Abstract:
A method of estimating channel impulse response in a signal transmitted over a channel in a communication system is described. The channel estimator obtains a priori knowledge about the transmitted signal, and then uses the transmitted signal and the a priori knowledge to choose an estimate of channel impulse response which minimizes the expected distance between the transmitted signal and a reconstructed signal. The expected distance that is minimized is a cost function, represented by E{∥r−Bh∥ 2 r}. By using soft decision feedback, the invention minimizes erroneous decision feedback which can cause error propagation. The decisions are usually in the form of log likelihood ratios (LLR).

Description:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION 
     This application claims priority of European Patent Application No. 98303417.4, which was filed on Apr. 30, 1998. 
     FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
     This invention relates to channel estimation methods and apparatus in mobile radio communications, which adaptively compensate for channel distortion on a block-by-block basis. 
     ART BACKGROUND 
     In digital mobile radio communications, transmission channels suffer from severe distortion due to frequency selective fading. In addition, channel characteristics are normally time-varying due to the relative motion of fixed and mobile stations. Inter-symbol interference (ISI) is one of the primary impediments to reliable estimates of the transmitted data. In order to allow for reliable transmission, the receiver must be able to estimate and compensate for channel distortion on a block-by-block basis. Equalization schemes usually employed in modern mobile communications rely on an estimate of the channel, generated from a known training sequence, inserted into the transmitted signal block. Equalization may be improved by means of decision feedback, as described in K. H. Chang and C. N. Georghiades in “Iterative Join Sequence and Channel Estimation for Fast Time-Varying Inter-symbol Interference”, Proc. Intern. Conf. Commun. Pp.357-361, June 1995. 
     There is thus a need for an equalizer with improved performance and which reduces the effects of error propagation. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     According to a first aspect of the invention there is provided a method of estimating channel impulse response in a signal transmitted over a channel in a communication system characterized by obtaining a priori knowledge about the transmitted signal and using the transmitted signal and the said a priori knowledge to choose an estimate of channel impulse response which minimizes the expected distance between the transmitted signal and a reconstructed signal. 
     In hard decision feedback, the decisions are assumed to be correct, and they are used in addition to a training sequence. Unfortunately, erroneous decisions may cause error propagations. With soft decision feedback, on the other hand, the decisions are usually in the form of log likelihood ratios (LLR). 
     A detailed description of the invention, using by way of illustration a practical digital radio receiver, is described below with reference to the following figures in which: 
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     FIG. 1 shows in outline an equalizer for a digital radio receiver. 
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     The discrete-time received signal r k  of FIG. 1 can be written as                r   k     =         ∑     l   =   0       L   -   1                         b     k   -   l            h   l         +     n   k               (   1   )                                
     where b k  ε{−1, 1} are the transmitted data symbols or known training sequence symbols, the L complex tap-gains h l  represent the samples of the equivalent channel impulse response, and n k  indicates additive white Gaussian noise with zero mean and variance σ 2 . Channel equalization is commonly performed by maximum likelihood (ML) or maximum a posteriori probability (MAP) data estimation. In both cases, the receiver must first estimate, in the channel estimator 11, the channel impulse response h l , which is required in the data estimation process, carried out in the equalizer 10. The data output L(b k ) is then deinterleaved, as indicated by Π −1  ( 12 ) in FIG.  1  and decoded ( 14 ). The initial channel estimation is usually obtained by means of correlative channel sounding. In this case, the samples of the CIR estimate are obtained by correlating the received signal r k  with N=16 bits b k  out of the 26 bits training sequence:                    h   ^     l     =         1   N            ∑     i   =   0       N   -   1                         b   i          r     l   +   1             +     n   k         ,     l   =   0     ,   …              ,     L   -   1             (   2   )                                
     Due to the good autocorrelation properties of the GSM training sequence, the correlative channel sounding technique corresponds to ML channel estimation. 
     Once the channel estimate is available, the estimation of the data symbol sequence is performed. If the channel cannot be considered approximately constant within one burst, the initial channel estimate can be updated during the burst by using the decisions at the equalizer output. The equalizer soft-output sequence is finally deinterleaved and decoded. 
     Maximum likelihood sequence estimation implemented by the Viterbi algorithm (VA) is the optimum sequence detector, such as described in G. D. Forney, Jnr., “Maximum Likelihood Sequence Estimation of Digital Sequences in the presence of Intersymbol Interference”,  IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. IT -18, pp. 363-378, May 1972. It is widely used in digital mobile receivers for processing both the ISI trellis (equalization) and the channel code trellis (channel decoding). However, the channel decoder performance is improved by an equalizer which provides soft values at the decoder input. Furthermore, in some advanced schemes implementing iterative equalization and decoding and/or source controlled channel decoding, such as described in J. Hagenauer, “Source Controlled Channel Decoding”,  IEEE Trans. On Commun, vol  43, no 9, pp. 2449-2457 September 1995, the channel decoder must be able to provide soft-outputs for the coded bits and for the information bits. 
     In terms of bit-error probability, the optimum algorithm for soft-in/soft-out equalization and decoding is the symbol-by-symbol MAP algorithm. In fact, being an a posteriori probability (APP) calculator, it intrinsically provides soft output values. 
     In a hard decision (HD) feedback scheme, all decisions are assumed to be correct and may be used as an additional training sequence. By using vector notation, the received signal may be described as              (           r     L   -   1               ⋮             r     N   -   1             )          r       =           (           b     L   -   1             b     L   -   2           ⋯         b   0               b   L           b     L   -   1           ⋯         b   1             ⋮       ⋮       ⋰       ⋮             b     N   -   1             b     N   -   2           ⋯         b     N   -   L                        )          B                         (           h   0             ⋮             h     L   -   1             )          h                    +       (           n     L   -   1               ⋮             n     N   -   1             )          n                                             
     where r is the received signal vector, B is the matrix with the transmitted bits, h denotes the channel vector, and n the channel noise. Since we assume binary signaling, the transmitted bits b k , take on the values ±1. The matrix product Bh corresponds to the convolution between b k  and h k  (see equation (1)). Note that the above notation assumes the channel to be constant over the block of transmitted data. 
     The least square (LS) estimate of the channel is 
     
       
           ĥ   HDLS =( B   H   B ) −1   B   H   r   
       
     
     where H denotes Hermitian transpose and the inverse is assumed to exist. 
     With soft decision (SD) feedback, the soft output of the equalizer is fed back to the channel estimator. The soft output is usually in the form of a log-likelihood ratio (LLR)                L        (       b   k     |   r     )       =     log                     Pr        (       b   k     =       +   1     |   r       )         Pr        (       b   k     =       -   1     |   r       )                   (   3   )                                
     which may equivalently be written as a probability          Pr        (       b   k     |   r     )       =       e       1   2          L        (       b   k     |   r     )               e       1   2          L        (       b   k     |   r     )           +     e       -     1   2            L        (       b   k     |   r     )                                      
     This a posteriori probability from the equalizer can be used as a priori knowledge for the channel estimator. A possible, but by no means unique, cost function to minimize would be                E        {              r   -   Bh          2     |   r     }       =     E        {         ∑     k   =     L   -   1         N   -   1                     r   k     -       h   k     *     b   k              2       |   r     }               (   4   )                                
     where the expectation is taken over the bits b k  conditioned on the received sequence r. This cost function represents the average (or expected) distance between the received signal and a reconstructed signal. To minimize the cost function (4) it is differentiated with respect to the channel            δ     δ                 h          E        {              r   -   Bh          2     |   r     }       =       E        {         δ     δ                 h              (     r   -   Bh     )     H          (     r   -   Bh     )       |   r     }       =       0   ⇒     
          E        {           -     B   H          r     +       B   H        Bh       |   r     }         =       0   ⇒   h     =         (         B   H        B     _     )       -   1              B   _     H        r                                  
     where {overscore (B H B)}=E{B H B} and {overscore (B)}=E{B}. For soft decision          E        {         b   k          b   1       |   r     }       =     {               b   _     k            b   _     1             k   ≠   1             1         k   =   1                                    
     where {overscore (b)} k =E{b k r}=2Pr(b k   +1|r )−1. Note that this value is always in the range [−1,+1]. The expectation of B H B (see above) now becomes:              B   H        B     _     =     (                      N   -   L   +   1                 b   _       L   -   1              b   _     L       +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   2              b   _       N   -   1               ⋯               b   _     0            b   _     L       +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   L   -   2              b   _       N   -   1                           b   _       L   -   1              b   _     L       +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   2              b   _       N   -   1                 N   -   L   +   1         ⋯               b   _     0            b   _       L   -   1         +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   L   -   2              b   _       N   -   2                   ⋮       ⋮       ⋰       ⋮                   b   _     0            b   _     L       +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   L   -   1              b   _       N   -   1                       b   _     0            b   _       L   -   1         +   ⋯   +         b   _       N   -   L   -   1              b   _       N   -   2               ⋯         N   -   L   +   1                      )                            
     The off-diagonals of {overscore (B H B)} are small compared to the main diagonal terms. By ignoring them we have the simplification 
     
       
           {overscore (B H B)}≈ ( N−L+ 1) I   (5) 
       
     
     and the simplified estimator (channel sounding) becomes                    h   ^     HDCS     =       1     N   -   L   +   1              B   _     H        r            
              h   ^     m   HDCS     =       1     N   -   L   +   1              ∑     k   =     L   -   1         N   -   1                         r   k            b   _       k   -   m                    
              b   _       k   -   m       =       E        {     b   k     }       =         2        Pr        (       b   k     =       +   1     |   r       )         -   1     =     tanh                   (       L        (       b   k     |   r     )       2     )                     (   6   )                                
     Although the equalizer provides the log-likelihood ratios L(b k |r), these can easily be transformed by a lookup table to produce {overscore (b)} k . 
     The above analysis also applies to the case where the channel estimator is obtained by feeding back the L-values of the coded bits provided by the channel decoder. 
     At low SNR, the invention performs significantly better than hard decisions. From (6), where bits b k  are uncertain (say, Pr(b k =+1|r)=0.6) will produce a soft value (in this case {overscore (b)} k =0.2), whereas bits with a high reliability will give soft values close to ±1. This means that when a decision error occurs at the equalizer output, the probabilities Pr(b k =+1|r) often indicates a weak reliability which the channel estimator can use to reduce the effects of error propagation. 
     At higher SNR, simulation show that least squares estimators perform significantly better than channel sounding, since least squares estimators can use the soft information to optimally weigh the feedback bits. At higher SNR, approximations (2) and (5) become significant, whereas with a low SNR this approximation error is concealed by the channel noise. 
     Simulations have also shown that the invention provides an improvement of about 0.8 dB with channel sounding and about 0.9 dB with a least squares estimation. Another advantage of the invention is that it does not require any matrix inversion.