Digital predistortion for RF power amplifiers: State
of the art and advanced approaches
Mazen Abi Hussein ∗1 , Olivier Venard #2 , Bruno Feuvrie ξ3 and Yide Wang ζ4
∗ ESYCOM, # LaMIPS, ESIEE Paris, Systems Engineering Dept., 93162 Noisy-Le-Grand, France
ξ IETR-IUT Nantes, ζ IETR-Polytech’Nantes, 44300 Nantes, France
1 2
m.abihussein@esiee.fr
3 4
bruno.feuvrie@univ-nantes.fr
Abstract—Digital predistortion (DPD) is one of the most
promising techniques for the linearization of power amplifiers. In
this overview paper, some of the most important aspects related
to this technique are briefly covered. State of the art on the
DPD techniques, the associated signal processing algorithms and
crest-factor reduction techniques is presented.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Wireless communications technologies are in constant evo-
lution since the inception of cellular networks in the early
1980’s. From the first (1G) to the forth (4G) generation, the
intuitive adoption of users for mobile technologies has been
leading impressive innovations, from voice and text to mobile
web, apps and localization capabilities, among others. Ex-
tending mobile broadband availability and improving service
quality, while economically satisfying users’ demands, have
been the main quests of industry.
Energy consumption of wireless systems, and in particular
transmitters, accounts for very high amount of operating
expenses of mobile operators. RF power amplifiers (PAs) are
the most power consuming building blocks in wireless trans-
mitters. Their design is highly constrained by tradeoff between
power efficiency and linearity. Traditionally, high efficiency
operating modes induce unacceptable nonlinear distortions at
the output of the PA. On the other hand, the price for linearity
is a sharp drop in power efficiency.
In fact, in order to overcome spectrum scarcity, many
techniques have been developed to increase the amount of
data transmitted per Hz of spectrum used and to increase
speeds. The main drawback of such techniques comes from
the fact that the generated waveforms are extremely vulnerable
to imperfections in the transmission chain. Thus, the inherent
nonlinearity of PAs operating in high efficiency modes is less
tolerated than ever before.
Different techniques have been proposed to achieve high
efficiency linear operating modes of PAs. Some of them were
dedicated to improve efficiency behavior and others to extend
the linear behavior into high efficiency regions of operation.
The latter’s are known as linearization techniques.
In this special session, state of the art and advancements
of one of the most promising linearization techniques will be
covered. This technique, called digital predistortion (DPD),
978-1-4799-0620-8/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
o.venard@esiee.fr
yide.wang@univ-nantes.fr
Digital Analog
I(n)
Predistorter
y(t)
DAC RF PA
(FPGA) upconverter
Q(n)
DSP
Dual/Single ZIF/IF
ADC downconverter
Fig. 1. Adaptive digital baseband predistortion
is considered as a key enabling technique for future software-
Defined and cognitive radio transmitters. It is implemented en-
tirely using digital processors and this offers re-configurability
capabilities, one of the main features of future communication
systems.
II. D IGITAL PREDISTORTION TECHNIQUE
DPD is based on the identification of an equivalent baseband
model of the PA by comparing a digitized part of the output
signal to the reference input signal. The extracted model,
which is ideally the exact inverse of an equivalent baseband
model of the PA, is then used in baseband to process online
the input baseband signal, as shown in Fig. 1. Ideally, this
operation will pre-compensate the nonlinear effects of the PA,
and the whole system becomes linear.
Due to broadband and/or high power transmissions, PAs
exhibit nonlinear memory effects. The models used to model
the behavior of the PA and/or its pre-inverse (the predistorter
PD) must take into account such effects in order to achieve
linearity requirements. Thus, the models used may have very
complex structures and as a result their associated identifica-
tion algorithms may be very complex as well.
A. Model structures
In handheld units the PA presents negligible memory effects
and memoryless models are sufficient to compensate for the
nonlinearity. In this case, the static complex gain function F
of the PD can be estimated using an equivalent baseband
polynomial model. F can be also directly estimated for a
finite number of amplitudes on the whole dynamic range of
the input signal and implemented in a look-up table, see [1]
and references therein.
 Linearized PA d(n) = gu(n)
In base stations, PAs may exhibit strong memory effects u(n) x(n) y(n)
PA
and behavioral models that are capable of capturing such PD
e(n)
nonlinear dynamic effects are needed. Simplified structures
H
of the general Volterra model have been predominantly used
in this case. In general, the structure of the model, either for Mod. PD Mod. PA
the PA or for the PD, is defined empirically, i.e., depending Parameters
estimation
on the PA used, the validity of a predefined structure is
determined by an experimental evaluation of various criteria. Fig. 2. Direct Learning Architecture - DLA
For PA modeling evaluation many criteria have been defined in
literature [2], [3], and they can be also used for PD modeling Pre−inverse: PD
u(n) x(n) y(n)
evaluation in addition to linearity metrics, EVM (Error Vec- P’ PA

tor Magnitude) and ACPR (Adjacent Channel Power Ratio). 1

Copying Post−inverse g
Among all models of this type, the memory polynomial (MP) parameters zp (n) z(n)
P
model [4] and the generalized memory polynomial (GMP)
model [5] have good modeling performance when compared to Parameters
estimation
other model structures [2], [6]. Hammerstein (H), Wiener (W),
Hammerstein-Wiener (HW) and Wiener-Hammerstein (WH)
Fig. 3. Indirect Learning Architecture - ILA.
belong also to this category of models and have been evaluated
for PA and PD modeling [7], [8]. Parallel structures like the
parallel Hammerstein and Parallel HW models have been also
functions used. In [17] the 1-bit ridge regression algorithm
used recently [9]–[11].
has been used to eliminate the ill-conditioning problem and
In order to improve modeling accuracy, fitting PA or PD
a method to reduce complexity by reducing the number of
characteristics can be done piece wise over local sub-ranges
samples used without affecting the condition number. For other
of amplitude or over two-dimension regions defined by the
model structures, i.e., when the output depends nonlinearly on
amplitude and its delayed version as suggested in [12]. Such
the coefficients, sophisticated algorithms must be derived (e.g.,
models are particularly interesting for the linearization of
[11]).
highly nonlinear PAs.
Many algorithms have been also used for DLA architecture.
B. Identification algorithms The main advantage of DLA is its robustness in presence of
noise [18]. An algorithm based on an analytical method to
There are two different approaches for the identification of
compute the output of the predistorter using the extracted MP
the pre-inverse of the PA or PD. One of the main difficulties
model of the power amplifier has been proposed in [4]. This
in extracting the behavioral model of the PD comes from the
method is highly sensitive to noise, presenting high instability
fact that the internal signal interconnecting the PD and the
over system level iterations [18]. Unlike the analytical method,
PA is not known “a priori”. So in order to identify the PD
nonlinear filter architectures have been proposed in [19], [20]
we are restricted by an intermediate step, in which the PA is
in which an adaptive algorithm is used to identify a model
first identified, and its model is then used for the extraction
for PD from the extracted parameters of PA. The algorithms
of PD coefficients. This identification approach is based on a
proposed are the Nonlinear Filtered-x LMS (NFxLMS) [19]
direct learning architecture (DLA) illustrated in figure 2. On
and RLS (NFxRLS) [20] algorithms. The latter has good con-
the other hand, the post-inverse of the PA can be more easily
vergence properties but the overall computational complexity
identified since the input (PA output) and the output (linearly
is relatively high. This limits the use of DLA over ILA since
amplified version of PA input signal) signals are known. Thus,
the latter offers often good compromise between complexity
a second approach, based on an indirect learning architecture
and performance.
(ILA), has been proposed with the assumption that the post-
inverse can be used as a pre-inverse. This learning architecture III. A SSOCIATED S IGNAL P ROCESSING T ECHNIQUES
is illustrated in figure 3. In this case, a post-inverse model is
directly identified and used as a PD. A. I/Q Mismatches and DC offset
Identification algorithms differ upon the learning architec- The overall I/Q mismatches may arise from different ori-
ture used. In ILA, when the PD model can be written as a gins: Tx chain and observation path, analogue quadrature
linear combination of a set of basis functions, the least squares modulator/demodulator, AtoD and DtoA delays and transfer
(LS) technique can be used [5], [6]. In this case the matrix to functions mismatches [21], [22], which may give rise to
be inverted may have large condition number and the solutions frequency dependent mismatches. Part of these frequency
over system level iterations tend to be unstable. One of the dependent mismatches could be handled using equalizers [21].
solutions to this problem is the use of orthogonal polynomi- A useful property of modulated complex waveforms,
als as in [13]–[15]. Recently in [16] a stochastic conjugate namely circular property, allows to derive efficient iterative
gradient algorithm has been proposed which can smoothly or block algorithms to mitigate IQ impairments even for
estimate PD parameters over iterations and optimize the basis multicarrier waveforms [23]. In [24], frequency selective IQ
impairments are modeled by linear filtering of the complex
waveform and of its conjugate. This model is then merged to
the linear part of a Hammerstein predistorter to allow for joint
correction using ILA architecture.
Correction of the DC offset is still mandatory and may be
obtained in a simple manner using a running average combined
with an iterative smoothing update of the DC level to be
canceled [21].
B. Time Alignment
In both ILA and DLA the input and the output of the PA
are used to identify either the post-inverse or the direct model
of the PA. Thus they have to be synchronized. If the delay
between the input signal to be up converted to the PA and the
output of the PA downconverted is not frequency dependent,
it can then be approximated by a pure delay [25].
Delay estimation rely on a two steps procedure, namely the
coarse or integer (number of samples) delay estimation and
the fine or fractional delay estimation to obtain a good enough
time alignment [26].
The reference algorithm [27] for coarse time-alignment
seeks to maximize the mutual information between a function
of the cross-correlation between the input and the output of
the PA and the magnitude of the output of the PA. Other
approaches simply look for the maximum of the input-output
cross-correlation [28] or other criterion involving even less
computation complexity as absolute difference [29].
Once the integer part of the delay have been estimated and
compensated for, one may need to estimate the remaining
fractional delay. This can be done using two main approaches,
namely “open loop” and “closed loop”. “Open loop” ap-
proach seeks to maximize some criteria derived from the
cross-correlation between the output and a set of interpolated
sequences of the input [29]. In that case, the search for the
fractional delay is done in a discrete set. On the other hand a
“close loop” algorithm is proposed, for instance in [28], where
the detector is build upon the input-output cross-correlation
and the time delay is continuously compensated for, thanks to
an interpolator. In this last case the convergence time depends
on the loop parameters.
The sensitivity of the predistortion algorithm to the time
alignment has been widely reported, especially in the case
of LUT predistor. It is worth noting that the integer and
fractional time delay compensation is mandatory when the
predistorter is memoryless. When it embeds a deep enough
memory, the fractional delay identification and compensation
may be handled by the identification algorithm and embedded
in the predistorter.
C. Monitoring of the identification process
The triggering of the update of the coefficients of the
predistorter is sparsely addressed in the literature. It is mainly
based on monitoring of features of the transmitted signal like
ACPR [30], [31] or average power and histograms [32]. In
[32], a DCL mode (Dynamic Control Layer) is also offered
which allows to switch between different coefficient sets
depending on the average power of the transmitted signal.
IV. C REST FACTOR REDUCTION
Peak to average power ratio (PAPR) or crest factor (CF)
requires to back-off the PA and thus degrades the power effi-
ciency of the transmitter. Waveforms that exhibit the highest
spectrum efficiency (i.e. user throughput), as OFDM tends to
have high PAPR. A PAPR ranging from 5 to 8dB is a goal
to achieve reasonable power efficiency of the linearized RF
stage [33], but multicarriers downlink waveforms could exhibit
PAPR greater than 12dB [34], [35].
PAPR reduction techniques are constrained by the ful-
fillment of the guidelines for the transmitter: error vector
magnitude (EVM) and adjacent channel leakage ratio (ACLR)
[36]. One can roughly divide techniques used to reduce the CF
into two categories: the first one do not degrade the transmitted
signal but requires side information. In this category, one
can quote Selective Mapping and Partial Transmit Sequence
[37]. On the other hand approaches like hardware or soft-
ware clipping [33], [38] and optimization of the sub carriers
power [10] do not require side information but may severely
degrade the EVM and the ACLR. Software clipping or sub-
carriers power tuning strive to reduce the crest factor while
minimizing the regrowth of both the EVM and the ACLR. It
has been highlighted that software clipping of the magnitude
(polar transmitter) instead of the in-phase and quadrature
components (cartesian transmitter) allows better crest factor
reduction (CFR) for a given EVM budget [33]. In [39], the
author introduces another method by applying a spectrally
shaped “pulse” to cancel signal peaks, hence the name of
Peak Cancellation-CFR. The spectral shape depends on the
modulation waveforms and could accommodate multi-carriers
and multi-standards transmitted waveforms.
Cascading CFR and DPD allows to increase significantly
the efficiency of the PA as it has been shown in [10], [38].
DPD allow to decrease the back-off and hence increase the
average power at the input of the PA. As long as the peak
input power remains in the weak compression area of the PA,
the DPD is able to compensate for the nonlinearities. But if
the peak input power goes closer to the strong compression
area of PA, DPD will be useless and even detrimental. In
that case CFR will allow to decrease the peak input power
or equivalently to increase the average input power and thus
increase the efficiency of the PA while allowing the DPD to
be beneficial.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, some of the most important aspects of digital
predistortion techniques have been addressed. DPD relies
mainly on an equivalent baseband behavioral modeling of non-
linear dynamic systems. Some of the most important models
were referenced in this paper. Also, identification algorithms
based on two learning architectures have been briefly dis-
cussed. Other associated signal processing techniques, which
are needed for HW implementation, have been also briefly
discussed. Finally, Crest-Factor reduction techniques, which
are complementary to DPD, were addressed. With relatively
small increase in computational complexity those techniques
allow to reach the full potential of the correction capabilities
of DPD, by reducing the output power backoff, and thus
increasing system power efficiency.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. Presti, D. Kimball, and P. Asbeck, “Closed-loop digital predistortion
system with fast real-time adaptation applied to a handset wcdma pa
module,” Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 604 –618, march 2012.
[2] M. Isaksson, D. Wisell, and D. Ronnow, “A comparative analysis of
behavioral models for rf power amplifiers,” Microwave Theory and
Techniques, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 348–359, Jan.
2006.
[3] P. Landin, M. Isaksson, and P. Handel, “Comparison of evaluation crite-
ria for power amplifier behavioral modeling,” in Microwave Symposium
Digest, 2008 IEEE MTT-S International, june 2008, pp. 1441 –1444.
[4] J. Kim and K. Konstantinou, “Digital predistortion of wideband signals
based on power amplifier model with memory,” Electronics Letters,
vol. 37, no. 23, pp. 1417–1418, Nov 2001.
[5] D. Morgan, Z. Ma, J. Kim, M. Zierdt, and J. Pastalan, “A generalized
memory polynomial model for digital predistortion of rf power ampli-
fiers,” Signal Processing, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 54, no. 10, pp.
3852–3860, Oct. 2006.
[6] A. Tehrani, H. Cao, S. Afsardoost, T. Eriksson, M. Isaksson, and
C. Fager, “A comparative analysis of the complexity/accuracy tradeoff in
power amplifier behavioral models,” Microwave Theory and Techniques,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1510 –1520, june 2010.
[7] F. Taringou, O. Hammi, B. Srinivasan, R. Malhame, and F. Ghannouchi,
“Behaviour modelling of wideband rf transmitters using hammerstein-
wiener models,” Circuits, Devices Systems, IET, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 282
–290, july 2010.
[8] S. Chen, “An efficient predistorter design for compensating nonlinear
memory high power amplifiers,” Broadcasting, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 856 –865, dec. 2011.
[9] M. Schoukens, R. Pintelon, and Y. Rolain, “Parametric identification of
parallel hammerstein systems,” Instrumentation and Measurement, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 3931 –3938, dec. 2011.
[10] C. Nader, P. Landin, W. Van Moer, N. Bjorsell, and P. Handel,
“Performance evaluation of peak-to-average power ratio reduction and
digital pre-distortion for ofdm based systems,” Microwave Theory and
Techniques, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 3504 –3511, dec.
2011.
[11] F. Ghannouchi, F. Taringou, and O. Hammi, “A dual branch
hammerstein-wiener architecture for behavior modeling of wideband rf
transmitters,” in Microwave Symposium Digest (MTT), 2010 IEEE MTT-
S International, may 2010, pp. 1692 –1695.
[12] S. Afsardoost, T. Eriksson, and C. Fager, “Digital predistortion using
a vector-switched model,” Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1166 –1174, april 2012.
[13] R. Raich, H. Qian, and G. Zhou, “Orthogonal polynomials for power
amplifier modeling and predistorter design,” Vehicular Technology, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 1468–1479, Sept. 2004.
[14] P. Lavrador, J. Pedro, and N. Carvalho, “A new volterra series based
orthogonal behavioral model for power amplifiers,” in Microwave
Conference Proceedings, 2005. APMC 2005. Asia-Pacific Conference
Proceedings, vol. 1, dec. 2005, p. 4 pp.
[15] R. Dallinger, H. Ruotsalainen, R. Wichman, and M. Rupp, “Adaptive
pre-distortion techniques based on orthogonal polynomials,” in Signals,
Systems and Computers (ASILOMAR), 2010 Conference Record of the
Forty Fourth Asilomar Conference on, nov. 2010, pp. 1945 –1950.
[16] H. Jiang, X. Yu, and P. Wilford, “Digital predistortion using stochas-
tic conjugate gradient method,” Broadcasting, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 114 –124, march 2012.
[17] L. Guan and A. Zhu, “Optimized low-complexity implementation of
least squares based model extraction for digital predistortion of rf power
amplifiers,” Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 594 –603, march 2012.
[18] M. Abi Hussein, V. A. Bohara, and O. Venard, “On the system
level convergence of ila and dla for digital predistortion,” in Wireless
Communication Systems (ISWCS), 2012 International Symposium on,
Aug. 2012, pp. 870 –874.
[19] Y. H. Lim, Y. S. Cho, I. W. Cha, and D. H. Youn, “An adaptive nonlinear
prefilter for compensation of distortion in nonlinear systems,” Signal
Processing, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1726–1730, Jun
1998.
[20] D. Zhou and V. E. DeBrunner, “Novel adaptive nonlinear predistorters
based on the direct learning algorithm,” Signal Processing, IEEE Trans-
actions on, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 120–133, Jan. 2007.
[21] H. Gandhi and W. Abbott, “A digital signal processing solution for pa
linearization and rf impairment correction for multi-standard wireless
transceiver systems,” in Microwave Conference (EuMC), 2010 Euro-
pean, sept. 2010, pp. 719 –722.
[22] C. Vogel and G. Kubin, “Modeling of time-interleaved adcs with
nonlinear hybrid filter banks,” AEU International Journal of Electronics
and Communications, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 288 – 296, july 2005.
[23] L. Anttila, M. Valkama, and M. Renfors, “Circularity-based i/q imbal-
ance compensation in wideband direct-conversion receivers,” Vehicular
Technology, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 2099 –2113, july
2008.
[24] L. Anttila, P. Handel, and M. Valkama, “Joint mitigation of power
amplifier and i/q modulator impairments in broadband direct-conversion
transmitters,” Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 730 –739, april 2010.
[25] H. Durney and J. Sala, “Time delay estimation in digital pre-distortion,”
in Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2003. Proceedings.
(ICASSP ’03). 2003 IEEE International Conference on, vol. 4, april
2003, pp. IV – 536–9 vol.4.
[26] Y. Nagata, “Linear amplification technique for digital mobile communi-
cations,” Vehicular Technology Conference, 1989, IEEE 39th, pp. 159–
164 vol.1, May 1989.
[27] J. Sala, “Conditional entropy based coarse time delay estimation in the
presence of am/am and am/pm non-linearities,” in Acoustics, Speech,
and Signal Processing, 2003. Proceedings. (ICASSP ’03). 2003 IEEE
International Conference on, vol. 4, april 2003, pp. IV – 584–7 vol.4.
[28] S. Tang, K. Gong, J. Wang, K. Peng, C. Pan, and Z. Yang, “Loop
delay correction for adaptive digital linearization of power amplifiers,”
in Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, 2007.WCNC
2007. IEEE, march 2007, pp. 1987 –1990.
[29] Y.-J. Liu, B. Lu, T. Cao, B.-H. Zhou, J. Zhou, and Y.-N. Liu, “On the
robustness of look-up table digital predistortion in the presence of loop
delay error,” Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 2432 –2442, oct. 2012.
[30] S.-Y. Lee, Y.-S. Lee, S.-H. Hong, H.-S. Choi, and Y.-H. Jeong, “An
adaptive predistortion RF power amplifier with a spectrum monitor for
multicarrier WCDMA applications,” IEEE Transactions on Microwave
Theory and Techniques, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 786 –793, Feb. 2005.
[31] Scintera, “Power amplifier linearization using RF pre-distortion,” in
IMS2012, 2012.
[32] Xilinx, “LogiCORE IP digital pre-distortion v5.0 - DS856,” Jun. 2011.
[33] N. Lashkarian, H. Tarn, and C. Dick, “Crest factor reduction in multi-
carrier WCDMA transmitters,” in IEEE 16th International Symposium
on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, 2005. PIMRC
2005, vol. 1, 2005, pp. 321–325.
[34] S. Kowlgi and C. Berland, “Linearity considerations for multi-standard
cellular base station transmitters,” in Microwave Conference (EuMC),
2011 41st European, Oct. 2011, pp. 226 –229.
[35] S. Hussain and Y. Louet, “Peak to average power ratio analysis of
multi-carrier and multi-standard signals in software radio context,”
in 3rd International Conference on Information and Communication
Technologies: From Theory to Applications, 2008. ICTTA 2008, Apr.
2008, pp. 1–5.
[36] 3GPP, “TS 36.104 - LTE; evolved universal terrestrial radio access (e-
UTRA); base station (BS) radio transmission and reception.”
[37] R. Baxley and G. Zhou, “Comparison of selected mapping and partial
transmit sequence for crest factor reduction in OFDM,” in IEEE Military
Communications Conference, 2006. MILCOM 2006, 2006, pp. 1–4, r.
[38] N. Chen, G. T. Zhou, and H. Qian, “Power efficiency improvements
through peak-to-average power ratio reduction and power amplifier
linearization,” EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing,
vol. 2007, no. 1, p. 020463, Feb. 2007. [Online]. Available:
http://asp.eurasipjournals.com/content/2007/1/020463/abstract
[39] A. Wegener, “High-performance crest factor reduction processor for
w-CDMA and OFDM applications,” in 2006 IEEE Radio Frequency
Integrated Circuits (RFIC) Symposium, Jun. 2006, p. 4 pp.