Lec 13 Error Rate Performance

Advanced Digital Communication
Instructor: Dr. Muhammad Arif Wahla

arif@mcs.edu.pk

Military College of Signals - MCS
National University of Sciences and
Technology - NUST
Lecture 13
11:52 AM
Adv Digital Comm - Dr. M. Arif Wahla
1
What are we studying ?
Digital Communications Systems
Base Band Modulation Schemes
Baseband Detection/Demodulation
Bandpass Modulation Schemes
BPSK, QPSK,QAM
Inter-Symbol Interference (ISI)
Eye Diagram Analysis
Pulse Shaping
Equalization
Modulation Schemes
Detection of Modulation Schemes
BPSK ; ASK ; FSK ; M-PSK etc
Error Performance
11:52 AM
2
4.7.1 Probability of Bit error for coherently detected BPSK
Received signal: r(t) = s
i
(t)+n(t)
The antipodal signals s
1
(t) and s
2
(t) can be characterized in a one-
dimensional signal space as:

Decision is made on the basis:

Probability of bit error P
B
,

1 1
2 1
( ) ( )
0
( ) ( )
s t E t
t T
s t E t

=

s s
`
=

)
otherwise t s
T z if t s
) (
0 ) ( ) (
2
0 1
= >
|
|
.
|
\
|

=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
}
0
2 1
) 2 / (
2
2 2
exp
2
1
0 2 1
o
t
o
a a
Q du P
a a
B
11:52 AM
3
For equal-energy antipodal signaling, the receiver output components are

Then
2 2 1 1
s for E a and s for E a
b b
= =
du P
N E
B
b
}
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0
/ 2
2
2
exp
2
1
t
0
2
b
B
E
P Q
N
| |
=
|
|
\ .
11:52 AM
Adv Digital Comm - Dr. M. Arif
Wahla
4
4.7.2 Probability of Bit error for coherently detected
Differentially Encoded BPSK
(
(
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0 0
2
1
2
2
N
E
Q
N
E
Q P
b b
B
Fig 4.25
This formulae is for
reference only
11:52 AM
5
4.7 Error Performance For Binary
Systems
11:52
AM
6
Passband Baseband
Modulation P
B
P
B
Modulation

PSK
(Coh)
Bipolar
DPSK (Diff
Coh)
Bipolar

Orthogonal FSK
(Coh)
Unipolar
Orthogonal FSK
(NonCoh)

Unipolar

QPSK
P
BPSK
=P
BPSK
QPSK
0
2
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
2
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
1
exp
2
b
E
N
| |
|
\ .
0
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
1
exp
2 2
b
E
N
| |
|
\ .
0
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
2
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
2
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
0
2
b
E
Q
N
| |
|
|
\ .
4.7.3 Probability of Bit error for coherently detected Binary
Orthogonal FSK
A general treatment for binary coherent signals (not limited to antipodal
signals) yields

For orthogonal, BFSK =/2; thus =0 and:
0
2
(1 ) /
1
exp ;
2
2
b
B
E N
P du
| |
=
|
\ .
}
du P
N E
B
b
}
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0
/
2
2
exp
2
1
t
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0
N
E
Q P
b
B
cos u =
11:52 AM
7
4.7.4 Probability of Bit error for Noncoherently detected
Binary Orthogonal FSK
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0
2
exp
2
1
N
E
P
b
B
E
b
/N
0
penalty of the simpler
noncoherent detection is only
about 1dB at practical bit error
rates
As a result, the simpler,
noncoherent FSK forms the basis
of many low end (e.g. 1200 bps)
telephone and radio modems in
the market-place

11:52 AM
8
4.7.5 Probability of Bit error for Binary DPSK

Theoretical performance for
COPSK and DPSK is shown here
for an AWGN channel

BER for COPSK is exactly the
same as that derived for bipolar
(antipodal) baseband
transmission

|
|
.
|
\
|
=
0
exp
2
1
N
E
P
b
B
0
2
b
B
E
P Q
N
| |
=
|
|
\ .
11:52 AM
Wahla
9
4.8 M-ary Signaling and Performance
4.8.1 Ideal Probability of Bit Error Performance
Typical probability of error versus Eb/N
0
curve has a waterfall like shape
The ideal curve displays the characteristics as the Shannon limit
The limit represents the threshold Eb/N
0
below which reliable
communication cannot be maintained
Ideal Curve:
For all values of Eb/N
0
above the Shannon limit of -1.6db, P
B
is
arbitrarily small
Once Eb/N
0
is reduced below the Shannon limit, P
B
degrades to worse
case value of

11:52 AM
10
Figure: 4.27 Ideal P
B
versus Eb/N
0

Ideal Curve:
For all values of
Eb/N
0
above the
Shannon limit of -
1.6db, P
B
is
arbitrarily small
Once Eb/N
0
is
reduced below the
Shannon limit, P
B

degrades to worse
case value of
11:52 AM
Wahla
11
4.8.2 M-ary Signaling
In M-ary signaling the processor, considers k bits at a time and modulates
one of M=2
k
waveforms
K=1 implies binary signaling
Trick question:
Does M-ary signaling improve or degrade error performance?
Lets review the next two figures before answering the question
11:52 AM
12
Figure 4.28: Bit error probability for Coherently detected M-ary
orthogonal signaling. 11:52 AM
Wahla
13
Figure 4.29: Bit error probability for
coherently detected multiple phase
signaling
11:52 AM
Wahla
14
It appears that M-ary signaling produces improved error performance with
orthogonal signaling and degraded error performance with multiple phase
signaling
This result poses two more questions:
Why is multiple phase PSK signaling used in systems if it provides
degraded error performance compared to binary PSK signaling?
Is error probability Eb/N
0
, the only performance criterion?

Bandwidth: Another performance criterion

In Figure 4.28, increase in k increases the required bandwidth
For M-ary multiple phase curves in Figure 4.29, increase in k implies that
larger bit rate can be transmitted within the same bandwidth (or for fixed
data rate, the required bandwidth is decreased)

11:52 AM
15
4.8.3 Vectorial View of MPSK Signaling
For k=2, M=2 and antipodal vectors s1 and s2 are positioned 180 degree
apart
The signal space is partitioned into two regions creating decision boundary
The following figure establishes the magnitude and orientation of the
minimum energy noise vector that would cause the detector to make
symbol error

Figure 4.30
11:52 AM
16
4.8.4 BPSK and QPSK have the same Bit Error Probability
General relationship between Eb/N
0
and S/N is
Where
S: is the average signal power
R: is the bit rate
Eb/N
0
characteristics of the
orthogonal BPSK channels
making up QPSK signal can
be shown to be equivalent
to the above Eb/N
0

|
.
|
\
|
=
R
W
N
S
N
E
b
0
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
.
|
\
|
=
R
W
N
S
R
W
N
S
N
E
b
0 0 0
2 /
2 /
Figure 4.31
11:52 AM
17
4.8.5 Vectorial View of MFSK Signaling

Figure 4.32: MFSK signal sets for M=2,3
11:52 AM
18
Basic mapping relation:

Where W is the detection bandwidth. Since

Where T is the symbol duration, then

For FSK signaling, the detection bandwidth W (in Hz) is typically equal in
value to the symbol rate 1/T; or WT1, therefore

|
.
|
\
|
=
R
W
N
S
N
E
b
0
T
k
T
M
R = =
2
log
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
k
WT
N
S
M
WT
N
S
N
E
b
2 0
log
|
.
|
\
|
~
k N
S
N
E
b
1
0
11:52 AM
19
Figure 4.33: Symbol error probability versus SNR for coherent FSK
signaling
11:52 AM
Wahla
20
4.9 Symbol Error Performance For M-ary Systems
4.9.1 Probaility of Symbol Error for MPSK
For large energy to noise ratios, the symbol error performance P
E
(M), for
equally likely, coherently detected M-ary PSK signaling:

where P
E
(M) : is the probability of symbol error
E
s
=E
b
(log
2
M) : is the energy per symbol
M=2
k
: is the size of the symbol set

Symbol error performance for differentially coherent detection of M-ay
DPSK (for large E
b
/N
0
) is :
|
|
.
|
\
|
~
M N
E
Q M P
s
E
t
sin
2
2 ) (
0
|
|
.
|
\
|
~
M
N
E
Q M P
s
E
2
sin
2
2 ) (
0
t
11:52 AM
21
Figure 4.35: Symbol
error probability for
coherently detected
multiple phase
signaling
11:52 AM
Wahla
22
4.9.2 Probaility of Symbol Error for MFSK
The symbol error performance P
E
(M), for equally likely, coherently
detected M-ary orthogonal signaling can be upper bounded as:

where:
E
s
= E
b
(log
2
M): is the energy per symbol
M: is the size of the symbol set
The symbol error performance P
E
(M), for equally likely, noncoherently
detected M-ary orthogonal signaling is:
|
|
.
|
\
|
s
0
) 1 ( ) (
N
E
Q M M P
s
E
|
|
.
|
\
|
<
0
2
exp )
2
1
( ) (
N
E M
M P
s
E
11:52 AM
23
Figure 4.36: Symbol error probability for coherently detected M-ary
orthogonal signaling
11:52 AM
Wahla
24
Figure 4.37: Symbol error probability for noncoherently detected M-ary
orthogonal signaling
11:52 AM
Wahla
25
4.9.3 Bit Error Probability versus Symbol Error Probability for
Orthogonal Signal
The ratio is:

In the limit as k increases, we get

Example of P
B
verses P
E
(Figure 4.38)
1
2 /
1 2
2
1
=

M
M
P
P
k
k
E
B
2
1
lim
=

E
B
k
P
P
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
Bit Position
Transmitted
Symbol
11:52 AM
26
4.9.4 Bit Error Probability versus Symbol Error Probability for
Multiple Phase Signaling
For the case of MPSK signaling, P
B
is less than or equal to P
E

The difference is:
For orthogonal signaling, selecting any one of the (M-1) erroneous
symbols is equally likely
For MPSK signaling, each signal vector is not equidistant from all
others
111
001
000
110 101
100
011
010
Transmitted
Symbol
001
000
101 111
110
010
011
100
Figure 4.39
11:52 AM
27
11:52 AM
28
11:52 AM
29
11:52 AM
30
11:52 AM
31
11:52 AM
32
11:52 AM
33
Advantages and Disadvantages of FSK

Advantages
FSK is a constant envelope modulation
hence insensitive to amplitude (gain) variations in the channel
hence compatible with non-linear transmitter and receiver systems
Detection of FSK can be based on relative frequency changes between
symbol states and thus does not require absolute frequency accuracy in
the channel (FSK is thus relatively tolerant to LO drift and Doppler Shift)

Disadvantages
FSK is less bandwidth efficient than ASK or PSK
The bit/symbol error rate performance of FSK is worse than PSK
In case of FSK, increasing the number of frequencies can increase the
occupied bandwidth

11:52 AM
34
Advantages and Disadvantages of PSK
Advantage:
Bandwidth Efficiency
In order to improve on the bandwidth efficiency of bandpass data
transmission, we can increase the number of symbol states

A reduction in bandwidth by a factor of k
M k
k
B
B
Binary
ary M 2 _
log = =
b
ary M
b
Binary
kT
B then
T
B if
1
,
1
_
= =
11:52 AM
35
Disadvantages:
Reduced immunity to noise
As a general rule, we know that as the number of symbol
states is increased, the tolerance to noise is reduced
Two exceptions to this rule, QPSK and orthogonal MFSK

Decreased immunity to noise compared to binary
Increased transmission power compared to binary
Increased complexity compared to binary
Lower transmission quality compared to binary

11:52 AM
36
where,
Rb = bit rate in bits/second
Eb = Energy per bit in Joules/bit
S = Total Signal power in Watts
Introducing the noise power
This equation implies that the SNR will be more than E
b
/N
o
by
a factor R
b
(if R
b
> 1 bit/symbol)

Increasing the data rate will increase the SNR, however , increasing Rb will also cause
more noise and noise term also increases ( due to ISI intersymbol interference , since
more bits are packed closer and sent through the channel).
So we cannot increase SNR by simply increasing Rb. We must strike a compromise
between the data rate and the amount of noise our receiver can handle.
SNR and E
b
/N
o

Lec 13 Error Rate Performance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lec 13 Error Rate Performance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Digital Communication

Instructor: Dr. Muhammad Arif Wahla

You might also like