INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION SYSTEMSInt. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410Published online 30 June 2006 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/dac.824
Performance of low density parity check coded continuousphase frequency shift keying (LDPCC-CPFSK) over
fading channels
Yesim Hekim*,y, Niyazi Odabasiogluz and Osman N. Ucan}
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Istanbul University, 34320 Avcilar, Istanbul, Turkey
SUMMARY
In this paper, in order to improve bit error performance, bandwidth efficiency and reduction of complexitycompared to related schemes such as turbo codes, we combine low density parity check (LDPC) codes andcontinuous phase frequency shift keying (CPFSK) modulation and introduce a new scheme, called ‘lowdensity parity check coded-continuous phase frequency shift keying (LDPCC-CPFSK)’. Since LDPC codeshave very large Euclidean distance and use iterative decoding algorithms, they have high error correctingcapacity and have very close performances to Shannon limit. In all communication systems, phasediscontinuities of modulated signals result extra bandwidth requirements. Continuous phase modulation(CPM) is a powerful solution for this problem. Beside CPM provides good bandwidth efficiency; it alsoimproves bit error performance with its memory unit. In our proposed scheme, LDPC and CPFSK, whichis a special type of CPM, are considered together to improve both error performance and bandwidthefficiencies. We also obtain error performance curves of LDPCC-CPFSK via computer simulations forboth regular and irregular LDPC code. Simulation results are drawn for 4-ary CPFSK, 8-ary CPFSK and16-ary CPFSK over AWGN, Rician and Rayleigh fading channels for maximum 100 iterations, while theframe size is chosen as 504. Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Received 1 August 2005; Revised 1 March 2006; Accepted 1 May 2006
KEY WORDS: low density parity check codes; continuous phase frequency shift keying
1. INTRODUCTION
In 1963, Gallager [1] invented low density parity check (LDPC) codes, which provide lowencoder and decoder complexity. Until 1996, Reed-Solomon (RS) and convolutional codes were
*Correspondence to: Yesim Hekim, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Istanbul University, 34320Avcilar, Istanbul, Turkey.yE-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]}E-mail: [email protected]
Contract/grant sponsor: Research Fund of The University of Istanbul, Turkey; contract/grant number: 354/03062005
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
considered perfectly suitable for error control coding and there were only a few studies onLDPC, which are References [2–4]. Then MacKay and Neal [5], Wiberg [6] rediscovered LDPCcodes and there is much research on this subject from then on, since decoding of LDPC codesare faster and has lower complexity than the decoding of turbo codes. LDPC with constrainedrandom code ensembles and iterative decoding algorithms can be considered seriouscompetitors to turbo codes in terms of complexity and performance. Encoder complexity ofLDPC codes is proportional with the square of code length (n2), therefore, encoding processtime is longer than turbo encoding. In construction of LDPC codes, choosing appropriate uppertriangle parity check matrix, provides significant encoding complexity reduction as inReferences [7,8]. These kind of matrix transformations may converse the sparsity of theoriginal matrix, but do not affect code performance. As originally suggested by Tanner [4],LDPC codes are well represented by bipartite graphs having two sets of nodes. These are; bitand check nodes, which correspond to elements of the codeword and parity-check constraints,respectively. Regular LDPC codes are those for which all nodes of the same type have the samedegree. For example, Figure 1(a) represents (3, 4) regular LDPC code in which all bit nodes hasdegree 3 and all check nodes have degree 4. Irregular LDPC codes [9] have variable bit andcheck node degrees. As an example, in Figure 1(b), an irregular LDPC code structure is given,where the degree of the first half of the bit nodes is ‘2’ and the other half is ‘3’.
In this paper, to improve error performance and bandwidth efficiency of LDPC coded signals,they are considered together with continuous phase modulation (CPM) approaches. In band-limited channels, CPM has explicit advantages with its low spectral occupancy property. CPM iscomposed of continuous phase encoder (CPE) and memoryless mapper (MM) [10]. CPE is aconvolutional encoder producing codeword sequences that are mapped onto waveforms byMM, creating a continuous phase signal. CPE also provides power efficiency beside phase
Bit Node
Check Node
Bit Node
Check Node
(a) (b)
Figure 1. Bipartite graph representation of: (a) regular ð3; 4Þ LDPC; and (b) irregular LDPC code.
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN398
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
continuity. The power efficiency of CPM can be further improved by coding. Some classicalcoding techniques such as convolutional and trellis codes have been designed for CPM. In therecent years, several parallel and serial concatenated coding schemes have been proposed for usewith CPM [11,12]. Here, we combine low density parity check codes and continuous phasemodulation and thus, we introduce low density parity check coded-continuous phase frequencyshift keying (LDPCC-CPFSK). In LPDCC-CPFSK scheme, message bits are first encoded byLDPC encoder. Then the coded bits are turned into serial to parallel according to the type ofmodulation. The least significant bits (LSB) of these bit streams are encoded again by CPE toprovide phase continuity. Then the coded bits are mapped into M-ary CPFSK signals by a MMand these signals are sent to channel. At the receiver side, LDPCC-CPFSK receiver demodulatesand decodes noisy signals respectively. Finally, input bits are estimated from decoded bits.
This paper is organized as follows; LDPC codes are described in Section 2 and in Section 3CPFSK is described. In Section 4, LDPCC-CPFSK systems are investigated and errorperformances of the proposed systems are discussed.
2. LOW DENSITY PARITY CHECK CODES
LDPC codes are linear block codes, which are specified by a very sparse parity check matrix,and can be represented easily by a bipartite graph, while parity check matrix H has P columnsand J rows. The bipartite graph of this code has P bit nodes, J check nodes and a certainnumber of edges. The code rate R is 1� ðJ=PÞ: Each bit node represents a bit symbol in thecodewords and each check node represents a parity equation of code. There is a line drawn inbipartite graph between a bit node and a check node if and only if that bit is involved in thatequation. The number of ‘1’ bit in rows can characterize LDPC codes and columns of the paritycheck matrix. LDPC codes are categorized into two groups, regular LDPC codes and irregularLDPC codes.
Regular LDPC codes are those for which all rows and columns of the parity check matrixhave the same degree. A regular LDPC code has a bipartite graph in which all bit nodes havedegree j and all check nodes have degree k. These degrees correspond to the number of ‘1’ bits incolumns and rows of parity check matrix H.
As an example of regular LDPC codes, the partite graph of (3, 4) is chosen (Figure 1(a)) andthe parity check matrix of this code is given in as
H ¼
0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0
0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
2666666666666666666664
3777777777777777777775
ð1Þ
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 399
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
In irregular LDPC codes, degree of nodes in each set is chosen according to some distributionrule. Optimal distribution of the rows and columns of an irregular LDPC code can be computedby density evolution as in Reference [13]. Irregular LDPC codes can be specified by degreedistribution ðl; rÞ pair or generating functions as:
lðxÞ ¼Xdlmax
i¼2
lixi�1
rðxÞ ¼Xdrmax
i¼2
rixi�1
ð2Þ
Here li and ri are the fraction of edges with (left, right) degree i, respectively, and dlmaxis the
maximal left degree of any edges, drmaxis the maximal right degree of any edges. The bipartite
graph of an irregular LDPC code is shown in Figure 1(b) having l2 ¼ 0:4; l3 ¼ 0:6; r3 ¼ 0:6 andr4 ¼ 0:4:
2.1. Encoding of LDPC codes
The parity check matrix (H) of an LDPC is random constructed. Therefore, the code words ofLDPC code, A with length n must be written in systematic form as
v ¼ ð%pj%uÞ ð3Þ
where, %u is the k-tuple message bit and %p is the ðn� kÞ-tuple parity check bits. Let the paritycheck matrix of A be H, can be defined as Equation (4), where A1 and A2 are, respectivelyðn� kÞ � ðn� kÞ and k� ðn� kÞ matrices.
HT ¼A1
A2
" #ð4Þ
Since v:HT ¼ ð%p j %uÞA1
A2
� �; then
%p:A1 þ %u:A2 ¼ 0 ð5Þ
Let be the generator matrix of A is G is the form of ð%%pjIkÞ; where %%p is k� ðn� kÞ matrix. Sincev ¼ %u:G ¼ %u: ½%%p j Ik� we have %p ¼ %u:%%p: Using Equation (5) for any %u we have,
%uð%%pA1 þ A2Þ ¼ 0 ð6Þ
Thus we have %%p ¼ �A2A�11 and a generator matrix in symmetric form is described in
Equation (7).
G ¼ ½%%p j Ik� ¼ ½A2A�11 j Ik� ð7Þ
The codeword can be found by multiplying the message bits with the generator matrix G ð%u:GÞ:
2.2. Decoding of LDPC codes
The decoding of LDPC codes is Tanner graph-based algorithm. Decoding is accomplished bypassing messages along the lines of graph. The messages on the lines that connect to the ith bitnode ci are the estimates of Prðci ¼ 1Þ: The probabilities are combined in each check node inparticular ways. The initial estimation probability of each bit node is the soft output of thechannel. The bit node broadcasts this initial estimate to the parity check nodes on the lines
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN400
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
connected to that bit node. Each check node makes a new estimate for the bits involved in thatparity equation and sends these new estimates back to the bit nodes.
The probabilities of message to be passed from bit node ci to the check node fj is described asfollows:
qijð0Þ ¼ 1� pi ¼ Prðci ¼ 0 j yiÞ ¼1
1þ e�2yi=s2
qijð1Þ ¼ pi ¼ Prðci ¼ 1 j yiÞ ¼1
1þ e2yi=s2
ð8Þ
where yi is received signal. The probabilities of message to be passed from check node fj to thebit node ci is given in the following equation:
rjið0Þ ¼1
2þ
1
2
Yi02Rj=i
ð1� 2qi0jð1ÞÞ
rjið1Þ ¼ 1� rjið0Þ
ð9Þ
where Rj=i is the set of column locations of ‘1’ bits in the jth row, excluding location i. At thenext step, the probabilities of the message to be passed from bit node to the check node is
qijð0Þ ¼ Kijð1� piÞYj02Ci=j
rj0ið0Þ
qijð1Þ ¼ KijpiYj02Ci=j
rj0ið1Þð10Þ
where Ci=j is the set of row locations of ‘1’ bits in the ith column, excluding location j.Kij constants are chosen to ensure qijð0Þ þ qijð1Þ ¼ 1: The probabilities, which are used to decidethe received signal is whether ‘0’ or ‘1’, are given in the following equation:
Qið0Þ ¼ Kið1� piÞYj2Ci
rijð0Þ
Qið1Þ ¼ KipiYj2Ci
rijð1Þð11Þ
Here the constants Ki are selected to ensure Qið0Þ þQið1Þ ¼ 1: After computing theseprobabilities, finally hard decision is made as
#ci ¼1; Qið1Þ > 1
2
0 other
(ð12Þ
If #ciHT ¼ 0 or number of iterations exceeds limitations then we finish computing the
estimations. If necessary conditions are not obtained, the probabilities in Equations (9)–(11) arecomputed again.
3. CONTINUOUS PHASE FREQUENCY SHIFT KEYING
Here, we study on M-ary CPFSK, which is an M-dimensional form of CPM. Rimoldi derivedthe tilted-phase representation of CPM in Reference [10], with the information-bearing phase
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 401
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
given by
fðt;YÞ ¼ 4phX1i¼0
Yiqðt� iTÞ ð13Þ
The modulation index h is equal to J/P, where J and P are relatively prime integers. Y is aninput sequence of M-ary symbols, Yi 2 f0; 1; 2; . . . ;M � 1g: T is the channel symbol period. J isgenerally chosen as 1 and modulation index appears in the form of h ¼ 1=P: P is a number thatcan be calculated as 2 to the power of l, number of memories in CPE. The phase responsefunction q(t), is a continuous and monotonically increasing function subject to the constraints
qðtÞ ¼0; t40
12; t5LT
(ð14Þ
where L is an integer. The phase response is usually defined in terms of the integral of afrequency pulse g(t) of duration LT, i.e. qðtÞ ¼
R t�1 gðtÞ dt: For full response signaling L is equal
to ‘1’, and for partial response systems L is greater than ‘1’. Finally, the transmitted signal s(t) isas
sðt;YÞ ¼
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi2Es
T
rcosð2pf1tþ fðt;YÞ þ f0Þ ð15Þ
where f1 is the asymmetric carrier frequency as f1 ¼ fc � hðM � 1Þ=2T and fc is the carrierfrequency. Es is the energy per channel symbol and f0 is the initial carrier phase. We assumethat f1T is an integer; this condition leads to a simplification when using the equivalentrepresentation of the CPM waveform.
4. SYSTEM MODEL
LDPCC-CPFSK system model is shown in Figure 2. As it can be seen in this figure, message bitsare first encoded by LDPC encoder. Then the encoded bits are turned into serial to log2Mparallel branch according to the type of M-ary CPFSK modulation. CPE encodes the LSB bitagain for phase continuity. The coded bits are mapped into M-ary CPFSK signals si i 2ð1; 2; . . . ; 2MÞ by MM according to partitioning rule.
In the partitioning rule, the MSB bit of serial to parallel (S/P) converter output, x1, dividessignal set into two subsets. If x1 ¼ 0; then the first subset is chosen, if x1 ¼ 1 then the secondsubset is chosen. The x2 bit divides the subsets into two groups as the similar way. Thispartitioning process continues until the last partitioning level occurs.
In order to clarify the operation of the partitioning mechanism for LDPCC-CPFSK system,the set partitioning for 8-ary CPFSK is chosen, as shown in Figure 3. Here, if x1 ¼ 0; then firstsubset fs0; s1; s2; s3; s8; s9; s10; s11g; if x1 ¼ 1; then the second subset fs4; s5; s6; s7; s12; s13; s14; s15g ischosen. At the second partitioning level, we assume that the first subset is chosen in firstpartitioning level, x2 determines whether fs0; s1; s8; s9g or fs2; s3; s10; s11g subsets to be chosen.Similarly, in the first partitioning level, if the second subset is chosen, x2 determines whetherfs4; s5; s12; s13g or fs5; s6; s14; s15g subsets to be chosen. In the last partitioning level, x3x4 bitsspecify which signal will be transmitted to the channel. This procedure can be shown in Table I.
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN402
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
LDPCEncoder
Seri
al /
Pare
llel
CPE Mem
oryl
ess
Map
per
LDPCC-CPFSK Receiver
Channel
Estimated bit sequence
Information bit sequence
LDPCC-CPFSK Transmitter
x1
x2
xN-1
xN
x si
rk
Figure 2. LDPCC-CPFSK scheme.
{s0 ,s2,s4,s6}θn θn+1
π
0 0
π
{s1 ,s3,s5,s7}
{s8 ,s10,s12,s14}
{s9 ,s11,s13,s15}
s0
s1
s9
s8
3 4x x =00 01 10 11
s0 s1
s2
s3
s11s10
00 01 10 11
x2=0 1
{s0 ,s2}
{s1 ,s3}
{s9 ,s11}
{s8 ,s10}
s9 s11s3s2s8 s10
s4
s5
s13s12
00 01 10 11
s4 s5
s6
s7
s15s14
00 01 10 11
x2=0 1
{s4 ,s6}
{s5 ,s7}
{s13 ,s15}
{s12 ,s14}
s13 s15s7s6s12 s14
x1=0 1
Figure 3. Set partitioning of 8-ary CPFSK.
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 403
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
In LDPCC 8-ary CPFSK system, if modulation index (h) is chosen as 12; initial and ending
phase of transmitted signal will take two different values ð0;pÞ as shown in Figure 3. In Table I,input–output data and signal constellations are given for this system. Here, x1 and x2 aresystematic bits, x3 and x4 are the bits encoded by CPE. Here, x3 helps to show us at which phasethe signal will start at the next coding interval. If the initial phase ðynÞ is ‘0’ and ‘x3’ is 0, theending phase of the instant signal and the starting angle of the next signal phase ðynþ1Þ is ‘0’. Ifyn ¼ 0 and x3 ¼ 1; ynþ1 ¼ p: If yn ¼ 1 and x3 ¼ 0; ynþ1 ¼ p: If yn ¼ 1 and x3 ¼ 1; ynþ1 is 0. If theinitial phase is ‘0’, the signal is positive and, if the initial phase is ‘1’, the signal is negative. Onlyif these conditions are met is continuity granted. According to Figure 3 and Table II, thetransmitted signals at the phase transitions are as follows: from 0 phase to 0, s0; s2; s4; s6; from 0phase to p phase, s1; s3; s5; s7; from p phase to 0 phase, s9; s11; s13; s15 and from p phase to pphase, s8; s10; s12; s14:
At the receiver side, since message passing algorithm, which is used as decoding procedure inLDPC decoder, uses one and zero probabilities of received signal, for every decoding interval,
Table I. Input–output and signal constellation for 8-ary CPFSK.
yn bn x1 x2 x3 x4 ynþ1 8-ary CPFSK
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s00 1 0 0 1 0 p s10 2 0 1 0 0 0 s20 3 0 1 1 0 p s30 4 1 0 0 0 0 s40 5 1 0 1 0 p s50 6 1 1 0 0 0 s60 7 1 1 1 0 p s7p 0 0 0 0 1 p s8 ¼ �s0p 1 0 0 1 1 0 s9 ¼ �s1p 2 0 1 0 1 p s10 ¼ �s2p 3 0 1 1 1 0 s11 ¼ �s3p 4 1 0 0 1 p s12 ¼ �s4p 5 1 0 1 1 0 s13 ¼ �s5p 6 1 1 0 1 p s14 ¼ �s6p 7 1 1 1 1 0 s15 ¼ �s7
Table II. Degree distribution of irregular LDPC code.
x; y lx ly
2 0.47718 }3 0.28075 }5 0.097222 }7 0.0089286 }8 } 114 0.00099206 }15 0.1002 }
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN404
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
one and zero probabilities are firstly evaluated for all parallel input branch sequences accordingto partitioning rule. These probabilities are calculated as
PL0 ¼
1
M
XM�1i¼0
1
ðrk � s2iÞ2
" #ð16Þ
PL1 ¼
1
M
XM�1i¼0
1
rk � s2iþ1ð Þ2
" #ð17Þ
where rk is received signal, L is partitioning level and si is the transmitted M-ary CPFSK signal.After computing the one and zero probabilities as in (16) and (17), the received signal is
mapped onto a one-dimensional BPSK signal as below
gL ¼ 1�2 � PL
0
PL0 þ PL
1
ð18Þ
These probability computations and mapping are executed in every partitioning level accordingto the signal set, which is shown in Figure 3. For partitioning level 1–3 these probabilities arecalculated as in Equations (19)–(24) wherePL
i ; i denotes ‘0’ or ‘1’ probability and L denotespartitioning level, rk is the received noisy CPFSK signal:
P10 ¼
1
8
X7i¼0
1
ðrk � s2iÞ2
" #ð19Þ
P11 ¼
1
8
X7i¼0
1
ðrk � s2iþ1Þ2
" #ð20Þ
P20 ¼
1
8
X1i¼0
1
ðrk � siÞ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ4Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ8Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ12Þ2
� �" #ð21Þ
P21 ¼
1
8
X1i¼0
1
ðrk � siþ2Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ6Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ10Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ14Þ2
� �" #ð22Þ
P30 ¼
1
8
X3i¼0
1
ðrk � siÞ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ8Þ2
� �" #ð23Þ
P31 ¼
1
8
X3i¼0
1
ðrk � siþ4Þ2þ
1
ðrk � siþ12Þ2
� �" #ð24Þ
For every partitioning level, these one and zero probabilities are evaluated and then #ci’sestimated from formulae (8)–(12).
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 405
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
5. SIMULATIONS RESULTS
In our study, we combine LDPC codes and CPM structure together. For simulation purpose,we use (3,6) regular and irregular, which has a degree distribution shown in Table II,LDPC codes. Block length is chosen 504 bits and the number of maximum iteration is 100. Inboth regular and irregular codes, we design three LDPC coded CPFSK scheme for4-ary CPFSK, 8-ary CPFSK and 16-ary CPFSK. The bit error ratio (BER) versus signal tonoise ratio (SNR) curves of the proposed systems (LDPCC 4-ary CPFSK, LDPCC8-ary CPFSK, LDPCC 16-ary CPFSK) are obtained for AWGN, Rician (for Ricianchannel parameter K ¼ 10 dB) and Rayleigh channels using Monte-Carlo simulationtechnique. To compare performance of our schemes, we also simulate BPSK system, which isencoded by the same LDPC codes. The results are shown in Figures 4–9. Although LDPCC8-ary CPFSK, LDPCC 16-ary CPFSK systems have higher bit/symbol rate than LDPC codedBPSK scheme, our proposed systems have better error performance in all channels and SNRvalues.
For regular LDPC code, our proposed LDPCC-CPFSK systems provide coding gains 1.48 dBup to 3.88 dB on various channels. Consequently irregular LDPCC-CPFSK systems have gainsbetween 1.3 and 4 dB as seen in Table III. As an example, LDPCC 8-ary CPFSK, LDPCC16-ary CPFSK have 1.78 and 2.57 dB coding gains, respectively, on AWGN channel for a biterror rate of 10�4 compared to LDPCC-BPSK system. As it can be seen in simulation resultsLDPCC-BPSK has better error performance than LDPCC 4-ary CPFSK, since BPSK hasdouble bit/symbol rate (1
2bit/symbol) compared to LDPCC 4-ary CPFSK system (1 bit/symbol).
Even though, LDPCC 8-ary CPFSK and 16-ary CPFSK systems also have higher bit/symbolrate (1.5 and 2 bit/symbol) than LDPCC-BPSK system, they have significant coding gains
Figure 4. Error performance of regular LDPCC-CPFSK system on AWGN channel.
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN406
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
because channel signals have 8 and 16 dimensions for 8-ary CPFSK and 16-ary CPFSK,respectively. Thus, as the modulated signal dimension (M) of M-ary CPFSK modulationincreases, better error performances are obtained.
Figure 5. Error performance of regular LDPCC-CPFSK system on Rayleigh channel.
Figure 6. Error performance of regular LDPCC-CPFSK system on Rician ðK ¼ 10 dBÞ channel.
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 407
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
6. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we evaluate error performance of LDPC coded CPFSK. For this purpose, wedesign several systems. The performances of these systems are compared to LDPC coded BPSK(LDPCC-BPSK) system. It is shown that our proposed systems provide significant amount of
Figure 7. Error performance of irregular LDPCC-CPFSK system on AWGN channel.
Figure 8. Error performance of regular LDPCC-CPFSK system on Rayleigh channel.
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN408
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
coding gains over LDPCC-BPSK system. Furthermore, since CPFSK is selected as modulator,our system has also bandwidth efficiency. Thus, our system has important power and bandwidthadvantages and is very suitable for low power and band limited applications such as satellite andmobile radio communications.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by the Research Fund of The University of Istanbul. Project number: 354/03062005.
REFERENCES
1. Gallager RG. Low-Density Parity-Check Codes. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1963.2. Zyablov V, Pinkster M. Estimation of the error-correction complexity of Gallager low-density codes. Problemy
Peredachi Informatsii 1975; 11:23–26.3. Margulis GA. Explicit construction of graphs without short cycles and low density codes. Combinatorica 1982;
2(1):71–78.4. Tanner R. A recursive approach to low complexity codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1982;
IT-27:533–547.
Figure 9. Error performance of regular LDPCC-CPFSK system on Rician ðK ¼ 10Þ channel.
Table III. Proposed systems’ coding gains (in dB) over LDPCC-BSPK system for Pb ¼ 10�4:
System AWGN channel Rician channel ðK ¼ 10 dBÞ Rayleigh channel
Coding gains for LDPCC-CPFSK over LDPCC-BPSK for regular LDPC code8-ary CPFSK 1.78 1.62 1.4816-ary CPFSK 2.57 2.71 3.88
Coding gains for LDPCC-CPFSK over LDPCC-BPSK for irregular LDPC code8-ary CPFSK 1.59 1.5 1.316-ary CPFSK 2.24 2.5 4
PERFORMANCE OF LDPCC-CPFSK OVER FADING CHANNELS 409
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac
5. MacKay DJC, Neal RM. Near Shannon limit performance of low density parity check codes. Electronic Letters1996; 32:1645–1646.
6. Wiberg N. Codes and decoding on general graphs. Dissertation on. 440, Department of Electronics, LinkopingUniversity, Linkoping, Sweden, 1996.
7. MacKay DJ, Wilson ST, Davey MC. Comparison of construction of irregular Gallager codes. IEEE Transactions onCommunications 1999; 47:1449–1454.
8. Richardson TJ, Urbanke RL. Efficient encoding of low density parity-check codes. IEEE Transactions onInformation Theory 2001; 47:638–656.
9 Luby MG, Mitzenmacher M, Shrokrollahi MA, Spielman D, Stemann V. Practical loss-resilient codes. InProceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Texas, U.S.A., 1997; 150–159.
10. Rimoldi BE. A decomposition approach to CPM. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1988; 34:260–270.11 Shane MR, Wesel RD. Parallel concatenated turbo codes for continuous phase modulation. In Proceedings of
WCNC, vol. 1, Chicago, U.S.A., 2000; 147–152.12. Szego V, Pasupathy P. Iterative decoding of serially concatenated convolutional codes and MSK. IEEE
Communication Letters 1999; 3(9):272–274.13 Richardson TJ, Urbanke RL. The capacity of low-density parity-check codes under message-passing decoding. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory 2001; 47:599–618.
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
Yesim Hekim was born in Ordu, Turkey in 1981. She received the BSc, MSc degree
from the University of Istanbul, Department of Electrical and Electronics
Engineering in 2003 and 2005, respectively. Since 2004 she has been working as a
research assistant at Istanbul University Engineering Faculty, Department of
Electrical and Electronics Engineering. At present, she is pursuing the PhD degree in
Electrical and Electronics Engineering in the Department of Electrical and
Electronics Engineering at the University of Istanbul. Her research interests include
source coding, channel coding, modulation techniques and image transmission.
Niyazi Odabasioglu was born in Konya, Turkey in 1978. He received the BSc, MSc
and PhD degree from the University of Istanbul, Department of Electrical and
Electronics Engineering in 1999, 2002 and 2006, respectively. Since 1999 he has been
working as a research assistant at Istanbul University Engineering Faculty,
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering. His current research interests
are digital and wireless communication systems, especially channel coding and
modulation techniques.
Osman Nuri Ucan was born in Kars, Turkey on January, 1960. He received the
BSEE, MSEE and PhD degrees in Electronics and Communication Engineering
Department from the Istanbul Technical University in 1985, 1988 and 1995,
respectively. During 1986–1997 he worked as a research assistant in the same
university. He is now Professor and Vice Dean of Istanbul University Engineering
Faculty. His current research areas include: information theory, jitter analysis of
modulated signals, channel modeling, cellular neural network systems, turbo coding
and Markov Random Field applications on real geophysics data, satellite based 2-D
data image processing.
Y. HEKIM, N. ODABASIOGLU AND O. N. UCAN410
Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 2007; 20:397–410
DOI: 10.1002/dac