Aufgaben:Exercise 5.5: Multi-User Interference: Difference between revisions

From LNTwww
No edit summary
Hwang (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


{{quiz-Header|Buchseite=Modulationsverfahren/BER der PN–Modulation
{{quiz-Header|Buchseite=Modulation_Methods/Error_Probability_of_Direct-Sequence_Spread_Spectrum_Modulation
}}
}}


[[File:P_ID1887__Mod_A_5_5.png|right|frame|$\rm PAKF$  und  $\rm PKKF$  von M–Sequenzen mit  $P = 31$]]
[[File:P_ID1887__Mod_A_5_5.png|right|frame|$\rm PACF$  and  $\rm PCCF$  of M-sequence with  $P = 31$]]
Wir betrachten die PN–Modulation mit folgenden Parametern:
We consider PN modulation with the following parameters:
* Die Spreizung erfolgt mit der M–Sequenz mit der Oktalkennung  $(45)$, ausgehend  vom Grad  $G = 5$.  Die Periodenlänge ist somit  
* The spreading is done with the M-sequence with the octal identifier  $(45)$, starting from the degree  $G = 5$.  The period length is thus  
:$$P = 2^5 –1 = 31.$$
:$$P = 2^5 –1 = 31.$$
* Der AWGN–Parameter wird mit  $10 · \lg \ (E_{\rm B}/N_0) = 5 \ \rm  dB$  festgelegt   ⇒    $E_{\rm B}/N_0 = 3.162 = 1/0.316$.
* The AWGN parameter is set as  $10 · \lg \ (E_{\rm B}/N_0) = 5 \ \rm  dB$    ⇒    $E_{\rm B}/N_0 = 3.162 = 1/0.316$.
* Die Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit beträgt ohne interferierende Teilnehmer im gleichen Frequenzband:
* The bit error probability without interfering subscribers in the same frequency band is:
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{ {2\cdot E_{\rm B}}/{N_{\rm 0}}}\right ) \approx {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{2 \cdot 3.162}\right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 2.515 \right ) \approx 6 \cdot 10^{-3} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{ {2\cdot E_{\rm B}}/{N_{\rm 0}}}\right ) \approx {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{2 \cdot 3.162}\right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 2.515 \right ) \approx 6 \cdot 10^{-3} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
* Da ohne interferierende Teilnehmer alle Nutzabtastwerte gleich  $±s_0$  sind  (Nyquistsystem), ist die Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit  mit dem Rauscheffektivwert  $σ_d$  vor dem Entscheider  $($herrührend vom AWGN–Rauschen$)$  wie folgt gegeben:    
* Since in the absence of interfering subscribers all payload samples are equal to  $±s_0$   (Nyquist system), the bit error probability with the noise effective value  $σ_d$  before the decision maker  $($originating from the AWGN noise$)$  is given as follows:    
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( {s_0}/{\sigma_d}\right ) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( {s_0}/{\sigma_d}\right ) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$


In dieser Aufgabe soll untersucht werden, wie die Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit durch einen zusätzlichen Teilnehmer verändert wird.  
In this task, we want to investigate how the bit error probability is changed by an additional participant.  


*Die möglichen Spreizfolgen des interferierenden Teilnehmers seien ebenfalls durch $P = 31$ festgelegt.  Zur Verfügung stehen die PN–Generatoren mit den Oktalkennungen  $(45)$,  $(51)$,  $(57)$,  $(67)$,  $(73)$ und  $(75)$.
*The possible spreading sequences of the interfering participant are also defined by $P = 31$.   The PN generators with octal identifiers  $(45)$,  $(51)$,  $(57)$,  $(67)$,  $(73)$ and  $(75)$ are available.


*In der Tabelle sind die PKKF–Werte für  $λ = 0$  angegeben, desweiteren auch der jeweilige Maximalwert für eine andere Anfangsphase:
*In the table the PCCF values for  $λ = 0$  are given, furthermore also the respective maximum value for another initial phase:
:$$ {\rm Max}\,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}| = \max_{\lambda} \,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}(\lambda)| \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ {\rm Max}\,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}| = \max_{\lambda} \,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}(\lambda)| \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Der Sonderfall  $φ_\text{45, 45}(λ = 0)$  gibt den PAKF–Wert der Spreizfolge mit der Oktalkennung   $(45)$  an.
*The special case  $φ_\text{45, 45}(λ = 0)$  gives the PACF value of the spreading sequence with the octal identifier   $(45)$.   




Im Verlauf dieser Aufgabe und in der Musterlösung werden folgende Signale erwähnt:
In the course of this exercise and in the sample solution the following signals are mentioned:
: $q(t)$:   binäres bipolares Quellensignal, Symboldauer  $T$,
: $q(t)$:   binary bipolar source signal, symbol duration  $T$,
: $c(t)$:    $±1$–Spreizsignal, Chipdauer  $T_c$,
: $c(t)$:    $±1$ spreading signal, chip duration  $T_c$,
: $s(t)$:    bandgespreiztes Sendesignal; es gilt   $s(t) = q(t) · c(t)$, Amplitude  $±s_0$, Chipdauer  $T_c$,
: $s(t)$:    band spreading transmit signal; it holds that  $s(t) = q(t) · c(t)$, amplitude  $±s_0$, chip duration  $T_c$,
: $n(t)$:    AWGN–Rauschen, gekennzeichnet durch den Quotienten  $E_{\rm B}/N_0$,
: $n(t)$:    AWGN noise, characterized by the quotient  $E_{\rm B}/N_0$,
: $i(t)$:    Interferenzsignal des störenden Teilnehmers,
: $i(t)$:    interference signal of the interfering subscriber,
: $r(t)$:    Empfangssignal; es gilt   $r(t) = s(t) + n(t) + i(t)$,
: $r(t)$:    received signal; it holds that  $r(t) = s(t) + n(t) + i(t)$,
: $b(t)$:    bandgestauchtes Signal; es gilt   $b(t)= r(t) · c(t)$,
: $b(t)$:    bandpassed signal; it holds that  $b(t)= r(t) · c(t)$,
: $d(t)$:    Detektionssignal nach Integration von  $b(t)$  über die Symboldauer  $T$,
: $d(t)$:    detection signal after integration of  $b(t)$  over the symbol duration  $T$,
: $v(t)$:    Sinkensignal, der Vergleich mit  $q(t)$  liefert die Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit.
: $v(t)$:    sink signal, comparison with  $q(t)$  gives the error probability.




Line 40: Line 40:




''Hinweise:''  
''Notes:''  
*Die Aufgabe gehört zum  Kapitel  [[Modulation_Methods/Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit_der_PN%E2%80%93Modulation|Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit der PN-Modulation]].
*The exercise belongs to the chapter  [[Modulation_Methods/Error_Probability_of_Direct-Sequence_Spread_Spectrum_Modulation|Error Probability of Direct-Sequence Spread Spectrum Modulation]].
*Bezug genommen wird insbesondere auf den Abschnitt  [[Modulation_Methods/Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit_der_PN–Modulation#Zwei_Teilnehmer_mit_M.E2.80.93Sequenz.E2.80.93Spreizung |Zwei Teilnehmer mit M–Sequenz–Spreizung]].  
*Reference is made in particular to the section  [[Modulation_Methods/Error_Probability_of_Direct-Sequence_Spread_Spectrum_Modulation#Two_participants_with_M-sequence_spreading|Two participants with M-sequence spreading]].  
   
   
*Für die so genannte Q-Funktion kann von folgenden Näherungen ausgegangen werden:
*For the so-called Q-function, the following approximations can be assumed:
:$$ {\rm Q} (2) \approx 0.02275, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (3) \approx 0.00135, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (5) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ {\rm Q} (2) \approx 0.02275, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (3) \approx 0.00135, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (5) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$




===Fragebogen===
===Questions===


<quiz display=simple>
<quiz display=simple>
{Wie groß ist der (normierte) Rauscheffektivwert am Entscheider?
{What is the (normalized) noise effective value at the decision maker?
|type="{}"}
|type="{}"}
$σ_d/s_0 \ = \ $  { 0.4 3% }  
$σ_d/s_0 \ = \ $  { 0.4 3% }  


{Wie groß ist Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit &nbsp;$p_{\rm B}$, wenn der störende Teilnehmer &nbsp;$i(t)$&nbsp; die gleiche M–Sequenz mit Oktalkennung &nbsp;$(45)$&nbsp; nutzt wie der betrachtete Teilnehmer?
{What is the bit error probability &nbsp;$p_{\rm B}$ if the interfering participant &nbsp;$i(t)$&nbsp; uses the same M-sequence with octal identifier &nbsp;$(45)$&nbsp; as the participant under consideration?
|type="{}"}
|type="{}"}
$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ { 25 3% } $\ \%$
$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ { 25 3% } $\ \%$


{Welche Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit &nbsp;$p_{\rm B}$&nbsp; ergibt sich näherungsweise, wenn der störende Teilnehmer&nbsp;$i(t)$&nbsp; die M–Sequenz  mit Oktalkennung &nbsp;$(75)$&nbsp; nutzt?
{What is the approximate bit error probability &nbsp;$p_{\rm B}$&nbsp; if the interfering subscriber&nbsp;$i(t)$&nbsp; uses the M-sequence with octal identifier &nbsp;$(75)$?&nbsp;
|type="{}"}
|type="{}"}
$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ { 1.2 3% } $\ \%$
$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ { 1.2 3% } $\ \%$


{Welche Aussagen könnten unter Umständen für eine andere Spreizfolge des interferierenden Teilnehmers möglich sein?
{What statements could possibly be made for a different spreading sequence of the interfering participant?
|type="[]"}
|type="[]"}
- Mit der Oktalkennung &nbsp;$(51)$&nbsp; ist &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 0.1\%$ &nbsp; möglich.
- With the octal identifier &nbsp;$(51)$,&nbsp; &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 0.1\%$ &nbsp; is possible.
+ Mit der Oktalkennung &nbsp;$(57)$&nbsp; ist &nbsp;  $p_{\rm B} = 0.7\%$ &nbsp; möglich.
+ With the octal identifier &nbsp;$(57)$,&nbsp; &nbsp;  $p_{\rm B} = 0.7\%$ &nbsp; is possible.
+ Mit der Oktalkennung &nbsp;$(67)$&nbsp; ist &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 1.2\%$ &nbsp; möglich.
+ With the octal identifier &nbsp;$(67)$,&nbsp; &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 1.2\%$ &nbsp; is possible.
</quiz>
</quiz>




===Musterlösung===
===Solution===
{{ML-Kopf}}
{{ML-Kopf}}
'''(1)'''&nbsp;  Aus den beiden vorne angegebenen Gleichungen folgt direkt:
'''(1)'''&nbsp;  From the two equations given above, it follows directly:
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q}(2.515) = {\rm Q}({s_0}/{\sigma_d}) \hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow\hspace{0.3cm} \frac{\sigma_d}{s_0} = \frac{1}{2.515} = 0.398 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 0.4} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q}(2.515) = {\rm Q}({s_0}/{\sigma_d}) \hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow\hspace{0.3cm} \frac{\sigma_d}{s_0} = \frac{1}{2.515} = 0.398 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 0.4} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Man könnte diese Größe aber auch über die allgemeinere Gleichung
*However, one could also calculate this quantity using the more general equation
:$$ \sigma_d^2 = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} |H_{\rm I}(f) |^2 \,\,{\rm d} {\it f}\hspace{0.05cm} = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\rm si}^2(\pi f T)\,\,{\rm d} {\it f} = \frac{N_0}{2T } \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ \sigma_d^2 = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} |H_{\rm I}(f) |^2 \,\,{\rm d} {\it f}\hspace{0.05cm} = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\rm si}^2(\pi f T)\,\,{\rm d} {\it f} = \frac{N_0}{2T } \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:berechnen.&nbsp; Hierbei beschreibt $H_{\rm I}(f)$ den Integrator im Frequenzbereich.  
:&nbsp; Here $H_{\rm I}(f)$ describes the integrator in the frequency domain.
*Mit $E_{\rm B}= s_0^2 · T$ erhält man das gleiche Ergebnis:
*With $E_{\rm B}= s_0^2 · T$ the same result is obtained:
:$$\frac{\sigma_d^2}{s_0^2} = \frac{N_0}{2 \cdot s_0^2 \cdot T } = \frac{N_0}{2 E_{\rm B} } = \frac{0.316}{2 } = 0.158\hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} {\sigma_d}/{s_0} = 0.398 \approx 0.4 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$\frac{\sigma_d^2}{s_0^2} = \frac{N_0}{2 \cdot s_0^2 \cdot T } = \frac{N_0}{2 E_{\rm B} } = \frac{0.316}{2 } = 0.158\hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} {\sigma_d}/{s_0} = 0.398 \approx 0.4 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$






'''(2)'''&nbsp; Benutzt der interferierende Teilnehmer die gleiche M–Sequenz&nbsp; $(45)$&nbsp; wie der betrachtete Nutzer, <br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; so sind die (normierten) Detektionsnutzabtastwerte gleich&nbsp; $+2$&nbsp; $($zu $25\%)$,&nbsp; $-2$&nbsp; $($zu $25\%)$&nbsp; und&nbsp; $0$&nbsp; $($zu $50\%)$.  
'''(2)'''&nbsp; If the interfering participant uses the same M-sequence&nbsp; $(45)$&nbsp; as the considered user, <br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; then the (normalized) detection utility samples are equal to&nbsp; $+2$&nbsp; $($at $25\%)$,&nbsp; $-2$&nbsp; $($at $25\%)$&nbsp; and&nbsp; $0$&nbsp; $($at $50\%)$.  
*Bei &nbsp;$d(νT) = ±2$&nbsp; wird die Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit für den betrachteten Teilnehmer signifikant verkleinert.&nbsp; In diesem Fall übertragen beide Nutzer das gleiche Bit $($"$+1$" oder "$-1$"$)$ und der Abstand von der Schwelle wird verdoppelt:
*When &nbsp;$d(νT) = ±2$,&nbsp; the error probability for the considered user is significantly reduced.&nbsp; In this case, both users transmit the same bit $($"$+1$" or "$-1$"$)$ and the distance from the threshold is doubled:
:$$ p_{\rm B}\,\,\big [{\rm falls}\,\, d (\nu T) = \pm 2s_0 \big ] = {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \cdot 2.515 \right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 5.03 \right ) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \approx 0 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ p_{\rm B}\,\,\big [{\rm if}\,\, d (\nu T) = \pm 2s_0 \big ] = {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \cdot 2.515 \right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 5.03 \right ) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \approx 0 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Ist dagegen &nbsp;$d(νT) = 0$&nbsp; (zum Beispiel, wenn&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$&nbsp; und&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$&nbsp; gilt oder umgekehrt), so löschen sich die Signale vollständig aus und man erhält
*On the other hand, if &nbsp;$d(νT) = 0$&nbsp; (for example, if&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$&nbsp; and&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$&nbsp; holds or vice versa), the signals cancel completely and we obtain
:$$p_{\rm B}\,\,\big[{\rm falls}\,\, d (\nu T) = 0 \big] = {\rm Q} \left ( 0 \right ) = 0.5 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$p_{\rm B}\,\,\big[{\rm if}\,\, d (\nu T) = 0 \big] = {\rm Q} \left ( 0 \right ) = 0.5 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Durch Mittelung über diese beiden gleichwahrscheinlichen Möglichkeiten ergibt sich so für die mittlere Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit:
*Averaging over these two equally probable possibilities, we thus obtain for the mean bit error probability:
:$$p_{\rm B}= 0.5 \cdot 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7}+ 0.5 \cdot 0.5 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 25\%} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$p_{\rm B}= 0.5 \cdot 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7}+ 0.5 \cdot 0.5 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 25\%} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$






'''(3)'''&nbsp;  Wir betrachten zunächst nur den Nutzanteil &nbsp; ⇒ &nbsp; $n(t) = 0$,&nbsp; beschränken uns auf das erste Datensymbol und setzen den Koeffizienten $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$ voraus.  
'''(3)'''&nbsp;  We first consider only the useful part &nbsp; ⇒ &nbsp; $n(t) = 0$,&nbsp; restricting ourselves to the first data symbol and assuming the coefficient $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$.  
*Dann gilt innerhalb dieses Datenbits&nbsp; $s(t) = c_{45}(t)$.  
*Then within this data bit&nbsp; $s(t) = c_{45}(t)$ holds.  
*Ist der Koeffizient&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} $&nbsp; des interferierenden Teilnehmers ebenfalls&nbsp; $+1$, so erhält man für die vorne spezifizierten Signale im Zeitintervall von&nbsp; $0$&nbsp; bis&nbsp; $T$:
*If the coefficient&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} $&nbsp; of the interfering participant is also&nbsp; $+1$, then for the signals specified in front in the time interval from&nbsp; $0$&nbsp; to&nbsp; $T$ we obtain:
:$$ r(t)  =  c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t)\hspace{0.05cm},$$  
:$$ r(t)  =  c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t)\hspace{0.05cm},$$  
:$$b(t)  =  r(t) \cdot c_{45}(t) = \left [c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t) \right ] \cdot c_{45}(t) = 1+ c_{45}(t) \cdot c_{75}(t) \hspace{0.05cm},$$
:$$b(t)  =  r(t) \cdot c_{45}(t) = \left [c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t) \right ] \cdot c_{45}(t) = 1+ c_{45}(t) \cdot c_{75}(t) \hspace{0.05cm},$$
:$$ d (T)  =  \frac{1}{T} \cdot \int_{0 }^{ T} b (t )\hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d}t = 1 + {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ d (T)  =  \frac{1}{T} \cdot \int_{0 }^{ T} b (t )\hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d}t = 1 + {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Hierbei bezeichnet&nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 75}(τ)$&nbsp; die PKKF zwischen den Spreizfolgen mit den Oktalkennungen&nbsp; $(45)$&nbsp; und&nbsp; $(75)$, die in der Tabelle auf der Angabenseite zu finden sind.
*Here, &nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 75}(τ)$&nbsp; denotes the PCCF between the spreading sequences with octal identifiers&nbsp; $(45)$&nbsp; and&nbsp; $(75)$, which can be found in the table on the data page.


*Entsprechend gilt für den Detektionsnutzabtastwert unter der Voraussetzung&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$&nbsp; und&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} =-1$:
*Correspondingly, for the detection utility sample, given&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$&nbsp; and&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} =-1$:
:$$d (T) = 1 - {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$d (T) = 1 - {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
*Aus Symmetriegründen liefern die Koeffizienten&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)}&nbsp; = -1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$&nbsp; sowie&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = -1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$&nbsp; die genau gleichen Beiträge für die Bitfehlerwahrscheinlichkeit wie&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$&nbsp; bzw.&nbsp; $a_{1(s)} = +1$,&nbsp; $a_{1(i)} = –1$, wenn man zudem das AWGN–Rauschen berücksichtigt.
*For symmetry reasons, the coefficients&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)}&nbsp; = -1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$&nbsp; as well as&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = -1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$&nbsp; provide exactly the same contributions for the bit error probability as&nbsp; $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$,&nbsp; $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$&nbsp; and&nbsp; $a_{1(s)} = +1$,&nbsp; $a_{1(i)} = –1$ respectively, if we also consider the AWGN noise.


*Mit dem Ergebnis der Teilaufgabe&nbsp; '''(1)'''&nbsp; und mit&nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 75}(λ = 0) = 7/31$&nbsp; erhält man somit näherungsweise:
*Thus, using the result of subtask&nbsp; '''(1)'''&nbsp; and with&nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 75}(λ = 0) = 7/31$,&nbsp; we obtain approximately:
:$$p_{\rm B}  =  \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1+ 7/31}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1- 7/31}{0.4} \right ) =  \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1.225}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{0.775}{0.4} \right ) = \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 3.06 \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 1.94 \right )$$  
:$$p_{\rm B}  =  \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1+ 7/31}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1- 7/31}{0.4} \right ) =  \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1.225}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{0.775}{0.4} \right ) = \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 3.06 \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 1.94 \right )$$  
:$$ \Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} p_{\rm B}\approx  \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [{\rm Q} \left ( 3 \right ) + {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \right ) \right ] = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [0.00135 + 0.02275 \right ] \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {= 1.2\%}\hspace{0.05cm}.$$
:$$ \Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} p_{\rm B}\approx  \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [{\rm Q} \left ( 3 \right ) + {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \right ) \right ] = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [0.00135 + 0.02275 \right ] \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {= 1.2\%}\hspace{0.05cm}.$$




'''(4)'''&nbsp; Möglich sind die <u>Lösungsvorschläge 2 und 3</u>:
'''(4)'''&nbsp; Possible solutions are <u>2 and 3</u>:
* Der PKKF–Wert&nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 57}(λ = 0)$&nbsp; ist betragsmäßig nur&nbsp; $1/31$&nbsp; und damit ist die Fehlerwahrscheinlichkeit nur geringfügig größer als&nbsp; $0.6\%$.  
* The PCCF value&nbsp; $φ_\text{45, 57}(λ = 0)$&nbsp; is only&nbsp; $1/31$&nbsp; in magnitude and thus the error probability is only slightly larger than&nbsp; $0.6\%$.  
*Die Folge mit den Oktalkennung&nbsp; $(67)$&nbsp; führt dagegen zur gleichen PKKF wie die Folge&nbsp; $(75)$.
*In contrast, the sequence with octal identifiers&nbsp; $(67)$&nbsp; leads to the same PCCF as sequence&nbsp; $(75)$.
*Ohne störenden Teilnehmer gilt entsprechend dem Angabenblatt: &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 0.6\%$.  
*Without interfering participants, the following applies according to the data sheet: &nbsp; $p_{\rm B} = 0.6\%$.  
*Mit Interferenz kann dieser Wert nicht unterschritten werden  &nbsp; ⇒  &nbsp; Lösungsvorschlag 1 ist nicht möglich.
*With interference, this value cannot be undercut &nbsp; ⇒  &nbsp; solution 1 is not possible.


{{ML-Fuß}}
{{ML-Fuß}}

Revision as of 12:27, 13 December 2021

$\rm PACF$  and  $\rm PCCF$  of M-sequence with  $P = 31$

We consider PN modulation with the following parameters:

  • The spreading is done with the M-sequence with the octal identifier  $(45)$, starting from the degree  $G = 5$.  The period length is thus  
$$P = 2^5 –1 = 31.$$
  • The AWGN parameter is set as  $10 · \lg \ (E_{\rm B}/N_0) = 5 \ \rm dB$    ⇒   $E_{\rm B}/N_0 = 3.162 = 1/0.316$.
  • The bit error probability without interfering subscribers in the same frequency band is:
$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{ {2\cdot E_{\rm B}}/{N_{\rm 0}}}\right ) \approx {\rm Q} \left ( \sqrt{2 \cdot 3.162}\right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 2.515 \right ) \approx 6 \cdot 10^{-3} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • Since in the absence of interfering subscribers all payload samples are equal to  $±s_0$   (Nyquist system), the bit error probability with the noise effective value  $σ_d$  before the decision maker  $($originating from the AWGN noise$)$  is given as follows:  
$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q} \left ( {s_0}/{\sigma_d}\right ) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$

In this task, we want to investigate how the bit error probability is changed by an additional participant.

  • The possible spreading sequences of the interfering participant are also defined by $P = 31$.   The PN generators with octal identifiers  $(45)$,  $(51)$,  $(57)$,  $(67)$,  $(73)$ and  $(75)$ are available.
  • In the table the PCCF values for  $λ = 0$  are given, furthermore also the respective maximum value for another initial phase:
$$ {\rm Max}\,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}| = \max_{\lambda} \,\,|{\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}i}(\lambda)| \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • The special case  $φ_\text{45, 45}(λ = 0)$  gives the PACF value of the spreading sequence with the octal identifier   $(45)$. 


In the course of this exercise and in the sample solution the following signals are mentioned:

 $q(t)$:   binary bipolar source signal, symbol duration  $T$,
 $c(t)$:   $±1$ spreading signal, chip duration  $T_c$,
 $s(t)$:   band spreading transmit signal; it holds that  $s(t) = q(t) · c(t)$, amplitude  $±s_0$, chip duration  $T_c$,
 $n(t)$:   AWGN noise, characterized by the quotient  $E_{\rm B}/N_0$,
 $i(t)$:   interference signal of the interfering subscriber,
 $r(t)$:   received signal; it holds that  $r(t) = s(t) + n(t) + i(t)$,
 $b(t)$:   bandpassed signal; it holds that  $b(t)= r(t) · c(t)$,
 $d(t)$:   detection signal after integration of  $b(t)$  over the symbol duration  $T$,
 $v(t)$:   sink signal, comparison with  $q(t)$  gives the error probability.





Notes:

  • For the so-called Q-function, the following approximations can be assumed:
$$ {\rm Q} (2) \approx 0.02275, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (3) \approx 0.00135, \hspace{0.2cm}{\rm Q} (5) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$


Questions

1 What is the (normalized) noise effective value at the decision maker?

$σ_d/s_0 \ = \ $

2 What is the bit error probability  $p_{\rm B}$ if the interfering participant  $i(t)$  uses the same M-sequence with octal identifier  $(45)$  as the participant under consideration?

$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ $\ \%$

3 What is the approximate bit error probability  $p_{\rm B}$  if the interfering subscriber $i(t)$  uses the M-sequence with octal identifier  $(75)$? 

$p_{\rm B}\ = \ $ $\ \%$

4 What statements could possibly be made for a different spreading sequence of the interfering participant?

With the octal identifier  $(51)$,    $p_{\rm B} = 0.1\%$   is possible.
With the octal identifier  $(57)$,    $p_{\rm B} = 0.7\%$   is possible.
With the octal identifier  $(67)$,    $p_{\rm B} = 1.2\%$   is possible.


Solution

(1)  From the two equations given above, it follows directly:

$$p_{\rm B} = {\rm Q}(2.515) = {\rm Q}({s_0}/{\sigma_d}) \hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow\hspace{0.3cm} \frac{\sigma_d}{s_0} = \frac{1}{2.515} = 0.398 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 0.4} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • However, one could also calculate this quantity using the more general equation
$$ \sigma_d^2 = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty} |H_{\rm I}(f) |^2 \,\,{\rm d} {\it f}\hspace{0.05cm} = \frac{N_0}{2 }\cdot\int^{+\infty}_{-\infty}{\rm si}^2(\pi f T)\,\,{\rm d} {\it f} = \frac{N_0}{2T } \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  Here $H_{\rm I}(f)$ describes the integrator in the frequency domain.
  • With $E_{\rm B}= s_0^2 · T$ the same result is obtained:
$$\frac{\sigma_d^2}{s_0^2} = \frac{N_0}{2 \cdot s_0^2 \cdot T } = \frac{N_0}{2 E_{\rm B} } = \frac{0.316}{2 } = 0.158\hspace{0.3cm}\Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} {\sigma_d}/{s_0} = 0.398 \approx 0.4 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$


(2)  If the interfering participant uses the same M-sequence  $(45)$  as the considered user,
        then the (normalized) detection utility samples are equal to  $+2$  $($at $25\%)$,  $-2$  $($at $25\%)$  and  $0$  $($at $50\%)$.

  • When  $d(νT) = ±2$,  the error probability for the considered user is significantly reduced.  In this case, both users transmit the same bit $($"$+1$" or "$-1$"$)$ and the distance from the threshold is doubled:
$$ p_{\rm B}\,\,\big [{\rm if}\,\, d (\nu T) = \pm 2s_0 \big ] = {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \cdot 2.515 \right ) = {\rm Q} \left ( 5.03 \right ) \approx 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7} \approx 0 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • On the other hand, if  $d(νT) = 0$  (for example, if  $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$  and  $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$  holds or vice versa), the signals cancel completely and we obtain
$$p_{\rm B}\,\,\big[{\rm if}\,\, d (\nu T) = 0 \big] = {\rm Q} \left ( 0 \right ) = 0.5 \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • Averaging over these two equally probable possibilities, we thus obtain for the mean bit error probability:
$$p_{\rm B}= 0.5 \cdot 2.45 \cdot 10^{-7}+ 0.5 \cdot 0.5 \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {\approx 25\%} \hspace{0.05cm}.$$


(3)  We first consider only the useful part   ⇒   $n(t) = 0$,  restricting ourselves to the first data symbol and assuming the coefficient $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$.

  • Then within this data bit  $s(t) = c_{45}(t)$ holds.
  • If the coefficient  $a_\text{1(i)} $  of the interfering participant is also  $+1$, then for the signals specified in front in the time interval from  $0$  to  $T$ we obtain:
$$ r(t) = c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t)\hspace{0.05cm},$$
$$b(t) = r(t) \cdot c_{45}(t) = \left [c_{45}(t) + c_{75}(t) \right ] \cdot c_{45}(t) = 1+ c_{45}(t) \cdot c_{75}(t) \hspace{0.05cm},$$
$$ d (T) = \frac{1}{T} \cdot \int_{0 }^{ T} b (t )\hspace{0.1cm} {\rm d}t = 1 + {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • Here,   $φ_\text{45, 75}(τ)$  denotes the PCCF between the spreading sequences with octal identifiers  $(45)$  and  $(75)$, which can be found in the table on the data page.
  • Correspondingly, for the detection utility sample, given  $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$  and  $a_\text{1(i)} =-1$:
$$d (T) = 1 - {\it \varphi}_{45,\hspace{0.05cm}75}(\lambda = 0) \hspace{0.05cm}.$$
  • For symmetry reasons, the coefficients  $a_\text{1(s)}  = -1$,  $a_\text{1(i)} = -1$  as well as  $a_\text{1(s)} = -1$,  $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$  provide exactly the same contributions for the bit error probability as  $a_\text{1(s)} = +1$,  $a_\text{1(i)} = +1$  and  $a_{1(s)} = +1$,  $a_{1(i)} = –1$ respectively, if we also consider the AWGN noise.
  • Thus, using the result of subtask  (1)  and with  $φ_\text{45, 75}(λ = 0) = 7/31$,  we obtain approximately:
$$p_{\rm B} = \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1+ 7/31}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1- 7/31}{0.4} \right ) = \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{1.225}{0.4} \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( \frac{0.775}{0.4} \right ) = \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 3.06 \right ) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot {\rm Q} \left ( 1.94 \right )$$
$$ \Rightarrow \hspace{0.3cm} p_{\rm B}\approx \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [{\rm Q} \left ( 3 \right ) + {\rm Q} \left ( 2 \right ) \right ] = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \left [0.00135 + 0.02275 \right ] \hspace{0.15cm}\underline {= 1.2\%}\hspace{0.05cm}.$$


(4)  Possible solutions are 2 and 3:

  • The PCCF value  $φ_\text{45, 57}(λ = 0)$  is only  $1/31$  in magnitude and thus the error probability is only slightly larger than  $0.6\%$.
  • In contrast, the sequence with octal identifiers  $(67)$  leads to the same PCCF as sequence  $(75)$.
  • Without interfering participants, the following applies according to the data sheet:   $p_{\rm B} = 0.6\%$.
  • With interference, this value cannot be undercut   ⇒   solution 1 is not possible.