Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving
Turbo coding is investigated for uninterleaved and partially interleaved Rayleigh fading channels. It is compared to ordinary convolutional coding with the same rate and memory 2, 4 and 8 best d/sub free/ encoders. When turbo frames are very long, turbo coding with a channel interleaver gets better...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Tagungsbericht |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1164 vol.2 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 1157 |
container_title | |
container_volume | 2 |
creator | Tepe, K.E. Anderson, J.B. |
description | Turbo coding is investigated for uninterleaved and partially interleaved Rayleigh fading channels. It is compared to ordinary convolutional coding with the same rate and memory 2, 4 and 8 best d/sub free/ encoders. When turbo frames are very long, turbo coding with a channel interleaver gets better bit error rates (BER) than ordinary convolutional coding with a channel interleaver. When the frames are shorter, lower complexity convolutional coding is as good as turbo coding. It is shown by experiment that only after a certain critical frame size does turbo coding get better BER than convolutional coding and the length of this threshold is linearly dependent on the inverse of the fading bandwidth, 1/BT. The effect of the constituent encoders on the error performance is also tested. Memory 2, 4 and 6 constituent encoders are compared. For short to moderate turbo frame size, the memory 2 constituent encoder is as good as the memory 4 and better than the memory 6 encoder. For very long block-lengths, the memory 4 encoder is the best. The memory 6 encoder is always the worst. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1109/MILCOM.2001.986027 |
format | Conference Proceeding |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>ieee_6IE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_986027</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>986027</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>986027</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-ieee_primary_9860273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9jt0KgjAcxQcRFOULeLUXyOZMp9dSFPQB4b1M-6sL22TOwrdvVNcdDpyL3zlwEHJ94vk-SdanwzG9nDxKiO8lcUQomyAnYTGxDhilIZ0hp-_vxCqkjG6iOTpngy4ULtVNyBoX0PCnUBoLia98bEHUDa74h5UNlxLaHr-EadRgcAe6gtLYrgHdgh3KeommFW97cH65QO5um6X7lQCAvNPiwfWYf88Ff-Eb3ys_Nw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</source><creator>Tepe, K.E. ; Anderson, J.B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Tepe, K.E. ; Anderson, J.B.</creatorcontrib><description>Turbo coding is investigated for uninterleaved and partially interleaved Rayleigh fading channels. It is compared to ordinary convolutional coding with the same rate and memory 2, 4 and 8 best d/sub free/ encoders. When turbo frames are very long, turbo coding with a channel interleaver gets better bit error rates (BER) than ordinary convolutional coding with a channel interleaver. When the frames are shorter, lower complexity convolutional coding is as good as turbo coding. It is shown by experiment that only after a certain critical frame size does turbo coding get better BER than convolutional coding and the length of this threshold is linearly dependent on the inverse of the fading bandwidth, 1/BT. The effect of the constituent encoders on the error performance is also tested. Memory 2, 4 and 6 constituent encoders are compared. For short to moderate turbo frame size, the memory 2 constituent encoder is as good as the memory 4 and better than the memory 6 encoder. For very long block-lengths, the memory 4 encoder is the best. The memory 6 encoder is always the worst.</description><identifier>ISBN: 9780780372252</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 0780372255</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/MILCOM.2001.986027</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>IEEE</publisher><subject>AWGN ; Bandwidth ; Bit error rate ; Convolution ; Convolutional codes ; Fading ; Frequency ; Interleaved codes ; Testing ; Turbo codes</subject><ispartof>2001 MILCOM Proceedings Communications for Network-Centric Operations: Creating the Information Force (Cat. No.01CH37277), 2001, Vol.2, p.1157-1164 vol.2</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/986027$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,776,780,785,786,2052,4036,4037,27902,54895</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/986027$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tepe, K.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, J.B.</creatorcontrib><title>Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving</title><title>2001 MILCOM Proceedings Communications for Network-Centric Operations: Creating the Information Force (Cat. No.01CH37277)</title><addtitle>MILCOM</addtitle><description>Turbo coding is investigated for uninterleaved and partially interleaved Rayleigh fading channels. It is compared to ordinary convolutional coding with the same rate and memory 2, 4 and 8 best d/sub free/ encoders. When turbo frames are very long, turbo coding with a channel interleaver gets better bit error rates (BER) than ordinary convolutional coding with a channel interleaver. When the frames are shorter, lower complexity convolutional coding is as good as turbo coding. It is shown by experiment that only after a certain critical frame size does turbo coding get better BER than convolutional coding and the length of this threshold is linearly dependent on the inverse of the fading bandwidth, 1/BT. The effect of the constituent encoders on the error performance is also tested. Memory 2, 4 and 6 constituent encoders are compared. For short to moderate turbo frame size, the memory 2 constituent encoder is as good as the memory 4 and better than the memory 6 encoder. For very long block-lengths, the memory 4 encoder is the best. The memory 6 encoder is always the worst.</description><subject>AWGN</subject><subject>Bandwidth</subject><subject>Bit error rate</subject><subject>Convolution</subject><subject>Convolutional codes</subject><subject>Fading</subject><subject>Frequency</subject><subject>Interleaved codes</subject><subject>Testing</subject><subject>Turbo codes</subject><isbn>9780780372252</isbn><isbn>0780372255</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>6IE</sourceid><sourceid>RIE</sourceid><recordid>eNp9jt0KgjAcxQcRFOULeLUXyOZMp9dSFPQB4b1M-6sL22TOwrdvVNcdDpyL3zlwEHJ94vk-SdanwzG9nDxKiO8lcUQomyAnYTGxDhilIZ0hp-_vxCqkjG6iOTpngy4ULtVNyBoX0PCnUBoLia98bEHUDa74h5UNlxLaHr-EadRgcAe6gtLYrgHdgh3KeommFW97cH65QO5um6X7lQCAvNPiwfWYf88Ff-Eb3ys_Nw</recordid><startdate>2001</startdate><enddate>2001</enddate><creator>Tepe, K.E.</creator><creator>Anderson, J.B.</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>6IE</scope><scope>6IH</scope><scope>CBEJK</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>RIO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2001</creationdate><title>Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving</title><author>Tepe, K.E. ; Anderson, J.B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-ieee_primary_9860273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>AWGN</topic><topic>Bandwidth</topic><topic>Bit error rate</topic><topic>Convolution</topic><topic>Convolutional codes</topic><topic>Fading</topic><topic>Frequency</topic><topic>Interleaved codes</topic><topic>Testing</topic><topic>Turbo codes</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tepe, K.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, J.B.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plan (POP) 1998-present by volume</collection><collection>IEEE Xplore All Conference Proceedings</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</collection><collection>IEEE Proceedings Order Plans (POP) 1998-present</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tepe, K.E.</au><au>Anderson, J.B.</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving</atitle><btitle>2001 MILCOM Proceedings Communications for Network-Centric Operations: Creating the Information Force (Cat. No.01CH37277)</btitle><stitle>MILCOM</stitle><date>2001</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>2</volume><spage>1157</spage><epage>1164 vol.2</epage><pages>1157-1164 vol.2</pages><isbn>9780780372252</isbn><isbn>0780372255</isbn><abstract>Turbo coding is investigated for uninterleaved and partially interleaved Rayleigh fading channels. It is compared to ordinary convolutional coding with the same rate and memory 2, 4 and 8 best d/sub free/ encoders. When turbo frames are very long, turbo coding with a channel interleaver gets better bit error rates (BER) than ordinary convolutional coding with a channel interleaver. When the frames are shorter, lower complexity convolutional coding is as good as turbo coding. It is shown by experiment that only after a certain critical frame size does turbo coding get better BER than convolutional coding and the length of this threshold is linearly dependent on the inverse of the fading bandwidth, 1/BT. The effect of the constituent encoders on the error performance is also tested. Memory 2, 4 and 6 constituent encoders are compared. For short to moderate turbo frame size, the memory 2 constituent encoder is as good as the memory 4 and better than the memory 6 encoder. For very long block-lengths, the memory 4 encoder is the best. The memory 6 encoder is always the worst.</abstract><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/MILCOM.2001.986027</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISBN: 9780780372252 |
ispartof | 2001 MILCOM Proceedings Communications for Network-Centric Operations: Creating the Information Force (Cat. No.01CH37277), 2001, Vol.2, p.1157-1164 vol.2 |
issn | |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_ieee_primary_986027 |
source | IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) Conference Proceedings |
subjects | AWGN Bandwidth Bit error rate Convolution Convolutional codes Fading Frequency Interleaved codes Testing Turbo codes |
title | Turbo coding behavior in Rayleigh fading channels without perfect interleaving |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T18%3A30%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ieee_6IE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=Turbo%20coding%20behavior%20in%20Rayleigh%20fading%20channels%20without%20perfect%20interleaving&rft.btitle=2001%20MILCOM%20Proceedings%20Communications%20for%20Network-Centric%20Operations:%20Creating%20the%20Information%20Force%20(Cat.%20No.01CH37277)&rft.au=Tepe,%20K.E.&rft.date=2001&rft.volume=2&rft.spage=1157&rft.epage=1164%20vol.2&rft.pages=1157-1164%20vol.2&rft.isbn=9780780372252&rft.isbn_list=0780372255&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/MILCOM.2001.986027&rft_dat=%3Cieee_6IE%3E986027%3C/ieee_6IE%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=986027&rfr_iscdi=true |