IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 59, NO.

1, JANUARY 2011

Asynchronous Classication of Digital Amplitude-Phase Modulated Signals in Flat-Fading Channels

William C. Headley, Student Member, IEEE, and Claudio R. C. M. da Silva, Member, IEEE

AbstractThis paper presents a new asynchronous modulation classier for digital amplitude-phase modulated signals in atfading channels when the channel state is assumed unknown. In the design of this classier, we propose new estimators for the unknown amplitude, time offset, and noise power that are blind to the modulation scheme of the received signal. It is shown that the proposed classier performs well compared to the optimal classier with perfect channel knowledge for an adequate estimation interval. Index TermsModulation classication, digital modulation, fading channels, delay estimation.

ODULATION classication is a critical stage in the demodulation process of any receiver that has no, or limited, knowledge of the modulation scheme of the received signal. Formally, modulation classication can be dened as: Given a received signal (), determine the modulation scheme used from among the c possible schemes 1 , 2 , . . . , [1]. While modulation classication has historically been discussed almost exclusively for military applications [2], research in the context of commercial applications is increasing due to its importance in cognitive radio systems [3]. The difculty in performing modulation classication is due primarily to the lack of sufcient knowledge of the channel state. This is because, in general, radios without complete knowledge of the received signals modulation scheme must rst classify the desired signal before they can synchronize with the received symbols and estimate the channel. As a result, the classication of signals in realistic channels is a challenging problem and, as discussed in [4], algorithms that rely less on pre-processing (for example, synchronization assumed to be solved by the radio front-end before classication [5]) are needed. In this paper, we propose an asynchronous likelihoodbased (LB) modulation classier for digital amplitude-phase modulated (PSK, QAM, . . . ) signals in at-fading channels. This new classier assumes no prior knowledge of the channel state (gain, time offset, phase shift, and noise level). Although synchronous LB classiers have been developed for this class of signals see [1], [6]-[10] among others an asynchronous LB classier has not yet been proposed for atfading channels. This can be attributed to the fact that, for
Paper approved by A. Zanella, the Editor for Wireless Systems of the IEEE Communications Society. Manuscript received January 29, 2010; revised June 9, 2010 and July 6, 2010. This work was supported in part by the Bradley Fellowship program of Virginia Tech. The authors are with the Bradley Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 24061 USA (e-mail: {cheadley, cdasilva}@vt.edu). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TCOMM.2010.102910.100022

I. I NTRODUCTION

LB classiers, unknown received signal parameters must be handled with no knowledge of the modulation scheme. This is accomplished by either removing the classiers dependence on the unknowns through the use of their probability density functions, or through the classiers use of estimates of the unknowns, each of which is signicantly more difcult for the asynchronous case. In the development of the proposed classier, we propose new method-of-moments estimators for the unknown amplitude, time offset, and noise power, each of which is blind to the modulation format (PSK, QAM, . . . ) and modulation order of the received signal. II. S YSTEM M ODEL The transmitted signal at time is dened as } { ( ) , () =
=

(1)

where is the transmitter gain, is the modulated data symbol, () is the (real-valued) pulse shape, is the symbol interval, and = 2 , where is the carrier frequency. The symbols , assumed to be normalized to unit average power without loss of generality, are taken from a (complex) symmetric constellation that denes the modulation scheme used. The pulse shape is assumed to have unit energy, without loss of generality, and to satisfy the Nyquist intersymbol interference criterion. In Section IV, the proposed estimators are derived for a square-root raised cosine pulse. Assuming that the transmitted signal passes through a at-fading channel, the information component of the received signal () }is given by { ( +) , where = ( ) , , and are the gain, phase shift, and time delay introduced by the channel, respectively. It is assumed that the channel remains constant during the observation interval. In general, any receiver that has no, or limited, knowledge of the received signals modulation scheme must rst classify the signal before it can synchronize with the received symbols. Therefore, the transmitter and receiver clocks are likely to be offset by an unknown time constant, denoted , during classication. In order to stress the different time references of each radio, we use different time indices for the transmitter () and receiver (), where = . This model is illustrated in Fig. 1. It should be emphasized that the relationship between the clock times of the transmitter and receiver is assumed unknown to both radios. Thus, for example, stating that the receiver samples the received signal when its clock shows = 1 (that is, obtains ( = 1)) does not imply that the radios

c 0090-6778/11$25.00 2011 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 59, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011

() ()

1 0 1 + 1 2

0 0

1 2 1 + 0 1 0

2 3 2 2 + 2

3 4 3 3 + 3 4 +

()

= 2 + 0

2 = 3 + 0

Fig. 1. Illustration of the transmitted signal () and received signal () using the transmitters () and receivers () time reference. For ease of presentation, we take the time support of the pulse shape to be [0, ). Also, channel gain, phase shift, and noise effects are not shown. In this gure, we take = 0.25 and 0 = 1.5 .

are synchronous. Although ( = 1) corresponds to the signal transmitted when the transmitters clock was = 1 + 0 , the values and are unknown to both radios. In the derivation that follows, it is convenient to write the combined unknown time offset due to the channel delay and the radios clock offset in terms of symbol intervals. Therefore, let = ( + ) , where represents the integer number of symbols offset and represents the remaining fraction of a symbol offset (0 < 1). Using this notation, the received signal can be written (using the receivers time reference) as { } ( +) () = ( ( + + ) ) +(), (2) where = and () is a zero-mean Gaussian noise process with two-sided power spectral density 0 /2. Note that the phase shift due to the time reference change is incorporated into . The following assumptions about the received signal are used in the analysis that follows. The symbol is uniformly distributed over the set of all possible constellation values of the modulation scheme used. The pulse shape (), the symbol interval , and the carrier frequency are assumed to be known. All other parameters, namely the amplitude , phase shift , time offset (+ ) , and noise power 0 are modeled as deterministic unknown variables. The assumption that the pulse shape, symbol interval, and carrier frequency are known is valid for potential usage scenarios. For example, 802.22 radios must be able to sense analog and digital TV systems [3]. The signal format used by TV systems can be found in their standards. The digital TV standard for North America (ATSC) denes the pulse shape to be a raised-cosine with 11% excess bandwidth and a symbol interval of 93 ns [11], for example. In applications in which this assumption may not hold (e.g., classication of hostile transmissions by military radios), these parameters should be incorporated into the classier design as nuisance parameters. III. M ODULATION C LASSIFIER There are two main approaches to modulation classication, namely feature-based and likelihood-based [4]. Feature-based classiers exploit modulation dependent features of the signal,
=

such as cyclostationary signatures [12], [13]. While featurebased approaches are generally easier to implement, they are sub-optimal. LB classiers are optimal in the Bayesian sense, as they minimize the probability of classication error [14]. LB approaches are composite hypothesis testing problems in which classication is performed by searching for the maximum a posteriori probability ( ()), or equivalently (() ) given equally likely modulation schemes, where {1 , 2 , . . . , } is the set of possible hypotheses. In this paper, we propose a new LB asynchronous classier for digital amplitude-phase modulated signals in at-fading channels. The proposed classier is developed based upon the output of a receiver that consists of a frequency conversion stage (from RF to baseband) and a matched lter. From (2), the output of the receiver at = ( + ) , where is an integer and is a real number in the range [0, 1), is , = ( ) (( + ) ) = 2
=

(( + ) ) + n, ,(3)

where () = ( )( ) and n, is a zero-mean complex Gaussian random variable with variance 0 /2. In the design of the classier, it is rst assumed that the receiver has a perfect estimate of the fractional time offset ; that is, the receiver perfectly estimates when symbol transitions occur. In this case, the vector r = [1, , 2, , . . . , , ] is a set of sufcient statistics for the detection of the symbols 1 , 2 , . . . , [15]. (Recall that is unknown.) Therefore, determining the maximum among (() ) is equivalent to determining the maximum among (r ). For an observation interval of symbols, there are possible symbol sequences that can be observed given the th modulation scheme, where is the modulation order. Given that the , values are independent, the Total Probability Theorem can be used to show that (r ) = =1 =1 (, , , ) (, ), where , is one of the complex constellation values of the th modulation scheme. Taking the logarithm of (r ), and using the fact that (3) reduces to , = + n, when = , the 2

HEADLEY and DA SILVA: ASYNCHRONOUS CLASSIFICATION OF DIGITAL AMPLITUDE-PHASE MODULATED SIGNALS IN FLAT-FADING CHANNELS

classier can be written as [1] ( ) 1 = arg max ln (, , , ) =1 =1 ( ) 2 1 , , 2 2 = arg max ln 0 ,(4) =1

=1

omitting constant terms, assuming that (, ) = 1/ , and where = {1, 2, . . . , }. It is important to recall that , , , and 0 are assumed to be deterministic unknown variables1 . As discussed in Section I, the difculty in performing modulation classication is primarily due to lack of sufcient channel state knowledge. For LB classication, there are four main approaches to handling unknown parameters: Average Likelihood Ratio Test (ALRT) [1], [6], [7], Generalized LRT (GLRT) [8], Hybrid LRT (HLRT) [9], [10], [16], and quasiHLRT (qHLRT) [9], [10], [16]. For a detailed discussion of these approaches, the reader is referred to [4]. In this paper, we use a qHLRT-based approach. For the qHLRT, the channel parameters are estimated through the use of low-complexity estimators that are blind to the modulation scheme of the received signal. This approach is used for two reasons. First, this approach does not require knowledge of the statistics of the channel parameters (like the ALRT, for example, which assumes their joint probability density function, conditioned on , is known). Instead, the channel parameters are modeled as deterministic unknown variables. Second, this approach does not require multi-dimensional maximum-likelihood estimation of the unknown parameters, as in the GLRT and HLRT approaches, leading to a lower complexity classier. Given that , , , and 0 are unknown at the receiver, the qHLRT approach dictates that these values are replaced by their estimates (denoted by). This leads to the nal form of { 2} 2 1 0 , , 2 = arg max ln , (5) =1
=1

As an example of the MoMs prior use in modulation classication, a synchronous qHLRT-based classier was developed in [9] that uses MoM estimates of , , and 0 . It was demonstrated that the classiers performance was comparable to that of a classier using ML estimates, given an adequate estimation interval. As stated, the unknowns , , and 0 are to be estimated through the solution of a system of statistical moment equations. The rst of these moments is E[,1 2 ], where ,1 is the output of the receiver at = ( + 1 ) , is an arbitrarily chosen integer, and 1 is an arbitrarily chosen real number in the range [0, 1). The values chosen for and 1 have no relation to or (which are unknown to the receiver). Using (3) with = 1 , the moment can be written as 2 0 , + , (6) 4 1 2 assuming the data symbols are independent. In (6), the function 1 , is dened as 1 = E[,1 2 ] = 1 , = =
= =

(( + 1 ) )2 ((1 ) )2 . (7)

It is important to note that (6) is a function of the unknowns , , and 0 , while not being a function of the unknown data, , or . Also, (6) is not a function of , which implies that E[1 ,1 2 ] and E[2 ,1 2 ] are equal for all integers 1 and 2 . For this reason, E[,1 2 ] = 1 . Assuming a square root-raised cosine pulse shape, 1 , is shown in Appendix I to be equal to 1 + 4 (cos(2(1 )) 1). Therefore, for this pulse shape, (6) can be rewritten as 2 {4 + (cos (2 [ 1 ]) 1)} . 0 = 21 (8) 8 Next, it is assumed that the receiver has a new sampling instant of ( + 2 ) , where is an arbitrarily chosen integer and 2 is an arbitrarily chosen real number in the range [0, 1), with 2 = 1 . (Note that and 2 have no relation to or .) Given this new sampling instant, a second equation for 0 can be determined from the moment E[,2 2 ] = 2 . Setting these two 0 equations equal, and performing some algebraic manipulation, gives 2 = 16(1 2 ) , [cos (2 ( 1 )) cos (2 ( 2 ))] (9)

= 1, 2, . . . , , for the proposed asynchronous qHLRT-based modulation classier, where , is the output of the receiver given the sampling instant ( + ) . IV. E STIMATION OF THE U NKNOWN R ECEIVED S IGNAL PARAMETERS In this section, we propose new estimators for , , and 0 that require no prior knowledge of the received signals modulation format (PSK, QAM, . . . ) and modulation order. The estimators are based on a low-complexity estimation approach known as the Method-of-Moments (MoM). This is a suboptimal approach in which parameters are estimated through the solution of a system of statistical moment equations [17].
1 Note that the classier does not require an estimate of the total time offset ( + ) . As expected, the value of (integer number of symbols offset) is irrelevant. Therefore, the classiers performance is the same if the symbols 1 , 2 , . . . , 10 or 55 , 56 , . . . , 64 are observed (assuming channel conditions remain constant). However, the classier must estimate when symbol transitions occur (that is, estimate ). Also, note that the classier is a function of the number of observed symbols .

which is only a function of the unknowns and . The nal step is to use a third moment equation to remove the dependence on one of the two unknowns of (9). Assuming a third sampling instant ( + 3 ) , where again is an arbitrarily chosen integer and 3 is an arbitrarily chosen real number in the range [0, 1), with 3 = 2 = 1 , the moment E[,3 2 ] = 3 can be determined. (Note that and 3 have no relation to or .) Using this third moment with either of the previous two moments, a second equation for 2 can be determined. Setting the two 2 equations equal and performing some manipulation leads to (12), where

10

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 59, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011

Fig. 2.

The proposed asynchronous qHLRT-based modulation classier.

= cos(2 ) and = sin(2 ). Inverting (12), and assuming that atan() is in the range [/2, /2), may assume one of three possible values, { } atan() atan() 1 atan() = , + , +1 . (10) 2 2 2 2 Therefore, the unknowns , , and 0 can be determined from the moments 1 , 2 , and 3 . This is done by rst using the moments to determine the three possible values for given by (10). One of the values can be immediately discarded for falling outside of the range 0 < 1. Given the remaining two possible values, two possible values for are determined through (9). As discussed in Appendix II, one of the values will be invalid, leaving just one valid solution for both and . Finally, the values for and are used to determine 0 through (8). In practice, the moments 1 , 2 , and 3 are unknown and thus must be estimated from the received signal. This estimation can be done using the simple sample average estimator
+ est = 1 , 2 , est =

= 1, 2, 3,

(11)

where , is the receiver output sampled at ( + ) , est is the number of samples observed, and is an arbitrary integer. Therefore, given that the moments themselves are estimated, the solutions to (8), (9), and (10) are estimates for the parameters 0 , , and , respectively. In order to estimate , a MoM-based algorithm known as the -power phase synchronizer is used, which is also blind to the received signals modulation scheme [18]. This estimator uses a sample average estimator for the th moment of the outputs , . For example, for } PSK schemes, the estimator { M-PSK = 1 arg , where is the order of is =1 , the modulation scheme assumed. For QAM schemes, QAM = } { 4 1 =1 , . (It is worth noting that while this estimator 4 arg works well for square QAM, it performs poorly for circular and cross QAM [19].) V. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS The proposed asynchronous modulation classier is presented in Fig. 2. As shown, the classier rst estimates , , and 0 using the new MoM estimators developed in Section

IV. Using the estimated fractional time offset , the received signal is sampled to provide the outputs , . These outputs are then used by the -power phase synchronizer to obtain . , and 0 , along with , , are used to classify Finally, , , the received signal. In the performance results that follow, 1 , 2 , and 3 are equal to 0, 1/3, and 2/3, respectively. The modulation schemes considered are BPSK, QPSK, 8-PSK, 16-QAM, and 64-QAM. Unless otherwise noted, the unknown amplitude is assumed to be Rayleigh distributed with E[2 ] = 1. Fig. 3 presents the performance of the proposed MoM estimators for a square root-raised cosine pulse with roll-off factors of = 0.35 and = 0.75. As expected, as the SNR and/or est is increased, the average mean square error (MSE) of the estimates decreases. This is because an increase in either of these parameters reduces the estimation error of 1 , 2 , and 3 . Additionally, it is seen that the average MSE of the estimates increases for lower roll-off factors. This is due to the fact that timing offsets result in larger intersymbol interference for lower roll-off factors, leading to an overall reduction in the performance of the estimators. Figs. 4 and 5 present the performance of the proposed classier for Rayleigh and Nakagami fading environments, respectively. The effect of the reliability of the estimates , , , and 0 on the performance of the classier can be observed in Fig. 4. As the reliability of the estimates improve, be it through higher values of est , , and/or SNR, the performance of the classier improves, as expected. It can be seen that the classiers performance closely approaches that of an optimal classier with perfect channel knowledge (developed in [1]) for an adequate estimation interval. Similar behavior is observed in Fig. 5, where it is additionally observed that the performance of the classier improves for increased values of the fading gure . (Recall that the Nakagami probability density function has smaller variance for larger values of [20].) Finally, recognizing that practical pulse shaping lters (possibly designed and manufactured by different companies) are not built to exact specication, Fig. 6 presents the performance of the proposed classier for the case in which the rolloff factors of the pulse shaping lters at the transmitter and receiver are mismatched. Specically, it is assumed that the roll-off factor of the lter used by the classier is a uniformly distributed random variable in the range [ , + ], where is the exact roll-off factor of the lter used by the transmitter. As expected, as the range of the mismatch increases, the performance of the classier decreases. However, even for = 0.1, the decrease in the probability of correct classication is only approximately 7%. VI. C ONCLUSIONS A new modulation classier, that assumes no prior knowledge of the channel state, was proposed for digital amplitudephase modulated signals in at-fading channels. In order

tan(2) =

(3 2 )1 + (1 3 )2 + (2 1 )3 = , (2 3 )1 + (3 1 )2 + (1 2 )3

(12)

HEADLEY and DA SILVA: ASYNCHRONOUS CLASSIFICATION OF DIGITAL AMPLITUDE-PHASE MODULATED SIGNALS IN FLAT-FADING CHANNELS
1 Average Probability of Correct Classification 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 5 5 10 SNR (dB) 15 20

11

MSE for 10 Average MSE 10 10 10 10 10 Average MSE 10 10 10 10 10

0

MSE for No

MSE for

= 0.35 0 5 10 SNR (dB) 15 20

0 1 2 3 4 5

Optimal (perfect estimates) [1], m = 2 Nest = 10000, m = 2 Optimal (perfect estimates) [1], m = 1 N = 10000, m = 1
est est

Optimal (perfect estimates) [1], m = 0.5 N = 10000, m = 0.5 0 5 10 15 Average SNR (dB) 20 25

= 0.75 0

Fig. 3. Average MSE given a square root-raised cosine pulse shape (solid: est = 1000 , dashed: est = 10000).
1

Fig. 5. Average probability of correct classication given a Nakagami fading model ( = 500, = 0.75).

1 Average Probability of Correct Classification 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 5 Optimal (perfect estimates) [1] Nest = 10000, = 0.75 Nest = 10000, = 0.35 N N 0 5
est est

Average Probability of Correct Classification

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 5 No Mismatch Mismatch (X = 0.05) Mismatch (X = 0.1) 0 5 10 15 Average SNR (dB) 20 25

= 1000, = 0.75 = 1000, = 0.35 20 25

10 15 Average SNR (dB)

Fig. 4. Average probability of correct classication given a Rayleigh fading model ( = 500).

Fig. 6. Average probability of correct classication for the case in which the roll-off factors of the pulse shaping lters at the transmitter and receiver are mismatched (est = 10000, = 500, solid: = 0.75, dashed: = 0.35).

to estimate the unknown amplitude, time offset, and noise power of the received signal for use in the classier, new estimators were developed that are blind to the received signals modulation scheme. It was shown that the proposed classier performs comparably well to the optimal classier with perfect channel knowledge for different fading models, given an adequate estimation interval. It was also demonstrated that the proposed classier is robust to mismatches between the roll-off factors of the pulse shaping lters at the transmitter and receiver. A PPENDIX I Using the Poisson Summation Formula [21, Section 6.24], we have ((1 ) )
=

1 =

2(1 ) , (13)

where ( ) is the Fourier transform (FT) of a function (). In order to simplify the expression for 1 , , () in (13) is set equal to ()2 from (7). Thus, this procedure requires the FT of ()2 . Given a square root-raised cosine pulse, () is (by denition) a raised cosine pulse. The FT of a raised cosine pulse can be found in [20], and the FT of 2 () can be obtained by convolving this equation. The FT of 2 () is non-zero only in the range [(1 + )/, (1 + )/ ], where is the roll-off factor. Therefore, for this pulse { shape, (13) is equal to (1/ )2(1 ) + (0)+ } (1/ )2(1 ) / , where (0) = ( ) /4 and (1/ ) = (1/ ) = /8. Substituting values, 1 , = 1 + (cos(2(1 )) 1). 4

12

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 59, NO. 1, JANUARY 2011

A PPENDIX II It is shown by (10) that there are three possible [ solutions ) for . Assuming that atan() is in the range , , 2 2 1 atan() < 1 . Thus, the rst or last solution will be 4 2 4 invalid, as [0, 1). Also, if the three possible solutions for are substituted into (9), the rst and third solutions result in the same value for 2 , and this result is the negative of the 2 value given by the second solution. Given that 2 must be positive, either the rst and third solutions, or the second solution, will be invalid. Therefore, only one of the possible solutions of (10) is valid. R EFERENCES
[1] W. Wei and J. M. Mendel, Maximum-likelihood classication for digital amplitude-phase modulations," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 48, pp. 189-193, Feb. 2000. [2] R. A. Poisel, Introduction to Communication Electronic Warfare Systems. Artech House, 2008. [3] C. R. Stevenson, G. Chouinard, Z. Lei, W. Hu, S. J. Shellhammer, and W. Caldwell, IEEE 802.22: the rst cognitive radio wireless regional area network standard," IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 47, pp. 130-138, Jan. 2009. [4] O. A. Dobre, A. Abdi, Y. Bar-Ness, and W. Su, Survey of automatic modulation classication techniques: classical approaches and new trends," IET Commun., vol. 1, pp. 137-156, Apr. 2007. [5] E. E. Azzouz and A. K. Nandi, Automatic Modulation Recognition of Communication Systems. Kluwer, 1996. [6] J. L. Xu, W. Su, and M. Zhou, Software-dened radio equipped with rapid modulation recognition," IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 59, pp. 1659-1667, May 2010. [7] J. A. Sills, Maximum-likelihood modulation classication for PSK/QAM," in Proc. IEEE Military Commun. Conf., 1999, pp. 57-61.

[8] P. Panagiotou, A. Anastasoupoulos, and A. Polydoros, Likelihood ratio tests for modulation classication," in Proc. IEEE Military Commun. Conf., 2000, pp. 670-674. [9] O. A. Dobre and F. Hameed, Likelihood-based algorithms for linear digital modulation classication in fading channels," in Proc. IEEE Canadian Conf. Electr. Comp. Eng., 2006, pp. 1347-1350. [10] F. Hameed, O. A. Dobre, and D. Popescu, On the likelihood-based approach to modulation classication," IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 8, pp. 5884-5892, Dec. 2009. [11] Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC), Recommended practice: guide to the use of the ATSC digital television standard, including corrigendum no. 1," Doc. A/54A, 2006. [12] O. A. Dobre, A. Abdi, Y. Bar-Ness, and W. Su, Cyclostationarity-based modulation classication of linear digital modulations in at fading channels," Wireless Personal Commun., July 2009 [Online]. [13] A. Fehske, J. Gaeddert, and J. H. Reed, A new approach to signal classication using spectral correlation and neural networks," in Proc. IEEE Dynamic Spectrum Access Nets., 2005, pp. 144-155. [14] S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing. Prentice-Hall, 1993, vol. II. [15] H. L. Van Trees, Detection, Estimation, and Modulation Theory. Wiley, 2001, vol. I. [16] A. Abdi, O. A. Dobre, R. Choudhry, Y. Bar-Ness, and W. Su, Modulation classication in fading channels using antenna arrays," in Proc. IEEE Military Commun. Conf., 2004, pp. 211-217. [17] S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing. Prentice Hall, 1998, vol. I. [18] U. Mengali and A. N. DAndrea, Synchronization Techniques for Digital Receivers. Plenum Press, 1997. [19] C. N. Georghiades, Blind carrier phase acquisition for QAM constellations," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 45, pp. 1477-1486, Nov. 1997. [20] J. G. Proakis and M. Salehi, Digital Communications. McGraw Hill, 2008. [21] D. Zwillinger, CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae. CRC Press, 2003.