This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Codebook-Based Downlink Beamforming Schemes
**

for Distributed Antenna Systems

Vinay Uday Prabhu, Sotiris Karachontzitis and Dimitris Toumpakaris

Wireless Telecommunications Laboratory

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras

Email: vinay@tenet.res.in,{karaxodg, dtouba}@upatras.gr

Abstract—In this paper, we consider limited feedback

codebook-based downlink beamforming involving two Remote

Antenna Units with two antennas each transmitting to a single-

antenna Mobile Terminal. A Central Unit to which the two

Remote Antenna Units are connected enables centralized joint

beamforming. We consider different practical channel scenarios

that may arise in Distributed Antenna Systems and gauge the

performance of the Grassmannian, Kerdock and Unitary-DFT

codebooks. We then compare the performance when modiﬁed

code books that exploit information such as transmit antenna

correlation are used. We conclude the paper by listing the

strengths and drawbacks of each of the three codebooks.

I. INTRODUCTION

Codebook-based limited feedback is widely being accepted

as an elegant way to learn the partial channel state information

at the transmitter (CSIT) in practical precoded multiple-input

single/multiple-output (MISO/MIMO) wireless systems [1-5].

Lately, there has been an evolution from vector quantization-

based strategies, such as [5], towards ﬁxed pre-known code-

books constructed on the principles of Grassmannian Line

Packing (GLP) [2], [3], maximizing minimum correlation be-

tween columns of truncated Fourier matrices [6], Equiangular

frames [7] and most recently, mutually unbiased bases (MUB)

[8]- [9]. We examine the possibility of using these off-the-

shelf codebooks (that are publicly available through online

repositories such as [10], [11] and which are constructed on the

assumption of the i.i.d Rayleigh channel) under unique channel

scenarios that emerge in Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS).

We consider such a distributed antenna system involving two

Remote Antenna Units (RAUs) which are connected to a

Central Unit (CU) through an optical back-haul. The RAUs

with 2 transmit antennas each beamform jointly to a single-

antenna mobile terminal (MT). In this paper, we compare

the performance of the off-the-shelf Grassmannian, Kerdock

and Unitary-DFT codebooks and benchmark them with the

ideal case (of perfect CSIT) for the DAS under consideration.

In Section II we provide the system model. In Section III,

we brieﬂy explain the principle of construction of the three

codebooks. In Section IV, we motivate a few idiosyncratic

scenarios that may arise in a DAS and present simulation

This work was supported by the FUTON research project FP7 ICT-2007-

2015533 of the European Commission.

results comparing the performance of these codebooks as

well as the modiﬁed codebooks which take into account the

correlation between transmitting antennas [4]. Harnessing the

results of Section IV, we present the observations in Section

V. We conclude the paper in Section VI.

II. SYSTEM MODEL

Fig. 1 provides a diagrammatic representation of the DAS

under consideration. Considering ﬂat fading for all wireless

Fig. 1. The system model of the DAS under consideration.

links between the RAUs and the MT and N

t

= 2 antennas

per RAU, the received symbol at a given time instant can be

written as:

y= h

∗

ˆ vs + w, (1)

where s ∈ C is the data symbol to be communicated to the MT,

ˆ v ∈ C

4×1

is the chosen beamforming vector, h = [h

T

1

h

T

2

] ∈

C

4×1

is the concatenated MISO channel of the individual

channels (h

1

, h

2

∈ C

2×1

are the downlink channels from

the ﬁrst and the second RAU to the MT respectively) and

w ∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

) is additive white Gaussian receiver noise.

At the receiver, we assume perfect Channel State Information

(CSI) and the existence of error-free and zero-delay feedback

paths to the RAUs. The beamforming vector is chosen from a

ﬁxed pre-known codebook T = {v

1

, ..., v

N

} ∈ C

4×N

. In this

work, we consider the Grassmannian [2], [3], Kerdock [8]- [9]

and Discrete Fourier matrix based Unitary-DFT codebooks [6]

which are under consideration in standards such as 3GPP LTE

[12]. The optimal beamforming vector is chosen as:

ˆ v = arg max

i∈[1,N]

{h

∗

v

i

2

|v

i

∈ T} , (2)

and the received SNR is equal to

SNR =

h

∗

ˆ v

2

2

P

σ

2

, (3)

where P = E

_

|s|

2

_

. The instantaneous capacity in bits/s/Hz

of this beamforming scheme is simply

C = log

2

(1 + SNR). (4)

III. KERDOCK, GRASSMANIAN AND UNITARY-DFT

CODEBOOKS - A BRIEF REVIEW

A. Grassmannian Codebooks

Given (1), it is well known that the optimal beamforming

vector is the principal right singular vector of the channel [13].

By exploiting the distribution of this vector in independent

identically distributed (i.i.d) Rayleigh fading matrix channels,

the problem of a size N codebook design was shown to

be equivalent to solving the problem of Grassmannian line

packing (GLP) [3]. The resultant codebooks, known as Grass-

mannian codebooks (T

grass

), satisfy the following design

criterion:

The codebook vectors in T

grass

= [v

1,grass

, ..., v

N,grass

] are

chosen such that they maximize the sine of the smallest angle

between any pairs of lines. That is:

T

grass

= arg max

T∈C

N

t

×N

δ(T), where,

δ(T) = sin(θ

min

) = min

1≤k<l≤N

_

1 −

¸

¸

v

H

k

v

l

¸

¸

2

(5)

B. Unitary-DFT codebooks

The Unitary-DFT codebook used is as designed in Sec. IV-

C of [6]. The codebook’s vectors T

dft

= [v

1,dft

, ..., v

N,dft

]

are the columns of the codebook matrix generated as:

T

dft

=

_

D

0

dft

F, D

1

dft

F, ..., D

Ni

dft

F

_

, where

F(k, l) =

1

√

N

t

e

{

2πkl

N

t

}

; F ∈ C

Nt×Nt

and D

dft

∈ C

Nt×Nt

.

(6)

Here, N

i

is chosen such that the codebook size, N = N

i

×N

t

.

D

dft

is a diagonal generator matrix that is derived as shown

in [6]. As seen, the generation of this codebook requires only

a diagonal matrix and the Fourier matrix which has resulted

in this codebook being proposed for the 3GPP LTE standard

[12].

C. Kerdock Codebooks

Recently, Inoue and Heath [8]- [9] have produced a qua-

ternary alphabet beamforming codebook based on Kerdock

codes that has attractive properties such as systematic con-

struction, minimal storage and online search computability.

This is exciting, as the traditional codebook design often

involved computationally intensive non-linear searches which

would be performed ofﬂine before writing the codebooks at

both the transmitter and the receiver. The special structure

in the codebook has been shown to facilitate derivation of

spatial multiplexing codebooks from multiple columns of the

beamforming codebook resulting in further storage reduction.

Furthermore, as revealed in [8]- [9], this codebook performs

as well as the Grassmannian codebook for the i.i.d. Rayleigh

channel. The codebook T

ker

is generated as,

T

ker

= [D

ker,0

H

Nt

, D

ker,1

H

Nt

, ..., D

ker,Ni−1

H

Nt

] .

(7)

Here H

Nt

∈ C

Nt×Nt

is the Sylvester-Hadamard Matrix [15]

of order N

t

and [D

ker,0

, ..., D

ker,Ni−1

] ∈ C

Nt×Nt

are the

diagonal generator matrices designed as shown in [9]. N

i

is

chosen such that N = N

i

×N

t

.

IV. CONSIDERED SCENARIOS AND SIMULATION RESULTS

We compare the three codebooks and benchmark their

performance with respect to the ideal case, which involves

full Channel State Information at the Transmitter (CSIT) at

the RAUs for different channel scenarios. For fair comparison,

the codebooks in all the cases are chosen to be of ﬁxed size

(N = 16), which entails a 4-bit feedback. On account of the

beamforming strategy being optimal only at lower SNRs, we

ﬁx P/σ

2

in our simulations to be 5 dB.

A. Rayleigh-I.I.D Case - h ∼ N

C

(0, 1)

We consider this case only as a theoretical benchmark.

It is highly unlikely that this scenario occurs in practice.

As predicted in [8], the Kerdock codebook performs very

well (nearly the same as Grassmannian and Unitary-DFT

codebooks) in spite of having codebook symbols drawn from

a restricted quaternary alphabet. The Capacity CDF (CCDF)

comparison is as shown in Fig. 2.

B. Mixed variance Rayleigh fading - (h

1

∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

1

), h

2

∼

N

C

(0, σ

2

2

))

Here, the downlink channels are Rayleigh i.i.d. with differ-

ent variances. Fig.3 indicates the CCDF performance compar-

ison. In the ﬁgure, Grassmann-Corr denotes the correlated-

Grassmannian codebook derived as described in [4]. For

the model under consideration, the correlated-Grassmannian

codebook T

corr,grass

is generated using

T

corr,grass

=

_

Dv

1,grass

Dv

1,grass

, ...,

Dv

N,grass

Dv

N,grass

_

∈ C

4×N

D =

_

I

2

0

0

σ1

σ2

I

2

_

; h

1

∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

1

), h

2

∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

2

).

(8)

3

Fig. 2. Capacity CDF comparison for the Rayleigh i.i.d. case.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann-Corr

DFT

Kerdock

Grassmann

Ideal

Grassmann-Corr

DFT/ Kerdock

Grassmann

Fig. 3. Capacity CDF comparison for the mixed variance Rayleigh fading

case.

As seen, we get to within 0.2 bps/Hz of the ideal capacity

curve when the correlated-Grassmannian code book is used.

However, this comes at the cost of additional complexity

involved in performing (8). Moreover, use of this codebook

requires the exact knowledge of the correlation matrix.

C. Correlated fading with different transmit correlation ma-

trices

We use the Kronecker MISO model [14]. The individual

transmit correlation matrices are assumed to be different

to accommodate for the different levels of mutual coupling

arising due to dissimilar antenna array-topologies used on the

two RAUs. This makes the simulations more realistic.

h

1

= R

1

2

t1

h

w

; h

2

= R

1

2

t2

h

w

; h

w

∼ N

C

(0, 1);

(9)

Here, R

t1

and R

t2

∈ C

2×2

are the transmit correlation

matrices of the two RAUs, modeled as

R

t

=

_

1 t

t 1

_

, t ≤ 1. (10)

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

Ideal

DFT /Kerdock

Grassmann

Grassmann

Ideal

DFT /Kerdock

Fig. 4. Capacity CDF comparison for Correlated fading with different

transmit correlation matrices.

With reference to Fig.4, we have set the transmit correlation

factors (also termed transmitter cross-correlation coefﬁcients)

high with t

1

= 0.9 and t

2

= 0.8 in the top sub-plot. A

drop in the degree of deterioration in the performance of the

Grassmannian codebook is seen when the transmit correlation

factors are reduced to t

1

= 0.45 and t

2

= 0.4 respectively

in the bottom sub-plot. Here, we assume that the MT does

not re-compute its Grassmannian codebook as in (8) using the

correlation matrix:

D =

_

R

t1

0

0 R

t2

_

. (11)

The computational cost apart, precise knowledge of the trans-

mit correlation factors (t

1

, t

2

) is required and whose estimation

in practice is non-trivial. The Kerdock and Unitary-DFT

codebooks are preferable in this case and they lag the ideal

CCDF curve by about 0.4 bps/Hz.

D. The generic case: Correlated fading, different correlation

matrices with Rayleigh and Ricean links.

This scenario arguably is the most generic and quite realistic

for the DAS under consideration. Referring to Fig. 5, we see

that the user in the scenario depicted has an NLOS link with

RAU-B (h

1

) and a LOS link with RAU-A (h

2

). We model

h

1

as a purely Rayleigh fading channel and h

2

as a Ricean

channel with the Ricean factor: k = 4. That is,

h

w1

∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

1

); h

w2

∼ N

C

(0, σ

2

2

); h

LOS

= [1 1]

T

h

1

= R

1

2

t1

h

w1

; h

22

= R

1

2

t2

h

w2

; h

2

=

_

k

k + 1

h

LOS

+

_

1

k + 1

h

22

Ricean Factor : k = 4; t

1

= 0.9; t

2

= 0.8.

(12)

h

1

h

2

Fig. 5. Scenario for the generic channel model case where the MT has a

LOS link with only one of the two RAUs.

The results for this scenario are as shown in Fig. 6. In the

ﬁrst sub-plot, we see that the Grassmannian codebook, like

in Fig.3, performs better than the Kerdock and Unitary-DFT

codebooks. This leads to a clear conclusion that the Kerdock

and Unitary-DFT codebooks are sensitive to the Rayleigh

i.i.d. assumption. The second sub-plot clearly highlights the

problem with the standard Grassmannian codebooks. High

antenna correlation affects the performance substantially and

the Grassmannian codebook lags the Kerdock and Unitary-

DFT codebooks by about 0.2 bps/Hz. The related average

ergodic capacity versus SNR curves are as depicted in Fig.

7. The average ergodic capacity is computed as:

C

ave

= E

h

_

log

2

_

1 +

h

∗

ˆ v

2

2

P

σ

2

__

. (13)

However, we see a marked improvement if we incorporate

the correlation matrix and modify the Grassmannian codebook.

Exact knowledge of the same will yield a near ideal perfor-

mance which is as shown in Fig. 8.

V. OBSERVATIONS FROM THE SIMULATION RESULTS

In the previous section, we saw that in all the cases, the DFT

and Kerdock codebooks performed almost the same. Kerdock

codes have the least storage requirement and computational

complexity. The restricted quaternary alphabet renders mul-

tiplication operations in to simple sign ﬂipping or ﬂipping

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

σ

1

2

=1

σ

2

2

=0.125

t

1

=0.9

t

2

=0.8

k=4

σ

1

2

=1

σ

2

2

=1

t

1

=0.9

t

2

=0.8

k=4

Ideal

Grassmann

/

DFT Kerdock

/

DFT Kerdock

Grassmann

Ideal

Fig. 6. Capacity CDF comparison for the generic channel model.

real and imaginary components. This motivates their usage

in MTs with limited computational and memory capabilities.

The major drawback of this code is its non-availability for odd

number of antennas as well as its limited maximum codebook

size. As shown in [8], the maximum codebook size is limited

to:

N

max

= N

t

×(N

t

+ 1) (14)

This is where the DFT codebook ﬁnd its utility. The relatively

simple construction and scalability coupled with its superior

resistance to antenna correlation (as seen in Fig. 4,6) makes it

an ideal candidate where the MT is antenna correlation blind

and has enough memory to store larger codebooks. In cases,

where the MT has access to the correlation information as well

as sufﬁcient memory Grassmannian codebooks are the best

choice. As seen in Fig. 3,4 and Fig. 8, Grasmmanian code-

book outperforms the other codebooks in scenarios involving

correlated fading provided we modify the codebook-based

on the nature of the correlation matrix. In the case of ﬁxed

codebook size schemes (like the N = 16 case considered),

we deem it prudent to have both the standard Grassmann and

Kerdock codebooks residing on the RAU and the MT. We

can then shrewdly utilize either of the two depending on the

information that the MT possesses about both transmit antenna

correlation and its environment parameters such as the Ricean

k-factor. This of course requires that we use one bit more than

the general case to indicate which of the two codebooks is

being used in the initial phase of communication between the

CU and the MT. It is equally important that we consider the

existence of larger Grassmannian and Unitary-DFT codebooks

(N = 64). Figure 9 clearly highlights the superior performance

obtained by the Grassmannian and Unitary-DFT codebooks

−5 0 5 10 15

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

SNR (in dB)

A

v

e

r

a

g

e

C

a

p

a

c

i

t

y

(

C

a

v

e

)

i

n

b

p

s

/

H

z

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

−5 0 5 10 15

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

SNR (in dB)

A

v

e

r

a

g

e

C

a

p

a

c

i

t

y

(

C

a

v

e

)

i

n

b

p

s

/

H

z

Ideal

Grassmann

DFT

Kerdock

Fig. 7. Comparison of average capacity versus SNR for the generic channel

model.

with N = 64. As discussed earlier, we can only have a N = 16

Kerdock codebook (N = 20 if we add the identity matrix too,

which translates in a simple antenna sub-set selection strategy).

Therefore, when RTs support larger codebooks, the N = 64

Grassmannian and Unitary-DFT codebooks come in to picture.

We capture these arguments in Fig.10.

VI. CONCLUSION

In this paper, we have attempted to subject the standard

Grassmannian, Unitary-DFT and Kerdock codebooks to a

limited feedback downlink beamforming scenario in a Dis-

tributed Antenna System. Such systems, owing to the dis-

tributed antenna topology yield unique idiosyncratic channel

realizations which are deviant from the i.i.d. Rayleigh channel.

We endeavored to gauge the performance variation of the

three codebooks, while allowing variations in the form of

modiﬁed correlation-aware codebooks as well as codebooks

with different sizes. We then presented the observations listing

the strong and weak points of the three codebooks used.

REFERENCES

[1] A. Narula, M. Lopez, M. Trott and G. Wornell, “Efﬁcient Use of

Side Information in Multiple-Antenna Data Transmission Over Fading

Channels,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas of Communications, vol. 16,

no. 8, pp. 1423-1436, Aug. 1998.

[2] K. Mukkavilli, A. Sabharwal, E. Erkip and B. Aazhang, “On Beam-

forming with Finite Rate Feedback in Multiple-Antenna Systems,” IEEE

Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 2562-2579, Oct.

2003.

[3] D. J. Love, R. W Heath Jr. and T. Strohmer, “Grassmannian Beam-

forming for Multiple-Input Multiple-Output Wireless Systems”, IEEE

Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 2735-2747,

Oct. 2003.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann−Corr

DFT

Kerdock

Ideal

DFT /Kerdock

Grassmann−Corr

Fig. 8. Capacity CDF comparison for the generic channel model using the

correlated Grassmann codebook.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Capacity (Bps/Hz)

P

r

o

b

a

b

i

l

i

t

y

Ideal

Grassmann−N=64

DFT−N=64

Kerdock−N=16

Ideal

Grassmann−N=64

DFT−N=64

Kerdock−N=16

Fig. 9. Capacity CDF comparison for the generic channel model using the

N = 64 Grassmannian and Unitary-DFT codebooks.(σ

2

1

= σ

2

2

= 1|k =

4|t

1

= 0.9, t

2

= 0.8.)

[4] D. J. Love and R. W. Heath Jr. , “Limited Feedback Diversity Techniques

for Correlated Channels”, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology,

vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 718-722, March 2006.

[5] J. Roh and B. Rao, “Transmit Beamforming in Multiple-Antenna

Systems with Finite Rate Feedback: a VQ-Based Approach”, IEEE

Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 1101-1112,

March 2006.

[6] D. J. Love and R. W. Heath Jr, “Limited Feedback Unitary Pre-coding

for Orthogonal Space-Time Block Codes”, IEEE Transactions on Signal

Processing, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 64-73, Jan. 2005.

[7] B. Mondal, R. Samanta and R. W. Heath Jr. , “Frame Theoretic

Quantization for Limited Feedback MIMO Beamforming Systems” in

Proc. Int. Conf. on Wireless Networks, Communications and Mobile

Computing, pp. 1065-1070 vol. 2, 2005.

[8] T. Inoue and R. W. Heath Jr. , “Kerdock Codes for Limited Feedback

MIMO Systems, in Proc. IEEE ICASSP (Las Vegas, NV), pp. 3113-3116,

March 30-April,4-2008.

[9] T. Inoue and R. W. Heath Jr, “Kerdock Codes for Limited Feed-

RT has limited computational capabilities

Serious memory constraints

KERDOCK CODEBOOK

RT has no access to correlation information

Memory can support larger codebooks

DFT CODEBOOK with

larger N, say N=64

RT has access to correlation information

But limited memory

Grassmannian CODEBOOK

N=16

N=16

RT has access to correlation information

Grassmannian CODEBOOK

N=64

Memory can support larger codebooks

Fig. 10. Diagrammatic representation of the observations.

back Precoded MIMO Systems”, accepted for publication in IEEE

Transactions on Signal Processing, also available at: http://arxiv.

org/PS cache/arxiv/pdf/0711/0711. 0557v2. pdf

[10] http://users. ece. utexas. edu/ inoue/codebook/index.html

[11] http://cobweb. ecn. purdue. edu/ djlove/grass. html

[12] 3GPP, “Physical Layer Aspects of UTRA High Speed Downlink Packet

Access, Technical Report TR25. 814, 2006. [Online] available at:

http://www. 3gpp. org/ftp/Specs/html-info/Meetings-R1.htm

[13] D. Tse and P. Viswanath, Fundamentals of Wireless Communications,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 2005.

[14] J. P. Kermoal, L. Schumacher, K. I. Pedersen, P. Mogensen and F. Fred-

eriksen, “A Stochastic MIMO Radio Channel Model with Experimental

Validation”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol.

20, no. 6, pp. 1211-1226, June 2002.

[15] K. J. Horadam, Hadamard matrices and their applications, Princeton

University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007.

Performance Comparison of Limited Feedback
Codebook-Based Downlink Beamforming Schemes
for Distributed Antenna Systems

Performance Comparison of Limited Feedback

Codebook-Based Downlink Beamforming Schemes

for Distributed Antenna Systems

Codebook-Based Downlink Beamforming Schemes

for Distributed Antenna Systems

- 2010 Maria Petrou, Costas Petrou(Auth.) Image Processing_ the Fundamentals, Second Editionby Choudhary Hukma
- Image Processingby Rafael Santos Pérez
- Expected Questions for UNIVERSITYl Exam DSP[1]by Ishak Khan Gulam
- Performance Comparison of Speaker Identification using circular DFT and WHT Sectorsby ijcsis

- Exam II Inel5309 f06
- Ch 6_DFT Based Channel Estimation Methods for MIMO-OfDM Systems
- Accerelate Framwork
- Chapter 04
- Digital Image Processing Questions
- DFT Matrix - Wikipedia
- Chap3-Discrete Fourier Transform
- IMPROVED AFFINE RESISTANT WATERMARKING BY USING ROBUST TEMPLATES
- c5
- Sh Ash
- Syllebus BE TE 2013 14 Semester5 6
- Tutorial No 2 Solution
- 2010 Maria Petrou, Costas Petrou(Auth.) Image Processing_ the Fundamentals, Second Edition
- Image Processing
- Expected Questions for UNIVERSITYl Exam DSP[1]
- Performance Comparison of Speaker Identification using circular DFT and WHT Sectors
- Untitled
- EECE 301 Note Set 22 DTFT Motivation
- Dsp
- eee
- Digital Signal Processing Lecture Notes_22Nov2010_v4
- The-FFT-Fundamentals-and-Concepts.pdf
- Discrete Time
- Windows
- dsp qb1
- dtfs
- Lecture 18
- Comparison of ATP Simulation and Micro-processor Based Fault Location Using DFT
- Signal Analysis Research by University of New Orleans Department of Physics Faculty, Students, and Graduates
- IpECE300
- Performance Comparison of Limited Feedback

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd