Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Power Control, Interference Suppression and Interference Avoidance in Wireless Systems Roy Yates (with S. Ulukus and C. Rose) WINLAB, Rutgers University.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 Power Control, Interference Suppression and Interference Avoidance in Wireless Systems Roy Yates (with S. Ulukus and C. Rose) WINLAB, Rutgers University."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Power Control, Interference Suppression and Interference Avoidance in Wireless Systems Roy Yates (with S. Ulukus and C. Rose) WINLAB, Rutgers University

2 2 CDMA System Model BS k BS 1

3 3 CDMA Receivers SIR 1 SIR i SIR N

4 4 CDMA Signals Power Control: p i Interference suppression: c ki Interference Avoidance: s i

5 5 SIR Constraints Feasibility depends on link gains, receiver filters

6 6 SIR Balancing SIR low  Increase transmit power SIR high  Decrease transmit power [Aein 73, Nettleton 83, Zander 92, Foschini&Miljanic 93]

7 7 Power Control + Interference Suppression 2 step Algorithm: –[Rashid-Farrokhi, Tassiulas, Liu], [Ulukus, Yates] –Adapt receiver filter c kj for max SIR Given p, use MMSE filter [Madhow, Honig 94] –Given c kj, use min power to meet SIR target Converges to min powers, corresponding MMSE receivers

8 8 Interference Avoidance Old Assumption: Signatures never change New Approach: Adapt signatures s i to improve SIR –Receiver feedback tells transmitter how to adapt. Application: –Fixed Wireless –Unlicensed Bands

9 9 MMSE Signature Optimization c i MMSE receiver filter Interference s i transmit signal Capture More Energy Interference Suppression is unchanged Match s i to c i

10 10 Optimal Signatures IT Sum capacity: [Rupf, Massey] User Capacity [Viswanath, Anantharam, Tse] BW Constrained Signatures [Parsavand, Varanasi]

11 11 Simple Assumptions N users, processing gain G, N>G Signature set: S =[s 1 | s 2 | … |s N ] Equal Received Powers: p i = p 1 Receiver/Base station Synchronous system

12 12 Sum Capacity [Rupf, Massey] CDMA sum capacity To maximize CDMA sum capacity –If N  G, S t S = I N N orthonormal sequences –If N > G, SS t = (N/G) I G N Welch Bound Equality (WBE) sequences

13 13 User Capacity [Viswanath, Anantharam, Tse] Max number of admissible users given –proc gain G, SIR target  With MMSE receivers: –N < G (1 + 1/  ) Max achieved with –equal rec’d powers, WBE sequences

14 14 User Capacity II Max achieved with equal rec’d powers p i = p WBE sequences: SS t = (N/G) I G MMSE filters: c i =g i (SS t +   I) -1 s i –g i used to normalize c i MMSE filters are matched filters!

15 15 Welch’s Bound For unit energy vectors, a lower bound for max i,j (s i t s j ) 2 derived using For k=1, a lower bound on Total Squared Correlation (TSC):

16 16 Welch’s Bound For k=1, a lower bound on TSC: If N  G, bound is loose –N orthonormal vectors, TSC=N If N>G, bound is achieved iff SS t = (N/G) I G

17 17 WBE Sequences, Min TSC, Optimality Min TSC sequences –N orthonormal vectors for N  G –WBE sequences for N > G For a single cell CDMA system, min TSC sequences maximize –IT sum capacity –User capacity Goal: A distributed algorithm that converges to a set of min TSC sequences.

18 18 Reducing TSC To reduce TSC, replace s k with –eigenvector of A k with min eigenvalue (C. Rose) A k is the interference covariance matrix and can be measured –generalized MMSE filter: (S. Ulukus)

19 19 MMSE Signature Optimization Algorithm c i MMSE receiver filter Interference s i transmit signal Iterative Algorithm: Match s i to c i Convergence?

20 20 MMSE Algorithm Replace s k with MMSE filter c k –Old signatures: S=[s 1,…, s k-1,s k,s k, s k+1,…, s N ] –New signatures: S ' =[s 1,…, s k-1,s k,c k, s k+1,…, s N ] Theorem: –TSC(S ’ )  TSC(S) –TSC(S ’ ) =TSC(S) iff c k = s k

21 21 MMSE Implementation Use blind adaptive MMSE detector RX i converges to MMSE filter c i TX i matches RX: s i = c i –Some users see more interference, others less –Other users iterate in response Longer timescale than adaptive filtering

22 22 MMSE Iteration S(n-1), TSC(n-1) At stage n: –replace s 1 TSC 1 (n) –replace s 2 TSC 2 (n) … replace s N TSC N (n) = TSC(n) TSC (n) is decreasing and lower bounded –TSC(n) converges  S(n)  S Does TSC reach global minimum?

23 23 MMSE Iteration Properties Assumption: Initial S cannot be partitioned into orthogonal subsets –MMSE filter ignores orthogonal interferers –MMSE algorithm preserves orthogonal partitions If N  G, S  orthonormal set If N > G, S  WBE sequences (apparently)

24 24 MMSE Convergence Example Eigenvalues TSC

25 25 MMSE Iteration: Proof Status Theorem: No orthogonal splitting in S(0)  no splitting in S(n) for all finite n –doesn’t say that the limiting S is unpartitioned In practice, fixed points of orthogonal partitions are unstable.

26 26 EigenAlgorithm Replace s k with eigenvector e k of A k with min eigenvalue –Old signatures: S=[s 1,…, s k-1,s k,s k, s k+1,…, s N ] –New signatures: S ' =[s 1,…, s k-1,s k,e k, s k+1,…, s N ] Theorem: –TSC(S ’ )  TSC(S)

27 27 EigenAlgorithm Iteration S(n-1), TSC(n-1) At stage n: –replace s 1 TSC 1 (n) –replace s 2 TSC 2 (n) … replace s N TSC N (n) = TSC(n) TSC (n) is decreasing and lower bounded –TSC(n) converges –Wihout trivial signature changes, S(n)  S Does TSC reach global minimum?

28 28 EigenAlgorithm Properties If N  G, –S  orthonormal set (in N steps) Each e k is a decorrelating filter If N > G, S  WBE sequences (in practice) –EigenAlgorithm has local minima –Initial partitioning not a problem

29 29 Stuff to Do Asynchronous systems Multipath Channels Implementation with blind adaptive detectors Multiple receivers

30 30 Unlicensed Bands FCC allocated 3 bands (each 100 MHz) around 5 GHz Minimal power/bandwidth rules No required etiquette How can or should it be used? –Dominant uses? Non-cooperative system interference


Download ppt "1 Power Control, Interference Suppression and Interference Avoidance in Wireless Systems Roy Yates (with S. Ulukus and C. Rose) WINLAB, Rutgers University."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google