Performance Degradation due to I/Q Imbalance in
Multi-Carrier Direct Conversion Receivers:
A Theoretical Analysis
Marcus Windisch, Gerhard Fettweis
Dresden University of Technology, Vodafone Chair Mobile Communications Systems, D-01062 Dresden, Germany
Email: windisch@ifn.et.tu-dresden.de
Abstract— I/Q imbalance has been identified as one of the most
serious concerns in the practical implementation of the direct
conversion receiver architecture. In particular, at the reception of
multi-carrier signals the achievable error rate is strictly limited
by the I/Q imbalance. Knowledge about the quantitative link
between the hardware parameters and the resulting error rate
is essential for a reasonable design of the receiver front-end.
In this paper a novel framework for the analytical computation
of the symbol error probability in multi-carrier systems is
presented. We consider an arbitrary M -ary QAM modulated
multi-carrier signal, which is corrupted by both a noisy Rayleigh
fading channel and receiver I/Q imbalance. The theoretical
results are validated exemplarily for the IEEE 802.11a WLAN
standard.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The growing number of wireless communications stan-
dards demands for highly flexible and low cost-terminals. I/Q
processing architectures, such as the direct conversion receiver,
are very attractive, because no costly analog image rejection
filter is required [1]. Instead, a theoretically infinite image
rejection is provided by the I/Q signal processing. However,
the limited accuracy of the analog hardware causes mismatches
between the components in the I- and the Q-branch of the
receiver, known as I/Q imbalance.
In the past decades, multi-carrier systems, such as OFDM,
have gained a lot of acceptance for the design of high data
rate communications systems. For example, the IEEE 802.11a
WLAN standard [2] is an OFDM system, which is widely used
in practice. While being able to easily cope with the frequency-
selective nature of a wireless communication channel, multi-
carrier systems are very sensitive to I/Q imbalance. In order to
cope with these impairments, different approaches for a digital
compensation of the I/Q imbalance have been proposed in the
literature, see for example [3] and the references herein. The
goal of the compensation is to provide an improved image
rejection, which by nature depends on the accuracy of the
digital estimation and compensation approach.
Knowledge about the quantitative relationship between
transceiver parameters (such as the image rejection ratio -
This work was partly supported by the German Ministry of Education
and Research (BMBF) within the project Wireless Gigabit with Advanced
Multimedia Support (WIGWAM) under grant 01BU370
i(k) s(k) iRx (k) sRx (k) ĩRx (k) s̃Rx (k)
a) −fSC +fSC b) −fSC +fSC c) −fSC +fSC
Fig. 1. Equivalent baseband representation of a) transmitted RF signal, b)
received RF signal (corrupted by the fading channel), c) received baseband
signal after direct conversion with I/Q imbalance
with or without digital compensation) on the one hand and
system parameters (such as the symbol error probability) on
the other hand is essential for the design and the dimensioning
of communications systems. Given a targeted error probability,
the hardware designer needs to know the image rejection
ratio required for reaching that goal. Conventionally, this
knowledge is gained for a specific system by using hardware
measurements or computer simulations [3], [4]. However, a
comprehensive theoretical analysis is still missing. The goal
of this paper is to contribute towards closing this gap.
The outline of this paper is as follows: Section II defines the
system model, which is the basis of our analysis. The symbol
error probability of a single subcarrier will be derived in sec-
tion III. Both exact solutions and reasonable approximations
are presented. A generalization of the results to multi-carrier
systems is done in section IV, followed by the conclusions in
section V.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
The degradation of the system performance due to the
I/Q imbalance is a consequence of the imperfect conversion
of the received radio frequency (RF) signal down to the
baseband (BB). Appropriate models for the impact of the I/Q
imbalance on the received signal have been derived in the
literature. It has been shown, that multi-carrier signals are
affected by a mutual inter-carrier interference between each
pair of symmetric subcarriers, see for example [3]. Because
the effect of the I/Q imbalance is the same for all subcarriers,
it is sufficient to consider a representative pair of symmetric
subcarriers, as depicted in Fig. 1.

Let sRx (k) denote the received symbol at an arbitrary
subcarrier frequency fSC at time index k, corresponding to the
received signal before down conversion (Fig. 1b). Similarly,
let iRx (k) denote the received symbol at the image subcarrier
frequency −fSC . The interference due to an imperfect direct
conversion with I/Q imbalance can be modelled by [3]
s̃Rx (k) = Ks sRx (k) + Ki i∗Rx (k). (1)
The asterisk denotes complex conjugation. The complex val-
ued weighting parameters Ks and Ki are determined by the
image rejection capabilities of the receiver. Ideally, the image
rejection ratio



Ks
2
IRR =


(2)
Ki

approaches infinity. However, the IRR which is achievable
with today’s technologies is limited to only 30-40 dB [1].
Most practical multi-carrier systems are designed such that
subcarrier spacing is much smaller than the coherency band-
width of the wireless channel. Hence, the frequency-selective
fading channel is split into frequency-flat subchannels in each
subcarrier. Considering the representative pair of subcarriers
at fSC and −fSC , the following channel models are used:
sRx (k) = hs (k)s(k) + ns (k), (3)
iRx (k) = hi (k)i(k) + ni (k). (4)
s(k), i(k) denote the transmitted symbols. hs (k), hi (k) denote
the corresponding time-variant channel coefficients. ns (k),
ni (k) denote the additive channel noise in each subcarrier.
From (1) and (3) one can see, that the desired signal s(k)
is rotated and scaled by both the channel coefficient hs (k)
and the I/Q imbalance parameter Ks . These effects can be
removed by a proper equalization. Assuming a perfect zero-
forcing equalizer, the following operation will be applied:
1 A. Effect of the Error Vector on the Signal Constellation
ŝ(k) = s̃Rx (k). (5)
Ks hs (k)
The remaining error vector ∆(k) = ŝ(k) − s(k) is a result of
both the image signal and the additive channel noise:
Ki h∗i (k) ∗ 1 Ki 1
∆(k) = i (k)+ ns (k)+ n∗ (k). (6)
Ks hs (k) hs (k) Ks hs (k) i
The severeness of the additional impairment due to the I/Q
imbalance strongly depends on the properties of the com-
munication channel. While the performance degradation is
only moderate for AWGN channels, a significant performance
degradation can be observed for frequency-selective fading
channels [3]. This result stems from the fact, that the quotient
h∗i (k)/hs (k) in (6) can take arbitrary large values in the case
of a frequency-selective channel.
For fading channels, the occurrence of large values is likely,
if the individual fading processes hi (k) and hs (k) are inde-
pendent. Independency holds, if the distance 2fSC between
the considered pair of symmetric subcarriers is larger than
the coherency bandwidth of the frequency-selective fading
channel. Because this scenario is most critical from the I/Q
imbalance point of view, it will be considered in our analysis.
Decision boundaries
Q Q
Symbols
A1 A2
d
+ d2
A0
∆
I − d2 I
a) d b) − d2 + d2
Fig. 2. a) QAM constellation, b) distinguished areas for the occurrence of
symbol errors
III. S TATISTICAL S IGNAL A NALYSIS
The goal of this section is to derive the probability of a
symbol error due to the I/Q imbalance and the channel noise.
Therefore, we model the samples of the channel coefficients
and the noise as complex valued random variables (RV’s),
which are written in bold style:
Ki hi ∗ ∗ 1 Ki 1 ∗
∆= i + ns + ni . (7)
Ks hs hs Ks hs
The resulting displacement ∆ is also a RV, whose properties
we will analyze in this section. The I/Q imbalance parameters
Ki and Ks are arbitrary fixed parameters. Furthermore, the
actual value of the image signal i is considered as an instan-
taneous fixed parameter. A generalization to a non-constant i
will be done at the end of this section.
The resulting error probability due to the error vector ∆
depends on both the structure (alphabet) of the desired signal
and the distribution of the error vector. In the following
subsections we will first consider the symbol alphabet. Then
we will analyze the distribution of the error vector.
In our analysis we focus on the reception of M -ary
quadrature amplitude modulated (QAM) signals, which are
most frequently used in practical multi-carrier systems. A
rectangular QAM constellation is shown exemplarily for the
modulation order M = 16 in Fig. 2a. The parameter d denotes
the distance between the amplitude levels of adjacent symbols
in both the I and the Q dimension. Assuming equally probable
symbols, the average power of a QAM signal is [5]
1
σ2 = (M − 1)d2 . (8)
6
In order to distinguish between the parameters of the desired
signal and the image signal, we will use the subscripts s and
i, respectively. Both the desired signal s(k) and the image
signal i(k) are assumed to be rectangular QAM signals of
the order Ms and Mi , respectively. Nevertheless, the analysis
framework presented in this paper can be easily adapted to
alternative constellations.
With the decision threshold of the detector placed at the the
midpoint of adjacent amplitude levels, 3 different areas for the
location of the error vector can be distinguished (see Fig. 2b):
 • If the error vector is located within area A0 , no symbol Gaussian distributed RV’s of the numerator and the denomina-
error occurs. tor can be represented as ∆N = rN ejϕN and ∆D = rD ejϕD .
• A location within area A1 (consisting of 4 partitions, The magnitudes rN and rD are Rayleigh distributed with
2 2
which are shaded in light gray) may result in a symbol the variances σN and σD , respectively. It can be shown (see
error. No symbol error occurs, if the desired symbol is Appendix), that the pdf of the magnitude r = rN /rD yields
located at the corresponding boarder of the constellation 
√ 2 r a2
r≥0
( M out of M symbols). (r 2 +a2 )2
fr (r) = (12)
• Similarly, a location within area A2 (consisting of 4 0 r < 0.
partitions, which are shaded in dark gray) may result in
The distribution function is parameterized by the parameter
a symbol error. No symbol error occurs, if the desired
a2 , which is defined as
symbol is located at the corresponding corner of the




constellation (1 out of M symbols). σ2 σh2 i
Ki
2 2 σn2 s σn2 i

Ki

2
a2 = N =

|i| + + . (13)
Hence the symbol error probability of a QAM signal corrupted σD2 σh2 s
Ks
σh2 s σh2 s
Ks

by an additive random error vector ∆ is determined by:
√ The phases ϕN and ϕD are uniformly distributed. Hence the
Ms − M s Ms − 1 phase ϕ = ϕN − ϕD is also uniformly distributed, i.e. its pdf
Ps (i) = P (∆ ∈ A1 )+ P (∆ ∈ A2 ), (9) is
Ms Ms 1
where P (∆ ∈ Ai ) denotes the probability, that ∆ is located fϕ (ϕ) = . (14)
2π
within area Ai . The argument in Ps (i) stresses the fact, that It has been shown, that the distribution of the complex RV
the error probability is based on an instantaneous value of ∆ can be easily described in polar coordinates using the pdf’s
the image signal i. In order to calculate the probabilities of ∆ of the magnitude r and the phase ϕ. However, for the following
being located in a certain area, the probability density function calculations it is reasonable to consider cartesian coordinates
(pdf) of the error vector ∆ will be derived in the next section. ∆ = x + jy instead. In general, the joint pdf’s of the polar
B. Distribution of the Error Vector coordinates r, ϕ and the cartesian coordinates x, y are linked
by [6]
In our analysis we consider a Rayleigh fading channel [5], 1
i.e. the RV’s hs and hi representing the channel coefficients fxy (x, y) = frϕ (r, ϕ). (15)
r
are complex Gaussian distributed with zero mean and vari-
In our case, the joint pdf of the polar coordinates is separable,
ances σh2 s and σh2 i , respectively. Furthermore, we assume an
i.e. frϕ (r, ϕ) = fr (r)fϕ (ϕ). Merging (12), (14), (15) and
independent additive Gaussian noise. Therefore, the RV’s ns
using the dependency r2 = x2 + y 2 , the joint pdf of the
and ni are complex Gaussian distributed with zero mean and
cartesian coordinates results in:
variances σn2 s and σn2 i , respectively. Based on (7), the resulting
RV ∆ can be rewritten as a quotient of two RV’s: 1 a2
fxy (x, y) = . (16)
∗ ∗ ∗
π (x2 + y 2 + a2 )2
Ks hi i + ns + Ks ni
Ki Ki
∆N
∆= = . (10) C. Symbol Error Probability
∆D hs
Given the joint pdf in cartesian coordinates, the desired
The numerator ∆N is a linear combination of Gaussian
probabilities P (∆ ∈ A1 ) and P (∆ ∈ A2 ) of equation (9)
distributed RV’s. Hence ∆N is also Gaussian distributed, if the
can be calculated by a two-dimensional integration within the
channel coefficient hs and the noise terms ns , ni are mutually
appropriate integration boundaries:
independent.With this assumption, ∆N has zero mean and a
variance of  − d2s  + d2s


2

2 P (∆ ∈ A1 ) = 4 fxy (x, y) dx dy (17)
2


2
Ki


2 2


2
Ki


−∞ − d2s
σN = σhi
|i| + σns + σni
. (11)
Ks
Ks
 − d2s  − d2s
P (∆ ∈ A2 ) = 4 fxy (x, y) dx dy (18)
Similarly, the denominator ∆D is found to have zero mean −∞ −∞
2
and a variance of σD = σh2 s .
Here we used the circular symmetry of the joint pdf fxy (x, y),
Hence ∆ is the quotient of two zero-mean Gaussian dis-
resulting in 4 equiprobable partitions of the areas A1 and
tributed RV’s. While the derivation of its distribution function
A2 , respectively. The equations (17) and (18) are solvable in
is quite extensive in general, the derivation becomes much
closed form. By merging the results into (9), the symbol error
simpler in the case of ∆N and ∆D being independent. This
probability can be represented as
assumption holds, if hs is independent from both the noise √
terms ns , ni and the channel coefficient hi . Ms − 1 Ms − 1 2
Ps (i) = −  (19)
In order to calculate the distribution function of the dis- Ms Ms 1 + γ 2 (i)
placement vector, we represent ∆ = rejϕ in polar coordinates. √
( Ms − 1)2 4 1 1
The real RV’s r and ϕ denote the magnitude and the phase of −  arctan  ,
the the complex RV ∆, respectively. Similarly, the complex Ms π 1 + γ 2 (i) 1 + γ 2 (i)
where 0.6






Correction factor alpha

σh2 i
Ki
2 2 σn2 s σn2 i
Ki
2 4
γ 2 (i) =



0.5

σh2 s
Ks
|i| + σ 2 + σ 2
Ks
d2 . (20)

hs hs s
0.4

Recall, that (19) represents the symbol error probability for

0.3
an instantaneous value of the complex-valued image signal i.
In order to calculate the total symbol error probability, the 0.2
4 16 64 256 1024 4096
distribution function of the image signal must be considered. Modulation Order M
s
With the realistic assumption, that the samples of the image
signal are generated based on an alphabet with discrete equally Fig. 3. Shape of the correction function α(Ms )
probable symbols, the total symbol error probability yields

1 i
M
In order to derive a concise representation of (24), the impact
Ps = Ps (im ), (21)
Mi m=1 of the modulation order Ms is separated from the remaining
parameters. We introduce the correction parameter
where Mi denotes the modulation order of the image signal  √
2 Ms − 1 1 Ms − 1 1 ( Ms − 1)2
and im denotes the mth complex-valued symbol of the mod- α(Ms ) = + , (27)
ulation alphabet. 3 Ms 2 Ms π Ms
which is approximated by α(Ms ) ≈ 1/2 for higher order
D. Second order approximation modulations (see Fig. 3). Using this correction factor, (24)
Based on the set of equations (19)-(21) the exact symbol can be rewritten as





error probability can be calculated for arbitrary settings of σh2 i σi2
Ki
2 σ 2
σ 2
Ki
2
the individual variances. However, due to the high complexity Ps = 2 2


[2]
+ n s
+ 2 2


n i
Ms α(Ms ).
σhs σs Ks
σh2 s σs2 σhs σs Ks

of the formulas, their usage might be impractical. Therefore
we aim for a simplification of the formulas, while preserving (28)
the accuracy of the predicted error probability in regions of The 3 terms of the sum inside the brackets of (28) deserve a
interest. Our approach is to approximate the instantaneous more detailed discussion. σi2 is the average power of the image
symbol error probability in (19) by a second order Taylor subcarrier at the transmitter side, while σh2 i is the variance of
series, which results in: its associated channel coefficient. Hence σh2 i σi2 is the average
 √ power of the image subcarrier measured at the receiver side.
[2] 1 Ms − 1 1 ( Ms − 1)2 2
Ps (i) = + γ (i). (22) Similarly, the term σh2 s σs2 represents the average power of the
2 Ms π Ms desired subcarrier measured at the receiver side. Therefore, the
By merging (20),(21) and (22), the second order approxima- term
σ 2 σs2
tion of the total symbol error probability yields: SIRSC = h2s 2 (29)
σhi σi
1 i [2]
M
Ps[2] = P (im ) (23) denotes the signal-to-image power ratio of the considered pair
Mi m=1 s of subcarriers, measured at the receiver. Similarly, the term





σh2 i
Ki
2 1 Mi
σn2 s σn2 i
Ki
2 σh2 s σs2
= 2


|i |2
+ +

SN RSC = (30)
σhs Ks
Mi m=1
Ks

m
σh2 s σh2 s σn2 s
 √
4 1 Ms − 1 1 ( Ms − 1)2 denotes the subcarrier-based signal-to-noise power ratio, mea-
· 2 + . (24)
d s 2 Ms π Ms sured at the receiver. Finally, the third term describes the
residual impact of the additive noise in the image signal.
Interestingly, the specific structure of the image signal (mod- This term is much smaller than the second term for similar
ulation order Mi , symbol alphabet) is irrelevant in the second noise powers σn2 s ≈ σn2 i , because IRR  1 for practical
order approximation of the symbol error probability. The only I/Q imbalance parameters. Hence, the third term of the sum
relevant parameter is the average power of the image signal will be neglected. With these definitions, (28) simplifies to an
easy-to-use approximation of the symbol error probability for
1 i
M
σi2 = |im |2 . (25) a single subcarrier:
Mi m=1 
[2] 1 1 1
Ps ≈ + Ms α(Ms ). (31)
By using (8), the symbol distance ds can be replaced by the SIRSC IRR SN RSC
average power of the desired signal σs2 :
Equation (31) indicates an interchangeability between distor-
4 1 2 tions due to the channel noise (SN RSC ) on the one hand
2
= 2 (Ms − 1). (26)
ds σs 3 and distortions due to the I/Q imbalance (SIRSC IRR) on
 10
0 IV. M ULTI -C ARRIER SYSTEMS
The derived equations for the symbol error probability of
10
−1 a single representative subcarrier constitute a basis for the
calculation of the total symbol error probability in arbitrarily
designed multi-carrier systems. The total error probability can
Symbol Error Probability

−2
10
M = 256 be obtained by merging the individual error probabilities of
−3 M = 64
all data subcarriers. Note, that this approach is capable to
10
deal with frequency-selective I/Q imbalance as well. In this
−4
M = 16 case, the parameter IRR becomes a function of the subcarrier
10
frequency.
M=4
For example, we consider a simple multi-carrier system with
−5
10
Theory: Approximation the following properties:
Theory: Exact solution
Simulation
• all data subcarriers are transmitted with the same power,
10
−6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
i.e. σs2 = σi2 = σ 2 for all SC,
Image Rejection Ratio [dB] • the average power of the channel coefficients is
frequency-flat, i.e. σh2 s = σh2 i = σh2 for all SC,
2 2 2
Fig. 4. Single subcarrier symbol error probability: SIR = 1, no channel • the additive channel noise is white, i.e. σns = σni = σn
noise for all SC,
• the I/Q imbalance is frequency-flat, i.e. the IRR is
constant for all SC.
60 In this case, the subcarrier-based symbol error probability Ps
will be identical for all data subcarriers. Consequently, the
0.1

0.01
0.01

55
0.001

0.0
01 total symbol error probability of the multi-carrier system P̄s
50 equals Ps as well.
Signal to Noise Ratio [dB]

When considering the total system performance, it is more

45 meaningful to determine P̄s as a function of the signal-to-noise
40
power ratio SN RM C , which is defined based on the entire
0.1

multi-carrier signal. The scaling factor between SN RM C and

35
30
0.1
25
20
20 25
Fig. 5. Contour plot of the single subcarrier symbol error probability: SIR =
1, modulation orders: Ms = 64 (solid lines), Ms = 256 (dashed lines)
the other hand. In the presence of a dominating channel
noise (SN RSC  SIRSC IRR), the set of equations (19)-
(21) simplify to the special case of an M -ary QAM signal
transmitted over a noisy Rayleigh fading channel, which has
been analyzed in various textbooks [5], [7].
Equivalently, for SN RSC  SIRSC IRR, the system
performance is mainly determined by the I/Q imbalance.
Figure 4 shows the symbol error probability as a function of
the image rejection ratio for different modulation orders Ms =
Mi = M . The theoretical results are confirmed by computer
simulations. Approximation (31) matches sufficiently with the
exact solution (19)-(21) for symbol error probabilities of Ps ≤
0.1. Finally, Fig. 5 addresses the performance degradation due
to both channel noise and I/Q imbalance for two exemplary
modulation orders.
0.01 SN RSC depends on the actual structure of the multi-carrier
0.1 signal. Let Ntotal denote the total number of subcarriers.
Assuming Nused used subcarriers with equal transmit power,
0.1 we get:
Nused · σh2 σ 2 Nused
SN RM C = = SN RSC . (32)
30 35 40 45
Image Rejection Ratio [dB]
50 55 60 Ntotal · σn2 Ntotal
The validity of the derived theoretical results will be demon-
strated exemplarily for the IEEE 802.11a WLAN standard [2].
Figure 6 shows the simulation results for the ETSI Hiperlan/2
channel models A and B [8]. For high SN Rs, the error floor
due the I/Q imbalance becomes obvious.
A careful comparison between the theoretical and the simu-
lative results reveals a small mismatch, if the I/Q imbalance is
the dominating impairment. This effect can be understood by
considering the individual symbol error rates in each subcarrier
(see Fig. 7). In the theoretical analysis, the channel coefficients
of the desired subcarrier and the image subcarrier are assumed
to be independent. However, in practical systems a residual
dependency between the channel coefficients may exist, in
particular around the DC subcarrier. Obviously, the degree
of residual dependency is strongly related to the coherency
bandwidth of the channel. An increased coherency bandwidth
corresponds to a reduced symbol error probability (here:
channel ETSI-A). The gap between the theoretical and the
simulative results vanishes as the coherency bandwidth gets
smaller. Therefore, the theoretical results presented in this
paper can be considered as a worst case analysis.
 10
0 A PPENDIX
IRR = 20dB Given two independent Rayleigh distributed RV’s rN , rD
2 2
−1
with the variances σN and σD , respectively. The pdf of these
10
RV’s is  2
IRR = 30dB  2rx − σrxr2
rx ≥ 0 ,
Symbol Error Probability

frx (rx ) = σr2x e

x
(33)
10
−2

IRR = 40dB
0 rx < 0
where the index x is replaced by N and D, respectively. We
want to calculate the pdf fr (r) of the random variable r =
−3
10 IRR = 50dB

rN /rD , which is a function of the random variables rN and

−4 rD . According to [6], the pdf of the quotient of two RV’s is
10 Theory: Approximation
Theory: Exact solution IRR → ∞
 ∞
Simulation: ETSI−A channel fr (r) = |rD |f (r rD , rD ) drD , (34)
Simulation: ETSI−B channel
−∞
0 10 20 30
Signal to Noise Ratio SNR
40
[dB]
50 60
where f (rN , rD ) denotes the joint pdf of rN and rD . Because
rN and rD are independent, the joint pdf can be separated as
MC

 ∞
Fig. 6. Performance degradation in a 64-QAM mode IEEE 802.11a WLAN
system due to I/Q imbalance for different image rejection ratios fr (r) = |rD |frN (r rD ) frD (rD ) drD . (35)
−∞
In order to calculate fr (r), the cases r ≥ 0 and r < 0 must be
10
−1 distinguished. First we consider the case r < 0. According
to (33), frN (r rD ) = 0 for rD ≥ 0. On the other hand,
frD (rD ) = 0 for rD < 0. Hence (35) becomes
 ∞
fr (r) = |rD | frN (r rD ) frD (rD ) drD = 0 (36)
 
Symbol Error Probability

−∞
0

−2
for r < 0. Next we consider the case r ≥ 0. According to
10
(33), frD (rD ) = 0 for rD < 0. Hence the integral in (35)
becomes
 ∞ r2 r2 r2
2 r rD − σ2 D 2 rD − σD 2
fr (r) = rD 2 e
N
2 e
D dr
D (37)
0 σ N σ D

Theory  ∞ 2
Simulation: ETSI−A channel 4r 3
− r2 + 12 rD 2

−3
Simulation: ETSI−B channel = 2 2 rD e σN σD drD (38)
10 σN σD 0
−30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30  
Subcarrier index   −2
1 r2 1
+
2 σ2 σ2
N D
Fig. 7. Comparison between theoretical and measured symbol error proba- 2
 2
−2
σN σN
bility of individual subcarriers: 64-QAM, SN RM C =40dB, IRR=30dB
= 2r 2 r2 + 2 . (39)
σD σD
for r ≥ 0.
V. C ONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK R EFERENCES
[1] B. Razavi, “Design Considerations for Direct-Conversion Receivers,”
A novel framework for the theoretical computation of the IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems—Part II: Analog and Digital
symbol error probability in multi-carrier systems has been Signal Processing, vol. 44, pp. 428–435, June 1997.
derived in this paper. We considered a M -ary QAM modu- [2] IEEE, “Part11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) specifications,” IEEE Std 802.11a-1999, 1999.
lated multi-carrier signal, which is corrupted by both a noisy [3] M. Windisch and G. Fettweis, “Standard-Independent I/Q Imbalance
Rayleigh fading channel and receiver I/Q imbalance. The the- Compensation in OFDM Direct-Conversion Receivers,” in Proc. 9th Intl.
oretical results have been confirmed by computer simulations. OFDM Workshop (InOWo), (Dresden, Germany), pp. 57–61, 15-16 Sept.
2004.
In addition to analyzing the symbol error probability, the [4] C.-L. Liu, “Impacts of I/Q imbalance on QPSK-OFDM-QAM detection,”
presented framework can be used as a basis for calculating IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 44, pp. 984–989, Aug.
1998.
the bit error probability of the multi-carrier system. In many [5] J. G. Proakis, Digital Communications. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 3rd ed., 1995.
practical applications, the bit error probability is even more [6] A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes.
expressive than the symbol error probability alone. Further- McGraw-Hill, Inc., 3rd ed., 1991.
[7] K. D. Kammeyer and V. Kühn, MATLAB in der Nachrichtentechnik. J.
more, an extension of the system model towards correlated Schlembach Fachverlag, 2001.
channel coefficients is desirable. A solution of these issues is [8] ETSI EP BRAN, “Channel models for HIPERLAN/2 in different indoor
under active research. scenarios,” Mar. 1998.