IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO.

XX, MONTH 2009

Adaptive Generalized Rake Reception in DS-CDMA Systems

Tracy L. Fulghum Senior Member, IEEE, Douglas A. Cairns Senior Member, IEEE, Carmela Cozzo Senior Member, IEEE, Y.-P. Eric Wang Member, IEEE, and Gregory E. Bottomley Fellow, IEEE

AbstractDirect-sequence code-division multiple-access (DSCDMA) cellular systems, such as Wideband CDMA (WCDMA), are limited in performance by interference. Linear equalization, such as generalized Rake (G-Rake) receivers and transversal chip equalizers, can theoretically provide signicant gains in performance by suppressing interference. In this paper, an adaptive G-Rake receiver is developed, employing practical algorithms for nger placement and weight computation. Finger placement is determined by selecting delays from a candidate set using a maximal-weight criterion. Weight computation includes estimation of an impairment covariance matrix using a parametric approach. While described in the context of the downlink, these algorithms can be used in the uplink as well. Both single-antenna and dual-antenna receivers are considered. Link and system performance are evaluated for the downlink, showing signicant gains in high-rate coverage. Index TermsCoherent demodulation, channel estimation, rake receivers.

I. I NTRODUCTION

HIRD generation cellular systems using direct-sequence code-division multiple-access (DS-CDMA), such as Wideband CDMA (WCDMA) and CDMA2000, are currently being deployed worldwide. On the downlink, performance of these systems is limited by various forms of interference. Within a cell, symbols are transmitted orthogonally, but the dispersive radio channel destroys this orthogonality. Between cells, transmissions are not orthogonal. Performance can be improved by employing advanced receiver structures that suppress interference, such as linear equalization. The focus of this paper is on developing practical, adaptive algorithms for advanced receivers and on evaluating link and system performance of such receivers. There are many advanced downlink receiver approaches, providing different combinations of performance and complexity. Here we consider a relatively simple class of singleManuscript received June 5, 2006; revised December 13, 2007; accepted February 7,2009. The associate editor coordinating the review of this paper and approving it for publication was NAME. T. L. Fulghum, D. A. Cairns, and Y.-P. E. Wang are with Ericsson, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. (e-mail: tracy.fulghum@ericsson.com). C. Cozzo is with Viasat, Inc., Carlsbad, CA, USA. This work was presented in part at the IEEE Digital Signal Processing Workshop, Taos Ski Valley, NM, Aug. 1-3, 2004 and at the IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Melbourne, Australia, May 7-10, 2006. Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TWC.2009.xxxxxx.

user linear equalizers that employ coherent reception1. A representative receiver in this class is the generalized Rake (G-Rake) receiver [3], a type of symbol-level equalizer. It is based on a maximum-likelihood (ML) formulation, though a minimum mean-square error (MMSE) formulation can also be used [4]-[6]. Another member of this class is the MMSE transversal chip equalizer [4], [5], [7]-[9], which has been shown to be equivalent to the G-Rake receiver (for the same tap and nger placements) [10]. Such receivers were originally developed for the uplink [11], [12] and have a similar structure to noncoherent phased-array processing [13]. The G-Rake receiver has the same structure as a Rake receiver [14], in that ngers (correlators) are used to despread the received signal at different delays and the despread values are combined to form symbol estimates. With a coherent Rake receiver, the goal is to collect signal energy by placing ngers on the path delays of the dispersive channel and combining the despread values coherently using weights that correspond to channel coefcient estimates. With a G-Rake receiver, nger placement and weight computation are used to both collect signal energy and suppress interference. One contribution of this paper is the synthesis of practical algorithms for nger placement and weight computation, building on approaches taken from work on G-Rake receivers, chip equalizers, and linear equalizers. The goal is to achieve most of the potential performance gains with reasonable complexity2 . Finger placement is based on selecting delays from a candidate set using a maximal-weight criterion. Weights are computed from estimates of the channel response and an impairment covariance matrix. A key aspect of these algorithms is that the weights are computed in a way that simplies nger placement. While the focus is on the downlink, these algorithms can be used in the uplink as well. A second contribution of this paper is the evaluation of link and system performance for the practical G-Rake receiver. These results complement existing link results for ideal GRake receivers and MMSE chip equalizers (e.g., [3], [5], [9]) and system results for ideal G-Rake receivers [15][17]. The existing results show that linear equalization can provide signicant gains. For example, with an ideal single-antenna receiver, link gains of 1 - 3.5 dB [3] and system capacity
1 The receivers are single-user in the sense that only spreading codes of desired and pilot symbols are needed, and only for the purpose of despreading. Other, more advanced linear receivers, require knowledge of the spreading codes of other symbols to determine combining weights [1] or chip equalization lter coefcients [2]. 2 A detailed comparison of approaches is beyond the scope of this paper.

1536-1276/08$25.00 c 2009 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2009

gains of 30% [15], [16] have been shown. We examine link and system performance of an adaptive G-Rake receiver in the High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) system. HSDPA is an evolution of WCDMA to support high-speed packet data. Both single-antenna and dualantenna reception are considered. Signicant gains in system performance are shown. The paper is organized as follows. A system model is given in Section II. In Section III, the adaptive receiver is described, including algorithms for nger placement and weight computation. Performance is evaluated in Section IV, and Section V concludes the paper. II. S YSTEM MODEL Our complex baseband system model extends the model in [15] to multiple receive antennas and is general to both uplink and downlink. Some of the model development is repeated here for convenience. Only a single transmitter is considered, though extension to multiple transmitters is straightforward. The radio channel is characterized by discrete, Rayleigh fading signal paths. We assume a common path prole (average strength and path delays) to all antennas, but assume the realization of the fading coefcients is independent across antennas and paths. The impulse response between the transmitter and Na receive antennas can be written as a vector function
L 1 =0

where d is a delay specic to the nger. We will assume, without loss of generality, that the desired symbol is s0 (0). The despread value can be written as ya (d) = ha (d)s0 (0) + ua (d), which describes the despread value as a net response times the desired symbol, lumping all undesired components (interference and noise) into ua (d). From (6) of [15], the net response of the transmitter is dened as
L 1

ha (d) =

Es
=0

ga ( )Rp (d ( )),

(5)

where Rp () is the autocorrelation of the chip pulse shape and Es is the transmit symbol energy of the spreading code of interest. The output despread values from the combining ngers from all antennas can be collected into a J -length vector, y, where J is the total number of combining ngers. This gives us a convenient vector notation, y = hs0 (0) + u, where h and u contain the corresponding values of ha (d) and ua (d). The despread values are combined with weight vector w to form the decision statistic for the desired symbol, z = wH y. For the Rake receiver, the combining weight vector w is simply the vector of medium coefcients (w = g, where g is a stacked vector of all L vectors g( )). For the G-Rake receiver, w is given by
1 w = R u h,

(6)

g( ) =

g( ) ( ( )),

(1)

where g( ) is an Na -length medium coefcient vector at the th of L resolvable paths for the transmitter, and ( ) is the corresponding path delay. Combining (1) and (2) of [15], the signal from the transmitter can be written as a sum of K individually spread signal components,
K 1 N 1

where Ru = E {uuH }, with expectation being conditioned on the fading channel coefcients. From (3) and typical independence assumptions, Ru is theoretically given by Ru = Ec Ri (g) + N0 Rn , (7)

x(t) =

Ec
k=0 j =

sk (j )
m=0

ck,j (m)p(t mTc ), (2)

where index j represents the symbol period, index k represents the spreading code of K possible codes in a multicode system, index m represents the chip period, Ec is the total energy per chip, sk (j ) is the modulated symbol, ck,j (m) is the spreading sequence, and p(t) is the chip pulse shape. The vector of baseband signals received across the receiver antennas is
L 1

where these terms represent own-cell interference (or selfinterference in the uplink) and noise, which models thermal noise and other-cell interference. (see (12) in [15]). Matrix Ri (g) is the normalized interference covariance, and Ec is the total received energy per chip of the transmitted signal. The normalized noise covariance is represented as Rn , and N0 is the one-sided noise power spectral density. An element in Rn corresponding to ngers f1 and f2 is given by rn (f1 , f2 ) = Rp (d1 d2 ) a1 = a2 0 a1 = a2 , (8)

r(t) =
=0

g( )x(t ( )) + n(t),

(3)

where n(t) represents thermal noise across the receiver antennas and is assumed to be a white, Gaussian, and independent across receive antennas. The receiver is a standard Rake receiver in structure. Combining ngers are used to despread the ath receive antenna signal to produce a despread value according to 1 ya (d) = N
N 1

where the delay and antenna settings for nger f1 are given by d1 and a1 , respectively (similarly for nger f2 ). Similar to (13) in [15], elements in Ri (g) are given by [Eq. 9] where Tc is the chip duration. The term 1 (m) indicates that for the desired transmission at chip lag m = 0, there is no interference due to spreading code orthogonality. Note that the innite summation in m can also be expressed in closed form [18]. The SINR of symbol estimate z , important for transmission rate adaptation, is given by SINR = ( {wH h})2 , wH Ru w + (10)

ra (t + d)
m=0

ck,j (m)p(t mTc )

dt, (4)

where {} denotes the real part of a complex number. The interfering effect of the quadrature part of the symbol, denoted by , can be neglected.

T. L. FULGHUM et al.: ADAPTIVE GENERALIZED RAKE RECEPTION IN DS-CDMA SYSTEMS

L 1 L 1

ri (f1 , f2 )

=
1 =0 2 =0

ga1 ( 1 )ga ( 2) 2

(1 (m))
m=

Rp (d1 mTc ( 1 )) Rp (d2 mTc ( 2 )),

(9)

antenna signal(s)

combining fingers combining delays path delays

combiner

weights finger placement weight computation weights candidate delays measurements

path searcher

measurement delays

measurement fingers

Fig. 1.

Adaptive receiver block diagram.

III. A DAPTIVE R ECEIVER S TRUCTURE The main components of the receiver are nger placement and weight computation as shown in Figure 1. The purpose of nger placement is to generate a set of delays for ngers that will be combined (combining delays) to produce soft symbol values. To determine the combining delay set, the nger placement algorithm generates a superset of delays called candidate delays. This set includes the set of measurement delays (used to estimate receiver parameters), which incorporates the set of path delays (i.e. L resolvable paths of (1)). Weight computation provides set(s) of coefcients used by the combiner to generate soft symbol values for forward error correction decoding. An overview of nger placement and weight computation is given below, along with detailed design equations. A. Finger Placement Overview For nger placement, a channel probing approach is used, in which the combining delay set is chosen from a set of candidate delays. The candidate delay set is determined from path delays of the channel response, which change slowly over time and can be determined using a form of channel sounding [19]. The candidate delay set is determined using an ad hoc mirroring approach that considers pairs of paths and determines a number of candidate delays corresponding to an inverse channel response. The selection process is performed at a relatively high rate (the fading rate), using a maximal-weight criterion. Specically, combining weights corresponding to the candidate delay set are computed3, and the delays with the largest weight magnitudes are selected. Then, combining ngers despread trafc symbols that are coherently combined to form soft symbol estimates. The channel probing approach is motivated by the fact that it is difcult to determine instantaneously where to place a limited number of ngers. However, it is easier to determine potentially good nger locations on average (the candidate
3 Note that it is possible to compute weights for arbitrary delays due to the parametric approach to covariance estimation.

set). The mirroring approach is based on identifying delays corresponding to the inverse channel response, as suggested in [3], [20]. The approach is somewhat ad hoc, as it considers pairs of paths and their associated inverse response. Inverting the channel results in own-cell interference suppression, due to the orthogonality property of the spreading codes. The maximal-weight criterion is used due to its simplicity. The notion of selecting delays from a candidate set can be found in traditional equalization [21]-[23]. In a decision feedback equalizer (DFE), feedforward tap locations are selected from an evenly-spaced grid using the maximalweight criterion [21], [22], thresholding the weight magnitudes [23], or evaluating an approximate expression for the signalto-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) [22]. For DS-CDMA equalization, both SINR [24] and mean-square error (MSE) [25] have been used as criteria for combining nger delay selection in a recursive sequential search approach. In [26], an incremental SINR criterion is used in an iterative procedure. The procedure terminates when either the incremental SINR falls below a threshold or the number of available ngers is reached. The mirroring approach for determining the candidate set is related to existing approaches for nger placement in GRake receivers and chip equalizers. It can be viewed as an extension of the approach in [27], [28], which places only two extra ngers or taps for each pair of path delays. The approach in [29], motivated by locating interfering symbol images, only places one extra nger per pair. In [26], the approach in [27] is used to obtain an initial candidate set, and additional candidate delays are added as nger delays are selected. An analytical approach to nger placement is given in [25]. It is based on approximating the convolutional integral for continuous-time linear equalization. Sampling times are determined from a density function that is optimized. Interestingly, the optimized density function depends on the magnitude-square of the continuous-time equalizer weighting function, indicating that more samples should be taken where the weighting function is large. The maximal-weight approach can be interpreted as a coarse approximation, as selecting maximal-weight ngers from the candidate set provides a simple way of sampling more where the weighting function is larger. Other approaches for nger/tap placement have been suggested. In [30], approaches for tap placement for DFE feedforward lters and linear transversal equalizers are given, with the intent of identifying tap locations with the largest corresponding lter coefcients. Another approach is to adaptively position a grid of contiguous nger/tap delays [9], [20]. B. Finger Placement Details Finger placement involves assigning delays to both measurement and combining nger delay sets. Since the measure-

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2009

ment delay set (total of B delays) is a subset of the candidate delay set from channel probing, we focus on describing channel probing and comment on the measurement nger delay set as appropriate. Channel probing consists of constructing a candidate delay set and selecting a subset. We consider the construction of the candidate delay set rst and then describe the subset selection procedure. We conclude with an example of channel probing. 1) Candidate Delay Set Generation: We begin by considering a single-antenna receiver. Our approach to constructing the candidate delay set is motivated by considering two extreme impairment scenarios. In the rst scenario, the impairment consists solely of white noise. In this case, the receiver should put ngers on the channel delays. In the second scenario, the impairment consists solely of own-cell interference. In this case, the receiver should put ngers at delays corresponding to the channel inverse lter to restore orthogonality. We conjecture that the union of the delays from these two scenarios will provide a good candidate delay set. To control complexity, computation of the full channel inverse is not performed. Instead, an approximate channel inverse is considered based on decomposing the actual channel into multiple two-tap channels. The effect of this decomposition is to simplify the calculation of the channel inverse delays. For a two-tap channel with the stronger tap at and the weaker tap at + , the stable channel inverse delays are at , , 2, etc. Similarly, for a two-tap channel with the stronger tap at and the weaker tap at , the stable channel inverse delays are at , + , + 2, etc. As either case just described could be valid depending on the instantaneous fading values, the nger placement algorithm takes the union of these two cases for different pairwise combinations of path delays. A key question is how many candidate delays must be considered to approximate the inverse of each two-tap channel. Our approach is based on assigning more ngers to dominant pairs, which correspond to larger average path strengths. If we number the paths in order of decreasing strength, then more ngers are assigned to the pair (1,2) than to the pairs (1,3) and (2,3). We have empirically determined the number of ngers to be allocated per pair based on wireless channels given in [31, 25.101]. The method should be generally applicable, since the channels in [31, 25.101] are representative of wireless channels. The procedure for candidate delay set construction assumes that path delays are ordered in decreasing strength (P ( (1)) > P ( (2)) > > P ( (L))). The full procedure is shown below in terms of mn , where mn = (n) (m): 1) Assign L path delays to candidate delay set. 2) Add candidate delays at (m) mn for n = 2, . . . , min(L, 5)4 and m = 1, . . . , n 1. 3) Add candidate delays at (n) + mn for n = 2, . . . , min(L, 4) and m = 1, . . . , n 1. 4) Add candidate delays at (m) 2mn for n = 2, . . . , min(L, 4) and m = 1, . . . , n 1. 5) Add candidate delays at (n) + 2mn for n = 2, . . . , min(L, 3) and m = 1, . . . , n 1.
4 min(x, y )

6) Add candidate delays at (m) 3mn for n = 2, . . . , min(L, 3) and m = 1, . . . , n 1. 7) If L > 1, add candidate delay at (2) + 312 . 8) If L > 1, add candidate delay at (1) 412 . Candidate delays must be at least 0.5Tc away from existing delays or no new nger is generated. The procedure above generates Nc candidate delays, where Nc depends on L and the path delays5 . To illustrate the procedure, consider a channel with path delays of [0, Tc , 2Tc , 3Tc]. The candidate delays for such a channel according to steps 1-8 are [0, Tc , 2Tc ,3Tc , Tc, 2Tc , 3Tc, 4Tc , 6Tc , 5Tc , 4Tc, 6Tc]. With multiple receive antennas, we found that fewer candidate delays are needed. Therefore, we omit steps 7 and 8 and modify the upper limit on the min operation to one less than that given in steps 2 through 6 (e.g. min(L, 4) instead of min(L, 5) in step 2). The procedure is repeated on each antenna for a total of P = Nc Na candidate delays. 2) Subset Selection: We then choose J of P candidate delays for combining nger placement. Usually J is a hardware limitation of the receiver. Here we have used values for J that were found empirically to provide most of the performance gains of G-Rake. For a single-antenna receiver, there are two cases. For L <= 4, J = 2L as suggested in [3]. Otherwise, J = 3L. For a dual-antenna receiver, J is 1.5 times the value for a single-antenna receiver. A maximal-weight selection approach is employed. First, weights corresponding to using all P candidate delays are computed. The J largest magnitude weights then determine the selected delays. Finally, weights for just the J selected delays are re-computed. A similar solution has been suggested for linear equalization [21], [22]. 3) Example: Consider a channel with two chip-spaced paths (delays 0 and Tc ) of equal average strength, used to produce the results of Figures 2 and 3. The receiver has a single antenna. Let us contrast the channel probing approach with the nger placement approach described in [27]. For this channel, the approach in [27] employs four ngers at [Tc , 0, Tc , 2Tc]. The channel probing approach considers candidate delays of 0, Tc (the path delays) and Tc , 2Tc , 2Tc , 3Tc , . . . , 4Tc, stopping early when the number of candidate delays is limited. In Figure 2, the CDF of symbol SINR is plotted for several receivers. The legend indicates the number of candidate delays and combining ngers (e.g. 8/4 indicates 8 candidate delays and 4 combining ngers). The curve labeled 4/4 shows the performance of [27]. One can see that a receiver employing channel probing gains approximately 0.5 dB in median SIR with four combining ngers (8/4 curve), and approximately 1 dB with six combining ngers (8/6 curve), relative to [27]. The 12/12 curve, using a chip-spaced grid of ngers, is given as a bound to illustrate that most of the gain is realized by the channel probing approach. It is also useful to know how the maximal-weight selection approach compares to a subset selection technique that is optimum in some sense. A constrained version of the instantaneous optimum (IO) approach described in [3] can be used, constrained to the candidate delay set. With the IO approach,
5 the

gives the minimum value of the integers x and y .

rst B/Na delays generated for each antenna are measurement delays.

T. L. FULGHUM et al.: ADAPTIVE GENERALIZED RAKE RECEPTION IN DS-CDMA SYSTEMS

0.5 4/4 8/4 8/6 12/12 Rake 0 6 4 2 0 2 SINR (dB) 4 6

DFEs, it was found that direct computation of the weights using an adaptive ltering approach did not perform as well [32], [33]. The channel response is estimated from a common pilot channel using the subset of measurement ngers placed on the path delays. The impairment covariance matrix is estimated using a parametric approach, in which the covariance matrix is estimated based on a model of the impairment. With the parametric approach, there are fewer quantities to estimate, improving estimation accuracy. Also, combining weights can be computed at arbitrary delays, allowing the maximal-weight nger selection approach to be performed without the need of placing measurement ngers on all candidate delays. The impairment covariance is estimated using the channel response estimate and estimates of total base station signal power and noise power. These powers, generally unknown at the receiver, are obtained by tting a measured impairment covariance matrix to the modeled one. The measured impairment covariance matrix is typically too noisy to use directly, and smoothing the measured value over an extended period can degrade performance in a packet-data system in which interference statistics can vary rapidly. With multiple receive antennas, the combining weights are determined jointly across antennas and delays as in [11], though weight computation per path is also possible [12], [13], [34]. Parametric estimation of the impairment covariance for GRake reception can be found in [27], [35], [36]. In [27], [35], a parametric form is used that requires desired signal power, total base station power, and noise power estimates. The signal powers are estimated from embedded pilot symbols, a common pilot channel, and an assumed overhead percentage [27]. In [36], the impairment covariance is computed as a convex sum of interference and noise terms, and the convex weighting is determined adaptively using an output SINR measurement. Parametric impairment covariance estimation for G-Rake reception is similar to other parametric covariance estimation problems. In chip equalization, parametric estimation of the chip impairment covariance [8] or data covariance [37], [38] can be used. In [8], [37], signal and noise powers are estimated by tting the modeled covariance to a measured covariance. In [38], the noise power is estimated from estimates of the total receive power and pilot channel powers as well as an assumed overhead percentage. By contrast, nonparametric estimation of the impairment covariance or other covariance matrices does not impose a model on the impairment. One approach is to use the sample matrix inversion (SMI) technique [41], obtaining impairment samples from unused codes [39] or pilot symbols [40]. Another approach is to use the sample data correlation before and after despreading to solve for the impairment covariance [12], [13]. A third approach is to use the sample data correlation before despreading and subtract a vector outer product of channel estimates [42]. Finally, it is possible to replace the impairment covariance estimate with an estimate of the data correlation, either before despreading [5], [43]-[45] or after despreading [43].

Fig. 2. CDF of G-Rake SINR, two equal strength tap channel, various combinations of candidate delays/combining ngers.

cdf

prob. of select

0.5 4/4 8/4 8/6 8/4 IO 8/6 IO 2 0 2 finger locations (chip periods) 4

0 4

Fig. 3. Probability of selecting nger locations, channel with two equal strength taps, various combinations of candidate delays/combining ngers.

all combinations of J delays out of the set of P delays are considered. The combination which gives the best SIR is selected. This approach is much more complex than the maximal-weight approach. The comparison of maximal-weight selection with constrained IO nger selection is shown in Figure 3 in terms of the probability of nger selection. One can see that for both the 8/4 case and the 8/6 case, the results for maximalweight selection mirror those for IO selection quite closely. Thus, simple maximal-weight approach selects roughly the same delays as the more complex IO approach. C. Weight computation overview For weight computation, weights are determined from estimates of the channel response and an impairment covariance matrix. This indirect approach6 was used because with
6 Direct

adaptation of the weights has also been studied in, e.g., [5] and

[7].

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2009

weights candidate delays ~ h weight solver

where A1 relates the L medium coefcients to the L net response at the path delays. Finally, the net channel response vector for all ngers is a h = a , A2 g (15)
combining delays

measurements

channel estimation ~ g impairment covariance estimation

subset formation

^ Ru

weight solver weights

where A2 relates the L medium coefcients to the J elements of the net response vector. 2) Covariance estimation: To estimate Ru , we employ a parametric approach similar to [35] that estimates model parameters from pilot symbols. From (7), Ru can be estimated as u R = Ri ( g ) + Rn , (16)

candidate delays

Fig. 4.

Adaptive receiver weight computation.

D. Weight Computation Details , are Based on (6), the practical combining weights, w obtained by solving uw R , = h (11) is a scaled estimate of h and R u is an estimate of where h is a scaled estimate because it is based on Ru . The vector h pilot symbols which may differ in symbol energy from trafc symbols. Similar to [35], [36], [46], (11) is solved using the Gauss-Seidel method [47]. The weight computation process is illustrated in Figure 4. Measurements are used for channel estimation and impairment covariance estimation. The weights are computed for the set of candidate delays for the purpose of nger selection, and then recomputed for the set of combining delays for the purpose of combining. Recomputing involves taking a subset of the rows . u and h and columns of R 1) Channel estimation: Correlation-based estimation of the net channel response at all candidate delays may be too noisy, as the channel is estimated in locations where the signal energy is low or absent. For this reason, we rst measure the net channel response at the path delays using pilot symbols, then compute the vector of medium coefcients at the path delays, and nally estimate the net channel response for all ngers, similar to [48]. For the ath receive antenna, the net channel response vector at the path delays is estimated as a h = 1 Ns
N s 1 j =0 p) s (j )y ( a (j ) ,

where theoretically = N0 and = Ec /Ep , with Ep representing the energy per pilot symbol. The tting parameters and need to be estimated. The elements of g) are given in Rn are given in (8) and the elements of Ri ( (9). The tting parameters are obtained as follows. Measurement ngers are used to obtain a short-term measurement (p) of Ru given by [Eq. 17] where yp (m) stacks ya (m) from is the net channel response different receive antennas and h a from all antennas. The tting vector obtained by stacking h parameters are then obtained using a least-squares t between the measurement and the model, i.e., Ru Ri ( g ) + Rn , (18)

where is used to signify equivalence in a least-squares sense. The least-squares t is formulated by stacking the upper triangular elements of the constituent matrices. Complexvalued equations are treated as two real equations, as the tting parameters are purely real. As the tting parameters are positive by denition, negative values are clipped to zero. E. Example To better understand the impact of estimation error, consider the following dual-antenna example. The channel consists of 4 chip-spaced paths at relative powers of 0, -3, -6, and 9 dB (exponential prole)7 , and each path is block faded. SINR distributions (over the fading) are shown in Figure 5 for practical Rake and G-Rake weights. Results with ideal weights are also provided for Rake (Rake w id) and GRake (G-Rake ref with unlimited ngers8 and G-Rake w id with a limit of B =18 candidate delays (9 per antenna), select J =10. Semi-ideal results for G-Rake (G-Rake w semi) correspond to using ideal values for the tting parameters and but practical channel estimates. For the practical GRake results (G-Rake w pract), measurement ngers were placed on B = 12 (6 per antenna) of the candidate delays: delays 0 through 3 (the path delays in chip periods) as well as -1 and -2. Observe that there is a substantial gain in median SINR between the ideal G-Rake and Rake receivers. Most of this gain is realized with the practical G-Rake receiver. Note that
7 This can be recognized as the multipath prole of the 3GPP Case 3 channel [31, 25.101]. 8 Approximated by a chip-spaced grid extending 8 chips before the rst path delay to 8 chips past the last path delay.

(12)

where j is a time index, s(j ) is a known pilot symbol, Ns (p) is the number of pilot symbols, and ya (j ) is the vector of despread pilot symbol values during symbol period j . From (5), we can write the relation of the net response vector to the medium coefcient vector of the channel as a = Ag a, h (13)

where the (j, ) element of A is Aj, = Rp (dj ( )). The medium coefcient vector can then be estimated as a g
1 = A 1 ha ,

(14)

T. L. FULGHUM et al.: ADAPTIVE GENERALIZED RAKE RECEPTION IN DS-CDMA SYSTEMS

Ru

1 Ns 1

N s 1 m=0

)(s (m)y (p) (m) h )H , (s (m)y(p) (m) h

(17)

1 0.8 0.6 CDF 0.4 0.2 0 5 GRake ref GRake w id GRake w semi GRake w pract Rake w id Rake w pract 0 SINR (dB)
Fig. 5. CDF of SINR for Rake and G-Rake, exponential channel, 2 receive antennas, 18 candidate delays (9 per antenna), 12 combining ngers.

of 3 km/hr at a carrier frequency of 2 GHz. To simulate othercell interference, white, complex Gaussian noise is added to the received signal at a ratio of Ior /Ioc = 10 dB, where Ior and Ioc are the power spectral densities of the desired base station signal and the interference, respectively. For the practical receivers of the simulations, the common pilot channel is utilized for estimating receiver quantities, and all estimation is performed on a per-slot basis (10 pilot symbols). G-Rake ngers are assigned as described in Section III-B. Finger assignment for single antenna simulations uses P = 12, J = 8, and B = 12 while P = 18, J = 12, and B = 12 are used for two antenna simulations. For the ideal receivers used for comparison, the channel coefcients and impairment covariance are assumed to be known perfectly, and the G-Rake ngers are placed on a chip-spaced grid that extends 8 chips before the rst path delay and 8 chips past the last path delay. In all cases the path searcher is ideal (i.e. the receivers know the path delays and average path strengths perfectly). In discussing subsequent results, we use Raken and GRaken to denote receivers with n antennas. In the rst set of simulations, the data rate is xed. A block of 3090 information bits is rate-1/3 turbo coded, and the resulting coded bits are rate matched (punctured in this case) to give an effective coding rate of r = 0.32. A Log-MAX turbo decoder with 8 decoding iterations is used. Figures 6 and 7 show the resulting coded block error rate (BLER) versus the fraction of the transmitter power devoted to the desired trafc channel. This fraction is represented by the ratio Ec /Ior , where Ec is the total energy per chip devoted to the desired trafc channel (summed over all desired user spreading codes). In the single antenna case of Figure 6, ideal G-Rake1 gains 3.4 dB in Ec /Ior over ideal Rake1 at 10% BLER. Most of this gain (2.4 dB) is achieved with a practical receiver. In the two antenna case of Figure 7, we see the same qualitative relationship between the G-Rake2 and Rake2 receivers. The ideal G-Rake2 gain is 5.5 dB, and most of this (4.0 dB) is achieved in practice. Compared to the Rake1 receivers, the practical and ideal G-Rake2 receivers gain 7.0 dB and 8.5 dB respectively. The relatively large gains can be attributed to the interference reduction capabilities of the receiver in this particularly interference dominated case. In the second set of simulations, the fraction of transmitter power devoted to the desired trafc channel is xed at Ec /Ior = 3 dB, and the coding and data rate are varied according to the rate matching algorithm dened in [31, 25.212] based on QPSK modulation and 10 channelization codes. In this case only practical receivers were simulated, with the results shown in Figure 8. We note that over a fairly wide range of data rates, G-Rake1 works about as well as Rake2. G-Rake2 signicantly lowers the BLER for all data rates.

10

the loss due to estimated quantities for the practical G-Rake receiver is mostly due to weight computation rather than nger placement, specically channel estimation. IV. E VALUATION OF P ERFORMANCE In the following section, we investigate downlink performance of the proposed adaptive G-Rake receiver via link simulation and system simulation based on WCDMA/HSDPA [31, 25.943]. A. Link Performance Link performance is evaluated for a single base station transmitting several physical channels according to Table C.8 of [31, 25.101]: a common pilot at spreading factor SF = 256, comprising 10% of total transmitter power, a primary common control/synchronization channel at SF = 256, 6% of total power 9 , a paging channel at SF = 256, 3% of total power, desired user trafc channel consisting of 10 spreading codes at SF = 16 (unless otherwise specied), with the percentage of total power as a variable quantity, and 6 voice user signals at SF = 128, lling the remainder of the transmitter power according to the power of the desired trafc channel. All channels employ QPSK unless otherwise noted. The channel is dispersive with an exponential prole as dened in section III-E, except now the fading corresponds to a speed
9 In the G-Rake weight formulation, we have ignored the fact that the synchronization channel is not transmitted orthogonally to the other physical channels.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2009

10

10

10
BLER 10
1

BLER 10
Ideal GRake1 Practical GRake1 Ideal Rake1 Practical Rake1 8 7 6 5 Ec/Ior (dB) 4 3 2
2

10

10

Practical GRake2 Practical GRake1 Practical Rake2 Practical Rake1 2 2.5 3 Rate (Mb/s) 3.5 4

1.5

Fig. 6. Link results, BLER vs. Ec /Ior , exponential channel, ideal and practical receivers, one receive antenna, Ior /Ioc = 10 dB.

Fig. 8. Link results, BLER vs. data rate, exponential channel, one and two receive antennas, practical receivers, Ior /Ioc = 10 dB, Ec /Ior = 3 dB.

10

Ideal GRake2 Practical GRake2 Ideal Rake2 Practical Rake2

TABLE I M APPING BETWEEN INFORMATION RATE AND SYMBOL SINR. ( COMPILED BASED ON AWGN SIMULATIONS USING 12 CHANNELIZATION CODES ) symbol SINR (dB) range (, 11.5) [11.5, 10.5) [10.5, 9.5) [9.5, 8.5) [8.5, 7.5) [7.5, 6.5) [6.5, 5.5) [5.5, 4.5) [4.5, 3.5) [3.5, 2.5) [2.5, 1.5) [1.5, 0.5) [0.5, 0.5) [0.5, 1.5) [1.5, 2.5) [2.5, 3.5) [3.5, 4.5) [4.5, 5.5) [5.5, 6.5) [6.5, 7.5) [7.5, 8.5) [8.5, 9.5) [9.5, 10.5) [10.5, 11.5) [11.5, 12.5) [12.5, 13.5) [13.5, ) bits per symbol 0.0626 0.0758 0.0990 0.1253 0.1516 0.1980 0.2506 0.3032 0.3958 0.5011 0.6063 0.7116 0.8814 1.0427 1.2041 1.3654 1.5267 1.6881 1.8494 2.0108 2.5135 2.7659 3.0182 3.2705 3.5228 3.7751 4.0000

BLER

10

10 12

10

8 Ec/Ior (dB)

Fig. 7. Link results, BLER vs. Ec /Ior , exponential channel, ideal and practical receivers, two receive antennas, Ior /Ioc = 10 dB.

For HSDPA, adaptive rate control is used to adjust the transmission data rate according to fading variations as well as receiver capability to suppress interference. In this case, the transmission data rate varies according to feedback of the channel quality indicator (CQI), which indicates the highest data rate that the mobile can receive with a BLER less than 10% [31, 25.214]. An exemplary mapping between information rate in terms of number of bits per symbol and symbol SINR is shown in Table I. The switch points in Table I were found through link simulations based on the use of 12 channelization codes. For a xed coding and modulation scheme, BLER performance does not vary by much for information block sizes over a few thousands bits. Thus, these switch points also work for assignments of 8-15 channelization codes. Perfect CQI estimation, based on actual net response vector and impairment covariance matrix, and error-free feedback are assumed. We consider both QPSK and 16-QAM in adaptive rate control.

Figure 9 shows the median HSDPA transmission data rates for the various receivers. Here, we assume that 75% of base station power and 15 channelization codes are allocated to a scheduled HSDPA user. All user terminals are assumed to be category 10 mobiles according to the denition of [31, 25.214], capable of receiving this transmission. Observe that the G-Rake2 receiver achieves a much higher median data rate when own-cell interference dominates (high Ior /Ioc ). When other-cell interference dominates (low Ior /Ioc ), both G-Rake2 and Rake2 achieve array gain. Also, G-Rake1 is as good or better than Rake2 at Ior /Ioc > 10 dB.

T. L. FULGHUM et al.: ADAPTIVE GENERALIZED RAKE RECEPTION IN DS-CDMA SYSTEMS

12 median data rate (Mbps)

median data rate (Mbps)

15

10 8 6 4 2 0 5

GRake2 GRake1 Rake2 Rake1

GRake2 GRake1 Rake2 Rake1 10

5 Ior/Ioc (dB)

10

15

0 0

0.5 1 distance (km)

1.5

Fig. 9. Link results, median data rate vs. Ior /Ioc , exponential channel, one and two receive antennas, practical receivers.

Fig. 10. System results, median data rate vs. distance, exponential channel, one and two receive antennas, practical receivers.

B. System Performance The performance of the practical receivers is evaluated in a macro-cell environment, where the site deployment consists of a uniform hexagonal pattern containing 19 sites, each equipped with three sectorization antennas. This results in a total of 57 cells. The sector antenna is normalized to have a constant 0 dBi gain in the 120 degree sector illumination directions and innite attenuation in other directions. The site-to-site distance is 3 km, and the users are uniformly distributed. This cell layout is wrapped around to achieve continuity at the edges. The total transmission power per cell is 20 Watts (W) for all the base stations in the system, including 4.4 W allocated to downlink overhead channels (e.g. common pilot channel, synchronization channel, and signaling channels). Power and code allocation to a scheduled data user are the same as those used to generate the results in Figure 9. Path loss, shadowing loss, and receiver noise gure are based on the recommended parameters for the Vehicular Environment given in [49] (see also Table I in [15]). While [49] species a receiver noise gure of 5 dB, the requirement in [31, 25.101] allows the noise gure to be much higher. We assume a 9 dB receiver noise gure. Other-cell interference is modeled as white noise in both weight formulation and SINR evaluation. Figure 10 shows the median achievable data rate for the practical receivers in the exponential prole channel as a function of distance from the serving base station. As expected, data rate goes down as the user moves farther away from the base station. Both G-Rake2 and G-Rake1 effectively reduce own-cell interference and thus reach higher data rates than Rake1 and Rake2 for users close to the base station. At the cell border, performance is more noise-limited, so the G-Rake receivers perform only slightly better than the Rake receivers and the dual-antenna receivers provide array gain. Results in other channel conditions are summarized in Table II. Specically, results are produced for Pedestrian A (mildly dispersive), Pedestrian B (heavily dispersive), and Vehicular A (heavily dispersive) channels [31, 25.101]. Path delays of these channels are quantized to half-chip grids in our simula-

tions as specied in [50]. Like the case of exponential prole channel, G-Rake ngers are assigned as described in Section III-B. For all cases B = 12. For single antenna simulations, (P = 16, J = 6) for Pedestrian A, and (P = 27, J = 18) for Pedestrian B and Vehicular A. For two antenna simulations, (P = 20, J = 9) for Pedestrian A, (P = 30, J = 27) for Pedestrian B, and (P = 32, J = 27) for Vehicular A. We see that G-Rake2 achieves a median data rate higher than 10 Mb/s at a distance of 0.5 km from the base station, even in heavily dispersive channels. Also, within this distance, GRake1 outperforms Rake2. At the edge of the cell (1 km), G-Rake2 achieves median data rates higher than 5 Mb/s in heavily dispersive channels. V. C ONCLUSION Practical algorithms have been provided for both nger placement and weight computation in a G-Rake receiver. Fingers are placed by selecting delays from a candidate set using a maximal-weight criterion. Weights are determined using channel estimates and a parametric estimate of an impairment covariance. The parametric approach allows weights to be determined for the candidate delay set without having to place measurement ngers at all delays. While the algorithms are described in the context of a G-Rake receiver and the downlink, they can be used in other linear equalization contexts (a chip equalizer, uplink). Link and system performance results show that signicant improvements in coverage for high-rate services in HSDPA can be achieved with practical receivers. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors gratefully acknowledge A. S. Khayrallah and H. Bjrkegren for guiding and supporting this work; J.-F. Cheng for providing the data in Table I; and K. Hooli for help in identifying and obtaining references. The authors would also like to thank H. Koorapaty, R. Ramsh, and the anonymous reviewers for helpful comments.

10

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2009

TABLE II M EDIAN ACHIEVABLE DATA RATES IN VARIOUS DISPERSIVE CHANNELS (75% POWER ALLOCATION AND 15 CHANNELIZATION CODES , QPSK AND 16-QAM)

receiver Rake1 G-Rake1 Rake2 G-Rake2

PA 0.5 km 6.66 Mbps 11.77 Mbps 10.87 Mbps 14.40 Mbps

1 km 3.75 Mbps 3.75 Mbps 5.50 Mbps 6.66 Mbps

PB 0.5 km 3.17 Mbps 6.08 Mbps 4.92 Mbps 10.87 Mbps

1 km 2.18 Mbps 3.17 Mbps 3.75 Mbps 5.50 Mbps

VA 0.5 km 1 km 3.17 Mbps 2.56 Mbps 6.66 Mbps 3.75 Mbps 4.92 Mbps 3.75 Mbps 14.40 Mbps 6.08 Mbps

R EFERENCES
[1] S. Tantikovit, A. U. H. Sheikh, and M. Z. Wang, Combining schemes in rake receiver for low spreading factor long-code W-CDMA systems," Electron. Lett., vol. 36, no. 22, pp. 1872-1874, Oct. 26, 2000. [2] A. Klein, G. K. Kaleh, and P. W. Baier, Zero forcing and minimum mean- square-error equalization for multiuser detection in code-division multiple-access channels," IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 45, pp. 276287, May 1996. [3] G. E. Bottomley, T. Ottosson, and Y.-P. E. Wang, A generalized RAKE receiver for interference suppression," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 18, pp. 1536-1545, Aug. 2000. [4] I. Ghauri and D. T. M. Slock, Linear receivers for the DS-CDMA downlink exploiting orthogonality of spreading sequences," in Proc. 32nd Asilomar Conf. Signals, Systems Computers, Pacic Grove, CA, Nov. 1998, pp. 650-654. [5] C. D. Frank, E. Visotsky, and U. Madhow, Adaptive interference suppression for the downlink of a direct sequence CDMA system with long spreading sequences," J. VLSI Signal Processing - special issue signal processing wireless commun.: algorithms, performance, architecture, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 30, pp. 273-291, Jan.-Mar. 2002. [6] S. Mudulodu, G. Leus, and A. Paulraj, An interference-suppressing RAKE receiver for the CDMA downlink," IEEE Sig. Proc. Lett., vol. 11, pp. 521-524, May 2004. [7] M. J. Heikkil, P. Komulainen, and J. Lilleberg, Interference suppression in CDMA downlink through adaptive channel equalization," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Sept. 19-22, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 978-982. [8] A. Jarosch and D. Dahlhaus, Linear space-time diversity receivers for the downlink of UMTS with WCDMA," European Trans. Telecommun., vol. 12, pp. 379-391, Sept./Oct. 2001. [9] T. P. Krauss, W. J. Hillery, and M. D. Zoltowski, Downlink specic linear equalization for frequency selective CDMA cellular systems," J. VLSI Signal Processing - special issue signal processing wireless communications: algorithms, performance, architecture, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 30, pp. 142-162, Jan.-Mar. 2002. [10] H. Hadinejad-Mahram, On the equivalence of linear MMSE chip-level equalizer and generalized RAKE," IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 8, pp. 7-8, Jan. 2004. [11] T. F. Wong, T. M. Lok, J. S. Lehnert, and M. D. Zoltowski, A linear receiver for direct-sequence spread-spectrum multiple-access systems with antenna arrays and blind adaptation," IEEE Trans. Infom. Theory, vol. 44, pp. 659-676, Mar. 1998. [12] J. Choi, Pilot channel-aided techniques to compute the beamforming vector for CDMA systems with antenna array," IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 49, pp. 1760-1775, Sept. 2000. [13] A. F. Naguib and A. Paulraj, Recursive adaptive beamforming for wireless CDMA," in Proc. IEEE Intl. Conf. Commun. (ICC), Seattle, WA, June 18-22, 1995, pp. 1515-1519. [14] R. Price and P. E. Green, Jr., A communication technique for multipath channels," in Proc. IRE, vol. 46, pp. 555-570, Mar. 1958. [15] Y.-P. E. Wang and G. E. Bottomley, DS-CDMA downlink system capacity enhancement through interference suppression," IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 1767-1774, July 2006. [16] Y.-P. E. Wang, J.-F. T. Cheng, and E. Englund, The benets of advanced receivers for high speed data communications in WCDMA," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Vancouver, Canada, Sept. 24-28, 2002, pp. 132-136. [17] R. Love, K. Stewart, R. Bachu and A. Ghosh, MMSE equalization for UMTS HSDPA," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Orlando, FL, Oct. 6-9, 2003, pp. 2416-2420. [18] L. A. Jatunov and V. K. Madisetti, Closed-form for innite sum in bandlimited CDMA," IEEE Commun. Letters, vol. 8, pp. 138-140, Mar. 2004.

[19] G. L. Turin, Introduction to spread-spectrum antimultipath techniques and their application to urban digital radio," in Proc. IEEE, vol. 68, pp. 328-353, Mar. 1980. [20] G. E. Bottomley, "Optimizing the RAKE receiver for the CDMA downlink," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Secaucus, NJ, May 18-20, 1993, pp. 742-745. [21] P. A. M. Bun, Effective low-effort adaptive equalizers for digital mobilophone systems," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), San Francisco, CA, May 1-3, 1989, pp. 147-154. [22] S. Ariyavisitakul, N. R. Sollenberger, and L. J. Greenstein, Tapselectable decision-feedback equalization," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 45, pp. 1497-1500, Dec. 1997. [23] M. Stojanovic, L. Freitag and M. Johnson, Channel-estimation-based adaptive equalization of underwater acoustic signals," in Proc. IEEE OCEANS 99, Seattle, WA, Sept. 13-16, 1999, pp. 985-990. [24] A. S. Khayrallah and D. A. Cairns, Fast nger selection for GRAKE," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Stockholm, May 30-June 1, 2005, pp. 728-732. [25] H. Sui, E. Masry, and B. D. Rao, Chip-level DS-CDMA downlink interference suppression with optimized nger placement," IEEE Trans. Sig. Proc., vol. 54, pp. 3908-3921, Oct. 2006. [26] N. Piazzese, G. Avellone, and E. Messina, On the timing placement in the G-Rake detector," in Proc. Intl. Symp. Wireless Commun. Syst. (ISWCS), Siena, Italy, Sept. 5-9, 2005, pp. 250-254. [27] G. Kutz and A. Chass, On the performance of a practical downlink CDMA generalized RAKE receiver," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., Vancouver, Canada, Sept. 24-28, 2002, pp. 1352-1356. [28] G. Kutz and A. Chass, Sparse chip equalizer for DS-CDMA downlink receivers," IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 9, pp. 10-12, Jan. 2005. [29] T. Hasegawa and M. Shimizu, Multipath interference reduction method using multipath interference correlative timing for DS-CDMA systems," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Birmingham, AL, May 6-9, 2002, pp. 1205-1209. [30] F. K. H. Lee and P. J. McLane, Design of nonuniformly spaced tapped-delay-line equalizers for sparse multipath channels," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 52, pp. 530-535, Apr. 2004. [31] 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical Specication Group Radio Access Networks: UE Radio Transmission and Reception (FDD) (3GPP TR 25.101, version 6.8.0, Jun. 2005), Deployment aspects (3GPP TR 25.943, v6.0.0, Dec. 2004), Multiplexing and channel coding (FDD) (3GPP TR 25.212, version 6.5.0, June 2005), and Physical layer procedures (FDD) (3GPP TR 25.214, version 6.6.0, June 2005). [32] M. Stojanovic, J. G. Proakis, and J. A. Catipovic, Analysis of the impact of channel estimation errors on the performance of a decision-feedback equalizer in fading multipath channels," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 43, pp. 877-886, Feb./Mar./Apr. 1995. [33] N. W. K. Lo, D. D. Falconer, and A. U. H. Sheikh, Adaptive equalization for co-channel interference in a multipath fading environment," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 43, pp. 1441-1453, Feb./Mar./Apr. 1995. [34] J. Ramos, M. D. Zoltowski, and H. Liu, A low-complexity space-time RAKE receiver for DS-CDMA communications," IEEE Sig. Proc. Lett., vol. 4, pp. 262-265, Sept. 1997. [35] G. Kutz and A. Chass, Low complexity implementation of a downlink CDMA generalized RAKE receiver," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Vancouver, Canada, Sept. 24-28, 2002, pp. 1357-1361. [36] J. S. Nielsen, Adaptive generalized matched lter rake receiver system and method," U.S. Patent Publication US 2002/0080863 A1, June 27, 2002. [37] M. Lenardi and D. T. M. Slock, A RAKE structured SINR maximizing mobile receiver for the WCDMA downlink," in Proc. 31st Asilomar Conf. Signals, Systems Computers, 2001, pp. 410-414. [38] T. Kawamura, K. Higuchi, Y. Kishiyama, and M. Sawahashi, "Comparison between multipath interference canceller and chip equalizer in HSDPA in multipath channel," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Birmingham, AL, May 6-9, 2002, pp. 459-463.

T. L. FULGHUM et al.: ADAPTIVE GENERALIZED RAKE RECEPTION IN DS-CDMA SYSTEMS

11

[39] K. Li and H. Liu, A new blind receiver for downlink DS-CDMA communications," IEEE Commun. Letters, vol. 3, pp. 193-195, July 1999. [40] I. N. Psaromiligkos and S. N. Batalama, Recursive short-data-record estimation of AV and MMSE/MVDR linear lters for DS-CDMA antenna array systems," IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 52, pp. 136-148, Jan 2004. [41] I. S. Reed, J. D. Mallett, and L. E. Brennan, Rapid convergence rate in adaptive arrays," IEEE Trans. Aerospace Electronic Systems, vol. AES10, pp. 853-863, Nov. 1974. [42] J. Vidal, M. Cabrera, A. Agustin de Dios, and M. A. Lagunas, Enhanced MDIR receiver for space-time dispersive channels," IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 2, pp. 99-107, Jan. 2003. [43] T. Hasegawa and M. Shimizu, A chip correlation MMSE receiver with multipath interference correlative timing for DS-CDMA systems," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Stockholm, May 30-June 1, 2005, pp. 1740-1744. [44] M. Lenardi and D. T. M. Slock, A RAKE receiver with intracell interference cancellation for a DS-CDMA synchronous downlink with orthogonal codes," in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. (VTC), Tokyo, Japan, May 15-18, 2000, pp. 430-434.

[45] E. Tiirola and J. Ylitalo, Performance of smart antenna receivers in WCDMA uplink with spatially coloured interference," in Proc. IST Mobile Commun. Summit, Sitges (Barcelona), Spain, Sept. 9-12, 2001. [46] L. Mailaender, Low-complexity implementation of CDMA downlink equalization," in Proc. IEE Intl. Conf. 3G Mobile Commun. Technol., Mar. 26-28, 2001, pp. 396-400. [47] G. H. Golub and C. Van Loan, Matrix Computations, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1996. [48] B. C. Ng, M. Cedervall, and A. Paulraj, A structured channel estimator for maximum-likelihood sequence detection," IEEE Commun. Letters, vol. 1, pp. 52-55, Mar. 1997. [49] Selection procedures for the choice of radio transmission technologies of the UMTS (UMTS 30.03)," ETSI Tech. Rep. 101 112, version 3.1.0, Nov. 1997. [50] Modied channel models and channelisation codes for LMMSE simulations", 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP); Technical Specication Group Radio Access Networks; Working Group 4, R4-050112, Feb. 2005.