See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/290446790

Improving MIMO systems performances by concatenating LDPC decoder to the STBC

and MRC receivers

Conference Paper · September 2015

DOI: 10.1109/WSCNIS.2015.7368281

CITATION READS

1 132

5 authors, including:

Elies Ghayoula Mohamed Haj Taieb

Laval University Laval University
13 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   119 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ridha Ghayoula Jean-Yves Chouinard

University of Tunis El Manar Laval University
65 PUBLICATIONS   146 CITATIONS    227 PUBLICATIONS   1,320 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

MICROWAVE IMAGING TECHNIQUE FOR BREAST CANCER DETECTION View project

Miniaturized Fluorescence Microscopy: Industrial project with Doric lenses Inc, North America View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Elies Ghayoula on 16 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Improving MIMO Systems Performances by
Concatenating LDPC Decoder to the STBC and
MRC Receivers.

Elies Ghayoula1,2 , Mohamed Haj Taieb2 , Jean-Yves Chouinard2 , Ridha Ghayoula2 and Ammar Bouallegue1
1
Sys’Com Laboratory, National Engineering School of Tunis, ENIT, EL Manar University
Tunis, Tunisia
Email: elies.ghayoula.1@ulaval.ca and ammar.bouallegue@enit.rnu.tn
2
Departement of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Laval University
Quebec, Quebec G1V0A8, Canada
Email: mohamed.haj-taieb.1@ulaval.ca, jean-yves.chouinard@gel.ulaval.ca and ridha.ghayoula.1@ulaval.ca

Abstract—Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems
are commonly used in wireless communications to ensure high
bit-rate and high capacity transmission. Space time block coding
(STBC) is a technique used in MIMO to provide transmit
diversity in communication over fading channels. Although STBC
has full diversity gain, the coding gain need to be improved by
using channel coding such as low density parity check (LDPC)
codes or Turbo codes. This paper evaluates the performance of
MIMO systems and the improvement obtained by concatenating
LDPC codes. MIMO are based on spatially separated multiple
transmitting and receiving antennas to provide diversity. This
helps combatting the effect of multipath fading in wireless chan-
nels. For single-input multiple-output (SIMO) schemes, maximum
ratio combining (MRC) receiver are used to handle redundantly
the same information-bearing signal over two or more fading
channel. The output of this receiver consist on soft decision
metrics that can be fed to LDPC decoder for error correction. For
MIMO and multiple-input single-output (MISO) systems, space
time block codes (STBC) are used to generate orthogonal signals
to avoid interference between signal streams. These signals are
transmitted at slightly different times to benefit from temporal
diversity. LDPC codes are used in conjunction with STBC to
improve the error capability. This paper investigates diversity
coding for MIMO systems combined with LDPC soft decoding.
Performances of the proposed scheme in terms of bit error rates
are reported.
I. I NTRODUCTION
To address the growing need for high data rate, MIMO is
one of the most attractive techniques in wireless communica-
tion. It uses multiple antennas at both transmitter and receiver
ends to improve communication performance and to insure
high-speed transmission with a minimum quality of service
degradation [1], [2], [3], [4]. Moreover, MIMO systems are able
to enhance the capacity of the radio channel without investment
of additional frequency resources. The intense research activity
on MIMO systems was inspired by seminal works by Telatar
[5], Foschini and Gans [6] that showed a dramatic linear
increase in channel capacity with the number of antennas [7].
The idea of using multiple antenna configurations instead of
a single one has proven to be successful in enhancing data
978-1-4799-9907-1/15/$31.00 2015
c IEEE
transfer rate, coverage, security and the overall performance
of radio networks.
Space-time block coding (STBC) introduced by Alamouti
[8] is the space-time transmit diversity technique for high bit-
rate and high capacity transmission in wireless communica-
tions. Tarokh et al. generalized this technique to more than
two transmit antennas by using the orthogonal designs [9]. In
these techniques. information symbols can be restored without
a reduction of the transmission rate by using the simple linear
processing. Since the STBC can obtain not the coding gain but
the diversity gain, the concatenation scheme of STBC codes
and ldpc codes (STBC-LDPC) was proposed to improve the
error rate performance of the STBC.
In this paper, we study different types of transmit or/and
receive diversity techniques according to the number of N
TX (transmiting) and M RX (receiving) antennas. We begin
with the classical Maximum Ratio Combining (MRC) receiver
used for SIMO schemes (1 TX , M RX ). For these schemes,
the receiver sees several copies of the signal corrupted by
different channels and the MRC is used since it is the best
diversity-combining technique in terms of link performance.
For transmission scheme with multiple transmit antennas
(N ≥ 2 TX , M RX ) [8], space time block code (STBC)
need to be used [10], [11], [12]. In fact, when using multiple
transmitting antennas the signal can interfere with itself and
orthogonal/quasi-orthogonal codes are required.
The common point between MRC decoder and STBC
decoder is that they process channel observation to produce
soft values. Hard decision can be done at this point, but instead
by using a channel code such as LDPC, decoding iteration
can be applied to these soft values to enhance the correction
capabilities of the system.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II is a brief
introduction to LDPC codes. Section III presents the MRC
receiver and its applications for the (1 TX , M RX ) model
using LDPC decoding. Section IV describe the space time bloc
code to ensure transmitting and receiving diversity. Before con-
cluding, section V presents a BER performance comparisons
for the different coded and uncoded schemes.
 Variable nodes III. M AXIMAL R ATIO C OMBINING (MRC) R ECEIVER
v1 v2 v3 v4 v5 v6 v7 WITH LDPC CODING

Maximal-ratio combining (MRC) is a method of diversity

h26 combining in which the signals from each channel are added
together. Maximal-ratio combining is the optimum combiner
h11
h12 for independent AWGN channels. This classical approach of
diversity involves multiple antennas at the receiver to improve
signal quality.
c1 c2 c3
Let the message to be transmitted be m1 , . . . , mk . Each
Check nodes block of k message bits are fed to an LDPC encoder with rate
R = k/K resulting on K-length codewords s1 , . . . , sK . These
Fig. 1: Tanner graph for the LDPC code. LDPC codewords are then transmitted to the M receiving
antennas.

II. A BRIEF OVERVIEW ON LDPC CODES A. MRC for SIMO (1 TX , 2 RX )

Low density parity check (K, k) codes are linear error The resulting received baseband signals rm at antenna m ∈
correcting block codes characterized by a (K − k) × K sparse {1, 2} are given by:
parity check matrix H. These codes are generally called
capacity approaching codes because system capacity using r 1 = α1 s1 + η 1
(4)
these codes is close to Shannon’s capacity limits [13]. LDPC r 2 = α2 s1 + η 2
encoding algorithm can be represented by bipartite graph
called Tanner graph [14] as shown in Fig. 1Tanner graph The channels are assumed to be flat (non frequency selective)
for the LDPC code.figure.caption.1, it consists of variable fading channels with path gains for the receive antenna m
nodes vj , which represents transmitted symbols or bits and the defined as αm . The estimated signal by the maximal ratio
parity check nodes ci , which represent the check equations. If combining receiver is:
Hi,j = 1, it means an edge is placed between variable node
vi and check node ci . Thus the corresponding parity check s̃1 = α1∗ r1 + α2∗ r2
matrix to the Tanner graph of figure 1Tanner graph for the = α1∗ (α1 s1 + η 1 ) + α2∗ (α2 s1 + η 2 ) (5)
2 2
LDPC code.figure.caption.1 is given by, = (|α1 | + |α2 | )s1 + α1∗ η 1 + α2∗ η 2

  It can be noticed from this latter equation that the contribution

1 1 0 0 1 0 0 of the receiving antennas can be added constructively together
H= 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 (1) using MRC receiver. The desired signal s1 is enhanced by a
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 2
positive factor of (|α1 | +|α2 | ) while the noise is added either
constructively or destructively depending on the path gains α1
In regular LDPC codes, all nodes of same type will have and α2 .
same degree. For irregular LDPC codes, degrees of each set
of nodes are chosen according to some distribution. Thus,
irregular LDPC codes are characterized by two polynomials B. MRC for SIMO (1 TX , 4 RX )
as shown below. The resulting received baseband signals rm at antenna m ∈
{1, . . . , 4} are given by:

dv
λ (x) = λi xi−1 (2)
r1 = α1 s1 + η 1
i=1
r2 = α2 s1 + η 2
(6)
r3 = α3 s1 + η 3

dc
r4 = α4 s1 + η 4
ρ (x) = ρi xi−1 (3)
i=1
Similarly to SIMO (1 TX , 2 RX ), the estimated signal by
Where, λi is fraction of edges in bipartite graph that are the MRC receiver is:
connected to variable nodes of degree i and ρi is the fraction of s̃1 = α1∗ r1 + α2∗ r2 + α3∗ r3 + α4∗ r4
edges in the same graph that are connected to check nodes of 2 2 2 2
= (|α1 | + |α2 | + |α3 | + |α4 | )s1 (7)
degree i. The maximum degrees of variable and check nodes ∗ 1 ∗ 2 ∗ 3 ∗ 4
+α1 η + α2 η + α3 η + α4 η
are dv and dc , respectively. Irregular LDPC codes have better
error correction capabilities than regular LDPC codes. The
LDPC codes can be decoded by using probability propagation Here the desired signal s1 is enhanced by a postive factor
2 2 2 2
algorithm between the variable nodes and the check nodes. of (|α1 | + |α2 | + |α3 | + |α4 | ) thanks to the four chan-
This algorithm is known as sum-product algorithm (SPA) [13] nels contributions. However the undesired noise component is
or belief propagation [15]. obtained by adding four independant random variables.
 M Receive antennas

+ r1
D1
m1 , m2 , , mk s1 , s2 , , sK K1 s1 , s2 , , sK mˆ 1 , mˆ 2 , , mˆ k
LDPC D2 MRC LDPC
encoder + r2 receiver decoder

DM K2

+ rM

KM
Fig. 2: Maximal ratio combining receiver with LDPC code.

IV. S PACE TIME BLOCK CODING WITH LDPC with LDPC code.figure.caption.3 is able to decode the trans-
mitted sequence without inter-symbol interference. The space
The spacetime block coding (STBC) techniques provide time block code used for the MISO 2 × 1 scheme to ensure
full spatial diversity in the context of collocated MIMO sys- orthogonality at the reception is defined by the following
tems to ensure reliable wireless communications at high rates. matrix:
Consider a MIMO wireless communication system with
N transmit antennas and M receive antennas [11], [16] as    
n=1,2 c11 c21 s1 s2
shown in figure 3Space time block codes diagram with LDPC C= [cnt ]t=1,2 = = (9)
code.figure.caption.3. c12 c22 −s∗2 s∗1

After LDPC encoding the message packets of length k,  ∗

codewords of length K are generated. These LDPC codewords s̃1 = α1∗ r1 + α2 r2
are STBC encoded using the matrix C and fed to the N    ∗

= α1∗ α1 s1 + α2 s∗2 + η 1 + α2 −α1∗ s2 + α2∗ s1 + η 2

transmitting antennas. At each time slot, 1 ≤ t ≤ T , signals
 ∗
2 2
cnt , n = 1, 2, . . . , N are transmitted simultaneously from the = |α1 | + |α2 | s1 + α1∗ η 1 + α2 η 2
N transmit antennas. The channels are again assumed to be (10)
non frequency selective (flat) and the path gains from transmit
antenna n to receive antenna m are defined as αn,m . The B. STBC for MIMO (2 TX , 2 RX )
wireless channel is assumed to be quasi-static such that the
path gains are constant over a time frame of length l, but vary As for the MISO 2 × 1 scheme, the STBC matrix used for
from one frame to another. At time t, signal rtm , received at MIMO 2 × 2 scheme is as given in (9STBC for MISO (2 TX ,
antenna m, is given by: 1 RX )equation.4.9).
The received signals are:

N
r11 = +α1,1 s1 + α2,1 s2 + η11
rtm = αn,m cnt + ηtm (8)
r12 = −α1,1 s∗2 + α2,1 s∗1 + η21
n=1 (11)
r21 = +α1,2 s1 + α2,2 s2 + η12
r22 = −α1,2 s∗2 + α2,2 s∗1 + η22
Here, the noise samples ηtm are assumed to be indepen-
dent samples modelled as a zero-mean complex Gaussian The STBC decoder provides the following signals:
random variable with variance N/(2 × SN R) per complex
dimension. The LDPC decoder then determines the code word
∗
that minimizes the sum in (8Space time block coding with s̃1 = α1,1 r11 + α2,1 (r21 )∗ + α1,2
∗
r12 + α2,2 (r22 )∗
LDPCequation.4.8). (12)
s̃2 = α2,1 r1 − α1,1 (r2 ) + α2,2 r12 − α1,2 (r22 )∗
∗ 1 1 ∗ ∗

Substituting (11STBC for MIMO (2 TX , 2 RX )equation.4.11)

A. STBC for MISO (2 TX , 1 RX ) in (12STBC for MIMO (2 TX , 2 RX )equation.4.12) leads to
Since the transmitter uses two antennas, a space time

2 2 2 2
block code need to be used to ensure orthogonality at the s̃1 = |α1,1 | + |α2,1 | + |α1,2 | + |α2,2 | s1
∗
 ∗  ∗
reception. The orthogonality means that the combiner (STBC +α1,1 η11 + α2,1 η21 + α1,2 ∗
η12 + α2,2 η22
decoder) shown in figure 3Space time block codes diagram (13)
 Channel Matrix
m 1,, M
ª¬D n ,m º¼ n 1,, N
1 1
c c 1
1 , 2,, T c r11 , r21 ,  , rT1
+
Kt1 s1 , s2 , , sK
m1 , m2 ,  , mk s1 , s2 , , sK mˆ 1 , mˆ 2 ,  , mˆ k
2
c c 2 2
c r12 , r22 ,  , rT2
LDPC 1 , 2 ,, T STBC LDPC
STBC + decoder decoder
encoder matrix C

Kt2

+ r1M , r2M ,  , rTM

c1N , c2N ,  , cTN
KtM
N Transmit M Receive
antennas antennas

Fig. 3: Space time block codes diagram with LDPC code.

2 2 2 2
s̃2 = |α1,1 | + |α2,1 | + |α1,2 | + |α2,2 | s2 the receiver from 2 (1TX , 2RX ) to 4 (1TX , 4RX ), leads to a
 ∗  ∗ significant performance improvement with an SNR reduction
−α1,1 η21 + α2,1 ∗
η11 + α1,2 η22 + α2,2 ∗
η12
(14) of 12 dB for a BER = 10−5 .
0
10
C. STBC for MIMO (4 TX , 4 RX ) No diversity (1 Tx, 1 Rx)
MRRC (1 Tx, 2 Rx)
The space time block code used for the MIMO 4×4 scheme −1
10 MRRC (1 Tx, 4 Rx)
to ensure pseudo-orthogonality at the reception is defined by MISO (2 Tx, 1 Rx)
the following matrix [10],[17]: −2
MIMO (2 Tx, 2 Rx)
10 MIMO (4 Tx, 4 Rx)
Bit error rate (BER)

⎛ ⎞
+s1 +s2 +s3 +s4 −3
10
n=1,...,4 ⎜ −s2 +s1 −s4 +s3 ⎟
C= [cnt ]t=1,...,4 =⎝
−s2 ⎠
(15)
−s3 +s4 +s1
−s4 −s3 +s2 +s1 −4
10

At time t, signal rtm , received at antenna m, is given by: −5

10

4

rtm = αn,m cnt + ηtm
−6
(16) 10
−10 0 10 20 30 40 50
n=1 SNR (dB)

The STBC decoder selects the codewords that minimize Fig. 4: Comparison between the different diversity schemes.
the following decision metric:

4 
2
4  4 
 m   The (2TX , 2RX ) MIMO scheme gives an improvement
 rt − αn,m cnt  (17)
  over the MISO system (2TX , 1RX ) and the SIMO (1TX ,
t=1 m=1 n=1
2RX ) of 12 dB and 8 dB respectively at a BER = 10−5 .
V. S IMULATIONS RESULTS However, SIMO (1TX , 4RX ) provides an improvement over
the (2TX , 2RX ) MIMO scheme of 3 dB. The 3−dB penalty
A. Performances with transmit and receive diversity is incurred because in the simulations we assume that each
transmit antenna radiates half the energy in order to ensure
Fig. 4Comparison between the different diversity
the same total radiated power as with one transmit antenna.
schemes.figure.caption.4 gives the simulation BER results
of the different antenna arrangements discussed earlier. It In traditional communication systems, there were only one
is clear that increasing the number of receiving antennas transmitting antenna and one receive antenna. Now the future
does improve the system performance. For instance, at an wireless mobile communication services require higher data
SN R = 20 dB, the SISO system (1TX , 1RX ) gives a transmission rates (increased transmission capacity). Thus, to
BER = 3 × 10−3 while the SIMO system (1TX , 2RX ) gives increase capacity and meet these demands, the bandwidths
a BER = 2 × 10−5 . Increasing the number of antennas at of these systems and the powers to transmit need to be
 0
significantly increased. However, the use of multiple transmit 10
(1 Tx, 1 Rx) Uncoded
and receive antennas in MIMO systems allows the increase in
(1 Tx, 1 Rx) LDPC
data transmission rates without increasing either the bandwidth (1 Tx, 2 Rx) Uncoded
of the receiving antenna or signal transmission power. In fact, −1
(1 Tx, 2 Rx) LDPC
by further increasing the number of antennas (4TX , 4RX ), 10 (1 Tx, 4 Rx) Uncoded
an improvement of 5 dB is obtained compared to the scheme (1 Tx, 4 Rx) LDPC

Bit error rate (BER)

(1TX , 4RX ) as it shown in Fig. 4Comparison between the
different diversity schemes.figure.caption.4. −2
10

B. Low Density Parity Check (LDPC) codes

Instead of taking hard decision at the output of the MRC
−3
receiver and the STBC decoder, these soft values are further 10
processed at an LDPC decoder module. For these simulations,
we consider a (510, 384) LDPC code with degree distribution:
λ (x) = 0.0019608 + 0.098039x + 0.0019608x2 −4
10
+0.89804x3 (18) −10 −5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
ρ (x) = 0.15079x14 + 0.33333x15 + 0.51587x16 SNR (dB)

The rate of this code is, Fig. 5: Improvement obtained by adding LDPC decoding to
the MRC receiver.
k 384
R= = = 0.753 (19)
K 510
0
10
C. Maximum ratio combining receiver with LDPC (1 Tx, 1 Rx) Uncoded
(1 Tx, 1 Rx) LDPC
The MRC receiver with LDPC given in figure 2Maxi- (2 Tx, 1 Rx) Uncoded
mal ratio combining receiver with LDPC code.figure.caption.2 −1
(2 Tx, 1 Rx) LDPC
is implemented and the results are given in figure 5Im- 10 (2 Tx, 2 Rx) Uncoded
provement obtained by adding LDPC decoding to the MRC (2 Tx, 2 Rx) LDPC
Bit error rate (BER)

receiver.figure.caption.5. Three SIMO antenna arrangement:

SISO (1 TX , 1 RX ), SIMO (1 TX , 2 RX ) and SIMO −2
(1 TX , 4 RX ) are investigated. The uncoded scheme is 10

compared to the LDPC scheme and the reported improvement

at BER = 2 × 10−4 are as follow:
• SISO (1 TX , 1 RX ): 20 dB improvement is reported −3
10
by using LDPC coding. For low SNR, the use of
channel coding is not efficient and the energy allocated
to transmit the LDPC generated parity bit should
−4
instead be used for transmitted the data bits. For high 10
−10 −5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
SNR, few bits remain incorrect in the uncoded data SNR (dB)
stream. Since no code is used each bit is decoded on
its own and the correct bits does not help decoding Fig. 6: Improvement obtained by adding LDPC code to the
the incorrect ones. However, by using LDPC code STBC decoder.
each codeword is decoded as a whole and soft channel
likelihood values are processed through many iteration
leading to high error correction capability.
in figure 6Improvement obtained by adding LDPC code to
• SIMO (1 TX , 2 RX ): 10 dB improvement is reported the STBC decoder.figure.caption.6. The uncoded scheme is
by using LDPC coding. compared to the LDPC scheme and all reported improvement
• SIMO (1 TX , 4 RX ): 7 dB improvement is reported are noticed at BER = 2 × 10−4 . These improvement for the
by using LDPC coding. This scheme with LDPC code MISO (2 TX , 1 RX ) and MIMO (2 TX , 2 RX ) schemes are
is able to insure a reliable communication even if the 9 dB and 7 dB, respectively.
noise level is equivalent to the signal power (SN R =
0 dB). VI. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we have attempted to provide a clear overview
D. Space time block code with LDPC
of the effect of using multiple antennas on the diversity and
The MISO (2 TX , 1 RX ) and the MIMO (2 TX , 1 BER performance of wireless communication systems. Sim-
RX ) systems are based on STBC to insure orthogonality. The ulation results show the relationship between the number of
use of LDPC to process the output of the STBC decoder antennas and the BER. Our results illustrate, as expected, that
as shown in 3Space time block codes diagram with LDPC increasing the number of transmitting and receiving antennas
code.figure.caption.3 is implemented and the results are given for a wireless MIMO channel does indeed improve the BER
performance that can be obtained. Afterwards, LDPC codes
are used in conjunction with the MRC receiver and with the
STBC decoder to further exploit the soft values at their output.

R EFERENCES
[1] V. W. Sonone, N. B. Chopade , “Techniques for Improving BER
and SNR in MIMO Antenna for Optimum Performance ,” SSRG
International Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (SSRG-
IJEEE), vol. 1, no. 3, May 2014.
[2] E. Ghayoula, A. Bouallegue, R. Ghayoula and J.-Y. Chouinard, “Capac-
ity and Performance of MIMO systems for Wireless Communications,”
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review, vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 108–111, August 2014.
[3] S. Sarkar, M. S. Rahman, “Optimal BER in MIMO Rayleigh fading
channel from QPSK Modulation: Modified MMSE Versus ML Equal-
izer Evaluation,” International Journal of Electronics and Informatics,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 34–39, March 2013.
[4] M. J. Gans, “Aircraft Free-Space MIMO Communications,” in Proceed-
ing 2009 Conference Record of the Forty-Third Asilomar Conference
on Signals, Systems and Computers, pp. 663–666.
[5] I. E. Telatar, “Capacity of Multi-Antenna Gaussian Channels,” Eur.
Trans. Telecomm., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 2172–2178, 2000.
[6] G. J. Foschini and M. J. Gans, “On limits of wireless communications
in a fading environment when using multiple antennas,” Wireless Pers.
Comm., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 311–335, March 1998.
[7] V. Raghavan and A. M. Sayeed , “Multi-Antenna Capacity of Sparse
Multipath Channels,” Information Theory Workshop (ITW 2004), San
Antonio, TX and the IEEE International Symposium on Information
Theory (ISIT 2006), 2006.
[8] S. M. Alamouti, “A Simple Transmit Diversity Technique for Wireless
Communications,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications,
vol. 16, pp. 656–715, October 1998.
[9] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani, and A. R. Calderbank, “Space-time block
codes from orthogonal designs,” IEEE Transactions on Information
Theory, vol. 45(S), pp. 1456–1467, July 1999.
[10] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani et A.R. Calderbank, “Space Time Block Codes
from Orthogonal designs,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 45, pp. 744–765, July 1999.
[11] [9] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani et A.R. Calderbank, “Space Time Block
Coding for Wireless Communications : Performance Results,” IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 451–
460, March 1999.
[12] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani et A.R. Calderbank, “The application of
orthogonal designs to wireless communications,” In proc. IEEE Inofr-
mation Theory Workshop, pp. 46–47, June 1998.
[13] D. J. C. MacKay and R. M. Neal, “Near Shannon limit performance of
Low Density Parity Check Codes,” Electronics Letters, vol. 32, no. 18,
pp. 1645–1646, August 1996.
[14] L. M. Tanner, “A recursive approach to low complexity codes,” IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 533–547, 1981.
[15] Chen and M. P, C. Forsorier, “Near optimum universal belief prop-
agation based decoding of low-density parity-check codes,” IEEE
Transaction on Communications, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 406–414, March
2002.
[16] V. Tarokh, N. Seshadri, and A. R. Calderbank, “Space time codes for
high data rate wireless communication : Performance analysis and code
construction,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 44, pp.
744–765, March 1998.
[17] T. Brown, E.D. Carvalho, P. Kyritsi, Practical Guide to the MIMO
Radio Channel with MATLAB Exemples. WILEY Publication, 2012.

View publication stats