Transcript IEEE C802.16m-09/1012

Performance comparison on SFBCH coding schemes
Document Number:
IEEE C802.16m-09/1012
Date Submitted:
2009-04-27
Source:
Seunghyun Kang, Jinyoung Chun, Bin-Chul Ihm
LG Electronics
Re:
Email: {sh_kang, jychun03} @lge.com
Category: AWD comments / Area: Chapter 15.3.9 (UL-CTRL)
“Comments on AWD 15.3.9 UL-CTRL”
Venue:
IEEE Session #61
Purpose:
To be discussed and adopted in the Amendment Working Document
Notice:
This document does not represent the agreed views of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group or any of its subgroups. It represents only the views of the
participants listed in the “Source(s)” field above. It is offered as a basis for discussion. It is not binding on the contributor(s), who reserve(s) the right to add,
amend or withdraw material contained herein.
Release:
The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the
creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this
contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor
also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.16.
Patent Policy:
The contributor is familiar with the IEEE-SA Patent Policy and Procedures:
<http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6> and <http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3>.
Further information located at <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html> and <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat >.
Performance evaluation

k=7

k=12

k=24
Simulation environment
Coding
scheme
LGE’s block code [1]
Ericsson AB’s TBCC [2]
Intel’s TBCC [3]
Subcarrier
mapping
Frequency first data mapping in [1]
Channel
Condition
PedB 3km/h
Detection
and
Decoding
Block code: Symbol level-MLD
TBCC: WAVA with 4 iterations
Pilot
2 pilots, Pilot shifting and 3dB boosting
Performance evaluation


Required SNR at 10% and 1% PER
Required SNR at10% PER [dB]
Required SNR at 1% PER [dB]
Information
Size
LGE
Ericsson AB
Intel
LGE
Ericsson AB
Intel
7 bits
-2.82
-2.36
-1.99
0.77
1.50
1.74
12 bits
-1.03
-0.56
-0.45
2.50
3.18
3.08
24 bits
2.73
3.05
2.62
6.21
7.31
6.35
Performance comparison at 10% PER
Information Size
Performance comparison
7 bits
LGE >> Ericsson AB > Intel
12 bits
LGE > Ericsson AB ≈ Intel
24 bits
LGE ≈Intel > Ericsson AB
Conclusion


LGE’s block code shows equal or better performance than
TBCCs from both Intel and Ericsson AB.
Adopt LGE’s SFBCH proposal in C802.16m-09/1011 for AWD.
Reference
[1] IEEE C802.16m 09/1011, “Proposed Amendment Text for Secondary Feedback
Channel”, May. 2009.
[2] IEEE C802.16m 09/0506r2, “Tail-Biting Convolutional Codes with Expurgation and
Rate-Compatible Puncturing for the Secondary Fast Feedback Channel” Mar.2009
[3] IEEE C802.16m 09/0875, “Proposed Tailed Biting Convolutional codes for
SFBCH”, May. 2009