance signal variance 120 of σdist2 and a disturbance normalized spectral density 125 of
(ν) is received through the master coupling filter 115. In a digital subscriber line (DSL) environment, the disturbance signal 118 may be near-end cross-talk (NEXT). A master channel white noise 133 having a master channel white noise variance 135 of σWM2 is added to the main signal 108 and the disturbance signal 118 at a master perturbation summing circuit 130 to produce a master-composite signal 140. The master-composite signal 140 is input to a feedback circuit 195 that recursively updates its feedback characteristics.
The feedback circuit 195 comprises a master feedforward filter 145, a feedback summing circuit 155, a memory-less decision device 165, a feedback filter 180, and a updating adder circuit 170 that feeds back a correction signal 175 to the master feedforward filter 145 and the feedback filter 180. The master feedforward filter 145 of the feedback circuit 195 initially receives the master-composite signal 140 and filters the master-composite signal 140 to produce a master filtered signal 150. The master filtered signal 150 is input to the feedback summing circuit 155, which uses the master filtered signal 150 to produce a feedback-compensated signal 160. The feedback-compensated signal 160 is input to both the memory-less decision device 165 and the updating adder circuit 170. The memory-less decision device 165 receives the feedback-compensated signal 160 and produces a decision output 190. The decision output 190 is fed back to both the feedback filter 180 and the updating adder circuit 170. The feedback filter 180 receives the decision output 190 and produces a feedback signal 185 as a function of the decision output 190. This feedback signal 185 is subtracted from the master filtered signal 150 by the feedback summing circuit 155. Thus, the feedback-compensated signal 160 is a function of both the feedback signal 185 and the master filtered signal 150. The updating adder circuit 170 receives the decision output 190 and produces a correction signal 175 by subtracting from the decision output 190 the earlier received feedback-compensated signal 160. It is this correction signal that is used to update the master feedforward filter 145 coefficient and the feedback filter 180 coefficient.
In the above-described system, the degree of signal corruption may be represented by an error variance after channel equalization. Thus, in the classical minimum-mean-square error (MMSE) decision feedback equalizer (DFE) (i.e., the receiver 100) of
wherein V represents the error variance, σmain 2 represents the variance 110 of the main signal 108, ν represents the normalized frequency, and SNR(ν) represents the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the DFE at the normalized frequency. The SNR(ν) may be further represented as:
wherein (ν) represents the frequency gain of the system, σmain2 represents the variance 110 of the main signal 108, σWM2 represents the master channel white noise variance 135, σdist2 represents the disturbance signal variance 120 after the master coupling filter 115, and
(ν) represents the normalized spectral density 125 of the disturbance signal 118 (e.g., near-end cross-talk (NEXT)). Additionally, since
(ν) represents the normalized spectral density 125, this implies that:
Due to the setup of classical MMSE-DFE, the SNR is a function of the disturbance signal 118 spectral density, which is represented by:
σdist2(ν) [Eq. 4].
By strategically adding a secondary sensor 200 (
The system of
The secondary sensor comprises a slave-coupling filter 205 having a slave-coupling filter coefficient of (ν) and a slave feedforward filter 225. The disturbance signal 118 is received by the secondary sensor 200 through the slave-coupling filter 205. A slave channel white noise 213 having a slave channel white noise variance 210 of σWS2 is added to the disturbance signal 118. For purposes of illustration,
In the system of (ν), becomes:
wherein:
σWS2 represents the variance 210 of the slave channel white noise 213, and (ν) and
(ν) represent the responses of the master coupling filter 115 and the slave-coupling filter 215, respectively.
As seen from Eqs. 4 and 5, the new spectral density term of Eq. 5 will always be less than or equal to the traditional spectral density term of Eq. 4, thereby resulting in an inequality such that:
Given that the added secondary sensor 200 alters the spectral density term according to Eqs. 5 and 7, the new SNR term, according to Eqs. 2 and 5, becomes:
Furthermore, now that the new SNR is defined according to Eq. 8, the new variance of the system having the additional secondary sensor 200 is now:
Thus, from Eqs. 7, 8, and 9, it can be seen that for all frequencies:
SNR(ν)≦SNRnew(ν) [Eq. 10],
thereby allowing for a more effective denoising scheme. Additionally, if the master channel white noise 133 is relatively small compared to the disturbance signal 118 effect, then Eq. 9 may be approximated according to:
Thus, according to Eqs. 1 and 11, the commensurate improvement in variance may be seen as:
As shown from the system of
The system, therefore, may be seen as having two parallel segments that are coupled at the input, and a feedback circuit 395 that is configured to receive the output of the two parallel segments and update system characteristics of the two parallel segments. The first segment is referred to as a master segment, while the second segment is referred to as a secondary sensor 300.
The master segment comprises a master channel input 105, a master coupling filter 115 having a master coupling filter coefficient of (ν), a master-composite signal adder 340, and a master feedforward filter 145. A main signal 108 having a main signal variance 110 of σmain2 is received through the master channel input 105, while a disturbance signal 118 having a disturbance signal variance 120 of σdist2 is received through the master coupling filter 115. Master channel white noise 130 having a master channel white noise variance 130 of σWM2 is added to the disturbance signal 118. For purposes of illustration,
The secondary sensor 300 comprises a slave-channel input 305, a slave-coupling filter 205 having a slave-coupling filter coefficient of (ν), a slave-composite signal adder 320, and a slave feedforward filter 350. The main signal 108 is received through the slave-channel input 305, while a disturbance signal 118 is received through the slave-coupling filter 205. Slave channel white noise 213 having a slave channel white noise variance 210 of σWS2 is added to the disturbance signal 118. For purposes if illustration,
The feedback circuit 395 comprises the master feedforward filter 145 and the slave feedforward filter 350. Additionally, the feedback circuit 395 comprises a system composite signal adder 365, a feedback summing circuit 155, a memory-less decision device 165, a feedback filter 180, and an updating adder circuit 170. Once the master feedforward filter 145 and the slave feedforward filter 350 have produced the master filtered signal 360 and the filtered slave signal 355, respectively, these two signals 360, 355 are added together ad the system composite adder 365 to produce a system composite signal 370. The system composite signal 370 is input to the feedback summing circuit 155, which uses the system composite signal 370 to produce a feedback compensated signal 380. The feedback-compensated signal 380 is input to both the memory-less decision device 165 and the updating adder circuit 170. The memory-less decision device 165 receives the feedback-compensated signal 380 and produces a decision output 390. The decision output 390 is fed back to both the feedback filter 180 and the updating adder circuit 170. The feedback filter 180 receives the decision output 390 and produces a feedback signal 385 as a function of the decision output 390. This feedback signal 385 is subtracted from the system composite signal 370 by the feedback summing circuit 155. Thus, the feedback-compensated signal 380 is a function of both the feedback signal 385 and the system composite signal 370. The updating adder circuit 170 receives the decision output 390 and produces a correction signal 375 by subtracting from the decision output 390 the earlier received feedback-compensated signal 380. It is this correction signal 375 that is used to update the master feedforward filter 145 coefficient, the slave feedforward filter 350 coefficient, and the feedback filter 180 coefficient.
As shown in
In the system of (ν), which takes into account the frequency gain of both the master segment and the secondary sensor 300. In other words,
(ν) represents both the master frequency gain and the slave frequency gain. Additionally, since there is a correlation between the perturbation in the master segment and the perturbation in the secondary sensor 300, a matrix
(ν) may be defined to represent the spectral covariance between the master perturbation and the slave perturbation. Stated differently,
(ν) represents the spectral covariance matrix of both the master-perturbation signal 335 and the slave-perturbation signal 220. Eq. 1 may now be re-written as:
to account for the contribution of the secondary sensor 300.
If the signal from the secondary sensor 300 is sufficiently small, then the variance of Eq. 13 may be approximated by:
wherein:
(ν) represents the spectral density of the master-perturbation signal 335,
(ν) represents the spectral density of the slave-perturbation signal 220, and
(ν) represents the inter-spectral density between the slave-perturbation signal 220 and the master-perturbation signal 335.
According to the Schwartz inequality, (ν)
(ν) will never be greater than
(ν). Hence, for all ν:
ρS,M2(ν)≦1 [Eq. 16].
Thus, from Eqs. 1, 14, and 16, if the signal from the secondary sensor 300 is sufficiently small, then:
Vnew≦V [Eq. 17].
In addition to the systems described above, another embodiment of the invention may be seen as a method for reducing system error variance, thereby reducing signal corruption (or degradation).
Although an exemplary embodiment of the present invention has been shown and described, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that a number of changes, modifications, or alterations to the invention as described may be made, none of which depart from the spirit of the present invention. For example, while the secondary sensor 200 (
All such changes, modifications, and alterations should therefore be seen as within the scope of the present invention.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/283,465, dated Apr. 12, 2001, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5214675 | Mueller et al. | May 1993 | A |
| 5881108 | Herzberg et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 6411661 | Nguyen et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6891897 | Bevan et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6999504 | Amrany et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7010030 | Vaidyanathan | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 20020150059 | Blake | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20030043887 | Hudson | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20060039550 | Chadha et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60283465 | Apr 2001 | US |