The present invention is directed to a system and method to maximize capacity and/or range of a wireless radio communication link between two radio communication devices.
Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radio communication techniques are known to enhance the received SNR for signals transmitted by one device to another. Research in MIMO radio algorithms has been conducted in which multiple signal streams are transmitted simultaneously from multiple antennas at one device to another device, thereby greatly enhancing the data rate of the wireless radio channel between two devices. One prior approach for transmitting multiple signals streams simultaneously by a plurality of antennas uses a power constraint on the total power transmitted by the plurality of antennas combined and a waterfilling solution. The waterfilling solution requires multiple full-power power amplifiers at the transmitting device since, for some channels, it is possible that all or nearly all the transmit power may be transmitted from one power amplifier. There is room for improving the design of devices capable of MIMO radio communication, particularly where it is desirable to fabricate the radio transceiver of the device in an integrated circuit.
Briefly, a system, method and device are provided for simultaneous radio communication of multiple signals (signal streams) between a first device having N plurality of antennas and a second device having M plurality of antennas. Unlike prior approaches, the approach taken herein is to impose a power constraint on each transmit antenna path at the transmitting device.
At the first device, a vector s representing L plurality of signals [s1 . . . sL] to be transmitted are processed with a transmit matrix A to maximize capacity of the channel between the first device and the second device subject to a power constraint that the power emitted by each of the N antennas is less than or equal to a maximum power. The power constraint for each antenna may be the same for all antennas or specific or different for each antenna. For example, the power constraint for each antenna may be equal to a total maximum power emitted by all of the N antennas combined divided by N. The transmit matrix A distributes the L plurality of signals [s1 . . . sL] among the N plurality of antennas for simultaneous transmission to the second device. At the second device, the signals received by the M plurality of antennas are processed with receive weights and the resulting signals are combined to recover the L plurality of signals. Solutions are provided for the cases when N>M and when N≦M.
The performance of a system in which the communication devices are designed around a power constraint at each antenna is nearly as good as the optimal waterfilling solution, yet provides significant implementation advantages. The radio transmitter can be implemented with power amplifiers that require lower power output capability, and thus less silicon area. Consequently, there is lower DC current drain by the transmitter, and lower on-chip interference caused by the power amplifiers.
The above and other objects and advantages will become more readily apparent when reference is made to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
Referring to
Device 100 will simultaneously transmit L plurality of signals s1, s2, . . . , sL by antennas 110(1) to 110(N). A vector s is defined that represents the L plurality of signals [s1 . . . sL] (at baseband) to be transmitted such that s=[s1 . . . sL]T. The number (L) of signals that can be simultaneously transmitted depends on the channel H between device 100 and device 200, and in particular L≦Rank of HHH≦min(N,M). For example, if N=4, and M=2, then L≦Rank of HHH≦2.
The device 100 has knowledge of the channel state (e.g., using training sequences, feedback, etc.), i.e., device 100 knows H. Techniques to obtain and update knowledge of the channel H at the transmitting device (between the transmitting device and a receiving device) are known in the art and therefore are not described herein. For example, training and feedback techniques are described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,144,711 to Raleigh et al.
Two matrices are introduced: V is the eigenvector matrix for HHH and Λ is the eigenvalue matrix for HHH. Device 100 transmits the product As, where the matrix A is the spatial multiplexing transmit matrix, where A=VD. The matrix D=diag(d1, . . . , dL) where |dp|2 is the transmit power in pth mode, or in other words, the power of the pth one of the L signals where p=1 to L. Device 200 receives HAs+n, and after maximal ratio combining for each of the modes, device 200 computes c=AHHHHAS+AHHHn=DHDΛs+DHVHHHn.
As shown in
The transmit matrix A is a complex matrix comprised of transmit weights wT,ij, for i=1 to L and j=1 to N. Each antenna weight may depend on frequency to account for a frequency-dependent channel H. For example, for a multi-carrier modulation system, such as an orthogonal frequency division multiplexed (OFDM) system, there is a matrix A for each sub-carrier frequency k. In other words, each transmit weight wT,ij is a function of sub-carrier frequency k. For a time-domain (single-carrier) modulation system, each transmit weight wT,ij may be a tapped-delay line filter.
Prior approaches involve selecting the weights dp to maximize capacity
subject to a total power constraint emitted by the plurality of transmit antennas combined on the transmit matrix A, i.e.,
The optimum solution to this problem is to use waterfilling to select the weights dp (i.e., use waterfilling to put more power in eigenchannels with higher SNR λp).
The waterfilling approach requires N full-power capable power amplifiers at the transmitting device since, for some channels, it is possible for the optimal solution to require all or nearly all the transmit power to be sent from one antenna path. To reiterate, the prior approaches constrain the total power emitted from all of the antenna paths combined, simply ΣPi=PTOT<Pmax (for i=1 to N antennas) where Pmax is a total power constraint and Pi is the power from transmit antenna path i.
A better approach is to use a power constraint for each individual transmit antenna path. One such constraint is that the power transmitted from each antenna is less than the total power transmitted from all N antennas combined (Pmax) divided by N, e.g., Pi≦Pmax/N for all i. Using this approach, referred to as the “antenna power constraint” approach, each power amplifier can be designed to output (no more than) Pmax/N average power, where Pmax is the maximum power of the transmission from all of the N antennas combined. A significant benefit of this approach is that the power amplifiers can be designed to have lower maximum output power capability, thus requiring less silicon area. The use of smaller and lower-output power amplifiers has the benefit of lower on-chip power amplifier interference and lower DC current drain.
Using a Pmax/N power constraint for each antenna, the problem becomes:
In this case, the transmitting device (having N plurality of antennas) multiplies the vector s representing the L signals [s1 . . . sL]T to be transmitted with the transmit matrix A (i.e., computes As), where the transmit matrix A is computed with D set equal to I·sqrt(Pmax/N) (where I is the identity matrix) enforcing equal power in each mode. As a result, HHH is Hermitian and (with probability 1) is full-rank, which means that V is orthonormal. Consequently, (AAH)ii=(VDDHVH)ii=(VVH)iiPmax/N=Pmax/N, which means that equal power Pmax/N is transmitted at each antenna by a corresponding power amplifier of device 100, and the total transmit power is equal to Pmax.
Case 2: N>M:
In this case, HHH is not full-rank. Let v1, . . . , vL denote the L eigenvectors for HHH having nonzero eigenvalues. Let V=[v1 . . . vL], and let D=sqrt(d·Pmax/N)·I, where the power for each mode is the same and dp=d for p=1 to L. The power in antenna path i is given by (d·Pmax/N)·(VVH)ii. Thus, the power emitted from each of the i antenna paths may be different. The transmitting device (having the N antennas) multiplies the vector s representing the L signals [s1 . . . sL]T to be transmitted with the transmit matrix A (i.e., computes As), where the transmit matrix A is computed with D set equal to sqrt(d·Pmax/N)·I, where the power for each mode is the same and dp=d for p=1 to L.
Approach 1: Set d=1/z, where
Then the maximum power from any antenna path is Pmax/N. The total power from all antenna paths can be shown to be at least Pmax/M and no greater than Pmax.
Approach 2: Set d=1. In this case, the total power emitted by the N plurality of antennas is Pmax/M and the power emitted by antenna i for i=1 to N is (Pmax/N)·(VVH)ii.
Assuming the power amplifiers at devices on both sides of the link have the same peak output power, then for Case 1 and Case 2/Approach 2, the total power transmitted from the N antenna device will be equal to the total power transmitted from the M antenna device. Hence, the link between the two devices is symmetric in these situations. Case 2/Approach 1 is slightly more complicated (since it requires a normalization step) but has more transmitted power than Approach 2.
The solutions described above are capable of performing within 1 dB of the Shannon limit for a symmetric system (same number of antennas on both sides of the link), but facilitate use of smaller and more efficient power amplifiers in the radio transceiver, and as a result, achieve lower on-chip interference between radio paths (caused by the power amplifiers) than the waterfilling solution.
The antenna power constraint need not be the same for each of the transmit antennas and may be specific to or different for each antenna. Moreover, even if a different antenna power constraint is used for each antenna, each of the antenna-specific power constraints may be less than or equal to Pmax/N.
The device 200 with M plurality of antennas will transmit to device 100 subject to the same type of power constraint at each of the M plurality of antennas. The cases described above are applied where M is compared relative to N, and the appropriate solution is used for transmitting signals to device 100.
There are many ways to implement the modem 120.
The receiver section 120B shown in
As suggested in the description above of
A modem may be built that applies the power constraint principles described above to a time-domain system implementation where tapped delay-line filters are used.
In sum, a system and method are provided for MIMO radio communication between a first device having N plurality of antennas and a second device having M plurality of antennas. At the first device, a vector s representing L signals [s1 . . . sL] to be transmitted is processed with a transmit matrix A to maximize capacity of the channel between the first device and the second device subject to a power constraint that the power emitted by each of the N antennas is less than a maximum power, whereby the transmit matrix A distributes the L signals [s1 . . . sL] among the N plurality of antennas for simultaneous transmission to the second device. Similarly, a radio communication device is provided comprising N plurality of antennas, N plurality of radio transmitters each coupled to a corresponding one of the plurality of antennas, and a baseband signal processor coupled to the N plurality of radio transmitters to process a vector s representing L signals [s1 . . . sL] to be transmitted with a transmit matrix A to maximize capacity of the channel between the first device and the second device subject to a power constraint that the power emitted by each of the N antennas is less than a maximum power, whereby the transmit matrix A distributes the L signals [s1 . . . sL] for simultaneous transmission to the second device by the N plurality of antennas. The transmit matrix A is computed subject to the power constraint being different for one or more of the N antennas or being the same for each of the N plurality of antennas. For example, in the latter case, the transmit matrix A may be computed subject to the power constraint for each of the N plurality of antennas being equal to a total maximum power emitted by all of the N plurality of antennas combined divided by N.
The above description is intended by way of example only.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/319,437, filed Jul. 30, 2002, to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/461,672, filed Apr. 10, 2003, and to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/479,945, filed Jun. 19, 2003. The entirety of each of these applications is incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4121221 | Meadows | Oct 1978 | A |
| 4599734 | Yamamoto | Jul 1986 | A |
| 4639914 | Winters | Jan 1987 | A |
| 5274844 | Harrison et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
| 5394435 | Weerackody | Feb 1995 | A |
| 5437055 | Wheatley, III | Jul 1995 | A |
| 5457808 | Osawa et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5491723 | Diepstraten | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5493307 | Tsujimoto | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5507035 | Bantz et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5539832 | Weinstein et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5570366 | Baker et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5577265 | Wheatley, III | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5610617 | Gans et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5752173 | Tsujimoto | May 1998 | A |
| 5761193 | Derango et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5761237 | Petersen et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5812531 | Cheung et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5848105 | Gardner et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5898679 | Brederveld et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5912921 | Warren et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5930248 | Langlet et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5982327 | Vook et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6008760 | Shattil | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6023625 | Myers, Jr. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6037898 | Parish et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6038272 | Golden | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6044120 | Bar-David et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6058105 | Hochwald et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6091934 | Berman et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6097771 | Foschini | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6118788 | Kermani | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6122260 | Liu et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6124824 | Xu et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6141393 | Thomas et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6141567 | Youssefmir et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6144651 | Rinchiuso et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6144711 | Raleigh et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6147985 | Bar-David et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6157340 | Xu et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6157843 | Derango et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6177906 | Petrus | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6185440 | Barratt et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6195045 | Xu et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6211671 | Shattil | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6252548 | Jeon | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6252884 | Hunter | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6266528 | Farzaneh | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6295026 | Chen et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6298092 | Heath, Jr. et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6307882 | Marzetta | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6314147 | Liang et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6317466 | Foschini et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6327310 | Hochwald et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6331837 | Shattil | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6349219 | Hochwald et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6351499 | Paulraj et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6362781 | Thomas et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6369758 | Zhang | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6370182 | Bierly et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
| 6377631 | Raleigh | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6377636 | Paulraj et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6377819 | Gesbert et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6400699 | Airy et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6400780 | Rashid-Farrokhi et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6442214 | Boleskei et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6452964 | Yoshida | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6462709 | Choi | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6463295 | Yun | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6473467 | Wallace et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6522898 | Kohno et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6549786 | Cheung | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6570929 | Eriksson | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6584161 | Hottinen | Jun 2003 | B2 |
| 6636568 | Kadous | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6646600 | Vail et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6661856 | Calderbank et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6684064 | Kazakevich et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6687492 | Sugar et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6763073 | Foschini et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
| 6771706 | Ling et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6922445 | Sampath et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
| 6963619 | Gesbert et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6968013 | Awater et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 20010012764 | Edwards et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010015994 | Nam | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010015999 | Nam | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010046255 | Shattil | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20010053143 | Li et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020001316 | Hornsby et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020024975 | Hendler | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020034191 | Shattil | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020039884 | Raynes et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020064246 | Kelkar et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020067309 | Baker et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020072392 | Awater et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020085643 | Kitchener et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020102950 | Gore et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111142 | Klimovitch | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020118781 | Thomas et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020122383 | Wu et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020122501 | Awater | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020127978 | Khatri | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020136170 | Struhsaker | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020141355 | Struhsaker et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020147032 | Yoon et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020158801 | Crilly, Jr. et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020159537 | Crilly, Jr. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020172186 | Larsson | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020172269 | Xu | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020191535 | Sugiyama et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020196842 | Onggosanusi et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030002450 | Jalali et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030003880 | Ling et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030022693 | Gerogiokas et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030032423 | Boros et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030043929 | Sampath | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030048761 | Jarett | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030072379 | Ketchum | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030072382 | Raleigh et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030108117 | Ketchum et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030114108 | Frecassetti et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030125040 | Walton et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030125090 | Zeira | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030130012 | Brunner et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030139194 | Onggosanusi et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030161282 | Medvedev et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030162566 | Shapira et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030165189 | Kadous | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030181165 | Sugar et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030181171 | Sim et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030185309 | Pautler et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030190897 | Lei et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030218973 | Oprea et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20040002364 | Trikkonen et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040013212 | Benesty et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040023621 | Sugar et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040095907 | Agee et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040171385 | Haustein et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040184398 | Walton et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20050094598 | Medvedev et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2107989 | Mar 1998 | RU |
| 2238611 | Oct 2004 | RU |
| 2005100514 | Jun 2005 | RU |
| 0145300 | Jun 2001 | WO |
| 0203568 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| WO0203568 | Jan 2002 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20040023621 A1 | Feb 2004 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60319437 | Jul 2002 | US | |
| 60479945 | Jun 2003 | US | |
| 60461672 | Apr 2003 | US |