This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
Approximate Capacity of Fast Fading Interference
Channels with No Instantaneous CSIT
Joyson Sebastian, Can Karakus, Suhas Diggavi
Abstract—We develop a characterization of fading models,
which assigns a number called logarithmic Jensen’s gap to a
given fading model. We show that as a consequence of a finite
logarithmic Jensen’s gap, approximate capacity region can be
obtained for fast fading interference channels (FF-IC) for several
scenarios. We illustrate three instances where a constant capacity
gap can be obtained as a function of the logarithmic Jensen’s
gap. Firstly for an FF-IC with neither feedback nor instantaneous
channel state information at transmitter (CSIT), if the fading
distribution has finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap, we show that a
rate-splitting scheme based on average interference-to-noise ratio
(inr) can achieve its approximate capacity. Secondly we show that
a similar scheme can achieve the approximate capacity of FF-
IC with feedback and delayed CSIT, if the fading distribution
has finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap. Thirdly, when this condition
holds, we show that point-to-point codes can achieve approximate
capacity for a class of FF-IC with feedback. We prove that the
logarithmic Jensen’s gap is finite for common fading models,
including Rayleigh and Nakagami fading, thereby obtaining the
approximate capacity region of FF-IC with these fading models.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The 2-user Gaussian IC is a simple model that captures
the effect of interference in wireless networks. Significant
progress has been made in the last decade in understanding the
capacity of the Gaussian IC [3], [4], [5], [6]. In practice the
links in the channel could be time-varying rather than static.
Characterizing the capacity of FF-IC without CSIT has been an
open problem. In this paper we make progress in this direction
by obtaining the capacity region of certain classes of FF-IC
without instantaneous CSIT within a constant gap.
A. Related work
Previous works have characterized the capacity region to
within a constant gap for the IC where the channel is known at
the transmitter and receiver. The capacity region of the 2-user
IC without feedback was characterized to within 1 bit/s/Hz
in [5]. In [6], Suh and Tse characterized the capacity region
of the IC with feedback to within 2 bits per channel use.
These results were based on the Han-Kobayashi scheme [3],
where the transmitters use superposition coding splitting their
messages into common and private parts, and the receivers use
joint decoding. Other variants of wireless networks based on
Shorter versions of this work appeared in [1], [2] with outline of proofs.
This version has complete proofs. This work was supported in part by NSF
grants 1514531, 1314937 and a gift from Guru Krupa Foundation. Joyson
Sebastian and Suhas Diggavi are with the Dept. of Electrical and Computer
Engineering (ECE), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Can
Karakus is with Amazon, but this work was done while he was at Dept.
of ECE, UCLA. E-mail: {joysonsebastian, karakus, suhasdiggavi}@ucla.edu
0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
the IC model have been studied in literature. The interference
relay channel (IRC), which is obtained by adding a relay to the
2-user interference channel (IC) setup, was introduced in [7]
and was further studied in [8], [9], [10], [11]. In [12], Wang
and Tse studied the IC with receiver cooperation. The IC with
source cooperation was studied in [13], [14].
When the channels are time varying, most of the ex-
isting techniques for IC cannot be used without CSIT. In
[15], Farsani showed that if each transmitter of FF-IC has
knowledge of the inr to the non-corresponding receiver1 , the
capacity region can be achieved within 1 bit/s/Hz. Lalitha et
al. [16] derived sum-capacity results for a subclass of FF-IC
with perfect CSIT. The idea of interference alignment [17]
has been extended to FF-IC to obtain the degrees of freedom
(DoF) region for certain cases. The degrees of freedom region
for the MIMO interference channel with delayed CSIT was
studied in [18]. Their results show that when all users have
single antenna, the DoF region is same for the cases of no
CSIT, delayed CSIT and instantaneous CSIT. The results from
[19] show that DoF region for FF-IC with output feedback
and delayed CSIT is contained in the DoF region for the case
with instantaneous CSIT and no feedback. Kang and Choi
[20] considered interference alignment for the K-user FF-IC
with delayed channel state feedback and showed a result of
2K/ (K + 2) DoF. They also showed the same DoF can be
achieved using a scaled output feedback, but without channel
state feedback. Therefore, the above works have characteriza-
tions for DoF for several fading scenarios, and also show that
for single antenna systems, feedback is not very effective in
terms of DoF. However, as we show in this paper, the situation
changes when we look for more than DoF, and for approximate
optimality of the entire capacity region. In particular, we
allow for arbitrary channel gains, and do not limit ourselves
to SNR-scaling results2 . In particular, we show that though
the capacity region is same (within a constant) for the cases
of no CSIT, delayed CSIT and instantaneous CSIT, there is
a significant difference with output feedback. When there is
output feedback and delayed CSIT the capacity region is larger
than that for the case with no feedback and instantaneous CSIT
in contrast to the DoF result from [19]. This gives us a finer
understanding of the role of CSIT as well as feedback in FF-
IC with arbitrary (and potentially asymmetric) link strengths,
and is one of the main contributions of this paper.
1 For Tx1 the non-corresponding receiver is Rx2 and similarly for Tx2 the
non-corresponding receiver is Rx1
2 However, we can also use our results to get the generalized DoF studied
in [5] for the FF-IC. This shows that for generalized DoF, feedback indeed
helps, as shown in our results.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
Some simplified fading models have been introduced to
characterize the capacity region of the FF-IC in the absence of
CSIT. In [21], Wang et al. considered the bursty IC, where the
presence of interference is governed by a Bernoulli random
state. The capacity of one-sided IC under ergodic layered
erasure model, which considers the channel as a time-varying
version of the binary expansion deterministic model [22], was
studied in [23], [24]. The binary fading IC, where the channel
gains, the transmit signals and the received signals are in the
binary field was studied in [25], [26] by Vahid et al. In spite
of these efforts, the capacity region of FF-IC without CSIT is
still unknown, and this paper presents what we believe to be
the first approximate characterization of the capacity region of
FF-IC without CSIT, for a class of fading models satisfying the
regularity condition, defined as the finite logarithmic Jensen’s
gap.
B. Contribution and outline
In this paper we first introduce the notion of logarithmic
Jensen’s gap for fading models. This is defined in Section
III as a number calculated for a fading model depending
on the probability distribution for the channel strengths.
It is effectively the supremum of log (E [link strength]) −
E [log (link strength)] over all links and operating regimes of
the system. We show that common fading models including
Rayleigh and Nakagami fading have finite logarithmic Jensen’s
gap, but some fading models (like bursty fading [21]) have
infinite logarithmic Jensen’s gap. Subsequently, we show the
usefulness of logarithmic Jensen’s gap in obtaining approxi-
mate capacity regions of FF-ICs without instantaneous CSIT.
We show that Han-Kobayashi type rate-splitting schemes [3],
[4], [5], [6] based on inr, when extended to rate-splitting
schemes based on E [inr] for the FF-ICs, give the capacity
gap as a function of logarithmic Jensen’s gap, yielding the
approximate capacity characterization for fading models that
have finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap. Since our rate-splitting
is based on E [inr], it does not need instantaneous CSIT. The
constant gap capacity result is first obtained for FF-IC without
feedback or instantaneous CSIT. We also show that for the
FF-IC without feedback, instantaneous CSIT cannot improve
the capacity region over the case with no instantaneous CSIT,
except for a constant gap. We subsequently study FF-IC with
feedback and delayed CSIT to obtain a constant gap capacity
result. In this case, having instantaneous CSIT cannot improve
the capacity region over the case with delayed CSIT. We show
that our analysis of FF-IC can easily be extended to fading
interference MAC channel to yield an approximate capacity
result.
The usefulness of logarithmic Jensen’s gap is further illus-
trated by analyzing a scheme based on point-to-point codes
for a class of FF-IC with feedback, where we again obtain
capacity gap as a function of logarithmic Jensen’s gap. Our
scheme is based on amplify-and-forward relaying, similar to
the one proposed in [6]. It effectively induces a 2-tap inter-
symbol-interference (ISI) channel for one of the users and
a point-to-point feedback channel for the other user. The
work in [6] had similarly shown that an amplify-and-forward
0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
2
based feedback scheme can achieve the symmetric rate point,
without using rate-splitting. Our scheme can be considered as
an extension to this scheme, which enables us to approximately
achieve the entire capacity region. Our analysis also yields a
capacity bound for a 2-tap fading ISI channel, the tightness of
the bound again determined by the logarithmic Jensen’s gap.
The paper is organized as follows. In section II we de-
scribe the system setup and the notations. In section III
we develop the logarithmic Jensen’s gap characterization for
fading models. We illustrate a few applications of logarithmic
Jensen’s gap characterization in the later sections: in section
IV, by obtaining approximate capacity region of FF-IC without
feedback, in section V, by obtaining approximate capacity
region of FF-IC with feedback and delayed CSIT, and in
section VI, by developing point-to-point codes for a class of
FF-IC with feedback.
II. M ODEL AND N OTATION
We consider the two-user FF-IC (Figure 1)
Y1 (l) = g11 (l)X1 (l) + g21 (l)X2 (l) + Z1 (l) (1)
Y2 (l) = g12 (l)X1 (l) + g22 (l)X2 (l) + Z2 (l), (2)
where Yi (l) is the channel output of receiver i (Rxi) at
time l, Xi (l) is the input of transmitter i (Txi) at time
l, Zi (l) ∼ CN (0, 1) is complex AWGN noise process at
Rxi, and gij (l) is the time-variant random channel gain. The
channel gain processes {gij (l)} are constant over a block of
size T and independent across blocks and across links (i, j).
Without loss of generality we assume block size T = 1 for the
fading, our results can be easily extended for arbitrary T case
by coding across the blocks. The transmitters are assumed
to have no knowledge of the channel gain realizations, but
the receivers do have full knowledge of their corresponding
2
channels. We assume that |gij (l)| is a random variable with
a known
PNdistribution.
2
We assume average power constraint
(1/N ) l=1 |Xi (l)| ≤ 1, i = 1, 2 at the transmitters, and
assume Txi has a message Wi ∈ 1, . , 2N Ri , for a block
length of N , intended for Rxi for i = 1, 2, and W1 , hW2 arei
independent of each other. We denote SN Ri := E |gii |
2
h i
2
for i = 1, 2, and IN Ri := E |gij | for i 6= j. For the
2
instantaneous interference channel gains we use inri := |gij | ,
i 6= j. Note that we allow for arbitrary channel gains, and
do not limit ourselves to SNR-scaling results, but get an
approximate characterization of the FF-IC capacity region.
Z1 ∼ CN (0, 1)
X1 Y1
g11 +
Tx1 Rx1
g21
g12 Z2 ∼ CN (0, 1)
Tx2 + Rx2
X2 g22 Y2
Figure 1. The channel model without feedback.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
3

Under the feedback model (Figure 2), after each reception, δ if for any (R1 , R2 ) ∈ C, (R1 − δ, R2 − δ) ∈ R, where C is
each receiver reliably feeds back the received symbol and the the capacity region of the channel.
channel states to its corresponding transmitter3 . For example,
at time l, Tx1 receives (Y1 (l − 1) , g11 (l − 1), g21 (l − 1)) III. A LOGARITHMIC J ENSEN ’ S GAP CHARACTERIZATION
from Rx1. Thus X1 (l) is allowed
to be a function of FOR FADING MODELS
W1 , {Y1 (k) , g11 (k), g21 (k)}k<l .
Definition
n 1. For a given fadingo model, let Φ =
2
(Y1 , g11 , g21 ) φ : |gij | ∼ φ, for some i, j ∈ {1, 2} be the set of all
Delay
probability density functions, that the fading model induce on
2
Z1 ∼ CN (0, 1) the channel link strengths |gij | , across all operating regimes
X1 Y1 of the system. We define logarithmic Jensen’s gap cJG of the
g11 +
Tx1 Rx1 fading model to be
g21
cJG = sup (log (a + E [W ])
a∈R+ ,W ∼φ∈Φ

g12 Z2 ∼ CN (0, 1) −E [log (a + W )]) . (3)

Tx2 + Rx2 In other words it is the smallest value of c such that

X2 g22 Y2
log (a + E [W ]) − E [log (a + W )] ≤ c, (4)

Delay for any a ≥ 0 , for any φ ∈ Φ, with W distributed according

(Y2 , g22 , g12 )
to φ.
Figure 2. The channel model with feedback. The following lemma converts requirement in Definition 1
to a simpler form.
We define symmetric FF-IC to be a FF-IC such that g11 ∼
Lemma 2. The requirement log (a + E [W ]) −
g22 ∼ gd and g12 ∼ g21 ∼ gc (we use the symbol ∼ to
E [log (a + W )] ≤ c for any a ≥ 0, is equivalent to
indicate random variables following same distribution), all of
log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] = −E [log (W 0 )] ≤ c, where
them being independent. Here gd and gc are dummy random
W 0 = E[WW
].
variables according to which the directhlinks iand cross links
2
are distributed. We denote SN R := E |gd | , and IN R := Proof: We first note that letting a = 0 in the re-
h
2
i quirement log (a + E [W ]) − E [log (a + W )] ≤ c shows that
E |gc | , for the symmetric case.
log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] = −E [log (W 0 )] ≤ c is necessary.
We use the vector notation g 1 = [g11 , g21 ], g 2 = [g22 , g12 ] To prove the converse, note that ξ (a) = log (a + E [W ]) −
and g = [g11 , g21 , g22 , g12 ]. For schemes involving multiple E [log (a + W )] ≥ 0 due to Jensen’s inequality. Taking deriva-
(i)N
blocks (phases) we use the notation Xk , where k is the tive with respect to a and again using Jensen’s inequality we
user index, i is the block (phase) index and N is the number get
(i)
of symbols per block. The notation Xk (j) indicates the j th −1
h
−1
i
th th
symbol in the i block (phase) of k user. We explain this in (ln 2) ξ 0 (a) = (a + E [W ]) − E (a + W ) ≤ 0. (5)
Figure 3.
Hence, ξ (a) achieves the maximum value at a = 0 in the
(i)
Xk (j) : Notation for one symbol.
range [0, ∞). Hence we have the equivalent condition
log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] ≤ c, (6)

Block i − 1 Block i Block i + 1

which is equivalent to −E [log (W 0 )] ≤ c.
Hence, it follows that for any distribution that has a point
User k
1 2 ... j mass at 0 (for example, bursty interference model [21]), we
Blocklength N do not have a finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap, since it has
E [log (W 0 )] = −∞. Now we discuss a few distributions that
Xk
(i)N
: Notation for the N can be easily shown to have a finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap.
symbols of the block taken together. Note that any finite c, which satisfies Equation (4), is an upper
bound to the logarithmic Jensen’s gap cJG .
Figure 3. The notation for schemes involving multiple blocks (phases).

The natural logarithm is denoted by ln () and the logarithm A. Gamma distribution

with base 2 is denoted by log (). Also we define log+ (·) := Gamma distribution generalizes some of the commonly used
max (log(·), 0). For obtaining approximate capacity region of fading models, including Rayleigh and Nakagami fading. The
ICs, we say that a rate region R achieves a capacity gap of probability density function for Gamma distribution is given
3 IC with rate limited feedback is considered in [27] where outputs are by
w
f (w) = wk−1 e− θ / θk Γ(k)


quantized and fed back. Our schemes can also be extended for such cases. (7)

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
4

for w > 0, where k > 0 is the shape parameter, and θ > 0 is Table I
the scale parameter. U PPER BOUND OF LOGARITHMIC J ENSEN ’ S GAP FOR DIFFERENT FADING
MODELS
Proposition 3. If the elements of Φ are Gamma distributed
Fading Model c
with shape parameter k, they satisfy Equation (4) with con- Rayleigh 0.83
stant c = log (e) /k − log (1 + 1/ (2k)). Gamma k = 1 0.86
Gamma k = 2 0.40
Proof: Using Lemma 2, it is sufficient to prove Gamma k = 3 0.26
log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] ≤ log (e) /α − log (1 + 1/ (2α)). Weibull k = 1 0.83
It is known for the Gamma distribution that E [W ] = kθ and Weibull k = 2 0.24
Weibull k = 3 0.11
E [ln (W )] = ψ (k)+ln (θ) , where ψ is the digamma function.
Therefore,
log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] = log(e) (ln (k) − ψ (k)) . (8) C. Other distributions
We first use the following property of digamma function Here we give a lemma that can be used together with
ψ (k) = ψ (k + 1) − 1/k, and then use the inequality Lemma 2 to verify whether a given fading model has a finite
ln (k + 1/2) < ψ (k + 1)from [28, Lemma 1.7]. Hence, logarithmic Jensen’s gap.

log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] Lemma 7. If the cumulative distribution function F (w) of W

satisfies F (w) ≤ awb over w ∈ [0, ] for some a ≥ 0, b > 0,
< log(e) (ln (k) − ln (k + 1/2) + 1/k) (9)
and 0 <  ≤ 1, then
= log (e) /k − log (1 + 1/ (2k)) . (10)
E [ln (W )] ≥ ln () + ab ln () − ab /b.


(12)

Corollary 4. If the elements of Φ are exponentially distributed

(which corresponds to Rayleigh fading), they satisfy Equation Proof: The condition in this lemma ensures that the prob-
(4) with constant c = 0.86. ability density function f (w) grows slow enough as w → 0−
2 so that f (w) ln (w) is integrable at 0. Also the behavior for
Proof: In Rayleigh fading model the |gij | is exponen-
large values of w is not relevant here, since we are looking
tially distributed. The exponential distribution itself is a special
for a lower bound on E [ln (W )]. The detailed proof is in [29,
case of Gamma distribution with k = 1 . Substituting α = 1
Appendix C].
in (10) we get log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] < 0.86.
Hence, if the cumulative distribution of the channel gain
Nakagami fading can be obtained as a special case of the
grows polynomially in a neighborhood of 0, the resulting
Gamma distribution; in this case the logarithmic Jensen’s gap
logarithm becomes integrable, and thus it is possible to find a
will depend upon the parameters used in the model.
finite constant c for the Equation (4).
B. Weibull distribution
IV. A PPROXIMATE C APACITY R EGION OF FF-IC WITHOUT
The probability density function for Weibull distribution is FEEDBACK
given by
In this section we make use of the logarithmic Jensen’s gap
k−1 −(w/λ)k
f (w) = (k/λ) (w/λ) e (11) characterization to obtain the approximate capacity region of
for x > 0 with k, λ > 0. FF-IC with neither feedback nor instantaneous CSIT.
Theorem 8. For a non-feedback FF-IC with a finite logarith-
Proposition 5. If the elements of Φ are Weibull distributed mic Jensen’s gap cJG , the rate region RN FB described by
with parameter k, they satisfy Equation (4) with c =

(13) is achievable with λpk = min IN1Rk , 1 :
γ log (e) /k + log (Γ (1 + 1/k)), where γ is Euler’s constant.
R1 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 − 1


Proof:
For Weibull distributed W , we have E [W ] = (13a)
λΓ 1 + k1 and E [ln (W )] = ln (λ) − γk , where Γ (·) denotes R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2 + λp1 |g12 |2 − 1


(13b)
the gamma function and γ is the Euler’s constant. Hence, R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


it follows that log (E [W ]) − E [log (W )] ≤ γ log (e) /k + + E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 − 2


(13c)
log (Γ (1 + 1/k)) . Using Lemma 2 concludes the proof.
R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2 + |g21 |2


Note that exponential distribution can be specialized from
+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + λp1 |g12 |2 − 2


Weibull distribution as well, by setting k = 1. Hence, we get (13d)
R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + |g21 |2


the tighter gap in the following corollary.
+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + |g12 |2 − 2


Corollary 6. If the elements of Φ are exponentially distributed, (13e)
2R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2 + |g21 |2


they satisfy Equation (4) with constant c = 0.83.
+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


In the following table we summarize the values we obtain
+ E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 − 3


as upper bound on logarithmic Jensen’s gap, according to (13f)
R1 + 2R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


Definition 1 and Equation (4) for different fading models.

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
5

+ E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + |g21 |2



15

+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + λp1 |g12 |2 − 3



(13g)

and the region RN F B has a capacity gap of at most cJG + 1

bits per channel use.
10
Proof: This region is obtained by a rate-splitting scheme
1
that allocates the private message power proportional to E[inr] .

Rsym
The analysis of the scheme and outer bounds are similar to
that in [5]. See subsection IV-B for details.
5
Remark 9. For the case of Rayleigh fading we obtain a
,=.25, Outer bound
capacity gap of 1.83 bits per channel use, following Table ,=.25, Inner bound
I. ,=.5, Outer bound
,=.5, Inner bound
Corollary 10. For FF-IC with finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap
0
cJG , instantaneous CSIT cannot improve the capacity region 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
of except by a constant. Log(SNR)

Proof: Our outer bounds in subsection IV-B for the non- Figure 4. Comparison of outer and inner bounds with given α = log(SN R)
log(IN R)

feedback IC are valid even when there is instantaneous CSIT. for non-feedback symmetric FF-IC at the symmetric rate point. For high SNR,
These outer bounds are within constant gap of the rate region the capacity gap is approximately 1.48 bits per channel use for α = 0.5 and
1.51 bits per channel use for α = 0.25 from the numerics. Our theoretical
RN F B achieved without instantaneous CSIT. analysis yields gap as 1.83 bits per channel use independent of α.
Corollary 11. Delayed CSIT cannot improve the capacity
region of the FF-IC except by a constant.
interference strength to approximately achieve the capacity
Proof: This follows from the previous corollary, since region.
instantaneous CSIT is always better than delayed CSIT. We compare the symmetric rate point achievable for the
Remark 12. The previous two corollaries are for FF-IC with 2 non-feedback symmetric FF-IC in Figure 4. The fading model
users and single antennas. It does not contradict the results for used is Rayleigh fading. The inner bound in numerical simu-
MISO broadcast channel, X-channel, MIMO IC and multi-user lation is from Equation (14) (which is slightly tighter than
IC where delayed CSIT or instantaneous CSIT can improve (13) since some terms in (14) are simplified and bounded
capacity region by more than a constant [30], [31], [20], [32], with the worst case values to obtain (13)) in subsection IV-B
[18]. according to the choice of distributions given in the same
subsection. The outer bound is plotted by simulating Equation
Corollary 13. Within a constant gap, the capacity region of (17) in subsection IV-B. The SN R is varied after fixing
the FF-IC (with finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap cJG ) can be log(IN R)
α = log(SN R) . The simulation yields a capacity gap of 1.48
proved to be same as the capacity region of IC (without
h i fading) bits per channel use for α = 0.5 and a capacity gap of 1.51
2
with equivalent channel strengths SN Ri := E |gii | for i = bits per channel use for α = 0.25. Our theoretical analysis for
FF-IC gives a capacity gap of cJG + 1 ≤ 1.83 bits per channel
h i
2
1, 2, and IN Ri := E |gij | for i 6= j.
use independent of α, using data from Table I in Section III.
Proof: This is an application of the logarithmic Jensen’s
gap result. The proof is given in [29, Appendix D]. B. Proof of Theorem 8
From [4] we obtain that a Han-Kobayashi scheme
A. Discussion for IC can achieve the following rate region for all

p (u1 ) p (u2 ) p (x1 |u1 ) p (x2 |u2 ). Note that we use Yi , gi
It is useful to view Theorem 8 in the context of the instead of (Yi ) in the actual result from [4] to account for
existing results for the ICs. It is known that for ICs, one the fading.
can approximately achieve the capacity region by performing R1 ≤ I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U2


(14a)
superposition coding and allocating a power to the private

R2 ≤ I X2 ; Y2 , g2 |U1 (14b)
symbols that is inversely proportional to the strength of the

interference caused at the unintended receiver. Consequently, R 1 + R 2 ≤ I X2 , U 1 ; Y2 , g 2


the received interference power is at the noise level, and + I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U1 , U2 (14c)


the private symbols can be safely treated as noise, incurring R1 + R2 ≤ I X1 , U2 ; Y1 , g1
only a constant rate penalty. At first sight, such a strategy + I X2 ; Y2 , g2 |U1 , U2


(14d)
seems impossible for the fading IC, where the transmitters do

R1 + R2 ≤ I X1 , U2 ; Y1 , g1 |U1
not have instantaneous channel information. What Theorem

+ I X2 , U1 ; Y2 , g2 |U2 (14e)
8 reveals (with the details in subsection IV-B) is that if the


fading model has finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap, it is sufficient 2R1 + R2 ≤ I X1 , U2 ; Y1 , g1 + I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U1 , U2


to perform power allocation based on the inverse of average + I X2 , U1 ; Y2 , g2 |U2 (14f)

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
6

Z1 ∼ CN (0, 1)



R1 + 2R2 ≤ I X2 , U1 ; Y2 , g2 + I X2 ; Y2 , g2 |U1 , U2


+ I X1 , U2 ; Y1 , g1 |U1 . (14g) W1
X1
g11 +
Y1
W1 , W2
Tx1 Rx1
Now similar to that in [5], choose mutually independent g21
Gaussian input distributions Uk , Xpk to generate Xk .
Uk ∼ CN (0, λck ) , Xpk ∼ CN (0, λpk ) , k ∈ {1, 2} (15) g12 Z2 ∼ CN (0, 1)

X1 = U1 + Xp1 , X2 = U2 + Xp2 , (16) W2 Tx2 + Rx2 W2

X2 g22 Y2

where λck + λpk = 1 and λpk = min (1/IN Rk , 1). Here

Figure 5. Fast Fading Interference MAC channel
we introduced the rate-splitting using the average inr. On
evaluating the region described by (14) with this choice of
input distribution, we get the region described by (13); the by δ1 , for the second pair denote the gap by δ2 , and so on.
calculations are deferred to Appendix A. By inspection δ1 ≤ 1 and δ2 ≤ 1. Now
Claim 14. An outer bound for the non-feedback case is given
h 
−1 i
δ3 = E log 1 + |g11 |2 1 + |g12 |2
by (17):
− E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 + 2


(18)
R1 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2


(17a)
(a)
≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2 (1 + IN R1 )−1


R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2


(17b)
− E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + 2 + cJG


R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


(19)
(b)
h 
−1 i
+ E log 1 + |g11 |2 1 + |g12 |2 (17c) ≤ 2 + cJG . (20)
R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 |2 + |g21 |2


The step (a) follows from Jensen’s inequality and logarithmic
2
h 
−1 i
+ E log 1 + |g22 |2 1 + |g21 |2 (17d) Jensen’s gappropertyof |g12 | . The step (b) follows because
 
|g11 |2
 λp1 = min IN1R1 , 1 ≥ IN R11 +1 . Similarly, we can bound
R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g21 |2 + the other δ’s and gather the inequalities as:
1 + |g12 |2
|g22 |2
  
+ E log 1 + |g12 |2 + (17e) δ1 , δ2 ≤ 1; δ3 , δ4 ≤ 2 + cJG (21)
1 + |g21 |2
δ5 ≤ 2 + 2cJG ; δ6 , δ7 ≤ 3 + 2cJG . (22)
2R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g11 | + |g21 |2
2


 
|g22 |2
 For δ5 , δ6 , and δ7 we have to use the logarithmic Jensen’s
+ E log 1 + |g12 |2 + gap property twice and hence 2cJG appears. We note that
1 + |g21 |2
h 
−1 i δ1 is associated with bounding R1 , δ2 with R2 , (δ3 , δ4 , δ5 )
+ E log 1 + |g11 |2 1 + |g12 |2 (17f)
with R1 + R2 , δ6 with 2R1 + R2 and δ7 with R1 +
R1 + 2R2 ≤ E log 1 + |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


2R2 . Hence, it follows that
the capacity gap is at most
 
|g11 |2
 max δ1 , δ2 , δ23 , δ24 , δ25 , δ36 , δ37 ≤ cJG +1 bits per channel use.
+ E log 1 + |g21 |2 +
1 + |g12 |2
h 
−1 i
+ E log 1 + |g22 |2 1 + |g21 |2 . (17g)
C. Fast Fading Interference MAC channel
Proof: The outer bounds (17a) and (17b) are easily We now consider the interference MAC channel [33] with
derived by removing the interference from the other user by fading links (Figure 5), where we can obtain an approximate
providing it as side-information. capacity result similar to the FF-IC. This setup has similar
The outer bound in Equation (17e) follows from [5, The- network structure as FF-IC. However Rx1 needs to decode
orem 1]. Those in Equation (17f) and Equation (17g) follow the messages from both the two transmitters, while Rx2 needs
from [5, Theorem 4]. We just need to modify
 the
 theorems to decode only the message from Tx2.
from [5] for the fading case by treating Yi , g i as output,
Theorem 16. A rate splitting scheme based on average INR
and using the i.i.d property of the channels. We illustrate the can achieve the approximate capacity region of fast fading
procedure for Equation (17g) in Appendix B. Equation (17e) interference MAC channel with a finite logarithmic Jensen’s
and Equation (17f) can be derived similarly. gap cJG , within 1 + 12 cJG bits per channel use.
The derivation of outer bounds (17c) and (17d) uses similar
techniques as for Equation (17g). We derive Equation (17d) Proof: The proof is by extending the techniques used in
in Appendix B. Equation (17c) follows due to symmetry. [33] and using similar calculations as for the FF-IC. Details
are in [29, Appendix E].
Claim 15. The gap between the inner bound (13) and the outer
bound (17) for the non-feedback case is at most cJG + 1 bits
V. A PPROXIMATE C APACITY R EGION OF FF-IC WITH
per channel use.
FEEDBACK
Proof: The proof for the capacity gap uses the logarithmic
Jensen’s gap property of the fading model. Denote the gap In this section we make use of the logarithmic Jensen’s gap
between the first outer bound (17a) and first inner bound (13a) characterization to obtain the approximate capacity region of

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
7

FF-IC with output and channel state feedback, but transmitters Proof: This is again an application of the logarithmic
having no prior knowledge of channel states. Under the Jensen’s gap result. The proof is given in [29, Appendix F].
feedback model, after each reception, each receiver reliably
feeds back the received symbol and the channel states to its
corresponding transmitter. For example, at time l, Tx1 receives A. Proof of Theorem 17
(Y1 (l − 1) , g11 (l − 1), g21 (l − 1)) from Rx1. Thus X1 (l)
is
Note that since the receivers know their respective incoming
allowed to be a function of W1 , {Y1 (k) , g11 (k), g21 (k)}k<l . channel states, we
 canview the effective channel output at
The model is described in section II and is illustrated with
Rxi as the pair Yi , g i . Then the block Markov scheme of
Figure 2 in the same section.
[6, Lemma 1] implies that the rate pairs (R1 , R2 ) satisfying
Theorem 17. For a feedback FF-IC with a finite logarithmic

Jensen’s gap cJG , the rate region RF B described by (23) R1 ≤ I U, U2 , X1 ; Y1 , g1 (24a)
2

is achievable
 for 0 ≤ |ρ| ≤ 1, 0 ≤ θ < 2π with λpk = R1 ≤ I U1 ; Y2 , g2 |U, X2
2
min IN1Rk , 1 − |ρ| :


+ I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U1 , U2 , U (24b)


R2 ≤ I U, U1 , X2 ; Y2 , g2 (24c)


R1 ≤ E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2 R2 ≤ I U2 ; Y1 , g1 |U, X1



+ I X2 ; Y2 , g2 |U1 , U2 , U
  i
∗
+2 |ρ|2 Re eiθ g11 g21 +1 −1 (23a) (24d)


R1 + R2 ≤ I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U1 , U2 , U
R1 ≤ E log 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g12 |2





+ I U, U1 , X2 ; Y2 , g2 (24e)
+ E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 − 2


(23b)

R1 + R2 ≤ I X2 ; Y2 , g2 |U1 , U2 , U
R2 ≤ E log |g22 |2 + |g12 |2



  i + I U, U2 , X1 ; Y1 , g1 (24f)
∗
+2 |ρ|2 Re eiθ g22 g12 + 1 − 1 (23c)
for all p (u) p (u1 |u) p (u2 |u) p (x1 |u1 , u) p (x2 |u2 , u) are
R2 ≤ E log 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g21 |2



achievable. We choose the input distribution according to
+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + λp1 |g12 |2 − 2


(23d)
U ∼ CN 0, |ρ|2 , Uk ∼ CN (0, λck )


(25)
R1 + R2 ≤ E log |g22 |2 + |g12 |2


∗
 i Xpk ∼ CN (0, λpk )
+2 |ρ|2 Re eiθ g22 g12 + 1
X1 = eiθ U + U1 + Xp1 , X2 = U + U2 + Xp2 (26)
+ E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 − 2


(23e)
2
R1 + R2 ≤ E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2
 (U, Uk , Xpk being mutually independent) with 0 ≤ |ρ| ≤
2

∗
 i 1, 0 ≤ θ < 2π, λck  + λpk = 1 − |ρ| and λpk =
+2 |ρ|2 Re eiθ g11 g21 +1 2
min 1/IN Rk , 1 − |ρ| .
+ E log 1 + λp2 |g22 |2 + λp1 |g12 |2 − 2


(23f) With this choice of λpk we perform the rate-splitting ac-
cording to the average inr in place of rate-splitting based
and the region RF B has a capacity gap of at most cJG + 2 on the constant inr. Note that we have introduced an extra
bits per channel use. rotation θ for the first transmitter, which will become helpful
in proving the capacity gap by allowing us to choose a point
Proof: The proof is in subsection V-A. in inner bound for every point in outer bound (see proof of
Remark 18. For the case of Rayleigh fading we obtain a claim 21). On evaluating the terms in (24) for this choice of
capacity gap of 2.83 bits per channel use, following Table input distribution, we get the inner bound described by (23);
I. the calculations are deferred to [29, Appendix G].
An outer bound for the feedback case is given by (27) with
Corollary 19. Instantaneous CSIT cannot improve the capac- 0 ≤ |ρ| ≤ 1 (ρ being a complex number):
ity region of the FF-IC (with finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap ∗
R1 ≤ E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2 + 2Re (ρg11 g21


)+1 (27a)
cJG ) with feedback and delayed CSIT except for a constant.
R1 ≤ E log 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g12 |2




Proof: Our outer bounds in subsection V-A for feedback "

1 − |ρ|2 |g11 |2

!#
case are valid even when there is instantaneous CSIT. These + E log 1 + (27b)
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g12 |2


outer bounds are within constant gap of the rate region RF B ∗
R2 ≤ E log |g22 |2 + |g12 |2 + 2Re (ρg22


achieved using only feedback and delayed CSIT. g12 ) + 1 (27c)
 2
2

R2 ≤ E log 1 + 1 − |ρ| |g21 |
Corollary 20. If the phases of the links gij are uniformly " !#
1 − |ρ|2 |g22 |2


distributed in [0, 2π], then within a constant gap, the capacity + E log 1 + (27d)
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g21 |2


region of the feedback FF-IC (with finite logarithmic Jensen’s
∗
R1 + R2 ≤ E log |g22 |2 + |g12 |2 + 2Re (ρg22


gap cJG ) with feedback and delayed CSIT can be proved to be g12 ) + 1
same as the capacity region of a feedback IC (without i fading)
" !#
1 − |ρ|2 |g11 |2


h
2
with equivalent channel strengths SN Ri := E |gii | for i = + E log 1 + (27e)
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g12 |2


h i
2 ∗
1, 2, and IN Ri := E |gij | for i 6= j. R1 + R2 ≤ E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2 + 2Re (ρg11 g21


)+1

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
8

" !#
1 − |ρ|2 |g22 |2


+ E log 1 + . (27f) where (a) follows by using logarithmic Jensen’s gap property
2
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g21 |2


on |g12 | and Jensen’s inequality. The step (b) follows because
1 − |ρ|2


The outer bounds can be easily derived following the proof 1
∗ = (36)
techniques from [6, Theorem 3] using E [X1 X2 ] = ρ, treating 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 IN R1 1


 1−|ρ|2
+ IN R1
Yi , g i as output, and using the i.i.d property of the channels. ≤ min 1/IN R1 , 1 − |ρ| 2

= λp1 (37)
The calculations are deferred to [29, Appendix H].
Similarly, by inspection of the other bounding inequalities we
Claim 21. The gap between the inner bound (23) and the outer can gather the inequalities on the δ’s as:
bound (27) for the feedback case is at most cJG + 2 bits per
channel use. δ1 , δ3 ≤ 2; δ2 , δ4 ≤ cJG + 2; δ5 , δ6 ≤ cJG + 3. (38)
Proof: Denote the gap between the first outer bound (27a) We note that (δ1 , δ2 ) is associated with bounding R1 , (δ3 , δ4 )
and inner bound (23a) by δ1 , for the second pair denote the
gap by δ2 , and so on. For comparing the gap between regions with R2 , (δ5 , δ6 ) with R1 + R2 . Hence it follows
that the
we choose the inner bound point with same |ρ| as in any given capacity gap is at most max δ1 , δ2 , δ3 , δ4 , δ25 , δ26 ≤ cJG + 2
outer bound point. The rotation θ for the first transmitter also bits per channel use.
becomes important in proving a constant gap capacity result.
We choose θ in the inner bound to match arg (ρ) in the outer
bound. With this choice we get VI. A PPROXIMATE CAPACITY OF FEEDBACK FF-IC USING
h    i POINT- TO - POINT CODES
∗
δ1 = E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2 + 2 |ρ| Re eiθ g11 g21 +1 As the third illustration for the usefulness of logarithmic
h  
∗
 i
Jensen’s gap, we propose a strategy that does not make use
− E log |g11 |2 + |g21 |2 + 2 |ρ|2 Re eiθ g11 g21 +1 +1
of rate-splitting, superposition coding or joint decoding for
(28)
   iθ ∗
  the feedback case, which achieves the entire capacity region
2Re(e g11 g21 )
1 for 2-user symmetric FF-ICs to within a constant gap. This
  1 + |g11 |2 +|g21 |2 + |ρ| |g11 |2 +|g21 |2
constant gap is dictated by the logarithmic Jensen’s gap for the

= Elog 
 
∗  + 1.
 
2 2Re(e g11 g21 )
iθ
1
1 + |g |2 +|g |2
+ |ρ| |g |2 +|g |2
fading model. Our scheme only uses point-to-point codes, and
11 21 11 21

(29)
a feedback scheme based on amplify-and-forward relaying,
  similar to the one proposed in [6].
 2Re(eiθ g11 g∗ )  |e−iθ g11
∗ ∗
g21 +eiθ g11 g21 | The main idea behind the scheme is to have one of the trans-
We have  |g |2 +|g 21 |2  =

|g |2
|2 ≤ 1, hence
11 21 11 +|g21 mitters initially send a very densely modulated block of data,
e−iθ g ∗ g
11 21 +eiθ g
11 21 g∗ 2 2 and then refine this information using feedback and amplify-
we call |g11 |2 +|g21 |2
= sin ϕ and let |g11 | + |g21 | =
2 and-forward relaying for the following blocks, in a fashion
r . Therefore,
" !# similar to the Schalkwijk-Kailath scheme [34], while treating
1 + 1/r2 + |ρ| sin ϕ the interference as noise. Such refinement effectively induces a
δ1 = E log 2 + 1. (30) 2-tap point-to-point inter-symbol-interference (ISI) channel at
1 + 1/r2 + |ρ| sin ϕ
the unintended receiver, and a point-to-point feedback channel
1+1/r 2 +|ρ| sin ϕ for the intended receiver. As a result, both receivers can decode
If sin φ < 0, then 1+1/r 2 +|ρ|2 sin ϕ
≤ 1. Otherwise, if sin φ >
(|ρ|−|ρ|2 ) sin ϕ their intended information using only point-to-point codes.
1+1/r 2 +|ρ| sin ϕ
0, then 1+1/r 2 +|ρ|2
sin ϕ
= 1 + 1+1/r2 +|ρ|2 sin ϕ ≤
2 since Consider the symmetric FF-IC, where the channel statistics
 
2
0 ≤ |ρ| − |ρ| sin φ ≤ 1 and 1 + 1/r + |ρ| sin φ > 1. 2 2 are symmetric and independent, i.e., g11 (l) ∼ g22 (l) ∼ gd
and g12 (l) ∼ g21 (l) ∼ gc and all the random variables
Hence, we always get
independent of each other. We consider n transmission phases,
δ1 ≤ 2. (31)
each phase having a block length of N. For Tx1, generate
(1)N (n)N
Now we consider the gap δ2 between the second inequality 2nN R1 codewords X1 , . . . , X1 i.i.d according to
(27b) of the outer bound and the second inequality (23b) of  nN R1

the inner bound. CN
 (0, 1) and encode its message W1 ∈ 1, . . . , 2 onto
(1)N (n)N
" !# X1 , . . . , X1 . For Tx2, generate 2nN R2 codewords
1 − |ρ|2 |g11 |2


δ2 = E log 1 + (1)N
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g12 |2


X2 = X2N i.i.d according to CN (0, 1) and encode its
 (1)N
− E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 + 2


(32)
message W2 ∈ 1, . . . , 2nN R2 onto X2 = X2N . Note
(a)
that for Tx2 the message is encoded into N length sequence
≤ E log 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 IN R1 + 1 − |ρ|2 |g11 |2




to be transmitted at first phase, whereas for Tx1 the message
− log 1 + 1 − |ρ|2 IN R1 + cJG


is encoded into nN length sequence to be transmitted through
n phases.
− E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 + 2


(33) (i)N (1)N
" 2
2
!# Tx1 sends X1 in phase i. Tx2 sends X2 = X2N in
1 − |ρ| |g11 | phase 1. At the beginning of phase i > 1, Tx2 receives
≤ E log 1 + (34)
1 + 1 − |ρ|2 IN R1


(i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N
Y2 = g22 X2 + g12 X1 + Z2 (39)
− E log 1 + λp1 |g11 |2 + 2 + cJG


(i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N
(b) from feedback. It can remove g22 X2 from Y2
≤ 2 + cJG , (35) (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N
to obtain g12 X1 + Z2 . Tx2 then transmits the

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
9

|g21 (2)|2 (|g12 (1)|2 +1) ∗

 
g11 (1)g21 (2)g12 (1)
h
2 2
i |g11 (2)|2 + 1+IN R
+1 √
1+IN R
KY1 (1) = 1 + |g11 (1)| + |g21 (1)| , K Y1 (2) =  ∗
g11 (1)g21 ∗
(2)g12 (1)
, (40)
√
1+IN R
|g11 (1)| + |g21 (1)|2
2
+1

|g21 (l)|2 (|g12 (l−1)|2 +1) ∗

 h i 
g11 (l−1)g21 (l)g12 (l−1)
|g11 (l)|2 + 1+IN R
+1 √
1+IN R
, 0l−2
KY1 (l) =  h ∗ i† . (41)
g11 (l−1)g21 (l)g12 (l−1)
√
1+IN R
, 0 l−2 KY1 (l − 1)

(i)N
resulting interference-plus-noise after power scaling as X2 , capacity region of symmetric feedback IC within 3cJG + 2
i.e. (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N bits per channel use.
(i)N g12 X1 + Z2
X2 = √ . (42)
1 + IN R Proof: The proof follows from the analysis in the follow-
Thus, in phase i > 1, Rx2 receives ing subsection.
(i)N (i)N (i)N (i)N (i)N (i)N
Y2 = g22 X2 + g12 X1 + Z2 (43) A. Analysis of Point-to-Point Codes for Symmetric FF-ICs
!
(i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N
(i)N g12 X1 + Z2 We now provide the analysis for the scheme, going through
= g22 √
1 + IN R the decoding at the two receivers and then looking at the
+ g12 X1
(i)N (i)N
+ Z2
(i)N
(44) capacity gap for the achievable region.
 Rx1 : At the end
1) Decoding at  of n blocks Rx1 col-
and feeds it back to Tx2 for phase i + 1. The transmission N (1)N (n)N
scheme is summarized in Table II. Note that for phase i = 1 lects Y1 = Y1 , . . . Y1 and decodes W1 such
 
Tx1 receives N
that X1 (W1 ) , Y1 N
is jointly typical, where X1 N =
(1)N (1)N (1)N (1)N (1)N (1)N  
Y1 = g11 X1 + g21 X2 + Z1 (45) (1)N (n)N
X1 , . . . X1 . The joint typicality is considered ac-
and for phase i > 1 Tx1 observes a block ISI channel since cording the product distribution pN (X1 , Y1 ), where
it receives    
! (1) (n) (1) (n)
(i)N (i)N (i)N (i)N
(i−1)N
g12
(i−1)N
X1 +
(i−1)N
Z2 p (X1 , Y1 ) = p X1 , . . . X1 , Y1 , . . . Y1 (48)
Y1 = g11 X1 + g21 √
1 + IN R is a joint Gaussian distribution, dictated by the following
+ Z1
(i)N
(46) equations that arise from our n-phase scheme:
(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)
!
(i)N (i−1)N Y1 = g11 X1 + g21 X2 + Z1 . (49)
(i)N (i)N g21 g12 (i−1)N
= g11 X1 + √ X1
1 + IN R And for i = 2, 3, . . . , n:
(i)N !
+ Z̃1 , (47) (i) (i) (i) (i) g12
(i−1)
X
(i−1)
+ Z2
(i−1)
(i)
Y1 = g11 X1 + g21 √1 + Z1 (50)
(i)N (i)N (i)N (i−1)N −1/2 1 + IN R
where Z̃1 = Z1+ (1 + IN R)
g21 Z2 .
N
 At the end of n blocks, Rx1 collects Y1 = (i)
with X1 , X2 , Z1 , Z2
(1) (i) (i−1)
being i.i.d CN (0, 1). Essentially
(1)N (n)N
Y1 , . . . , Y1 and decodes W1 such that (1) (i)
  X2 , Z1 are both Gaussian noise for Rx1.
X1 N (W1 ) , Y1 N is jointly typical (where Using standard techniques it follows that for the n-
phase h scheme, as N → ∞ useri1 can achieve the rate
 
(1)N (n)N (1)N
X1 N = X1 , . . . , X1 ) treating X2 = X2N 
KY |X (n)−1 , where |KY1 (n)| de-
1
 
as noise. At Rx2, channel outputs over n phases can be n E log |K Y 1
(n)| 1 1

combined with an appropriate scaling so that the interference- notes the determinant of covariance matrix for the n-
plus-noise at phases {1, . . . , n − 1} are successively canceled, phase scheme, as defined in (40), and (41), where 0l−2
i.e., an effective point-to-point channel can be generated is (l − 2) length zero vector, † indicates Hermitian con-
jugate, g11 (i) ∼ gd i.i.d and g12 (i) , g21 (i) ∼ gc i.i.d.
 
(j)N
N (n)N Pn−1 Qn −g (i)N
through Ỹ2 = Y2 + i=1 j=i+1 1+IN R Y2
√ 22
Letting hn →  ∞, Rx1 
can achievei the rate R1 =
−1
(see the analysis in the subsection VI-A for details). Note 1
lim n E log |KY1 (n)| KY1 |X1 (n)
 . We need to eval-
n→∞
that this can be viewed as a block version of the Schalkwijk- 1
h   −1 i
Kailath scheme [34]. Given the effective channel Ỹ2N , the uate lim n E log |KY1 (n)| KY1 |X1 (n) . The follow-
n→∞
1
receiver can simply use point-to-point typicality decoding to ing lemma gives a lower bound on n E [log (|KY1 (n)|)].
recover W2 , treating the interference in phase n as noise. Lemma 23.
Theorem 22. For a symmetric FF-IC with a finite logarithmic
 
(1/n) E [log (|KY1 (n)|)] ≥ (1/n) log K̂Y1 (n) − 3cJG ,
 
Jensen’s gap cJG , the rate pair

(R1 , R2 ) = log (1 + SN R + IN R) − 3cJG − 2 , where K̂Y1 (n) is obtained
√ from KY1 (n) by√ replacing
 g12 (i)’s,g21 (i)’s with IN R and g11 (i)’s with SN R.
E log+ |gd |2 / (1 + IN R)
 
Proof: The proof involves expanding the matrix determi-
is achievable by the scheme. The scheme together with nant and repeated application of the logarithmic Jensen’s gap
switching the roles of users and time-sharing, achieves the property. The details are given in [29, Appendix I].

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
10

Table II
T RANSMITTED SYMBOLS IN n- PHASE SCHEME FOR SYMMETRIC FF-IC WITH FEEDBACK

User Phase 1 Phase 2 . . Phase n

(1)N (2)N (n)N
1 X1  X1  . .  X1 
−1/2
(1 + IN R)−1/2
(1)N (1)N (1)N (1)N (n−1)N (n−1)N (n−1)N
2 X2 g12 X1 + Z2 (1 + IN R) . . g12 X1 + Z2

Subsequently,
 we use
 the following lemma in bounding and
1 !
lim log K̂Y1 (n) . (i−1)N (i−1)N (i−1)N
 
n→∞ n (i)N (i)N g12 X1 + Z2 (i)N (i)N
Y2 = g22 √ + g12 X1
  1 + IN R
|a| b
Lemma 24. If A1 = [|a|] , A2 = , A3 = (i)N
  b∗ |a| + Z2 (59)
|a| b 0 for i > 1. Now let
 b∗ |a| b  , etc. with |a|2 > 4 |b|2 , then n−1 n
!
(j)N
0 b∗ |a| (n)N
X Y −g (i)N
Ỹ2N = Y2 + √ 22 Y2 .
i=1 j=i+1
1 + IN R
lim inf (1/n) log (|An |) ≥ log (|a|) − 1.
n→∞ We have
Proof: The proof is given in [29,
 Appendix
 J]. !
n−1 n (j)N
For the n-phase scheme, the K̂Y1 (n) matrix has the
 
(n)N
X Y −g (i)N
Ỹ2N = Y2 + √ 22 Y2 (60)
form An , as defined in Lemma identifying |a| = 1 + IN R
√ 24 after  √

i=1 j=i+1
!
1 + IN R + SN R and b = SN R · IN R / 1 + IN R . (n)N g12
(n−1)N
X1
(n−1)N
+ Z2
(n−1)N

2 2
= g22 √
Note that with this choice |a| > 4 |b| holds due to AM-GM 1 + IN R
(Arithmetic Mean ≥ Geometric Mean) inequality. Hence, we (n)N
+ g12 X1
(n)N
+ Z2
(n)N
(61)
have  
(n)N −1/2
1   + −g22 (1 + IN R)
lim inf log K̂Y1 (n) ≥ log (1 + IN R + SN R) − 1 (51)
 
n→∞ n 
(n−2)N (n−2)N (n−2)N
!
(n−1)N g12 X1 + Z2
using Lemma 24. Also, KY1 |X1 (n) is a diagonal matrix of × g22
 √
1 + IN R
the form

(n−1)N (n−1)N (n−1)N 

|g21 (n)|2 |g21 (n − 1)|2 +g12 X1 + Z2
KY1 |X1 (n) = diag + 1, + 1, . . .
1 + IN R 1 + IN R  
(1 + IN R)−1
(n)N (n−1)N
|g21 (2)|2 + g22 g22

, + 1, |g21 (1)|2 + 1 . (52)
1 + IN R  !
(n−3)N (n−3)N (n−3)N
(n−2)N g12 X1 + Z 2
Hence, using Jensen’s inequality × g22 √
1 + IN R
1   

lim sup E log KY1 |X1 (n) (53)

n→∞ n (n−2)N (n−2)N (n−2)N 
 n−1 ! +g12 X1 + Z2
1 IN R
≤ lim sup log +1 (1 + IN R) (54)
n→∞ n 1 + IN R + ···
= log IN R (1 + IN R)−1 + 1

!
(55) Y n  
(j)N −1/2
≤ 1. (56) + −g22 (1 + IN R)
j=2
 
(1)N (1)N (1)N (1)N
Hence, by combining Lemma 23, Equation (51) and Equation × g22 X2N + g21 X2 + Z1 (62)
(56), we get n (j)N
!
(1)N
Y −g22 (n)N (n)N
= g22 √ X2N + g12 X1
R1 ≤ log (1 + IN R + SN R) − 3cJG − 2 (57) j=2
1 + IN R
(n)N
is achievable. + Z2 . (63)
2) Decoding at Rx2 : For user 2 we can use a block due to cross-cancellation. Now Rx2 decodes for its message
variant
h of i scheme [34] to achieve R2 =
 Schalkwijk-Kailath from Ỹ2N . Hence, Rx2 can achieve the rate
2
E log+ |gd | / (1 + IN R) . The key idea is that the   !
n
interference-plus-noise sent in subsequent slots can indeed 1   Y 2 −1

refine the symbols of the previous slot. The chain of refinement R2 ≤ lim inf E log 1 + |g22 (j)| (1 + IN R)
n→∞ n
j=2
over n phases compensate for the fact that the information 
symbols are sent only in the first phase. We have  2 
|g22 (1)|
×  , (64)
Y2
(1)N
= g22
(1)N
X2N + g12
(1)N
X1
(1)N
+ Z2
(1)N
(58) 1 + |g12 (n)|2

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
11

where g22 (1) , . . . , g22 (n) ∼ gd being i.i.d and g12 (n) ∼ gc . Corollary 25. The capacity CF −ISI of the 2-tap fast fading
Hence, it follows that ISI channel is bounded by
R2 ≤ E log+ |gd |2 (1 + IN R)−1


(65) CF −ISI ≤ log (1 + SN R + IN R) + 1
is achievable. CF −ISI ≥ log (1 + SN R + IN R) − 1 − 3cJG ,
3) Capacity gap: We can obtain the following outer bounds
from Theorem 17 for the special case of symmetric fading where the channel fading strengths is assumed to have a
statistics. logarithmic Jensen’s gap of cJG .
R1 , R2 ≤ E log |gd |2 + |gc |2 + 1


(66) Proof: The proof is given in [29, Appendix L].
h 
−1 i
R1 + R2 ≤ E log 1 + |gd |2 1 + |gc |2
+ E log |gd |2 + |gc |2 + 2 |gd | |gc | + 1 ,


(67) VII. C ONCLUSION
We introduced the notion of logarithmic Jensen’s gap and
where Equation (66) is obtained from Equation (27b) and
demonstrated that it can be used to obtain approximate capac-
Equation (27d) by setting ρ = 0 (note that ρ = 0 yields
ity region for FF-ICs. We proved that the rate-splitting schemes
the loosest version of outer bounds in Equation (27b) and
for ICs [5], [4], [6], when extended to the fast fading case give
Equation (27d)). Similarly, Equation (67) is a looser version
capacity gap as a function of the logarithmic Jensen’s gap.
of outer bound Equation (27e) independent of ρ. The outer
Our analysis of logarithmic Jensen’s gap for fading models
bounds reduce to a pentagonal region with two non-trivial
like Rayleigh fading show that rate-splitting is approximately
corner points (see Figure 6). Our n-phase scheme can achieve
optimal for such cases. We then developed a scheme for
the two corner points within 2 + 3cJG bits per channel use for
symmetric FF-ICs, which can be implemented using point-
each user. The proof is using logarithmic Jensen’s gap property
to-point codes and can approximately achieve the capacity
and is deferred to [29, Appendix K].
region. An important direction to study will be to see if similar
schemes with point-to-point codes can be extended to general
FF-ICs. Also our schemes are not approximately optimal for
Achievable by n phase schemes
R2
bursty IC since it does not have finite logarithmic Jensen’s gap,
it would be interesting to study if the schemes can be extended
4.5 bits/s/Hz to bursty IC and then to any arbitrary fading distribution.
Extension to FF-ICs with more than 2 users seems difficult,
Outer bound
since there are no approximate (within constant additive gap)
capacity results known even for 3-user IC with fixed channels.

A PPENDIX A
P ROOF OF ACHIEVABILITY FOR NON - FEEDBACK CASE
We evaluate the term in the first inner bound inequality
(14a). The other terms can be similarly evaluated.

(a)

I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U2 = I X1 ; Y1 | U2 , g1 (69)
R1


= h Y1 | U2 , g1


Figure 6. Illustration of bounds for capacity region for symmetric FF-IC. − h Y1 | X1 , U2 , g1 , (70)
The corner points of the outer bound can be approximately achieved by our



h Y1 | U2 , g1 = h g11 X1 + g21 X2 + Z1 | U2 , g1 (71)
n-phase schemes. The gap is approximately 4.5 bits per channel use for the

Rayleigh fading case. = h g11 X1 + g21 Xp2 + Z1 | g1 , (72)

variance g11 X1 + g21 Xp2 + Z1 | g1 = |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 + 1,

B. An auxiliary result: Approximate capacity of 2-tap fast

Fading ISI channel ∴ h Y1 | U2 , g1 = E log |g11 |2 + λp2 |g21 |2 + 1




Consider the 2-tap fast fading ISI channel described by + log (2πe) , (73)

Y (l) = gd (l) X (l) + gc (l) X (l − 1) + Z (l) , (68)

h Y1 |X1 , U2 , g1
where gd ∼ CN (0, SN R) and gd ∼ CN (0, IN R) are inde- = h g11 X1 + g21 X2 + Z1 | X1 , U2 , g1


(74)
pendent fading known only to the receiver andh Z ∼iCN (0, 1).

2
= h g21 Xp2 + Z1 | g1 (75)
Also we assume a power constraint of E |X| ≤ 1 on
= E log 1 + λp2 |g21 |2 + log (2πe)


the transmit symbols. Our analysis for R1 can be easily (b)
modified to obtain a closed form approximate expression for ≤ E log 1 + |g21 |2 /IN R2 + log (2πe)


(76)
this channel. This gives rise to the following corollary on the (c)
capacity of fading ISI channels. ≤ log (2) + log (2πe) (77)

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
h  i

2 2 (90)
∴ I X1 ; Y1 , g1 |U2 ≥ E log |g11 | + λp2 |g21 | + 1
− 1,
where (a) uses independence, (b) is because λpi ≤
(c) follows from Jensen’s inequality.
A PPENDIX B
P ROOF OF OUTER BOUNDS FOR NON - FEEDBACK CASE
Note that we have the notation g = [g11 , g21 , g22 , g12 ], S1 =
g12 X1 + Z2 , and S2 = g21 X2 + Z1 . Our outer bounding steps
are valid while allowing X1i to be a function of W1 , g n ,
thus letting transmitters have instantaneous and future CSIT.
On choosing a uniform distribution of messages we get
n(R1 + 2R2 − n )
≤ I W1 ; Y1n , S1n , g n + I W2 ; Y2n , g n



+ I W2 ; Y2n , S2n , X1n , g n


= I W1 ; Y1n , S1n | g n + I W2 ; Y2n | g n



+ I W2 ; Y2n , S2n | X1n , g n


= I W1 ; S1n | g n + I W1 ; Y1n | S1n , g n + I W2 ; Y2n | g n



+ I W2 ; S2n | X1n , g n + I W2 ; Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n



= h S1n | g n − h S1n | W1 , g n + h Y1n | S1n , g n




− h Y1n | W1 , S1n , g n + h Y2n | g n − h Y2n | W2 , g n



+ h S2n | X1n , g n − h S2n | X1n , W2 , g n



+ h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n − h Y2n | X1n , W2 , S2n , g n



= h S1n | g n − h (Z2n ) + h Y1n | S1n , g n − h S2n | g n



+ h Y2n | g n − h S1n | g n + h S2n | g n




− h (Z1n ) + h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n − h (Z2n )


= h Y1n | S1n , g n + h Y2n | g n + h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n



− h (Z1n ) − 2h (Z2n )
(a) X  X ference channel to within 2 bits,” IEEE Transactions on Information
h Y1i |S1i , g n − h (Z1i ) + h Y2i |g n − h (Z2i )

 

≤ Theory, vol. 57, pp. 2667–2685, May 2011.
X
h Y2i |X1i , S2i , g n − h (Z2i )


+ (83)
hX
n

i
= Eg n h Y1i |S1i , g − h (Z1i )
hX
i
h Y2i |g n − h (Z2i )


+ Egn
hX
i
h Y2i |X1i , S2i , g n − h (Z2i )


+ Egn
(b)
≤ nE log 1 + |g21 |2 + |g11 |2 / 1 + |g12 |2



+ nE log 1 + |g12 |2 + |g22 |2


+ nE log 1 + |g22 |2 / 1 + |g21 |2



, (85)
where (a) is due to the fact that conditioning reduces entropy
and (b) follows from Equations [5, (50)] , [5, (51)] and [5,
(52)]. Note that in the calculation of step (b) we allow the
symbols X1i , X2i to depend on g n , but since g n is available
in conditioning the calculation proceeds similar to that in [5].
n(R1 + R2 − n )
≤ I W1 ; Y1n , g n + I W2 ; Y2n , S2n , X1n , g n



= I W1 ; Y1n | g n + I W2 ; Y2n , S2n | X1n , g n



= I W1 ; Y1n | g n + I W2 ; S2n | X1n , g n



+ I W2 ; Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n


= h Y1n | g n − h Y1n | W1 , g n



0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Transactions on Communications
12
+ h S2n | X1n , g n − h S2n | X1n , W2 , g n



+ h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n − h Y2n | X1n , W2 , S2n , g n



= h Y1n | g n − h S2n | g n + h S2n | g n




− h (Z1n ) + h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n − h (Z2n )


(91)
1
IN Ri , and = h Y1n | g n + h Y2n | X1n , S2n , g n − h (Z1n ) − h (Z2n )



(92)
(a) X 
h Y1i |g n − h (Z1i )


≤
X
h Y2i |X1i , S2i , g n − h (Z2i )


+ (93)
hX
i
h Y1i |g n − h (Z1i )


= Eg n
hX
i
h Y2i |X1i , S2i , g n − h (Z2i )



+ Eg n (94)
(b)
≤ nE log 1 + |g21 |2 + |g11 |2


+ nE log 1 + |g22 |2 / 1 + |g21 |2



, (95)
where (a) is due to the fact that conditioning reduces entropy
and (b) again follows from Equations [5, (51)] and [5, (52)].
(78)
R EFERENCES
(79)
[1] J. Sebastian, C. Karakus, S. N. Diggavi, and I. H. Wang, “Rate splitting


is approximately optimal for fading Gaussian interference channels,” in
Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Comput-
ing, pp. 315–321, Sept 2015.
[2] J. Sebastian, C. Karakus, and S. N. Diggavi, “Approximately achieving
the feedback interference channel capacity with point-to-point codes,”


in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, pp. 715–719,
July 2016.
[3] T. S. Han and K. Kobayashi, “A new achievable rate region for
(80) the interference channel,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 27, pp. 49–60, Jan 1981.


[4] H.-F. Chong, M. Motani, H. K. Garg, and H. E. Gamal, “On the Han-
Kobayashi region for the interference channel,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 3188–3194, 2008.
(81) [5] R. H. Etkin, D. N. C. Tse, and H. Wang, “Gaussian interference channel


capacity to within one bit,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 54, no. 12, pp. 5534–5562, 2008.
(82) [6] C. Suh and D. N. C. Tse, “Feedback capacity of the Gaussian inter-

[7] O. Sahin and E. Erkip, “Achievable rates for the Gaussian interfer-
ence relay channel,” in IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference
(GLOBECOM), pp. 1627–1631, Nov 2007.
[8] Y. Tian and A. Yener, “The Gaussian interference relay channel: Im-
proved achievable rates and sum rate upperbounds using a potent relay,”
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 57, pp. 2865–2879, May
2011.
(84) [9] I. Maric, R. Dabora, and A. J. Goldsmith, “Relaying in the presence
of interference: Achievable rates, interference forwarding, and outer
bounds,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58, pp. 4342–
4354, July 2012.
[10] G. Bassi, P. Piantanida, and S. Yang, “Capacity bounds for a class of
interference relay channels,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 61, pp. 3698–3721, July 2015.
[11] S. Gherekhloo, A. Chaaban, and A. Sezgin, “Cooperation for inter-
ference management: A GDoF perspective,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 62, pp. 6986–7029, Dec 2016.
[12] I. H. Wang and D. N. C. Tse, “Interference mitigation through lim-
ited receiver cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 57, pp. 2913–2940, May 2011.
[13] V. M. Prabhakaran and P. Viswanath, “Interference channels with
(86) source cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 57,
pp. 156–186, Jan 2011.
(87) [14] I. H. Wang and D. N. C. Tse, “Interference mitigation through limited
(88) transmitter cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 57, pp. 2941–2965, May 2011.
[15] R. K. Farsani, “The capacity region of the wireless ergodic fading
(89) interference channel with partial CSIT to within one bit,” in IEEE
International Symposium on Information Theory, pp. 759–763, July
2013.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TCOMM.2018.2864266, IEEE
Transactions on Communications
13

[16] L. Sankar, X. Shang, E. Erkip, and H. V. Poor, “Ergodic fading inter-
ference channels: Sum-capacity and separability,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 57, pp. 2605–2626, May 2011.
[17] V. R. Cadambe and S. A. Jafar, “Interference alignment and degrees
of freedom of the k-user interference channel,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 54, pp. 3425–3441, Aug 2008.
[18] C. S. Vaze and M. K. Varanasi, “The degrees of freedom region and
interference alignment for the MIMO interference channel with delayed
CSIT,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58, pp. 4396–
4417, July 2012.
[19] R. Tandon, S. Mohajer, H. V. Poor, and S. Shamai, “Degrees of freedom
region of the MIMO interference channel with output feedback and
delayed CSIT,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 59,
pp. 1444–1457, March 2013.
[20] M. G. Kang and W. Choi, “Ergodic interference alignment with delayed
feedback,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 20, pp. 511–514, May
2013.
[21] H. Wang, C. Suh, S. N. Diggavi, and P. Viswanath, “Bursty interference
channel with feedback,” in IEEE International Symposium on Informa-
tion Theory, pp. 21–25, IEEE, 2013.
[22] A. S. Avestimehr, S. N. Diggavi, and D. N. C. Tse, “Wireless network
information flow: A deterministic approach,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 57, pp. 1872–1905, April 2011.
[23] V. Aggarwal, L. Sankar, A. R. Calderbank, and H. V. Poor, “Ergodic
layered erasure one-sided interference channels,” in IEEE Information
Theory Workshop, pp. 574–578, Oct 2009.
[24] Y. Zhu and D. Guo, “Ergodic fading z-interference channels without
state information at transmitters,” IEEE Transactions on Information
Theory, vol. 57, pp. 2627–2647, May 2011.
[25] A. Vahid, M. A. Maddah-Ali, and A. S. Avestimehr, “Capacity results
for binary fading interference channels with delayed CSIT,” IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 60, pp. 6093–6130, Oct 2014.
[26] A. Vahid, M. A. Maddah-Ali, A. S. Avestimehr, and Y. Zhu, “Binary
fading interference channel with no CSIT,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 63, pp. 3565–3578, June 2017.
[27] A. Vahid, C. Suh, and S. Avestimehr, “Interference channels with rate-
limited feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58,
pp. 2788–2812, May 2012.
[28] N. Batir, “Inequalities for the gamma function,” Archiv der Mathematik,
vol. 91, no. 6, pp. 554–563, 2008.
[29] J. Sebastian, C. Karakus, and S. N. Diggavi, “Approximate capacity
of fast fading interference channels with no instantaneous CSIT,”
http://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03659, 2017.
[30] M. A. Maddah-Ali and D. N. C. Tse, “On the degrees of freedom of
MISO broadcast channels with delayed feedback,” EECS Department,
University of California, Berkeley, Tech. Rep. UCB/EECS-2010-122,
2010.
[31] H. Maleki, S. A. Jafar, and S. Shamai, “Retrospective interference
alignment over interference networks,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics
in Signal Processing, vol. 6, pp. 228–240, June 2012.
[32] B. Nazer, M. Gastpar, S. A. Jafar, and S. Vishwanath, “Ergodic inter-
ference alignment,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58,
no. 10, pp. 6355–6371, 2012.
[33] E. Perron, S. Diggavi, and E. Telatar, “The interference-multiple-access
channel,” in 2009 IEEE International Conference on Communications,
pp. 1–5, June 2009.
[34] J. Schalkwijk and T. Kailath, “A coding scheme for additive noise
channels with feedback–I: No bandwidth constraint,” IEEE Transactions
on Information Theory, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 172–182, 1966.
Can Karakus received his B.S. degree from Bilkent
University, Turkey, in 2011, and his M.S. and Ph.D.
degrees in Electrical Engineering from University
of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), USA, in 2013
and 2018, respectively. Currently he is an Ap-
plied Scientist at Amazon Web Services. He was
a recipient of UCLA Graduate Division Fellow-
ship in 2011, UCLA Electrical Engineering Depart-
ment Fellowship in 2013, and Qualcomm Roberto
Padovani Scholarship in 2015. His research interests
are broadly in distributed optimization, machine
learning, information theory, and wireless networks.
Suhas Diggavi received the B. Tech. degree in
electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of
Technology, Delhi, India, and the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering from Stanford University,
Stanford, CA, in 1998. After completing his Ph.D.,
he was a Principal Member Technical Staff in
the Information Sciences Center, AT&T Shannon
Laboratories, Florham Park, NJ. After that he was
on the faculty of the School of Computer and
Communication Sciences, EPFL, where he directed
the Laboratory for Information and Communication
Systems (LICOS). He is currently a Professor, in the Department of Electrical
Engineering, at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he directs
the Information Theory and Systems laboratory. His research interests include
wireless network information theory, wireless networking systems, network
data compression and network algorithms. He is a co-recipient of the 2013
IEEE Information Theory Society & Communications Society Joint Paper
Award, the 2013 ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Net-
working and Computing (MobiHoc) best paper award, the 2006 IEEE Donald
Fink prize paper award, 2005 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference best
paper award and the Okawa foundation research. He is a Fellow of the IEEE,
a distinguished lecturer for the information theory society and has served
on the editorial board for Transactions on Information Theory, ACM/IEEE
Transactions on Networking, IEEE Communication Letters, a guest editor
for IEEE Selected Topics in Signal Processing. He served as the Technical
Program Co-Chair for 2012 IEEE Information Theory Workshop (ITW) and
the Technical Program Co-Chair for the 2015 IEEE International Symposium
on Information Theory (ISIT).

Joyson Sebastian received his B.Tech. degree from

Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur in 2012 in
electrical engineering. He recieved his M.S. degree
from University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA),
USA, in 2015, and is currently a Ph.D. candidate
at UCLA, all in electrical engineering. He was a
recipient of UCLA Graduate Division Fellowship in
2013, Guru Krupa Fellowship in 2014 and 2018. His
research interests are broadly in information theory,
wireless networks, and algorithms.

0090-6778 (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.