See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268402380

Comparative Study of STBC MIMO System in Scattering Environment

Article in International Journal of Computer Applications · October 2011

CITATION READS
1 941

5 authors, including:

Debjyoti Ghosh Samarendra Nath Sur

Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology
6 PUBLICATIONS 39 CITATIONS 150 PUBLICATIONS 599 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Samarendra Nath Sur on 31 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Symposium on Devices MEMS, Intelligent Systems & Communication (ISDMISC) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

Comparative Study of STBC MIMO System in

Scattering Environment
Debjyoti Ghosh, Samarendra Nath Sur, Saptarshi Dutta Choudhary, Basudev Basak,
Madhur Mohan
Sikkim Manipal Institute of Technology, Majitar, Rangpo, East Sikkim-737136.

of the transmitted signal over time, frequency, or space [1].

ABSTRACT Multipath propagation has long been regarded as “impairment”
At this age of high speed multimedia communication system, because it causes signal fading. To mitigate this problem,
MIMO is one of the prime technologies that can achieve the diversity techniques were developed.
ultimate goal of the 4G. STBC techniques are applied for
multiple input multiple output (MIMO) wireless communication
system to utilize the inherent spatial diversity in wireless Here mathematical models for optimal receiver (ML and ML-
systems. In this paper we presented the performance analysis of MMSE joint) are described and flowchart of simulation is
STBC coded MIMO system in rich scattering environment and depicted in section 2. The simulated results are analyzed in
also analyze its performance in different modulation scheme. section 3.

Keywords 2. MATHEMATICAL MODEL

MIMO, Minimum Mean Square Error (MMSE), Zero Forcing
(ZF), Maximum Likelihood (ML).

1. INTRODUCTION 2.1 ML
MIMO has multiple (MT) transmitting antennas and multiple
(MR) receive antennas and, finally, MIMO-multiuser (MIMO- The ML receiver performs optimum vector decoding and is
MU), which refers to a configuration that comprises a base optimal in the sense of minimizing the error probability. ML
station with multiple transmit/receive antennas interacting with receiver is a method that compares the received signals with all
multiple users, each with one or more antennas [1]. MIMO possible transmitted signal vector which is modified by channel
antenna cam be either at transmitter or receiver or at both. The matrix H and estimates transmit symbol vector x according to
various configurations can be referred as MISO, SISO, SIMO, the Maximum Likelihood principle , which is shown as:
MIMO [2] .This system consists of several antenna elements,
plus adaptive signal processing, at both transmitter and receiver. 2
It exploits multipath instead of mitigating it [3]. Multiple input x̂  argx k {x1x 2 ......x n } min r  H x k
multiple output (MIMO) systems have attracted much attention
because of high spectrum efficiency. Many different detection
techniques are developed to get the diversity gain introduced by ------------------------- (1)
MIMO techniques [9]. The effect of multiple antennas might be
two fold. In spatial multiplexing mode, the objective is the data Where the minimization is performed over all possible transmit
rate maximization, by exploiting appropriately the structure of estimated vector symbols Although ML detection offers optimal
the channel matrix to obtain independent signaling paths that error performance, it suffers from complexity issues.
can be used to support independent data streams. Alternatively,
in diversity mode the multiple antennas are jointly used in order
to effectively mitigate the negative effects of fading, thus 2.2 MMSE
improving the overall system reliability [5]. However, the The MMSE receiver suppresses both the interference and noise
benefits of such systems are obtained at the cost of remarkable components, whereas the ZF receiver removes only the
implementation complexity [10] [7]. This increases the capacity interference components. This implies that the mean square
of the wireless channel [8]. Capacity is expressed as the error between the transmitted symbols and the estimate of the
maximum achievable data rate for an arbitrarily low probability receiver is minimized. Hence, MMSE is superior to ZF in the
of error [6]. presence of noise. Some of the important characteristics of
MMSE detector are simple linear receiver, superior performance
Fading channels are an important element of any wireless to ZF and at Low SNR, MMSE becomes matched filter. Also at
propagation environment [4] Multipath fading is a significant high SNR, MMSE becomes Zero-Forcing. MMSE receiver
problem in communications. In a fading channel, signals gives a solution of:
experience fades (i.e., they fluctuate in their strength). When the
signal power drops significantly, the channel is said to be in a
fade. This gives rise to high bit error rates (BER). We resort to
diversity to combat fading [11]. This involves providing replicas

11
 International Symposium on Devices MEMS, Intelligent Systems & Communication (ISDMISC) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

  / M
1 2

 1  1
x̂  D.x   I N R  H H H  .H H x P ( |  ) 
  exp{  sin 2 (
M
) sec 2 }d --- (7)

 SNR   / 2

And for MDPSK modulation the conditional error probability is

------------------------- (2)
given by
At low SNR, MMSE becomes ZF:

sin(  / M) 2 exp[(1  cos( / M) cos )]
1 P ( |  )   d ----- (8)
 1  1 2   / 2 1  cos( / M) cos 
 I M R  H H H  HH  HH
 SNR  SNR
The probability of error for coherent MPSK over Rician fading
------------------------- (3)
channel can be calculated, by substituting
P( | ) and
At high SNR, MMSE becomes ZF: f  ()
as in equation (7) and (5) respectively into equation (6),

 
1 as given below.
 1 H  1
 SNR I M T  H H 
  .H H  H H H HH
  
  

K sin 2 sec2 

exp  M 
NK 2  2 
------------------ (4) N   / M   sin sec  
1NK 2
 s M  d
P( )    
   s   / 2 NK  
N
2.3 ERROR PROBABILITY   sin 2 sec2  
The probability density function (PDF) [15] of instantaneous  
 s M 
signal to noise ratio (SNR) under Rician fading given by The
SNR pdf of a Rician fading channel is given by
------------------------- (9)
(1  K) (1  K) k(1  K)
f  ()  exp[ K  ]I0 (2 ),   0, The probability of error for coherent MDPSK over Rician fading
s s s
---- (5)
channel can be calculated, by substituting
P( | ) and

ES f  ()
as in equation (8) and (5) respectively into equation (6),
S ( )  is the average SNR.
N0 as given below

Where K= is the Rician factor, I0 (.) is the zero-order modified     

 K1  cos cos   
Bessel function of the first kind. The Rician factor K can define   M  
exp  
as the ratio of the LOS component energy to the diffuse  NK 
N    1  cos cos  
(multipath) component energy. If K=0 we get the Rayleigh sin  NK  2  s M 
P( )  M      d
distribution, whereas the channel approaches the no fading case 2    N
 s   / 2    N  K  
(AWGN channel) as K increases. 1  cos cos    1  cos cos  
 M   s M 
The error probability can be calculated by averaging the
conditional probability of error over the pdf of γ, i.e.
------------------------ (10)

P() 
 P( | )f  ( )d -------------------- (6)
0

Now, the conditional error probability for coherent MPSK is

given by

12
 International Symposium on Devices MEMS, Intelligent Systems & Communication (ISDMISC) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

2.4 FLOWCHART

Fig: 1 BER vs SNR curves for 2x2 MIMO system in Rician

channel condition with different modulation schemes.

Quantification:-At a particular SNR of 10dB the BER values for

BPSK and 8-PSK are 0.0001745 and 0.04066 respectively.

This means that the BER performance of the 2x2 MIMO

systems degrades with increase in modulation order. BPSK
modulation scheme provides 200 times better performance than
that of 8-PSK modulation.

Flow chart1: Flow chart of implementation of 2x2 STBC MIMO

system with ML and ML-MMSE receiver

3. SIMULATION RESULT
We have implemented the mathematical model in MATLAB
environment. The programming has been done on the basis of
Fig: 2 BER vs SNR curves for 2x2 MIMO system in Rician
the flowchart shown above. Here STBC and equalization
channel condition with different K.
schemes ML and MMSE incorporated for better performance in
fading channel environment. The Rician K factor is defined as to be the signal power in the
dominant component over the scattered. It determines the
distribution of the received signal component. Knowledge of the
Rician K factor can be useful in determining the bit error rate of

13
 International Symposium on Devices MEMS, Intelligent Systems & Communication (ISDMISC) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

the channel. Fig iv shows the plot of the BER as a function of 5. REFERENCES
the SNR for the different Rician K factor. [1] M. Jankiraman, Space-time codes and MIMO systems,
Artech House, 2004
Quantification:-At a particular SNR of 10dB the curves K=30,
[2] Tzi- Dar Chiueh and Pei-Yun Tsai, “OFDM Baseband
K=20, K=10, K=5 and K=3 obtain a BER of 0.003, 0.004,
Receiver Design for Wireless Communications”, Willey,
0.006, 0.011, 0.016. 2007.

Reason:-This difference in the BER at the same SNR is due to [3] Claude Oestges and Bruno Clerckx, “MIMO Wireless
the fact that since K is the ratio of signal power in the dominant Communications- From Real Time Propagation to Space
Time Code Design” Academic Press, 2007.
component over the scattered so with increasing K value the
signal power in the dominant component increases and thus the [4] Dragan Samardzija , Narayan Mandayam , “ Pilot Assisted
performance gain improves. Estimation of MIMO Fading Channel Response and
Achievable Data Rates ”, DIMACS Workshop on Signal
Moreover from the above values we can see that at the same Processing for Wireless Transmission, Rutgers University,
October 2002.
SNR the difference of BER between two consecutive curves
starting from K=30 are 0.001, 0.002, 0.005 and 0.006.Thus the [5] Tolga M. Duman and Ali Ghrayeb “Coding for MIMO
successive difference between the curves is increasing. Communication Systems”, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2007
[6] R. D. Murch and K. B. Letaief, “Antenna systems for
Another interesting observation from the curve is that with the broadband wireless access,” IEEE Communications
increasing SNR the spacing of the curves increases. As for Magazine, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 76–83, 2002.
example, at a SNR of 6dB the BER value for the curve K=5 is
[7] J. C. Koshy, J. C. Liberti, and T. R. Hoerning, “Iterative
0.050 while for K=10 is 0.036.whereas the BER values for the mimo detector using a group-wise approach,” in Sarnoff
same two curves at a SNR of 12dB is at 0.006088 and 0.00225. Symposium, May 2007, pp. 1–7.

Figure 3 depicts the performance comparison curve for the 2x2 [8] Goldsmith, A.; Jafar, S.A.; Jindal, N.; Vishwanath,
S.; “Capacity limits of MIMO channels”, Selected Areas in
MIMO systems in different channel condition. It is clear from
Communications, IEEE Journal on, Volume: 21 Issue:5,
the curves that due to the presence of multipath component in June 2003
Rician and Raleigh channel the system performance is degraded
in comparison AWGN condition. Figure 4 represent the [9] Fan Wang, Yong Xiong, and Xiumei Yang, “Approximate
ML Detection Based on MMSE for MIMO Systems”,
comparative study of 2x2 MIMO system with ML and ML-
PIERS ONLINE, VOL. 3, NO. 4, 2007.
MMSE joint receiver.
[10] Vlasis Barousis, Athanasios G. Kanatas, George
4. CONCLUSION Efthymoglou., “A Complete MIMO System Built on a
Single RF Communication ends” PIERS ONLINE, VOL.
In this paper we have analyzed the 2x2 STBC MIMO systems in
6, NO. 6, 2010.
scattering environment. MIMO technology is the one way to
increase the capacity of the wireless channel without increasing [11] Lehmann, N.H. Fishler, E. Haimovich, A.M. Blum, R.S.
the power or bandwidth. However the complexity of the optimal Chizhik, D. Cimini, L.J. Valenzuela, R.A. , “Evaluation of
Transmit Diversity in MIMO-radar Direction Finding”,
detector, e.g., ML detector, is exponential with transmission
This paper appears in: IEEE Transactions on Signal
diversity and modulation order which is prohibitive for practical Processing, Volume: 55 Issue: 5, May 2007.
applications.

A large number of low complexity linear MIMO detectors have [12] Foschini, G. J. “Layered space-time architecture for
been studied so far; generally these linear detectors are based on wireless communication in a fading environment when
minimum mean-square error (MMSE) and based on Maximum using multi-element antennas," Bell Labs. Tech. J., vol. 1,
Likelihood (ML) principle. But the performance of this detector no. 2, pp. 41-59, Autumn 1996.
can be poor, especially in MIMO systems that use a small
number of receiving antenna branches. To improve
[13] Benesty J, Huang Y., and Chen, J. “A fast recursive
performance, a so-called vertical Bell laboratories layered space-
algorithm for optimum sequential signal detection in a
time (V-BLAST) algorithm needs to be implemented [12] [13]; BLAST system” IEEE Trans. SP, vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1722-
this performs successive interference cancellations (SIC) in the 1730, July 2003.
appropriate order.

14
 International Symposium on Devices MEMS, Intelligent Systems & Communication (ISDMISC) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

Fig: 3 BER vs SNR curves for 2x2 MIMO systems in Different channel Condition.

Fig: 4 BER vs SNR curves for 2x2 MIMO systems with ML and ML-MMSE receiver.

15

View publication stats