On Parameter Estimation of MIMO Flat-Fading Channels With Frequency Offsets
On Parameter Estimation of MIMO Flat-Fading Channels With Frequency Offsets
On Parameter Estimation of MIMO Flat-Fading Channels With Frequency Offsets
3, MARCH 2003
Abstract—We address the frequency offsets and channel gains advocated. The first consists of using an encoding strategy
estimation problem for a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) that is immune to frequency offsets. This is the purpose of the
flat-fading channel using a training sequence. The general double-differential space-time coding scheme recently pro-
case where the frequency offsets are possibly different for each
transmit antenna is considered. The Cramér–Rao bound (CRB) posed in [15], which allows for information recovery regardless
for the problem at hand is derived. Additionally, we present a of the frequency offsets. The alternative solution is similar to
simple, closed-form expression for the large-sample CRB and many single antenna communication systems to estimate the
show that it depends in a simple way on the channel parameters. frequency offsets with a view to compensate for them. This is
Next, the parameters estimation issue is investigated. First, the the route we take here.
maximum likelihood estimator (MLE), which entails solving an
-dimensional maximization problem where is the number of In this paper, we consider a multiple-input multiple-output
transmit antennas, is derived. Then, we show that the likelihood (MIMO) flat-fading channel affected by Doppler shifts, and we
function can be written as the product of one-dimensional address the problem of estimating the channel gains and the fre-
(1-D) functions if a suitable choice of the training sequence is quency offsets. Despite the fact that it may reduce the informa-
made. Based on this fact, we suggest two computationally simpler tion rate, the use of training sequences to estimate frequency off-
methods. Numerical examples that illustrate the performance of
the estimators and compare it with the CRB are provided. sets and channel gains remains an effective solution, and thus,
we consider this framework. In contrast to previously published
Index Terms—Channel estimation, Cramér–Rao bounds, flat-
fading channels, frequency offsets, maximum likelihood, multiple papers (see e.g., [15]), we do not assume that the frequency off-
antennas. sets are the same for each Tx antenna. The latter assumption is
valid only when the multipath components impinge on the re-
ceiver from a common angle of arrival. Herein, we relax this
I. INTRODUCTION AND DATA MODEL assumption, and therefore, the model considered is more gen-
eral.
S PACE-TIME diversity, which is achieved through the use
of multiple transmit and receive antennas, has recently
been advocated as an efficient means to mitigate fading effects
Let us therefore consider a flat-fading channel with Tx an-
tennas and Rx antennas that is affected by Doppler shifts and
in wireless channels, see, e.g., [1]–[4] and references therein. possibly carrier frequency mismatches as well. Then, the output
In addition to the inherent diversity provided by multiple of the -th Rx antenna can be written as (see, e.g., [15] for a de-
transmit antennas, efficient space-time coding strategies (such tailed derivation of the equation below)
as space-time block coding) have been proposed [5]–[9].
Space-time block codes enable us to achieve full diversity
(1)
while maintaining a simple linear decoding structure at the
receiver. However, their effectiveness relies on accurate channel
state information [10], [11], which can be obtained for instance where we have the following.
through the use of training sequences [12]. To remedy this • The channel gains { } are assumed to be unknown con-
problem, differential encoding schemes have been proposed; stants that do not change over the interval [ ].
see, e.g., [13] and [14]. However, the performance of these • { } are the (known) sequence symbols transmitted via
schemes may seriously degrade in the presence of frequency the Tx antennas. Unless otherwise stated, we do not
offsets that are unavoidably present due to the relative motion make any specific assumption about the way these se-
between the transmitter and the receiver (as well as possible quence symbols are generated. Some specific assumptions
carrier frequency mismatches). Therefore, it is of primary im- will be introduced when needed, e.g., to derive the asymp-
portance to take into account these offsets prior to performing totic CRB.
detection. Toward this end, two alternative strategies can be • { } are the frequency offsets (that may be different for
each Tx and Rx antenna). It should be pointed out that
Manuscript received January 17, 2002; revised October 10, 2002. The work frequency offsets are to be estimated. This is to be con-
of P. Stoica was supported in part by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Re- trasted with previous works where does not depend
search. The associate editor coordinating the review of this paper and approving
it for publication was Dr. Alex C. Cot. on .
O. Besson is with the Department of Avionics and Systems, ENSICA, • { } is a sequence of zero-mean, independent and iden-
Toulouse, France (e-mail: [email protected]). tically distributed Gaussian random variables such that
P. Stoica is with the Department of Systems and Control, Uppsala University,
Uppsala, Sweden (e-mail: [email protected]).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSP.2002.808102 (2)
1053-587X/03$17.00 © 2003 IEEE
BESSON AND STOICA: PARAMETER ESTIMATION OF MIMO FLAT-FADING CHANNELS 603
where is the Kronecker delta, i.e., if The CRB for the estimation of is obtained as the inverse of
and if . and can be written as
The problem is to estimate the { } and { }. It can be Re Im
viewed as a generalization of the problem of frequency esti-
Im Re
mation in the presence of time-varying amplitude to multiple
signals and amplitudes that are partly known [ ] and partly
unknown [ ]. Below, we derive the CRB for the problem at Im
hand. Additionally, the problem of estimating the channel gains Re Re
and frequency offsets is addressed.
Im Re (6)
II. CRAMÉR–RAO BOUND
with .
This section is devoted to the derivation of the CRB. First, Proof: See Appendix A
we consider the exact (i.e., finite-sample) CRB and then derive The following remarks are in order.
the asymptotic (i.e., large-sample) CRB. While the former is a
• The first fact to be noted is that the FIM and, hence, the
rather complicated function of the channel gains and the fre-
CRB are block-diagonal. Hence, there is a decoupling be-
quency offsets, the latter exhibits a simple dependence on .
tween the estimation errors corresponding to the param-
Only the main results will be given while their proofs are de-
eters of two different Rx antennas. This implies that the
ferred to the appendices.
estimation of the parameters of interest can be carried out
A. Exact CRB independently for each Rx antenna.
• The CRB for the estimation of can be readily derived
Let us define the vector of the parameters of interest as
from (6) and is given by (see Appendix A)
.. (3) Re
.
(7)
• The CRB for the estimation of is given by
with
Re (8)
Re Im
• The CRB for the estimation of and depends on all
through the matrices .
• The CRB for the estimation of and also depends on
Proposition 1: The Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) for the all ; more precisely, it depends on the differences
estimation of is block-diagonal, i.e., ; see (37). When the frequency offsets at the th
Rx antenna happen to be all equal (see, e.g., [15]), i.e.,
when , the CRB for estimation of the th
.. frequency offset no longer depends on . Indeed, in the
. (4) latter case, one has
..
.
diag
where each is the FIM corresponding to the estimation of with , and the matrices and only
and is given by depend on . Furthermore, if it is known a priori that
, it can be shown (see Remark 5 in
Re Im Im Appendix A) that
Im Re Re (5)
Im Re Re
where , and
with (9)
with ,
.. .. .. .. , and .
. . . .
.. .. .. ..
. . . . B. Asymptotic CRB
The exact CRB, although obtained in closed form, exhibits
diag a rather complicated dependence with respect to (w.r.t.) the
diag channel gains and the frequency offsets. Thus, it does not
604 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOL. 51, NO. 3, MARCH 2003
provide immediate insights into the influence of the channel on In this case, which is most commonly encountered, the asymp-
the estimation accuracy. To remedy this problem, we derive the totic CRB no longer depends on the frequency offsets but only
asymptotic (large-sample) CRB. The latter will be a much sim- on the training sequences powers. Furthermore, the errors asso-
pler function of and . Furthermore, as will be illustrated in ciated with the estimation of and are not correlated for
Section V, the asymptotic CRB is close to the exact CRB even . A similar result holds for and . However, there is
for small . Therefore, it is an interesting tool to evaluate the a coupling between the estimation errors corresponding to
influence of the channel parameters and the training sequences and .
onto the estimation performance. The asymptotic CRB can also Remark 1: When the frequency offsets are a priori known to
serve as a measure to design the ; see the next section. be equal, then the model should be reparameterized as a function
In order to obtain the asymptotic CRB, we assume that the of ; see Remark 5 in Appendix I and the dis-
are realizations of zero-mean stationary random processes, cussion at the end of the previous section. Using the arguments
and we examine the limiting behavior of the FIM. The main of Appendix B, it is straightforward to show that the asymptotic
result is given in the following proposition whose proof can be CRB is given in this case by
found in Appendix B.
Proposition 2: Under mild conditions on (see
Appendix B), the asymptotic CRB for the estimation of
can be written as
(16)
Tr subject to (17)
with
asCRB (14)
asCRB (15)
BESSON AND STOICA: PARAMETER ESTIMATION OF MIMO FLAT-FADING CHANNELS 605
(19)
(20)
with equality if . Imposing the constraint, the solution
of (17) is thus with respect to and . It is well known that for a given ,
the minimizer of (20) is
(18)
(21)
Re
(24)
606 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOL. 51, NO. 3, MARCH 2003
whose entries are the powers of the training sequences. Hence, MLE only for a specific choice of the training sequence. Note
the function in (22) converges to that although the number of data samples has been halved the
“aperture” remains the same as 2 for is still .
Let and .
Observe that in (29) is the maximum likelihood estimator of
(25) if one considers as a constant-amplitude exponential
signal. Indeed, for , we have from (28)
Fig. 1. +
CRB (solid lines), asymptotic CRB (“3”) and MSE of the SMLE (“ ”), and the correlation-based estimator (“o”) versus the training sequence length.
SNR = 15 dB.
note that converges to a scaled identity matrix, performance of the SMLE (22) and the correlation-based esti-
regardless of the frequency offsets separation. Moreover, mator (31) proposed in the previous section is illustrated and
we can choose such that ; this is the case for compared with the CRB. In all simulations, the number of Tx
instance if a space-time encoder is built from the designs and Rx antennas is set to and , respectively. For
proposed in [7], [8]. Consequently, the sake of clarity, we only display the results for the first Rx
is likely to be small for antenna (similar results were obtained for the second Rx an-
, regardless of the values { }. In fact, even for tenna). The training sequences are phase-modulated (QPSK)
, can be signals generated according to (27) with
arbitrarily small [and even equal to zero] for . Hence, the and . With this choice, the covariance matrix
matrix is usually well conditioned, which in turn im- of is the identity matrix. The additive noise
plies that (22) should not give rise to numerical problems with is zero-mean, complex-valued, and Gaussian distributed with
closely spaced frequencies. Furthermore, when the training variance SNR, where SNR denotes the signal-to-noise
sequence is selected as in (27), is diagonal, irrespec- ratio.
tive of the frequency offsets separation. This is a significant In the simulations, only the “random” part of the model,
advantage over the conventional frequency estimation problem. i.e., the additive noise , is varied from trial to trial. A
Finally, observe that the number of frequencies to be estimated specific channel is used in all simulations; more precisely,
is known, which is an additional appealing feature. is drawn from an i.i.d. zero-mean complex Gaussian
distribution with variance equal to 1, and this channel
is used in all runs. For our particular channel, we have
V. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES . The fre-
quency offsets are selected as . Hence,
The aim of this section is twofold. First, the validity of the they are rather close to each other. This example is chosen
asymptotic formula (13) is checked; moreover, we study the to show that the additional degrees of freedom provided by
number of samples , which is required for the asymptotic CRB enable us to deal with closely spaced frequency offsets.
to be an accurate approximation of the exact CRB. Second, the Observe that estimating with would be a hard
608 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOL. 51, NO. 3, MARCH 2003
Fig. 2. +
CRB (solid lines), asymptotic CRB (“3”) and MSE of the SMLE (“ ”), and the correlation-based estimator (“o”) versus SNR. N = 16.
problem, requiring a large number of samples ( ). For lation-based estimator to accurately estimate the two fre-
each simulation, 500 Monte Carlo trials are run. quencies, due to the knowledge of and the way it has
In a first simulation, the influence of is studied, whereas been chosen.
the SNR is fixed at SNR dB. In Fig. 1, we plot the CRB, In a second simulation, the influence of SNR is studied for
asymptotic CRB, and the empirical mean-square error (MSE) . The results are displayed in Fig. 2. Again, it can
of the estimators. The following facts can be observed. be seen that the asymptotic CRB provides an accurate approx-
• The asymptotic CRB is very close to the exact CRB, even imation of the exact CRB. A threshold effect is observed for
for short data samples, which are typically . This both the SMLE and the correlation-based estimator. For SNR
is an important result as it implies that the very simple above the threshold, the two methods provide efficient estimates
expression of the asymptotic CRB can be used instead while a breakdown is observed below the threshold. Note that
of the complicated expression of the CRB for practical the threshold is lower for the SMLE than for the correlation-
training sequences lengths. based estimator; in other words, the SMLE performs better in
• Since the asymptotic CRB is very close to the exact CRB low SNR environments. It should also be pointed out that the
and since the former depends only on the training se- threshold does not occur at the same SNR for and . This
quence powers, it implies that the exact CRB is not very fact can be explained as follows. The estimators are based on
sensitive to the particular realization of . Indeed, in , which is given by (30). In our definition of the SNR
other simulations not reported here, we verified that the [remember that SNR], the factors are not taken
variations of the CRB are negligible when is changed into account. Hence, the “effective” SNR, considering as
[provided that its power is kept constant]. a constant-amplitude exponential signal, is SNR SNR
• The SMLE has aperformance very close to the CRB forboth : For our choice of , this results in an SNR loss
the frequency offsets and the channel gains estimation. The of 4.52 dB and 0.57 dB for and , respectively.
correlation-based estimator is as accurate as the SMLE. This is why a higher SNR is required to estimate . Once
• Even though is small and the number of sam- above the threshold, the correlation-based estimator performs
ples is small, there is no problem for the SMLE and corre- as well as the SMLE and achieves the CRB.
BESSON AND STOICA: PARAMETER ESTIMATION OF MIMO FLAT-FADING CHANNELS 609
Im
with ,
, and
Im (37b)
(32)
Im (37d)
diag
diag
Re
For distributed as in (33), it is known [17], [19] that the FIM for
estimation of is block-diagonal, i.e., the estimation Re (37e)
of is decoupled from that of . Therefore, in the sequel, we
only consider the FIM for , which we denote by . The th
element of the latter is given by [19], [17] Re
Re
Re (34)
Re (37f)
610 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOL. 51, NO. 3, MARCH 2003
Rewriting (37) in a more compact form yields the expression for and therefore, the CRB for the estimation of is given by
shown in (38) at the bottom of the page. Let us now proceed
Re Im
to the derivation of the CRB. Since the FIM is block-diagonal,
the CRB is also block-diagonal; hence, in the sequel, we focus Im Re
on . For the sake of clarity, let us partition
as Im
Re Re
Im Re
where corresponds to the lower right corner of (39)
, and the other matrices definitions follow obviously from
inspection of (38). Accordingly, for notational convenience, let It should be pointed out that there is coupling in the CRB be-
us define , , and tween the estimation errors of Re , Im , and . In par-
. The inverse of is given by [20] ticular, it implies that the channel gain estimation errors may not
be circular. The CRB associated with the estimation of is ob-
tained as the lower right corner of the previous matrix, yielding
Re
Re
Observing that
where . The CRB for the
estimation of is obtained as the th diagonal element of
Re Im . In order to derive the CRB associated with the es-
Im Re timation of (and not only its real and imaginary part), let us
define and note that
it follows that
Im Re
Re Im Im The CRB for the estimation of is thus given by (40), shown
Im Re Re at the bottom of the page.
Remark 5: The previous derivations can be modified in a
Re
straightforward manner when it is known a priori that the fre-
quency offsets are common to all transmit antennas, i.e., when
and hence for . In this case, one should define the
vector of interest as Re Im . The
Re Re derivatives in (36) should then be modified to
Similarly (41a)
Re
Re Im Im (41b)
Im
Im Re Re
Im (41c)
Re
Re Im Im
Im Re Re (38)
Im Re Re
Re Re
(40)
Re Re
BESSON AND STOICA: PARAMETER ESTIMATION OF MIMO FLAT-FADING CHANNELS 611
Mimicking the derivations that led to (38), one can readily for some integer . Indeed, one has
show that the FIM corresponding to the estimation of
can be written as (42), shown at the bottom of the page,
where . The lemma for the inverse of partitioned (47a)
matrices can again be invoked to obtain the CRB associated
with the estimation of , and subsequently, the CRB for
, resulting in
(47b)
with , , (47c)
Therefore, in the sequel, we concentrate on above and derive
and .
an asymptotic expression for it. The statistical average of is
given by
APPENDIX B
DERIVATION OF THE ASYMPTOTIC CRB
In this appendix, we derive an expression for the asymptotic
(i.e., large-sample) CRB that hopefully results in a much simpler
(48)
dependence w.r.t. the channel and the pilot symbols. Toward this
end, we consider that the are realizations of (possibly cor- where and where we used the fact that
related) zero-mean random stationary processes that satisfy the
so-called mixing conditions [21] (see below). Next, we evaluate
the limit of the statistical average of the quantities appearing in .
the FIM. Finally, we show that as tends to infinity, these quan- We now show that under the mild conditions stated in (43)
tities converge in mean-square sense to their statistical average, (49)
which enables us to derive the asymptotic CRB.
In the sequel, we therefore assume that are where the limit should be understood in the mean-square sense.
zero-mean random sequences such that all their joint cumulants Toward this end, let us examine the variance of
of all orders satisfy
cum
(43)
where . This condition
means that samples of that are well separated in time
are approximately independent. Although it may appear some-
what technical, we stress the fact that it is applicable to a fairly
large class of signals; see our Remark 6. Let us introduce the
normalized FIM
(44)
(45)
(46) (50)
Re Im Im
Im Re Re (42)
Im Re Re
612 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOL. 51, NO. 3, MARCH 2003
In order to prove (49), it remains to show that the three terms in is obtained as the inverse of (54). After some straightforward
the last equality of (50) converge to zero. As the proofs are sim- calculations, similar to those used for inverting the finite-sample
ilar, we only prove the result for the first term, which is referred FIM, the asymptotic (normalized) CRB is readily seen to be
to as . This is achieved by writing that
Re Im
Im Re
Im
Re
Im Re
(55)
(56)
Therefore, . Similar calculations can be con- Remark 6: The above derivations were carried out under the
ducted with the other terms in (50), and we arrive at the main hypothesis that (43) holds true. Despite the fact that (43) may
result appear somehow technical, it applies to many signals encoun-
tered in practice. More precisely, the asymptotic formula (54)
(51) is valid whenever the are stationary processes such that
is of finite duration or exponentially de-
caying (see [20, App. B] for related derivations). We also stress
Applying (51) to (47), we get the fact that (54) is valid when corresponds to the output of
a space-time block code (STBC) designed with the procedures
(52a) described e.g., in [7] and [9]. A sketch of the proof is now given.
Any STBC can be represented as a transmission matrix
(52b) where is the number of time slots needed to transmit sym-
bols. Since at every samples new and independent symbols
(52c) enter the space-time encoder, it follows that
Re Im Im
Im Re Re (54)
Im Re
BESSON AND STOICA: PARAMETER ESTIMATION OF MIMO FLAT-FADING CHANNELS 613
on the latter property. More precisely, one has [15] Z. Liu, G. Giannakis, and B. Hughes, “Double-differential space-time
block coding for time-selective fading channels,” IEEE Trans.
Commun., vol. 49, pp. 1529–1539, Sept. 2001.
[16] P. Stoica and O. Besson, Training Sequence Design Freq. Offset Channel
Estimation Freq. Selective Channels, Nov. 2001, submitted for publica-
tion.
[17] P. Stoica and R. Moses, Introduction to Spectral Analysis. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1997.
[18] S. Kay, “A fast and accurate single frequency estimator,” IEEE Trans.
Acoust., Speech, Signal Processing, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 1987–1990, Dec.
1989.
[19] , Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation
Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1993.
[20] T. Söderström and P. Stoica, System Identification. London, U.K.:
Prentice-Hall Int., 1989.
[21] A. Dandawaté and G. Giannakis, “Asympotic theory of kth-order cyclic
moment and cumulant statistics,” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 41,
pp. 216–232, Jan. 1995.