An Interleave-Division Multiplexing (IDM) based Modulation

for 3GPP LIE Downlink

Dageng Chen, Yi Wang, and Jiayin Zhang
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
No.450, Jinyu road, Shanghai, China, 201206
Tel: +86-21-50993168, Fax: +86-21-50993619
E-mail: {dagengchen.yLwang.zhangjiayin}@huawei.com
Abstract-Interleave-Division Multiple-Access (IDMA) is an
efficient multiple access technique to improve high spectrum
efficiency for cellular communications. In this paper
IDM-based modulation (called layered modulation (LM)) is
proposed for OFDM systems. The idea of LM is to multiplex
multiple parallel layers of data streams by performing
repetition and layer-specific interleaver on each layer. Since
LM code bits are fully distributed in time-frequency plane, by
the aid of low-complexity chip-by-chip interference cancellation
time-frequency diversity can be well exploited in LM. Applying
LM to 3GPP LTE downlink, we compare LM to M-PSKlQAM
modulation. Numerical results show that the LM can achieve
superior performance over M-PSK/QAM. The performance
gain over QPSK, 8PSK and 16QAM is 1.1dB, 2.2dB and O.6dB,
respectively.
Index Terms-Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing
(OFDM), Interleave-Division Multiple-Access (IDMA),
Layered-Modulation (LM), Code Divison Multiple Access
(CDMA)
I. INTRODUCTION
Combined orthogonal frequency-division multiple-access
(OFDMA) and code-division multiple-access (CDMA) is a
promising multiple access solution for future broadband
wireless communications. OFDMA has the advantages of
low-complexity, robustness to multi-path channel, suitable
for link adaptation and multiuser diversity etc. But frequency
diversity is not fully exploited in OFDMA since only part of
frequency band is assigned for one user. On the other hand, in
CDMA every user occupies the whole frequency band and
frequency diversity can be well exploited at the cost of
increased complexity.
IDMA can be regarded as a kind of CDMA technique. It
spreads code bits by repetition sequence, as performed in
CDMA. The difference is that IDMA uses a user-specific
interleaver to distinguish users whereas CDMA utilizes
user-specific signature sequence for each user. Many efforts
have been made in IDMA researches [1-6]. The primary idea
ofIDMA is presented in [1] as an improved CDMA scheme,
where interleaver in CDMA is put after spreading unit, and
with a chip-by-chip multiuser detection the modified CDMA
scheme can achieve significant performance gain over
CDMA. In [2], Li Ping firstly proposed to use only
interleaver (without user-specific signature) to distinguish
users, and receive algorithm is derived. Sequential researches
focus on the performance of IDMA, MIMO-IDMA, link
adaptation based on reliability information, receive algorithm
convergence, channel coding etc. See [3] for a survey of
IDMA researches.
Recently, IDMA is applied to OFDM system and
OFDM-IDMA structure is studied [4, 5]. OFDM-IDMA
inherits most of the merits of OFDM and IDMA. The key
advantage of OFDM-IDMA is that MUD can be realized
efficiently with complexity per user independent of the
channel length and the number of users, which is
significantly lower than that of other alternatives. Meanwhile,
it can achieve better performance or high throughput than
OFDMA systems.
In this paper, we propose to use IDM as a modulation
method for OFDM-based systems, called layered-modulation.
That is, users are multiplexed in OFDMA method, and data
flows from one user are modulated in IDM form. Compared
with OFDMA system with M-PSK/QAM, we will show that
such IDM-OFDMA scheme may well exploit time-frequency
diversity and achieve better performance. Moreover, since
IDM is performed within user data instead of multiple users,
receiver complexity is lower than OFDM-IDMA system. The
remainder ofthis paper is organized as follows: In Section II,
the system model including transmitter and receiver is
presented. In Section III, an enhanced scheme for Layered
Modulation is proposed. Numerical results are shown in
Section IV, and conclusions are drawn in Section V.
II. LAYERED-MODULATION (LM)
A. System model
The transmitter based on layered-modulation and OFDMA
system is shown in Fig.l. For user k, the serial data stream
after channel coding is divided into M parallel data streams by
SIP unit. Each data stream (or each layer of code bits) is
repeated with a common repetition sequence (e.g. + - + - ...).
Then a layer-specific interleaver is performed on the repeated
code bits (or chips). The interleaver length is the code bit
length multiple with repetition factor. Next the interleaved
chips are modulated by modulation unit. Finally, each layer of
modulated symbols are summed together as the output ofLM,
and sent to share OFDM modulation with other users.
The iterative receiver structure is similar to that of IDMA
receiver, as shown in Figure 2. After performing OFDM
demodulation on received signals, a chip-by-chip multi-layer
detection (MLD) is used to separate each layer of data. Then
the detected sequences are sent to layer-specific
de-interleaver followed by de-repetition operation. Before
channel decoding, an iterative computation of soft
information (called ipternal iteration) can be performed
2
where
(8)
(9)
(7)
(6)
M
= H
k
LE(x
m
,) = E(Yk) - HkE(x
m
)
m'=l,m';tm
Ext(x
m
) =IOg(P(X
m
=+1)J
p(x
m
= -1)
M
= IH
k
1
2
L Var(x
m
,)+ (j2
m'=l,m';tm
A. Comparison with PSK/QAM
In this section, we will simulate the LM-based system
performance. Simulation assumptions are listed in Table I.As
the baseline, performance of OFDMA with M-PSK/QAM is
also given. To achieve the same spectrum efficiency, LM
needs to have the number of layers (QPSK is adopted for
each layer in LM-based system):
b if 1 spectrumefficiency x repetiton factor
num er 0 ayers = 2
III. PHASE-SHIFTED LAYERED-MODULATION (PSLM)
The LM is the non-orthogonal superposed scheme, the
multilayer interference is assumed to be suppressed by the
low complexity iterative receiver. If some modifications are
used to alleviate the multilayer interference at the transmitter,
the performance will be improved at least while the iterative
receiver does not work effectively.
Assigning unique angle to each layer is one of the ways to
alleviate interference. E.g. assume we have two BPSK
signals {+1, -I}. The superposition oftwo BPSK signals will
produce a three level output signal {+2, 0, -2}. The "+2" level
indicates that both the two BPSK signals are "+1" and the
"-2" level indicates that both the two BPSK signals are "-I".
The "0" level indicates that one BPSK signal is "+1" and the
other is "-1" but we cannot distinguish which is which. The
distance between these two output signals "(+1) + (-1)" and
"(-1) + (+1)" are zero. This will case a performance loss even
under a noiseless channel. If we introduce an angle rotation
before adding these two signals, then the ambiguous level
"0" will not occur (the distance can be larger than zero) and
hence improve the performance.
IV. NUMERICALRESULTS
E(x
m
) = (+I)p(x
m
= +1)+ (-l)p(x
m
= -1)
=exp(Ext(xm ))-1 = tanh(Ext(x )/2)
exp(Ext(x
m
)) +1 m
Var(x
m
) =1- (E(X
m
))2 (10)
Detailed descriptions of receive algorithm of other
modules such as De-Rep, Re-Rep, DEC etc, were given in
[2].
From (5)-(10), we can see that the MLD detection
algorithms inherit the low complexity of IDMA, the
normalized computational cost is only about 6 additions, 6
multiplications and a tanh(x) function per chip per layer per
iteration which is the same to IDMA iteration detection [2].
so
= Var(Yk) -IHk1
2
Var(x
m
)
E(x
m
) and Var(x
m
) both are determined by the input extrinsic
information Ext(x
m
), defined by (8), given by re-interleaver
module.
(5)
(4)
(3)
M
c;m =H k LXm' +nk
m'=l,m':#:m
MLD
where
is the interference in yk with respect to layer m. From the
central limit theorem, can be approximated as a Gaussian
variable, and yk can be characterized by a conditional
Gaussian probability density function, e.g. BPSK is adopted,
xm E {+I,-I}.
P(Yk IX
m
= 1) = 1 ex
p
[ (Yk - (H
k
+ E(;m )))2]
J21rVar(;m) 2Var(;m)
where E(*) and Var(*) are the mean and variance functions,
respectively.
The output Log Likelihood Rate (LLR) of x can be
expressed as
llr(x ) = logP(Yk IXm= +1) = 2H
k
Yk -E(c;m)
m P(Yk IX
m
=-1) Var(c;m)
b) Receiver for user k
Fig. 1. Transmitter and receiver structure based on layered-modulation (LM)
where M is the total layer number for k-th user; Hk is the
channel coefficient for user-k, xm is the modulated symbol
for m-th layer, and {nk} are samples ofa zeros-mean AWGN
with variance a2=NO/2.Due to the use ofrandom interleavers,
the MLD operation can be carried out in a chip-by-chip
manner, (1) can be rewritten as
Yk = Hkx
m
+;m (2)
between MLD and de-repetition unit. After internal iteration,
the output of de-repetition is sent to decoder for decoding.
Decoded information is fed back to MLD for further iteration
(called external iteration). Since de-repetition unit has much
lower complexity than channel decoding, using the internal
iteration can significantly reduced the complexity as in
traditional IDMA receiver where only external iteration is
utilized.
OFDM is adopted to transmit the LM symbols, so the LM
symbols can be thought as passing through a single path flat
fading channel. For user k, the received symbol after FFT
(Fast Fourier Transform) can be written as
M (1)
Yk =HkLxm +nk
m=l
TABLE 1SIMULATION PARAMETERS FOR LAYERED-OFDMA SYSTEM
3
TABLE 2PERFORMANCE GAIN OF LM-BASED SYSTEM WITH PSK/QAM
The repetition factor (RF) in LM-based system is selected
to 4, so with the same spectrum efficiency to QPSK, 8PSK
and 16QAM, the corresponding number of layers (nLayer) is
4, 6 and 8, respectively.
Fig. 2 shows the LM-based system performance in
different block sizes. A RB is defined as a block with 12
subcarriers by
14 OFDM symbols. Ideal channel estimation is applied. The
solid lines are OFDMA with PSKlQAM as the baseline while
the dash lines present Layered-OFDMA. The marks on the
lines are the same while the spectrum efficiency of LM and
PSKlQAM is the same.
Block-error-rate (BLER) is used as the performance
measurement merit. Given BLER threshold as 10%, we
investigate the performance gain of LM-based system over
OFDMA system with M-PSK/QAM. The gain is defined as:
Gain = (Et/NO)OFDMA-(Et/NO)LM-OFDMA @ BLER=10%
The performance comparison between LM and PSKlQAM
based OFDM in Fig. 2 is summarized in Table 2. As shown in
Table 2, with the RB number increasing, the gain grows. In
the case of QPSK and I6QAM, Layered-OFDMA shows
better performance selectively. For 8PSK, LOFDMA always
shows better performance. At 8RB, the gain ofQPSK, 8PSK,
I6QAM is I.IdB, 2.2dB and 0.6dB respectively.
With the RB size increasing, the interleaver length of each
layer increases, that means the data correlation between
layers is weaker, the iteration procedure works more
effectively which leads to eliminate Multi-Layer interference
effectively. That is why the performance gain grows with
data block size increasing.
B. Angle Rotation influence
A special case of LM (S-LM) is studied by setting RF=I,
nLayer=2 and phase-shifted adopted. Fig. 3 gives the
minimize Euclidean distance by simulation. As shown in
Fig.3, the phase-shifted factor is 30 or 60 differential which
has the maximum of the minimum Euclidian distance for the
I6-point superposed constellations.
As shown in Fig. 4, the BLER performance of S-LM in
TU30 is studied. Considering the 16QAM as the baseline, the
gain of LM at BLER=O.1 is only -O.1dB, while the gain of
S-LM is 2 dB. When data block is only 4RB, the interleaver
Parameters
Transmission Bandwidth
Sample frequency
Timeslot Duration
Subcarrier spacing
FFT size
Number of occupied subcarriers
Short CP
Primary resource block (RB)
Number of Antennas
Channel model
UE speed (km/h)
Channel Code Rate
Channel Code Polynomials
Decoder algorithm
Modulation
Iteration number
Values
5 MHz
7.68 MHz
0.5 ms
15kHz
512
301
(4.69us 136 samples) X6,
(5.21us 140 samples) XI
12 subcarriersx 14 symbols
lxl
Ray-6 TU
30
1/3
013015017
Max-log-MAP
QPSK
4(inner) 16 (outer)
Gain QPSK 8PSK I6QAM
IRB -0.1dB 0.2dB -1.2dB
2RB 0.4dB 0.8dB -0.7dB
4RB 0.9dB 1.9dB -O.OdB
8RB l.IdB 2.2dB 0.6dB
length is not enough for iterative receiver to eliminate the
MLI effectively. S-LM adopts the phase-shifted module to
alleviate the MLI at the transmitter, which helps the iterative
receiver work effectively at the spectrum efficiency
corresponding to I6QAM, if the iterative receiver works
effectively, not only the multilayer interference can be
eliminated, but also the channel diversity can be achieved.
v. CONCLUSION
Layered-Modulation based on IDM technique is proposed
in this paper. Since code bits are well distributed over
time-frequency plane, LM can well exploit time-frequency
diversity. Since only one channel coding is applied for the
LM, receiver complexity is lower than OFDM-IDMA.
Simulation results show that LM may achieve performance
gain up to I.IdB over QPSK, 2.2dB over 8PSK, 0.6dB over
I6QAM. A trend is that performance gain increases with data
block size. Furthermore, a special case of
Layered-modulation is studied. With the aid of angle-rotation,
LM can improve the gain over I6QAM from 0.6dB to 2dB.
At the view of modulation, the symbol superposed by 2
independent QPSK symbols with angle rotation could
perhaps be regarded as a special mapping constellation
corresponding to I6QAM.
REFERENCES
[1] R. H. Mahadevappa and J. G. Proakis, "Mitigating multiple access
Interference and intersymbol interference in uncoded CDMA systems
with chip-level interleaving," Trans. Wireless Commun.,vol. 1, no. 4, pp.
781-792, Oct. 2002.
[2] P.Li, "Interleave-division multiple access and chip by chip iterative
multi-user detection," IEEE Commun. Magazine, vol. 43, no. 6, pp.
S19-523, June 2005.
[3] H. Schoeneich and P. A. Hoeher, "Adaptive interleave division multiple
access - A potential air interface for 4G bearer services and wireless
LANs," in Proc. WOCN 2004, Muscat, Oman, pp. 179-182, June 2004.
[4] P.Li, Q. Guo, and J. Tong, "The OFDM-IDMA approach to wireless
communication systems," IEEE Wireless Commun. vol. 14, pp. 18-24,
June 2007.
[5] I. Mahafeno, C. Langlais, and C. Jego, "OFDM-IDMA versus IDMA
with ISIC for quasi-static Rayleigh fading multipath channels," in Proc.
4th International Symposium on Turbo Codes & Related Topics, Munich,
Germany, April 2006.
[6] K. Kusume and G. Bauch, "A Simple Complexity Reduction Strategy for
Interleave Division Multiple Access," IEEE Vehicular Technology
Conference (VTC2006-fall), Montreal, Canada, September 2006.
[8] R. H. Mahadevappa, "Interference Cancellation Techniques for
Multiuser Communication Systems," PhDthesis supervised by J. Proakis,
Northeeastem University, USA, Nov. 2002.
[9] P. Li, L. Liu, K. Y. Wu, and W. K. Leung, "A unified approach to
multiuser detection and space-time coding with low complexity and
nearly optimal performance," 40th Allerton Conference, pp. 170-179,
Oct. 2002.
[10] H. Schoeneich and P. Hoeher, "A Hybrid Multiple Access Scheme
Approaching Single User Performance," in Proc. Sixth Baiona
Workshop on Signal Processing in Communications,Baiona, Spain,
September 2003.
[11] J. C. Fricke, P. A. Hoeher, and H. Schoeneich, "An uplink proposal
based on interleave - division multiple access," in Proc. Wireless World
Research Forum 14th Meeting (WWRFI4), San Diego, California, July
2005.
4
LH vs PSK/QAM in OFDMA data block=2RB
10-
3
'-===::::r:====:::::r::==_.L-_---l..__--L__..L-_----.J
o 6 8 W
EblNO (dB)
-1
10
14 12 10 6 8
Eb/NO (dB)
--&-QPSl<

-B-16QAH
- e - LM
- - LM RF=4
-3 - 8 - LM RF=4
10
o
o LH vs PSl</QAH in OFDHA data block=lRB
10 , .

: ...70' . :::::: ... :!.: . :.... ::.: . : :
............ ..:- -: -. < ..
.""" ".
10-
1
... ..... ........
r C : :J : :0'(' :. ::: ::TN 0
...................................... "
.
W W
a) data block = 1 RB b) data block = 2 RBs
LM vs PSK/QAM in OFDHA data block=4RB
-1
10
-2
10 ........................-.-....................................................
-e-QPSK
--+--8PSK
--a-16QAM
- e - LM
- - LM RF=4
-3 - B - LM RF=4
10
o 6 8
Eb/NO (dB)
10 12
LM vs PSK/QAM in OFDMA data block=SRB
-1
10
-2
10 _
-e-QPSK
--+--SPSK
--a-16QAM
- e - LM
- - LM RF=4
-3 - B - LM RF=4
10
6 8 ro u
Eb/NO (dB)
c) data block = 4 RBs d) data block = 8 RBs
Fig. 2 BLER performance ofLM and PSK/QAM based OFDMA with different number ofRBs
TU30 S-LH Perforlllance data block=4RB
-2
10
-1
10
o
10
::::::1:::::::::.
. : : .
. : .. "" : .
:



:::::::::: :::::::::::: :::::::::: :::::::::: :::::::::::: :::::::::: :: :::::
...........: : : : : : , .
.. r::::::::::f:::::::
- B - LH : : : .
10-3 'L:__..1.:__--L:_----1
o 2 6 8 10 12 14
EbINO (dB)
Fig. 4 S-LM based system performance, data block =4RB
.
.. .. .. .. '.' : : I : :. ..
.. .. .. . .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. . .. . ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
....... :- : : : : : : : .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
....... , ,. , .
.................... ., :- : -: ;- .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
.. .
................. _ .
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
., ..
........ :. .. . . .. .:. . : ... . .. . : : .
.. .
.' .
.' .
.. .
.. .
.
........ :- : : : : : : : .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
0L--_.....a...__.L..-_.....a...__.L..-_.....a...__.L..-_.....a...__.L..-_--"
o 00 ro 00
Angle ldegree
Fig. 3 Minimize Euclidean Distance with different angle rotation
0.1
0.2
0.7
0.6