You are on page 1of 10

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering RESEARCH and Technology IN (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ENGINEERING

6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

AND TECHNOLOGY (IJARET)

ISSN 0976 - 6480 (Print) ISSN 0976 - 6499 (Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November - December 2013, pp. 120-129 © IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijaret.asp Journal Impact Factor (2013): 5.8376 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

IJARET
©IAEME

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF SINGLE CARRIER - FREQUENCY DOMAIN EQUALIZATION OVER ORTHOGONAL FREQUENCY DIVISION MULTIPLEXING USING MATLAB
Smrati Singh Sachan1 and Dr. Anil Kumar Sharma2 M. Tech. Scholar1, Professor & Principal2, Deptt. of Electronics & Communication Engg., Institute of Engineering & Technology, Alwar-301030 (Raj.), India

ABSTRACT The driving force in today’s wireless market is the excellent internet services and growing demand for wireless multimedia. OFDM has been widely accepted as a solution for high-speed broadband applications. In this paper, we have attempted to present a comprehensive overview of a promising alternative solution, SC-FDE, which has been historically shadowed by OFDM. Although the basic ideas behind SC-FDE can be traced back to Walzman and Schwartz’s work on adaptive equalizers in 1973, the recent surge of interest in SC-FDE was subsequent to the work of Sari. SCFDE enjoys a comparable complexity to OFDM due to the similar transceiver architecture based on efficient FFT/IFFT operations. Because of the single-carrier implementation, SC-FDE also avoids the inherent drawbacks of OFDM such as amplifier nonlinearities, carrier frequency offsets, and phase noise. OFDM is commonly used in practice in conjunction with coding. The comparative performance analysis of SC-FDE, coded OFDM, and adaptive OFDM schemes reveals that SC-FDE achieves comparable (or even better in some scenarios) performance compared to its OFDM counterpart. this paper has compared the two schemes SC-FDE and OFDM, especially the BER performance of OFDM & SC-FDE Zero forcing, SC-FDE(MMSE). Both schemes involve frequency-domain processing, and their complexity is similar, in BER curve for ZF and OFDM is OFDM performs better than SC-FDE with zero forcing equalizer. The Zero forcing equalizer runs almost parallel to OFDM BER curve though above it. The reason being whenever there are deep fades in the channel noise gets amplified and results in degradation of the performance & in the BER curve for MMSE equalizer shows better performance compared to OFDM beyond certain Signal to Noise ratio. Unlike ZF equalizer, MMSE coefficients takes into account the effect of channel noise. Also this equalizer can potentially exploit the full diversity available in the channel.
120

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

Keywords: CFO, MMSE, OFDM, SC-FDE, TDE. 1. INTRODUCTION In digital wireless communication method, time dispersion increase in multipath propagation. time dispersion tends to be more pronounced with data rate increment, it give a large length discretetime equivalent frequency selective channel. A lengthy frequency-selective channel might spread Inter Symbol Interference (ISI) over tens or even hundreds of symbol intervals, and cause severe performance degradation. Therefore, devising effective techniques to equalize long channels becomes crucial for supporting high-rate wireless communications [1]. This raises the question of anti-multipath measures with low-cost. Practical schemes for channel responses spanning many symbols Include [2]. Conventional Single Carrier (SC) modulation with time domain equalization (TDE) at receiver, Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM). A verified way to lessen inter-symbol interference in single carrier digital communication systems is the compensation for channel distortions via channel equalization in the time domain (TD) at the receiver side. There are different time-domain equalizers (TDEs) which has been widely studied in the past some of them are Maximum likelihood Sequence Estimators(MLSEs), LEs (linear equalizers) and DFEs (decision feedback equalizers).In history the main purpose for the development of TDEs were ISI mitigation in narrowband wire line channels and TDEs were well accepted in various standards for dial-up modems. In theory, we can also use TDEs in broadband wireless communications; though, with the increase of the data rate or ISI span, the number of operations per signaling interval also increases linearly [3]. Multi Carrier (like OFDM) transmission is a practical way to mitigate time dispersion effects, that was achieve by a ability of Multi carrier to split the operating wideband channel into large number of parallel narrowband sub carriers. As OFDM is the most popular choice among the communication enthusiast for broadband communications standards, but it experiences numerous disadvantages that include intolerance to amplifier nonlinearities, high sensitivity to carrier frequency offsets (CFOs) and large peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR). An alternative lowcomplexity approach that has been recently receiving much attention is the use of Frequency Domain Equalization (FDEs) in single carrier communications. Systems employing Frequency Domain equalization are closely related to OFDM systems. SC systems employing FDEs enjoy a similar complexity advantage as OFDM systems without the stringent requisites of extremely precise frequency synchronization and linear power amplification, as it is well known that the computational complexity of FDEs is lesser than their time division. 2. PARAMETERS USED FOR SIMULATION This work is based on performance analysis Single Carrier Frequency Domain Equalization as an alternative to OFDM. These techniques are tested on two condition: Bit Error Rate, Signal to Noise. These are the quality of service factors that are used to achieve better performance in terms of best effort. we have attempted to present a comprehensive overview of a promising alternative solution, SC-FDE, which has been historically shadowed by OFDM. Although the basic ideas behind SC-FDE can be traced back to Walzman and Schwartz’s [6] work on adaptive equalizers in 1973, the recent surge of interest in SC-FDE was subsequent to the work of Sari. SC-FDE enjoys a comparable complexity to OFDM due to the similar transceiver architecture based on efficient FFT/IFFT operations. The Simulation Parameters for Zero Forcing Equalizer are shown in Table-1.

121

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

Table 1: Simulation Parameters for Zero Forcing equalizer Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Frame size Total number of frames Transmitted Channel Number of taps Perfect Channel knowledge of the receiver Platform Simulation done in baseband MATLAB Parameters Value 52 100 Rayleigh + AWGN 20

In Zero forcing equalizer simulation is done in base based, we are considering frame size 52, total number of frame size transmitted in zero forcing equalizer is 100, number of taps are 20.in this case we assume that we have full detail about channel at the receiver side, for the simulation of zero forcing equalizer MATLAB plate form has been used. Here we are considering both Rayleigh channel as well as AWGN channel. These are simulation parameter of SC-FDE zero forcing equalizer. The received vector at the input of FDE can be expressed as R(l) =H(l)X(l) + VN(l) (1)

This result shows that, if the channel gains are ideally known and channel noise was not present, channel distortion could be completely rewarded for by pre-multiplying the above equation by matrix H-1 and then performing a DFT on the resulting vector. This equalization strategy, commonly known as zero-forcing strategy, can produce an enhancement of a noise level, owing to small channel gains. we can say that the FDE coefficients in case of zero forcing equalizer is CK= ୌ୩

(2)

However, in frequency selective fading, where spectral null(deep fades) occur, the inversion of HK in ZF –FDE results in noise enhancement at those points of spectral null. In broadband wireless communication systems, a coherence fading channel’s bandwidth was significantly less than the transmission bandwidth. that outcome in ISI (inter-symbol interference) and at the same time provides frequency diversity that can be exploited at the receiver to enhance transmission reliability It is well-known that for Rayleigh flat-fading channels, the error rate decays only linearly with signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). For frequency-selective channels, however, proper exploitation of the available frequency diversity forces the error probability to decay at a possibly higher rate and, therefore, can potentially achieve higher diversity gains, depend on the finding scheme working at the receiver. In terms of diversity, the diversity order achieved by symbol-by- symbol ZF linear equalization is Perr = SNR-1 (3)

122

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

The Simulation Parameters for MMSE Equalizer are shown in Table-2. Table 2: Simulation Parameters for MMSE equalizer Sl. No. Parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Frame size Total number of frames transmitted Channel: Number of taps Perfect Channel knowledge at the receiver Platform Simulation done in baseband MATLAB Value 52 100 Rayleigh + AWGN 10

In MMSE equalizer simulation is done in base based, we are considering frame size 52, total number of frame size transmitted in MMSE equalizer is 100, number of taps are 20.in this case we assume that we have full detail about channel at the receiver, for the simulation of MMSE equalizer MATLAB plate form has been used. Here we are considering both Rayleigh channel as well as AWGN channel. these are simulation parameter of SC-FDE MMSE equalizer. we used MMSE equalizer in place of zero forcing equalizer because zero forcing equalizer can produce an enhancement of the noise level, due to small channel gains. For this reason, minimum mean square (MMSE) strategies are normally used, as we equalize a channel winning into account the effect of channel noise.zero forcing equalizer has the disadvantage that it can produce an enhancement of the noise level, due to small channel gains. For this reason, minimum mean square (MMSE) strategies are normally used, as this equalize a channel taking into the account the effect of channel noise. The signals from the channel are transformed into the frequency domain by an FFT processor. Before they enter the FFT processor, they will be multiplied by a set of multiplying coefficients Ck . To minimize the combined effect of inter-symbol interference (ISI) and Gaussian noise, Ck can be optimized under the minimum mean-squared error MMSE) criterion. The FDE parameters Ck are given by equation W=HH / (HHH +σn2 I) (4)

Where H is the channel matrix and HH is the Hermittian of H. In terms of diversity, this equalizer can potentially exploit the full diversity available in the channel [13]. Minimum mean-squared error give better result after some signal to noise value.SC-FDE MMSE equalizer giving better performance with respect to OFDM in some parameter, when we received signal at receiver signal is in time domain, that signal is change in to frequency domain by using FFT processor. these equalizer are used in frequency domain that’s why we have to change the signal from time domain to frequency domain by using FFT, before this we minimize the inter symbol interference effect and Gaussian noise which is added with signal in the channel , for this we multiplying coefficient with signal. the BER curve for MMSE equalizer shows better performance compared to OFDM beyond certain Signal to Noise ratio. Unlike ZF equalizer, MMSE coefficients takes into account the effect of channel noise. Also this equalizer can potentially exploit the full diversity available in the channel. The Simulation parameter for OFDM are as shown in Table-3.

123

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

Table 3: Simulation Parameter for OFDM Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Parameters Frame Size Total frame transmitted Channel Modulation Cyclic Prefix duration Number of taps Platform Parameter Value 52 100 Rayleigh + AWGN BPSK 25% of frame size 20 MATLAB

In the OFDM simulation is done using MATLAB, we are considering frame size 52, total number of frame size transmitted in OFDM is 100, number of taps are 20.in this case we assume that we have full detail about channel at the receiver, for the simulation of OFDM MATLAB plate form has been used. Here we are considering both Rayleigh channel as well as AWGN channel. These are simulation parameter of OFDM equalizer. Modulation technique we are using is binary phase shift keying, cyclic prefix duration is 25 percentage. SC-FDE enjoys a comparable complexity to OFDM due to the similar transceiver architecture based on efficient FFT/IFFT operations. Owing to the single-carrier implementation, SCFDE also avoids the inherent drawbacks of OFDM such as amplifier nonlinearities, carrier frequency offsets, and phase noise. OFDM is commonly used in practice in conjunction with coding. The comparative performance analysis of SC-FDE, coded OFDM, and adaptive OFDM schemes reveals that SC-FDE achieves comparable (or even better in some scenarios) performance compared to its OFDM counterpart. 3. SIMULATION STEPS Simulation Modeling is done for real valued data. First of all a Simulation Flow Diagram of Zero Forcing Equalizer and a MMSE Equalizer has been made. In simulation phase, there’s a comparative analysis between theoretical OFDM, SC-FDE (Zero Forcing) & SC-FDE(MMSE) and BER curve for theoretical OFDM,SC-FDE(Zero Forcing)and SC-FDE (MMSE). (i) Simulation flow graph of Zero Forcing Equalizer: In first step of the simulation Flow graph of zero forcing equalizer is production of arbitrary binary sequence, these sequence are in binary form 0 and 1, BPSK modulation is used here, in BPSK 1 bit represent 1 and 0 bit represent -1, Then this binary sequence Converted into stream of data after that we add cyclic prefix in to stream, when stream with cyclic prefix are done, start convolving each frame with a 20-tap Rayleigh fading channel. Fading channel's frequency response on each frame is computed and stored. Then adding white Gaussian Noise in frames, the received vector is collected at the receiver part, at the receiver side first removing cyclic prefix. Here Cyclic prefix is also used for frame synchronization before its removal. Received symbol are in time domain. Time domain then Convert into frequency domain by using FFT, The equalization takes place by multiplying the received vector with channel h. The coefficients of equalizer are simply the inverse of h. equalizer output is in frequency domain, for this first equalized output is converted into time domain using IFFT. After that the output of IFFT is fed to detector and BER curve is plotted. Fig 5.1 Simulation flow graph.
124

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

Random data Generator and modulation

Rayleigh Channel Transmitter section Convolution Add AWGN FFT of Rx data

x
CP appended

FFT of Channel

y/ h IFFT

Receiver section

x
Demod. and Comparison to plot BER

Fig 1: Flow graph of Zero Forcing Equalizer (ii) Simulation Flow Diagram of MMSE Equalizer: In the flow graph of simulation of MMSE equalizer first there is production of arbitrary binary sequence, here we are using binary phase shift keying modulation, in the 1 bit represent 1 and 0 bit represent -1, after that we convert bits into streams so that it converted into stream of data and after that we add cyclic prefix with streams. Then we are convolving each frame with a 20-tap Rayleigh fading channel.

Random data Generator and modulation

Rayleigh Channel Transmitter section Convolution Add AWGN FFT of Rx data

x
CP appended

FFT of Channel

W=HH / (HHH +s n2 I) IFFT

Receiver section

x
Demod. and Comparison to plot BER

Fig 2 Simulation flow graph of MMSE

125

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

Fading channel's frequency response of each frame is computed and after r that we stored each frame of Fading channel's frequency response. Then we add white Gaussian Noise, then received vector was collected, originally i eliminate cyclic prefix from a data, that cyclic prefix is also used for frame synchronization, however this is used before cyclic prefix removal. symbol received at the receiver er side is in time domain that’s why we change time domain in to frequency domain using FFT processor, here we do equalization that will be done by multiplying the received vector with channel coefficients W. When hen signal is equalized after that we convert convert the output in to time domain using IFFT, signal we got it now is in time domain comes from IFFT will be fed to detector and BER curve is plotted. 4. SIMULATION RESULT In the Fig-3 we can see BER curve for OFDM and BER curve for MMSE, blue line show OFDM and pink is for SC-FDE FDE MMSE, in this graph SNR increase and bit error rate decreasing its mean bit error rate is improving with increasing SNR. SNR In case of bit error rate when this is decreasing its mean there is improvement in bit error rate, however in case cas of SNR, when it is increasing improvement is there. Here in this graph bit error rate is decreases in number, but this is an improvement, when bit error rate is 10 10-5 its mean when 1 bit error occur over 105 bits. MMSE equalizer shows better performance compared to OFDM beyond certain Signal to Noise ratio. Unlike ZF equalizer, MMSE coefficients takes into account the effect of channel noise. Also this equalizer can potentially exploit the full diversity available in the channel.

Fig 3: BER curve for theoretical OFDM and SC-FDE FDE (MMSE)

126

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

The SNR Versus BER value is shown in Table-4. Table Table-4: Table SNR versus Bit Error Rate BER for SCFDE BER for Difference OFDM (10-4) MMSE (10-4) Between etween BER 1000 2500 1500 590 980 390 200 350 150 70 45 25 23 2 21 6 6 2.4 2.4

SNR (in DB) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

4 we can find out difference between BER for OFDM & SC-FDE SC FDE MMSE equalizer, In table-4 at ‘ 0’ SNR BER for OFDM is 1000, when SNR is 5 db bit error rate will be 590, at 10 SNR bit error rate is 200, when SNR increases at 15 bit error rate will be 80, at SNR 20 bit error rate will be 23, here we can see SNR is increase with improved BER performance, in case SNR value is increases with decreasing value of BER, its mean bit error rate is improving. bit error error rate of OFDM and SC SCFDE zero forcing equalizer is decreases. bit error rate is number of bit error over transmitted bits, bit error rate is unit less dimension is always measured in percentage, signal to noise ratio increases means signal is improving. The BER curve for theoretical OFDM and SC-FDE SC FDE (Zero Forcing) is shown in Fig. 4

Fig. 4 The BER curve for theoretical OFDM and SC-FDE SC FDE (Zero Forcing) In Fig-4 we can see BER curve for OFDM and BER curve for SC-FDE, SC FDE, blue line show OFDM graph and pink is for SC-FDE, FDE, as SNR increases and BER decreases its mean BER is improving with increasing SNR. When W BER decreasing it means there is improvement in BER, however in case of SNR, when it is increasing improvement is there. In n this graph bit error rate is
127

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

decreases in number, but this is an improvement, when bit error rate is 10-5 its mean when 1 bit error occur over 105 bits. OFDM performs better than SC-FDE with zero forcing equalizer. The Zero forcing equalizer runs almost parallel to OFDM BER curve though above it. The reason being whenever there are deep fades in the channel noise gets amplified and results in degradation of the performance. Table-4 shows the SNR vs BER. Table 4 SNR versus Bit Error Rate SNR (in DB) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 BER for OFDM (in 10-4) 1000 600 210 80 24 8 2.5 BER for SC-FDE zero forcing (in 10-4) 2800 1100 550 140 95 65 4 Difference in BER 1800 500 340 60 71 57 1.5

In Table-4 we can find out the difference between BER for OFDM & SC-FDE zero forcing, at ‘ 0’ SNR BER for OFDM is 1000,when SNR is 5 db, bit error rate will be 600,at 10 SNR bit error rate is 210,when SNR increases at 15 bit error rate is 80,at SNR 20 bit error rate is 24,here we can see SNR is increased with improved BER performance, in SC-FDE zero forcing equalizer SNR value increases with decreasing BER, it means BER is improving. It is unit less dimension and always measured in percentage. When SNR ratio increases means signal strength is improving. 5. CONCLUSIONS The BER curve for ZF and OFDM is shown in Fig. We can see OFDM performs better than SC-FDE with zero forcing equalizer. The Zero forcing equalizer runs almost parallel to OFDM BER curve though above it. The reason being whenever there are deep fades in the channel noise gets amplified and results in degradation of the performance. Also the BER curve for MMSE equalizer shows better performance compared to OFDM beyond certain Signal to Noise ratio. Unlike ZF equalizer, MMSE coefficients takes into account the effect of channel noise. Also this equalizer can potentially exploit the full diversity available in the channel. REFERENCES 1. 2. Zhiqiang Liu, “Maximum Diversity in Single-Carrier Frequency-Domain Equalization” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 51, no. 8, August 2005. Lei Ye, Alister Burr, “Frequency Diversity Comparison of Coded SC-FDE & OFDM on Different Channels” The 18th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC'07). Fabrizio Pancaldi, Giorgio M. Vitetta, Reza Kalbasi, Naofal Al Dhahir , Murat Uysal and Hakam Mheidat “Single Carrier- Frequency Domain Equalization” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine Vol. 25, No. 5, September 2008.
128

3.

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 – 6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online) Volume 4, Issue 7, November – December (2013), © IAEME

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12.

13.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

20.

21.

22.

Shankar, P.M “Introduction to wireless Systems”, pp. 299, John Wiley & Sons, 2001. Xiaohui Zhang, Enqing Chen, and Xiaomin Mu “Single-Carrier Frequency-Domain Equalization Based on Frequency-Domain Oversampling” IEEE Communications Letters, Vol. 16, No. 1, January 2012. T. Walzmanand M Schwartz “Automatic equalization using the discrete frequency domain ” IEEE Trans. Inform Theory, vol 19, no.1, pp 59-68, Jan 1973. H. Sari, G. Karam, and I. Jeanclaude, “Transmission techniques for digital terrestrial tv broadcasting,” Communications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 100 –109, Feb 1995 Ramji Prasad “OFDM for wireless communication system” pp 118, Universal Personal communication, Artech House, 2004. Masoud Olfat and K. J. Ray Liu “Recursive Construction of 16-QAM Super-Golay codes for OFDM systems” IEEE international Conference, pp 3387 - 3391 vol.5, 11-15 May 2003. D. Falconer, S. L. Ariyavisitakul, A. Benyamin-Seeyar, and B. Eidson, “Frequency domain equalization for single-carrier broadband wireless systems," IEEE communication Magazine, Vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 58-66, Apr 2002. Z. Wang and G. B. Giannakis, “Wireless multicarrier communications: Where Fourier meets Shannon," IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Vol. 17, pp. 29-48, May 2000. N. Al-Dhahir, “Single-carrier frequency-domain equalization for space-time block-coded transmissions over frequency-selective fading channels,” IEEE Commun. Letter, Vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 304–306, July 2001. Lei Ye, Alister Burr, ”Frequency Diversity Comparison of Coded SC-FDE & OFDM on Different Channels”, The 18th Annual IEEE International Symposium on personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC'07)”. Ali Tajer, Aria Nosratinia, Naofal Al-Dhahir, “Diversity Analysis of Symbol-by-Symbol Linear Equalizers” IEEE transaction on Communication, Sep 2011. G. Proakis, “Digital Communications”, New-York McGraw-Hill, 1989 T. Rappaport, “Wireless Communications, Principle & Practice”, IEEE Press,Prentice Hall, pp. 31, 1996. V. Erceg et al., “A Model for the Multipath Delay Profile of Fixed Wireless Channels, ” IEEE JSAC, vol. 17, no. 3, Mar. 1999, pp. 399–410. H. Sari, G. Karam and I. Jeanclaude, “Frequency-Domain equalization of Mobile Radio and Terrestrial Broadcast Channels”, Proc. Globecom’94, San Francisco, Nov.-Dec. 1994, pp. 1-5. Antonio Gusmao, Rui Dinis, Nelson Esteves, “On Frequency-Domain Equalization and Diversity Combining for Broadband Wireless Communications”, IEEE Transactions on Communications, Vol.51, NO.7, July 2003. Zarana Barot and Anil Kumar Sharma, “Modeling and Simulation of Physical Layer of Ieee 802.22 Over a Multipath Fading Channel”, International Journal of Computer Engineering & Technology (IJCET), Volume 4, Issue 5, 2013, pp. 91 - 98, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6367, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6375. Nishant Tripathi and Dr. Anil Kumar Sharma, “Efficient Algorithm Based on Blind Source Separation Independent Component Analysis Using Matlab”, International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering & Technology (IJECET), Volume 4, Issue 6, 2013, pp. 14 - 20, ISSN Print: 0976- 6464, ISSN Online: 0976 –6472. Nidhi Malhotra and Anil Kumar Sharma, “Simulation & Analysis of Efficient CSFQ Over Regular CSFQ, Red & Fred Queuing Techniques using Matlab”, International Journal of Computer Engineering & Technology (IJCET), Volume 4, Issue 5, 2013, pp. 99 - 108, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6367, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6375.

129