P. 1
Punctured Self-Concatenated Trellis Codes with Iterative Decoding

Punctured Self-Concatenated Trellis Codes with Iterative Decoding

|Views: 25|Likes:
Published by ijcsis
Abstract - A special concatenated code structure called self-concatenated trellis code (SCTC) is presented. This scheme based on only one recursive convolutional code(RSC), followed by a mapping modulator. The union bounds of SCTC are derived for communications over Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) and Rayleigh fading channels. Asymptotic results for large interleavers are extended to M-ary bandwidth efficient modulation schemes by puncturing process. The combination of self-concatenated codes with powerful bandwidth-efficient component codes leads to a straightforward encoder structure, and allows iterative decoding. The scheme has been investigated for 4-PSK, 8-PSK, 16-PSK, and 16-QAM modulation schemes with varying overall bandwidth efficiencies. The choice based on the rate of RSC and puncturer encoder component.

keywords; Self-Concatenated codes, trellis-coded modulation, uniform interleaved coding, convolutional coding, iterative decoding
Abstract - A special concatenated code structure called self-concatenated trellis code (SCTC) is presented. This scheme based on only one recursive convolutional code(RSC), followed by a mapping modulator. The union bounds of SCTC are derived for communications over Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) and Rayleigh fading channels. Asymptotic results for large interleavers are extended to M-ary bandwidth efficient modulation schemes by puncturing process. The combination of self-concatenated codes with powerful bandwidth-efficient component codes leads to a straightforward encoder structure, and allows iterative decoding. The scheme has been investigated for 4-PSK, 8-PSK, 16-PSK, and 16-QAM modulation schemes with varying overall bandwidth efficiencies. The choice based on the rate of RSC and puncturer encoder component.

keywords; Self-Concatenated codes, trellis-coded modulation, uniform interleaved coding, convolutional coding, iterative decoding

More info:

Published by: ijcsis on Oct 10, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/10/2010

pdf

text

original

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No.

6, September 2010

Punctured Self-Concatenated Trellis Codes with Iterative Decoding
Labib Francis Gergis
Misr Academy for Engineering and Technology Mansoura City, Egypt drlabeeb@yahoo.com

Abstract-A special concatenated code structure called self-concatenated trellis code (SCTC) is presented. This scheme based on only one recursive convolutional code(RSC), followed by a mapping modulator. The union bounds of SCTC are derived for communications over Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) and Rayleigh fading channels. Asymptotic results for large interleavers are extended to M-ary bandwidth efficient modulation schemes by puncturing process. The combination of selfconcatenated codes with powerful bandwidthefficient component codes leads to a straightforward encoder structure, and allows iterative decoding. The scheme has been investigated for 4-PSK, 8-PSK, 16-PSK, and 16-QAM modulation schemes with varying overall bandwidth efficiencies. The choice based on the rate of RSC and puncturer encoder component.

key words ;Self-Concatenated codes, trellis-coded modulation, uniform interleaved coding, convolutional coding, iterative decoding

1. INTRODUCTION
Trellis coded modulation (TCM) [1] was originally proposed for transmission over AWGN and fading channels due to its attractive bandwidth efficiency. Concatenated trellis-coded modulation is an alternative to TCM. Different approaches to concatenated trellis-coded modulations were presented in [2], and [3]. The main principle in the concatenated coding schemes is to use two codes in series (or parallel) joined through one or more interleavers. This means that the information sequence is encoded twice, the

second time after a scrambling of the information bits. Concatenated trellis codes are classified as serially concatenated convolutional codes (SCCC), these codes were analyzed in [4]. Using the same ingredients, another type of concatenated codes named parallel concatenated convolutional codes (PCCC), was described in [5]. A third choice is defined as a hybrid concatenation of convolutional codes (HCCC) was described in [4] and [6]. Selfconcatenated convolutional codes proposed in [7], [8], and [9] constitute another attractive iterative detection aided code-family for their low complexity, since they invoke only a single encoder and a single decoder. Puncturing is the process of deleting some parity bits from the codeword according to a puncturer code rate. The redundant bits in coding decrease the bandwidth efficiency. Puncturing increases code rate without increasing complexity and decreases free distances of code. The advantage of punctured codes for binary transmission is that the encoders and decoders for the entire class of codes constructed easily by modifying the single encoder and decoder for the rate 1/2 binary convolutional code from which the high rate punctured code was derived [10]. The construction of self-concatenated trellis codes (SCTC) is described in section 2. Section 3, derives analytical upper bounds to the biterror probability of SCTC using the concept of uniform interleavers. Factors that affect the performance of SCTC are described in section 4. Finally results for some examples depicted in section 4, have been stated in section 5.

139

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No. 6, September 2010

2. SCTC MODEL
The basic concept of self-concatenated scheme is shown in Figure. 1, the input bit sequence {b1} of the self-concatenated encoder is interleaved to yield the bit sequence {b2}. After the parallel-to-serial (P/S) conversion, the information sequence is defined as b(1) = {b1,1 b2,1 b1,2 b2,2 …. }. The resultant bit sequences are input to a recursive systematic convolutional (RSC) encoder. At the output of the encoder the interleaved bit sequence is punctured. The encoder output is composed of the combined systematic bit sequence and parity bit sequence.

where Eb/No is the bit energy to noise density ratio, Acw,h for block code C represents the number of codewords of the block code with output weight h associated with an input sequence of weight w, and N is the size of the interleaver. The Acw,h is the input-output weight coefficient (IOWC). The function Q (√2R h Eb/No) represents the pairwise error probability which is a monotonic decreasing function of the signal to noise ratio and the output weight h. For a fading channels, assuming coherent detection, and perfect Channel State Information (CSI), the conditional pairwise error probability is given by

π b1

b2 P / S b1 b(1)
Fig 1. The Self-Concatenated Code Encoder RSC
Encoder R1=1/2 Puncturer R2=1/2

Q(

2R Eb/ No ∑ ρi2 )
i=1

h

(3)

c(1)

The fading samples ρ are independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) random variables with Rayleigh density of the form - ρ2 f(ρ)= 2 ρ e (4) The structure of a SCTC, as shown in Figure .1, is composed of q-1 interleavers each of size N bits, and a single systematic recursive trellis code C with rate (bq/bq+1),where only the b + 1 outputs of the encoder are mapped to 2b+1 modulation levels. The average input-output weight coefficients Acw,h for SCTC with q-1 interleavers can be obtained by averaging equation (2) over all possible interleavers. A uniform interleaver is defined as a probabilistic device that maps a given input word of weight permutations with w into all its distinct N equal probability 1/
w N w

The overall code rate, R, can be derived based on [9] as: R = R1 / 2 R2 = (1/2) / 2 (1/2) = 1/2 (1) It can be observed that different codes can be designed by changing R2.

3. PERFORMANCE OF SELF-CONCATENATED TRELLIS CODES
Consider a linear block code C with code rate R, and minimum distance hm. An upper bound on the conditional bit-error probability of the block code C over AWGN channels, assuming coherent detection, maximum likelihood decoding, can be obtained in the form [4]
N/R N

.

Thus, the expression for IOWC of SCTC is derived as [7]
c

Acw,w,….,w,h (5) N w

A w,h =

Pb(e/ρ) ≤ Q

(w/N)

Acw,h ·
(2)

h= dmin w=1

R h (Eb / No)

where Acw,w,….,w,h is the number of code words of the trellis encoder of weight h, which is determined in [5], and

140

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No. 6, September 2010

N w

Nw (6) w!
1.e-4 1.e-5

Substituting equation (6) in equation (2) yields [3]
BER

1.e-6 1.e-7 1.e-8 1.e-9
N = 10

Pb (e/ρ ) = Bm N-q+1 Q ( √ 2 R hm Eb/ No ) (7)
where the constant Bm is independent of N, and is derived in [8], and hm is the minimum Euclidean distance of the SCTC scheme .

1.e-10

N = 50 N = 100 N = 200

4. SCTC: PERFORMANCE FACTORS
It is shown from equation (7), that there are many factors that affect the performance of SCTC. The most influential parameter is the interleaver size N. The bit error probabilities for self-concatenated trellis code with overall rate R=1/2, is shown in Fig. 2, with various interleaver lengths N= 10, 50, 100, 200, and 300 are plotted versus the signal-to-noise ratio Eb/No. The systematic and parity bits, bo and b1, are mapped to 4-ary Phase Shift Keying (QPSK) modulation. The figure shows the beneficial gain that can be achieved through increasing N.

1.e-10 0

N = 300

1

2 Eb / No

3 dB

4

5

Fig. 3. Upper Bounds to the Bit Error Probability for SCTC with QPSK using different Interleaver Lengths

Applying the upper bound of equation (7), we obtain the results reported in Fig. 3.It is
also clear from equation (7) that, the minimum Euclidean distance of the SCTC code (hm) is an another main parameter affecting the performance of SCTC. Different values of hm could be obtained by a variety of modulation schemes. Puncturing is used in order to increase the achievable bandwidth efficiency. Different codes could be designed by changing the rates R1 and R2. The output of the encoder is then mapped to the Gray-code mapping function. The various coding schemes considered in this paper are characterized in Table 1, that defines both R1,R2, the overall code rate R, and the associated mapped modulation scheme to R. The BER versus Eb/No performance curves of the various QPSK, 8-PSK, 16-PSK, and 16-QAM are shown in Fig.4.

Fig. 2. Self-Concatenated Trellis Encoder with rate R = 1/2

141

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No. 6, September 2010

R1

R2

R

Modulation Scheme QPSK

1/2

1/2

1/2

1/3

1/4

2/3

8-PSK 16-PSK 16-QAM

1/3

2/3

1/4

Table 1. Various Modulation Schemes Obtained from Varying R1 and R2.

Fig 5. Self-Concatenated Trellis Decoder The decoder is a self-concatenated scheme using a soft-input soft-output (SISO) maximum aposteriori probability (MAP) algorithm [9]. It first calculates the extrinsic logliklihood Ratio (LLR) of the information bits, namely Le(b1) and Le(b2). Then they are appropriately interleaved to yield the a priori LLRs of the information bits, namely La(b1) and La(b2), as shown, in Fig. 5.Self-concatenated decoding proceeds, until a fixed number of iterations is reached. The performance of SCTC with QPSK modulation schemes considered are shown in Fig .6. The SCTC has an overall rate R = 1/2, the interleaver length N of this code = 100 bits. The performance after various numbers of iteration is shown. It is clear that performance improves as the number of decoder iterations increases.

1.e-6
N = 100

1.e-7

BER

1.e-8

1.e-9
16QAM 16 PSK 8 PSK

1.e-10 0

QPSK

1

2 Eb / No

3 dB

4

5

Fig. 4. Upper Bounds to the Bit Error Probability for SCTC versus Different Modulation Schemes The choice of decoding algorithm and number of decoder iterations also influences performance. A functional diagram of the iterative decoding algorithm for SCTC is presented in Fig. 5.

5. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a channel coding scheme (SCTC) that is bandwidth efficient and allows iterative decoding of codes built around punctured codes together with higher order signaling.

142

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No. 6, September 2010

1.e-6 1.e-7 1.e-8 1.e-9 1.e-10
BER
QPSK Scheme N = 100

1.e-11 1.e-12 1.e-13 1.e-14 1.e-15 1.e-16 0 1 2
Eb / No
No Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Iteration 4 Iteration

3
dB

4

5

Fig. 6. Upper Bounds to the Bit Error Probability for SCTC versus Different Decoding Iterations The SCTC schemes consists of binary RSC codes and different puncturing rates. The puncturer is used to increase the achievable bandwidth efficiency. A search for good rates was performed, taking into account the puncturing at the transmitter. It is also demonstrated the significant in the performance and the decrease of the bit error rate and probability of errors to SCTC within increasing: the interleaver size N, and the number of decoder iterations

REFERENCES
[1] G. Ungerboeck, "Channel coding with multilevel phase signaling," IEEE Trans. Inf. Th., Vol. 25, pp. 5567, Jan. 1982 [2] F. Brannstrom, A. Amat, and L. Rasmussen, " A General Structure for Rate-Compatible Concatenated Codes," IEEE Trans on Communication Letters, Vol. 11, pp. 437-439, May 2007.

[3] A. Amat, G. Montorsi, and S. Benedetto, " New High-rate Convolutional Codes for Concatenated Schemes", Proceeding of IEEE International Conference on Communication, ICC 2002,Vol. 3, pp. 1661-1666, April 2002. [4] D. Divsalar, and F. Pollara, " Serial and Hybrid Concatenated Codes with Applications,"International Symposium on Turbo Codes and Related Topics, Brest, France 1997 [5] S. Benedetto, and G. Montorsi," Unveiling Turbo Codes: Some Results On Parallel Concatenated Coding Schemes,"IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 42, No. 2, March 1996 [6] A. Amat, and E. Rosnes," Good Concatenated Code Ensembles for the Binary Erasure Channel", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 928-943, August 2009. [7] S. Ng, M. Butt, and L. Hanzo, " On the Union Bounds of Self-Concatenated Convolutional Codes", IEEE Signal Processing Letters, Vol. 16, No. 16, No. 9, September 2009. [8] S. Benedetto, D. Divsalar, G. Montorsi, and F. Pollara, " Self-Concatenated Codes with Self-Iterative Decoding for Power and Bandwidth Efficiency" International Symposium on Information Theory, ISIT 1998, Cambridge, MA, USA, August 1998. [9] M. Butt, R. Riaz, S. Ng, and L. Hanzo, Distributed SelfConcatenated Codes for LowComplexity Power-Efficient Cooperative Communication", IEEE VTC 2009, Anchorage, Alasks, USA, 2009. [10] R. Deshmukh, and S. Ladhake, " Analysis of Various Puncturing Patterns and Code Rates: Turbo Code", International Journal of Electronic Engineering Research Volume 1, Number 2, pp.79-88, India, 2009.

143

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, Vol. 8, No. 6, September 2010

AUTHOR PROFILE
Labib F.Gergis received the Bsc, Msc, and Ph.D from faculty of engineering, Mansoura University, Egypt, in 1980, 1990, and 2000, respectively. He is presently in Misr Academy for Engineering and Technology, Egypt. His areas of interest include digital communications, Coding, and Multiple Access.

144

http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ ISSN 1947-5500

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->