This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Study of Linear Precoding and Stream Combining for Rate Splitting in MU-MIMO Systems

André Flores, Rodrigo C. de Lamare and Bruno Clerckx
Abstract

This paper develops stream combining techniques for rate-splitting (RS) multiple-antenna systems with multiple users to enhance the common rate. We propose linear combining techniques based on the Min-Max, the maximum ratio and the minimum mean-square error criteria along with Regularized Block Diagonalization (RBD) precoders for RS-based multiuser multiple-antenna systems. An analysis of the sum rate performance is carried out, leading to closed-form expressions. Simulations show that the proposed combining schemes offer a significant sum rate performance gain over conventional linear precoding schemes.

Index Terms:
Multiuser MIMO, ergodic sum rate, rate-splitting, regularized block diagonalization.

I Introduction

Multiuser multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems can provide high data rates through spatial multiplexing to distributed users. However, multiuser interference (MUI) can heavily degrade the overall performance of a MIMO system [1]. Therefore, several precoding techniques aiming to mitigate the MUI have been reported in the literature [1, 2]. The main drawback of these methods is that they rely on very accurate channel state information at the transmitter (CSIT), which remains challenging to acquire in practice[3].

In the past years, rate-splitting (RS) has been established as a promising strategy to improve the performance of Multiuser MIMO, even under imperfect CSIT [4]. RS splits original messages into common and private parts, encodes the common and privates parts into streams, precode and then transmit them in a superimposed manner. At the receivers, all users use successive interference cancellation (SIC) to decode and cancel the common stream, before each user can decode its private stream. The key advantage of RS is the flexibility introduced by the split of the messages and the creation of the common stream, whose content and power can be adapted with the purpose of adjusting how much interference is canceled by the receivers. This enables to flexibly manage multiuser interference between the two extremes of fully decode interference and fully treat it as noise [5].

RS has been used in [3] and [6] with linear precoders and in [7] with non-linear precoders considering perfect and imperfect CSIT. RS for robust transmission has been studied in [8]. In [9], RS has been implemented to reduce the effects of the imperfect CSIT caused by finite feedback. However, previous works focus on multiple-input single-output (MISO) systems along with either optimized or closed-form zero-forcing (ZF) and minimum mean-squared error (MMSE) channel inversion-type precoders. MIMO systems, with multiple receive antennas, have been considered in [10] from a Degrees-of-Freedom (DoF) perspective. In [11], RS has been employed in a MIMO scenario using the BD precoder and two different common stream combining techniques. The results show that the common combiner has the potential to significantly increase the sum rate of MIMO systems.

In this work, we present stream combining techniques along with regularized block diagonalization (RBD) precoder for RS in multiuser MIMO systems [12]. We consider a different receiver structure than the one employed in [11] in order to simplify the combiners and reduce the computational complexity. We also propose the MMSE common stream combiner to further enhance the rate of the common stream and compared its performance with the Min-Max and Maximum Ratio stream combiners. We derive closed form expressions to describe the sum rate performance of the proposed schemes. Furthermore, analytical expressions for the sum rate of the proposed combiners with the RBD precoder are derived. Simulations assess the performance of the proposed approaches against existing techniques under both perfect and imperfect CSIT.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the system model and reviews the RBD precoding technique. Section III presents the proposed combining strategies and the structure of the receiver. In Section IV, the analysis of the sum rate performance is carried out. The simulation results are displayed in Section V. Finally, Section VI concludes this work.

Matrices and vectors are represented by upper and lowercase boldface letters respectively. The conjugate transpose of a matrix is denoted by ()H\left(\cdot\right)^{H}, whereas ()T\left(\cdot\right)^{\text{T}} denotes the transpose of a matrix. The operators \lVert\cdot\rVert, \odot, and 𝔼[]\mathbb{E}\left[\cdot\right] stand for the Euclidean norm, the Hadamard product and the expectation operator. The trace of a matrix and the cardinality of a set are given by tr()\text{tr}\left(\cdot\right), and card()\text{card}\left(\cdot\right). diag(𝐜)\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{c}\right) creates a diagonal matrix with the entries of 𝐜\mathbf{c} in the main diagonal.

II System Model and Linear Precoding

Let us consider the downlink of a MIMO system with KK users, as depicted in Fig. 1. The kkth User Equipment (UE) is equipped with NkN_{k} antennas i.e., the total number of receive antennas is Nr=k=1KNkN_{r}=\sum_{k=1}^{K}N_{k}. The transmitter has NtN_{t} antennas, where NtK2N_{t}\geq K\geq 2. We consider RS in a system where the BS wants to deliver MM messages to the users, and, for simplicity, splits only one message into a common part and a private part, e.g. message m(RS)\text{m}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)} as in Fig. 1. The BS then encodes 11 common part and MM private parts (the private part from m(RS)\text{m}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}, namely mk\text{m}_{k}, and the remaining M1M-1 messages that have not been split), similarly to [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. The set k\mathcal{M}_{k} contains the data streams of the kkth user. The number of data streams transmitted is equal to M+1=k=1KMk+1M+1=\sum_{k=1}^{K}M_{k}+1 with Mk=card(k)M_{k}=\text{card}\left(\mathcal{M}_{k}\right) and nk=j=1k1Mjn_{k}=\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}M_{j}.

The data stream m(RS)\text{m}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)} is split and then modulated, resulting in a vector of symbols 𝐬(RS)=[sc,𝐬1T,𝐬2T,,𝐬KT]TM+1\mathbf{s}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}=\left[s_{c},\mathbf{s}_{1}^{\text{T}},\mathbf{s}_{2}^{\text{T}},\dots,\mathbf{s}_{K}^{\text{T}}\right]^{\text{T}}\in\mathbb{C}^{M+1}. The common symbol is denoted by scs_{c}, whereas the vector 𝐬k\mathbf{s}_{k} contains the MkM_{k} private streams of the kkth user. We assume that the symbols have zero mean and covariance matrix equal to the identity matrix.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: System model.

At the transmitter, a linear precoder 𝐏(RS)=[𝐩c,𝐏]NT×(M+1)\mathbf{P}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}=\left[\mathbf{p}_{c},\mathbf{P}\right]\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{T}\times\left(M+1\right)} maps the symbols to the transmit antennas. In particular, 𝐩cNt\mathbf{p}_{c}\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{t}} performs the mapping of the common symbol111Receivers with multiple antennas allow the transmission of a vector of common symbols/streams, which could further enhance the performance [10]. This is left for further studies. to the transmit antennas. The private precoder is given by 𝐏=[𝐏1,𝐏2,,𝐏K]\mathbf{P}=\left[\mathbf{P}_{1},\mathbf{P}_{2},\dots,\mathbf{P}_{K}\right], where 𝐏kNt×Mk\mathbf{P}_{k}\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{t}\times M_{k}} denotes the private precoder of the kkth user and the vector 𝐩k\mathbf{p}_{k} denotes the kkth column of 𝐏\mathbf{P}.

Let us consider a general diagonal power loading matrix 𝐀(RS)=diag(𝐚(RS))(M+1)×(M+1)\mathbf{A}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}=\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}\right)\in\mathbb{R}^{\left(M+1\right)\times\left(M+1\right)}. The vector 𝐚(RS)=[ac,𝐚1T,𝐚2T,,𝐚kT]T\mathbf{a}^{\left(\text{RS}\right)}=[a_{c},\mathbf{a}_{1}^{\text{T}},\mathbf{a}_{2}^{\text{T}},\cdots,\mathbf{a}_{k}^{\text{T}}]^{\text{T}} assigns the power to the common and private streams. Specifically, the vector 𝐚kMk\mathbf{a}_{k}\in\mathbb{R}^{M_{k}} allocates the power to the MkM_{k} private symbols in k\mathcal{M}_{k} and the coefficient aca_{c} designates the power to the common message. Then, the transmitted signal is expressed by

𝐱=acsc𝐩c+k=1K𝐏kdiag(𝐚k)𝐬k.\mathbf{x}=a_{c}s_{c}\mathbf{p}_{c}+\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mathbf{P}_{k}\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{k}\right)\mathbf{s}_{k}. (1)

The model satisfies the transmit power constraint 𝔼[𝐱2]Etr\mathbb{E}\left[\lVert\mathbf{x}\rVert^{2}\right]\leq E_{tr}, where EtrE_{tr} denotes the total transmit power. The transmit vector 𝐱\mathbf{x} passes through the channel 𝐇T=𝐇^T+𝐇~TNr×Nt\mathbf{H}^{\text{T}}=\mathbf{\hat{H}}^{\text{T}}+\mathbf{\tilde{H}}^{\text{T}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{r}\times N_{t}}, where 𝐇^T\mathbf{\hat{H}}^{\text{T}} designates the channel estimate and the matrix 𝐇~T\mathbf{\tilde{H}}^{\text{T}} models the CSIT quality by adding the estimation error. The matrix 𝐇kTNk×Nt\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{k}\times N_{t}} represents the channel of the kkth user. It follows that 𝐇=[𝐇1,,𝐇k,,𝐇K]\mathbf{H}=[{\mathbf{H}}_{1},\ldots,{\mathbf{H}}_{k},\ldots,{\mathbf{H}}_{K}]. For simplicity, we consider a flat fading channel which remains fixed during a transmission block.

The signal obtained at the kkth user following (1) is

𝐲k=\displaystyle\mathbf{y}_{k}= acsc𝐇kT𝐩cCommon stream+ikaisi𝐇kT𝐩iUser-k private streams+j=1jkMajsj𝐇kT𝐩jMulti-User Interference+𝐧k,\displaystyle\overbrace{a_{c}s_{c}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}}^{\text{Common stream}}+\overbrace{\sum_{i\in\mathcal{M}_{k}}a_{i}s_{i}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{i}}^{\text{User-k private streams}}+\overbrace{\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\notin\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}^{M}a_{j}s_{j}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{j}}^{\text{Multi-User Interference}}+\mathbf{n}_{k}, (2)

where the noise vector 𝐧kNk×1\mathbf{n}_{k}\in\mathbb{C}^{N_{k}\times 1} is assumed uncorrelated and follows a complex normal distribution i.e., 𝐧k𝒞𝒩(𝟎,σn2𝐈)\mathbf{n}_{k}\sim\mathcal{CN}\left(\mathbf{0},\sigma_{n}^{2}\mathbf{I}\right). The power of (2) at the iith receive antenna is given by

𝔼[|yk,i|2]=\displaystyle\mathbb{E}\left[\lvert\text{y}_{k,i}\rvert^{2}\right]= ac2|𝐡i(k)T𝐩c|2+j=1Maj2|𝐡i(k)T𝐩j|2+σn2.\displaystyle a_{c}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{h}^{\left(k\right)^{\text{T}}}_{i}\mathbf{p}_{c}\rvert^{2}+\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\end{subarray}}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{h}^{\left(k\right)^{\text{T}}}_{i}\mathbf{p}_{j}\rvert^{2}+\sigma_{n}^{2}. (3)

Under perfect CSIT assumption, the estimation error goes to zero and equations (2) and (3) remain the same with 𝐇=𝐇^\mathbf{H}=\mathbf{\hat{H}}. Note that the conventional non-RS MIMO system represents a particular case of the model established where no power is distributed to the common message, i.e., ac=0a_{c}=0 (and therefore no split of the message is conducted).

In what follows we consider the RBD precoding technique [13, 14, 15, 16, 17] to define the private precoder. RBD separates the precoder into two matrices, i.e., 𝐏k(RBD)=𝐏ka𝐏kb.\mathbf{P}_{k}^{\left(\text{RBD}\right)}=\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}\mathbf{P}^{b}_{k}. The filter 𝐏ka\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k} partially removes MUI [13] and is computed through the following optimization problem:

𝐏ka=min𝐏ka𝔼[𝐇¯kT𝐏ka2+𝐧k2δ2],\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}=\min_{\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}}\mathbb{E}\left[\lVert\mathbf{\bar{H}}^{\text{T}}_{k}\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}\rVert^{2}+\frac{\lVert\mathbf{n}_{k}\rVert^{2}}{\delta^{2}}\right], (4)

where the matrix 𝐇¯k\mathbf{\bar{H}}_{k} is formed by excluding the kkth user, i.e. 𝐇¯k=[𝐇1,,𝐇k1,𝐇k+1,,𝐇K]\mathbf{\bar{H}}_{k}=\left[\mathbf{H}_{1},\ldots,\mathbf{H}_{k-1},~{}\mathbf{H}_{k+1},\ldots,\mathbf{H}_{K}\right] and the parameter δ\delta is a scaling factor imposed in order to fulfil the transmit power constraint. By applying SVD we get 𝐇¯kT=𝐔¯k𝚿¯k𝐕¯kH\mathbf{\bar{H}}_{k}^{\text{T}}=\mathbf{\bar{U}}_{k}\mathbf{\bar{\Psi}}_{k}\mathbf{\bar{V}}_{k}^{H}. The solution to (4) is given by

𝐏ka=𝐕¯k(𝚿¯𝐤T𝚿¯k+Nrσn2Etr𝐈Nt)1/2\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}=\mathbf{\bar{V}}_{k}\left(\mathbf{\bar{\Psi}_{k}}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{\bar{\Psi}}_{k}+\frac{N_{r}\sigma_{n}^{2}}{E_{tr}}\mathbf{I}_{N_{t}}\right)^{-1/2} (5)

The second filter 𝐏kb\mathbf{P}^{b}_{k} allows parallel symbol detection. Consider the effective channel matrix defined as 𝐇¨kT=𝐇kT𝐏ka\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{H}}_{k}^{\text{T}}=\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{P}^{a}_{k}. A second SVD is computed on the effective channel , i.e., 𝐇¨kT=𝐔¨k𝚿¨k𝐕¨kH\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{H}}_{k}^{\text{T}}=\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{\Psi}}_{k}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{V}}_{k}^{H}, in order to find the second precoder and the receive filter of the kkth user as given by

𝐏kb=\displaystyle\mathbf{P}^{b}_{k}= 𝐕¨k,\displaystyle\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{V}}_{k}, 𝐆k(RBD)=\displaystyle\mathbf{G}^{\left(\text{RBD}\right)}_{k}= 𝐔¨kH.\displaystyle\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}^{H}. (6)

III Proposed Stream Combining Techniques

Let us consider a system employing an RS scheme with Gaussian signalling. The instantaneous common rate at the kkth user is defined as

Rc,k=log2(1+γc,k),R_{c,k}=\log_{2}\left(1+\gamma_{c,k}\right), (7)

where γc,k\gamma_{c,k} is the Signal-to-Interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) at the kkth user when decoding the common message.

In order to evaluate the performance we consider the Ergodic Sum Rate (ESR) over a long sequence of fading channel states to ensure that the rates are achievable, as detailed in [3]. The total ESR of the system is given by

Sr=mink[1,K]𝔼[R¯c,k]+𝔼[R¯p].S_{r}=\min_{k\in\left[1,K\right]}\mathbb{E}\left[\bar{R}_{c,k}\right]+\mathbb{E}\left[\bar{R}_{p}\right]. (8)

The first term of (8) represents the ergodic common rate, where R¯c,k=𝔼[Rc,k|𝐇^]\bar{R}_{c,k}=\mathbb{E}\left[R_{c,k}\lvert\hat{\mathbf{H}}\right]. The min operator is used since all users should decode the common message. The second term denotes the ergodic sum-private rate with R¯p=𝔼[Rp|𝐇^]\bar{R}_{p}=\mathbb{E}\left[R_{p}\lvert\hat{\mathbf{H}}\right]. The sum-private rate RpR_{p} embodies all private rates, i.e., Rp=k=1KRkR_{p}=\sum_{k=1}^{K}R_{k}, where RkR_{k} denotes the instantaneous private rate of the kkth user.

Unlike receivers in RS MISO systems, the kkth receiver in a MIMO system has access to NkN_{k} copies of the common symbol. Let us consider (2) and define the combined signal y~k=𝐰kH𝐲k\tilde{\text{y}}_{k}=\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}, where the vector 𝐰k=[w1w2wMk]T\mathbf{w}_{k}=\left[w_{1}~{}~{}w_{2}~{}~{}\cdots~{}~{}w_{M_{k}}\right]^{\text{T}} represents the combining filter used to maximize the SNR. Let us define the vectors 𝐫k,c=𝐇kT𝐩c\mathbf{r}_{k,c}=\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c} and 𝐫k,i=𝐇kT𝐩i\mathbf{r}_{k,i}=\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{i}. Then, the average power of y~k\tilde{\text{y}}_{k} is

𝔼[|y~k|2]=ac2|𝐰kH𝐫k,c|2+j=1Maj2|𝐰kH𝐫k,j|2+𝐰k2σn2.\mathbb{E}\left[\lvert\tilde{\text{y}}_{k}\rvert^{2}\right]=a_{c}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\rvert^{2}+\sum_{j=1}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rvert^{2}+\lVert\mathbf{w}_{k}\rVert^{2}\sigma_{n}^{2}. (9)

From (9) we get the common message SINR given by

γk,c=ac2|𝐰kH𝐫k,c|2ikai2|𝐰kH𝐫k,i|2+j=1jkMaj2|𝐰kH𝐫k,j|2+𝐰k2σn2.\gamma_{k,c}=\frac{a_{c}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\rvert^{2}}{\sum\limits_{i\in\mathcal{M}_{k}}a_{i}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,i}\rvert^{2}+\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\notin\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rvert^{2}+\lVert\mathbf{w}_{k}\rVert^{2}\sigma_{n}^{2}}. (10)

The structure of the kkth receiver is shown in Fig. 2, which is different from [11], where the combiner and the private receiver are implemented sequentially. In what follows, we propose combining strategies to set up 𝐰k\mathbf{w}_{k} and enhance the common rate performance.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Receiver structure.

III-A Min-Max Criterion

Let us consider (3) from the model described in (2). The common rate obtained at the iith receive antenna of user kk can be computed by

Rc,k,i=log2(1+ac2|𝐡i(k)T𝐩c|2j=1Maj2|𝐡i(k)T𝐩j|2+σn2).R_{c,k,i}=\log_{2}\left(1+\frac{a_{c}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{h}_{i}^{\left(k\right)^{\text{T}}}\mathbf{p}_{c}\rvert^{2}}{\sum_{j=1}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{h}_{i}^{\left(k\right)^{\text{T}}}\mathbf{p}_{j}\rvert^{2}+\sigma_{n}^{2}}\right). (11)

The Min-Max criterion selects at each receiver the antenna that leads to the highest common rate, i.e., Rc,k(max)=maxi(Rc,k,i).R_{c,k}^{\left(\text{max}\right)}=\max_{i}\left(R_{c,k,i}\right). The kkth entry of 𝐰k\mathbf{w}_{k} is set to one if the kkth antenna is selected and all the other entries are set to zero. Using Rc,k(max)R_{c,k}^{\left(\text{max}\right)} with (8) we get the sum rate performance.

III-B Maximum Ratio Combining

Another possibility to enhance the common rate is to use Maximum Ratio Combining (MRC). The maximum value of the numerator is achieved when 𝐰k(MRC)=𝐫k,c𝐫k,c2\mathbf{w}_{k}^{\left(\text{MRC}\right)}=\frac{\mathbf{r}_{k,c}}{\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\rVert^{2}} i.e., when the vectors 𝐰k\mathbf{w}_{k} and 𝐫k,c\mathbf{r}_{k,c} are parallel. Using the property of the dot product and simplifying terms in (10), the SINR can be expressed as follows:

γk,c(MRC)=ac2𝐫k,c2ikai2𝐫k,i2cosβi+j=1jkMaj2𝐫k,j2cosβj+σn2.\gamma_{k,c}^{\left(\text{MRC}\right)}=\frac{a_{c}^{2}\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\rVert^{2}}{\sum\limits_{i\in\mathcal{M}_{k}}a_{i}^{2}\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,i}\rVert^{2}\cos\beta_{i}+\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\notin\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rVert^{2}\cos\beta_{j}+\sigma_{n}^{2}}. (12)

where βj\beta_{j} is the angle between 𝕨k\mathbb{w}_{k} and 𝐫k,j\mathbf{r}_{k,j}. The sum rate performance can be found by using (12) in (7) and in (8).

III-C Minimum Mean-Square Error Combining

The proposed MMSE combiner (MMSEc) considers the optimization problem given by

𝐰k(MMSE)=min𝐰k𝔼[sc𝐰kH𝐲k2].\mathbf{w}_{k}^{\left(\text{MMSE}\right)}=\min_{\mathbf{w}_{k}}\mathbb{E}\left[\lVert s_{c}-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}\rVert^{2}\right]. (13)

Evaluating the expected value on the right side of (13), we have

𝔼[sc𝐰kH𝐲k2]=\displaystyle\mathbb{E}\left[\lVert s_{c}-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}\rVert^{2}\right]= 𝔼[(sc𝐰kH𝐲k)(sc𝐰kH𝐲k)]\displaystyle\mathbb{E}\left[\left(s_{c}-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}\right)\left(s_{c}-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}\right)\right]
=\displaystyle= 1𝐰kH𝐇kT𝐩c𝐩cH𝐇k𝐰k+\displaystyle 1-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}-\mathbf{p}_{c}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\mathbf{w}_{k}+
𝐰kH𝐑𝐲k𝐲k𝐰k,\displaystyle\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}\mathbf{w}_{k}, (14)

where 𝐑𝐲k𝐲k=𝔼[𝐲k𝐲kH]\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}=\mathbb{E}\left[\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}^{H}\right]. Taking the derivative with respect to 𝐰kH\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H} and equating the result to zero we obtain

𝔼[sc𝐰kH𝐲k2]𝐰kH=𝐇kT𝐩c+𝐑𝐲k𝐲k𝐰k=0.\frac{\partial\mathbb{E}\left[\lVert s_{c}-\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{y}_{k}\rVert^{2}\right]}{\partial\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}}=-\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}+\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}\mathbf{w}_{k}=0. (15)

Solving (15) with respect to 𝐰k\mathbf{w}_{k} we get the MMSEc expression, which is given by

𝐰k(MMSE)=𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝐇k𝐩c.\mathbf{w}_{k}^{\left(\text{MMSE}\right)}=\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{k}\mathbf{p}_{c}. (16)

Let us consider the quantities:

𝐰k2σn2=tr(𝐑𝐲k𝐲k2𝐇kT𝐩c𝐩cH𝐇k)σn2,\lVert\mathbf{w}_{k}\rVert^{2}\sigma_{n}^{2}=\text{tr}\left(\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-2}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}\mathbf{p}_{c}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\right)\sigma_{n}^{2}, (17)
|𝐰kH𝐫k,i|2=𝐩iH𝐇k𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝐇kT𝐩c𝐩cH𝐇k𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝐇kT𝐩i,\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,i}\rvert^{2}=\mathbf{p}_{i}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}\mathbf{p}_{c}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{i}, (18)
|𝐰kH𝐫k,c|2=𝐩cH𝐇k𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝐇kT𝐩c𝐩cH𝐇k𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝐇kT𝐩c,\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\rvert^{2}=\mathbf{p}_{c}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}\mathbf{p}_{c}^{H}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{*}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}, (19)

Substituting (17),(18), and (19) into (10) we obtain the SINR of MMSEc, which can be used with (7) to get the common rate.

III-D Private Rate

The common symbol is removed from the received signal using a SIC technique [18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23]. A receive filter 𝐆kMk×Nk\mathbf{G}_{k}\in\mathbb{C}^{M_{k}\times N_{k}} can be used to improve the detection of the private symbols. Let us consider the matrix 𝐅k=𝐆k𝐇kT\mathbf{F}_{k}=\mathbf{G}_{k}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}} in order to simplify the notation. Then, the achievable rate of the kkth user is described by

Rk=log2(det[𝐈+𝐅k𝐏kdiag(𝐚k𝐚k)𝐏kH𝐅kH𝐑𝐳k𝐳k1]),R_{k}=\log_{2}\left(\det\left[\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{F}_{k}\mathbf{P}_{k}\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{k}\odot\mathbf{a}_{k}\right)\mathbf{P}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{F}^{H}_{k}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{z}_{k}\mathbf{z}_{k}}^{-1}\right]\right), (20)

where the covariance matrix of the effective noise is given by

𝐑𝐳k𝐳k=i=1ikK𝐅k𝐏idiag(𝐚i𝐚i)𝐏iH𝐅kH+σn2𝐈.\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{z}_{k}\mathbf{z}_{k}}=\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}i=1\\ i\neq k\end{subarray}}^{K}\mathbf{F}_{k}\mathbf{P}_{i}\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{i}\odot\mathbf{a}_{i}\right)\mathbf{P}_{i}^{H}\mathbf{F}_{k}^{H}+\sigma_{n}^{2}\mathbf{I}. (21)

IV Rate Analysis

In this section, we carry out the sum rate analysis of the proposed strategies combined with the RBD precoder. Let us consider the matrices 𝐇(k,j)=𝐇kT𝐏ja\mathbf{H}^{\left(k,j\right)}=\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{P}^{a}_{j},𝚼(k,j)=𝐔¨kH𝐇(k,j)𝐕¨j\mathbf{\Upsilon}^{\left(k,j\right)}=\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{H}^{\left(k,j\right)}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{V}}_{j} and 𝚼~(k,j)=𝐔¨kH𝐇~(k,j)𝐕¨j\mathbf{\tilde{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,j\right)}=\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{\tilde{H}}^{\left(k,j\right)}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{V}}_{j} . Employing an RBD precoder leads us to the following received vector:

𝐲k=\displaystyle\mathbf{y}_{k}= acsc𝐇kT𝐩c+(𝐔¨k𝚿¨k+𝚼~(k,k))diag(𝐚k)𝐬k\displaystyle a_{c}s_{c}\mathbf{H}_{k}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{p}_{c}+\left(\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{\Psi}}_{k}+\mathbf{\tilde{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,k\right)}\right)\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{k}\right)\mathbf{s}_{k}
+j=1jkK𝚼(k,j)diag(𝐚j)𝐬j+𝐔¨kH𝐧k\displaystyle+\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\neq k\end{subarray}}^{K}\mathbf{\Upsilon}^{\left(k,j\right)}\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{j}\right)\mathbf{s}_{j}+\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{n}_{k} (22)

For the Min-Max criterion, we have

Rc,k,i(RBD)=log2(1+ac2|𝐡j(k)T𝐩c|2ρi,k(RBD)2+j=1jkKmjam2|υi,mnj(k,j)|2+σn2),R_{c,k,i}^{\left(RBD\right)}=\log_{2}\Bigg{(}1+\frac{a_{c}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{h}^{\left(k\right)^{\text{T}}}_{j}\mathbf{p}_{c}\rvert^{2}}{\rho^{\left(\text{RBD}\right)^{2}}_{i,k}+{\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\neq k\end{subarray}}^{K}\sum\limits_{m\in\mathcal{M}_{j}}a_{m}^{2}\lvert\upsilon^{\left(k,j\right)}_{i,m-n_{j}}\rvert^{2}}+\sigma_{n}^{2}}\Bigg{)}, (23)

where ρi,k(RBD)2=lkal2|ψlnk(k)ui,lnk(k)+υ~i,lnk(k,k)|2\rho_{i,k}^{\left(\text{RBD}\right)^{2}}=\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}l\in\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}a_{l}^{2}\lvert\psi_{l-n_{k}}^{\left(k\right)}u_{i,l-n_{k}}^{\left(k\right)}+\tilde{\upsilon}^{\left(k,k\right)}_{i,l-n_{k}}\rvert^{2}. Then we set Rc,k(max)=maxiRc,k,i(RBD)R_{c,k}^{\left(\text{max}\right)}=\max_{i}R_{c,k,i}^{\left(RBD\right)} and use (7) and (8) to obtain the performance of the Min-Max criterion. In a perfect CSIT scenario, we have 𝚼(k,j)=𝚼^(k,j)\mathbf{\Upsilon}^{\left(k,j\right)}=\mathbf{\hat{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,j\right)} and Rc,k,i(RBD)R_{c,k,i}^{\left(RBD\right)} is given by (23) with ρi,k(RBD)2=lkal2|ψlnk(k)ui,lnk(k)+υ^i,lnjk(k,k)|2\rho_{i,k}^{\left(\text{RBD}\right)^{2}}=\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}l\in\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}a_{l}^{2}\lvert\psi_{l-n_{k}}^{\left(k\right)}u_{i,l-n_{k}}^{\left(k\right)}+\hat{\upsilon}^{\left(k,k\right)}_{i,l-n_{j}k}\rvert^{2}.

Let us now consider MRC for the kkth user and evaluate the vector 𝐫k,j\mathbf{r}_{k,j} with jqj\in\mathcal{M}_{q} and the column index t=jnqt=j-n_{q}. When q=kq=k the squared norm of vector 𝐫k,j\mathbf{r}_{k,j} is reduced to:

𝐫k,j2=ψ¨t(k)𝐮¨t(k)+𝐇¨~kT𝐯¨t(k)2.\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rVert^{2}=\lVert\underaccent{\ddot}{\psi}_{t}^{\left(k\right)}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{u}}^{\left(k\right)}_{t}+\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{\tilde{H}}}_{k}^{\text{T}}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{v}}^{\left(k\right)}_{t}\rVert^{2}. (24)

When qkq\neq k the squared norm of 𝐫k,j\mathbf{r}_{k,j} is given by

𝐫k,j2=Etri=1Nk|l=1Ntn=1Nthi,l(k)λn(q)v¯l,n(q)v¨n,t(q)|2,\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rVert^{2}=E_{tr}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{k}}\left\lvert\sum_{l=1}^{N_{t}}\sum_{n=1}^{N_{t}}h_{i,l}^{\left(k\right)}\lambda_{n}^{\left(q\right)}\bar{v}_{l,n}^{\left(q\right)}\underaccent{\ddot}{v}_{n,t}^{\left(q\right)}\right\rvert^{2}, (25)

where λn(q)=(Etrψn(q)+Nrσn2)1\lambda_{n}^{\left(q\right)}=\left(\sqrt{E_{tr}\psi_{n}^{\left(q\right)}+N_{r}\sigma_{n}^{2}}\right)^{-1}. Substituting (24) and (25) in (12) we get the SINR of the MRC criterion, which can be used in (7) and (8) to obtain the achievable sum rate. Under perfect CSIT assumption, (24) is reduced to 𝐫k,j2=|ψ¨t(k)|2\lVert\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rVert^{2}=\lvert\underaccent{\ddot}{\psi}_{t}^{\left(k\right)}\rvert^{2}.

Finally, we consider MMSEc and define 𝐃k=𝐔¨k𝚿¨k+𝚼~(k,k)\mathbf{D}_{k}=\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{U}}_{k}\underaccent{\ddot}{\mathbf{\Psi}}_{k}+\mathbf{\tilde{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,k\right)}, 𝐉𝐤=diag(𝐚k𝐚k)\mathbf{J_{k}}=\text{diag}\left(\mathbf{a}_{k}\odot\mathbf{a}_{k}\right). In the case of MMSEc, we have

ikai2|𝐰kH𝐫k,i|2=tr(𝐫k,cH𝐑𝐲k𝐲𝐤1𝐃k𝐉k𝐃kH𝐑𝐲k𝐲𝐤1𝐫k,c)\small\sum\limits_{i\in\mathcal{M}_{k}}a_{i}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,i}\rvert^{2}=\text{tr}\left(\mathbf{r}_{k,c}^{H}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y_{k}}}^{-1}\mathbf{D}_{k}\mathbf{J}_{k}\mathbf{D}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y_{k}}}^{-1}\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\right) (26)
j=1jkMaj2|𝐰kH𝐫k,j|2=j=1jkKtr(𝐫k,cH𝐑𝐲k𝐲k1𝚼~(k,j)𝐉k𝚼~(k,j)H𝐑𝐲k𝐲𝐤1𝐫k,c)\small\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\notin\mathcal{M}_{k}\end{subarray}}^{M}a_{j}^{2}\lvert\mathbf{w}_{k}^{H}\mathbf{r}_{k,j}\rvert^{2}=\sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{c}j=1\\ j\neq k\end{subarray}}^{K}\text{tr}\left(\mathbf{r}_{k,c}^{H}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y}_{k}}^{-1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,j\right)}\mathbf{J}_{k}\mathbf{\tilde{\Upsilon}}^{\left(k,j\right)^{H}}\mathbf{R}_{\mathbf{y}_{k}\mathbf{y_{k}}}^{-1}\mathbf{r}_{k,c}\right) (27)

Substituting (26) and (27) in (10) we obtain the SINR, which can be used in (7) and (8) to obtain the sum rate.

V Simulations

In this section we evaluate the performance of the proposed combining techniques in a RS-based MIMO system employing MMSE and RBD precoders. As reported in the literature [1, 13], these precoders outperform their ZF and BD counterparts by allowing small MUI to significantly reduce the power penalty associated with linear precoding. We set 𝐆k=𝐈\mathbf{G}_{k}=\mathbf{I} for the MMSE precoder, whereas the RBD precoder uses the receiver defined in (6) since we focus on evaluating the common combiners. We consider Nt=12N_{t}=12 and K=6K=6 for all simulations. Each user is equipped with 2 receive antennas. The inputs are Gaussian distributed with zero mean and unit variance. Each coefficient of 𝐇~\tilde{\mathbf{H}} follows a Gaussian distribution, i.e., 𝒞𝒩(0,σe2)\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,\sigma^{2}_{e}). We consider additive white Gaussian noise and define SNREtr/σn2\text{SNR}\triangleq E_{tr}/\sigma_{n}^{2} with σn2=1\sigma_{n}^{2}=1 for all simulations. The ESR was computed averaging 1000 independent channel realizations. For each channel realization we obtained R¯c\bar{R}_{c} and R¯p\bar{R}_{p} employing 100 error matrices. We use SVD over the channel (𝐇=𝐔𝚿𝐕)\left(\mathbf{H}=\mathbf{U}\mathbf{\Psi}\mathbf{V}\right) and then set 𝐩c=𝐯1\mathbf{p}_{c}=\mathbf{v}_{1}222Note that the optimization of the common precoder would further increase the sum rate performance. However, finding the optimum is a non convex problem and performing an exhaustive search would dramatically increase the computational complexity. The power allocated to scs_{c} was found through exhaustive search in order to maximize the sum rate. Uniform power allocation is used across private users.

For the first simulation, we fixed the channel error variance to σe2=0.1\sigma_{e}^{2}=0.1. Fig. 3 shows the sum-private rate and the common rate of the RBD precoder with MMSEc, denoted by RBD-RS-MMSEc-Pr and RBD-RS-MMSEc-Cr respectively. The sum-private rate decreases up to 6% when compared to the conventional RBD precoding since part of the transmit power is allocated to the common stream. However, the common rate attains up to 20% of the conventional RBD rate, leading to an overall gain of the system performance. It is important to note that to obtain the gain an efficient power allocation scheme between common and private streams should be employed. The RS scheme deals partially with the MUI which is shown in Fig. 3 where the common rate increases as the SNR grows.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Sum Rate performance under imperfect CSIT

Fig. 4 shows the performance of the proposed schemes as the estimation error increases. The conventional precoders are denoted by MMSE and RBD. MMSE-RS and RBD-RS denote the RS scheme without the common combiner. The best strategy from [11] is represented by BD-RS-MRC. For this simulation we set the SNR to 2020 dB. The robustness of the system increases across all error variances when a common combiner is employed as shown in Fig. 4. The figure shows that the proposed strategy outperforms the BD-RS-MRC scheme. The proposed MIMO RBD-RS-MMSEc attains a sum rate performance up to 34% higher than conventional RBD. Moreover, MMSEc achieves the best performance among the combiners.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Error variance VS Sum Rate performance

In the last example, we consider that the error in the channel estimate is reduced as the SNR increases, i.e. σe2=ξ(Etr/σn2)α\sigma^{2}_{e}=\xi\left(E_{tr}/\sigma^{2}_{n}\right)^{-\alpha} with ξ=0.94\xi=0.94 and α=0.6\alpha=0.6. Fig. 5 shows that the use of combiners results in a higher sum rate than that of conventional schemes. The proposed MIMO RBD-RS-MMSEc obtains the best performance, which is up to 15% when compared to conventional RBD precoding. Future work might consider massive MIMO systems [24, 25]

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Sum rate performance with imperfect CSIT.

VI Conclusion

Simulation results show that employing a common stream significantly increase the overall performance of the system, contributing up to 20% to the overall system sum rate. Furthermore, the proposed common stream combiners exploit the multipath propagation and the multiple antennas at the receiver to enhancing even more the performance of the common rate as shown by the simulations. The RBD-RS-MMSEc shows an increase in the sum rate performance of more than 15% when compared to conventional techniques. MMSEc also obtains the best performance among the combiners. Simulations have shown that the proposed stream combiners increase the robustness of the system under imperfect CSIT.

References

  • [1] M. Joham, W. Utschick, and J. A. Nossek, “Linear transmit processing in MIMO communications systems,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 2700–2712, Aug. 2005.
  • [2] Q. H. Spencer, A. L. Swindlehurst, and M. Haardt, “Zero-forcing methods for downlink spatial multiplexing in multiuser MIMO channels,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 461–471, Feb. 2004.
  • [3] H. Joudeh and B. Clerckx, “Sum-rate maximization for linearly precoded downlink multiuser MISO systems with partial CSIT: A rate-splitting approach,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 64, no. 11, pp. 4847–4861, Nov. 2016.
  • [4] B. Clerckx, H. Joudeh, C. Hao, M. Dai, and B. Rassouli, “Rate splitting for MIMO wireless networks: a promising PHY-layer strategy for LTE evolution,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 98–105, May 2016.
  • [5] Y. Mao, B. Clerckx, and V. Li, “Rate-splitting multiple access for downlink communication systems: Bridging, generalizing and outperforming SDMA and NOMA,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, vol. 2018, no. 1, p. 133, May 2018.
  • [6] C. Hao, Y. Wu, and B. Clerckx, “Rate analysis of two-receiver MISO broadcast channel with finite rate feedback: A rate-splitting approach,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 63, no. 9, pp. 3232–3246, Sep. 2015.
  • [7] A. R. Flores, B. Clerckx, and R. C. de Lamare, “Tomlinson-Harashima precoded rate-splitting for multiuser multiple-antenna systems,” in 2018 15th International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems (ISWCS), Lisbon, 2018.
  • [8] H. Joudeh and B. Clerckx, “Robust transmission in downlink multiuser MISO systems: A rate-splitting approach,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 64, no. 23, pp. 6227–6242, Dec. 2016.
  • [9] G. Lu, L. Li, H. Tian, and F. Qian, “MMSE-based precoding for rate splitting systems with finite feedback,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 642–645, Mar. 2018.
  • [10] C. Hao, B. Rassouli, and B. Clerckx, “Achievable DoF regions of MIMO networks with imperfect CSIT,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 63, no. 10, pp. 6587–6606, Oct. 2017.
  • [11] A. Flores and R. C. de Lamare, “Linearly precoded rate-splitting techniques with block diagonalization for multiuser MIMO systems,” in 2019 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops), Shanghai, China, 2019.
  • [12] A. R. Flores, R. C. De Lamare, and B. Clerckx, “Linear precoding and stream combining for rate splitting in multiuser mimo systems,” IEEE Communications Letters, pp. 1–1, 2020.
  • [13] V. Stankovic and M. Haardt, “Generalized design of multi-user MIMO precoding matrices,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 953–961, Mar. 2008.
  • [14] H. Sung, S. . Lee, and I. Lee, “Generalized channel inversion methods for multiuser MIMO systems,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 3489–3499, Nov. 2009.
  • [15] K. Zu and R. C. d. Lamare, “Low-complexity lattice reduction-aided regularized block diagonalization for mu-mimo systems,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 925–928, June 2012.
  • [16] K. Zu, R. C. de Lamare, and M. Haardt, “Generalized design of low-complexity block diagonalization type precoding algorithms for multiuser mimo systems,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 4232–4242, October 2013.
  • [17] W. Zhang, R. C. de Lamare, C. Pan, M. Chen, J. Dai, B. Wu, and X. Bao, “Widely linear precoding for large-scale mimo with iqi: Algorithms and performance analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 3298–3312, May 2017.
  • [18] R. C. De Lamare and R. Sampaio-Neto, “Minimum mean-squared error iterative successive parallel arbitrated decision feedback detectors for ds-cdma systems,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 778–789, May 2008.
  • [19] P. Li, R. C. de Lamare, and R. Fa, “Multiple feedback successive interference cancellation detection for multiuser mimo systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 2434–2439, August 2011.
  • [20] R. C. de Lamare and R. Sampaio-Neto, “Adaptive reduced-rank equalization algorithms based on alternating optimization design techniques for mimo systems,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 2482–2494, July 2011.
  • [21] P. Li and R. C. De Lamare, “Adaptive decision-feedback detection with constellation constraints for mimo systems,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 853–859, Feb 2012.
  • [22] R. C. de Lamare, “Adaptive and iterative multi-branch mmse decision feedback detection algorithms for multi-antenna systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 5294–5308, October 2013.
  • [23] A. G. D. Uchoa, C. T. Healy, and R. C. de Lamare, “Iterative detection and decoding algorithms for mimo systems in block-fading channels using ldpc codes,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 2735–2741, April 2016.
  • [24] R. C. de Lamare, “Massive mimo systems: Signal processing challenges and future trends,” URSI Radio Science Bulletin, vol. 2013, no. 347, pp. 8–20, Dec 2013.
  • [25] W. Zhang, H. Ren, C. Pan, M. Chen, R. C. de Lamare, B. Du, and J. Dai, “Large-scale antenna systems with ul/dl hardware mismatch: Achievable rates analysis and calibration,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 1216–1229, April 2015.