Advertisement

Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 72, Issue 3, pp 1603–1617 | Cite as

Performance Comparison of Uncoded OFDM Systems with Trellis Shaping over Nonlinear Channels

  • Ryota Yoshizawa
  • Hideki Ochiai
Article

Abstract

Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) can achieve remarkable performance in terms of spectral efficiency, but its power amplifier efficiency becomes poor because of its high peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) nature of transmitted signals. Trellis shaping is an effective method to reduce peak and average power without signal distortion at the cost of transmitter complexity and its performance depends on the metric used for the trellis decoder. Several metrics, defined in either time or frequency domain, have been proposed in the literature. In many practical OFDM systems, however, slight nonlinearity is tolerable as long as the resulting distortion meets the system requirements such as bit error rate (BER) and spurious level of transmitted signals. In this paper, we make a thorough performance comparison of trellis-shaped uncoded OFDM systems with different metrics in terms of complexity, achievable PAPR, and resulting BER as well as power spectrum in a practical channel where the signal envelope is distorted by a power amplifier (PA). Our study shows that the metric designed in frequency domain is mostly favorable in such a scenario.

Keywords

Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) Bit error rate (BER) Trellis shaping (TS) Peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) Power amplifier (PA) 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by MEXT KAKENHI 23686058.

References

  1. 1.
    Jiang, T., & Wu, Y. (2008). An overview: Peak-to-average power ratio reduction techniques for OFDM signals. IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, 54(2), 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Louët, Y., & Palicot, J. (2008). A classification of methods for efficient power amplification of signals. Annals of Telecommunications, 63(7–8), 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li, X., & Cimini, L. J, Jr. (1998). Effects of clipping and filtering on the performance of OFDM. IEEE Communications Letters, 2(5), 131–133.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ochiai, H., & Imai, H. (2002). Performance analysis of deliberately clipped OFDM signals. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 50(1), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bäuml, R. W., Fischer, R. F. H., & Huber, J. B. (1996). Reducing the peak-to-average power ratio of multicarrier modulation by selected mapping. IEE Electronics Letters, 32(22), 2056–2057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Müller, S. H., & Huber, J. B. (1997). A novel peak power reduction scheme for OFDM. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on personal, indoor and mobile radio communications (PIMRC), (pp. 1090–1094).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nguyen, T. T., & Lampe, L. (2008). On partial transmit sequences for PAR reduction in OFDM systems. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 7(2), 746–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Forney, G. D, Jr. (1992). Trellis shaping. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 38(2), 281–300.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morrison, I. S. (1992). Trellis shaping applied to reducing the envelope fluctuation of MQAM and band-limited MPSK. In Proceedings IEEE international conference on digital satellite communications (ICDSC), (pp. 143–149).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tanahashi, M., & Ochiai, H. (2009). Near constant envelope trellis shaping for PSK signaling. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 57(2), 450–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henkel, W., & Wagner, B. (2000). Another application for trellis shaping: PAR reduction for DMT (OFDM). IEEE Transactions on Communications, 48(9), 1471–1476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ochiai, H. (2004). A novel trellis-shaping design with both peak and average power reduction for OFDM systems. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 52(11), 1916–1926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nguyen, T. T., & Lampe, L. (2007). On trellis shaping for PAR reduction in OFDM systems. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 55(9), 1678–1682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoshizawa, R., & Ochiai, H. (2011). Peak power reduction of OFDM signals using trellis shaping with M-algorithm. In Proceedings IEEE international conference on computer communication networks (ICCCN), (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rapp, C. (1991). Effects of HPA-nonlinearity on 4-DPSK-OFDM-signal for a digital sound broadcasting system. In Proceedings 2nd European conference on satellite communications, (pp. 179–184).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringYokohama National UniversityYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations