You are on page 1of 8

Enhanced Underwater Acoustic Communication Performance Using Space-Time Coding and Processing

Subhadeep Roy Tolga Duman Leo Ghazikhanian Vincent McDonald John Proakis
Department of Electrical Engineering Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-5706 Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center San Diego Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of California, San Diego

Abstract— Recent advances in information theory and terrestrial wireless communication show that significant performance gains are achievable with increased signaling diversity through the use of multiple transmit and receive arrays. An effective approach for increasing data rate over wireless channels is to employ coding techniques appropriate for multiple transmit antennas, namely space-time coding. This paper investigates the feasibility and effectiveness of space-time trellis and layered space-time codes for the shallow-water, acoustic, frequencyselective channel. Using data collected during a recent experiment in the Mediterranean, we show that systems using multiple transmit and receive transducers outperform more conventional single-transmit single-receiver configurations.

I. I NTRODUCTION Recent information theoretic studies [1], [2] have shown that significant capacity improvement is possible with the use of multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) systems, as opposed to the more conventional single-input, single-output (SISO) systems. As an example, for a system employing transmit and receive antennas over a flat Rayleigh fading channel, the information theoretic capacity grows linearly with the minimum of and . This tremendous increase in capacity, which directly translates into a corresponding increase in the achievable data rate, motivates us to investigate the performance of MIMO systems, for real underwater acoustic (UWA), frequency selective fading channels. Typically, UWA channels are characterized by fast temporal variations and long multipath spreads that cause intersymbol interference (ISI). The optimal methods for detecting signals impaired by ISI are the maximum likelihood sequence estimation (MLSE) technique and the maximum a-posteriori probability (MAP) technique. The computational complexity of MLSE and MAP, however, grows exponentially with the channel memory. Moreover, for systems with multiple transmit antennas, this complexity is also exponential in the number of transmit antennas. The high complexity of systems with a large number of transmitters and a long ISI span renders the optimal detection practically infeasible, thereby requiring sub-optimal low-complexity techniques.
Dr. John Proakis is an adjunct professor at the University of California, San Diego.

In this paper, we consider the MIMO communication scenario for frequency selective, shallow-water, UWA channels by using space-time coding at the transmitter, and MIMO decision feedback equalization at the receiver. In particular, we consider the use the space-time trellis codes (STTC) [3] and layered space-time codes (LSTC) [4]. The receiver consists of a MIMO decision feedback equalizer (DFE) [5], which is an extension of the structure first proposed in [6] for SISO systems. The structure consists of an explicit phasetracking and timing-recovery loop for each link of the system (from each transmitter to each receiver), whose operation is jointly optimized with the equalizer coefficients. For the case of STTC, we propose a modification of the above structure, which facilitates joint equalization and decoding of STTC. The proposed structure strives to utilize the powerful trellis structure of the STTC in the equalization process, and reduce error propagation effects inherent in the DFE. For the case of layered space-time codes, we extend the structure proposed in [7] for MIMO systems and perform iterative (turbo) equalization. By successfully decoding several MIMO data sets obtained in the Mediterranean sea, we demonstrate: ( ) the feasibility of MIMO systems and space-time coding for shallow-water, UWA channels over a range of km to km and ( ) show that MIMO systems can achieve considerable performance improvement over SISO systems, both in terms of added signaling diversity and increased data rate. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: We describe the system model and the jointly optimized MIMO DFE structure in Section II. In Section III we describe the space-time trellis codes briefly and outline the proposed receiver structure with the embedded STTC decoder using the modified Viterbi algorithm. Section IV talks about MIMO communication using LSTC and also describes the extension of the iterative DFE structure [7] for MIMO systems. We present experimental results in Section V and conclusions in Section VI. II. MIMO-DFE A. System Model


transmit and receive Consider a MIMO system with antennas. The signal transmitted from the transmit antenna



¤ ¥¡



James Zeidler

¢ ¡ 

¢ £¡

¤ ¥¡

¢ ¡

¤ ¥¡


the presence of an explicit phase compensator for each link of the MIMO system is essential for proper equalizer operation [6]. one for each of the incoming received signal streams. which is jointly optimized with a where transmitter and the receiver. but for the data stream is then given by also co-channel interference (CCI) from the other transmit antennas. ted from the transmit antenna at time instant . so formed. with is the signal sample vector for the as the sampling duration. is which explicitly tracks the carrier phase variation caused by the transmit pulse shape. banks. The output of the feedforward section from each transmit antenna. where. . Each bank consists of finite impulse response (1) (FIR) filters. The filter of the bank ( where is the space-time coded -ary symbol transmit) is followed by a phase compensator (de-rotator). which is assumed to be the same the channel between the transmitter and the receiver. the presence of residual carrier frequency offset causes equalizer tap rotation. for a MIMO system over a stream as stacked to form the overall FF vector for the frequency selective fading channel.Feed-forward filter bank for Transmitter 1 From DFE 2 From DFE Feedback filter bank for Transmitter From DFE 1 From DFE 2 Feed-forward filter bank for Transmitter Feedback filter bank for Transmitter Fig. and let the uncertainty. for all the transmit antennas. this is not the case in after matched filtering can be written as practice. The filter feedforward section consists of received stream. Particularly for the UWA channel. [6] for SISO systems. is the overall impulse response of the channel Each FIR filter in the feedforward (FF) section consists of between the transmit and the receive antenna. 2   o s Y The jointly optimized MIMO-DFE-PLL structure is shown filter in Fig. While an equalizer. proposed by Stojanovic et al. as well the past and the future symbols respectively. For the Gaussian noise (AWGN) process at the receive antenna. Let the lengths and as the physical channel. in theory. (4) . originally . all the column vectors. The structure is an extension of the structure. Thus. data stream. The variables of the non-causal and the causal parts of the filter be are the corresponding carrier phase distortion and the delay and respectively. not only experiences ISI. The following section describes is the phase estimate for the channel between the the MIMO-DFE structure. If we denote the overall received s „ tY ‘ Y ` B. Thus the receiver has to mitigate the effect of both (3) ISI and CCI. while compensating for the rapid temporal variations of the UWA channel. Receiver Structure § c ‰ „ § ¤ ¥¡ h ‡C a ‘    ¢ ¡  c   G shfC a   E h ‡C „   o    ’ c f c y q  § c ‰ m  l€ n¢th H a § v wu h sC x k y j C iv UG f AxUa G f xi v C G f xi v C     ¤ ¡ ¤ ¡ s „ tY ¡ g h &’ E f $f C fC fC q      ¤ ¡   W „ o q Xp f P ¦ Y `    can be represented in the baseband form as  ¥ 5 6 ¡ 56  ¥  §¥ ¡  §¥ ¡  ¥  ¥ £¡ ¡ ¡ 3 20( 1)  £ ¥  ¡ ¥ 3 40( 1)  R ˜ ¢ D¦ ¢C ¡E ¡E f g f g H eG R   ¡ ¨6 ’  §¥ ¨ 6 pq r ¡ ¢d™ E C ’ a — — — q ” H xxxa –C •uC  ¥ §A9 f ¡ 9 h ‡C j iv H IG f C ta ‘ " "  ¡ 87  ¥ @7 f C iˆ ¢ ¤ ¡ ¡E h sC c q       f h  “ f ¦ ¥  # &¥ ¨ % $" !  # £ ¥ $" ! ¨% # ¡  ¥ ¨ % $" ! # ¦ ¥ ¡ ¨ % $" ! # £¡ ¨ % $" ! ¡ # " ¡ ¨ % $¤! G F E hC ¢AUsxv G F E ¢A`V G F E ¢AUh  '¥ ¢ ¡ … „ ƒ ‚ †`A x# ¡ ¢ ¥¡ G F E h ¢U‡C  ¥ ¦ ¥    ¡ ¥   £ ¥  ¦ §¥ ¡  £ ¡   € @h c ¡ ¡    ˆ  y G G F E hC v ¢AUsxwW   f c d f § G F E ¢AUh e   Y a bG f ¦ ¥  §¨ ©  ¥ …  £  §¥ ¨ ©  ¡  §¥ ¨ © Y ` Y ` ¦  ¡ ¥ ¤¨ © ¡ ¤¨ ©  ¡ £ ¤¨ ©  ¡ ¡ ¡ W F E V XD¤G W F E hC r uAts&G ¡ @UTQI¢A¢DB E C S R P H G F E C ¡ @US E C ¦ ¥ §¤  £ ¤  ¡ ¢        R P G F h ¢E ‡C r G q p X4C  ¡E R P C S H G F E h i¢AU§g . where the bank aims to equalize the data stream. respectively. 1. the transmitted symbols . can compensate for phase The continuous-time received signal at the receive antenna variations introduced by the channel. are Equation (2) indicates that. and is the symbol duration. 1. and second-order PLL to perform equalization and synchronization. MIMO DFE Structure. (2) ultimately causing them to diverge. while is the additive white FF coefficients be arranged in a column vector . which a causal and a non-causal part in order to mitigate ISI due to includes both the transmit and the receive filters.

t. ‘ G E q The overall DFE output for the ™ H eG stream is then given by CiS WITH a 7 QG G 3 ¡ §y E C „ G ¡ U‡hC E ™ E tbG ¡ U‡hC E ™ ) ' H eG ¡ U‡hC E ¡ where .r. 2. . in 1998 [3]. an example is shown in Fig. The RLS algorithm [8] is applied to the composite data vector . . (FB) filter coefficients for the stream are arranged in a column vector as where H G    ¡ h E sC ™ ¢ ¡ x j iv y ¦ ¥ ¢th k G ¦ C Ua  l€ ..t. quence of The output of the FB section is then given as is the instantaneous gradient of the MSE..signal vector. hC ‡§i v Maximum likelihood detection is then performed on . The feedback Fig. +1−1 The aim of the filter bank is to mitigate the residual ISI and the CCI experienced by the symbol stream. The second-order phase update equation is given by (14) (15)   f G ¡ tshC 9 ™ E      ¡ g h ’ E h h sC B −1+1 (6) PSfrag replacements The receiver feedback section consists of filter banks. H h ‡C i ˆ G E h t‡C H where is the sepreviously detected symbols for the stream. and is the output. MIMO-DFE with Embedded STTC Decoder for Frequency Selective Fading Channels The STTC described above provides full spatial diversity of for flat. The estimation error is defined as G and and are the proportional and the integral gain constants respectively. #  l€ th k G h C ta y j iv The feedback symbol vector processed by is formed as (8) (9) G E ¡ G (10) G (11) G III. i. a larger diversity order can be obtained (due to the additional multipath diversity available). However. vu v y G j C iv ¡ l € h k bq xta  ¡ G iv ¢&Ua ¡E    R C C   g   C ¡E ¡E “ as (5) Information symbols −1 −1−1 +1+1 +1 +1+1 −1−1 +1−1 −1+1 b/s/Hz vu ¦ ¡ E q¢ “ W H IG R § q 2C ¤ h H IG ¡ t© S § E C H IG ¥¦ © § H ¨eG C ¤ ¡E C r hC ‡i v a di v a G ¡E C  ¡ 'y E C ¡ tS E C ˜ #G ‘! “ pq r C ™ i    ¡ E ¢C H ¡E H C ¡E C y "” ! C G ¥¦ ¡ @C E h sC i G £ ¡ E C¢  ” e ¡ @tS E C ˆ  h ‡C i v &   © H H C G & & ¡E C $ . w. The channel phase and the symbol timing parameters are estimated using a second-order gradient based algorithm. is made. As proposed in [6]. the RLS algorithm is used to estimate the equalizer tap weights. processed by q h pq q H G iv Idta then (3) can be more compactly written as state STTC. The parameters to be jointly optimized are the equalizer coefficient vectors and . with proper code design. . A similar equation for the timing parameter can be obtained by forming the instantaneous gradient of the MSE w.e. and a hard decision on the transmitted symbol. The incoming symbol stream is first encoded using the trellis structure and the encoded stream is then distributed among the transmit antennas. To investigate the STTC performance over UWA channels.e. which recursively estimates the composite weight vector . due to its fast convergence property. The parameters for equalization of the stream are obtained by minimizing the mean squared error.t. when the input is the time derivative of the received signal. . i. The example code shown in Fig. even in the presence of frequency selectivity. we propose a receiver structure for joint equalization and decoding of the STTC. . J OINTLY O PTIMIZED MIMO-DFE T RELLIS C ODES B. It has been argued in [9] that the above codes are capable of achieving a diversity order of at least . 2. and are given by A. The gradient of the MSE.r. w. . The proposed 3 7 65 G ¡ E A¢G 3C y ¡ E hC@ Usd™ 1 9  ) 8 6 W H MSE 7 5 3 664G G ¡ E C 'y „ G ¡ E h ™ E U‡C txG ¡ E hC ™ 1 Usd2 ) ' 0( W H MSE ˆ h sC i & (12) (13) ¤ ¥¡ ¢ ¡  R ¢ ¤ ¡ ¥¡ ¡ ¢ ¤ ¥¥¡ is the known transmitted symbol during the where training mode and is replaced by during the decision directed mode. MSE . . and the synchronization parameters. 2 is designed for transmit antennas using BPSK symbols and has trellis states. S PACE -T IME G o E h UsC H IPp f G E 2F„ G P ‘ R # l€  th k ¢§h AxUa y G j C iv ¡ UshC E H G E #q 2F„ G ¡ Uh E Ch h DsCg ’ H yG ¡ UshC E ¡ UshC 9 ™ E i ˆ H IG § „ ¡E h ‡C i ˆ   ¡E ¤ ¡    ¡E c  G ¢ C©S ˜ ¢C £ W a ¢C ƒ ‚ C f C — c £ ¢ e ¢ ¡  G § W a ¡E  ¢ c G ¡ U© S E C ¡ ¢ ¥¡ h ‡C i v E C© @tS ¡ @US E C  ¡ ¢G ¡ ¢uG ¡ C E C  W E ” “ •H C R i c y    ¡E © a — — — a xxxbG a — — — a xxxbG c § W uG ¥¦  ¢˜G ¡E ¢ C h sC i Cg % a ¡ @tS E C £ ˆ § £ c x .  R (7) is the output of the filter in the filter bank (for the stream). Space-Time Trellis Codes for Flat Fading Channels Space-time trellis codes are introduced by Tarokh et al.r. BPSK. . Rayleigh fading channels. and ( ). The trellis is designed to provide the full spatial diversity advantage. These codes are described by a trellis structure.

by making use of the trellis structure of the STTC. we outline the Viterbi algorithm for the sake of completeness. implemented using the Viterbi algorithm as shown in Fig. we propose a joint equalization/decoding strategy in which we feed back instantaneous. However. coupled with long ISI and severe CCI.PSfrag replacements £ # A¡ ¨ % $" ! ¡ # ¡ ¨ % $" ! £ £ ¡ ¤£ ¡ ¤¤¨ ©  ¡ a bG R G £ '¤E f R Fig. thereby introducing a delay of one code block (in practice. 3. which is characterized by rapid temporal variations. and hence is not suitable for use in the decision feedback process. denote the soft equalizer denote the symbol outputs at time instant . Let . The variable is computed G¥ 2¦£ ! s R £ ¨ ¥ 7©6£ 2 £E 3a X™ H G £ a ¥ £ I'§¦¤E £ ¥ ¤E R (16) G £ ¥ E q k G q R &G £ £ 0'§a ¥ E ) £ a £E 0a ¥ U¤X™ G q R ˜ R ) £E 3a X™ 5 4s P P G £ §E R H H H & ¢˜GE G £ '¤E R  & R where (19) (20) ¡ 2 § G q R )E ™ 1X–G R q ) ! ¤u™ £E R 2a — — — 3bxxa H eG q R )a £E 0UX™ (§E ' G £ q 2” H a — — — i S bxa G E q i S ” q ) R R & ¡ 5 £  R  structure consists of a DFE with an embedded space-time trellis decoder. This is similar to what is done in the BCJR algorithm [10]. Thus. corresponding to the state transition of the trellis. at every time instant. Since these decisions are made using the powerful trellis structure of the code. and all the equalizer outputs from time to time . processing o G H H G £ '§a 5 (17) G £ a ¥ £ '§¦¤E R B q p C C X4C ECtS ¡ ‘ P W ™ @ U¦y i ! §  A G ¥ £ ! £EX™–G ¥ R §U£ ! £ a 2E 8u™ 2 Ra £ E ¥ £ ! 0U¤u™ 5 The overall metric corresponding to each outgoing state at time is then computed recursively as ˜ G R R where for the transition as is the state transition probability . which are then fed back to the equalizer. The variable is computed recursively as R is the information symbol corresponding to the where transition and is the variance of the residual ISI 4 ‘ C D ! G £ £E C ‘ #'§a ¥ ¤@US W G ¡ G B B E X™ ¡ £ ¨ ¥ E(¦£ 9 R B where denotes the overall metric accumulated at state at time instant . this delay can be unacceptable. the Viterbi algorithm structure is modified to facilitate the generation of instantaneous (but tentative) symbol decisions. at time . To overcome this problem. (18) H C and the vector is the vector at the equalizer output at time . Layered space-time encoder. and transmitted from the transmit antenna. we compute the joint probability of each outgoing state . we have a candidate sequence (survivor) for each outgoing state. and hence helps reduce the DFE error propagation effects. UWA channel. but reliable symbol decisions to the equalizer. and then explain the proposed joint equalization/decoding algorithm in detail. This joint probability is defined as  section for Transmitter ¡ $ % Modified Viterbi  section for Transmitter ¡ # ¡ ¢  section for Transmitter £ ¥ ¤E ¡ ¡ ! §a ¥ twW G G £ £EC S ‘ q k R  G £ a ¥ £ E '§¦¤@C S 3 ¥ ) £ 56 3 ¥ ) ¡ 56 „ 3 ¥ ) £ ¨6 £ ¡ section for Transmitter 1 Information stream S/P Symbol mapper Encoder ¦ $ % ¦ # 3 ¥ ) ¡ ¨6 ¡ ¡ G £ '§a £ ¥ ¤E ¢ ¡ R " ¡ " E Ci @US ! a — — — bxxa !s  ”   # ¦ §¥ £ ¨ % $" ! # ¦ ¥ ¡ ¨ % $" ! ££ ¨ % ¡ # ¤£ ¨ % $" ! q p unC ¡ £ ¨ ¥ ©¦£      R # $" ! a P § H G £ I'§a H H " G £ 'E ¦ ¥ ¡  ¦ ¥ £  ¡ £  ¡ ¡  £ ¡  £ £  £ ¥ ¤E    ¡E ¦  £ ¥ ¢¨ © CiS ¦  §¥ ¤¡ ¨ © £ ¨ ©  £ ¡ ¨ ©  £ £ ¡ ¨ ©   ¡ ¦ ¥ ¤  £   ¡   Encoder Symbol mapper £ . The branch metric for each trellis branch is first computed as the entire block may not be necessary and tentative hard decisions can be made with a smaller delay). for a MIMO. However. In other words. MIMO DFE with embedded STTC decoder using modified Viterbi algorithm. they are much more reliable than the decisions made by a symbol-by-symbol slicer. Therefore. 3. Fig. obtained by the above Viterbi algorithm. 4. In the rest of this section. The hard decisions on the information symbols are then made by retracing the trellis from state once the entire block is processed. the standard Viterbi algorithm produces symbol decisions with a certain delay. after the Viterbi algorithm computes the surviving branches. The proposed algorithm works as follows: At every time instant . performing equalization and decoding separately can cause the DFE to suffer from excessive error propagation due to the unreliable decisions (obtained by a symbol-by-symbol slicer) being fed back to it during the equalization process.

the most likely state at time is computed as (22) The trellis is then read back from state at each time instant and the coded symbols. the state probability is computed for every outgoing state at time . and the state with the highest value of is chosen for the instantaneous trellis traceback. 5. The iterative MIMO DFE block diagram is shown in Fig. interleaved and mapped into symbols before being transmitted over the channel as shown in Fig. Since independent streams are transmitted from each transmit antenna. including the iterative DFE structure in [7]. flat Rayleigh fading environments. The equalizer outputs for each stream are de-interleaved. which tries to exploit the full spatial diversity of the system. the proportionality in (20) can be re-written as a G £ £ D ‘ ! §a ¥ E C wW G S (21) where is a constant. and AWGN for the stream. Clearly. so obtained. the system’s spectral efficiency grows linearly with the number of transmit antennas. by making use of the trellis structure in the equalization process. For a frequency selective channel. The decoder for each substream computes the log-likelihood ratios (LLR) for the corresponding information sub-stream. are fed back to the feedback portion of the equalizer. the DFE combines the soft information provided by the decoder from the previous iteration with the equalizer ! From DFE  @6 9 5 785 6  4 3 ¥ ¤¤£ £ ¡ 4¤¤£ £ 3 ¡  ¥ ! 2  ¥ 4 3 £ ¤¤£ ¡ ! 2 ¡ 4 3 £ ¤£ ¡ ! 2 2  ¥ 0 )%& (' £ £  §¥ ¡ 0 1%& (' ¡  ¥ ¡   ¥  ¥  £ ¡  ¡ ¡   £ §¥   ¡ ¥  7 A 5  9 5A ! ! & ¦ %¥ ¨ $ #! ¥  "  " £ §¥ ¨ $ #! " ¦ ¥ ¡ ¨ $ #!  " ¡ ¥ ¨ $ #! " £ ¡ ¨ $ #! ¡ " ! ¡ ¨ $ #¤  ¥ £ G q G Rq R ¡ G £ '¤E ¥ 6£ )a £E 0UX™ 3 £ R ) ! X™ £E ¦ §¥  ¥   ¡ ¥  £  ¥  ¦ ¥  ¡ ¡ ¡  £ ¡  ¡ R E CiS! & s I#H FD D G E s I#H FD D G E s I D #H FD G E q p unC  R P ‘ ¡ ¦ ¥  §¨ ©  ¥ § B C &  £  §¥ ¨ ©  ¡  ¥ ¨ © ¦ ¥ ¤¡ ¨ ©  ¡ ¤¤¨ ©  ¡ £ ¡ ¨ ©  G W A H H H B E X™    ™ @ y ¦¡ 3 £ R ¡ R ¦ ¥ §¤  £ ¤  B H G £ CI'a R B ¡ ¢  £ ¥ E £ R 5 ¡ . each receive antenna observes a superposition of all the streams corrupted by AWGN.MAP Feed-forward section for Transmitter 1 From DFE From DFE Feedback section for Transmitter MAP Feed-forward section for Transmitter From DFE Feedback section for Transmitter Fig. soft-output channel decoder. thereby reducing the effects of error propagation considerably. [4]. At each iteration. so formed is independently encoded. each stream also experiences ISI. For a flat fading channel. and given to the soft-input. [11]. It has been shown [12] that for a coded system. 4. 5 At the transmitter. however. 5. Several low-complexity alternatives to the above algorithm have been proposed. Unlike STTC. At the receiver. the tentative hard decisions for the DFE are much more reliable than the symbol-by-symbol decisions made by the memoryless slicer. and the extrinsic information for the coded bit stream. In other words. In other words. This extrinsic information is fed back to the DFE for the next iteration and this iterative procedure is repeated several times. J OINTLY O PTIMIZED MIMO-DFE WITH L AYERED S PACE -T IME C ODES Layered space-time codes were introduced by Foschini et al. significant performance improvement can be obtained by performing iterative (turbo) equalization. the incoming bit stream is spatially multiplexed across the transmit antennas. in addition to the CCI from the other streams. these codes aim at achieving the very high spectral efficiencies possible in a system with a large number of transmit antennas. IV. we outline the extension of the structure in [7] for MIMO systems. whereby each substream. each stream can be successively decoded by using layered successive interference cancellation and nulling techniques [4]. Using (19) and (21). the equalizer and the channel decoder exchange soft information in an iterative fashion. thereby reducing the bit error rate of the system gradually. independent of or . In the rest of this section. R Iterative MIMO DFE Structure. for rich scattering. Assuming that all the symbols are equally likely ( does not depend on a specific state transition).

2 4800    ¦ Tx 464 428 304 124 18 2 Tx 822 875 908 920 910 926 Tx 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tx 144 7 3 0 0 0 ¦   ¦ 1 1 2 ¦       G C E S ¢ ¡ c   c y  G CiS E " " ¢" C § a CiS ‘  © ¨¦ 1 1 2     H IG C E S C  B § ¨¦ Test number 1 33 1 Information rate (bps) 1000 1000 2000 Packet length (sec) 4. we observe that both the data sets are decoded with zero or very few errors. we compare SISO with the -transmitter LSTC case. Ideally.8 4. using linear frequency modulated (LFM) probes. ¥¢ ¤ £¡ ¢ K M FOR TEST 33. with a -m hydrophone spacing. off the coast of Elba island to demonstrate: (1) the feasibility of space-time coded MIMO UWA communication. with a generator matrix of . the results presented here are for the BPSK data sets only. with the uncoded SISO performance. 1 2 3 4 5 6 and a hard decision on overall is made to form the symbols which are fed back to the DFE. and the -transmitter LSTC.8 1. R ANGE : K M FOR TEST 1. Under this assumption. STTC is able to achieve much lower error-rate performance than SISO. of bits 4800 4800 9600 No. Thus.8 4. No. The space-time codes used were the -transmitter STTC (Fig. LSTC. the error-rate performance at the SISO equalizer output. STTC is capable of transmitting twice as fast as SISO. the impulse response at each receiver was observed. we find that the data rates are the same for both (since we are observing the uncoded SISO performance. of errors at the equalizer output 176 2 Transmitter : 3 Transmitter : 6 Transmitter : 0 Transmitter : 0 Tx Tx Tx 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tx Tx Tx 389 151 523 156 0 406 21 0 153 7 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 B     R ESULTS FOR LOW BAND SINGLE CARRIER . for a MIMO system the power length of transmitted by each transmit antenna should be normalized. The decoding results for several data sets are tabulated in Table I. The interleaver size for LSTC was coded bits. indicating that. so as to keep the total power of the system constant. the data rate achieved by STTC is twice that of SISO. in this experiment each transmit antenna transmitted with the same power level as the SISO system. The center frequency was and the symbol rate was symbols per second. but the error-rate for STTC ( ) is roughly two orders of magnitude lower than that of SISO ( ). However.. if we compare the performance of STTC. V. Let the extrinsic information provided by the channel decoder be ext . 2). E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS In October 2003. we Looking at the error-rate performance of the observe that as the number of turbo iterations increase. the equivalent LLR corresponding to the soft equalizer output can be computed as [7]: ¡ Data was transmitted in bursts of seconds. the    — R     LSTC 33 4 1 4000 1. Both BPSK and QPSK modulation schemes were used. to form more reliable hard symbol estimates. i. and (2) to illustrate the performance of several space-time codes over real. MIMO DATA SETS . for the same data rate. a -element receiver array was deployed at a depth of meters. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Iter. Before processing the data. Thus each burst contained 9600 symbols. At the receiver.8 No. of information bit errors 0 0 3 0 Tx 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tx 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tx 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tx 342 132 11 0 0 0 Tx 310 219 129 10 2 0 Tx 550 564 563 569 599 562 Total 310 219 129 10 2 0 Total 1036 703 577 569 599 562 H IG C i S E ©   G C S tE ‘ C R B  . 6 " " $# " ¨ R &R % R "¢" $#¨  "  §  © — §§   § ˜  a © ” G C E S „ overall ext (24)  where is the variance of the channel noise and the residual ISI. although. The hydrophones having nearly equal strength response to all the transmit elements were chosen for decoding. The equalizer outputs are converted into corresponding LLR values by approximating their distribution to a normal distribution. The overall likelihood of the transmitted symbols are formed as ¨ !§ (23) — § " R ¢" A output of the current iteration. at the output of the equalizer (for the data stream). However. a shallow-water experiment was conducted in the Mediterranean sea. Comparing SISO with -transmitter STTC. UWA channels. Several SISO data sets were also transmitted for performance comparison. The SISO and the LSTC data sets were encoded with a rate convolutional code.e. Next.2 9600 4800 Iter. The bandwidth octal kHz available was kHz. which corresponds to a transmission seconds. We can make several observations for comparison of the SISO and the MIMO data sets. for similar error-rate performance.TABLE I SISO STTC 33 LSTC 33 2 4 2 4 2000 4000 4. On the other hand. which were transmitted prior to each data set. there is no rate penalty).

kHz transmit array and a 32-element receive array. whereas. shallow-water UWA communication. In order to get an intuitive idea of the order of magnitude of the error-rates. ultimately clearing the frame in iteration. However. Since LSTC does not have transmit diversity and has to rely on receive and temporal diversity (coding). a rate code and BPSK modulation). Table II lists the spectral efficiencies (bps/Hz) achieved by SISO. We have also extended the iterative DFE structure proposed in [7] for MIMO systems. even with such non-aggressive data sets. the design of the data sets and the transmission parameters were carried out rather conservatively. SSC San Diego and the Center for Ocean Research (SAIC) will be constructing a 10-element. Note that. Comparing the results of [13] with our results. We have also shown that MIMO systems can be successfully used to achieve considerable performance improvement over the more conventional SISO systems. let us compare the uncoded performance of SISO and LSTC. which is a joint research effort with the NATO Undersea Research Center. which may be due to the positioning of that particular transmitter in the water column or a malfunctioning transmitter. We have extended the phase coherent receiver structure proposed in [6]. we have demonstrated the feasibility of MIMO systems over UWA channels. these initial results suggest that. which immediately mitter had an excess bandwidth of reduces the spectral efficiency by a factor of . only after the first iteration (since subsequent iterations utilize feedback from the decoder). the uncoded error-rate of LSTC is . we observe that. namely the space-time trellis codes and the layered space-time codes. for MIMO systems and have proposed a new receiver structure for joint equalization and decoding of space-time trellis coded signals. This MIMO system will be demonstrated and used during the summer 2005 High Frequency Initiative Experiment off the coast of Kauai Hawaii. Several iterative receiver structures will be developed. the lack of sufficient receive diversity caused the receiver to fail for the case. including the layered successive interference cancellation based receiver and the channel shortening prefilter based receiver. if we disregard transmitter (a system). C ONCLUSIONS We have studied the performance of space-time coding. and we are considering only transmitters) with LSTC transmitting three times as fast as SISO. both in terms of added signaling diversity and improved data rate. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research was sponsored by the ILIR-04 program at Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center. Thus. Interestingly. Interestingly. we can conclude that for comparable error rates. respectively are reported in [13] for a code rate of approximately . thereby demonstrating that MIMO systems are very promising candidates for high data-rate. with sufficient number of receive antennas (the case). wherein the link from transmitter to all the receivers exhibited considerably lower average SNR than the other links. for MIMO systems over real. Consequently. the spectral efficiencies achieved by the MIMO systems are significant. Finally. San Diego. we find that the SISO system has an uncoded error-rate of . Nevertheless. STTC and LSTC. As an example. Modulation Spectral Prob. and achieve a data rate times that of SISO. Similarly the symbol rates and the code rates were chosen to be somewhat lower than what one would normally implement. Appreciation is expressed to the Captain and Crew of the R/V Alliance. in particular to Chief Scientists Finn Jensen (first half) and Mark Stevenson (second half). to scientific and technical personnel from NURC. This effect becomes more prominent for the LSTC case where we observe that transmitter failed to converge. AND F UTURE W ORK  —   #§  " ¢"  — § § " § " " ¢¢      ¥ £ ¢ ¦    ¤¢ ¥   ¢   ¢ R  % R R  % ¨ ¨ §  ¡§ ¢   ¤ ¨ ¢   © §B ¢    " ¢" R % R " ¢" § ¢ ¡¢    § % R "  R " ¢"   ¢ ¡ "  — §  . the MIMO systems are capable of achieving better or similar spectral efficiencies than some of the existing SISO systems. For instance. we note that we achieve better spectral efficiencies with MIMO systems.TABLE II S PECTRAL EFFICIENCIES ACHIEVED BY VARIOUS MIMO SYSTEMS . with BPSK modulation implies that no errors were observed (probability of error in a block of 9600 symbols). For reasons described above. in order to make the realtime implementation of the system practically feasible. we should look at the number of equalizer errors. of method efficiency (bps/Hz) bit error SISO BPSK STTC BPSK LSTC BPSK SISO [13] QPSK NA VI. The experimental work was conducted within the ElbaEx Experiment as part of the ONR-supported High Frequency Initiative. we note that the primary experimental aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of MIMO systems for shallowwater. LSTC can achieve an fold higher spectral efficiency than SISO. data rates of kbps and kbps. the turbo equalization process is able to achieve error free performance (with an increased complexity). lowcomplexity versions of the above algorithms will be developed. respectively. even with such modest choice of transmission parameters (excess bandwidth of . and their performance will be evaluated using the above system. the shaping pulse at the trans. Finally. as opposed to achieving very high spectral efficiencies. By successfully decoding several spacetime coded data sets. This phenomenon was also observed for several other data sets. over a bandwidth of and kHz. underwater acoustic channels. UWA channels. to observe the uncoded LSTC performance. even with BPSK modulation and lower code rates. frequency selective. uncoded symbols in (since each transmitter transmits seconds. 7 " C© W © ¨   error-rate decreases gradually. we note that the error-rate perthe formance is dominated by transmitter . for similar range and depth conditions.

pp.” Wireless Personal Communications. “A bidirectional coherent acoustic communication system for underwater vehicles. we would like to thank Dan Kilfoyle (SAIC) and Lee Frietag (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute) for including our waveforms as part of their MIMO testing during the ElbaEx Experiment. March 2001. Proakis. March 1998. pp. Seshadri.2 Oct. vol. 284–287. Seshadri. Haykin. vol. 20.” IEEE Transactions on Communications. “Iterative decision-feedback equalizer for time-dispersive channels. vol.Lastly. [11] G. Gans. and Electronics. February 1999. vol. E. Adaptive Filter Theory. R. Prentice Hall. L. and F. A. 225–229. September-October 1998. J. . March 1998. [7] M. pp. pp. “On limits of wireless communications in a fading environment when using multiple antennas. and R. Catipovic. 65–73. F. November/December 1999. Foschini. 295–300. Naguib. pp.” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. 585–595. NJ. 6. pp. Proakis. January 2002. R. J. Douillard et al. Golden. pp. 47. vol. Cocke. vol. “Layered space-time receivers for frequency-selective wireless channels. pp. Bahl. Christenson. W. M. 1986. [13] L.” IEEE Transactions on Communications. Foschini. and A. 199–207. 482–486. D. G. vol. Baltimore. 8 . “Space-time codes for high data rate wireless communications: Performance criterion and code construction. J. Foschini and M. “V-BLAST: An architecture for realizing very high data rates over the rich-scattering wireless channel. vol. and J. “Layered space-time architecture for wireless communication in a fading environment when using multi-element antennas. Grund.” European Transactions on Telecommunication. 1. Jelinek. J. Telatar. Marandin. MD. [10] L. Singh. pp. J. “Capacity of a multi-antenna Gaussian channels. Lozano and C. A. 29 Sept. 100–111. G.” European Transactions on Telecommunications. R EFERENCES [1] G. J. Salehi. Papadias.” IEEE Oceans Conference Proceedings. Marquis. “Iterative correction of intersymbol interference: Turbo equalization. and J. R. 6. mobility. 507–511. S. [6] M. March 1974. 10. 1998. 744–765. [8] S. 19.” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. “Optimal decoding of linear codes for minimizing symbol error rate. pp.” Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Information Sciences and Systems. September-October 1995. [5] A.. and A. January 1994. [3] V.” URSI International Symposium on Signals. N. 50. 311–335. and J. vol. Blackmon. J. Captipovic. 44.” Bell Labs Technical Journal. Autumn 1996. Calderbank. [12] C. Freitag. Englewood Cliffs. Wolniansky. pp. Raviv. N.” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering. Valenzuela. “Phase coherent digital communications for underwater acoustic channels. S. “Space-time codes for high data rate wireless communication: performance criteria in the presence of channel estimation errors. Systems. Tarokh. [9] V. [2] I. M. Stojanovic. Tarokh. [4] P. Calderbank. Smith. and multiple paths.