by
A.M.J. Koonen
E I N D H 0 V E NUN I V E R SIT Y 0 F T E C H N 0 LOG Y
Department of Electrical Engineering
Eindhoven The Netherlands
by
A.M.J. Koonen
THReport 79E99
ISBN 9061440998
Eindhoven
September 1979
 1 
ABSTRACT
The average bit error probability for a digital optical fiber system is
numerically calculated using two receiver models. We analyze the influence
of a number of important system parameters and of mBnB line coding. The
decision threshold and the average avalanche gain are optimized to yield a
minimum average bit error probability. Timing errors in the receiver are
not considered, and we assume the shape of the received optical pulses to
be known (rectangular or Gaussian). The equalization in the receiver is of
the raised cosine type. A Gaussian approximation of the statistics of the
signal at the threshold detector input is introduced. Average bit error
probabilities are calculated using the exhaustive method.
Koonen, A.M.J.
ERROR PROBABILITY IN DIGITAL FIBER OPTIC COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS.
Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering,
Eindhoven, The Netherlands. September 1979.
THReport 79E99
CONTENTS
page
1. Introduction 4
2. System model 6
3. Statistical analysis of signals 9
3.1. Photo detector 9
3.2. Equalizer output signal 10
3.3. Time normalization 11
3.4. Transmitter alphabet 12
3.5. Worst case and best case data patterns 13
3.6. Excess noise factor 14
4. Line:ar receiver model 17
4.1. Thermal noise power at the equalizer output 18
4.2. Received optical pulse shapes 19
4.3. Equalized output pulse shapes 20
4.4. Shot noise variance functions 23
5. Calculating the error probability 24
5.1. Gaussian approximation of the output signal statistics 24
5.2. Average bit error probability 24
5.3. Exhaustive method 26
5.4. Worst case analysis 28
5.4.1. Weighting factors 29
6. RecE!iver optimization 31
6.1. Choosing the decision threshold 31
6.1.1. Minimizing the error probability for a fixed 31
data pattern
6.1.2. Minimizing the average bit error probability 32
6.2 .. Choosing the average avalanche gain 33
6.2.1. Minimizing the error probability for a fixed 34
data pattern
6.2.2. Minimizing the average bit error probability 35
6.3. Average received optical power 36
7. Lin" coding 38
7.1. 1B2B split phase code 38
7.2. 5B6B code 39
 3 
I. Introduction
Several years ago the optical fiber was introduced as an important new
communication medium. It offers a lot of technical and economical advantages
as compared with conventional metallic conductors like coaxial cables. For
instanee it weights less. It is thinner, more flexible, free of electro
magnetic interferences, it has a larger bandwidth, and is composed of
cheaper basic materials. Being an attractive solution to meet the growing
need of information transmission capacity, it is the subject of many inves
tigations and experiments.
An appropriate criterion to judge the quality of a digital transmission
system is the average bit error probability. As far as error probability
calculations are concerned, optical fiber systems distinguish themselves
from coaxial systems by the fact, that at the photo detection process in
the reeeiver a socalled shot noise is produced. This shot noise is non
stationary and signaldependent. The receiver adds the usual stationary
Gaussian noise. In coaxial systems only stationary, signalindependent noise
p lays a part.
Several methods to calculate the error probability of a digital optical
transmission system have already been published. They all try to approximate
the very complicated statistics of the signal at the threshold detector input
in the receiver with more or less accuracy. An approach with Gaussian quadra
ture integration formu1es is possible [8], ane' also an "exact" calculation
[I], a statistical simulation [1], a method based on the Chernoffbound [I],
and a method based on a Gaussian approximation [1,3,6]. The last method offers
more il1Sight into the influence of system parameter variations, and facilitates
the im,?lementation of line coding in the calculations. It gives fairly accurate
results, but tends to underestimate the optimum threshold setting and over
estimate the optimum average avalanche gain [I]. Following this method, we
numeri,oally calculate the average bit error probability using two receiver
models. We analyze the influence of a number of important system parameters
and of mBnB line coding.
To carry out error probability calculations, we have to define a system model
(chapter 2). Using this a statistical signal analysis is derived (chapter 3).
We introduce a linear receiver model (chapter 4). The very complicated
statistics of the signal at the threshold detector input, needed for error
probability calculations, may under certain circumstances be approximated by
 5 
Gaussian statistics (chapter 5). The signal dependence of the shot noise Cdn
be translated into interference by the neighboring symbols with the symbol
under decision. We can deal with this interference using the socalled ex
haustive method. This method scans all possible patterns of the relevant
neighboring symbols. Using this method we shall calculate the average bit
error probability with the aid of a digital computer. We consider the optimum
setting of the decision threshold and of the average avalanche gain at the
receiver (chapter 6), and the aspects of the socalled mBnB line coding
(chapter 7). Using the previously mentioned receiver model, calculations of
the average bit error probability are carried out (chapter 8). Timing errors
at the sampler are not considered, and we assume the shape of the received
optical pulses to be known (rectangular or Gaussian). The equalization in
the receiver is of the raised cosine type. We analyze the influence of a
number of important system parameters, and of line coding. The decision
threshold and the average avalanche gain are optimized to yield a minimum
average bit error probability. Similar calculations are carried out using a
modified receiver model (chapter 9).
 6 
2. Syst,em model
p.(~)
I
optical
sourel:! encoder
transmitter
~ J,
+">
~ b h (tkT)
L Ie L
k. ...
~ul:.(U
I photo amplifier
[~ + J
detector equalizer I
fi bU"
• . ,.
1. h (t: kT) h
I
(I:)
{ a.,)
IJ/,.__ ,~ threshold
detector
decoder
A laser diode or a light emitting diode (LED) 's used as optical trans~;tter
We prefer a laser diode because of its larger output power, smaller .pectral
bandwidth, faster response, and smaller divergence of the light beam. The
modulation characteristic of a laser diode is nonlinear. We may however
specify the shape of the output optical pulses ~(t) in such a way that the
laser output approximately is formed by a linear superposition of these
pulses. The optical power, launched into the fiber, is
+00
p. (t) =
1
I bk·~(tkT) (2.1)
k=oo
+00
where f
_00
bk.~(tkT)dt is the energy of the kth optical pulse, and hL(t) ~ 0
for every t.
Introducing a linear approximation of the fiber baseband behavior [2), we
denote its impulse response by ~(t). We obtain for the light power at the
output of the fiber
+00
p (t) =
o I bk·hp(tkT) (2.2)
k=oo
where
The photodetector converts p (t) into an electrical current i (t). For this
o s
purpose we take a PINphotodiode or an avalanche photodiode (APD) . We prefer
an APD because of its internal amplification mechanism.
The amplifier and the equalizer convert i (t) into an output voltage v (t),
s =t
which will be further analyzed in chapter 3. The joint impulse response of
amplifier and equalizer is denoted by hI(t). The signal v (t) is periodically
out
 8 
sampled at t + kT. From the sampled values, the threshold detector derives
s
estimates {b k }
for the symbols {b } being sent, using bitbybit detection.
k
A decoder converts the sequence {b } into estimates {~m} of the sequence
k
produce,d by the source.
 9 
3.1. Photodetector
N(t)
i (t) = L eg .. h (tt.) (3.1)
s 1 s 1
i=1
where:
e charge of an electron
random avalanche gain at random time ti' i.e. the number of secondary
electrons generated for a primary electron at t.
1
g.h (t) : APD impulse response (ideal APD: h (t) = oCt»~
s s
N(t) : the number of primary electrons generated during ("',t) for the incident
photons
AN t
Pr[N(t) = N] = N! e
A /',.
where A = J A(T)dT
A( t) ...!J.
hv
• p (t) + A
0 0
(3.2)
where
hv energy in a photon
n quantum efficiency of the detector
A dark current of the detector
o
Substituting (2.2) we obtain
+00
A( t) =...!J.
hv
I bk.h (tkT) + A (3.3)
k='" P 0
The same model holds for a PIN photodiode, but without avalanche effect (so
g. =: 1).
1
 10 
(3.4)
where
N(t)
x(t) = i (t) * hI(t) ::: I eg .• hI(tt.)
1. 1.
s i=1
(3.5)
The signal x( t) can be separated into its expectation E [x( t) 1 and a non
stationary, signaldependent,zeromean shot noise n (t)
s
r:,
n (t)
8
= x(t)  E[x(t)J (3.6)

(3.3) '.e calculate for the expectation [3,4J
E[v
out
(t )IBJ = E[x(ts)IBJ =
s
f A(T).E[eg.hI(tsT)JdT
0>
+00
= I bk·hout(tskT) + Vo (3.7)
k=oo
where
equalized output pulse
 II 
2 2
Var[v (dIB] = E[n (t )IB] + E[n h(t)]
out s sst
= f
= hv F • (3.8)
n e
where
F
e
~ E[i]/G 2 excess noise factor
b.
z (t) = (eGn) 2 h (t) * hi (t) = h (t) * hI2 (t) shot noise variance
hv p p
function
hl(t) = r [H (f)]
I
1
~ .1"I[H (f)/H (f)]
out P
+'"
Z
o
~ A .F • (hv)2
oe noo f I
2
IH (f)1 df: dark current contribution
In order to isolate the dependence on the time slot width T from the functions
hp (t) and hou t(t), we introduce timenormalized functions
h' t(t)
eu
~ h
out
(t.T) H'
out
(f) = Y[h'
out
I
(t)] = T.H (fiT) (3.9)
out
+.'"
r h'(t) dt = H'(o) = I (3. 10)
.; P P
Using (3.9) we can also obtain timenormalized equivalents for the functions
hi (t) and z(t):
H; (f) I
=rlh;(t)] = T·HI(f/T)
= H' (f)/H'(f) (3.11)
out p
A b .
Llm1n
EXT =
b
(3.14)
max
t;, b
k
bl
k
=
b
(3.15)
max
b
kE {EXT ,I} where EXT ~ 0 (3.16)
10 lbmax (I+EXT) I
Po = 10. log 2T. 1 mW i (dBm) (3.17)
This formula applies to the case of a balanced line code, and to the case of
straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols.
Substituting (3.9) through (3.15) in (3.7) and (3.8), we obtain for the
expectation and the variance of the equalizer output signal at the decision
time t , respectively
s
t
E[v ou t(t sliB] = b' .h' (~  k) + V (3. 18)
k out T o
+00 t
Var[v (t)IB]=hV. F • b
out s
I
n e max k=oo bk·z'( ;  k) + Zo (3.19)
hv 1 Hout (0)
vo = eC.Ao·n·eC· H (0) = Ao T.hfn .H'ell teo) (3.20)
p
hv 2
Z
o
= A0 T.()
n .F e .1 2
(3.21)
+00 +00
~ 2 2
I
2
f
00
IH' (f)/H'(f)1 df =
out p
f IHj(f)1 df (3.22)
_00
This factor only takes into account the shape of the received optical pulse
h (t) and of the equalized output pulse h (t) . It is independent of the
p out
time slot width T, because it is expressed in the timenormalized spectra of
these pulses. Note that both dark current contributions are inversely pro
portional to the signalling rate liT.
so with (3.12)
Hence the signal contribution to the output variance (3.19), given a symbol
under decision b , attains its maximum value if the neighboring symbols
o
{bk,k+) all have their maximum value. We therefore define with (3.13) a
worst case pattern BWC of neighboring symbols by
b } (3.25)
max
This pattern gives rise to the maximum noise power at the equalizer output
at the decision time t given b , for which we write using (3.15) and
s o
(3.19)
t t t
= hV. F {b
11 e 0
.z'(~) + b
T max
(L z '(s  k)
T
z' (2.» }
T
k=co
+ Z (3.26)
o
In a similar way we define with (3.13) a best case pattern BSC of neighboring
symbols by
(3.27)
which :~ives rise to the minimum noise power at the equalizer output

o Oll S 0
t t t
hv
= .F
11 e 0
s) + b . • ( L
. { b .z '(T
m1n k=oo
Z' (~
T
 k)  z' ( ;»}
+ Z (3.28)
o
We can express the excess noise factor F in the average avalanche gain G
e
 15 
F
e =
dg 1/G
2 2
=
d 2M (s)
ds 2
~
ljt lJM
::')
(3.29)
which leads to
"
, ..
10 k =.1
o
o 10 70 00 '0 100
 ..·G
Figure 3.1. Excess noise factor F versus the average avalanche
e
gain G with the APD ionisation constant k as a parameter
The constant k is the ratio of the probability per unit length of a hole
(moving in the detector high field region) producing a collision, to the
same quantity for electrons.
Figure 3.1 shows a plot of F versus G with k as a parameter. For large G
e
(3.30) can be approximated by
(3.32)
  
amplifier
,
,~
f'W A
• A 'co.
,
  detector + bias    .... ,
f S,3
threshold decoder
detector f+
Figure 4.1 shows a typical optical receiver in schematic form [3). Here
The noise sources are assumed to be white, Gaussian, and uncorrelated. The
amplifier gain A is assumed to be sufficiently high so that noises introduced
by the equalizer are negligible. The equalizer impulse response h (t) is
eq
chosen such, that a received optical pulse h (t) causes an equalized output
p
pulse h
out
(t) free from intersymbol interference at t = kT for every integer k:
h
out
(kT) = ok (4. 1)
Ok = for k = 0
=0 for integer k, k# O.
 18 
(4.2)
where
2
twosided spectral noise density of ib(t) in A /Hz
2
SE twosided spectral noise density of ea(t) in V /Hz
2
S1 twosided spectral noise density of i (t) in A /Hz
a
= RAII~ (II denotes parallel connection)
Rr
C = C + Cd
T A
Like 12 the weighting factor 13 takes into account only the shape of the
received optical pulse h (t) and of the equalized output pulse h t(t), and
p ou
is independent of the time slot width T. We define 13 in agreement with [3]
by
+""
2 2
f f .IH;(f)1 df (4.3)
00
2
To minimize E[nth(t)] ~ and RA must be as large as possible, and Cd and C as
A
small as possible.
2 2
According to (4.2) E[nth(t)] 1S inversely proportional to G • We define a
thermal noise parameter Z independent of G, by
th,
(4.4)
2
Thus Zth (and E [nth (t)] also) consists of a term, proportional to 12 and
inversely proportional to the signalling rate liT, and of a term, proportional
to 13 an.d to 1IT. Hence at higher rates 1IT, Zth is nearly proportional to 1IT:
 19 
(4.6)
and to ntherm' defined in [6, p. 217] (where it is named nth)' being the
thermal noise in the units of secondary electrons, by
hv 2 2
= (Ti) .n therm (4.7)
h' (t)
p
= l/a
r
for It I < a /2
r
=0 otherwise (4.8)
H'(f)
p
= sin(a .TIf)/(a .TIf)
r r
b. Gaussian pulses
2 2
t /2a
e g
H I (f) = (4.9)
p
These pulses are shown by figure 4.2. Pulse narrowing leads to a proportional
increase in pulse height, because of the pulse energy remaining constant (see
(3.10».
It is worth noticing that the assumption of rectangular received optical
pulses makes sense only in the case of negligible fiber dispersion. A
certain amount of fiber dispersion makes Gaussian pulses more plausible.
We define a normalized r.m.s. optical pulse width ¥by [3]
 20 
t ~.,. (1:)
 GC
r
s 0 .S' 0 .ot
.t.
4.2.a. Rectangular ,.: I )(ct 4.2.b. Gaussian
r
Figure 4.2. Received optical pulse shapes (timenormalized)
= (4. 10)
Hence
liZ . TO and ct
g
=.£
T
(4. II)
We consider two families of equalized output pulse shapes, both with a roll
off factor S (0 ~ S ~I), and timenormalized according to (3.9):
a. raisE~d cosine pulses
sin(TIt).cos(STIt)
h' (t) =
out TIt. [1(2St)2]
b. "optimum" pulses
sin(1Tt) 1Tt
h' t (t) = 1Tt ((Ifl) cos (fl1Tt) + sin(fl )}
ou 1Tt
= 0 otherwise (4.13)
_......:     .~:
    
~
.
I .~ I
j ; 
I .f" o I .S' o
f f
4.3.a. raised cosine 4.3.b. "optimum" spectrum
spectrum H' (f) H' (f)
out out
 22 
.75
·5
... .C
....,
:>
:I:
·25
a
0
·25
4 3 2 \ o 3
.75
....,.
.5
b
:> C
:<:
.25
.25
1 3 2 \ 0 2 J
T
Using a fairly large rolloff factor B and a not to large normalized r.m.s.
optical pulse width alT (e.g. S= 1 and alT = .144), z'(t) decays so fast,
that this inter symbol interference is nearly negligible.
 24 
2 2
(aIl) /20 (5. I )
e
where
2
o = Var [v (t )IB]
out s
vouc(t s ) < D + b = b
0 min
(5.2)
vout(t s ) ;, D + b = b
0 max
 25 
+ P[b
0
= biB')
max
. P[b 0
= b . I B' , b = b )
mln 0 ma
= P [b
o
= b .
m~n
I B' ) • Q(D crAil A) (5.3)
IlB
+ P[b
o
biB') •
max Q( crBD)
where
00 2
1
Q(x) ~   fea /2 da
I2Ti x
2 t.
cr = Var [v (t )IB', b = b . )
A out s 0 mln
~ E[v
ou
t(t s )IB', b 0
~ E[v
au
t(t s )IB', b 0

_ _•• c<
(5.3)
t
h'
out
(s
T
k) =0
for k < kl and k > k (5.6)
t
Z
z' ( "T
s k) o
Pe = t P (B 1 ) • P e (B )
1
(5.7)
where
= E[v
III out (t)
s IB1l
= I if b (1)
o
b .
m,n
and where the summation must be carried out over the indices 1 of all possible
data patterns B .
1
In the' case of binary mutually independent symbols b (straight binary
k
. . ) • the summat,on
transm'ss,on . .,nc1udes ZkZkl+1 patterns B ; ,f
. the alphabet
1
 28 
hv
(5.8)
n
where we have defined weighting factors II and <I in agreement with [3] using
(3.12) by
/::, +""
I I = z' (0) = I = J h' (T)
p
t=O ""
+""
f H' (f)
p
(H; (f) • H'I (f) )df (5.9)
""
and
/::, 'r
+"" +""
1:1 L Z' (k) = L h' (t)
P
• h;2(t)1
k=oo k=oo t=k
 29 
+00 +00
2
I
k=_oo
f h' (.k)
P
hi (.) d.
00
+00 +00
;:: e j.2~f.k . H'(f)
=
k=oo 00
f p (Hi (f) * H'I (f»df
+00 +00
=
00
f [2:"
k=oo
6(fk)J • H'p (f) (Hi (f) * Hi (f) )df
+00
I H' (k)
p (H i (f) * H'(f»i (5. 10)
k=oo I f=k
hv
n
(5. I I )
Note that the terms containing 12 are inversely proportional to the signalling
rate liT and that the term containing 13 is proportional to liT. The terms
containing II and E I , which account for the signal shot noise, are independent
of liT.
Appendix 2 shows plots of the weighting factors II' E , EII , 12 and 13 for
I I
the four possible combinations of received optical pulse shapes (rectangular
 30 
+~ +~
The behavior of z' (t) as discussed in section 4.4, such as the faster decay
for large, B and smaller ofT, agrees with the behavior of LI  II according
to (5.12).
 31 
6. Receiver optimization
This chapter is dealing with the receiver optimization, namely with setting
the decision threshold and the average avalanche gain so that the average
bit error probability is minimized. The relation between the average received
optical power and the average bit error probability is also discussed.
Throughout this chapter timing errors are not considered: ts = O. Hence
using (3.18) and (4.1) we find for the expectation of the equalizer output
signal
CJ
CJAB)2 • b.  b (b b.) 2 +2 (CJ 2 CJ 2 ) In (CJ
B
( mln max max mln B A aA
+ ~~~~~~
(6.2)
where
2
CJA = Var[v
out
(t=O)IB', b
s 0
bmm
. I
2
CJB = Var [v (t =0) I B' , b = bmaxl
out s 0
2 2
Pewe'
(B' b0 = bm~n
. ) = Pe(Bw'e' b o = Q (0) (6.4)
b
max
+ V
0
= Dp(B~e)  bmin  Vo
(6.5)
°A
Dp(B~e) V0_ +
= ___ °A
~~
°
+__~
B ____
• EXT_
(6.6)
b bmax 0A + 0B
m.3,x
2
(according to (5.8) and (6.2) 0A and 0B2 are calculated with (5.11)). This
threshold achieves a worst case error probability Pe (B )' which is
we
independent of the message statistics P[b o = bminiBwe] and P[b o = bmaxiBWe]
according to (5.3):
(6.7)
Hence one can prove that D (B' ) is the threshold of a MINIMAXreceiver [9].
p we
(6.8)
In the same way we find with respect to the best case pattern of neighboring
symbols B~c
(6.9)
The on b
max
normalized optimum threshold D
opt
Ib max satisfies
D DML(BW' C)
<~< (6. II)
b b
max max
:2 2
0 = Var[v out (t s = O)\B l ] = F e • Al + Zth IG (6.IZ)
1
where
k
Z
hv
Al = 
tJ.
n
b
max I
k=k
I
b' (1)
k
z'(k)+
t:f . A T . IZ
0
(6.13)
2
Because of F being an increasing function of G and I/G a decreasing
e
function of G. every B1 has its optimum average avalanche gain Gopt (B 1 ).
Z
which minimizes Ol and therefore Pe(B l ). By putting
Z
~hk
+ th I  k)3 ( Z
(6.14)
f Al • k (3k + Al
(6.15)
 35 
Every data pattern BI (k ,k 2 ) has its optimum avalanche gain GOpt(B I ), given
l
by (6.14); each G (B ) satisfies
opt I
G
opt
(B
I
= {bel)
k
= bmax }) ~ G t(B )
op I
~ G t(B
op I
= {bk(l)  b . }).
m~n
(6.16)
By averaging over all possible BI (see (5.7)), we derive for the optimum
average avalanche gain G ,which minimizes the average bit error probability
opt
p
e
G
opt
(B = {b k = bma ) ) < G
opt
< G
opt (B = {b k  b . })
m~n
(6.17)
G (B'
opt WC = {b k , kJ'O  b
max
}) < G
opt
< G (B'
opt BC {bk,kJ'O  bm~n
. }) (6.18)
Zth ]1/3
Gopt '" k."':bo::.. (6.19)
f max
1/3
Gopt '"
l _I.;.3_ _ _ ]
k • b
max
• T
for large I/T (6.20)
P I (6.22)
o.req = 2T
where
x
(2l:]II) + \ (2L I )2 + ]6(t ) • L] • (LII )
Y] ~
I I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _'x::.._ _ _ _ _ __ I
(6.24)
21:) • (LII )
I
(6.25)
 37 
3x + 2
10 • 2x + 2 dBloctave of signalling rate (6.28)
7. Line ·:oding
R = m bits/sec (7. 1)
n T
As examples of mBnB codes we will consider the 1B2B split phase code and the
SB6B code.
Table 7.1 shows the very simple coding rule of the IB2B split phase code.
o o
o
 39 
Let the disparity of a binary oode word be: the number of ones reduced by the
number of zeros in it; and the running digital sum (RDS) of a binary data
stream at a given time: the number of ones reduced by the number of zeros
till that time, divided by 2. A minimum RDS variation implies a minimum DC
wander.
Advantages of the 1B2B split phase code as compared with straight binary
transmission are:
much timing information (maximum number of successive zeros or ones in the
coder output stream is 2)
balanced code (disparity of each code word equals 0, thus minimizing RDS
variations: IRDSI = .5)
max
 possibility of error detection (00 and 11 are not used as code words)
and disadvantages are:
 small efficiency (= m/n = 50% only)
 doubling the signalling rate I/T, required for the same information rate R
(see (7.1».
Because of the very simple coding rule, the realization of coder and decoder
is quite simple.
Table 7.2 shows the more complicated coding rule of the 5B6B code. For the
6bits code words only words with disparity 2,0 and +2 are selected, in
order to minimize RDS variations. The encoder has two states:
 mode 1: the disparity of the next code word is 0 or +2
 mode 2: the disparity of the next code word is 0 or 2
The Odisparity code words are identical in both modes; the +2 disparity code
words in mode 1 are converted into the 2 disparity code words in mode 2 by
bit inversion.Figure 7.1. shows the state diagram of the 5B6B code.
2
o mode mode o
1 2
+2
•
Hence
 42 
hc 19
hv 0
3.117.10 J (c : light velocity in vacuum)
11
=:
11Al " 0
8
A .. 6.25.10 primary electrons/sec
0
(8.2)
~ /I RA
:= = .5 Ml1
Rr
and
3
1.003 1: 1 " 5.12.10
II " 1 1
.072 (8.3)
12 " .805 13 "
(8.4)
I/T 25 MBaud
The excess noise exponent x .5 corresponds fairly well with an APD ionisation
constant
(8.5)
(8.6)
For the average number of primary electrons, generated by the dark current
A in the time slot T
o
f::, (8.8)
n cJ = A0 T
 43 
we have
In this :>ection the influence of the dark current Ao and the extinction EXT
on the dl=cision threshold D and the average bit error probability P is
e
analyzed.
As a starting point we take Ao = 0, EXT = 0 and D = Dp(B~e) (see (6.6». Using
(6.22) through (6.25) we calculate the average received optical power, required
9
for a Pe(B~e) = Q(6) ~ 10 , at the optimum average avalanche gain GoPt(B~e):
G (B')
opt we
= 56.89 (8.15)
16
Throughout this section we will put b
max
= 1.3289 .10 J (P
0
= 57.80 dBm)
and G = 56.89.
For the average number of primary electrons, generated by a received optical
pulse with the maximum energy b
max
b
max (8.17)
we have
 45 
From (6.1), (8.10) and (8.16) it follows, that the dark current contribution
V to E[v (t =O)IB] is much smaller that the maximum signal contribution.
o out s
Moreover, Vo is inversely proportional to the signalling rate I/T.
According to (3.21) the dark current contribution to Var[v (t =O)IB] is
out s
Table 8.1. The influence of the dark current A and the extinction EXT
o
on various normalized decision thresholds and on the average
bit error probability Pe'
(straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols;
16
t s = O·'max
b = 1.3289.10 J', G = 56.89,' further receiver
data: section 8.1)
I 8 8
\ (sec ) o 6.25 .10 6.25 .10
EXT o o .01
8 8
P
e
I. 18 . 10 2.34 .10
P
e
 46 
Table 8.1 shows the influence of A and EXT on the various normalized decision
o
thresholds; in some cases the average bit error probability P e is also
calculat,ed. We always have Dp(Bwe) < DML (Bwe) (see subsection 6.1.1). The
difference between DML(B~e) and DML(B ) is very small, because of the shot
we
noise of the neighboring symbols being very small as compared with that of
the symbol under decision (LII « II' see (8.3». Using (6.10) we find that
I
the optimum threshold D increases if A or EXT increases. This agrees with
opt 0
subsection 6.1.2. P increases with increasing Ao or EXT due to the increasing
e
noise power at the equalizer output.
In the remaining sections of this chapter we consider the average bit error
probability P as a function of the maximum energy b in a received optical
e max
pulse, t.he average avalanche gain G, and the decision threshold D:
P = P (b ,G,D) (8.2J)
e e max
We put), = 6.25. JO 8 primary electrons/sec (see (8.2», and EXT = .OJ. The
o
relation between b and the average received optical power P is given
max 0
by (3. J7).
'
10 \
\
.
\
\
\ \
\ \ 1>
'P.. ""•• " \/ '""ct."
t /\ \
"P.
e fIr"'" z \
\
\
,;'f \
, \
\
\ \
\
\
f \
\
\
, ,,
\
\
" ....
.
to
.1.~ ."1.'
Figure 8.1. The average bit error probability Pe versus the normalized
decision threshold D/b (straight binary transmission with
max 16
equiprobable symbols' t = O' I/T = 25 MBaud; bmax = 1.3289.10 J
's '
(P ~ 57.75 dBm); G = 56.89; EXT .01; received optical pulses:
o
rectangular, duty cycle a = .5 (Gaussian, a ~ .144); equalized
r g
output pulses: raised cosine, rolloff factor S= I; further
receiver data: section 8.1)
Figure 8.2 shows a plot of P versus G, calculated using Dopt /b max and
16 e
putting b
max
= 1.3289.10 J (P ~ 57.75 dBm). Also plotted are D
o
/b
opt max
,
P
emax
= Pe (Bw'e) and Pem~n
. = Pe (BB'e)' Dopt /b max is calculated by minimizing
P with bmax and G fixed.
e
In agreement with subsection 6.1.2., Dopt /b max decreases if G increases.
P is again tightly bounded by P and P . , as discussed in section 8.4.
e emax em~n
 48 
.,.
;'1' ~
.~
1>.....
l'
'.
.~.
1 ..
I.~
.~~
I
_""i"h
.'.
'1 •'J~
'0.
:10
.....
•'1.0
to .,0 ~d §'o
'0 7°
Grt .G
Figure B.2. The average bit error probability P versus the average avalanche
e
gain G, using the normalized optimum decision threshold D /b •
opt max
(straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols; t & 0;
16 s
I/T = 25 MBaud; b = 1.3289.10 J (P ~ 57.75 dBm); EXT = .01;
max 0
received optical pulses: rectangular, duty cycle a =.5 (Gaussian,
r
ag ~ .144); equalized output pulses: raised cosine, rolloff factor
S= 1; further receiver data: section 8.1)
8.6. Influence of the average received optical power, and of line coding
,
10
1B2B
16'
P
e
straight
,.
'0 binary
'2
10
I~
10 L__~__~__~__~~~~__~__~__~___ ~__J
62 6\ 60 69 58 51 56 55 54 53 52 5\
P (dBm)
o
Figure 8.3.a. The average bit error probability P
e
60
1B2B
50
5B6B
40 ~
st ra ight
bi nary
30 ~__L~__~__~__~__~__~__~__~__L~
62 6\ 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 6\
Po (dBm)
Figure 8.3.b. The optimum average avalanche gain G
opt
 50 
.41
.48
.45
straight
.44
.43 binary
.42
.4\
.4
.39
D,opt .38

b
 .31
.36
max
.35
.34
.33
.32
.31
.3
.29
.28
.11
62 6\ 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 5\
P (dBm)
o
Figure 8.3.c. The normalized optimum decision threshold D Ib
opt max
Figure 8.3. The average bit error probability P versus the average received
e
optical power P , using the optimum average avalanche gain G
o opt
and the normalized optimum decision threshold D t/b ;
op max
calculated for straight binary transmission with equiprobable
symbols, 5B6B coding and IB2B split phase coding.
(t
s
= Q. R
'
= 25 Mbit/sec; EXT = .01; received optical pulses:
rectangular, duty cycle ~
r
= .5 (Gaussian, ~
g
~ .144); equalized
output pulses: raised cosine, rolloff factor S = 1; further
receiver data: section 8.1)
Plots of G and of D t/b versus P are shown by figure a.3.b and a.3.c
opt op max 0
respectively. These plots are calculated for straight binary transmission
with equiprobable symbols, for 5B6B coding, and for IB2B split phase coding.
Gop t and Dop t/b max are calculated by minimizing P e = Pe (bmax ,G,D) over G and
D, with b fixed. The relation between P and b is given by (3.17). P
max 0 max o
can also be related to n p ' i. e. the average number of primary electrons
generate:d by a received optical pulse having the maximum energy bmax'•
 51 
plIO
= 11
2.10 3
n . T . 10 0 (B.22)
p hV (1 + EXT)
T
=m
n • R 30 MBaud (B.23)
= 50 MBaud (B.24)
T
Hence for straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols P = 60 dBm
o
corresponds with n ~ 254 primary electrons, and for IB2B split phase coding
p
P = 56.5 dBm corresponds with n ~ 284 primary electrons.
o p
The plots in figure B.3, obtained for rectangular received optical pulses with
duty cycle a r = .5, are according to section 8.2 nearly identical with those
obtained for Gaussian pulses with a
g a /112 ~ .144. This can be verified
r
from table B.2 in the case of straight binary transmission with equiprobable
symbols. The differences are too small to notice in figure B.3.
By assuming no timing errors (t s = 0), the neighboring symbols do not affect
E[vout(t =O)IB] (see (6.1». Moreover, as compared with the symbol under
s
decision, the neighboring symbols hardly contribute to the shot noise power
at the equalizer output (LII I « II' see (B.3», and therefore hardly to
Var[v (t = O)IB]. Hence, the interference of the neighboring symbols is
out S
nearly negligible. This is illustrated in figure B.3.a, where in the case
of straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols in addition to P
e
(solid curve) also P = P (BW'C) and P . = P (BB'C) (both broken curves)
emax e eml.n e
are plotted. These three curves nearly coincide with each other.
If Po increases, P e decreases strongly, as shown by figure B.3.a. In the case
9
of straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols P = 10 requires
e
~ 57.35 dBm (corresponding with 1.84 nH) at G
opt '" 39.7 and Dopt Ib max '"
P
o
.342.
As compared with straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols, mBnB
 52 
Pe * opt /bmax*
P (dBm) G * D
o opt
coding requires for the same information rate R an increase in the signalling
rate I/T by a factor n/m (see C7. I». We have seen that the interference of
the neil~hboring symbols is nearly negligible here. Hence the suppression of
the most unfavourable (but also of the most favourable) combinations of these
symbols, as achieved by mBnB coding (see chapter 7), hardly plays a part. The
increas,~ in I/T is therefore (and because a balanced code is assumed) the
most important aspect of mBnB coding as far as error probability calculations
are con,cerned.
As comp.ared with straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols, the
power penalty for using the 5B6B code is according to figure 8.3.a .85 to .9
dB to achieve the same Pe' and for using the IB2B split phase code 3.4 to 3.5
dB. Because of P ~ Pe(BWC) and the increase in I/T being the most important
e
influence of mBnB coding on Pe' the penalty for using mBnB coding can be
approximated here according to (6.28) by
 53 
3x + 2
10'2x+2 18.25)
The receiver in question has an APD excess noise exponent x = .5 (see seeliol.
8. I), leading to a penalty of .924 dB for using the 5B6B code and of 3.51 dB
for using the IB2B split phase code. Thus (8.25) is a good approximation here.
Figure 8.3.b shows, that at a given P the use of 5B6B coding instead of
o
straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols requires an increase
in G by approximately a factor 1.12, and the use of IB2B split phase coding
opt
an increase by approximately a factor 1.57 (both at P = 55 dBm). If we take
o
into account mEnB coding only by its increase in I/T again, this increase in
G at a given P is according to (6.21) by approximately a factor
opt 0
which is (1.2)2/3 ~ 1.13 for 5B6B coding and (2)2/3 ~ 1.59fur IB2B split phase
coding. Thus (8.26) is a good approximation here.
From the figures 8.3.a and 8.3.b it follows that, as compared with straight
binary transmission with equiprobable symbols, 5B6B coding requires for
9
P = 10 an increase in G t by approximately a factor 1.07, and IB2B split
e op
phase coding by approximately a factor 1.26. Because of P ~ Pe(B
e WC )
and the
increase in I/T being the most important influence of mEnB coding on P , this
e
increase in G at a fixed P is according to (6.29) by approximately a
opt e
factor
(n/m)I/(2+2x) (8.27)
The receiver in question has an APD excess nOIse exponent x = .5 (see section
8.1), leading to a factor (I .2)1/3 ~ 1.063 for 5B6B coding and a factor
(2)1/3 ~ 1.260 for IB2B split phase coding. Thus (8.27) is a good approximation hPTP.
In the preceding chapters we have assumed DC coupling in the amplifier and the
equalizer. The decision threshold of the threshold detector may therefore be
a DC voltage, which has to be very stable. This makes high demands on the
technical realization.
Let us now consider another receiver model with AC coupling in the amplifier
and the equalizer. The AC coupled amplifier and equalizer can be represented
by a DC coupled amplifier and equalizer followed by a coupling capacitor, as
shown in figure 9.1. The threshold detector can be realized by a comparator
with one input grounded.
fiber
threshold detector
o·~~IL_d_e_c_o_d_e_r_ __'I••
t s +I.tT
•
H (0)
DC level of v (t) = (DC level of p (t» • :.::.o~u:.::t,<_ + V (9. Z)
out 0 H (0) 0
p
1 T/Z
DC level of po(t) = T f E[p (t)] dt
T/Z 0
1 T/Z .,.."
b
max (9.4)
=Z • (I+EXT)
Hence
= ..::;::"";,::;
ZT f h (t) dt
p
b
max (I +EXT)
=
ZT
. HP (0) (9.5)
b ( I+EXT)
max
D
eq
=
Z • H'ou t(o) + V
0
(9.6)
b (1+EXT)
D = { max + AT ~}.H' (0) (9.7)
eq Z 0 11 out
Thus using this receiver model, we can vary by varying H' t(o). D
eq ou
For instance, let us assume a raised cosine equalized spectrum H' (f) with
out
a rolloff factor S> 1 (see also (4.IZ»:
 57 
H' (f)
out sin(2~) . cos(S)
TIf
for If I < (SI)/2
0 otherwise
Figure 9.2.a shows this spectrum (see also figure 4.3.a), and figure 9.2.b
the time functions (see also figure 4.3.c). These time functions decay very
fast; the larger 6 is, the faster the decay. The worst case eye patterns,
shown by figure 9.3, are therefore wide open. Rolloff factors S > 1.5 intro
duce small irregularities in the eye pattern, because of h' (t) having zero
out
crossings for It I < I.
From (4.12) and (9.8) we have
D A T
~= { I+EXT +_0__ In . (TI
hV} .S1n 26 ) f or 6 > I (9. 10)
b 2 b
max max
..
. 75
.6
.. •
.~
.~
~ ,.....d
;~
'0
e
:~ f
25
V
o J \\\
'
 .f5
4 J 2 1 o 1 3
T
.8
.6
.2
00
.5c:: 0
.,
."
.,? .2
»
w .4
.6
.8
I
.5 .4 .3 .2 .1 o .1 .2 .3 .4 .5
time/T
Figure 9.3. Worst case eye patterns for raised cosine pulses with rolloff
factor B (a: B = .1; b: B = .5; c: B = 1; d: B = 1.5; e: B = 2;
f: S = 2.5)
. . . _
.5
Deq
.4
b max
.3
.2
.1
0
0 1 2 3 4
13
Figure 9.4. The normalized equivalent decision threshold D /b versus
eq max
the rolloff factor S of the raised cosine equalized output
pulses (A
o
= 0; EXT = 0)
 60 
In the preceding chapters we have assumed, that narrowing the received optical
pulses leads to a proportional increase in pulse height, thus leaving the
pulse energy unchanged (see figure 4.2). The peak power of a practical optical
transmit:ter (laser diode or LED) however is limited. Hence there is an upper
bound on the pulse height, and therefore a lower bound on the pulse width.
Let us now assume for the received optical pulses having the maximum energy
b (the socalled ON pulses) a fixed height P such, that the peak power
max max
limit of' the optical transmitter is not exceeded. Hence the pulse energy is
proportional to the pulse width. Figure 9.5 shows rectangular and Gaussian
ON puls.!s. We have for the pulse power p(t)
h (t)
p (I:) = P P (9. II)
max h (0)
P
1pet) p r pet)
max
 
p
0( • max
•
.5 o .5
tiT tiT
9.S.a. rectangular (a < I) 9.5.b. Gaussian
r
+=
f p(t)dt = Pmax /hp (0) (9.12)
CD
b
max
= T.Pmax /h'(o)
p
= a r .T.Pmax (9.13)
b = a ./2iT.T.P (9.14)
max g max
_ 10 [ar·Pmax · (I+EXT)]
Po  10. log 2 mW (dBm) (9. 15)
(dBm) (9.16)
We use the data for a typical optical receiver again, enumerated by Personick
in [3, part II, chapter III] (see reo I) and(8.2». The following additions and
 62 
6"
P 1T • Pmax,r (9. 18)
max,g = \
Then from (9.15) and (9.16) we have the same average received optical power P
o
for both pulse types, if we have the same r.m.s. pulse width a/To Hence, the
results of error prohability calculations using rectangular received optical
pulses 'Nith duty cycle Ct and maximum height P = 100 nW, described in the
r max,r
followin.g sections, are nearly equal to those using Gaussian pulses with
ag = Ct
r
/112 and Pmax,g '" 138.20 nW. This will be verified in subsection 9.3.4.
9.3.3. Influence of the rolloff factor of the raised cosine equalized output
.spectrum
Figure 9.6 shows a plot of the average bit error probability P versus the roll
e
off factor S of the raised cosine equalized output spectrum. It is calculated
 63 
t '00
c; D.$
1; Gor~
'0 . ~
9° I. .x
,
I I
80
De,\
"....... " 7° 1
.1
'0
..0
t .'l
40
30 .1
:, ~.e; 3
130,""
• fJ
Figure 9.6. The average bit error probability P versus the rolloff factor B
e
of the raised cosine equalized output spectrum, using the optimum
average avalanche gain G (normalized equivalent decision thres
opt
hold D /b ).
eq max
(IB2B split phase coding; t = 0; I/T = 140 MBaud; EXT = .01;
s
received optical pulses: rectangular, duty cycle a = .3; maximum
r
height P = 100 nW (Gaussian, a = a //12 ~ .087, P =
max,r g r max,g
P
max,r
./67IT ~ 138.20 nW) (P 0 ~ 48.20 dBm); further receiver data:
subsection 9.3.1)
Figure 9.6 shows also plots of Copt' and of the normalized equivalent
decision threshold D /b (see (9.10)).
eq max
 64 
9.3.4. Influence of the average received optical power, and of line coding
!i
10
7
10
P
e
10' "
straight
III
10 bi nary
']
10
.!i
10
$7 56 55 54 53 52 5\ 50 49 48 47 46 45
~ (dBm)
9 . 7.a. The average bit error probability P
e
 65 
= R = 70 MBaud (9.20)
T
ci.
r
.05 .I .3 .4 .5
90
so
1B2B
10
5B6B
60
straight
50 binar y
40
57 56 55 54 53 52 51 60 49 46 47 46 45
P (dBm)
o
0(
r
·05 .I .2 .4 .5
2.6
straight
5B6B
2.5 binary
Popt
1B2B
2.4
2.2
51 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 41 46 45
Po (dBm)
9.7.c. The optimum rolloff factor Sopt
Figure 9.7. The average bit error probability P Versus the average received
e
optical power P , using the optimum average avalanche gain G
o opt
and the optimum rolloff factor S of the raised cosine equalized
opt
output spectrum; calculated for straight binary transmission with
equiprobable symbols, 5B6B coding and IB2B split phase coding.
s
= O'' R = 70 Mbit/sec; EXT = .01; received optical pulses:
(t
rectangular, duty cycle a , maximum height P
r max,r
= 100 nW
(Gaussian, a g = a r 1m, Pmax,g = Pmax,r .16TiT" 138.20 nW);
further receiver data: subsection 9.3.1)
T
= !:.
m
R = 84 MBaud (9.21)
and IB2E. split phase coding liT = 140 MBaud (see (9.19)).
The plots in figure 9.7, obtained for rectangular received optical pulses with
duty cycle a and maximum height P = 100 nW, are according to subsection
r max,r
 67 
9.3.2 nearly identical with those for Gaussian pulses with a = a 1/f2 and
g r
p
max,g
= P
rnax,r
.16Trf '" I 38. 20 nW. This can be verified from table 9.1 in the
case of straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols. The differences
are too small to notice in figure 9.7.
Table 9.1. The average bit error probability P as a function of the average
e
received optical power P , using the optimum average avalanche gain
o
G t and the optimum rolloff factor S of the raised cosine
~ ~t
equalized output spectrum; calculated for rectangular and Gaussian
received optical pulses with the same r.m.s. width alT and with
maximum height Pmax,r = 100 nW and Pmax,g = Pmax,r .16Trf '" 138.20 nW
respectively (a/T = a = a 1/f2; straight binary transmission with
g r
equiprobable symbols; ts = 0; liT = 70 MBaud; EXT = .01; further
receiver data: subsection 9.3.1)
P (dBm) P* G* S;pt
o e opt
4
55.98 4.512 • 10 72.95 2.333
4
4.512 · 10 72.95 2.333
15
49.96 I . 125 .10 47.04 2.587
15
1.135 · 10 46.99 2.587
With the same arguments as used in section 8.6, here also the interference
of the neighboring symbols is nearly negligible. Thus the increase in liT is
the most important aspect of mBnB coding as far as error probability calcu
lations are concerned.
As compared with straight binary transmission with equiprobable symbols, the
power penalty for using the 5B6B code is according to figure 9.7.a approxi
mately 1 (I) dB, and for using the IB2B split phase code approximately 3.8
9 12
(4) dB to achieve a P = 10 (10 ). According to (8.25) these penalties are
e
.924 dB and 3.51 dB respectively. For the previous receiver model (8.25) was quite
 68 
accurate (see section (8.6), but here it underestimates the power penalties.
This calC. be explained as follows. As compared with the previous receiver
model, increasing P yields here a larger increase in the noise power at the
o
equalize,r output, the weighting factors II' LII I , 12 and 13 do not remain
constant, but increase with Po because of the increasing optical pulse width
(and the, variations in S t' see figure 9.7. c). Thus P decreases less fast
~ e
if P increases, particularly for larger P • Hence the power penalties for
o 0
using mBnB coding increase as P decreases.
e
Figure 9.7.b shows an increase in G at fixed P if the conversion ratio
opt 0
n/m of the mBnB code increases. As compared with straight binary transmission
with equiprobable symbols, Gop t increases at P0 = 50 dBm using 5B6B coding
by approximately a factor 1.12, and using IB2B split phase coding by approxi
mately Ii factor 1.56. According to (8.26) these factors are (1.2)2/3 " 1. 13
and (2) 2/3 "1.5 9 respect~ve
. I y. Thus (8.26) is a good approximation here.
For the previous receiver model however it was slightly more accurate (see
section 8.6), because there the weighting factor 13 for instance, on which
G t alao depends (see (6.21», did not vary.
op
The figures 9.7.a and 9.7.b show an increase in Gopt at fixed P if n/m
e
increas,~s. As compared with straight binary transmission with equiprobable
9
symbols, G increases at P = 10 using 5B6B coding by approximately a
opt e
factor 1.05, and using IB2B split phase coding by approximately a factor 1.17.
According to (8.27) these factors are (1.2) 1/3" 1.063 and (2) 1/3 " 1.260
respectively. Approximation (8.27) was more accurate for the previous receiver
model, because there the weighting factors did not vary.
Plotting G logarithmically as a function of P at a fixed I/T (and fixed
opt a
1 , k and EXT), we get according to (6.21) approximately a straight line.
3
This applies to sufficiently large I/T, and is confirmed by figure 9.7.b.
Here also approximation errors are caused by the variations in the weighting
factors (e.g. in 1 ) accompanying the increase in Po' Particularly at a large
3
pulse width (a or a g ) and at a strongly varying optimum rolloff factor Sopt
r
these errors are noticeable, as shown by figure 9.7.b for IB2B split phase
coding.
Figure 9.7.c shows a plot of Sopt versus P . Using the previous receiver
0
model, the normalized optimum decision threshold D t/b increased at
op max
fixed F' if we used mBnB coding instead of straight binary transmission with
o
equiprobable symbols; the larger n/m, the larger this increase was (see
figure 8.3.c). According to (9.10) this corresponds with a decreasing Sop t
 69 
We numerica1ly calculated the average bit error probability using two receiver
models. The influence of a number of important system parameters and of mBnB
line coding was analyzed. The decision threshold and the average avalanche
gain were optimized to yield a minimum average bit error probability. Timing
errors in the receiver were not considered, and the shape of the received
optical pulses was assumed to be known (rectangular or Gaussian). The
equalization in the receiver was of the raised cosine type. A Gaussian
approximation of the statistics of the signal at the threshold detector in
put was introduced. Average bit error probabilities were calculated using the
exhaustive method.
The Gaussian approximation of the statistics of the signal at the threshold
detector input is a1lowed at the average received optical powers and signal
ling rates considered here, because of the average number of primary electrons
generatl!d in a time slot being very large. This approximation gives fairly
accurat.~ results, but tends to underestimate the optimum threshold setting
and to overestimate the optimum aver;lge avalanche gain. This occurs because
the Gaussian approximation depends only on the expectation and the variance
of the avalanche gain distribution, and is insensitive to its skewness to
wards Llrge values of the avalanche gain [I].
The assumption of rectangular received optical pulses makes sense only in the
case of negligible fiber dispersion. A certain amount of fiber dispersion
makes G,lussian pulses more plausible. Both pulse types appear to be nearly
equivalent in error probability calculations, if they have the same normalized
r.n.s. ,.idth.
Practical values of the received optical pulse width (for instance, a duty cycle
not exc,eeding 50% for rectangular pulses) and of the ro1loff factor of the
pulses at the equalizer output (for instance, a rolloff factor 1 or larger
for raised cosine pulses) yield a shot noise power of the neighboring symbols,
which is nearly negligible as compared with that of the symbol under decision.
In the absence of timing errors in the receiver, the interference of the
neighboring symbols is therefore very small. Hence the exhaustive method,
which can deal only with a finite (preferably small) number of neighboring
symbols, is well suited to calculate average bit error probabilities. More
over, this method facilitates the implementation of line coding in the
calculations.
 71 
Acknowledgement
The author wishes to thank lecturer ir. J. van der Plaats and dr.ir. w.e. van
Etten for many helpful 1 and stimulating discussions. He is also grateful to
Mrs. T. van de VenPellegrino and Mrs. L. de JongVriens for typing this paper.
Referenc:es
[1] S.D. Personick, P. Balaban, J.H. Bobsin and P.R. Kumar: "A detailed
comparison of four approaches to the calculation of the sensitivity
of optical fiber system receivers", IEEE Tr. on Communications, Vol.
COM25, No.5, May 1977, pp. 541548.
[2] S.D . Personick: "Baseband linearity and equalization in fiber optic
digital communication systems", BSTJ, Vol. 52, No.7, Sept. 1973, pp.
11751194.
[3] S.D" Personick: "Receiver design for digital fiber optic communication
sysl:ems, I and II", BSTJ, Vol. 52, No.6, JulyAug. 1973, pp. 843886.
[4} E. l'arzen: Stochastic processes, San Francisco: HoldenDay, 1962.
[5] A. l'apoulis: Probability, random variables and stochastic processes,
New York: Mc Graw Hill, 1965.
[6] G. Cariolaro: "Error probability in digital fiber optic communication
systems", IEEE Tr. on Information Theory, Vol. IT24 , No.2, Mar. 1978,
pp. 213221.
[7] L_E. Franks: "Further results on Nyquist's problem in pulse transmission",
IEEE Tr. on Communication Technology, Vol. COM16. No.2, Apr. 1968, pp.
337340.
[8] R. Dogliotti, A. Luvison and G. Pirani: "Pulse shaping and timing errors
in optical fibre systems", Proc. of the Fourth European Conference on
Optical Communication, Genova, Italy, Sept. 1215, 1978, pp. 510516.
[9] J.M. Wozencraft and I.M. Jacobs: Principles of communication engineering,
New York: Wiley, 1965.
[10] S.D. Personick: "Statistics of a general class of avalanche detectors
with applications to optical communication", BSTJ, Vol. 50, No. 10, Dec.
1971, pp. 30753095.
[11] Y. Takasaki, M. Tanaka, N. Maeda, K. Yamashita and K. Nagano: "Optical
pulse formats for fiber optic digital communications", IEEE Tr. on
Conmunications, Vol. COM24, No.4, Apr. 1976, pp. 404413.
Appendix I
Timenormalized equalized output pulse shape h' (t) (section 4.3): raised
out
cosine or "optimum!!, rolloff factor S.
HOUTITI:~AlS[O C06
Hpl T I. RECTANGULAR
.75
....
0
" .5
,..C1/T=.260, r =.5
0
~/
\ a
~ 2 3 4
4 3 2
T
 74 
HOUTIT'.RRISED COS
Hpl T', GAUSSIAN
.15
...
0
N
.5
.... O'/T =.144,r=1

0
.25
C1IT=.144,rD ~=.260,r=.5
0
4 3 2  I 0 2 3 4
T
HOUTIT'. OPTIHUM
Hp I T I. RECTANGULAR
.16
...
0
N ",Cf IT =.144 .r= 1
....
~
.S
.26
C11T=.144,r=.1
.~ I)
\: 0'1 =.260,r=·5
0
4 3 2 \ 0 2 3 4
T
 75 
HOUI I I I, OPTIMUM
Hplli. GAUSSIAN
.75

a
....
N
.5
O/T =.144.r=1

~
.25
O/T =.144,r=.1
0
4 3 2 \ 0 2 , 4
T
 76 
Appendix 2
Plots of the weighting factors versus the normalized r.m.s. optical pulse
width, with the rolloff factor of the equalized output spectrum as a parameter
Received optical pulse shape (section 4.2): rectangular o.r Gaussian, normalized
r.m.s. optical pulse width alT (~ .5).
Equalized output pulse shape (section 4.3): raised cosine or "optimum", rolloff
factor B (= .1, = .5 and =1).
20·0
BETA = 0.1
RECTANGULAR
10·0 GAUSSIAN
6.0
II 4.0
2·0
1 .5
I .0 
OPTIMUM
  
ra ised COS
0.8
a .05 .1 .16 ·2 .25 .3 3S .4 ·45 .5
51 GMAIT
 77 
20.0
BETA =0·1
RECTANGULAR
10·0 GAUSSIAN
G.O
SUM 1 4.1)
:?
2.0 :?
.;:;
raised cos .;:;
1.5 .;:;
~~
~
~
1 .a ~
OPTIMUM
0.6
a .05 .1 .15 .2 .20 .3 )~ .4 .45 ·5
51 GM'11T
1.0+01
GAUSSIAN
I .001
1.002
1·003
5en
I .004
1 .005
I .006
0 .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 ·3 .35 .4 .45 ·5
S 1GMR/T
 78 
20. 0 rrr,r~_.______r_.___,___,
BE TA = O. I
RECTANGULAR
10·0 GAUSSIAN
6.0
~ ·0
12
7
2·0 7
.::;
;:::.
raised cos ~
;:::.
~~
~
1 .0
0·6 OPTIMUM
0·6
0 .05 .1 . 15 ·2 ·25 .3 35 ·4 .45 .6
SIGMAIT
10.00
BETA = o. 1
4·00 RECTANGULAR
GAUSSIAN
2·00
I ·00
13
0.40
",..
0·20 ra is e d cos ?"
o·o~
I
I
0 ·05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .35 .4 .45 .5
51 GMAIl
 79 
BETn ~ 0.5
RECTANGULAR
10.0 GAUSSIAN
6.0
11 4 .0
2.0
/

1 ·5
OPTIMUM .../
1 .0
0.8 L
~ai~d  COS
0 .05 .1 .15 .2 .26 .3 ·35 .4 .45 .5
51 GMAIT
20.0 ,..,...r..,
BETR ~ 0.5
RECTANGULAR
10.0  GAUSSIAN
13.0
SUM 1 4.0
/
/
/
2.0
./ ./
1.5 OPTIMUM ~ /

1 ·«1+01
BETA : 0.5
1 . «1+00
1.001
RECTANGULAR
GAUSSIAN
 ::;:::::. 
...
I .002
. OPTIMUM
:1.003
S
til
1.004
·1 .005
I .006
0 .05 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 ·35 .4 .46 .6
S I GMAIT
20.0
Bnn = 0.5
RECTANGULAR
10.0 _. GAUSSIAN
6.0
4.0 ,
/
12
/
/
/
2.0
/ /'
~
ra ised COS ~
1.a ~7
0.6
0.6
~ OPTIMUM
SlGMAIT
 81 
1000 ,
BfTA = 0.5
4·00 RECTANGULAR
GAUSSIAN
l.OO
I .00 /
/
J3
/
,
0·40 /
/ ./'
0.20 OPTIMUM
../"
~
../"
0·10
 ..
raised cos
0.04 ___ .....I..._~ L
''
0 .05 I 15 .2 .25 3 .35 .4 .45 .5
51 GMAIl
20.0 r~.rr~'rT~~
8[1 A = 1.0
RECTANGULAR
10.0 GAUSSIAN
6·0 /
/
11 4.0 I
I
I I
I I
/ /
2.0 / /
/ /
1 .5 /
,
OPTIMUM
, 
1 .a ~/~~~~ COS
0·6
0 .05 .1 .15 .2 .Z6 .3 .35 .4 .46 .5
51GMA/T
 82 
BfTR = 1.0
RECTANGULAR
10.0 GAUSSIAN
I
I
6.0
I
/
SUM I 4.0
/ I
I I
I I
/ /
/
2.0 ,/ ,"
" ... .
1 ·6
1 .a
0.6
a .05 .I .15 ·2 .26 .3 .35 .4 .4& ·5
SlGl1A/T
I ·Q.OO RECTANGULAR

GAUSSIAN
1 . Q 0 1
, .
... ~
raised
1 . QOZ
~ 1.003
<;;
1.U04
\.1105
\ . a06
0 .OS .1 .15 .2 ·25 ·3 .35 .4 .45 .5
SIGl1R/T
 83 
BEtR = 1 .0
RECTANGULAR /
10.0 GAUSSIAN
/
6·0 I
/
4.Q / /
12 I /
/ /
/
I
/
/
2·Q /
/ /
/ /
/
/ /
, ,/ /
/
1 .a ra i sed cos
0.8
OPTIMUM
0.6
0 .06 .I .16 ·2 ·26 ·3 ·35 .4 .46 .5
&IGI1A/T
10.00 ,
BElA = 1 .0
4.00
RECTANGULAR /
.. GAUSSIAN
/
200
/
/
1.00 /
/
13 /
/
0.40 / /
OPTIMUM
0.20
/' / '
../
0.10
raised cos
0.04
0 .06 .I .16 .2 .25 .3 .36 .4 ·46 .5
SIGMA/T
 84
Appendix 1
Plots of the weighting factors versus the rolloff factor of the raised cosine
equalized output spectrum, with the normalized r.m.s. optical pulse width as
a parameter
Equalized output pulse shape (section 4.3): raised cosine, rolloff factor S
(~ 3).
1.5
1.4
II
1 .2
<1 IT =.087
"IT =.144
1 .0
D .5 1.5 2 2.5 3
BETA
 85 
t .5
I ·4
SUM 1
I .2
all =.144 _
all =.087 ~~
. .
~~~
1 .0
0'/h.029
, _ _ _ _ _ _ .1 _ _ ~'_
1 .• 02
t .• 03
t .• 04
t .• 05
t .• 06
1 .• 01  GAUSSIAN
HOUT1T),RAI6fD COS
  J_ _ _ _ _'_ _ _
\ .• 08 L_
_~_ :~
2.0 r    ,      ,
RECTANGULAR
1.5
 GAUSSIAN
HOUT1T):RRISEO COS
I .0
0.7
12
O/T =.144
0.5
0'/T=.087
0.4
<11 T =.029
0.3
o .5 1 .5 2 2.5 3
BETA
_____ _ RECTANGULAR
0.30
.. GAUSSIAN
HOUT1T):RAISEO COS
0.20 / ,
0.07
0.05
L_ _ _ _'_ _ _ _ _   '  _ _ .L.._. _ _ _ ' _ _ _ _''_ _ _ _...J
0.04
0 .5 I .5 2 2.5 3
BETA
'~
Reports:
Reports:
14) Lorencin. M.
AUTOMATIC METEOR REFLECTIONS RECORDING EQUIPMENT.
THReport 70E14. 1970. ISBN 9061440149
15) Smets. A.S.
THE INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLE METHOD AND RELATED IDENTIFICATION SCHEMES.
TH Report 70E15. 1970. ISBN 9061440157
16) White. J .... R.C.
A SURVEY OF RANDOM METllODS FOR PARAMETER OPTIMIZATION.
THReport 70E16. 1971. ISBN 9061440165
17) Talmon. J.t.
APPROXIMATED GAUSSMARKOV ESTIMATORS AND RELATED SCHEMES.
THReport 71E17. 1971. ISBN 9061440173
v
18) Kalasek. V.
MEASUREMENT OF TIME CONSTANTS ON CASCADE D.C. ARC IN NITROGEN.
THReport 71E18. 1971. ISBN 9061440181
19) Hosse1et. l.M.l.F.
OZONBILDUNG MITTELS ELEKTRISCHER ENTLADUNGEN.
THReport 71E19. 1971. ISBN 906 I 4401 9X
20) Arts. M.G.J.
ON THE INSTANTANEOUS MEASUREMENT OF BLOODFLOW BY ULTRASONIC MEANS.
THReport 71E20. 1971. ISBN 9061440203
21) Roer. Th.G. van ue
NONISO THERMAL ANALYSIS OF CARRIER WAVES IN A SEMICONDUCTOR.
THReport 71E21. 1971. ISBN 9061440211
22) Jeuken. PJ .• C. Huber and C.E. Muluers
SENSING INERTIAL ROTATION WITH TUNING FORKS.
THReport 71E22. 1971. ISBN 906 I 44022X
23) Dijk. J ... J.M. Berenus and E.J. Maanuers
APERTURE BLOCKAGE IN DUAL REFLECTOR ANTENNA SYSTEMS  A REVIEW.
THReport 71E23. 1971. ISBN 9061440238
24) Kregting. J. and R.C. White. Jr.
ADAPTIVE RANDOM SEARCH.
THReport 71E24. 1971. [SBN 906[440246
25) Damen, A.A.H. anu H.A.l. Piceni
THE MULTIPLE DIPOLE MODEL OF THE VENTRICULAR DEPOLAR[SATION.
THReport 7[E25. [971. ISBN 9061440254
26) Bremmer. H.
A MATHEMATICAL THEORY CONNECTING SCATTERING AND DIFFRACTION
PHENOMENA, INCLUDING BRAGGTYPE INTERFERENCES.
THReport 7[E26. 1971. ISBN 9061440262
27) Bokhooven. W.M.G. van
METHODS AND ASPECTS OF ACTIVE RCFILTERS SYNTHESIS.
THReport 71E27. 1970. ISBN 9061440270
28) Boeschoten. F.
TWO FLUIDS MODEL REEXAM[NED FOR A COLLlSIONLESS PLASMA IN THE
STATION~RY .STATE
"'HRc!,w: 72E28. '9,; .. ISBN 906!~·4n89
EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
THE NETHERLANDS
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
Reports:
29) REPORT ON THE CLOSED CYCLE MHD SPECIALIST MEETING. Working group of the
joint ENEA/IAEA International MHD Liaison Group.
Eindhoven, TIle Netherlands, September 2022, 1971. Edited. by L.H.Th. Rietjens.
THReport 72E29. 1972. ISBN 9061440297
30) Kessel, CG.M. van and J.W.M.A. Houben
LOSS MECHANISMS IN AN MHD GENERATOR.
THReport 72E30. 1972. ISBN 9061440300
31) Veefkind, A.
CONDUCTION GRIDS TO STABILIZE MHD GENERATOR PLASMAS AGAINST
IONIZATION INSTABILITIES.
TH Report 72E31. 1972. ISBN 9061440319
32) Daalder, J.E., and C.W.M. Vos
DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS OF THE SPOT DIAMETER FOR SINGLE AND MULTI
CATHODE DISCHARGES IN VACUUM.
THReport 73E32. 1973. ISBN 9061440327
33) DaaIder, J.E.
JOULE HEATING AND DIAMETER OF THE CATHODE SPOT IN A VACUUM ARC.
THReport 73E33. 1973. ISBN 9061440335
34) Huber, C.
BEHAVIOUR OF THE SPINNING GYRO ROTOR.
THReport 73E34. 1973. ISBN 9061440343
35) Bastian, C et al.
THE VACUUM ARC AS A FACILITY FOR RELEVANT EXPERIMENTS IN FUSION
RESEARCH. Annual Report 1972. EURATOMT.H.E. Group 'Rotating Plasma'.
THReport 73E35. 1973. ISBN 9061440351
36) Blom, J.A.
ANALYSIS OF PHYSIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS BY PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES.
THReport 73E36. 1973. ISBN 906 I 44036X
37) Cancelled
38) Andriessen, F.J., W. Boerman and I.F.E.M. Holtz
CALCULATION OF RADIATION LOSSES IN CYLINDER SYMMETRIC HIGH
PRESSURE DISCHARGES BY MEANS OF A DIGITAL COMPUTER.
THReport 73E38. 1973. ISBN 9061440386
39) Dijk, J., CT.W. van Diepenbeek, E.J. Maanders and L.F.G. Thurlings
THE POLARIZATION LOSSES OF OFFSET ANTENNAS.
THReport 73E39. 1973. ISBN 9061440394
40) Goes, W.P.
SEPARATION OF SIGNALS DUE TO ARTERIAL AND VENOUS BLOOD FLOW IN THE
DOPPLER SYSTEM THAT USES CONTINUOUS ULTRASOUND.
THReport 73E40. 1973. ISBN 9061440408
41) Damen, A.A.H.
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SEVERAL MODELS OF THE VENTRICULAR
DEPOLARIZATION; INTRODUCTION OF A STRINGMODEL.
THReport 73E41. 1973. ISBN 9061440416
EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
THE NETHERLANDS
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
Reports:
51) Sampic. G.
THE BIT ERROR PROBABILITY AS A FUNCTION PATH REGISTER LENGTH IN THE
VITERBI DECODER.
THReport74E51. 1974. ISBN 9061440513
Reports:
Reports:
Reports:
Reports:
96) Stefanov, B.
ELECTRON MOMENTUM TRANSFER CROSSSECTION IN CESIUM AND RELATED CALCULATIONS
OF THE LOCAL PARAMETERS OF Cs + Ar MHD PLASMAS. THReport 79E96. 1979.
ISBN 9061440963