This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2017.2733540, IEEE
Communications Letters
Precoding-Aided Spatial Modulation with Increased
Robustness to Channel Correlations
Mutlu Koca, Member, IEEE and Hikmet Sari, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—We present a precoding approach for spatial modu-
lation (SM) for increased robustness against spatial correlations
over slow fading Rayleigh channels. This approach, based on
phase-rotation of the transmitted symbol according to the active
transmit antenna, can be implemented without changing the
power budget or needing any explicit knowledge of the channel
state information at the transmitter. The optimum precoding
coefficients are determined so as to minimize the asymptotic
average bit-error rate (ABER). Both theoretical analysis and
simulation results indicate significant performance improvements
even in the case of heavily correlated transmit antennas.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Spatial modulation (SM) [1], where part of the incoming
bits are used to choose a single transmit antenna while the
rest are used to select the modulation symbol to be sent from
the active antenna, has emerged as a novel communication
technology.Despite having fundamental advantages such as
the avoidance of inter-channel interference (ICI) and the
simplification of the transmit chain, the joint utilization of
both the antenna and signal spaces to convey information in
SM is also the cause of a main drawback. Specifically, if
there is spatial correlation among the transmit antennas due
to insufficient separation and/or a direct line-of-sight channel
component (i.e., Rician fading), the receiver performance in
resolving the active transmit antenna degrades significantly.
This in turn results in a large increase in the overall average
bit-error rate (ABER) of the SM transceiver as well. This
problem, that is the unequal error vulnerability of the antenna
and symbol bits against adverse fading channel effects, has
been addressed in [2]–[4] and various unequal error protection
(UEP) solutions based on trellis-coded modulation [2], bit-
interleaved coded modulation [3] and block-Markov superpo-
sition coding [4] have been proposed. Even though they are
not designed specifically for UEP, other alternatives such as
the trellis coding approach of [5] are also shown to provide
some robustness against these effects as well. However, in
all of these approaches, an encoder-decoder pair is added
to the transceiver which increases both the latency and the
computational complexity.
Recently, another line of work in [6]–[10] has addressed
the signal shaping by precoding at the transmitter to provide
transmit diversity and performance improvement for SM sys-
tems. Here, the precoder is designed to shape the constellation
observed at the receiver in a way to enhance the minimum
Euclidean distance or the bit-error probability. However, these
precoders are designed only for time-invariant channels and
for cases where the full channel information is available at the
transmitter. In [9], [10], partial channel state information (CSI)
is also considered where the transmitter is assumed to know an
M. Koca is with the Wireless Communications Laboratory, Department
of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Boǧaziçi University, Bebek 34342
Istanbul, Turkey, E-mail: mutlu.koca@boun.edu.tr.
H. Sari is with Sequans Communications, Les Portes de la Défense,
15-55 Boulevard Charles de Gaulle, 92700 Colombes, France,
E-mail:hsari@ieee.org.
1089-7798 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
erroneous version of the channel. However, these works still
rely on fixed or block-fading channel realizations. That is why,
in this work we extend this constellation shaping approach to
slow-fading and correlated Rayleigh channels and present a
rotation-based precoding approach against transmit correlation
effects as a cost and complexity effective alternative. This
method is based on imposing a different phase rotation on
the symbols according to the activated antenna, hence it
continues to avoid ICI, does not change the transmit power
and can still be implemented in a single radio frequency (RF)
structure with only a marginal increase in the circuitry as
opposed to the coding based approaches mentioned above. The
rotation optimization is based on minimizing the asymptotic
average bit-error probability (ABEP) at high signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) values. The presented approach is also similar to
the random phase rotation approach of [11]. However, whereas
the method in [11] requires a random precoding phase set to
be shared between the ransmitter and the receiver in every
signalling instant, the precoding presented in this work relies
on the sharing of a single optimum phase set throughout
the entire transmission and therefore is more practical. The
proposed precoder also differs from multi-antenna precoder
approaches given in works such as [12], which achieve ICI
free signals at the receiver at the cost of losing the single
RF structure at the transmitter, as it can be implemented with
both conventional and generalized versions of SM and while
preserving the single RF structure during precoding.
Compared with the existing precoding approaches, the con-
tributions of this work are as follows: i) Slow fading Rayleigh
channels are considered as opposed to fixed channel realiza-
tions where the precoder is designed for robustness against
the spatial correlation effects among the transmit antennas; ii)
Unlike the approaches presented in [6]–[12], only the channel
type and the correlation parameters are needed at the trans-
mitter and not the explicit channel knowledge. Both analysis
and simulation results show that precoded SM overcomes
significant performance losses even in the case of severe inter-
antenna correlations in comparison to conventional SM.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
We consider the conventional SM system model with Nt
transmit and Nr receive antennas employing maximum likeli-
hood (ML) detection. In this scheme, the number of transmit
antennas is an integer power of 2, i.e., Nt = 2n , and the
transmitter employs M -ary digital modulation to an m-bit
m
message where M = 2 and the modulation symbol set is
X = X1 , . . . Xk , . . . XM . At each transmission
instant, each set of n + m bits is split into groups of n and m
bits, and the former is used to select a single transmit antenna
and the latter is mapped onto one of M possible constella-
tion points. The method used in the bit-to-index mapping is
immaterial to the central discussion, so throughout the paper
we assume uniform mapping. The transmitted signal vector is
 T
x= x 1 , . . . xℓ , . . . xNt where all but one entry
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2017.2733540, IEEE
Communications Letters 2

is zero because only one antenna is active for transmission. where N (u, û, v, v̂) denotes the number of bit errors between
In other words, the position of the non-zero element denotes the channel and symbol pairs, (hu , Xv ) and (hû , Xv̂ ), and
the active antenna index and its value indicates thetransmitted log2 (Nt M ) is the total number of bits. P̄s (u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂)
symbol. We assume unit transmit power, i.e., Ex x† x = 1 .

denotes the corresponding average pairwise error probability
The proposed precoding approach is based on rotating (APEP) that can be written as
the symbols according to the antenna selected for signal " r !#
transmission. This can be seen as multiplying the transmit- k z k2
P̄s (u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂) = EH Q (5)
ted symbol vector x with a diagonal phase  rotation matrix, 2
Θ = Diag ejθ1 ejθ2 ... ejθNt , which does not
change power budget and the single RF property of SM. The where the Nr × 1 vector z is defined as
√
corresponding received signal model is expressed as z = ρ hu Xv ejθ − hû Xv̂ ejθû ,


(6)
y = HΘx + ν (1) with ρ = 1
being the average SNR.
N0
Notice that under the signal model presented in the previous
where H is the Nr × Nt dimensional channel matrix and
section, z forms a zero-mean proper complex Gaussian random
y and ν are the Nr × 1 dimensional received signal and
vector with the covariance matrix Σz that can be computed as
channel noise vectors, respectively. The elements of ν are
modelled as independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) Σz = ργ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû )Σr , (7)
complex Gaussian variables with zero mean and double side-
where ρ is as defined before, and
band variance N0 , i.e., νk ∼ CN (0, N0 ) for k = 1, . . . , Nr .
If the active antenna and transmitted symbol indices are γ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû ) =| Xv |2 + | Xv̂ |2 −2Re{σu,
t
û e
j(θu −θû )
Xv Xv̂∗ }
given as u and v, respectively, (1) can also be written as (8)
is the correlation contribution of the transmission parameters
y = hu Xv ejθu + ν (2) t
with σu,û denoting the (u, û)-th entry of Σt . Notice from (7)
that the transmit and receive correlation effects are separable
where hu is the u-th column of H for u = 1, . . . , Nt and Xv in the covariance matrix expression. Then following the steps
is the v-th element of X for v = 1, . . . , M . given in [14], the APEP in (5) can be computed by
We assume correlated Rayleigh fading in the MIMO chan- Z π2  −1
nel. To describe the spatial correlation effects, the well-known 1  Σz 
Kronecker correlation model is used where H is expressed as P̄s (u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂) = 
2 + I dθ. (9)
π 0 4 sin θ

1 1
T Notice that (9) can be computed in closed form. Suppose
H = Σr2 H̆Σt2 (3)
λk for k = 1, . . . , Nr denote the eigenvalues of the matrix
with Σt and Σr being the real valued, Hermitian symmetric Σr . In the fully correlated receiver case rank [Σr ] = Nr and
transmit and receive correlation matrices, respectively. H̆ is the all the eigenvalues of Σz are distinct. Then
independent Rayleigh fading channel matrix whose elements  −1 Y Nr  −1 X Nr  −1
are described as i.i.d. complex Gaussian random variables,  Σz  ργλk ργλk
 4 sin2 θ + I = +1 = ξk +1
 
i.e., [H̆]p,q = h̆p,q ∼ CN (0, 1) for p = 1, . . . , Nr and q =
k=1
4 sin2 θ k=1
4 sin2 θ
1, . . . , Nt . Throughout this letter, the exponential correlation  −1
model of [13] is employed where the elements of Σt and Σr Q
where ξk = j6=k 1 − λkj
λ
is the k-th residual in the
t |q−q̂|
are defined as [Σt ]q,q̂ = σq,q̂ = αt for q, q̂ = 1, . . . , Nt partial fraction expansion for k = 1, . . . , Nr . With this result,
r |p−p̂|
and [Σr ]p,p̂ = σp,p̂ = αr for p, p̂ = 1, . . . , Nr where (9) can be rewritten as
0 ≤ |αt |, |αr | ≤ 1. However, the central contributions of this Nr Z π2  −1
work will also be valid with other models. X 1 ργλk
P̄s (u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂) = ξk + 1 dθ
Given the signal model in (2), the most-likely antenna and
k=1
π 0 4 sin2 θ
symbol index pair (uML , vML ) is expressed as Nr
s !
1X ργλk
(uML , vML ) = arg min D(y|hu , Xv , Θ) = ξk 1 − . (10)
u,v 2 4 + ργλk
k=1
jθu 2 The second line of (10) is from ( [15], Appdx. B) stating that
where D(y|hu , Xv , Θ) =k y − hu Xv e k is the distance
metric used in the detection. Z π2  n
1 sin2 θ
Jn (c) = dθ
π 0 sin2 θ + c
III. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS AND O PTIMIZATION n−1
n
X n−1+k  k
The central task in the design of the precoding matrix = [P (c)] [1 − P (c)] (11)
k
Θ is to determine the optimum rotation angles θℓ for ℓ = k=0
1, 2, . . . , Nt . Because we consider time-varying fading chan-  q 
nels without any CSI at the transmitter, a channel-aware where P (c) = 21 1 − 1+c c
. If the correlation matrix has
optimization is not possible. Instead, as proposed here, the repeated eigenvalues, the partial fraction
 expansion in (10) −t
precoder design is based on the minimization of the asymptotic

has terms in the form of 4ργλ k
sin2 θ
+1 where t > 1 for
ABEP, which is not available in closed-form but can be tightly
approximated by the upper bound given by which the expansion coefficients can be found and the ABEP
can still be computed. The extreme case is when the receiver
Nt XNt X M X M correlation does not exist, which corresponds to t = Nr . In
1 X N (u, û, v, v̂)
P̄b ≤ P̄s (u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂) this case, the APEP can be expressed directly as
Nt M u=1 log2 (Nt M )
û=1 v=1 v̂=1
(4) P̄s( u, û, θu , θû , v, v̂) = JNr (ρ̄) (12)
1089-7798 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2017.2733540, IEEE
where ρ̄ = ργ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû )/4 and JNr (·) is as in (11).
Once the APEP’s between all channel and symbol pairs are
computed, they can be used to obtain the tight ABEP upper
bound in (4). Unfortunately, in many cases, it is not possible
to obtain a closed-form solution for the optimum rotation
angle set Θ̂ that minimizes this union bound. However, Θ̂
can easily be found by employing numerical search algorithms
and several observations can be made regarding the proposed
ABER minimizing precoding approach as follows:
First, when there is no spatial correlation among the transmit
t
antennas Σt = I or σu,û = δu,û , and Σz used in (9) becomes
ρ | Xv |2 + | Xv̂ |2
−2Re{Xv Xv̂∗ } Σr , u = û


Σz =
ρ | Xv |2 + | Xv̂ |2 Σr , u 6= û.
Notice that any dependence on the rotation angles disappears.
That is why, rotation-based precoding provides benefits only
if there is some spatial correlation among transmit antennas
in the case of slow-fading, time-varying Rayleigh channels.
Second, notice also that the optimum rotation angle set Θ̂
is independent of the receiver correlation effects. To evaluate
this, consider the case where the receiver is fully correlated.
Using the
q first
 order Taylor expansion, the approximation
1

c 1
2 1− 1+c ≈ 4c for c >> 1 can be obtained and used to
rewrite the APEP in (10) at large SNR values as
1 In this section we present the effect of the optimum ro-
P̄s (u, û, v, v̂) ≈
ργ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû )
where B(Σr ) = N
P r ξk
k=1 λk is only dependent on the eigen-
values of Σr . That is, the impact of the transmit and receive
parameters on the APEP are separable. As a result, the ABEP
expression that appears in (4) at high SNR values becomes
Nt X
Nt XM XM
B(Σr ) X N (u, û, v, v̂)
P̄b ≤
ρNt M log2 (Nt M ) u=1 v=1
γ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû )
û=1 v̂=1
It is clear that any optimization of the rotation angles involves
only the terms inside the summations and not the terms out-
side. Therefore, the size and the structure of receive correlation
matrix does not change the optimum set.
Finally, notice that the number of receive antennas only
affects the number of terms in B(Σr ) which does not have
an impact on the optimum rotation matrix Θ̂. Therefore, the
precoder optimization can be done assuming a single receive
antenna for simplicity even if multiple receive antennas are
used. The optimum angle set remains the same.
Despite not being easy to obtain in closed-form for the
general SM scenarios, the optimum rotation angles can be
computed analytically for small scale MIMO systems and/or
constellations. Below we consider such a case that is useful in
depicting the potential benefits of the proposed phase rotation.
A. Example Case: Precoding for 2 × Nr SM with BPSK
Consider a 2 × Nr SM system employing BPSK. Suppose
the BPSK symbols transmitted from the first antenna are
sent without any rotation and a constellation rotation of θ
is employed for the symbols transmitted from the second
antenna. Then γ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû ) in (8) can be expressed as
 |u−û|
γ(u, û, v, v̂, θu , θû ) = 2 1 − αt cos π(v − v̂) + θ(u − û)
where αt is the correlation coefficient between the two trans-
mit antennas and the approximate ABEP in (14) in the high
1089-7798 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Communications Letters 3
SNR regime can be written as
2 2 2 2
B(Σr ) X X X X N (u, û, v, v̂)
P̄b ≤
8ρ u=1 1 − αt cos(π(v − v̂) + θ(u − û))
 û=1 v=1 v̂=1 
B(Σr ) 1 1 2
= + + . (14)
2ρ 1 + αt 1 − αt cos θ 1 + αt cos θ
It is clear from (14) that when θ is 0 or π radians, the
ABEP upper bound is maximized. That is, conventional SM
transmission with no rotation or that employing full rotation
are the two worst strategies. On the other hand, √ a unique
minimum is achieved when αt cos θ = γ0 = 3 − 8 radians.
More importantly, so long as αt ≥ γ0 , this minimum is
achievable by some rotation angle θ̂ = arccos αγ0t even when
the two transmit antennas are fully correlated ( αt = 1).
Notice that the 2 × Nr dimensional SM system employ-
ing BPSK is a special case where approximate closed-form
solution for the optimum rotation angle is possible. Such
closed-form solutions are not available for higher dimensional
MIMO systems or larger constellations but this does not pose
a significant problem as the evaluation of (4) is relatively easy
which makes it possible to find the optimum rotation angle set
conveniently by numerical search methods.
IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS
B(Σr ) (13)
tation angles used in the precoding on the simulated ABER
performance. For ease of illustration, we consider the 2 × 2
SM system where BPSK or QPSK symbols are sent from the
first antenna without any rotations (θ1 = 0) and only those
transmitted from the second are rotated with θ (θ2 = θ).
In all configurations, Σr = I is assumed since the receive
correlation does not have any impact on the optimum rotation
angle(s) and the theoretical ABEP upper bounds are evaluated
. at 24 dB SNR where the bound is in tight agreement with the
actual ABER simulation results. The respective union bounds
for various values of the transmit correlation coefficient αt
are plotted as a function of θ and in each case the optimum θ̂
value minimizing the ABER is determined.
Figures 1(a) and (b) show the θ vs. the ABEP upper bounds
for BPSK and QPSK, respectively, for a number of αt values.
In all cases, θ = 0 corresponds to the conventional SM
where all symbols are transmitted with the same constellation
orientation regardless of the activated antenna. As seen in
Fig. 1(a) for BPSK, when the transmit correlation is high, the
conventional SM performance deteriorates significantly, but it
is possible to align the constellations for a minimum ABER
regardless of the severity of the correlation. For the QPSK
transmission shown in Fig. 1(b), the optimized rotation helps
in avoiding significant performance losses even if convergence
to a single minimum as in BPSK is not possible.
Next we depict the impact of optimum precoding on the
ABER vs. SNR performance of SM. Figures 2(a) and (b) show
the respective performances of the 2 × 2 system employing
BPSK and QPSK. As shown above, for BPSK, independently
of the correlation between the two transmit antennas, the
ABER performance of the precoded SM system converges
to that of the uncorrelated SM whereas conventional SM
performance suffers a significant loss especially for large cor-
relations. For QPSK, as in the case of BPSK, the performance


degradation of the conventional SM can be compensated
significantly by optimum precoding. Even for large transmit
correlations, the ABER’s can be brought within a few dB’s
of the uncorrelated Rayleigh performance even if convergence
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/LCOMM.2017.2733540, IEEE
Communications Letters 4

−1 0
10 10
α =0.99
t
α =0.9
t
−1
α =0.8 10
t
αt=0.7
−2
10 α =0.5 −2
t 10
αt=0
α =0.99, Conventional SM
ABEP Upper Bound

t
10
−3
α =0.99, Rotation optimized SM
t

ABER
−3 α =0.9, Conventional SM
10 t
α =0.9, Rotation optimized SM
−4 t
10
α =0.8, Conventional SM
t
α =0.8, Rotation optimized SM
t

10
−5 αt=0.7, Conventional SM
−4
10 αt=0.7, Rotation optimized SM
αt=0.5, Conventional SM
−6
10 α =0.5, Rotation optimized SM
t
α =0, Conventional SM
t

−5 −7 Theoretical ABEP Bounds

10 10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
θ (rad) SNR (dB)

(a) (a)

−1 0
10 10

α =0.99
t
α =0.9
t −1
10
α =0.8
t

10
−2
α =0.7
t
α =0.5
t −2
10
α =0
t
ABEP Upper Bound

ABER
−3 −3
10 10

αt=0.99, Conventional SM
α =0.99, Rotation optimized SM
−4 t
10
α =0.9, Conventional SM
t
10
−4
α =0.9, Rotation optimized SM
t
α =0.8, Conventional SM
−5 t
10
α =0.8, Rotation optimized SM
t
α =0, Conventional SM
t
Theoretical ABEP Bounds
−5 −6
10 10
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
θ (rad) SNR (dB)

(b) (b)

Figure 1: Optimization of ABER in 2 × 2 SM-MIMO system Figure 2: ABER comparison of precoded and conventional
employing a) BPSK, b) QPSK. 2 × 2 SM-MIMO systems employing a) BPSK, b) QPSK.

to a single minimum ABER is not possible. The proposed [5] E. Basar, U. Aygolu, E. Panayirci and H. V. Poor, ”New trellis code
precoding approach also provides similar benefits for higher design for spatial modulation,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Commu-
nications, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 2670-2680, Aug. 2011.
order MIMO systems or larger constellations but results for [6] C. Masouros, “Improving the diversity of spatial modulation in MISO
these cases are not presented here for space limitations. channels by phase alignment,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 18,
no. 5, pp. 729-732, May 2014.
[7] P. Yang, Y. Xiao, B. Zhang, M. El-Hajjar, S. Li and L. Hanzo,
V. C ONCLUSION “Phase rotation-based precoding for spatial modulation systems,” IET
We have presented a constellation rotation based precoding Communications, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 1315-1323, 2015.
[8] P. Yang, Y. L. Guan, Y. Xiao, M. D. Renzo, S. Li and L. Hanzo, “Trans-
approach for SM-MIMO over correlated Rayleigh channels. mit precoded spatial modulation: Maximizing the minimum Euclidean
Both analysis and simulation results indicate significant im- distance versus minimizing the bit error ratio,” IEEE Transactions on
provements over conventional SM with very small increase Wireless Communications vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 2054-2068, Mar. 2016.
[9] C. Masouros and L. Hanzo, “Constellation randomization achieves
in the computational complexity at the transmitter. Notice transmit diversity for Single-RF spatial modulation,” IEEE Transactions
that a more general precoding approach where amplitude (or on Vehicular Technology, vol. 65, no. 10, pp. 8101-8111, Oct. 2016.
power) scaling in addition to phase rotations as given in [6], [10] M. C. Lee, W. H. Chung and T. S. Lee, “Generalized precoder design
formulation and iterative algorithm for spatial modulation in MIMO
[8], [9] can also be considered for further improvements in systems with CSIT,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 63,
the performance. Future work may also involve the extension no. 4, pp. 1230-1244, April 2015.
of the proposed approach to other fading channel types such [11] E. G. Larsson, ”Improving the frame-error-rate of spatial multiplexing
in block fading by randomly rotating the signal constellation,” IEEE
as Rician, doubly-selective and multipath fading channels. Communications Letters, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 514-516, Aug. 2004.
[12] J. Li, M. Wen, X. Cheng, Y. Yan, S. Song and M. H. Lee, “Generalized
R EFERENCES precoding-aided quadrature spatial modulation,” IEEE Transactions on
Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 1881-1886, Feb. 2017.
[1] R. Mesleh, H. Haas, S. Sinanovic, C. W. Ahn and S. Yun, “Spatial [13] S. L. Loyka, “Channel capacity of MIMO architecture using the expo-
modulation,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 57, no. nential correlation matrix,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 5, pp.
4, pp. 2228-2241, July 2008. 369-371, Sept. 2001.
[2] R. Mesleh, M. Di Renzo, H. Haas and P. Grant, “Trellis coded spatial [14] M. Koca and H. Sari, “Performance analysis of spatial modulation over
modulation,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 9, correlated fading channels,” in Proc. 2012 IEEE VTC-Fall, Quebec City,
no. 7, pp. 2349–2361, July 2010. QC, Canada, 2012, pp. 1-5.
[3] M. Koca and H. Sari, ”Bit-interleaved coded spatial modulation,” in [15] M.-S. Alouini and A. Goldsmith, “A unified approach for calculating er-
Proc. IEEE PIMRC 2012, Sydney, NSW, 2012, pp. 1949-1954. ror rates of linearly modulated signals over generalized fading channels,”
[4] Z. Yang, C. Liang, X. Xu and X. Ma, ”Block Markov superposition IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 1324-34, Sep. 1999.
transmission with spatial modulation,” IEEE Wireless Communications
Letters, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 565-568, Dec. 2014.
1089-7798 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.