March

2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC Turbo Codes

for IEEE 802.11n
B. Bougard; B. Van Poucke; L. Van der Perre
{bougardb, vanpouck, vdperre}@imec.be
Presented by Bert Gyselinckx

IMEC/Wireless Research
March 2004
Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Outline
• Advanced FEC for WLAN
• Myths about Turbo-Codes
• Turbo Codes: preferred choice for WLAN

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Outline
 Advanced FEC for WLAN
• Myths about Turbo-Codes
• Turbo Codes: preferred choice for WLAN

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Advanced FECs get close to

Shannon’s Limit
8

n Limit
nno
Spectral Efficiency [bit/s/Hz]

Sh a
4

Uncoded
QPSK
2 Add points
SCBCB ( enedetto)

Regular
Irregular
Viterbi+RS
LDPC LDPC
1
PCCC

1/2

Submission Eb /No [dB]

March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC and LDPC

are close competitors
Performance

Submission
 March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC and LDPC

are close competitors
Complexity
LDPC PCCC

Encoder o(N2) >o(N)

Decoder N*2Nc+M*(2*Nr-1) <N*(2 v+3
+ 2v+2
+7)
~10 iterations ~ 3-6 iterations

Turbo: N: block size; v: constraint length

LDPC: N: block size; M: code dimension; Nc: #ones per column of H; #ones per row of H

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Outline
• Advanced FEC for WLAN
 Myths about Turbo-Codes
• Turbo Codes: preferred choice for WLAN

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Myth 1: PCCCs have poor

performance with small blocksize

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Myth 2: PCCCs require code

termination that reduces code rate
Double termination
Virtual termination

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Myth 3: PCCCs are power hungry

-5%

Look at the average TX+RX DC power with adaptive

modulation over a representative set of channel instances
Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Outline
• Advanced FEC for WLAN
• Myths about Turbo-Codes
 Turbo Codes: preferred choice for WLAN

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC assets
• PCCC already recognized in several standards
• Potential for low latency
• Potential for low power
• Flexibility
– Unconstrained in blocksize (numerous interleaver sizes
possible)
– Any code rate achievable by puncturing
– Code rate ‘compatible’ with CC scheme
– Energy-Scalable architecture possible

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Parallel PCCC codec prototype

 

Nominal clock frequency (max) 160 MHz (170.9 MHz)

Nominal throughput (max) 75.6 Mb/s (80.7 Mb/s)

Number of gates <400 K

Total RAM area 36 Kbit

Decoding Latency 5s

Energy consumption <1.45 nJ/bit

This holds for UMC .18 m technology. If mapped in .13

m, the architecture achieves easily 100Mbps with still
less latency and energy consumption
Submission
 March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Flexibility makes integration

in 802.11n easy
rate 1/3 1/2 2/3 3/4
mod 1 2 4 6 1 2 4 6 1 2 4 6 1 2 4 6
128 8 4 2 1 5.3 3 1.3 1 4 2 1 1 3.6 2 1 1
144 9 5 2 2 6 3 1.5 1 4.5 2 1 1 4 2 1 1
192 12 6 3 2 8 4 2 1 6 3 2 1 5.3 3 1 1
256 16 8 4 3 11 5 2.7 2 8 4 2 1 7.1 4 2 1
288 18 9 5 3 12 6 3 2 9 5 2 2 8 4 2 1
384 24 12 6 4 16 8 4 3 12 6 3 2 11 5 3 2
432 27 14 7 5 18 9 4.5 3 14 7 3 2 12 6 3 2
Interleaver size leading to an integer number of coded
Interleaver size OFDM symbols without bit stuffing
• Interleaver sizes = {128, 144, 192, 256, 288, 384, 432}
• Code rate = {1/3, 1/2, 2/3, 3/4}
• Virtual termination
Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Energy-scalability improves the data rate

versus energy consumption trade-off
Optimal RX energy per bit vs. rate
trade-off without energy scalable
decoder
Trade-off pts w/o
energy scalability

With energy scalable decoder

Total Rx energy per bit vs. net goodput

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Backup

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

LDPC in a nutshell
Parity check matrix

c.HT=0
Tanner graph
Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

LDPC in a nutshell: decoding

q 1
v1 v1 v1

q 2
v2 v2 v2

c1 c1 c1

q 3
v3 v3 v3

q 4
v4 c2 v4 c2 v4 c2

q 5
v5 v5 v5

c3 c3 c3

q 6
v6 v6 v6

q 7
v7 c4 v7 c4 v7 c4

q 8
v8 v8 v8

c5 c5 c5

q 9
v9 v9 v9

q 10
v10 v10 v10

(a) (b) (c)

Sum-product algorithm
Submission
 March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC in a nutshell
s
SISO 1 -
c1

D D D ILV DILV ILV

ILV c2

D D D SISO 2
-

Submission
March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

PCCC in a nutshell: decoding

Backward
recursion
Forward
Trellis Time

recursion Extrinsic
calculation

Cycle Time
BCJR algorithm
Submission
 March
2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/11-04-0256-00-000n

Key References
[1] S. B. Wicker, S. Kim, Fundamentals of codes, graphs and iterative decoding, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003
[2] A. Giulietti, B. Bougard, L. Van der Perre, Turbo Codes, Desirable and Designable, Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2003
[3] R. G. Gallager, Low Density Parity-Check Codes, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1963
[4] G. Berrou, A. Glavieux, P. Thitimajshima, “Near Shannon limit error-correcting coding and decoding: Turbo Codes”, in Proc.
Int. Conf. Commun., Geneva, Switzerland, May 1993 pp. 1064-1070.
[5] C. Schurgers et al., "Memory Optimization of MAP Turbo Decoder Algorithms,“, IEEE Transactions on VLSI Systems, Vol.9,
No.2, pp. 305-312, April 2001.
[6] A. Giulietti et al., "Parallel turbo code interleavers : avoiding collisions in accesses to storage elements", Electronics Letters,
Vol. 38 No. 5, Feb. 2002
[7] Thul, M.J.; Gilbert, F.; Wehn, N, "Concurrent interleaving architectures for high-throughput channel coding”, in Proc. IEEE
ICASSP 2003, Vol. 2 , pp.  6-10 April 2003
[8] B. Bougard et al., “A Scalable 837nJ/bit 75Mb/s Parallel Concatenated Convolutional (Turbo-) CODEC”, IEEE International
Solid-State Circuits Conference, Digest of Technical Papers, Vol. 1., pp.152 - 484, San Francisco, CA, Feb. 2003
[9] D. J. C. Mac Kay, “Good error correcting codes based on very sparse matrices”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 45, pp. 399-
431, Mar. 1999
[10] T. Richardson and R. Urbanke, “Efficient encoding of Low-density parity-check codes”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 47,
pp. 638-656, Feb. 2001

Submission