Maximum-mean-square soft-output (M

2
S
2
O): a
method for carrier synchronisation of short burst
turbo coded signals
A. Freedman, Y. Rahamim and A. Reichman
Abstract: The use of short bursts transmissions in modern communication systems is increasing
as the use of packet data communication replaces traditional, continuous bit stream data
communication. Turbo codes, which revolutionised communication coding, enable the operation
of receivers in low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions, thus increasing the range of operation of
the communication system. However, carrier frequency and phase synchronisation, needed for
optimal coherent performance of the receiver, still remains an open problem at low SNR
conditions for short bursts. A new efcient carrier synchronisation method for turbo coded short
packet communication operating at low SNR values is presented. This method is based on
maximising a newly invented objective function, the MSSO(Df, f) function, which uses the turbo
decoders soft decision outputs to iteratively improve the carrier synchronisation. This method is
suitable for non-data-aided acquisition and tracking of the carrier frequency and phase offsets. It is
shown, via simulations, that this algorithm achieves the lower bound on bit-error-rate performance
of the turbo decoder at very low SNR values.
1 Introduction
Packet data communication, which is an increasingly
important part of modern communication systems, is
characterised by transmissions of packets, which render
it bursty in nature. Some packets are very short, especially
those used for short control messages.
Turbo codes, among the most revolutionary topics in
information theory in the last decade, were shown in several
studies (e.g., [1, 2]) to achieve near-capacity performance for
band-limited channels communication using a low coding
effort and an iterative decoding process (based on the
maximum-a-posteriori probability, MAP, decoding). The
output of the turbo decoder is basically a soft decision,
namely, a number representing the likelihood that a certain
symbol was transmitted, given the received signal.
As mentioned above, these studies assumed perfect
synchronisation. In the case of imperfect carrier synchro-
nisation, the turbo codes performance degrades signi-
cantly. Therefore, achieving good synchronisation is
crucial in practical systems that implement turbo codes.
Unfortunately, achieving good synchronisation in the low
SNR operating region of the turbo codes is not possible
with conventional carrier synchronisation methods (e.g.,
[3, 4]) for short packets communication, because less energy
is available for the carrier phase and frequency estimation
and also the number of symbols that can be allocated for a
training sequence is limited.
In [5], DAmico and DAndrea proposed an efcient
carrier synchronisation algorithm for turbo-coded system
packet transmission, based on a combination of some
well-known powerful non-data-aided (NDA) conventional
carrier synchronisation methods. It was shown that a large
packet size (larger than 4096 symbols) was required to
achieve the theoretical turbo code performance, without
performance degradation, at E
b
/N
0
values as low as 1dB.
This proposed algorithm did not provide a solution
for short packets, with a typical length shorter than 500
symbols. Clearly, new efcient carrier synchronisation
algorithms are needed for this kind of system.
Most carrier synchronisation algorithms, presented in
the literature, do not exploit the redundancy in the received
signal introduced by the channel encoder and operate
directly on the received signal. It was rst suggested
by Ungerboeck [6], in 1984, that the phase tracking of a
trellis-coded-modulation (TCM) signal could be improved
by using the tentative decisions of the channel decoder
(Viterbi decoder) and employing decoder decision feed-
back. A similar idea is proposed in this paper for turbo
codes, as described in Fig. 1. The improvement in the
carrier synchronisation is achieved by exploiting the
redundancy in the received signal introduced by the channel
encoder.
There have been several papers proposing such joint
carrier synchronisation and turbo-decoding scheme. In [7],
Bar-David and Elia proposed a joint iterative a posteriori
probability (APP) soft input soft output (SISO) decoder
and a decision-directed (DD) recursive estimator of
the carrier frequency and phase offsets. As a model for
phase error, the paper used an unknown time-varying phase
function composed of a frequency offset plus a sinusoidally
varying phase at frequency of 0.01/T
s
Hz (T
s
is the symbol
time duration) with a 0.23 rad RMS value. Based on this
model, this algorithm achieves almost the lower bound on
bit-error-rate (BER) performance of the turbo decoder
(within 0.1dB) for short packets (384 symbols), using
binary phase shift keying (BPSK) modulation without a
training sequence. The main drawback of this algorithm is
The authors are with School of Electrical Engineering, Tel-Aviv University,
P.O. Box 39040, Ramat Aviv, Tel-Aviv, 69978, Israel
E-mail: avi@eng.tau.ac.il
r IEE, 2006
IEE Proceedings online no. 20050066
doi:10.1049/ip-com:20050066
Paper rst received 6th February and in nal revised form 29th November 2005
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 245
that the implementation of this compound decoder and
estimator is very complex for BPSK modulation and the
complexity increases for higher order modulations.
An important approach to the joint estimation of the
channel coefcients and the received data sequence is
the per-survivor-processing (PSP) approach, described by
Raheli et al. in [8]. This approach performs joint estimation
of the channel coefcients and the data sequence. This
approach was adapted for MAP decoders by Anastaso-
poulos and Chugg in [9], where a general treatment of the
adaptive-SISO problem is given. In [10], Anastasopoulos
and Chugg examined the adaptive-iterative-detection
(AID) approach, based on adaptive-soft-inverse (ASI)
algorithms, as a solution for the carrier-phase uncertainty
in turbo decoding. In this paper, the phase error was
modelled as a Gauss Markov process and it was shown that
at low phase dynamics an AID-based algorithm, assisted by
training pilot-symbols could achieve the same near-optimal
performance achieved by known phase systems. It was also
observed in [10] that this technique is inadequate at
medium-phase dynamics. In [11], Ferrari et al. proposed
two different adaptive detection trellis-based forward-
backward algorithms for the decoding of turbo codes, in
the presence of random moderate to fast, channel-phase
variations. The rst approach is based on limited-tree-
search (LTS) detection and the second approach is based on
truncated-memory (TM) detection. It was shown that these
algorithms, assisted by pilot-symbols, seem to work well at
low SNR values, improving signicantly the BER perfor-
mance of the traditional scheme (by up to 3.5dB). Still, the
paper states that, as in [9], the complexity of the algorithm
increases as the modulation order increases. The PSP-based
SISO algorithms are robust not only in estimating unknown
constant parameters but also in estimating slowly time-
varying parameters. Furthermore, the latter introduces only
a moderate increase in complexity, compared to the SISO
algorithms with known parameters.
In [12] and [13] Mielczarek and Svensson proposed
an improved MAP decoding algorithm, operating in the
presence of a phase offset. The main assumption of this
approach is that the phase offset can be modelled as a
random variable, with a Gaussian distribution based on a
rst order Markov chain model. Therefore, by increasing
the state space of the turbo MAP decoders, the bit error
probability decreases. This approach improves the BER
performance of the traditional scheme only by 0.10.2dB.
Also, this approach is suitable only for the estimation of
phase offsets with zero frequency offsets.
All the references mentioned above ([913]) used a
dynamic model for the phase error. However, in many
practical systems, the phase error is constant for the whole
transmission frame or is varying linearly in time as a result
of a small frequency offset between the transmitter and the
receiver. This is especially true in the case of short packets,
as presented in this paper. This model was also used in other
references. In [14], Oh and Cheun proposed a joint decoding
and phase recovery method, using an objective function
based on the extrinsic information generated by the MAP
decoder, to improve the phase estimation accuracy with low
implementation complexity. This method estimates recur-
sively the phase and frequency offsets of the received packet
based on the phase and frequency estimation of previous
packets. The main drawback of this method is that it is only
suitable for tracking small phase changes and it is not
suitable for acquisition, as required in burst synchronisa-
tion, since it requires a large number of frames for phase
estimation. Also, this method can track only small values
of frequency offsets (Df o10
4
/T
s
). In [15], Zhang and Burr
proposed a different joint decoding and phase recovery
method, which uses the extrinsic information from the
MAP decoder. The phase recovery is implemented jointly
and iteratively with the turbo-decoding based on the
maximum likelihood strategy. The authors reported that
this method can correct phase offsets up to 7371 for QPSK
modulation for a packet size of 1024 symbols, but the
performance degrades signicantly for shorter packet sizes.
The performance also degrades signicantly for even very
small values of frequency offset. Therefore, this method is
suitable only for phase estimation with zero frequency
offset. In [16], Lottici and Luise proposed a joint iterative
carrier phase estimation and turbo decoding algorithm.
This algorithm is suitable for tracking phase offsets in
coherent detection of turbo coded 16-QAM (quadrature
amplitude modulation). The phase estimator is based on a
maximum-likelihood (ML) approach and makes an itera-
tive use of the soft decisions provided by the turbo decoder
in a decision-directed fashion. This algorithm seems to work
well at low SNR values, achieving negligible degradation of
the turbo decoder performance compared to ideal phase
synchronisation. The main drawback of this algorithm is
that it is suitable only for tracking and not for acquisition
since it requires a good initial estimation of the phase offset.
Also, the proposed method deals only with phase offset
estimation (frequency offset estimation was not considered).
In this paper, a new efcient carrier synchronisation
method for turbo coded short packet communication, in
burst mode at low SNR values, is presented. This method
is based on maximising a new objective function, the
MSSO(Df, f) function. This function is the mean squared
soft output of the turbo decoder and is shown to have a
global single maximum around which it is a convex
function of the phase and frequency errors. This fact
enables non-data-aided (NDA) acquisition and tracking of
the carrier frequency and phase offsets. It is shown, via
simulations, that this algorithm achieves the lower bound
on BER performance of the turbo decoder performance at
very low SNR values. The maximisation of this function
can be used for carrier synchronisation without modica-
tion of the turbo decoder itself. It has been demonstrated
that for the case of an unknown phase error, the extra
computation needed for synchronisation is not large. For
the case where both the carrier frequency and the phase are
not known, a direct usage of the function requires a large
number of iterations of the turbo-decoder, which may
be prohibitive in some applications.
2 System model
The system model considered in this paper is shown in
Fig. 2. The description below includes the parameters used
for the simulations described in subsequent Sections.
A short packet d of N bits, is rst encoded by a parallel-
concatenated-convolution-code (PCCC) turbo encoder, as
presented in [1], using recursive-systematic-convolutional
carrier
frequency
& phase
estimation
decoded
data
joint carrier synchronisation
and turbo decoding
preliminary
carrier
recovery
received
signal
turbo
decoder
Fig. 1 Joint carrier synchronisation and turbo decoding
246 IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006
(RSC) encoders. The output frame is modulated into a K
complex transmitted symbols frame s ={s
0
, y, s
K1
}. The
transmitted frame is passed through an additive white
Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel and undergoes, in
addition, a random phase shift, f[p, p) (constant per
packet), and a carrier frequency shift, Df. Assuming perfect
symbol timing recovery, perfect frame synchronisation and
a small-normalised frequency offset, Df T
s
1, the
received signal (in the equivalent base-band complex
notation) can be written as
x
k
= s
k
exp(j 2pk Df T
s
f) w
k
;
k = 0; 1; . . . ; K 1
(1)
where T
s
is the symbol time duration and w
k
are iid,
complex-valued, zero-mean, Gaussian random variables,
with variance s
2
w
= N
0
=2. In the receiver, the received signal
is rst passed through a carrier recovery process, which
attempts to estimate and correct the received signal carrier
frequency and phase offsets. Next, the sequence of symbols
is passed to the QPSK demodulator, which extracts the
received codeword and passes it on to the turbo decoder.
The decoder produces an estimate
^
d of the transmitted
N-bits data packet.
By including the feedback path indicated by the dotted
line shown in Fig. 2, the conventional synchronisation
scheme can be improved. In this case, the turbo decoder soft
outputs are passed to the carrier frequency offset and phase
offset estimation block to improve its performance. This
mode of operation is discussed in this paper.
3 The effect of imperfect carrier synchronisation
on turbo codes performance
Turbo codes, with iterative decoding based on the MAP
algorithm, can achieve remarkable performance over
AWGN channels, as shown in [1, 2] and many other
papers. Unfortunately, iterative MAP decoding is sensitive
to carrier synchronisation errors, requiring exact knowledge
of the carrier frequency and phase. Therefore, the BER
performance of turbo codes with perfect synchronisation
can be regarded as a lower bound to their real BER
performance in practical systems, and it is referred to
here as near-ideal turbo code performance (since it is
an approximation of the optimal maximum likelihood
decoder). In the following Section, a brief review of the
effect of imperfect carrier synchronisation on turbo
decoding performance is presented.
A turbo decoder, as presented in [1], is formed by a
concatenation of two SISO component decoders with an
interleaver in between (identical to the one in the encoder),
each generating a weighted soft estimation of the informa-
tion sequence. The component decoders are usually based
on the MAP decoding algorithms, such as the one proposed
by Bahl et al. in 1974 [17], operating on the code trellis
diagram. The decoding process is performed iteratively with
proper exchange of extrinsic information between the two
decoders, where the extrinsic information is a function of
the redundant information introduced by each encoder,
thus improving the performance of the other decoder.
The MAP decoder algorithm, used in each component
decoder, maximises the probability of a correct decision
(minimises the probability of error) based on the received
noisy sequence. For each possible transmitted bit, it
generates a soft estimate in the form of an a posteriori
probability (APP). As described in [2], the soft estimate of
the nth transmitted information bit,
d
(n), is computed by
the log-likelihood ratio (LLR)

d
(n) = log

(m
/
;m)d
n
=1
a
n1
(m
/
) g
1
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) b
n
(m)

(m
/
;m)d
n
=0
a
n1
(m
/
) g
0
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) b
n
(m)
(2)
where d
n
is the nth transmitted information bit, y
n
is the nth
received noisy coded symbol, (m
/
, m) d
n
=i, i =0, 1, is the
set of transitions in the code trellis diagram that are caused
by the input bit d
n
=i, a
n
(m), n=0, 1, . . ., N are the forward
code trellis diagram nodes probabilities obtained by a
forward recursion, b
n
(m), n=0, 1, . . ., N are the backward
code trellis diagram nodes probabilities obtained by a
backward recursion, and g
i
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m), i =0, 1 are the code
trellis diagram branch transition probabilities, determined
by the channel properties. The calculation of a
n
(m), b
n
(m)
and g
i
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) for an AWGN memoryless channel is
given in [1] and [2].
Imperfect carrier synchronisation (no timing error is
assumed), implies that the received signal has a frequency
offset and a phase offset. The noise-corrupted samples of
the received complex symbols, as presented in (1), may be
rewritten as
x
k
(c) = (s
I
k
js
Q
k
) exp( j c
k
) w
k
= (s
I
k
js
Q
k
)
..
Transmitted Symbol
cos(c
k
) (s
Q
k
js
I
k
)
..
Cross-Talk
sin(c
k
) w
k
(3)
where s
I
k
and s
Q
k
denote, respectively, the in-phase and
quadrature-phase components of the complex symbol s
k
,
and c
k
denotes the phase offset of the received complex
symbols c
k
= 2 p k Df T
s
f.
Equation (3) shows that the samples passed to the
decoder, after demodulation, will have a reduced power
owing to scaling down by cos(c
k
), and will also have
additional interference owing to the cross-talk term scaled
by sin(c
k
). Thus, the total signal to noise and interference
(noise +cross-talk interference) power ratio is lower than
the signal to channel noise power ratio.
As described in [1], the MAP algorithm generates, for
each possible transmitted information bit, a soft estimate,
computed by the LLR in (2). The LLR is based on the
trellis branch transition probabilities g
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) deter-
mined by the channel quality, and on the probabilities
a
n
(m) and b
n
(m) obtained by the forward and backward
recursions on the code trellis. The trellis branch transition
probabilities are reduced, owing to scaling down of the
received systematic and parity symbols by cos(c) and
the more dominant additive noise component (higher
turbo
decoder
carrier frequency
and phase offsets
estimation
w
k
decoded
bits
receiver

d
x
s
information
bits packet
d

x
transmitter
QPSK
modulator
turbo
encoder
QPSK
demodulator
turbo decoder
soft decisions
e
j (2kf T
s
+)
Fig. 2 System model for a synchronisation system
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 247
noise variance). As a result of the reduction in the
trellis branch transition probabilities, the forward and
backward recursions probabilities a
n
(m) and b
n
(m) are
also reduced. The reduction in the trellis transitions
probabilities and in the forward and backward recursions
probabilities, have a signicant impact on the soft bit
calculated by the LLR.
For example, if the nth transmitted information bit is
0 (d
n
=0), then the value of the denominator in the
logarithm of the LLR in (2) decreases (relative to the case
of perfect carrier synchronisation with the same channel
properties), while the value of the numerator in the
logarithm of the LLR increases, causing the logarithm
of the ratio to approach zero, which is the most uncertain
soft output.
In iterative decoding, the uncertain soft output presented
by each component decoder, has also a signicant
impact on the decoding performance of the second
decoder, owing to the exchange of extrinsic information
between the two decoders. If the estimation of the APP
supplied to the second decoder is low (uncertain), the trellis
transitions probabilities g
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) in the second decoder
will further decrease, degrading the overall decoder
performance.
The turbo decoder BER performance for different values
of constant phase offset f (p/4, p/4) (with a zero
frequency offset) and for different E
b
/N
0
values, is presented
in Fig. 3 (the BER was calculated after 6 iterations of
the turbo decoder over 100 bit errors). In this simulation,
the packet size was N=256 bits, the RSC encoders were
identical with feed-forward and feedback generators
described as g
0
=(101)
2
and g
1
=(111)
2
respectively, hence
yielding a rate R=1/3 PCCC turbo encoder. The modula-
tion used was QPSK, and the number of transmitted
symbols is thus K=3N/2=384. Unless written otherwise,
these values will be used in all the simulations presented
below.
It can be seen that the code has a relatively small region
where the phase offset does not cause signicant perfor-
mance degradation ([f[o5

); outside this region the

performance degrades as f grows.
The BER performance for non-zero frequency offsets is
presented in Fig. 4, where the initial phase offset of the
received packet is modelled as a random variable with a
zero mean Gaussian distribution and a standard deviation
of s
f
=51 (root mean squared phase error). This phase
offset distribution is obtained when using a training
sequence for initial phase estimation. It can be seen that
the turbo code is very sensitive to the frequency offset Df
(normalised by the symbol rate 1/T
s
), and has a relatively
small region of frequency offset, Df o110
5
/T
s
, where it
does not cause a signicant degradation in BER perfor-
mance. Note that this region is dependent on the received
packet size; the longer the packet, the shorter this region
becomes, owing to larger phase variations in longer received
packets. From these results, it can be seen that turbo
codes performance is very sensitive to frequency and phase
offsets.
4 The mean-square soft-output (MSSO) objective
function
In this Section, a new objective function, suitable for robust
carrier synchronisation in turbo-coded systems operated
at low SNR values is presented. This objective function
has a unique global maximal point located at the opti-
mum synchronisation point over all area of interest
([f[ _ p; [Df[o). By maximising this function, it is
possible to accurately estimate the carrier frequency offset
and phase offset.
It was shown above that imperfect carrier synchronisa-
tion reduces the reliability of the turbo decoder (MAP
decoder) and causes the LLR (soft outputs) to approach
zero,
d
(n) 0; n = 0; 1; . . . ; N 1. Based on this
fact, it is shown in the Appendix that the sample mean
value of the squared soft outputs (mean-square soft-output,
MSSO)
MSSO(Df; f) =
1
N

N1
n=0

d
(n)
_ _
2
(4)
for different values of frequency and phase offsets, and for
different SNR values, has a unique global maximal value
located in the optimum synchronisation point (Df =0 and
f=0), as shown in Fig. 5 for a short packet size (N=256)
after one decoding iteration of the turbo decoder, where the
E
b
/N
0
value is only 3dB (E
s
/N
0
=1.24dB).
The MSSO objective function is thus a good indicator of
the frequency and phase synchronisation of a system. In the
next Section the possibility of using this function for phase
offset and frequency offset acquisition and tracking is
studied.
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40
, deg
b
i
t

e
r
r
o
r

p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
0 dB
1 dB
2 dB
3 dB
4 dB
Fig. 3 BER performance of a turbo-decoder with constant phase
offsets
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
0.5 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5
E
b
/ N
0
, dB
b
i
t

e
r
r
o
r

p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
f /T
s
= 1 10
3
f /T
s
= 5 10
4
f /T
s
= 4 10
4
f /T
s
= 3 10
4
f /T
s
= 2 10
4
f /T
s
= 1 10
4
f /Ts = 1 10
5
optimal BER
Fig. 4 BER performance of a turbo-decoder with frequency and
random phase offset (s
f
=51 RMS)
248 IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006
5 The maximum-mean-square soft-output
(M
2
S
2
O) algorithm
In this Section, a very efcient and robust joint NDA
carrier synchronisation and turbo-decoding algorithm,
operating at low SNR values and suitable for both
acquisition and tracking of the frequency and phase offsets,
is presented. This algorithm is based on the MSSO(Df, f)
function presented in the previous Section. This method is
referred to, in this paper, as the maximum-mean-square soft
output (M
2
S
2
O) algorithm.
A very efcient carrier synchronisation algorithm could
be achieved, at low SNR values, by a search for the carrier
frequency and phase offsets combination that maximises the
mean-square soft-output (MSSO) function
(D
^
f;
^
f) = arg max
D
~
f;
~
f ( )
MSSO(D
~
f;
~
f)
_ _
(5)
The implementation of carrier synchronisation based on
this approach could be done by constructing a joint carrier
synchronisation and turbo decoding scheme, implemented
as an array of turbo-decoders for all possible (or at least
closely spaced) combinations of carrier frequency and phase
offsets values as presented in Fig. 6. All decoders are
running in parallel, and each decoder produces a set of soft
outputs. The decoder with the highest MSSO value is most
likely to correspond to the best synchronisation point
and its soft outputs are used for the estimation of the
transmitted information bits. This scheme can be imple-
mented with an inevitable high cost in hardware. Similarly,
an exhaustive search, with a prohibitive computational
complexity, can be made sequentially as described in Fig. 7.
When it is required to perform the estimation of the
carrier frequency and phase offset as quickly and as cheaply
as possible, with the lowest computational complexity (i.e.,
evaluate the MSSO(Df, f) function as few times as possible),
the exhaustive search solution introduced above is
obviously not practical. The following Section deals with
feasible approximations to this joint carrier synchronisation
and turbo decoding scheme.
The proposed M
2
S
2
O algorithm is a sub-optimal
algorithm (in the sense of estimation accuracy) for the
maximisation of the MSSO(Df, f) function (estimation of
the carrier frequency and phase offsets). It is based on a
function maximisation numerical approach, with evaluation
of the MSSO(Df, f) function as few times as possible. This
algorithm operates in an iterative fashion, as shown in
Fig. 7, having a low implementation complexity.
The problem of locating the maximum or minimum of
a function of multi-variables is one that arises frequently in
the design of adaptive control and communication systems.
Finding the maximum of a function with a completely
unknown structure (such as the MSSO(Df, f) function)
is, in general, a very difcult problem (computationally
complex), since the only way that information about
this function can be obtained is by evaluating it at specic
points.
The M
2
S
2
O algorithm is a proposed method for
maximising the MSSO(Df, f) function, and is presented
for two scenarios:
(i) M
2
S
2
O algorithm for carrier phase estimation only
(zero frequency offset), which requires a one-
dimensional maximisation of the MSSO(Df =0, f)
function.
150
100
50
0
50
100
150
phase shift
, deg
f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

s
h
i
f
t

f
/ T
s

1
0
3
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
s
e
d

M
S
S
O
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1.0
0.5
0
0.5
1.0
Fig. 5 The normalised MSSO(Df, f) function at E
b
/N
0
=3dB
(E
s
/N
0
=1.24dB)

d
1

d
2

d
L
r
turbo
decoder
demodulator
turbo
decoder
demodulator
turbo
decoder
demodulator
MAX
MSSO
1
N

N 1
n = 0
(
d
1
(n))
2
N 1

N 1
1
N
n =0
(
d
2
(n))
2
{e
j (2kf
1
+
1
)
}
k 1
k = 0
k 1
k = 0
k 1
k = 0
{e
j (2kf
2
+
2
)
}
{e
j (2kf
L
+ L)
}

d
j
1
N
n = 0
(
d
L
(n))
2

Fig. 6 Joint turbo decoding and carrier synchronisation scheme, based on the mean-square soft-output (MSSO) function (parallel exhaustive
search approach)
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 249
(ii) M
2
S
2
O algorithm for joint carrier frequency and phase
offsets estimation, which requires a two-dimensional
maximisation of the MSSO(Df, f) objective function.
5.1 The M
2
S
2
O algorithm for carrier phase
offset estimation (zero frequency offset)
In the case where the received signal carrier frequency offset
is very small (Df 0), the M
2
S
2
O algorithm is reduced to
the estimation of a constant phase offset per received
packet. Using the MSSO(Df, f) function (objective func-
tion), the phase offset can be estimated as
^
f = arg max
~
f
MSSO(Df = 0;
~
f)
_ _
= arg max
~
f
MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f)
_ _
(6)
where MSSO
Df =0
(f) =MSSO(Df =0, f) is a cross-section
of the MSSO(Df, f) at zero frequency offset Df =0. This
maximisation problem becomes then a one-dimensional
problem.
The MSSO
Df =0
(f) function, for different values of phase
offset f, after one iteration of the turbo decoder, for QPSK
modulation and short packet size (N=256) is shown in
Fig. 8. It can be seen that the MSSO
Df =0
(f) function is
monotonic in the range of [f[o40

with a parabolic-like
form. Note that the MSSO
Df =0
(f) function seems to have
only one maximum and does not suffer from the phase
ambiguity problem that plagues other phase offset estima-
tion methods. Therefore, the correct phase decision region
in phase modulations (e.g., a quadrant for QPSK) can be
easily found using this function.
A low complexity M
2
S
2
O algorithm for carrier phase
estimation (zero frequency offset) is implemented in two
steps: a coarse phase offset estimation and a ne phase
offset estimation.
Step 1: An initial coarse phase offset estimation (phase
offset bracketing): Finding the phase region where the
MSSO
Df = 0
(
~
f) function is monotonic. The coarse phase
offset estimation is performed as follows:
1. A grid of discrete phase offset points covering the whole
phase region (at least one phase offset point per each of
the M-sectors in a M-PSK modulation) is selected
~
f
l
= j 2p=J; j = 0; 1; . . . ; J 1 and J4M (7)
where M is the modulation order (e.g., J44 for QPSK
modulation).
2. A single grid point
~
f
j
/ ( j = j
/
) for which the
MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f) crosses a pre-dened threshold is found
by an exhaustive search over the grid points determined
in step (1).
It was empirically found that for QPSK modulation and
J=5, this method is robust for the code tested in this paper;
namely, it always nds a correct initial bracket of the phase
offset (search range). The average number of function
evaluations was found to be 3 (the maximum number of
evaluations was 5).
Step 2: Fine phase offset estimation (search in the range
found in step 1): Based on one-dimensional numerical
maximisation algorithm, nding the phase offset which
maximises the MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f) function.
It was empirically found [18] that Brents method [19],
deemed to be the best for maximising the MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f)
function (in the sense of minimum number of function
evaluations), required on average only 9 MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f)
function evaluations for the required phase estimation
accuracy level of e
f
=51.
The choice of the threshold used to switch between the
grid search and ne estimation phase is important, but not
crucial. The actual threshold choice should also involve the
cost of a misdetection, but will not be elaborated on here.
Basically, for a given code and frame length the threshold
can be determined empirically.
5.2 The M
2
S
2
O algorithm for joint carrier
frequency and phase offsets estimation
In general, the carrier frequency and phase offsets can be
jointly estimated as described in (5). This maximisation
problem is two-dimensional.
The contour map (top view) structure of the
MSSO(Df, f) function is shown in Fig. 9, for different
values of frequency and phase offsets. It can be seen in
Fig. 9, and also in Fig. 5, that the MSSO(Df, f) function has
a long narrow and monotonic hill-like shape with an
elliptic-like shape around its maximum.
r turbo
decoder
(1 iteration)
demodulator
final values
iterative
MAX
MSSO
intermediate
values
f,

f,

d
k 1
k = 0
{e
j (2kf +)
}

1

N 1
N
n =0
(
d
2
(n))
2
Fig. 7 The maximum-mean-square soft-output (M
2
S
2
O) algorithm for carrier frequency and phase offsets estimation
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
150 100 50 0 50 100 150
phase shift , deg
M
S
S
O
(

)
Fig. 8 The normalised MSSO
Df=0
(
~
f) function at E
b
/N
0
=3dB
(E
s
/N
0
=1.24dB)
250 IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006
An M
2
S
2
O algorithm for joint carrier frequency and
phase offsets estimation is implemented in two steps (as in
the case of phase only estimation): coarse phase offset
estimation and ne phase offset estimation.
Coarse joint carrier frequency and phase offsets estimation:
Finding the combination of frequency offset and phase
offset values that lie inside the convergence region
of the MSSO(Df, f) function. The coarse joint carrier
frequency and phase offsets estimation is performed
as follows:
1. A grid of discrete frequency-phase offset points (D
~
f
i
;
~
f
j
)
covering the whole frequency-phase region is selected
D
~
f
i
= i Df
max
=I; i = 0; 1; . . . ; I
~
f
l
= j 2p=J; j = 0; 1; . . . ; J 1 and J4M
(8)
where, Df
max
denotes the maximum possible frequency
offset, Df
max
/I denotes the distance between two succes-
sive discrete frequency offsets in the grid. The value of
I, the number of frequency grid points, should be chosen
to be large enough, such that (Df
max
/I) T
s
o2p/M. J is
the number of phase grid points, M is the modulation
order (for QPSK modulation, M=4 and it is required
that J44) and T
s
is the symbol duration.
2. By exhaustive search (using a randomised search
strategy), a grid point (D
~
f
i
;
~
f
j
) is found, for which the
MSSO(D
~
f
i
;
~
f
j
) crosses a pre-dened threshold (the
border of the outer ellipse in Fig. 9).
The following set of conditions was tested in a simulation
(for QPSK modulation):
v
A maximum possible frequency offset of Df
max
[ [ _
1:2 10
3
=T
s
, where T
s
is the symbol time duration.
v
I =3 frequency offset grid points with a distance between
two successive discrete frequency offset grid points of
Df
max
/I =410
4
/T
s
.
v J=8 phase offset grid points.
These conditions imply a total of 56 discrete frequency-
phase offset points, with an average of 5 candidate points
inside the convergence region.
It was empirically found, that for these conditions,
this method is robust: it always converges to the
correct combination of frequency and phase offsets
values that lie inside the convergence region of the
MSSO(Df, f) function. The average number of function
evaluations was 12.
Fine joint carrier frequency and phase offsets estimation:
Based on a two-dimensional numerical maximisation
algorithm, the combination of carrier frequency and phase
offsets, which maximises the MSSO(Df, f) function, is
found.
It was empirically found in [18] that Powells method [19],
deemed to be the best for maximising the MSSO(Df, f)
function (in the sense of minimum number of function
evaluations), requires on average 60 function evaluations
for the required frequency and phase estimation accuracy
levels of e
Df
o1 10
5
/T
s
and e
f
=51 correspondingly.
This number could be too large for some applications. In
[20] an alternative method is suggested, using a decision
directed algorithm to reduce the complexity of the ne
search stage.
The M
2
S
2
O algorithm can be used for both acquisition
and tracking. For acquisition, where the phase and (or)
frequency offsets are not known, it requires a grid search
as described above. For tracking, the ne-estimation
part of the M
2
S
2
O algorithm can be used in which, given
an estimated phase and frequency offset, a better estimate
is calculated based on the maximisation of the MSSO
function.
The M
2
S
2
O approach is basically different from the
PSP-based approach, as described in [713], as it models the
unknown phase as a deterministic function of time, the
parameters of which are to be estimated, while in [713]
the unknown parameters are modelled as random dynamic
processes. The M
2
S
2
O approach is quite natural in the
context of burst processing, and the above-mentioned
function of time, which is slowly varying within the burst,
can in principle be estimated with a small number of
parameters, and does not need to be tracked in the sense
referred to in [713], since it changes abruptly on the next
burst.
In this paper, the usage of the M
2
S
2
O approach has been
focused on a linear model (constant phase plus a frequency
offset) and examined the performance of such an app-
roach. However, an extension to a higher order approxima-
tion function can be readily done, although our results do
not encourage extending the search to more parameters
(owing to the prohibitively long computation complexity
required).
The M
2
S
2
O approach has the very important practical
advantage that it does not require any modication of the
turbo-decoder itself, as it is completely external to it.
Furthermore, in the case of the methods described in [713],
the dynamic model has to be introduced as part of the
decoder and hence limits its performance to a particular
environment. This fact makes the M
2
S
2
O a very good
candidate for short burst synchronisation.
5.3 Simulation results and analysis
In order to analyse the performance of the M
2
S
2
O carrier
synchronisation algorithm, the BER performance of the
turbo decoder, operating jointly with the M
2
S
2
O algorithm,
was tested for two scenarios:
1. A zero frequency offset with a random phase offset
(constant per packet) uniformly distributed over the
interval [p, p): The M
2
S
2
O algorithm is used for carrier
phase offset estimation.
2. A non-zero frequency offset with a random phase offset
(as in 1): The M
2
S
2
O algorithm is used for joint carrier
frequency and phase offsets estimation.
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
150 100 50 0 50 100 150
phase offset , deg
f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

o
f
f
s
e
t

T
s

1
0

3
Fig. 9 Contour map of the MSSO(Df, f) function
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 251
All tests were performed with 6 iterations of the
turbo decoder after carrier frequency and phase offsets
estimation and correction. The BER was calculated over
100 bit errors.
Note that in all simulations, it is assumed that the
minimum value of the MSSO function for which a
combination of frequency offset and phase offset values
lies inside the convergence region of the function (the
threshold value for termination of the coarse estimation) is
known. It was shown via simulations that a wrong selection
of this threshold value may cause a misdetection of the
frequency and phase offsets with high probability, resulting
in a catastrophic BER performance.
Figure 10 presents the BER performance of the
joint M
2
S
2
O carrier synchronisation algorithm and
turbo decoding for a constant random phase offset per
packet, uniformly distributed over the interval [p, p)
and for different values of E
b
/N
0
. From these results,
it can be seen that best performance (no BER degradation)
is achieved for all values of phase offset f[p, p),
compared to f [ [o5

for decoding with no phase correction,

shown in Fig. 3.
Figure 11 presents the BER performance of the joint
M
2
S
2
O carrier synchronisation algorithm and turbo decod-
ing for different frequency offsets and a constant random
phase offset, uniformly distributed over the interval [p, p).
It can be seen that near-ideal turbo decoding perfor-
mance (no BER degradation, relative to turbo decoding
with perfect carrier synchronisation) is achieved for all
tested frequency offsets Df r110
3
/T
s
, compared to
Df o110
5
/T
s
for decoding with no frequency correction
(as shown in Fig. 4).
From these results it can be seen that near ideal
turbo code performance (no BER degradation) can be
achieved by using the M
2
S
2
O carrier synchronisation
algorithm.
The algorithm was also tested for different block
sizes. The performance for longer or shorter block sizes
is basically the same very close to the near-ideal
turbo-decoder performance. The difference lies mainly
in the coarse estimation phase. With longer block size
the ridge gets smaller and requires more iterations to
detect. For long blocks the classical phase and
frequency techniques, such as those used in [5], can be
used for coarse estimation, rather than the exhaustive search
shown here.
6 Summary and conclusions
This paper proposes the M
2
S
2
O algorithm as a practical
carrier synchronisation solution for turbo-coded short
packet transmission systems operating in the low SNR
region.
The M
2
S
2
O algorithm maximises (in an iterative fashion)
the newly invented MSSO(Df, f) objective function (the
mean of the squared soft outputs of the turbo decoder),
which is shown to have a unique global maximum located
at the optimum synchronisation point.
The M
2
S
2
O algorithm uses an iterative function max-
imisation numerical approach, requiring the least number of
MSSO(Df, f) function evaluations, among the known
maximisation algorithms. The following list summarises
the properties of the M
2
S
2
O algorithm:
v
The algorithm is robust (shown via simulations): near
ideal turbo decoding performance was achieved for all
frequency offset and phase offset values.
v The algorithm is suitable for both acquisition and
tracking of frequency and phase offsets (it is a complete
carrier synchronisation algorithm).
v
The algorithm has a low implementation complexity, as it
does not require the modication of the decoder, which is
required for methods like those presented in [7, 10, 11].
v
The algorithm has a low computational complexity for
the case of carrier phase estimation (zero frequency
offset).
v The algorithm has a medium computational complexity
for the case of joint carrier frequency offset and phase
offset estimation.
v
The algorithm is spectrally efcient: no training sequence
is required (blind synchronisation).
7 References
1 Berrou, C., and Glavieux, A.: Near optimum error correcting
coding and decoding: turbo-codes, IEEE Trans. Commun., 1996, 44,
pp. 12611271
2 Vucetic, B., and Yuan, J.: Turbo codes principles and applications
(Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000)
3 Meyr, H., and Aschied, G.: Synchronization in digital communica-
tions (Wiley, 1990)
4 Proakis, J.G.: Digital communications (McGraw-Hill, 1995, 3rd
edn.)
5 DAmico, A.A., DAndrea, A.N., and Regiannini, R.: Efcient non-
data-aided carrier and clock recovery for satellite DVB at very low
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
1 0 1 2 3 4 5
E
b
/ N
0
, dB
b
i
t

e
r
r
o
r

p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
optimal BER
U[,]
Fig. 10 Joint M
2
S
2
O carrier synchronisation and turbo decoding
BER performance for random phase offsets
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
0.5 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
E
b
/ N
0
, dB
b
i
t

e
r
r
o
r

p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5
f

T
s
= 1 10
3
f

T
s
= 9 10
4
f

T
s
= 8 10
4
f

T
s
= 7 10
4
optimal BER
Fig. 11 Joint M
2
S
2
O carrier synchronisation and turbo decoding
BER performance for frequency offset and random phase offset
252 IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006
signal-to-noise ratios, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., 2001, 19, (12),
pp. 23202330
6 Ungerboeck, G.: Channel coding with multilevel/phase signals, IEEE
Trans. Inf. Theory, 1982, 28, pp. 5567
7 Bar-David, I., and Elia, A.: Augmented APP (A
2
P
2
) module for
a-posteriori probability calculation and channel parameter tracking,
IEEE Commun. Lett., 1999, 3, (1), pp. 1820
8 Raheli, R., Polydoros, A., and Tzou, C.K.: Per-survivor processing: a
general approach to MLSE in uncertain environments, IEEE Trans.
Commun., 1995, 43, (2/3/4), pp. 354364
9 Anastasopoulos, A., and Chugg, K.M.: Adaptive soft-input soft-
output algorithms for iterative detection with parametric uncertainty,
IEEE Trans. Commun., 2000, 48, pp. 16381649
10 Anastasopoulos, A., and Chugg, K.M.: Adaptive iterative detection
for phase tracking in turbo-coded systems, IEEE Trans. Commun.,
2001, 49, pp. 21352144
11 Ferrari, G., Anastasopoulos, A., Colavolpe, G., and Raheli, R.:
Adaptive iterative detection for the phase uncertain channel: limited-
tree-search versus truncated-memory detection, IEEE Trans. Veh.
Technol., 2004, 53, pp. 433442
12 Mielczarek, B., and Svensson, A.: Improved MAP decoders for turbo
codes with non-perfect timing and phase synchronization. Proc. IEEE
VTC 1999, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 15901594
13 Mielczarek, B., and Svensson, A.: Phase offset estimation using
enhanced turbo decoders. Proc. IEEE ICC 2002, New York City,
USA, Vol. 3, pp. 15361540
14 Oh, W., and Cheun, K.: Joint decoding and carrier phase recovery
algorithm for turbo codes, IEEE Commun. Lett., 2001, 5, (9),
pp. 375377
15 Zhang, L., and Burr, A.: Phase estimation with the aid of soft output
from turbo decoder. Proc. IEEE VTC 2001, Atlantic City, New
Jersey, USA, Vol. 1, pp. 154158
16 Lottici, V., and Luise, M.: Carrier phase recovery for turbo-coded
linear modulations. Proc. IEEE ICC 2002, New York City, NY,
USA, Vol. 3, pp. 15411545
17 Bahl, L., Cocke, J., Jelinek, F., and Raviv, J.: Optimal decoding of
linear codes for minimizing symbol error rate, IEEE Trans. Inf.
Theory, 1974, IT-20, pp. 284287
18 Rahamim, Y.: Joint carrier synchronization and turbo decoding.
MSc thesis, Tel-Aviv University, Israel 2003
19 Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vettering, W.T., and Flannery, B.P.:
Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientic computing, (Cambridge
University Press, 1992, 2nd edn.), Chap. 10
20 Rahamim, Y., Freedman, A., and Reichman, A.: Methods for carrier
synchronization of short packet turbo coded signals. Proc. PIMRC
2004, Barcelona, Spain, Vol. 3, pp. 19831987
8 Appendix
The MSSO function as dened in (4) is a statistical estimate
of the quality of the decoding process. We will show in this
Appendix that, within the working conditions of the
communication system (namely with acceptable signal-to-
noise ratio and phase and frequency offset) its value is
maximised with high probability when the error in the
carrier phase is zero.
The mapping between the code symbols (the systematic
and parity bits) and the transmission symbols is not
trivial. For example, in a simple case of, a rate 1/2 code
combined with QPSK modulation, each 2-bit coding
symbol may be mapped to the same transmission symbol
and hence undergo the same phase error. However,
generally, a coding symbol might be transmitted by different
transmission symbols, and each bit undergoes a different
phase error. Note that after interleaving, the rate 1/2 with
QPSK case also becomes similar to the general case in
that sense.
For simplicity, we will show the claim for the specic
case of component codes of rates 1/2 each, as those used in
this paper, and assume BPSK modulation, for which the
phase error (which includes the frequency offset and
constant phase offset) for each coding bit is essentially
different.
Consider the likelihood ratio for the nth bit dened in (2),
and dene the numerator and denominator as L
1
and L
0
respectively.
L
i
n ( )=

(m
/
;m)d
n
=i
a
n1
(m
/
) g
i
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m)b
n
(m); i =0; 1 (9)
g
i
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) is the transition probability, namely the
probability to get the received signal vector y
n
(of size Q,
which depends on the code rate and modulation mapping
and in our case Q=2), given that the ith bit was transmitted
when the encoder was in the state S
m1
. For the AWGN
channel
g
i
n
(y
n
; m
/
; m) = p
n
(i)

Q
q =1
1
2ps
2
exp
d
2
[y
n
(q); s
m;m
/ (q)[
2s
2
_ _
=p
n
(i)
1
2ps
2
_ _
Q
exp
1
2s
2

Q
q =1
d
2
[y
n
(q); s
m;m
/ (q)[
_ _
(10)
where the multiplication is performed over the set of
different symbols, and d
2
[y
n
(q); s
m;m
/ (q)[ is the square of
the Euclidean distance between the received symbol, y
n
(q),
and the symbol s
m;m
/ (q) presumably transmitted for this bit,
as calculated for the particular transition from S
m
/ to S
m
.
For a phase error, f
n
(q) and a transmitted signal s
n
(q)
y
n
q ( ) = s
n
q ( )e
jf
n
q ( )
w
n
(11)
Consider the trellis, which describes the code. The likelihood
values, dened in (9) can also be written as
L
i
n ( ) =

tT i
n
( )

N
k =1
g
i
n
k
(y
k
; t) =

tT i
n
( )
A
i
n
t
(12)
where T(i
n
) is the set of paths included in the sum needed to
calculate L
i
(n), N is the length of the trellis, and g
i
n
k
(y
k
; t)
represents the transition probability in the tth path in the
kth time instant, which is included in the path needed to
calculate the probability that bit i was transmitted at time
instant n.
Using (10), and ignoring the constant (1/2ps
2
)
Q
, a single
term in the sum can be written as
A
i
n
t
=

N1
k=0
g
i
n
k
y
k
; t ( )
=

N1
k=0
p
k
t ( ) exp
1
2s
2

2
q=1
d
2
y
k
q ( ); s
k;t
q ( )
_
_ _
(13)
Thus, each of the terms depends on the a priori probabilities
for the bits along the path, and the sum of the squared
distance between each received symbol and the value
assumed for it along the t path.
The following observations can be made:
v
The likelihood value L
i
(n) that includes the correct
decision for the time instant n, includes a term which is a
product of a set of correct decisions along the whole
trellis. Denote this product by A
c
.
v
Other paths in the trellis differ from the correct path in at
least d
free
points, where d
free
is determined by the chosen
code.
We restrict the analysis to the region around the correct
decision, in the sense that for the correct path the correct
decision term A
c
dominates the sum.
Denote by A
i
(i =1, y, n) a term that has d
free
or more
incorrect multiplicands. The likelihood ratio between
the incorrect decision L
i
and the correct one L
c
can be
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 253
approximated as
L
i
L
c
=

n
i=1
A
i
A
c


n1
i=1
A
c
i
~

n
i=1
A
i
A
c
(14)
where A
c
i
denote the incorrect terms within the set T(i
n
).
A
i
contains at least d
free
incorrect multiplicands. The other
multiplicands in each A
i
are correct and hence identical to
their counterparts within A
c
. Denote by C(i) the set of
indexes of the correct multiplicands within the term A
i
and
by
~
C(i) the complementary set of incorrect multiplicands.
The ratio (A
i
/A
c
) contains only the unequal terms
A
i
A
c
=

k
~
C i ( )
p
ic
k
t ( )
p
c
k
t ( )
_
_
_
_
exp
1
2s
2

k
~
C i ( )

Q
q=1
d
2
[y
k
q ( ); s
ic
k;i
q ( )[
_
_
d
2
y
k
q ( ); s
k
q ( ) [ [
_
_
_
(15)
where s
k
(q) denotes a correct symbol, and s
ic
k;i
(q) indicates a
symbol in the path associated with the A
i
, p
c
k
(t) is the
a priori probability of a correct transition and p
ic
k
(t) is the
a priori probability of an incorrect transition.
In order to simplify the analysis, we shall refer to the
BPSK case. For BPSK s
k
(q) =

E
b
_
d
2
y
k
q ( ); s
k
q ( ) [ [ =2s
2
k
q ( ) 1 cos f
k
q ( ) [ [
2Re s
k
q ( ) e
jf
k
q ( )
1
_ _
w
k
q ( )
_ _
w
k
q ( ) [ [
2
(16)
d
2
[y
k
q ( ); s
ic
k;i
q ( )[ =2s
2
k
q ( ) 1 cos f
k
q ( ) [ [
2Re s
k
q ( ) e
jf
k
q ( )
1
_ _
w
k
q ( )
_ _
w
k
q ( ) [ [
2
(17)
And the difference between them
d
2
[y
k
q ( ); s
ic
k;i
q ( )[ d
2
y
k
q ( ); s
k
q ( ) [ [
= 4E
b
cos f
k
q ( ) 4s
k
q ( )Re w
k
q ( ) [ [ (18)
Substituting (18) into (15) results in
A
i
A
c
=

k
~
C(i)
p
ic
k
(t)
p
c
k
(t)
_
_
_
_
exp
1
2s
2

k
~
C i ( )

Q
q =1
4g
k
(q)E
b
cos f
k
(q)
_
_
4s
k
(q)g
k
(q)Re[w
k
(q)[
_
_
=

k
~
C(i)
p
ic
k
(t)
p
c
k
(t)
_
_
_
_
exp
2E
b
s
2

k
~
C(i)

Q
q =1
g
k
(q) cos f
k
(q)
_
_
_
_
_

E
b
_

k
~
C(i)

Q
q =1
u
k
(q)g
k
(q)Re[w
k
(q)[
_
_
_
_
_
(19)
where u
k
(q) is a random sequence of 71s, and g
k
(q) is either
0 or 1, depending on the code structure, and indicates
whether in the kth branch, the qth symbol is correct or
incorrect.
Dene
z i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )

Q
q = 1
g
k
q ( ) cos f
k
q ( )
w i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )

Q
q = 1
u
k
q ( )g
k
q ( )Re w
k
q ( ) [ [
P
d
i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )
p
ic
k
t ( )
p
c
k
t ( )
(20)
And
A
i
A
c
= P
d
i ( ) exp
2E
b
s
2
z i ( )
w i ( )

E
b
_
_ _ _ _
(21)
Dene z
0
(i) for the case there is no phase error and z
f
(i) for
the case there is a phase error. Clearly, based on (20)
z
0
i ( ) z
f
i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )

Q
q =1
g
k
q ( ) 1 cos f
k
q ( ) [ [40 (22)
The difference between the two cases, using (21)
A
i
A
c

A
i
A
c

0
= P
d
i ( ) exp
2E
b
s
2
z
f
i ( )
w i ( )

E
b
_
_ _ _ _
1exp
2E
b
s
2
z
0
i ( ) z
f
i ( )
_ _
_ _ _ _
= Z
A
i
A
c

f
(23)
Because of (22): 0oZo1, namely the ratio A
i
/A
c
gets larger
as phase error occurs.
A more general result, that for any set of phase errors
f
/
k
(q), for which for all k and q f
/
k
(q) _ f
k
(q), then
A
i
A
c

f
/
_
A
i
A
c

f
, can be easily obtained using the same
argumentation.
Consequently, the likelihood ratio with a phase error
L
i
L
c

f
, which is a sum of positive terms each increasing with
the increase of the phase error, also increases with the
increase of the phase error
L
i
L
c

f
~

n
i =1
A
i
A
c

f
4

n
i =1
A
i
A
c

0
=
L
i
L
c

0
(24)
The log-likelihood ratio, dened in (2), transforms the
ratio in (24) to a logarithmic scale, thus the increase in
the ratio between the incorrect and the correct likelihood
values transforms into a reduction of the absolute value of

d
(n).
The MSSO function, dened in (4), further averages the
square of
d
(n)
_
2
over all the bits thus it provides an
indication (comparing different phase offset correction
options) to the phase error effect. It should be noted that
from a statistical point of view, there is no new information
involved in the computation of each
d
(n). The benet in
the averaging stems from the fact that, for some n, the z(i)
variable in (20) may be more sensitive to phase errors than
others.
The approximation above holds if the ratio between the
correct term A
c
and the other terms summed together to
form L
c
is larger than some threshold, x. We shall refer to
the inverse of this ratio, namely

n
/
i=1
A
c
i
A
c
o
1
x
(25)
254 IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006
Dene, as in (21)
A
c
i
A
c
= P
d
i ( ) exp
2E
b
s
2
z i ( )
w i ( )

E
b
_
_ _ _ _
(26)
As this ratio should be as low as possible, the worst case is
that for all the incorrect symbols, only one bit is correct,
namely the variables and parameters in (20) are redened to
include a single incorrect symbol for each of the branches
associated with A
c
i
z i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )
cos f
k
q ( )
w i ( ) =

k
~
C i ( )
u
k
q ( )Re w
k
q ( ) [ [
(27)
The number of terms in the sum, K, is at least d
free
. w(i) is a
Gaussian random variable with zero mean and variance:
Ks
2
/2. We will estimate the validity of the approximation by
evaluating the probability that (25) occurs. A lower bound
on the probability can be evaluated
Pr

n
i=1
A
i
A
c
o
1
x
_ _
4Pr
A
i
A
c
o
1
xn
\i
_ _
= Pr max
A
i
A
c
_ _
o
1
xn
_ _
(28)
For each individual term in (28)
Pr
A
i
A
c
o
1
xn
_ _
= Pr P
d
i ( ) exp
2E
b
s
2
z i ( )
w i ( )

E
b
_
_ _ _ _
o
1
xn
_ _
= Pr w i ( )4
s
2
2

E
b
_ ln xnP
d
i ( )

E
b
_
z i ( )
_ _
= Q

s
2
2KE
b

ln xnP
d
i ( )

2KE
b
s
2
_
"
z i ( )
_
_
_
_
(29)
where
"
z(i) = z(i)=K is the average value of the z(i), and it is
close to one for small phase errors for any value of K.
Consider the following case
v
No information is provided by the a priori probability,
P
d
(i ) =1
v
The signal-to-noise of operation:
E
b
s
2
= 0 dB
v
For the code used in the paper, there is one path that
differs from the correct path by d
free
=5 incorrect
branches, and 4 paths that differ by 6. We shall ignore
the rest of the paths (the contribution of which to the sum
in (25) is even smaller) and take n =5.
v
Let us take as the performance threshold x=10
For those 5 paths
2d
free
E
b
s
2
=10=10dB for the rst path,
2KE
b
s
2
=12=11dB for
the other 4 paths
Without any phase error
For the rst path
Q

s
2
2d
free
E
b

ln xnP
d
i ( )

2d
free
E
b
s
2
_
_ _
= 0:9724
For the other paths
Q

s
2
2KE
b

ln xnP
d
i ( )

2KE
b
s
2
_
_
_
_
_
= 0:99
As long as the phase error is less than 251 the probabilities
above will not be less than 95%. This level of probability
means that operationally we can consider the MSSOfunction
as a good indication to the effectiveness of the phase error
correction. In simulations we have found that the lower
bound of (28) is quite loose, and in fact the results were valid
for all the multitude of packets used in the simulation.
An additional remark is in order concerning other
constellations, such as QPSK. For BPSK, the result in
(24) was straightforward, owing to the fact that a phase
error always introduces an additional bias to the distance
between the received signal and the correct symbol, while it
decreases the distance between the received signal and the
incorrect symbol. For other constellations the phase error
may also increase the distance between the received signal
and an incorrect symbol, thus making it possible that the
likelihood ratio in (24) would not increase but decrease. The
exact analysis is beyond the scope of this paper, however, it
can be observed that this negative effect occurs in a small
number of symbols, compared to the positive effect that was
demonstrated in the BPSK case (e.g. for QPSK, the distance
increases for one incorrect symbol and decreases for two
incorrect symbols), thus the averaging of the log-likelihood
ratio is indeed necessary in order to offset the effect of the
negative term.
IEE Proc.-Commun., Vol. 153, No. 2, April 2006 255