We are IntechOpen,

the world’s leading publisher of

Open Access books
Built by scientists, for scientists

7,200
Open access books available
192,000
International authors and editors
210M Downloads

Our authors are among the

154
Countries delivered to
TOP 1%
most cited scientists
14%
Contributors from top 500 universities

Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index

in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI)

Interested in publishing with us?

Contact [email protected]
Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected.
For more information visit www.intechopen.com
Chapter

Spatial Multiplexing for

MIMO/Massive MIMO
Haonan Wang and Ang Li

Abstract

In this chapter, we will discuss how to achieve spatial multiplexing in multiple-

input multiple-output (MIMO) communications through precoding design, for both
traditional small-scale MIMO systems and massive MIMO systems. The mathematical
description for MIMO communications will first be introduced, based on which we
discuss both block-level precoding and the emerging symbol-level precoding tech-
niques. We begin with simple and closed-form block-level precoders such as maxi-
mum ratio transmission (MRT), zero-forcing (ZF), and regularized ZF (RZF),
followed by the classic symbol-level precoding schemes such as Tomlinson-Harashima
precoder (THP) and vector perturbation (VP) precoder. Subsequently, we introduce
optimization-based precoding solutions, including power minimization, SINR
balancing, symbol-level interference exploitation, etc. We extend our discussion to
massive MIMO systems and particularly focus on precoding designs for hardware-
efficient massive MIMO systems, such as hybrid analog-digital precoding, low-bit
precoding, nonlinearity-aware precoding, etc.

Keywords: MIMO, massive MIMO, spatial multiplexing, precoding, beamforming

1. Introduction

In recent years, the demand for high-speed wireless communication has grown
exponentially, driven by the proliferation of smart devices, the Internet of Things
(IoT), and the increasing need for reliable and efficient data transmission [1]. To meet
these demands, multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technology has emerged as a
promising solution, offering significant improvements in spectral efficiency, capacity,
and reliability. In this chapter, we will explore the concept of spatial multiplexing in
MIMO communications, focusing on precoding design for both traditional small-scale
MIMO systems and massive MIMO systems.
MIMO communication systems employ multiple antennas at both the transmitter
and receiver ends to exploit the spatial domain, enabling the simultaneous transmis-
sion of multiple data streams over the same frequency band [2]. This spatial
multiplexing capability is the key factor in achieving the high data rates and improved
link reliability that MIMO systems offer. Precoding is a crucial technique in MIMO
communications, as it allows the transmitter to pre-process the signals before

1
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

transmission, effectively mitigating inter-stream interference and optimizing the

received signal quality. We will begin our discussion with a mathematical description
of MIMO communications, providing a solid foundation for understanding the prin-
ciples and techniques involved in precoding design. Based on this mathematical
framework, we will dive deep into both block-level precoding and the emerging
symbol-level precoding technique.
Block-level precoding techniques, such as maximum ratio transmission (MRT),
zero-forcing (ZF), and regularized ZF (RZF), offer simple and closed-form
solutions for mitigating inter-stream interference. These methods have been
widely adopted in small-scale MIMO systems due to their ease of implementation
and relatively low computational complexity. We will also discuss classic
symbol-level precoding schemes, including the Tomlinson-Harashima precoder
(THP) and vector perturbation (VP) precoder, which offer improved performance by
exploiting the inherent structure of the transmitted symbols. As we move beyond
these basic precoding techniques, we will introduce optimization-based precoding
solutions that aim to further enhance the performance of MIMO systems. These
approaches include power minimization, SINR balancing, and symbol-level interfer-
ence exploitation, among others. By optimizing various performance metrics, these
advanced precoding techniques can achieve significant gains in spectral efficiency and
link reliability.
In the latter part of the chapter, we will extend our discussion to massive MIMO
systems, which employ a large number of antennas at the transmitter and receiver to
achieve even greater spatial multiplexing gains. While the basic principles of
precoding design remain applicable to massive MIMO systems, the increased scale and
complexity of these systems introduce new challenges and opportunities for
precoding optimization. In particular, we will focus on precoding designs for
hardware-efficient massive MIMO systems, such as hybrid analog-digital precoding,
low-bit precoding, and nonlinearity-aware precoding. These techniques aim to
address the practical limitations of massive MIMO systems, including hardware con-
straints, power consumption, and implementation complexity, while still achieving
desired performance gains.
In conclusion, this chapter will provide a comprehensive overview of spatial
multiplexing in MIMO communications, with a focus on precoding design for both
small-scale and massive MIMO systems. By exploring a wide range of precoding
techniques, from simple closed-form solutions to advanced optimization-based
approaches, we aim to offer the reader a deep understanding of the principles and
methods involved in achieving high-performance MIMO communications.

2. Body of the manuscript

In Section 3, we will provide an introduction to the MIMO communication system,

which will include a mathematical description of the MIMO system, performance
metrics of MIMO communications, and emerging massive MIMO techniques. In Sec-
tion 4, we will explain traditional precoding design, which will include preliminaries
on precoding and classical precoding schemes. Subsequently, in Section 5, we will
discuss optimization-based precoding to demonstrate the use of convex optimization
in precoding design. Finally, in recognition of the wide application of massive MIMO,
Section 6 will introduce hardware-efficient precoding as a means of achieving a
favorable balance between communication performance and power consumption.
2
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

3. MIMO communication systems

Due to the increasing demand for higher data rates and reliability for wireless
networks, MIMO techniques have appeared and received extensive research attention.
To support spatial multiplexing, parallel data streams can be transmitted simulta-
neously with multiple antennas deployed at the BS. To improve reliability, space-time
coding techniques can be employed by sending copies of the same information across
the antenna array. In this section, we present an overview of the fundamental con-
cepts of multi-antenna technology, which serves as a foundation for the subsequent
discussion on precoding. Given that spatial multiplexing is the primary focus of this
chapter, our attention is primarily directed toward multi-user multi-input single-
output (MU-MISO) systems.

3.1 Mathematical description for MIMO communications

In a wireless multi-user MISO (MU-MISO) system, as depicted in Figure 1, the

data symbol vector is denoted as s, and one BS with N t antennas transmits wireless
signals to K single-antenna receivers. Mathematically, the signal vector at the receiver
can be expressed as.where hi,j denotes the complex channel gain between the i-th
receiver and the j-th transmit antenna, xj denotes the transmit signal on the j-th
transmit antenna, yi denotes the received signal of the j-th receiver, and ni denotes the
additive Gaussian noise corresponding to the i-th receiver. Based on that, the k-th
user’s received signal can be expressed as

y1 h1,1 h1,2 ⋯ h1,N t x1 n1

2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
6y 7 6h h2,2 h2,N t 7
7 6 x2 7
⋯ 6 7 6n 7
6 2 7 6 2,1 6 2
7¼6 7 þ 6 7, (1)
7
6 7 6
4 ⋮ 5 4 ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 5 4 ⋮ 5 4 ⋮ 5
yK hK,1 hK,2 ⋯ hK,Nt xN t nK
yk ¼ hTk x þ nk , (2)

where yk denotes the k-th user’s received signal, hk ∈ N t 1 denotes the k-th user’s
channel vector, x ∈ N t 1 denotes the transmit signal vector, and nk denotes
 the2 
additive noise vector which follows the complex Gaussian distribution ℂℕ 0, σ k I
with the zero mean and σ 2k noise power. The combining process is eliminated at the
receiver side, for the single-antenna configuration. Based on (2), the transmission
process in MU-MISO can be reorganized into a matrix form, as shown below:

y ¼ Hx þ n, (3)

Figure 1.
A block diagram of MU-MISO systems.

3
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

T
with y ¼ y1 , y2 , … , yK , H ¼ ½h1 , h2 , … , hK ŠT , and n ¼ ½n1 , n2 , … , nK ŠT .


To mitigate the detrimental impact of channel fading, the transmitter performs

precoding on the symbol vector to obtain the transmitted signal, expressed as x ¼ Ws:
Precoding is achieved using a matrix W ∈ N t K : The design of the precoding matrix
W is the crucial signal processing procedure in MIMO downlink transmission, as it
enables each receiver to achieve a received signal yk that closely approximates the
original symbol sk .

3.2 Performance metrics for MIMO communications

In order to measure the communication performance of MIMO systems, bit error

rate (BER) and channel capacity are the two performance metrics that are usually
employed, as explained below.

3.2.1 BER

Bit Error Rate (BER) refers to the proportion of erroneously transmitted bits to the
total number of transmitted bits during the transmission process and is the most
commonly used performance metric to evaluate the reliability of digital communica-
tion systems. Its mathematical definition can be given as

Ne
Pb ¼ , (4)
Nb

where N e denotes the erroneous transmitted bits, and N b denotes the total trans-
mitted bits.

3.2.2 Channel capacity

The channel capacity represents the maximum rate of information transmission

that can be sustained by a communication system when the bit error rate approaches
zero. Its mathematical definition is given as the maximum mutual information
between the input and output signals of the channel, which represents the extent to
which the received signal preserves information about the transmitted signal after the
channel. More specifically, the channel capacity is determined by identifying the
input distribution that maximizes the mutual information, subject to the constraints
of the channel’s physical properties and the power limitations of the system. There-
fore, it serves as a fundamental limit on the data transmission rate and is a crucial
performance metric for evaluating the effectiveness of communication systems. The
definition of channel capacity can be expressed as

C ¼ max I ðinput; outputÞ, (5)

where C denotes the channel capacity, and I (x; y) denotes the mutual information
between x and y. For SISO systems, when both the transmitter and receiver have
perfect Channel State Information (CSI), the channel capacity can be obtained as

C ¼ B log 2 ð1 þ γ Þ, (6)

4
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

where B denotes the system bandwidth, and γ denotes the receive SNR. The
physical interpretation of (8) has been discussed in ref. [2].
In the context of MIMO systems, it is feasible to decompose the channel into a sum
of multiple SISO channels via singular value decomposition (SVD) [2]. Subsequently,
utilizing “water-filling” power allocation strategy [2], it is possible to harness the full
potential of the system and achieve channel capacity. In an ideal scenario where both
the transmitter and receiver possess perfect CSI, the channel capacity of an N r  N t
MIMO channel can be captured precisely using the following equation:
 
ρ H
C ¼ log 2 det INr þ HH , (7)
Nr

where ρ denotes the transmit SNR.

3.3 Massive MIMO

As mobile communication technologies continue to evolve, wireless network

capacity and communication quality have become increasingly critical. Traditional
wireless communication systems face limitations that prevent them from satisfying
the modern industry’s demands for high-speed, high-capacity, and high-quality com-
munication. Massive MIMO technology has emerged as a promising solution to these
challenges.
Massive MIMO is an extension of conventional MIMO technology [3, 4]. In con-
trast to the typical tens-of-antenna configuration in traditional MIMO systems for
signal transmission and reception, Massive MIMO employs significantly more anten-
nas, for example, hundreds or even thousands of antennas.
Massive MIMO technology enjoys wide applications in various fields of wireless
communications, such as 5G and IoT [5]. It has several notable features: channel
hardening, favorable propagation, power concentration, capacity enhancement,
interference reduction, and spectral efficiency improvement. In particular, channel
hardening refers to the property that as the antenna array size increases, the relative
fluctuations of channel coefficients decrease [5]. Although randomness still exists, its
impact on communication approximates that of non-fading channels. Favorable
propagation is a phenomenon in which the channels of different users become nearly
orthogonal in the spatial domain as the number of antennas at the base station
increases significantly. This leads to a substantial reduction in inter-user interference
and further improved spectral efficiency, making massive MIMO a promising tech-
nology for future wireless communication systems. Power concentration refers to
Massive MIMO’s ability to focus transmitted power more efficiently through finer
beamforming techniques, especially for millimeter-wave communication where
channel gain drops off precipitously with distance [6]. Capacity enhancement is
achieved by processing more data streams than traditional MIMO systems, leading to
improved network capacity. Interference reduction is accomplished through spatial
multiplexing and beamforming, which minimize inter-signal interference and
enhance signal quality and reliability. Last, spectral efficiency improvement results
from more efficient utilization of bandwidth resources, which enhances data trans-
mission speeds.
However, Massive MIMO technology still faces certain challenges in engineering
applications, such as high power consumption [7] and hardware costs. To be more
5
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

specific, traditional MIMO systems equip each antenna with radio frequency (RF)
chains and high-resolution digital-to-analog converters (DACs), causing significant
power loss when the antenna array is large. In such a scenario, the advanced signal
processing mechanisms required to handle a large number of antennas for signal
transmission and reception are generally more complex, necessitating much more
energy consumption than traditional wireless communication systems. From this
perspective, hardware-efficient precoding techniques hold significant research value
and promising application prospects.

4. Traditional precoding

In this section, we will introduce traditional precoding to discuss its working

mechanism and design principle. Preliminaries will be first introduced, as the basis of
further discussion. Based on that, we mainly introduce the linear block-level
precoding schemes with closed-form solutions, including MRT, ZF, and RZF. After
that, the traditional non-linear symbol-level precoding will be discussed, including
THP and VP.

4.1 Preliminaries on precoding

First, we will introduce the preliminaries of the precoding process in the downlink
MIMO system, as the basis of further discussion.
Without loss of generality, we mainly consider a downlink MU-MISO system,
where K single-antenna users are served by a common base station with N t transmit
antennas at the same time. Considering that users are generally separated spatially,
based on CSI, the BS needs to employ signal processing techniques before transmis-
sion such that the destructive effect of channel fading and inter-user interference can
be eliminated as much as possible. This is the initial motivation for precoding. Math-
ematically, the precoding process can be expressed as

K
X
x¼ wk sk ¼ Ws, (8)
k¼1

where wk ∈ N t 1 denotes the k-th user’s precoding vector and sk is the k-th
user’s data symbol, which is drawn from a specific modulation constellation. Based on
that, with the general precoding matrix W ¼ ½w1 , w2 , … , wK Š ∈ N t K and date sym-
bol vector s ¼ ½s1 , s2 , … , sK ŠT ∈ K1 , the received signal for the k-th user can be
expressed as

yk ¼ hTk x þ nk ¼ hTk Ws þ nk , (9)

where yk is the received signal for the k-th user, hk ∈ N t 1 is the complex channel
vector between the BS and the k-th user, and nk  ℂℕð0, σ 2 Þ is the additive Gaussian
noise with zero mean and σ 2 noise power. Based on that, the transmission process can
be given as

y ¼ HWs þ n, (10)

6
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

where y ∈ K1 denotes the received signal vector, H ∈ KN t denotes the channel
matrix, and n ∈ K1 denotes the additive noise vector.
In traditional communication systems, the presence of interference can signifi-
cantly degrade the quality of the received signal. This is particularly true in multi-user
systems, where signals for different users are superimposed over the spatial channel.
In such scenarios, the transmitted signals from different users can interfere with each
other, leading to reduced signal quality at the receiver.
The insight of precoding is to design the precoding matrix W such that the
received signal y can approach the data symbol vector s as much as possible. In the
following subsections, we will introduce linear closed-form block-level precoding,
which is a classical type of precoding.

4.2 Linear closed-form precoding

The classical linear block-level precoding schemes have been widely used in prac-
tical engineering systems since they can ensure satisfactory communication perfor-
mance with low computational complexity. In this subsection, we will mainly discuss
the specific linear closed-form precoding, including MRT, ZF, and RZF, to show the
principle of precoding design and the physical mechanism of the precoding effect.
Specifically, the precoding matrix of MRT can be given as [4].
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 P0
WMRT ¼
HH ¼ H
HH , (11)
f MRT tr HH
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
trfHHH g
where f MRT ¼ P0 denotes the normalization factor to ensure the satisfaction
of the transmit power constraint, and P0 denotes the total transmit power. Consider-
ing that MRT can maximize the signal gain at the intended user, its performance is
promising in noise-limited scenarios (low SNR regimes or large-scale MIMO scenar-
ios), while its performance is limited in interference-limited scenarios.
Zero-Forcing (ZF) precoding is another classical precoding method that has been
extensively used in practical applications [8]. By employing a Moore-Penrose inverse
of the channel matrix H as the precoding matrix, ZF precoding can create an ideal
environment where each user’s effective channel is orthogonal with each other. Based
on that, inter-user interference can be eliminated as much as possible. The ZF
precoding matrix can be expressed as
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 1
u P0  1

HH HHH oHH HHH , N t ≥ K,
  
WZF ¼ ¼ t n (12)
u
f ZF 1
tr HHH


rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1
tr ðHHH Þ
where f ZF ¼ P0 denotes the normalization factor for ZF precoding. ZF
precoding is shown to achieve improved performance over MRT in the high SNR
regime. The main idea of ZF precoding is to create orthogonal effective channels
among all the users to fully eliminate inter-user interference. For its low computa-
tional complexity, ZF precoding has been widely used in practical engineering sys-
tems. However, the noise amplification effect limits its performance, especially in low
SNR regions, which has been improved by RZF precoding.
7
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

By introducing a regularization factor to handle the noise amplification effect, the

RZF precoding can further improve the performance of ZF precoding [9]. The RZF
precoding matrix can be given by

1  1

HH HHH þ α
I

WRZF ¼
f RZF
v ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u P0  1
oHH HHH þ α
I ,

¼ t n
u
1 1
tr HHH þ α
I HHH HHH þ α
I
  

(13)
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 1
tr ðHHH þα
IÞ HHH ðHHH þα
IÞ
where f RZF ¼ P0 denotes the normalization factor for
RZF precoding, and α denotes the regularization factor whose optimal value is
α ∗ ¼ Kσ 2 .

4.3 Non-linear symbol-level precoding

Compared with linear precoding, non-linear precoding can achieve better perfor-
mance by employing more sophisticated precoding techniques, at the cost of relatively
high computational complexity. Generally speaking, based on CSI and the data sym-
bol, non-linear precoding manipulates signal at the symbol level, which leads to a
better communication performance but higher processing complexity. The transmit-
ted signal of non-linear precoding is no longer a linearly weighted combination of
symbol vectors. In this subsection, we will introduce classical non-linear precoding
schemes to show their working mechanism.
Dirty Paper Coding (DPC) is able to reduce the destructive effect of inter-user
interference and further achieve channel capacity in MIMO systems [10]. However,
assuming perfect CSI and that interference information can be obtained at the trans-
mitter, the capacity-achieving DPC requires an infinite-length coding and a high-
complexity searching algorithm, which limits its application in practical systems.
Considering the high complexity of DPC, Tomlinson-Harashima Precoding
(THP) has been proposed as an alternating near-capacity scheme whose computa-
tional complexity is relatively acceptable in practice. The basic idea of THP is to pre-
distort the symbols before they are transmitted over the communication channel [11].
This pre-distortion is achieved by adding a feedback loop to the transmitting system,
which modifies the symbols based on the previous symbols that have been transmit-
ted. The feedback loop effectively cancels out the distortion introduced by the com-
munication channel, leading to a higher quality and more reliable signal at the
receiver. Figure 2 shows the architecture of the THP precoding system.
Specifically, THP first decomposes the channel matrix into

H ¼ LFH , (14)

with a lower-triangle matrix L and a unitary matrix F. Based on that, the trans-
mitted signal vector x for THP can be further expressed as

xTHP ,
xTHP ¼ F~ (15)

8
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

Figure 2.
The geometrical representation of THP.

where x
~ can be obtained by
( )
k 1
X
~ THP Šk ¼ modτ sk
½x ~ THP Šl , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g:
½BŠk,l ½x (16)
l¼1

modτ fxg denotes a complex modulo function, given by

   
ℜðxÞ þ τ=2 ℑðxÞ þ τ=2
modτ fxg ¼ ℜðxÞ τ
⌊ ⌋ þ j ℑðxÞ τ
⌊ ⌋ , (17)
τ τ

where τ denotes the modulo basis and ⌊
⌋ denotes the floor approximating func-
tion. Based on the analysis above, the effective THP channel can be expressed as

B ¼ GHF, (18)

where G is a diagonal matrix that contains the complex scaling gain

corresponding to each user, which is actually the inverse of the corresponding
diagonal entry in L, i.e.,

1
g k ¼ ½GŠk,k ¼ : (19)
½LŠk,k

At the receiver side, the scaling compensation operation and the modulo operation
are also required prior to the demodulation.
Considering that the performance of ZF precoding is mainly limited by its noise
amplification effect, the Vector- Perturbation (VP) precoding [12] has been pro-
posed as an improvement [12]. Based on the ZF precoding, VP precoding introduces a
perturbation vector to the symbol vector, resulting in a transmitted signal that aligns
better with the main eigenvector direction of the channel inverse matrix. This reduces
the noise amplification factor and further lowers the noise amplification effect of ZF.
Therefore, compared to ZF, VP can achieve significant performance gains. To be more
specific, the VP precoding process can be expressed as

1  1

HH HHH ðs þ τ
lÞ,

xVP ¼ (20)
f VP

where τ ¼ 2jcjmax þ Δ denotes the modulo basis corresponding to the modulation

level, jcjmax denotes the modulus value of the maximum amplitude modulation
9
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

constellation point, and Δ is the minimum distance among the constellation points.
l ∈ ℂℤK1 denotes the complex integer perturbation vector, given as

 1 2
l ¼ arg min HH HHH ðs þ τ
lÞ ,

(21)
2
l ∈ ℂℤK1

which can be obtained by the sphere decoder. Based on that, the normalization
factor of VP precoding can be obtained by

1 1
yk ¼
hk xVP þ nk ¼ ðsk þ τlk Þ þ nk , (22)
f VP f VP

where lk denotes the k-th element of the perturbation vector l. In order to elimi-
nate the perturbation component τlk at the receiver side, the receiver needs to accom-
plish the module operation after the power compensation, as shown below:

rk ¼ modτ f VP yk
n o
¼ modτ sk þ τlk þ f VPnk (23)
^k ,
¼ sk þ f VP n

^k denotes the effective noise of the k-th user.

where n

5. Optimization-based precoding

With the deepening of research on precoding technology, an increasing number of

mathematical tools, such as convex optimization, have been introduced into the
precoding design process to improve precoding performance as much as possible. In
addition, optimization-based precoding can flexibly serve various communication
targets, and therefore has a wide range of applications in practical engineering
systems.

5.1 Block-level precoding

5.1.1 Preliminary

Based on the analysis above, due to the linear relationship between the transmitted
signal vector x, the symbol vector s, and the precoding matrix W, the transmitted signal
x can be regarded as a linear weighted combination of the precoding matrix W, where
the weighting coefficients are given by the symbol vector s. Therefore, the wireless
transmission process of (7) and (8) can be reformulated in the following form:

K
X K
X
yk ¼ hk wi si þ nk ¼ hk wk sk þ hk w i si þ n k , (24)
i¼1 i6¼k

where the first component denotes the expected received signal of the k-th user,
the second component denotes the interference, and the third component denotes the
additive noise. Based on that, the received SINR of the k-th user can be given as
10
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

jhk wk j2
γ k ¼ PK 2
: (25)
2
i6¼k jhk wi j þ σ

Based on the analysis above, there are two main schemes for optimization-based
block-level precoding, as discussed in the following.

5.1.2 Power minimization (PM) scheme

Power minimization precoding, also known as minimum power beamforming1,

is a technique used to minimize the total transmitted power subject to a set of
quality of service (QoS) constraints. The goal of this technique is to transmit the signal
with the minimum possible power while ensuring that the received signal quality
meets the desired level. This technique is particularly useful in situations where power
consumption is a critical issue or in large-scale MIMO systems where the number of
antennas is much larger than the number of users.
The PM design problem can be formulated as below [13]:

K
X
P 1 : min
wi
kwi k2F
i¼1
(26)
jhk wk j2
s:t: PK 2
≥ Γk , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g
i6¼k jhk wi j þ σ2

where Γk denotes the SINR threshold for the k-th user. It is proved that P 1 is
convex which can be solved via convex optimization algorithms efficiently. In addi-
tion to conventional convex optimization algorithms, literature has revealed an
uplink-downlink duality in ref. [14], which has led to the development of an efficient
iterative algorithm for solving downlink precoding optimization. Meanwhile, after
transforming PM optimization into a semi-definite programming (SDP) problem, the
semi-definite relaxation (SDR) approach [15–17] can be used to design the precoding
matrix efficiently.

5.1.3 SINR balancing (SB) scheme

SINR balancing precoding is a technique used to balance the signal-to--

interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) across all users in a multi-user system. The goal
of this technique is to allocate the transmit power among the users such that each user
experiences an equal SINR. This technique is particularly useful in situations where
there are multiple users with different channel conditions, as it ensures that each user
receives an equal quality of service. To be more specific, the SB design problem can be
formulated as below [18]:

1
It is noted that in this chapter the term ‘beamforming’ and ‘precoding’ are interchangeable.

11
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

P2 : max wi min k γ k
jhk wk j2
s:t: γ k ¼ PK 2
, ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g (27)
2
i6¼k jhk wi j þ σ
XK
i¼1
kwi k2F ≤ P0

where P0 is the maximum transmit power. Unlike the PM design problem, P 2 is

non-convex, which brings difficulties to the optimal precoding design. However, SB
precoding can be efficiently designed through the bisection search method in ref. [16],
or via an iterative algorithm in [14].

5.2 Symbol-level precoding

Block-level precoding is a precoding design based on CSI and is generally inde-

pendent of the transmitted symbols. These algorithms tend to eliminate inter-user
interference. In recent years, symbol-level precoding has received increasing attention
[19]. Compared with block-level precoding, symbol-level precoding accomplishes
precoding design based on both CSI and transmitted symbols, which gives it the
ability to manipulate interference vectors more wisely compared with block-level
precoding. With symbol-level precoding, the system can manage and utilize inter-user
interference, which offers an additional power gain to improve system performance.
In this subsection, we first introduce the concept of constructive interference (CI) to
reveal the main idea of interference exploitation and then discuss the design problem
of symbol-level precoding in different scenarios.

5.2.1 Concept for interference exploitation

Interference is commonly considered a factor that limits performance in wireless

communication systems. It arises due to the superimposition of transmit signals for
different users in the wireless channel during multi-user transmission. Precoding
strategies capitalize on the availability of CSI at the base station, along with data
symbol information, to predict interference before transmission. Information theory
analysis reveals that known interference will not affect the broadcast channel’s capac-
ity when CSI is available at the transmitter. However, most existing linear precoding
schemes aim to eliminate, avoid or limit interference, and operate on a block level.
Recent studies suggest that constructive interference (CI) precoding via Symbol-Level
Precoding (SLP) can control both the power and direction of interfering signals,
allowing interference to contribute to error-less signal detection and improve system
performance [20]. Interference exploitation techniques are most useful in systems
where interference can be predicted. In this subsection, we will give an illustrative
example to demonstrate the division of instantaneous interference into CI and
destructive interference (DI) [20].
Let us consider a scenario where the desired symbol u is from a nominal BPSK
constellation, with the assumption that u ¼ 1. We use i to denote the interfering signal
and discuss two cases: (i) i > 0 and (ii) i < 0.
In the first case, when i > 0, as shown in Figure 3(a), the received signal can be
expressed as ~y ¼ hu u þ h ~i i þ n ¼ ~r þ n, where ~r represents the received signal exclud-
ing noise, and n denotes the additive noise at the receiver side. Figure 3(a) shows that
ProjOE~ ð~rÞ > ProjOE~ ðhu uÞ, which means that the interference has pushed r further away
12
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

Figure 3.
The geometrical representation of CI and DI.

from the detection threshold of BPSK when compared to the original data symbol u.
Here Projd ðxÞ denotes the projection of vector x on the direction of d. In this situa-
tion, the interfering signal is actually constructive and contributes to the useful signal
power. Given a fixed noise power, ~y ¼ ~r þ n is more likely to be detected correctly
than the interference-free case y0 ¼ hu u þ n: Thus, we can expect improved perfor-
mance.
On the other hand, in the second case, when i < 0, as shown in Figure 3(b), the
interfering signal causes the received signal r to move closer to the detection thresh-
old. In this case, the interfering signal reduces the useful signal power and is therefore
destructive. The noiseless received signal r ¼ hu u þ hi i is more susceptible to noise
than r0 ¼ u in this scenario.
In summary, symbol-level precoding offers more precise interference management
and control, with the added benefit of improved performance through beneficial
interference. This makes it a better communication performance option compared to
traditional block-level precoding. Next, we will introduce the design principles of
symbol-level precoding by discussing classical CI-SLP precoding methods.

5.2.2 Phase rotation metric

As depicted in Figure 4, CI-SLP is a technique that manipulates inter-user inter-

ference to ensure that the noise-free receive signal falls within the constructive region.

Figure 4.
CI-SLP, ‘phase-rotation’ metric, 8-PSK.

13
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

The SLP matrix W is designed to maximize the distance between the worst user’s
constructive region and the detection threshold, thereby improving the transmission
performance. Masouros [21] first proposed the “phase rotation” metric for PSK mod-
ulated systems. Based on this metric, the noise-free receive signal can be expressed as
follows [22]:

!
OA ¼ hTk Ws ¼ λk sk : (28)

The constructive factor λk quantifies the constructive effect of interference exploi-

tation for that user. Based on this factor, the constructive region can be described as
follows:

θAB ≤ θt ) tan θAB ≤ tan θt

j
λIk sk
) h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffii ≤ tan θt
ℛ
λk Γk σ 2 sk (29)
h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffii
) λℛ k Γk σ 2 tan θt ≥ λIk

According to the transmit power minimization criterion, the CI-SLP design

problem is shown below

P 3 : min ∥Ws∥2F
w
s:t:hk Ws ¼ λk sk , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g (30)
h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffii
λℛ
k Γk σ 2 tan θt ≥ ΓIk , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g,

where ΓIk denotes the Quality of Serves (QoS) threshold of the k-th user.
The convexity of P 3 can be proven, similar to the traditional PM problem, enabling
the use of several convex optimization algorithms to solve this problem conveniently.
Similarly, the CI-SLP design problem based on the SB criterion can be formulated as

P4 : max W,t t
s:t: hk Ws ¼ λk sk , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g
(31)
t tan θt ≥ λIk , ∀k ∈ f1, 2, ⋯, K g
 ℛ 
λk
∥Ws∥2F ≤ P0 :

It is worth noting that the convexity of the equation shown above can also be
proven, which distinguishes it from the traditional SB problem and renders it more
mathematically tractable.

5.2.3 Symbol scaling metric

In QAM modulation, the interference exploitation is conditional, unlike PSK mod-

ulation. The constellation signal points of QAM modulation can be classified into four
groups based on their interference exploitation characteristics, as shown in Figure 5.
Group A’ represents signal points that do not exploit any interference, while Group B0
and Group C0 represent signal points that exploit interference in the real and
14
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

Figure 5.
CI-SLP, ‘symbol-scaling’ metric, 16-QAM.

imaginary parts, respectively. Group D0 represents signal points that exploit interfer-
ence in both the real and imaginary parts, resulting in full interference exploitation.
The interference exploitation procedure via the “symbol-scaling” [23] metric and
decomposition of the noiseless receive signal of the k-th user can be described as
follows:

hTk Ws ¼ αTk sk , (32)

where

ℬ T ℬ T
αk ¼ αA , sk ¼ sA
   
k , αk k , sk (33)

with

sA
k ¼ ℜðsk Þ, sk ¼ ℑðsk Þ, k ¼ 1, 2, … , K:
ℬ
(34)

Based on that, the CI-SLP design problem in QAM-modulated systems can be

described as follows

P 5 : max W,Ωk ,t t
s:t: hTk Ws ¼ αTk sk , ∀k ∈ K
t ≤ αO O
m , ∀αm ∈ O (35)
t ¼ αIn , ∀αIn ∈ I
∥Ws∥22 ≤ p0 :

The set O comprises the indices of successful interference exploitation

corresponding to the real part of the symbol in group B0 , the imaginary part of the
symbol in group C0 , and both the real and imaginary parts of the symbol in group D0 .
Conversely, the set I comprises the indices of unsuccessful interference exploitation
corresponding to the imaginary part of the symbol in group B0 , the real part of the
15
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

symbol in group C0 , and both the real and imaginary parts of the symbol in group A’. It
follows that O and I satisfy the following relationship:

O∪I ¼ K, O∩I ¼ ∅,
(36)
cardfOg þ cardfI g ¼ 2K:

The definitions of the sets O and I reveal the difference between the phase
rotation criterion and the symbol scaling criterion. The former exploits interference
unconditionally, i.e., all constellation points participate in interference exploitation,
while the latter exploits interference conditionally. For QAM modulation systems, the
inner constellation points do not participate in interference exploitation, and benefi-
cial interference only results in performance gains for the outer constellation points.
This difference arises from the inherent properties of QAM and PSK modulation
schemes. In PSK modulation, the amplitude of the constellation points does not carry
any information, and therefore, any constellation point can be exploited for interfer-
ence without adversely affecting the detection of other constellation points. However,
for the inner constellation points in QAM modulation, interference vectors that push
the noiseless receive signal points in any direction will adversely affect the error
decision of other constellation points. It is worth noting that these two design criteria
only differ in their description of the interference exploitation process and are essen-
tially equivalent. Li et al. [23] has proven that under PSK modulation, the symbol
scaling criterion and the phase rotation criterion are equivalent, as depicted in
Figure 4, where the symbol-scaling metric is also applicable. Therefore, the symbol
scaling criterion is more universal in this sense.

6. Hardware-efficient precoding

The use of technologies such as General Artificial Intelligence (AI), has led to a
surge in users’ demand for mobile data traffic. One way to address this issue is to
utilize massive MIMO systems, which employ a large number of antennas at the
base station to improve data rate and link reliability. This approach allows signals to
be dynamically adjusted in both horizontal and vertical directions, reducing
interference between small areas and enabling more accurate pointing toward specific
users. However, directly applying Massive MIMO technology to traditional commu-
nication system architectures can result in new problems [3]. To be more specific,
traditional MIMO systems equip each antenna with RF chains and high-resolution
DACs, causing significant power loss when the antenna array is large. To solve this
issue, there are three general approaches: reducing the number of RF chains,
lowering the resolution of the DACs, or employing power-efficient nonlinear
power amplifiers. However, these hardware-efficient architectures introduce new
challenges to precoding designs, which will be explained in more detail in the
following.

6.1 Hybrid analog-digital (HAD) precoding

Fully-digital precoders can be used in traditional sub-6 GHz bands, but for milli-
meter wave (mmWave) communications, the cost and power consumption of hard-
ware components make this approach impractical. To solve this issue, researchers
16
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

have developed the hybrid analog-digital structure, which provides a promising trade-
off between the cost, complexity, and capacity of the mmWave network. This struc-
ture reduces hardware complexity and power consumption by reducing the total
number of RF chains. Specifically, the mmWave transceivers first process data
streams with a low-dimension digital precoder, followed by high-dimension analog
precoding using low-cost phase shifters, switches [24], or lens [25]. While the
performance of the hybrid precoder is usually inferior to that of a fully-digital
precoder, it offers a cost-efficient and energy-efficient solution for mmWave
communication.
In an MU-MIMO system illustrated in Figure 6, N t transmit antennas are utilized
by the BS to serve K single-antenna users simultaneously. The transmitter has N tRF RF
chains, where N tRF ≪ N t . In this subsection, we use phase shifter-based hybrid archi-
tecture as an illustrative example, without loss of generality.
Based on that, the transmit symbol vector x can be expressed as

x ¼ FRF FBB s, (37)

where FRF ∈ N tRF N t denotes the hybrid precoding matrix, FBB ∈ KN tRF denotes
the digital baseband precoding matrix, and s ∈ K1 denotes the data symbol vector
with  ssH ¼ K1 IK , respectively. Considering that the hybrid precoding matrix is the
mathematical description of phase shifters, we have the constant-module constraint
for the hybrid precoder, as shown below:

jFRF ði, jÞj ¼ 1, 1 ≤ i ≤ N tRF , 1 ≤ j ≤ N t : (38)

Meanwhile, the power constraint at the transmit side can be expressed as

kFBB FRF k2F ¼ P0 , (39)

where P0 is the maximum transmit power.

Based on that, the k-th user’s received signal can be expressed as

yk ¼ hH
k FRF FBB s þ nk , (40)

where hk ∈N t 1 denotes the complex channel matrix for the k-th user, and
nk  CN 0, σ 2k denotes the additive Gaussian noise vector for the k-th user with the
zero-mean and σ 2k noise power.
Aimed at maximizing the spectral efficiency, a common HAD precoding design
problem can be formulated as [26].

Figure 6.
The HAD MIMO system.

17
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

2
0 1
BB
K
X hH
k FRF f k
P 6 : max log 2 @1 þ P
B C
2 A
FRF , f BB BB
k k¼1
i6¼k hH
k FRF f i þ σ 2k
(41)
s:t: FRF ∈ ℱ, ∀1 ≤ k ≤ K,
h i 2
FRF f BB
1 , f BB
2 , … , f BB
K ¼ P0 ,
F

where ℱ denotes the available region of FRF , as defined below:

ℱ ¼ FRF jjFRF ði, jÞj ¼ 1, 1 ≤ i ≤ N tRF , 1 ≤ j ≤ N t : (42)

The non-convexity of P 6 is due to the constant-module constraint of FRF , making

it difficult to solve. To address this issue, a two-stage hybrid precoding algorithm was
proposed in ref. [27] where the analog precoder maximizes the effective channel gain
and the digital precoder mitigates multi-user interference based on the ZF principle.
In ref. [28], it was demonstrated that hybrid precoding can achieve any fully-digital
precoding when the number of RF chains is twice the number of data streams, and a
near-optimal hybrid precoding design was proposed for single-user and multi-user
transmissions with fewer RF chains. Reference [29] focused specifically on partially-
connected structures in multi-user scenarios and proposed hybrid precoding designs
based on successive interference cancelation (SIC). This approach decomposes the
total spectral efficiency optimization problem into a series of sub-rate optimization
problems that can be solved efficiently using the power iteration algorithm. Other
works on hybrid precoding include low-complexity designs based on MRT [30],
virtual path selection [31], and SVD [32].

6.2 Low-bit precoding

Using low-resolution DACs instead of high-resolution DACs in massive MIMO

architecture can be an effective way to reduce the power consumption of BS. This
approach reduces the power consumption per RF chain, as depicted in Figure 7,
instead of reducing the number of RF chains like in the hybrid architecture.
High-resolution DACs are required for each transmit signal to avoid signal distor-
tion, but they consume significant power due to their linear relationship with band-
width and exponential relationship with resolution [33]. Large-scale antenna arrays,
with hundreds of antenna elements, require a significantly large number of DACs,
posing practical challenges. To address this issue, low-resolution DACs, particularly 1-
bit DACs, can substantially simplify hardware and reduce the corresponding power

Figure 7.
The architecture of low-bit MIMO system.

18
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

consumption at the BS. Furthermore, 1-bit DACs generate CE signals, which facilitate
the use of power-efficient amplifiers, further reducing hardware complexity. The
common low-bit precoding design problem can be formulated as [34].

P 7 : min ks βDAC
Hxk22 þ Kβ2DAC σ 2

x
s:t:x ∈ X DAC (43)
βDAC > 0:

The optimization problem P 7 seeks to minimize the MSE between transmitted and
received symbols using low-resolution DACs. For 1-bit DACs, the set of output
n qffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffi o
P0 P0
signals is denoted as X DAC ¼  2N t
 2N t

j . In ref. [35], a non-linear precoding
method based on a biconvex relaxation framework achieved promising performance
with a low computational cost. Its corresponding VLSI design architectures were
illustrated in refs. [36]. Alternatively, Jacobsson et al. [37] proposed several 1-bit
precoding schemes based on SDR, sphere encoding, and squared l∞ -norm relaxation,
while Landau and de Lamare [38] described a 1-bit precoding method based on the
branch-and-bound framework that can theoretically achieve optimal performance.
Other downlink precoding designs for low-resolution DACs include SER minimization
in refs. [39, 40] and alternating minimization in ref. [34]. Nonlinear precoding
designs tend to outperform linear methods when low-resolution DACs are used at the
transmitter. For example, CI-based symbol-level precoding design has been discussed
in low-resolution DACs systems [41–43]. Several efficient solutions [43–45] have
been proposed for the NP-hard optimization problem, both for 1-bit and few-bit
DACs systems.

6.3 Nonlinearity-aware precoding

In a massive multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) system, the integration of

power-efficient nonlinear power amplifiers (PAs) can reduce the power consumption
of each RF chain, similar to the architecture of low-bit digital-to-analog converters.
Consequently, this leads to an improved energy efficiency of the system. However, in
traditional multi-antenna systems, the limited linear region of nonlinear PAs causes
significant signal distortions when transmitting signals with high peak-to-average
power ratios (PAPRs). This consequently negatively impacts system performance.
To resolve the issue of PAPR, traditional research falls into two categories: (a)
constant envelope precoding (CEP) schemes that maintain signal power at a
constant value, commonly known as SLP schemes; and (b) frame-level precoding
matrix optimization aimed at reducing the PAPR of the transmit signal. CEP elimi-
nates the performance loss introduced by nonlinear PAs by limiting the amplitude of
the transmit signal to a constant value, while the low-PAPR precoding relaxes the
strict CE constraint by allowing the maximum PAPR to a certain value. In recent
years, there has been a growing body of literature that explores the precoding design
based on the knowledge of the nonlinear response characteristics of PAs. This
approach represents a departure from the traditional emphasis solely on reducing the
peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) of transmitted signals. To be more specific,
nonlinearity-aware precoding utilizes a clipping function to model the response
characteristics of nonlinear PAs and developed a precoder that can resist both inter-
ference and PA nonlinearity by describing the modeled response characteristics [46].
19
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

Figure 8.
The nonlinearity-aware precoding system.

The nonlinearity-aware precoding system can be shown in Figure 8. Considering a

multi-user MISO system, the k-th user’s received signal can be expressed as

yk ¼ hTk ℱðWsÞ þ nk , (44)

where ℱð
Þ :  !  is the nonlinearity function that delineates the input-output

response properties of nonlinear power amplifiers [47]. Based on that, the
nonlinearity-aware precoding design problem aimed at maximizing the sum rate can
be expressed as

P8 : max Rsum ðWÞ

W ∈ KNt
(45)
 ∥ϕðWsÞ∥2 ¼ Pt ,
 
s:t:

where Pt denotes the maximum transmit power constraint. The problem has been
addressed through the introduction of a distortion-aware beamforming (DAB) algo-
rithm as proposed by [48]. This method adopts an iterative approach to optimize data
rate while minimizing the effect of distortions. In addition, several other precoding
strategies have been developed with a focus on accounting for nonlinearity in the
system. Specifically, Aghdam et al. [49] studied a precoding scheme that incorporates
power amplifier effects in massive MU-MIMO downlink systems and put forth a
robust algorithm to mitigate interference and nonlinearity resulting from power
amplifiers. Moreover, Zayani et al. [50] presented a power control mechanism and a
precoding scheme for SU-MISO communication systems that utilize nonlinear power
amplifiers at the base station. The proposed method maximizes the received SINR
while utilizing an iterative precoding algorithm. Finally, Jee et al. [51] optimized both
precoding and power allocation strategies jointly to maximize the achievable sum rate
of MU-MIMO systems.

7. Conclusions

In this chapter, we have provided a comprehensive overview of precoding design

for achieving spatial multiplexing in MIMO communications.
We began in Section 3 by introducing the fundamental concepts of MIMO systems,
including the mathematical description of MIMO communications, performance
metrics, and the increasingly important and widely used massive MIMO technology in
5G. These concepts laid a solid foundation for the subsequent discussions on the
precoding design.
20
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

In Section 4, we discussed traditional precoding design methods, including closed-

form linear block-level precoding techniques such as MRT, ZF, and RZF, as well as
traditional nonlinear symbol-level precoding techniques such as THP and VP.
Through these algorithms, we introduced the basic principles and guidelines of
precoding design.
In Section 5, we discussed more complex precoding design methods based on
convex optimization, including power minimization, SINR balancing, and the emerg-
ing CI-SLP precoding. These methods provide more flexibility and adaptability in
precoding design and can achieve better performance in practical communication
systems.
In Section 6, we focused on the hardware-efficient precoding design for massive
MIMO systems in 5G. We discussed hybrid analog-digital precoding, low-bit
precoding, and nonlinearity-aware precoding, which are essential for reducing power
consumption and computational complexity while maintaining high communication
performance.
Overall, this chapter highlights the importance of efficient precoding design for
achieving efficient and reliable wireless transmission. Precoding design is a critical
component of MIMO technology, and it requires a careful balance between commu-
nication performance, power consumption, and computational complexity. The dis-
cussions in this chapter provide a comprehensive understanding of the various
precoding techniques that can be employed to achieve spatial multiplexing in MIMO
communications and underscore the significance of efficient precoding design for
realizing the full potential of MIMO technology in wireless communication systems.

Nomenclature

SISO single-input single-output

MISO multi-input single-output
MIMO multi-input multi-output
MRT maximum ratio transmission
ZF zero-forcing
RZF regularized zero-forcing
THP Tomlinson-Harashima precoding
VP vector perturbation
IoT internet of things
PM power minimization precoding
SNR signal-to-noise ratio
SINR signal-to-interference-and-noise ratio
SB SINR balancing precoding
IE interference exploitation
CI constructive interference
DI destructive interference
BLP block-level precoding
SLP symbol-level precoding
HAD hybrid analog-digital precoding
CEP constant envelope precoding

21
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

Author details

Haonan Wang* and Ang Li*

Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected] and

[email protected]

© 2023 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original work is properly cited.
22
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

References

[1] Andrews JG, Buzzi S, Choi W, et al. equalizers for MIMO systems: An In-
What will 5G Be? IEEE Journal on depth study of the high SNR regime.
Selected Areas in Communications. IEEE Transactions on Information
2014;32(6):1065-1082. DOI: 10.1109/ Theory. 2011;57(4):2008-2026. DOI:
JSAC.2014.2328098 10.1109/TIT.2011.2112070

[2] Tse D, Viswanath P. Fundamentals of [9] Peel CB, Hochwald BM,

Wireless Communication. Cambridge, Swindlehurst AL. A vector-perturbation
UK: Cambridge University Press; 2005 technique for near-capacity
multiantenna multiuser communication-
[3] Swindlehurst AL, Ayanoglu E, part I: Channel inversion and
Heydari P, et al. Millimeter-wave regularization. IEEE Transactions on
massive MIMO: The next wireless Communications. 2005;53(1):195-202.
revolution? IEEE Communications DOI: 10.1109/TCOMM.2004.840638
Magazine. 2014;52(9):56-62. DOI:
10.1109/MCOM.2014.6894453
[10] Costa M. Writing on dirty paper.
IEEE Transactions on Information
[4] Joham M, Utschick W, Nossek JA.
Theory. 1983;29(3):439-441.
Linear transmit processing in MIMO
DOI: 10.1109/TIT.1983.1056659
communications systems. IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing. 2005;
53(8):2700-2712. DOI: 10.1109/ [11] Garcia-Rodriguez A, Masouros C.
TSP.2005.850331 Power-efficient Tomlinson-Harashima
precoding for the downlink of multi-user
[5] Lu L, Li GY, Swindlehurst AL, et al. MISO systems. IEEE Transactions on
An overview of massive MIMO: Benefits Communications. 2014;62(6):
and challenges. IEEE Journal of Selected 1884-1896. DOI: 10.1109/TCOMM.2014.
Topics in Signal Processing. 2014;8(5): 2317189
742-758. DOI: 10.1109/
JSTSP.2014.2317671 [12] Hochwald BM, Peel CB,
Swindlehurst AL. A vector-perturbation
[6] Hochwald BM, Marzetta TL, Tarokh technique for near-capacity
V. Multiple-Antenna Channel hardening multiantenna multiuser communication-
and its implications for rate feedback part II: Perturbation. IEEE Transactions
and scheduling. IEEE Transactions on on Communications. 2005;53(3):
Information Theory. 2004;50(9):1893- 537-544. DOI: 10.1109/TCOMM.2005.
1909. DOI: 10.1109/TIT.2004.833345 843995

[7] Heath RW, Gonzalez-Prelcic N, [13] Bengtsson M, Ottersten B. Optimum

Rangan S, et al. An overview of signal and suboptimum transmit beamforming.
processing techniques for Millimeter In: Handbook of Antennas in Wireless
wave MIMO systems. IEEE Journal of Communications. Boca Raton, Florida,
Selected Topics in Signal Processing. US: CRC Press; 2018. pp. 18-1-18-33.
2016;10(3):436-453. DOI: 10.1109/ DOI: 10.1201/9781315220031-18
JSTSP.2016.2523924
[14] Schubert M, Boche H. Solution of the
[8] Jiang Y, Varanasi MK, Li J. multiuser downlink beamforming
Performance analysis of ZF and MMSE problem with individual SINR

23
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

constraints. IEEE Transactions on [21] Masouros C. Correlation rotation

Vehicular Technology. 2004;53(1):18-28. linear precoding for MIMO broadcast
DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2003.819629 communications. IEEE Transactions on
Signal Processing. 2010;59(1):252-262.
[15] Huang Y, Palomar DP. Rank- DOI: 10.1109/TSP.2010.2088395
constrained separable semidefinite
programming with applications to [22] Li A, Masouros C. Interference
optimal beamforming. IEEE exploitation precoding made practical:
Transactions on Signal Processing. 2009; Optimal closed-form solutions for PSK
58(2):664-678. DOI: 10.1109/ modulations. IEEE Transactions on
TSP.2009.2031732 Wireless Communications. 2018;17(11):
7661-7676. DOI: 10.1109/TWC.
[16] Huang Y, Palomar DP. A dual 2018.2869382
perspective on separable semidefinite
programming with applications to [23] Li A, Masouros C, Vucetic B, et al.
optimal downlink beamforming. IEEE Interference exploitation precoding for
Transactions on Signal Processing. 2010; multi-level modulations: Closed-form
58(8):4254-4271. DOI: 10.1109/ solutions. IEEE Transactions on
TSP.2010.2049570 Communications. 2020;69(1):291-308.
DOI: 10.1109/TCOMM.2020.3031616
[17] Law KL, Wen X, Vu MT, et al.
General rank multiuser downlink [24] Méndez-Rial R, Rusu C, González-
beamforming with shaping constraints Prelcic N, et al. Hybrid MIMO
using real-valued OSTBC. IEEE architectures for Millimeter wave
Transactions on Signal Processing. 2015; communications: Phase shifters or
63(21):5758-5771. DOI: 10.1109/ switches? IEEE Access. 2016;4:247-267.
TSP.2015.2455516 DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2514261

[18] Wiesel A, Eldar YC, Shamai S. Linear [25] Brady J, Behdad N, Sayeed AM.
precoding via conic optimization for Beamspace MIMO for Millimeter-wave
fixed MIMO receivers. IEEE communications: System architecture,
Transactions on Signal Processing. 2005; Modeling, analysis, and measurements.
54(1):161-176. DOI: 10.1109/ IEEE Transactions on Antennas and
TSP.2005.861073 Propagation. 2013;61(7):3814-3827.
DOI: 10.1109/TAP.2013.2254442
[19] Li A, Spano D, Krivochiza J, et al. A
tutorial on interference exploitation via [26] El Ayach O, Rajagopal S, Abu-Surra S,
symbol-level precoding: Overview, et al. Spatially sparse precoding in
state-of-the-art and future directions. Millimeter wave MIMO systems.
IEEE Communications Surveys & IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Tutorials. 2020;22(2):796-839. Communications. 2014;13(3):1499-1513.
DOI: 10.1109/COMST.2020.2980570 DOI: 10.1109/TWC.2014.011714.130846

[20] Masouros C, Ratnarajah T, [27] Alkhateeb A, Leus G, Heath RW.

Sellathurai M, et al. Known interference Limited feedback hybrid precoding for
in the cellular downlink: A performance multi-user Millimeter wave systems.
limiting factor or a source of green signal IEEE Transactions on Wireless
power? IEEE Communications Communications. 2015;14(11):
Magazine. 2013;51(10):162-171. 6481-6494. DOI: 10.1109/TWC.2015.
DOI: 10.1109/MCOM.2013.6619580 2455980
24
Spatial Multiplexing for MIMO/Massive MIMO
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112041

[28] Sohrabi F, Yu W. Hybrid digital and algorithm for 1-bit massive MIMO. In:
Analog beamforming Design for Large- 2017 IEEE International Conference on
Scale Antenna Arrays. IEEE Journal of Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing
Selected Topics in Signal Processing. (ICASSP’17), 5-9 March, 2017; New
2016;10(3):501-513. DOI: 10.1109/ Orleans, LA, USA. New York: IEEE;
JSTSP.2016.2520912 2017. pp. 3464-3468. DOI: 10.1109/
ICASSP.2017.7952800
[29] Gao X, Dai L, Han S, et al. Energy-
efficient hybrid Analog and digital [36] Castañeda O, Jacobsson S, Durisi G,
precoding for mmWave MIMO systems et al. 1-bit massive MU-MIMO precoding
with large antenna arrays. IEEE Journal in VLSI. IEEE Journal on Emerging and
on Selected Areas in Communications. Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems.
2016;34(4):998-1009. DOI: 10.1109/ 2017;7(4):508-522. DOI: 10.1109/
JSAC.2016.2549418 JETCAS.2017.2772191
[30] Liang L, Xu W, Dong X. Low-
complexity hybrid precoding in massive [37] Jacobsson S, Durisi G, Coldrey M,
multiuser MIMO systems. IEEE Wireless et al. Quantized precoding for massive
Communications Letters. 2014;3(6): MU-MIMO. IEEE Transactions on
653-656. DOI: 10.1109/LWC.2014. Communications. 2017;65(11):
2363831 4670-4684. DOI: 10.1109/TCOMM.
2017.2723000
[31] Li A, Masouros C. Hybrid Analog-
digital Millimeter-wave MU-MIMO [38] Landau LTN, de Lamare RC. Branch-
transmission with virtual path selection. and-bound precoding for multiuser
IEEE Communications Letters. 2016; MIMO systems with 1-bit quantization.
21(2):438-441. DOI: 10.1109/LCOMM. IEEE Wireless Communications Letters.
2016.2621741 2017;6(6):770-773. DOI: 10.1109/
LWC.2017.2740386
[32] Li A, Masouros C. Hybrid precoding
and combining Design for Millimeter- [39] Swindlehurst A, Saxena A,
Wave Multi-User MIMO based on SVD. Mezghani A, et al. Minimum probability-
In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on of-error perturbation precoding for the
Communications (ICC’17), 21-25 May one-bit massive MIMO downlink. In:
2017; Paris. New York: IEEE; 2017. pp. 1-6. 2017 IEEE International Conference on
DOI: 10.1109/ICC.2017.7996970 Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing
(ICASSP’17), 5-9 March, 2017; New
[33] Allen PE, Dobkin R, Holberg DR. Orleans, LA, USA. New York: IEEE;
CMOS Analog Circuit Design. 2017. pp. 6483-6487. DOI: 10.1109/
Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2011 ICASSP.2017.7953405

[34] Chen JC. Alternating minimization [40] Shao M, Li Q , Ma WK. One-bit

algorithms for one-bit precoding in massive MIMO precoding via a
massive multiuser MIMO systems. IEEE minimum symbol-error probability
Transactions on Vehicular Technology. design. In: 2018 IEEE International
2018;67(8):7394-7406. DOI: 10.1109/ Conference on Acoustics, Speech and
TVT.2018.2836335 Signal Processing (ICASSP’18), 15-20
April, 2018; Calgary, AB, Canada. New
[35] Castaneda O, Goldstein T, Studer C. York: IEEE; 2018. pp. 3579-3583.
POKEMON: A non-linear beamforming DOI: 10.1109/ICASSP.2018.8461980
25
MIMO Communications – Fundamental Theory, Propagation Channels, and Antenna Systems

[41] Jedda H, Mezghani A, Nossek JA, Processing. 2018;12(3):557-570.

et al. Massive MIMO downlink 1-bit DOI: 10.1109/JSTSP.2018.2823267
precoding with linear programming for
PSK Signaling. In: 2017 IEEE 18th [47] Jedda H, Mezghani A,
International Workshop on Signal Swindlehurst AL, et al. Precoding under
Processing Advances in Wireless instantaneous per-antenna peak power
Communications (SPAWC’17), 3-6 July, constraint. In: 2017 25th European Signal
2017; Sapporo, Japan. New York: IEEE; Processing Conference (EUSIPCO’17),
2017. pp. 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/ 28 August-2 September, 2017; Kos,
SPAWC.2017.8227757 Greece. New York: IEEE; 2017.
pp. 863-867. DOI: 10.23919/EUSIPCO.
[42] Li A, Masouros C, Swindlehurst AL. 2017.8081330
1-bit massive MIMO downlink based on
constructive interference. In: 2018 26th [48] Ding L, Zhou GT. Effects of even-
European Signal Processing Conference order nonlinear terms on Predistortion
(EUSIPCO’18), 3-7 September, 2018; linearization. In: Proceedings of 2002
Rome, Italy. New York: IEEE; 2018. IEEE 10th Digital Signal Processing
pp. 927-931. DOI: 10.23919/ Workshop, 2002 and the 2nd Signal
EUSIPCO.2018.8553556 Processing Education Workshop, 16
October 2002; Pine Mountain, GA, USA.
[43] Li A, Liu F, Masouros C, et al. New York: IEEE; 2002. pp. 1-6.
Interference exploitation 1-bit massive DOI: 10.1109/DSPWS.2002.1231064
MIMO precoding: A partial branch-and-
bound solution with near-optimal [49] Aghdam SR, Jacobsson S, Eriksson T.
performance. IEEE Transactions on Distortion-aware linear precoding for
Wireless Communications. 2020;19(5): Millimeter-wave multiuser MISO
3474-3489. DOI: 10.1109/ downlink. In: 2019 IEEE International
TWC.2020.2973987 Conference on Communications
Workshops (ICC Workshops’19), 20-24
[44] Tsinos CG, Kalantari A, May 2019; Shanghai. New York: IEEE.
Chatzinotas S, et al. Symbol-level pp. 1-6. DOI: 10.1109/ICCW.2019.
precoding with low resolution DACs for 8757031
large-scale Array MU-MIMO systems.
In: 2018 IEEE 19th International [50] Zayani R, Shaïek H, Roviras D.
Workshop on Signal Processing Efficient precoding for massive MIMO
Advances in Wireless Communications downlink under PA nonlinearities. IEEE
(SPAWC’18), 25-28 June, 2018; Communications Letters. 2019;23(9):
Kalamata, Greece. New York: IEEE; 1611-1615. DOI: 10.1109/LCOMM.2019.
2018. pp. 1-5. DOI: 10.1109/ 2924001
SPAWC.2018.8445995
[51] Jee J, Kwon G, Park H. Precoding
[45] Bertsekas DP. Nonlinear design and power control for SINR
programming. Journal of the Operational maximization of MISO system with
Research Society. 1997;48(3):334-334. nonlinear power amplifiers. IEEE
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600425 Transactions on Vehicular Technology.
2020;69(11):14019-14024.
[46] Sohrabi F, Liu YF, Yu W. One-bit DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2020.3026752
precoding and constellation range design
for massive MIMO with QAM signaling.
IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal
26