1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \input{psfig.sty}
3: \input{epsf.sty}
4: \parskip 2ex
5: \textwidth 6.5in
6: \textheight 9.0in
7: \topmargin -5mm
8: \headsep 1 cm
9: \oddsidemargin -0.1in
10: \evensidemargin -0.1in
11: \parindent 0in
12:
13: \usepackage{graphicx}
14: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
15: \usepackage{color}
16: \usepackage{epsfig}
17: \newcommand{\Define}{\stackrel{\triangle}{=}}
18: \newcommand{\inprob}{\stackrel{p}{\longrightarrow}}
19: \newtheorem{thm}{\bf Theorem}
20: \newtheorem{cor}[thm]{Corollary}
21: \newtheorem{lem}{{Lemma}}
22:
23: \begin{document}
24: \baselineskip 0.25in
25:
26: \title{\LARGE Asymptotic Analysis of the Performance of LAS
27: Algorithm for Large-MIMO Detection\thanks{This paper in part was presented
28: in IEEE PIMRC'2008, Cannes, France, September 2008.}
29: \\
30: \vspace{-3mm}%\thanks{ }
31: }
32: \author{
33: Saif K. Mohammed, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan
34: \\
35: {\normalsize Department of ECE, Indian Institute of Science,
36: Bangalore 560012, India \vspace{-2.00cm}} \\
37: }
38: \date{}
39: \maketitle
40:
41: \baselineskip 1.20pc
42:
43: \baselineskip 2.00pc
44: \vspace{-8.5mm}
45: \begin{abstract}
46: \vspace{-4.5mm}
47: In our recent work, we reported an exhaustive study on the simulated bit
48: error rate (BER) performance of a low-complexity likelihood ascent search
49: (LAS) algorithm for detection in large multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
50: systems with large number of antennas that achieve high spectral efficiencies.
51: Though the algorithm was shown to achieve increasingly closer to near
52: maximum-likelihood (ML) performance through simulations, no BER analysis
53: was reported. Here, we extend our work on LAS and report an asymptotic BER
54: analysis of the LAS algorithm in the large system limit, where
55: $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$ with $N_t=N_r$, where $N_t$ and $N_r$ are the
56: number of transmit and receive antennas. We prove that the error
57: performance of the LAS detector in V-BLAST with 4-QAM in i.i.d. Rayleigh
58: fading converges to that of the ML detector as $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$.
59: \end{abstract}
60:
61: \vspace{-8.0mm}
62: {\em {\bfseries Keywords}} --
63: {\footnotesize {\em High spectral efficiencies, large-MIMO detection,
64: likelihood ascent search.
65: }}
66: \baselineskip 1.725pc
67:
68: \vspace{-7.5mm}
69: \section{Introduction}
70: \label{sec1}
71: \vspace{-8.5mm}
72: Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems that employ large number of
73: transmit and receive antennas can offer very high spectral efficiencies
74: of the order of tens to hundreds of bps/Hz
75: \cite{tela99},\cite{paulraj}. Achieving near-optimal signal detection
76: at low complexities in such large-dimension systems has been a challenge.
77: In our recent works, we have shown that certain algorithms from machine
78: learning/artificial intelligence achieve near-optimal performance in
79: large-MIMO systems that employ tens of transmit and receive antennas
80: using V-BLAST and non-orthogonal space-time block codes (STBC) \cite{bsr}
81: with tens to hundreds of dimensions in space and time, at low complexities.
82: Such algorithms include local neighborhood search based algorithms like
83: a {\em likelihood ascent search} (LAS) algorithm \cite{jsac},\cite{stbc}
84: and a {\em reactive tabu search} (RTS) algorithm \cite{rts}, and algorithms
85: based on {\em probabilistic data association} (PDA) \cite{pda} and {\em
86: belief propagation} (BP) \cite{bp1},\cite{bp2}. Similar algorithms have
87: been earlier reported in the context of multiuser detection
88: \cite{las1}-\cite{bpmud2}. In \cite{jsac}-\cite{bp2}, through detailed
89: simulations, we have shown that LAS and RTS algorithms achieve increasingly
90: closer to maximum-likelihood (ML) performance and that PDA and BP algorithms
91: achieve near maximum a posteriori probability (MAP) performance for increasing
92: number of dimensions in large-MIMO systems. For e.g., in \cite{stbc}, the BER
93: performance of the basic LAS algorithm (which uses a single symbol update
94: based neighborhood definition) and its generalized version (which uses a
95: multiple symbol update based neighborhood definition) has been exhaustively
96: studied through simulations. However, BER performance analysis of the LAS
97: algorithm for large-MIMO detection has not been reported. In this
98: correspondence, we fill some of this gap by presenting an asymptotic
99: BER analysis of the LAS algorithm in the large system limit, where
100: $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$ with $N_t=N_r$, where $N_t$ and $N_r$ denote
101: the number of transmit and receive antennas, respectively. Asymptotic
102: performance analysis of large systems in the context of multiuser
103: detection and MIMO communication have been reported in the literature
104: \cite{lma1}-\cite{lma6}, using random matrix theory (e.g.,
105: \cite{lma1},\cite{lma2}), replica method (e.g.,
106: \cite{lma3},\cite{lma4},\cite{lma5}), and free probability theory
107: (e.g., \cite{lma6}). We, in this correspondence, present an asymptotic BER
108: analysis of the LAS algorithm in the large system limit. Specifically,
109: we present an analytical proof that the error performance of the LAS
110: detector for V-BLAST with 4-QAM in i.i.d. Rayleigh fading converges to
111: that of the ML detector as $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$ with $N_t=N_r$,
112: which is an analytical result that has not been reported so far.
113:
114: The rest of this correspondence is organized as follows. The MIMO system
115: model and LAS detection algorithm are summarized in Section \ref{sec2}.
116: The asymptotic analysis of the LAS algorithm is presented in Section
117: \ref{sec3}. Lengthy proofs of lemmas and theorems are moved to the
118: appendices. Simulation results and discussions are presented in Section
119: \ref{sec4}. Conclusions are given in Section \ref{sec5}.
120:
121: \vspace{-5mm}
122: \section{System Model}
123: \label{sec2}
124: \vspace{-5mm}
125: Consider a V-BLAST system with $N_t$ transmit antennas and $N_r$ receive
126: antennas, $N_t\leq N_r$. Let ${\bf x}_c \in {\mathbb C}^{N_t \times 1}$
127: denote\footnote{Vectors are denoted by boldface lowercase letters, and
128: matrices are denoted
129: by boldface uppercase letters. $[.]^T$ and $[.]^H$
130: denote transpose and conjugate transpose operations, respectively.
131: $||.||$ denotes Euclidean distance.
132: }
133: the symbol vector transmitted, and
134: ${\bf H}_c \in {\mathbb C}^{N_r \times N_t}$ denote the channel matrix
135: such that its $(i,j)$th entry $h_{i,j}$ is the complex channel gain from
136: the $j$th transmit antenna to the $i$th receive antenna. Assuming rich
137: scattering, we model the entries of ${\bf H}_c$ as i.i.d.
138: $\mathcal C \mathcal N(0,1)$. Let ${\bf y}_c \in {\mathbb C}^{N_r \times 1}$
139: and ${\bf n}_c \in {\mathbb C}^{N_r \times 1}$ denote the received signal
140: vector and the noise vector, respectively, at the receiver, where the entries
141: of ${\bf n}_c$ are modeled as i.i.d $\mathcal C \mathcal N(0,\sigma^2)$. The
142: received signal vector can then be written as
143: \vspace{-3mm}
144: \begin{eqnarray}
145: \label{SystemModel}
146: {\bf y}_c & = & {\bf H}_c{\bf x}_c + {\bf n}_c.
147: \end{eqnarray}
148:
149: \vspace{-7mm}
150: Let ${\bf y}_c$, ${\bf H}_c$, ${\bf x}_c$, and ${\bf n}_c$ be decomposed
151: into real and imaginary parts as follows:
152: \vspace{-2mm}
153: \begin{eqnarray}
154: \label{SystemModelDecompose}
155: {\bf y}_c \, = \, {\bf y}_I + j{\bf y}_Q, \,\,\,\,\,\,\, {\bf x}_c \, = \, {\bf x}_I + j{\bf x}_Q,
156: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,
157: {\bf n}_c \, = \, {\bf n}_I + j{\bf n}_Q, \,\,\,\,\,\,\, {\bf H}_c \, = \, {\bf H}_I + j{\bf H}_Q.
158: \end{eqnarray}
159:
160: \vspace{-4mm}
161: Further, we define
162: ${\bf H}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 2N_t}$,
163: ${\bf y}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 1}$,
164: ${\bf x}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_t \times 1}$, and
165: ${\bf n}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 1}$ as
166:
167: \vspace{-10mm}
168: \begin{eqnarray}
169: \label{SystemModelRealDef}
170: {\bf H}_r \, = \, \left(\begin{array}{cc}{\bf H}_I \hspace{2mm} -{\bf H}_Q \\
171: {\bf H}_Q \hspace{5mm} {\bf H}_I \end{array}\right), \,\,\,\,\,
172: {\bf y}_r \, = \, [{\bf y}_I^T \hspace{2mm} {\bf y}_Q^T ]^T, \,\,\,\,\,
173: {\bf x}_r \, = \, [{\bf x}_I^T \hspace{2mm} {\bf x}_Q^T ]^T, \,\,\,\,\,
174: {\bf n}_r \, = \, [{\bf n}_I^T \hspace{2mm} {\bf n}_Q^T ]^T.
175: \end{eqnarray}
176:
177: \vspace{-3mm}
178: Now, (\ref{SystemModel}) can be written as
179:
180: \vspace{-15mm}
181: \begin{eqnarray}
182: \label{SystemModelReal}
183: {\bf y}_r & = & {\bf H}_r{\bf x}_r + {\bf n}_r.
184: \end{eqnarray}
185:
186: \vspace{-5mm}
187: Henceforth, we shall work with the real-valued signal model of the
188: system in (\ref{SystemModelReal}). For notational simplicity,
189: we drop subscripts $r$ in (\ref{SystemModelReal}) and write
190:
191: \vspace{-15mm}
192: \begin{eqnarray}
193: \label{SystemModelII}
194: {\bf y} & = & {\bf H} {\bf x} + {\bf n},
195: \end{eqnarray}
196: where {\small ${\bf H} = {\bf H}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 2N_t}$},
197: {\small ${\bf y} = {\bf y}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 1}$},
198: {\small ${\bf x} = {\bf x}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_t \times 1}$},
199: {\small ${\bf n} = {\bf n}_r \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_r \times 1}$}.
200: In this real-valued system model, the real-part of the complex data
201: symbols will be mapped to {\small $[x_1,\cdots,x_{N_t}]$} and the
202: imaginary-part of these symbols will be mapped to
203: {\small $[x_{N_t+1},\cdots,x_{2N_t}]$}. For $M$-QAM,
204: {\small $[x_1,\cdots,x_{N_t}]$} can be viewed to be from an underlying
205: $M$-PAM signal set and so is {\small $[x_{N_t+1},\cdots,x_{2N_t}]$.}
206: Let $\mathbb A_i$ denote the $M$-PAM signal set from which $x_i$ takes
207: values, $i=1,2,\cdots,2N_t$; e.g., for 4-QAM,
208: ${\mathbb A}_i=\{1,-1\}$ for $i=1,2,\cdots,2N_t$. Now, define a
209: $2N_t$-dimensional signal space $\mathbb S$ to be the Cartesian product
210: of $\mathbb A_1$ to $\mathbb A_{2N_t}$. The ML solution vector,
211: ${\bf d}_{ML}$, is given by
212:
213: \vspace{-10mm}
214: \begin{eqnarray}
215: \label{MLdetection}
216: {\bf d}_{ML} & = & {\mbox{arg min}\atop{{\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}}}
217: \hspace{1mm} \Vert {\bf y} - {\bf H}{\bf d} \Vert ^2
218: \,\,\,\, = \,\,\,\, {\mbox{arg min}\atop{{\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}}}
219: \hspace{1mm}\left({\bf d}^T {\bf H}^T{\bf H}{\bf d} - 2{\bf y}^T{\bf H}{\bf d}\right).
220: \end{eqnarray}
221:
222: \vspace{-4mm}
223: In the following subsection, we summarize the low-complexity LAS
224: algorithm, using a neighborhood definition based on 1-symbol
225: updates, presented in \cite{stbc} for large-MIMO detection for $M$-QAM.
226: The channel matrix {\bf H} is assumed to be known perfectly at the receiver.
227:
228: \vspace{-3mm}
229: \subsection{LAS Algorithm for Large-MIMO Detection}
230: \label{sec2a}
231: \vspace{-4mm}
232: The LAS algorithm starts with an initial vector ${\bf d}^{(0)}$,
233: given by ${\bf d}^{(0)} = {\bf B}{\bf y}$, where ${\bf B}$ is
234: the initial solution filter, which can be a matched filter (MF) or
235: zero-forcing (ZF) filter or MMSE filter. The index $m$ in ${\bf d}^{(m)}$
236: denotes the iteration number in a given search stage. The ML cost function
237: after the $k$th iteration in a given search stage is given by
238: \vspace{-1mm}
239: \begin{eqnarray}
240: \label{Ck}
241: C^{(k)} & = & {\bf d}^{(k)^T} {\bf H}^T{\bf H} {\bf d}^{(k)}-2{\bf y}^T{\bf H}{\bf d}^{(k)}.
242: \end{eqnarray}
243:
244: \vspace{-6mm}
245: The ${\bf d}$ vector is updated from $k$th to $(k+1)$th iteration
246: by updating one symbol, say, the $p$th symbol, as
247:
248: \vspace{-17.0mm}
249: \begin{eqnarray}
250: \label{UpdateK}
251: {\bf d}^{(k+1)} & = & {\bf d}^{(k)} + \lambda_p^{(k)} {\bf e}_p,
252: \vspace{-1mm}
253: \end{eqnarray}
254: where ${\bf e}_p$ denotes the unit vector with its $p$th entry only as one,
255: and all other entries as zero. Since ${\bf d}^{(k)}$ and ${\bf d}^{(k+1)}$
256: should belong to $\mathbb S$, $\lambda_p^{(k)}$ can take only certain integer
257: values. For example, for 16-QAM, ${\mathbb A}_p = \{ -3, -1, 1, 3\}\big)$,
258: and $\lambda_p^{(k)}$ can take values only from $\{-6,-4,-2,0,2,4,6\}$.
259: Using (\ref{Ck}) and (\ref{UpdateK}), and defining a matrix ${\bf G}$ as
260: \vspace{-2mm}
261: \begin{eqnarray}
262: {\bf G} & \Define & {\bf H}^{T}{\bf H},
263: \end{eqnarray}
264:
265: \vspace{-4mm}
266: we can write the cost difference
267: {\small $C^{(k+1)} - C^{(k)}$} as
268: \vspace{-1mm}
269: \begin{eqnarray}
270: \label{Ck+1MinusCk}
271: \hspace{-0mm} \nonumber
272: \mathcal F(l_p^{(k)}) & \Define & C^{(k+1)} - C^{(k)} \,\,\, = \,\,\, l_p^{(k)^2}a_p - 2l_p^{(k)} \vert z_p^{(k)} \vert,
273: \end{eqnarray}
274:
275: \vspace{-4mm}
276: where $z^{(k)}_p$ is the $p$th entry of the ${\bf z}^{(k)}$ vector
277: given by {\small ${\bf z}^{(k)}={\bf H}^T({\bf y}-{\bf H}{\bf d}^{(k)})$},
278: $a_p \Define \left({\bf G}\right)_{p,p}$ is the $(p,p)$th entry of the
279: ${\bf G}$ matrix, and $l_p^{(k)} = \vert \lambda_p^{(k)} \vert$. The value
280: of $l_p^{(k)}$ which gives the largest descent in the cost function from
281: the $k$th to the $(k+1)$th iteration (when symbol $p$ is updated) is
282: obtained as
283:
284: \vspace{-8mm}
285: {\small
286: \begin{eqnarray}
287: \label{Optdp}
288: l_{p,opt}^{(k)} & = & 2 \left\lfloor \frac { \vert z_p^{(k)} \vert } { 2 a_p} \right\rceil,
289: \end{eqnarray}
290: }
291:
292: \vspace{-7mm}
293: where $\lfloor . \rceil$ denotes the rounding operation.
294: If $d_p^{(k)}$ were updated using $l_{p,opt}^{(k)}$, it is
295: possible that the updated value does not belong to ${\mathbb A}_p$.
296: To avoid this, we adjust $l_{p,opt}^{(k)}$ so that the updated value
297: of $d_p^{(k)}$ belongs to ${\mathbb A}_p$. Let
298:
299: \vspace{-14mm}
300: \begin{eqnarray}
301: s & = & {\mbox{arg min}\atop p} \,\,\,\mathcal F(l_{p,opt}^{(k)}).
302: \end{eqnarray}
303:
304: \vspace{-3mm}
305: If {\small $\mathcal F(l_{s,opt}^{(k)}) < 0$}, the update for the
306: $(k+1)$th iteration is
307: \begin{eqnarray}
308: \label{AlgoUpdateK}
309: {\bf d}^{(k+1)} & = & {\bf d}^{(k)} + l_{s,opt}^{(k)}\,\mbox{sgn}(z_s^{(k)})\,{\bf e}_s \\
310: {\bf z}^{(k+1)} & = & {\bf z}^{(k)} - l_{s,opt}^{(k)}\,\mbox{sgn}(z_s^{(k)})\,{\bf g}_s,
311: \label{eqx}
312: \end{eqnarray}
313:
314: \vspace{-6mm}
315: where ${\bf g}_s$ is the $s$th column of ${\bf G}$. If
316: $\mathcal F(l_{s,opt}^{(k)}) \geq 0$, then the search terminates, and
317: ${\bf d}^{(k)}$ is declared as the detected data vector.
318:
319: \vspace{-4mm}
320: \section{Asymptotic Analysis of LAS Algorithm}
321: \label{sec3}
322: \vspace{-5mm}
323: In this section, we prove the asymptotic convergence of the error
324: probability of the LAS detector to that of the ML detector
325: for $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$ with $N_t=N_r$ in V-BLAST. Consider 4-QAM,
326: i.e., ${\mathbb S} \in \{+1,-1\}^{2N_t}$, and let $N_t=N_r$.
327: An $n$-symbol update on a data vector ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$ transforms
328: ${\bf d}$ to $({\bf d}-{\Delta {\bf d}_n})$ such that
329: $({\bf d}-{\Delta {\bf d}_n}) \in {\mathbb S}$. Further,
330: $({\bf d}-{\Delta {\bf d}_n})$ is obtained by changing $n$ symbols
331: in ${\bf d}$ at distinct indices given by the $n$-tuple ${\bf u}_n$
332: {\small $\Define$ $(i_1,i_2,\cdots,i_n)$, $1 \leq i_j \leq 2N_t,
333: \forall j=1,\cdots,n$} and
334: $i_j\neq i_k \, \mbox{for} \, j\neq k$.
335: Therefore, we can write $\Delta {\bf d}_n$ as
336: \vspace{-0mm}
337: \begin{equation}
338: \label{l1p1}
339: {\Delta {\bf d}_n} = \sum_{k=1}^{n} 2d_{i_{k}} {\bf e}_{i_{k}},
340: \end{equation}
341:
342: \vspace{-2mm}
343: where $d_{i_{k}}$ is the $i_k$th element of ${\bf d}$.
344: Let ${\mathbb L}_n \subseteq {\mathbb S}$ denote the set of data vectors
345: such that for any ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$, if a $n$-symbol update
346: is performed on ${\bf d}$ resulting in a vector $({\bf d}-\Delta {\bf d}_n)$,
347: then
348: $||{\bf y}-{\bf H}({\bf d}-\Delta{\bf d}_n)||\geq||{\bf y}-{\bf H}{\bf d}||$.
349: Our main result in this section is Theorem \ref{thm2}. To prove
350: Theorem \ref{thm2}, we need the following Lemmas \ref{lem1} to \ref{lem5},
351: Slutsky's theorem \cite{basu}, and Theorem \ref{thm1}.
352:
353: \vspace{-6mm}
354: \begin{lem}
355: \label{lem1}
356: Let ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$. Then, ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$
357: if and only if, for any $n$-update on ${\bf d}$, $n \in [1,2\cdots,2N_t]$,
358:
359: \vspace{-13mm}
360: \begin{eqnarray}
361: \label{l1p2}
362: \big({\bf y} - {\bf H}{\bf d} + \frac {1}{2} {\bf H}{\Delta {\bf d}_n}\big)^T\big({\bf H}{\Delta {\bf d}_n}\big) & \geq & 0.
363: \end{eqnarray}
364: \end{lem}
365:
366: \vspace{-4mm}
367: {\em Proof:}
368: By definition, if
369: ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$, then no $n$-symbol update can result in a
370: reduction in the ML cost function. Using this, we can write
371: \begin{eqnarray}
372: \label{pf1p1}
373: \Vert {\bf y} - {\bf H}({\bf d} - {\Delta {\bf d}_n}) \Vert^2 & \geq & \Vert {\bf y} - {\bf H}{\bf d} \Vert^2.
374: \end{eqnarray}
375: Simplifying (\ref {pf1p1}), we get (\ref {l1p2}). Since the choice
376: of the indices in ${\bf u}_n$ is arbitrary, the lemma holds true for all
377: possible $n$-tuples of distinct indices. For the converse, if ${\bf d}$
378: satisfies (\ref{l1p2}) for all possible ${\bf u}_n$ for a given $n$,
379: then, since (\ref{l1p2}) and (\ref{pf1p1}) are equivalent, ${\bf d}$
380: also satisfies (\ref{pf1p1}) for all possible ${\bf u}_n$. This implies
381: that ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$.
382: $\square$
383:
384: \vspace{-3mm}
385: If ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_1$, then using Lemma \ref{lem1} and
386: (\ref{SystemModelII}),
387: we can write
388: \vspace{-1mm}
389: \begin{equation}
390: \label{l1p5}
391: \hspace{-1mm}
392: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}) + {\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} \big)^T \big({\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p}) \geq 0, \,\, \forall p = 1,\cdots,2N_t, \hspace{-2mm}
393: \end{equation}
394:
395: \vspace{-5mm}
396: where ${\bf h}_p$ is the $p$th column of {\bf H}.
397:
398: \vspace{-3mm}
399: \begin{lem}
400: \label{lem2}
401: Assuming uniqueness of the ML vector ${\bf d}_{ML}$ in (\ref{MLdetection}),
402: a symbol vector ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$ is the ML vector if and only if
403: the noise vector ${\bf n}$ satisfies the following set of equations
404: \begin{eqnarray}
405: \label{MLCond}
406: \Big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}) + \Big(\sum_{j = 1}^{n} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\Big)\Big)^T \Big(\sum_{j = 1}^{n} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\Big) \geq 0,
407: \end{eqnarray}
408:
409: \vspace{-4mm}
410: $\forall \, n=1,\cdots,2N_t$, and for all possible $n$-tuples
411: $(i_1,\cdots,i_n)$ for each $n$.
412: \end{lem}
413: \vspace{-4mm}
414: {\em Proof:}
415: If ${\bf d}$ is the unique ML vector, then from the definition of the ML
416: criterion in (\ref{MLdetection}), it must be true that any $n$-update on
417: ${\bf d}$ will not
418: result in any decrease in the ML cost function. Therefore,
419: ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$, $\forall$ $n = 1,2 \cdots,2N_t$. Hence, by
420: Lemma \ref{lem1}, it must be true that ${\bf d}$ satisfies (\ref{l1p2})
421: for all $n = 1,2,\cdots,2N_t$ and for all possible ${\bf u}_n$ for each $n$.
422: Substituting ${\bf y} = {\bf H}{\bf x} + {\bf n}$ in (\ref{l1p2}), we
423: get (\ref{MLCond}). This proves the direct result. To prove the converse,
424: let the noise vector ${\bf n}$ satisfy (\ref{MLCond}) for some vector
425: ${\bf d}$. Since ${\bf y} = {\bf H}{\bf x} + {\bf n}$, the conditions in
426: (\ref{MLCond}) imply the conditions in (\ref{l1p2}) for all
427: $n=1,2,\cdots,2N_t$ and for all possible ${\bf u}_n$ for each $n$.
428: Therefore, by Lemma \ref{lem1}, ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb L}_n$ for all
429: $n=1,2,\cdots,2N_t$, which then implies that ${\bf d}$ indeed is the
430: ML vector.
431: $\square$
432:
433: \vspace{-1mm}
434: {\em Definition:} For each ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$ and for each
435: integer $m$, $1 \leq m \leq 2N_t$, we associate the set of vectors
436: ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}^m} = \Big\{{\bf v} \,|\, {\bf v} \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_t}
437: \, \mbox{and} \,
438: \big({\bf v} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}) + \big(\sum_{j = 1}^{n} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\big)\big)^T \big(\sum_{j = 1}^{n} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\big) \geq 0, \, \forall \, n=1,\cdots,m,
439: \mbox{and for all possible $n$-tuples} \, (i_1,\cdots,i_n) \, \mbox{for
440: each} \, n \Big\}$, and
441: define ${\cal R}_{\bf d} \Define {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2N_t}}$.
442:
443: \vspace{-4mm}
444: \begin{lem}
445: \label{lem3}
446: If the noise vector ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{\bf d}$, then ${\bf d}$ is
447: the ML vector.
448: Let ${\bf d}_i, {\bf d}_j \in {\mathbb S}$ and ${\bf d}_i \neq {\bf d}_j$.
449: Then ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_i}$ and ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_j}$ are disjoint.
450: \end{lem}
451:
452: \vspace{-5mm}
453: {\em Proof:}
454: From Lemma \ref{lem2} and the definition of ${\cal R}_{\bf d}$, it is
455: clear that ${\bf d}$ is the ML vector if and only if
456: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{\bf d}$.
457: The disjointness of ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_i}$ and
458: ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_j}$, $i\neq j$, can be shown by contradiction. If
459: ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_i}$ and ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_j}$ are not disjoint,
460: then there exists some vector ${\bf v}$ belonging to both
461: ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_i}$ and ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_j}$. If ${\bf v}$ were
462: to be the noise vector ${\bf n}$, then, ${\bf v}$ would satisfy the set
463: of equations in (\ref{MLCond}) for both ${\bf d}={\bf d}_i$ and
464: ${\bf d}= {\bf d}_j$, since
465: ${\bf v}$ belongs to both ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_i}$ and ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}_j}$,
466: This, by Lemma \ref{lem2}, implies that
467: both ${\bf d}_i$ and ${\bf d}_j$ are ML vectors, which is a
468: contradiction because of the uniqueness of the ML vector.
469: $\square$
470:
471: \vspace{-5mm}
472: \begin{lem}
473: \label{lem4}
474: Let ${\bf h} \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_t}$ be a random vector with i.i.d
475: entries distributed as ${\cal N}(0,0.5)$. Let $\{{\bf h}_i\},i=1,2,\cdots,m$
476: be a set of vectors, with each ${\bf h}_i \in {\mathbb R}^{2N_t}$ and having
477: i.i.d entries distributed as ${\cal N}(0,0.5)$,
478: ${\mathbb E}[{\bf h}_i{\bf h}_j^T]=0$ for $i\neq j$, and
479: ${\mathbb E}[{\bf h}{\bf h}_j^T]=0$ for $j=1,\cdots,m$. Then
480: \begin{eqnarray}
481: \label{l34St}
482: \lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}} \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{m} {\bf h}^T{\bf h}_k} {m N_t} & = & 0.
483: \end{eqnarray}
484: \end{lem}
485:
486: \vspace{-5mm}
487: {\em Proof:}
488: Let ${\tilde {\bf h}} \Define \frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}\sum_{k=1}^{m} {\bf h}_k$.
489: Then, ${\tilde {\bf h}} \sim {\cal N}({\bf 0},\frac{\bf I}{2})$.
490: Therefore, we have
491: \vspace{-1mm}
492: \begin{eqnarray}
493: \label{l34St1}
494: \lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}} \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{m} {\bf h}^T{\bf h}_k} {m N_t} & = & \lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}} \frac {{\bf h}^T{\tilde {\bf h}}} { \sqrt{m} N_t}.
495: \end{eqnarray}
496: We can write
497: \begin{eqnarray}
498: \label{l34St2}
499: \lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}} \frac {{\bf h}^T{\tilde {\bf h}}}{N_t} & = &
500: \lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}}
501: \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{2N_t} h_{k} {\tilde h}_{k}}{N_t},
502: \end{eqnarray}
503: where $h_{k}$ and ${\tilde h}_{k}$ are the $k$th elements of
504: ${\bf h}$ and ${\tilde {\bf h}}$, respectively. The r.v's
505: $h_k{\tilde h}_k, k=1,\cdots,2N_t$ are i.i.d with mean zero.
506: From the strong law of large numbers \cite{basu}, it follows that
507: $\lim_{_{N_t \rightarrow \infty}} \sum_{k=1}^{2N_t} \frac{h_{k} {\tilde h}_{k}}{2N_t}=0$.
508: Using this in (\ref{l34St1}) completes the proof.
509: $\square$
510:
511: \vspace{-2mm}
512: Before we present the next lemma, we present the Slutsky's theorem on
513: convergence of random variables, which is used to prove Lemma \ref{lem5}
514: and Theorem \ref{thm1}.
515:
516: \vspace{-2mm}
517: {\em Slutsky's Theorem \cite{basu}:}
518: Let $\{ {\bf X}_m \}$ and $\{ {\bf Y}_m \}$ be sequences of random variables.
519: If $\{ {\bf X}_m \}$ converges in distribution to a random variable
520: ${\bf X}$, and $\{{\bf Y}_m\}$ converges in probability to a constant
521: $c$, then it is true that
522: $i)$ $\{{\bf X}_m+{\bf Y}_m\}$ converges in distribution to ${\bf X}+c$,
523: $ii)$ $\{{\bf X}_m {\bf Y}_m\}$ converges in distribution to $c{\bf X}$,
524: and $iii)$ $\left\{\frac{{\bf X}_m}{{\bf Y}_m}\right\}$ converges in
525: distribution to $\frac{{\bf X}}{c}$.
526:
527: \vspace{-4mm}
528: \begin{lem}
529: \label{lem5}
530: For a given ${\bf u}_n$ and a given ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$,
531: define a r.v $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$ as
532: \vspace{-1mm}
533: \begin{eqnarray}
534: \label{l4St}
535: z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}} & \Define & \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{n} \sum_{j=k+1}^{n} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k}} { \sum_{j=1}^{n} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2},
536: \end{eqnarray}
537: where $i_j \in {\bf u}_n$, $j = 1,\cdots,n$.
538: For any ${\bf u}_n$ and any ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$, $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$
539: converges to zero in probability as $N_t\rightarrow \infty$, i.e.,
540: $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}} \inprob 0$
541: as $N_t\rightarrow \infty$, $\forall \, n=2,3,\cdots,2N_t$.
542: \end{lem}
543:
544: \vspace{-4mm}
545: {\em Proof:}
546: Proof of this Lemma is given in Appendix A.
547: $\square$
548:
549: In Fig. \ref{fig0}, we plot the simulated pdf of $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$ for
550: $n=2N_t$ for different values of $N_t=N_r$ for a certain ${\bf u}_n$ and
551: ${\bf d}$ (the pdf was observed to be same for different ${\bf u}_n$ and
552: ${\bf d}$). We observe that with
553: increasing $N_t=N_r$, the pdf of $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$ tends towards
554: the Dirac
555: delta function at zero. This implies that $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$ tends to
556: zero in distribution, and hence in probability, for large $N_t=N_r$, which
557: is formally proved in Lemma \ref{lem5}.
558:
559: \vspace{-4mm}
560: \begin{thm}
561: \label{thm1}
562: Let ${\bf d} \in {\mathbb S}$ and ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{1}}$.
563: Then ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{\bf d}$ in probability as
564: $N_t \rightarrow \infty$, i.e., for any $\delta$, $0 \leq \delta \leq 1$,
565: there exists an integer $N(\delta)$ such that for $N_t > N(\delta)$,
566: $p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{\bf d}) > 1-\delta$.
567: \end{thm}
568:
569: \vspace{-4mm}
570: {\em Proof:}
571: Proof of this theorem is given in Appendix B.
572: $\square$
573:
574: \vspace{-4mm}
575: \begin{thm}
576: \label{thm2}
577: The data vector/bit error probability of the LAS detector converges
578: to that of the ML detector as $N_t,N_r \rightarrow \infty$ with
579: $N_t=N_r$.
580: \end{thm}
581:
582: \vspace{-4mm}
583: {\em Proof:}
584: Let ${\bf d}_{LAS}$ be the final output symbol vector of the
585: LAS algorithm given ${\bf x}$, ${\bf H}$ and ${\bf n}$. The algorithm
586: terminates if and only if no 1-update results in any further decrease of
587: the cost function. This implies that for the given ${\bf x}$, ${\bf H}$
588: and ${\bf n}$, ${\bf d}_{LAS} \in {\mathbb L}_1$, and therefore it must
589: be true that ${\bf n}$ satisfies (\ref{l1p5}) with ${\bf d}$ replaced by
590: ${\bf d}_{LAS}$. These set of equations are the same which define
591: the region ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}^1}$. Therefore, replacing ${\bf d}$ by
592: ${\bf d}_{LAS}$, we can equivalently claim that
593: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}_{LAS}^1}$. Using Theorem \ref{thm1}, we
594: can further claim that asymptotically as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$,
595: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}_{LAS}}$ in probability.
596: From Lemma \ref{lem3},
597: we know that if ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{d_{LAS}}$, then ${{\bf d}_{LAS}}$
598: is indeed the ML vector for the given ${\bf x}$, ${\bf H}$ and ${\bf n}$.
599: Therefore, we can state that asymptotically as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$,
600: ${{\bf d}_{LAS}}$ is indeed the ML vector in probability.
601: That is, for any $\delta$, $0 \leq \delta \leq 1$, there exists an
602: integer $N(\delta)$ such that for $N_t \geq N(\delta)$
603: \begin{eqnarray}
604: \label{dlas_mlp}
605: P({{\bf d}_{LAS}} \,\, \mbox{is the ML vector}) & > & (1 - \delta).
606: \end{eqnarray}
607: Therefore, we can write that for $N_t \geq N(\delta)$
608:
609: \vspace{-14mm}
610: \begin{eqnarray}
611: \label{dlas_mlp2}
612: \hspace{-2mm}
613: \nonumber
614: P_{LAS}(error) &\hspace{-2mm} = & \hspace{-2mm} P({\bf d}_{LAS} \neq {\bf x})
615: \,\,\, = \,\,\, P({\bf d}_{LAS} \neq {\bf x} \, | \, {\bf d}_{LAS} = \mbox{ML vector}) P({\bf d}_{LAS} = \mbox{ML vector}) \nonumber \\
616: & & \hspace{20mm} + \, P({\bf d}_{LAS} \hspace{-0.25mm} \neq \hspace{-0.25mm} {\bf x} \, | \, {\bf d}_{LAS} \hspace{-0.0mm} \neq \mbox{ML vector}) P({\bf d}_{LAS} \neq \mbox{ML vector}).
617: \end{eqnarray}
618: From (\ref{dlas_mlp}), we have
619: $P({\bf d}_{LAS} \, \neq \, \mbox{ML vector}) \leq \delta$. Also,
620: $P({\bf d}_{LAS} \neq {\bf x} \, | \, {\bf d}_{LAS} = \mbox{ML vector})$
621: is the probability of error for the ML detector, which we denote by
622: $P_{ML}(error)$. Using these, we can bound the probability of
623: error for the LAS detector as
624: \vspace{-1mm}
625: \begin{eqnarray}
626: \hspace{-1mm}
627: \label{dlas_mlp3}
628: P_{LAS}(error) \,\, \leq \,\, P_{ML}(error)
629: + \, \delta \, P({\bf d}_{LAS} \neq {\bf x} \, | \, {\bf d}_{LAS} \neq \mbox{ML vector})
630: \,\, \leq \,\, {\bf P}_{ML}(error) + \delta.
631: \end{eqnarray}
632: Since $\delta$ can be arbitrarily small, we can conclude from
633: (\ref{dlas_mlp3}) that indeed as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$, the symbol
634: vector error probability of the LAS detector converges to that of
635: the ML detector. This proof can be adapted to show that apart
636: from the symbol vector error probability, the bit error probability of
637: the LAS detector also converges to that of the ML detector. The proof
638: for the bit error probability convergence is along the same lines as
639: (\ref{dlas_mlp2}) and (\ref{dlas_mlp3}), except that instead of defining
640: the error event as ${\bf d}_{LAS} \neq {\bf x}$, we define error events
641: for each bit. For example, for the $p$th bit, the error event is defined
642: as ${d_p}_{LAS} \neq {x_p}$. $\square$
643:
644: \vspace{-4mm}
645: \section{Simulation Results and Discussions}
646: \label{sec4}
647: \vspace{-5mm}
648: In Fig. \ref{fig1} we show the simulated BER performance of the LAS
649: detector for V-BLAST with 4-QAM and MMSE initial vector for increasing
650: $N_t=N_r$. Since an analytical expression for ML performance in the large
651: MIMO system limit is not available and simulating the ML performance
652: for large dimensions involves prohibitively high complexity, we plot
653: the SISO AWGN performance as a lower bound for comparison. It can be
654: seen that for
655: increasing $N_t=N_r$, the BER
656: performance of the LAS detector approaches the SISO AWGN performance at
657: high SNRs. Figure \ref{fig2} shows the average SNR required to achieve a
658: BER of $10^{-3}$ for increasing $N_t=N_r$ and 4-QAM. It can be seen that,
659: for large $N_t=N_r$, the required SNR gets increasingly closer to that
660: required in SISO AWGN for increasing $N_t=N_r$. A similar behavior can
661: be observed in Fig. \ref{fig3} for 16-QAM as well.
662: In Figs. \ref{fig2} and \ref{fig3}, we also see that there is an initial
663: degradation in performance for increasing number of antennas (for $N_t<10$).
664: This shows that the LAS detector is suboptimal for small systems with small
665: number of antennas\footnote{We do not have a theoretical explanation for
666: this small system behavior of the LAS detector, whereas we are able to
667: prove its asymptotic large system behavior.}, and becomes optimal in the
668: large system limit (as proved
669: in the previous section). LAS detector achieves close to large system limit
670: performance in systems with large number of dimensions (e.g., hundreds of
671: dimensions in Figs. \ref{fig2} and \ref{fig3}). Such large number of
672: dimensions need not be realized in spatial dimension alone, as in V-BLAST.
673: As shown in \cite{stbc}, exploiting time dimension in addition to
674: space dimension, large non-orthogonal STBC MIMO systems can render large
675: dimensions with less number of transmit antennas that can be implemented in
676: practice. A $16\times 16$ non-orthogonal STBC from cyclic division algebra
677: \cite{bsr} with complex data symbols has 512 real dimensions; with 64-QAM
678: and rate-3/4 turbo code, this STBC achieves a spectral efficiency of
679: 72 bps/Hz. In \cite{stbc}, LAS algorithm has been shown to achieve
680: near-capacity performance in $16\times 16$ STBC MIMO systems even in the
681: presence of spatial correlation and with estimated channel matrix.
682: Further, considering that NTT DoCoMo has demonstrated a $12\times 12$
683: V-BLAST MIMO system operating at 5 Gbps at a spectral efficiency of
684: 50 bps/Hz at 10 Km/hr mobile speeds \cite{docomo}, the availability of
685: low-complexity large-MIMO detection algorithms like the LAS algorithm
686: analyzed in this correspondence can motivate the adoption of $16\times 16$
687: and $24\times 24$ MIMO systems operating at spectral efficiencies in excess
688: of 50 bps/Hz in emerging wireless standards like IEEE 802.11 VHT
689: and IEEE 802.16/LTE-A.
690:
691: \vspace{-4mm}
692: \section{Conclusions}
693: \label{sec5}
694: \vspace{-5mm}
695: We conclude with the following two remarks: $i)$ The derivation of analytical
696: BER expressions for the ML performance in the large MIMO system limit for
697: different signal sets is an open problem. Since large MIMO systems can be
698: viable in practice due to the availability of low-complexity detectors like
699: the LAS detector, analytical BER expressions for the ML performance in the
700: large MIMO system limit would be quite useful as a benchmark for comparing
701: the performance of practical detectors in large-MIMO systems. The statistical
702: mechanics approach employed in \cite{lma3} for large CDMA system BER analysis
703: can be investigated for such an analysis. $ii)$ While we are able to prove
704: the asymptotic convergence of LAS performance to ML performance for 4-QAM
705: here, our simulation results for higher order QAM (e.g., 16-QAM; see Fig.
706: \ref{fig3}) show similar behavioral trend like that for 4-QAM. Consequently,
707: we conjecture that such a convergence holds for general $M$-QAM and an
708: analytical proof to show this can be attempted as an extension to this work.
709:
710: \vspace{-4mm}
711: \section*{Appendix A: Proof of Lemma \ref{lem5}}
712: \vspace{-5mm}
713: We present the proof of Lemma \ref{lem5} in this appendix.
714: The proof is by mathematical induction on $n$.
715: {\em Base Case:} For $n=2$, we have to show that
716: \begin{eqnarray}
717: \label{l4St1}
718: d_p \, d_q \, \frac { {\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q } { \Vert {\bf h}_p \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_q \Vert^2 } \inprob 0 \,\,\, \mbox{as} \,\, {N_t \rightarrow \infty}, \,\forall\, p,q = 1,2,\cdots,2N_t, \,\, p \ne q.
719: \end{eqnarray}
720: We can write the random variable
721: $\frac { {\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q }{\Vert {\bf h}_p \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_q \Vert^2 }$ as
722: \begin{equation}
723: \label{l4ss1}
724: \frac{{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q/(2N_t)}{(\Vert{\bf h}_p \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_q \Vert^2)/(2N_t)}.
725: \end{equation}
726: As $N_t \rightarrow \infty$, by strong law of large numbers, the
727: denominator of (\ref{l4ss1}) converges to 1 almost surely. Also, the
728: numerator of (\ref{l4ss1}) can be written as
729: \begin{eqnarray}
730: \label{l4St2}
731: \frac {{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q} {2N_t} & = & \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{2N_t} {h}_{p,k} {h}_{q,k}}{2N_t},
732: \end{eqnarray}
733: where $h_{p,k}$ and $h_{q,k}$ refer to the $k$th entry of the vectors
734: ${\bf h}_p$ and ${\bf h}_q$, respectively. Each ${h}_{p,k}{h}_{q,k}$ term
735: in the summation in (\ref{l4St2}) has the same distribution and
736: has mean 0. Therefore, by strong law of large numbers, we can see that
737: $\frac{{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q}{2N_t}$ converges to 0 almost surely.
738: This also implies that $\frac {{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q} {2N_t}$ converges
739: in distribution to the constant 0, and hence by Slutsky's theorem,
740: $\frac{{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q}{\Vert{\bf h}_p\Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_q\Vert^2}$
741: converges in distribution to 0. Since, if a sequence of r.v's converges in
742: distribution to a constant then the sequence converges in probability to
743: that constant, we conclude that indeed
744: $\frac{{\bf h}_p^T{\bf h}_q}{\Vert{\bf h}_p\Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_q\Vert^2}$
745: converges in probability to 0. This proves the the base case.
746:
747: {\em Induction Hypothesis:} Let $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}} \inprob 0$
748: as $N_t\rightarrow \infty$, $\forall \, n=2,3,\cdots,m$.
749:
750: \vspace{-2mm}
751: {\em Induction Step:}
752: Proof for $n=m+1$: We have
753: \begin{eqnarray}
754: \label{l4St3}
755: z_{{\bf u}_{(m+1)},{\bf d}} &=& \frac {\sum_{k=1}^{m+1} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m+1} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k}}{\sum_{j=1}^{m+1} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2} \\
756: & = & \frac{ \sum_{k=1}^{m} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k} + \sum_{k = 1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}} d_{i_k}} {\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}} \Vert^2 + \sum_{j=1}^{m}
757: \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2 } \\ \label{new1}
758: & = & \frac {\frac {
759: \sum_{k=1}^{m} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k}
760: } {\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2 } + \frac {\sum_{k = 1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}} d_{i_k}} {\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2 } } { 1 + \frac {\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}} \Vert^2 } { \sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2 } }.
761: \end{eqnarray}
762: Using Slutsky's theorem and the strong law of large numbers, it can be
763: shown that the denominator in (\ref{new1}) converges to $(1+\frac{1}{m})$
764: in probability. Also, from the induction hypothesis, the term
765: $\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{m} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k}}{\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2}$
766: in the numerator of (\ref{new1}) converges in probability to 0.
767: Therefore, the numerator in (\ref{new1}) converges to the same
768: distribution that the term
769: $\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k}}{\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2}$
770: converges to. Also, the term
771: $\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k}}{\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2}$
772: is the same as
773: $\frac{(\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k})/(mN_t)}{(\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2)/(mN_t)}$.
774: Further, from the strong law of large numbers, the term
775: $(\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2)/(mN_t)$ converges almost surely
776: to 1. Therefore, from Slutsky's theorem, we know that
777: $\frac{(\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k})/(mN_t)}{(\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2)/(mN_t)}$
778: converges in distribution to the distribution to which the term
779: $(\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k})/(mN_t)$
780: converges.
781:
782: For a given vector ${\bf d}$, ${\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_k}$ is a random vector
783: whose distribution is the same as that of ${\bf h}_{i_k}$. Therefore,
784: applying Lemma \ref{lem4}, we see that the term
785: $(\sum_{k=1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{(m+1)}}^T{\bf h}_{i_k}d_{i_{(m+1)}}d_{i_k})/(mN_t)$
786: converges almost surely to 0. Hence, the numerator in (\ref{new1}) converges
787: in probability to the constant 0 . Therefore,
788: $z_{{\bf u}_{(m+1)},{\bf d}} \inprob 0$
789: as $N_t\rightarrow \infty$. This proves the induction step and completes the
790: proof of Lemma \ref{lem5}.
791: $\square$
792:
793: \vspace{-4mm}
794: \section*{Appendix B: Proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}}
795: \vspace{-5mm}
796: We present the proof of Theorem \ref{thm1} in this appendix.
797: We shall prove through induction that if
798: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{1}}$, then
799: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m}}$ in probability,
800: $\forall m=2,\cdots,2N_t$, as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$.
801: {\em Base Case ($m=2$):}
802: Let ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{1}}$. Therefore, from the
803: definition of ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m}}$, ${\bf n}$ satisfies
804: (\ref{l1p5}). We show that
805: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}$ in probability as
806: $N_t \rightarrow \infty$. For ${\bf n}$ to belong to
807: ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}$, in addition to satisfying (\ref{l1p5}),
808: ${\bf n}$ must also satisfy the following equation
809: $\forall \, p,q = 1,\cdots 2N_t, p \neq q$:
810: \begin{eqnarray}
811: \vspace{-2mm}
812: \label{L2}
813: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}) + {\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} + {\bf h}_{q}{d}_{q} \big)^T \big({\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} + {\bf h}_{q}{d}_{q} \big) & \geq & 0,
814: \end{eqnarray}
815: which can be rewritten as
816: \begin{eqnarray}
817: \label{L21}
818: \vspace{-2mm}
819: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T{\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} + \big( {\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T{\bf h}_{q}{d}_{q} &
820: \geq & -\Vert {\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 - \Vert {\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2 -2{d}_{p}{d}_{q}{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}.
821: \end{eqnarray}
822: Since ${\bf n}$ satisfies (\ref{l1p5}), it satisfies the following two
823: equations:
824: \vspace{-2mm}
825: \begin{eqnarray}
826: \label{L22}
827: \nonumber
828: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T {\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} & \geq & -\Vert {\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2, \\
829: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T {\bf h}_{q}{d}_{q} & \geq & -\Vert {\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2.
830: \end{eqnarray}
831:
832: \vspace{-3mm}
833: Comparing (\ref{L22}) and (\ref{L21}), we notice that if ${\bf h}_{p}$
834: and ${\bf h}_{q}$ are orthogonal, then ${\bf n}$ trivially satisfies
835: (\ref{L21}) for all $N_t$. Therefore, when ${\bf h}_{p}$ and ${\bf h}_{q}$
836: are non-orthogonal, the only extra term in the RHS of (\ref{L21}) is
837: $2{d}_{p}{d}_{q}{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}$. Applying Lemma \ref{lem5},
838: with $n=2$, we see that as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$, the r.v.
839: $\frac{{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}}{\Vert {\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2}$
840: converges to zero in probability.
841: Then, we can write, for any $\epsilon$, $0 \leq \epsilon \leq 1$
842: \begin{eqnarray}
843: \label{one}
844: p\left(\frac{|{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}| }
845: {\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2} > \epsilon
846: \right) & < & \epsilon, \,\,\, \forall N_t>f(\epsilon).
847: \end{eqnarray}
848: Now, let us analyze $p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}})$
849: for the case of $d_pd_q=+1$ (a similar analysis holds for $d_pd_q=-1$).
850: Consider two disjoint events
851: $E_1 = \left\{\frac{|{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}|}{\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2} < \epsilon\right\}$ and
852: $E_2 = \left\{\frac{|{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}|}{\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2} > \epsilon\right\}$. Then, we can write
853: \begin{eqnarray}
854: \label{two}
855: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & = &
856: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_1) \, p(E_1) \, + \,
857: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_2) \, p(E_2).
858: \end{eqnarray}
859: The event $E_1$ can be further split into two disjoint events
860: $E_{11}$ and $E_{12}$, given by
861: $E_{11} = \left\{ 0 < {\bf h}_p^T {\bf h}_q < \epsilon \left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) \right\}$
862: and
863: $E_{12} = \left\{ 0 > {\bf h}_p^T {\bf h}_q > -\epsilon \left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) \right\}$.
864: Also, from (\ref{one}), $p(E_1)>1-\epsilon$ and $p(E_2) < \epsilon$.
865: Therefore, using (\ref{two}), we can write
866: \begin{eqnarray}
867: \nonumber
868: \label{five}
869: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & < &
870: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_1) \, p(E_1) \, + \, \epsilon \\ \nonumber
871: & < & p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{11}) \, p(E_{11}) \, + \, p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{12}) \, p(E_{12}) \, + \, \epsilon \\
872: & < & p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{11}) \, + \, p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{12}) \, + \, \epsilon.
873: \end{eqnarray}
874: If event $E_{11}$ is true, then
875: \begin{eqnarray}
876: \label{three}
877: \hspace{-8mm}
878: -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) & > &
879: -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2 + 2{\bf h}_p^T {\bf h}_q \right) \,\,\, > \,\,\,
880: -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) \left(1+2\epsilon\right).
881: \end{eqnarray}
882: Since ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{1}}$, ${\bf n}$ satisfies
883: (\ref{L22}), and hence satisfies the following equation:
884: \begin{eqnarray}
885: \label{four}
886: \left({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x}-{\bf d})\right)^T \left({\bf h}_pd_p + {\bf h}_qd_q \right) & \geq & -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right).
887: \end{eqnarray}
888: Using (\ref{three}) and (\ref{four}), we see that ${\bf n}$ satisfies
889: (\ref{L21}), and therefore ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}$.
890: Hence, we can conclude that
891: $p\left({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{11}\right) = 0$.
892: Now, we can rewrite (\ref{five}) as
893: \begin{eqnarray}
894: \label{seven}
895: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & < & p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}|E_{12}) \, + \, \epsilon.
896: \end{eqnarray}
897: If event $E_{12}$ is true, then
898: \begin{eqnarray}
899: \label{six}
900: \hspace{-8mm}
901: -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) (1-2\epsilon) & > & -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2 + 2{\bf h}_p^T {\bf h}_q \right) \,\,\, > \,\,\,
902: -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right).
903: \end{eqnarray}
904: Using (\ref{L21}) and (\ref{six}), we can write that
905:
906: \vspace{-4mm}
907: {\footnotesize
908: \begin{eqnarray}
909: \nonumber
910: \hspace{-0mm}
911: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}} \, | \, E_{12}) & = & p\left( \big[
912: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T{\bf h}_{p}{d}_{p} + \big( {\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T{\bf h}_{q}{d}_{q} \,\,
913: \leq \,\, -\Vert {\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 - \Vert {\bf h}_{q} \Vert^2 -2{\bf h}_{p}^T{\bf h}_{q}\big] \, \big| \, E_{12} \right) \nonumber \\
914: \hspace{-0cm} & \hspace{-3.7cm} < & \hspace{-2.0cm}
915: p\left(\big[-\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) \, \leq \,
916: \left({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x}-{\bf d})\right)^T \left({\bf h}_pd_p + {\bf h}_qd_q \right)
917: \, \leq \, -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right)(1-2\epsilon) \big] \, \big| \, E_{12} \right)\hspace{-1mm}.
918: \label{eqxx}
919: \end{eqnarray}
920: }
921:
922: \vspace{-8mm}
923: Define ${\cal R}_{\epsilon}$ to be a set of vectors in ${\mathbb R}^{2N_t}$,
924: as
925: {\footnotesize
926: \begin{eqnarray}
927: \hspace{-6mm}
928: {\cal R}_{\epsilon} & \Define &
929: \left\{{\bf v} \,\, \big| \,\, -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right) \, \leq
930: \left({\bf v} + {\bf H}({\bf x}-{\bf d})\right)^T \left({\bf h}_pd_p + {\bf h}_qd_q \right)
931: \, \leq \, -\left(\Vert{\bf h}_{p} \Vert^2 + \Vert{\bf h}_{q}\Vert^2\right)(1-2\epsilon)\right\}.
932: \label{eqxx2}
933: \end{eqnarray}
934: }
935: Also, define a function $f_2$ as
936: \begin{eqnarray}
937: f_2(\epsilon)& \Define & p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{\epsilon} \, | \, E_{12}).
938: \end{eqnarray}
939: Using the above definitions, (\ref{eqxx}) can rewritten as
940: \begin{eqnarray}
941: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}} \, | \, E_{12}) & < & f_2(\epsilon).
942: \label{eqxx3}
943: \end{eqnarray}
944: Let $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 \in {\mathbb R}$,
945: $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 > 0$, and $\epsilon_1>\epsilon_2$.
946: From the definition of ${\cal R}_{\epsilon}$ in (\ref{eqxx2}),
947: it can be seen that ${\cal R}_{\epsilon_2} \subset {\cal R}_{\epsilon_1}$.
948: This implies that $f_2(\epsilon_1) > f_2(\epsilon_2)$. Hence $f_2$ is a
949: monotonically increasing function. Using (\ref{eqxx3}),
950: we can rewrite (\ref{seven}) as
951: written as
952: \begin{eqnarray}
953: p({\bf n} \notin {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & < & f_2(\epsilon) \,+\, \epsilon.
954: \end{eqnarray}
955: Therefore,
956: \begin{eqnarray}
957: \label{eight}
958: p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & > & 1-\left(f_2(\epsilon) \,+\, \epsilon\right).
959: \end{eqnarray}
960: Now define $g_2(\epsilon) \Define f_2(\epsilon) + \epsilon$. So
961: $g_2$ is a monotonic function and is therefore invertible.
962: Let $\delta=g_2(\epsilon)$. Using (\ref{one}) and the above definitions, we
963: can write that
964: \begin{eqnarray}
965: N_t & > & f(\epsilon) \nonumber \\
966: & > & f\left(g_2^{-1}(\delta)\right) \nonumber \\
967: & > & N_2(\delta),
968: \end{eqnarray}
969: where $N_2 \Define f \circ g_2^{-1}$. We can then write (\ref{eight}) as
970: \begin{eqnarray}
971: p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}) & > & 1 - \delta.
972: \end{eqnarray}
973: Since $g_2$ is a continuous monotonic function,
974: for any
975: $\delta$, $0 \leq \delta \leq 1$, there exists an integer $N_2(\delta)$
976: such that for $N_t > N_2(\delta)$, $p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}})
977: > 1-\delta$.
978: Therefore,
979: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{2}}$ in probability as
980: $N_t \rightarrow \infty$, thus proving the base case.
981:
982: \vspace{-2mm}
983: {\em Induction Hypothesis:}
984: Let ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m-1}}$ in probability as
985: $N_t \hspace{-1mm} \rightarrow \hspace{-1mm} \infty$.
986:
987: \vspace{-2mm}
988: {\em Induction Step:}
989: We need to prove that
990: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m}}$ in probability as
991: {\small $N_t \rightarrow \infty$}. For ${\bf n}$ to belong
992: to ${\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m}}$, ${\bf n}$ must satisfy the following
993: equation for all possible $m$-tuples $(i_1,i_2,\cdots,i_m)$:
994:
995: \vspace{-12mm}
996: \begin{eqnarray}
997: \label{Lt2}
998: \Big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}) + \Big(\sum_{j=1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\Big)\Big)^T \bigg(\sum_{j=1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\bigg) & \geq & 0,
999: \end{eqnarray}
1000:
1001: \vspace{-4mm}
1002: which can be written as
1003:
1004: \vspace{-12mm}
1005: \begin{eqnarray}
1006: \label{Lt2x}
1007: \nonumber
1008: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T \Big(\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\Big) +
1009: \big({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d})\big)^T {\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}} & \\
1010: &
1011: \hspace{-70mm}
1012: \geq \,\, -\Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2 - \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2 - 2\Big(\sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}\Big)^T{\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}}.
1013: \end{eqnarray}
1014:
1015: \vspace{-4mm}
1016: However, we know from the induction hypothesis that
1017: $({\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}))^T (\sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}) \geq -\Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2$.
1018: Also, since
1019: ${\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^1}$, we know that $( {\bf n} + {\bf H}({\bf x} - {\bf d}))^T {\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}} \geq -\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2 $.
1020: Therefore, if the term
1021: $2(\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}})^T{\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}}$
1022: in the RHS of (\ref{Lt2x}) were 0, then (\ref{Lt2}) would have been
1023: trivially satisfied.
1024: We now show that the contribution of the term
1025: $2(\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}})^T{\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}}$
1026: when compared to the other two terms in the RHS (\ref{Lt2x}) converges to 0
1027: as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$.
1028:
1029: Define a r.v.
1030: $v_m \, \Define \, \frac {2(\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}})^T{\bf h}_{i_{m}}{d}_{i_{m}}}{\Vert \sum_{j=1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2 + \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2 }$.
1031: Our objective is to show that as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$,
1032: $v_m \rightarrow 0$ in probability.
1033: This is equivalent to proving that
1034: $w_m \Define v_m + 1 = \frac{\Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m}{\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2}{\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2 + \Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2 }$
1035: converges to one in probability as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$.
1036: We can write $w_m$ as
1037: \begin{eqnarray}
1038: \label{Lt3}
1039: w_m & = & \frac{\frac{\Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2}{\sum_{j = 1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2}}{\frac{\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2 } { \sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2} + \frac {\Vert (\sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} ) \Vert^2}{\sum_{j = 1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2} }.
1040: \end{eqnarray}
1041: From Lemma \ref{lem5}, we know that for any integer $m$, $1\leq m \leq 2N_t$,
1042: it is true that
1043: $\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{m} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k}} { \sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j}\Vert^2} $
1044: converges to 0 in probability as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$.
1045: By Slutsky's theorem, this is equivalent to
1046:
1047: \vspace{-8mm}
1048: \begin{eqnarray}
1049: \label{Lt5}
1050: \frac{2\sum_{k=1}^{m} \sum_{j=k+1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_j}^T{\bf h}_{i_k} d_{i_j}d_{i_k} } { \sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_j} \Vert^2 } + 1 & = &
1051: \frac{ \Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{j = m} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2 } { \sum_{j = 1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2 } \,\, \inprob \,\, 1
1052: \end{eqnarray}
1053:
1054: \vspace{-2mm}
1055: as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$. We shall use this result to prove the
1056: convergence of $w_m$ in (\ref{Lt3}). Using (\ref{Lt5}), it can be seen
1057: that the numerator of $w_m$ in (\ref{Lt3}) converges to 1 as $N_t\rightarrow
1058: \infty$, i.e.,
1059: \begin{eqnarray}
1060: \label{Lt9}
1061: \frac{\Vert \sum_{j = 1}^{m} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}} \Vert^2} {\sum_{j = 1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2} & \inprob & 1, \,\,\,\ \mbox{as} \,\, N_t \rightarrow \infty.
1062: \end{eqnarray}
1063: In the denominator of (\ref{Lt3}), it can be shown that the term
1064: \begin{eqnarray}
1065: \label{Lt10}
1066: \frac{\Vert{\bf h}_{i_{m}} \Vert^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2} & \inprob & \frac{1}{m}, \,\,\,\ \mbox{as} \,\, N_t \rightarrow \infty.
1067: \end{eqnarray}
1068: The 2nd term in the denominator of (\ref{Lt3}) can be rewritten as
1069: \begin{eqnarray}
1070: \label{Lt7}
1071: \frac{\Vert(\sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}) \Vert^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{m} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2} &
1072: = & \frac { \frac {\Vert (\sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} {\bf h}_{i_{j}}{d}_{i_{j}}) \Vert^2 } { \sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2 }}{\frac {\Vert {\bf h}_{i_{m}}\Vert^2 } { \sum_{j = 1}^{m-1} \Vert {\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2 } + 1 }.
1073: \end{eqnarray}
1074: Similar to the derivation of (\ref{Lt5}),
1075: we can claim that the numerator in (\ref{Lt7})
1076: converges to one in probability. From Slutsky's theorem, it can be shown that
1077: $\frac{\Vert{\bf h}_{i_{m}}\Vert^2}{\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} \Vert{\bf h}_{i_{j}}\Vert^2}$
1078: converges to $\frac{1} {m-1}$ in probability.
1079: Using this and Slutsky's theorem, it can be shown that (\ref{Lt7})
1080: converges to $\frac { m-1 } { m}$ in probability.
1081: Using this result along with (\ref{Lt9}),(\ref{Lt10}) and Slutsky's
1082: theorem in (\ref{Lt3}), it can be shown that $w_m$ converges to one
1083: in probability as $N_t \rightarrow \infty$.
1084: This, therefore, implies that $v_m$ converges to zero in probability.
1085: As proved in the base case,
1086: it can be shown that for any $\delta$, $0 \leq \delta \leq 1$, there
1087: exists an integer $N_m(\delta)$ such that for $N_t > N_m(\delta)$,
1088: $p({\bf n} \in {\cal R}_{{\bf d}^{m}}) > 1-\delta$. This proves the
1089: induction step and completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}.
1090: $\square$
1091:
1092: \vspace{-6.0mm}
1093: {\footnotesize
1094: \bibliographystyle{IEEE}
1095: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1096: \vspace{-3mm}
1097: \bibitem{tela99}
1098: I. E. Telatar, ``Capacity of multi-antenna Gaussian channels,'' {\em European
1099: Trans. Telecommun.,} vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 585-595, November 1999.
1100:
1101: \vspace{-1mm}
1102: \bibitem{paulraj}
1103: A. Paulraj, R. Nabar, and D. Gore, {\em Introduction to Space-Time Wireless
1104: Communications}, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
1105:
1106: \vspace{-1mm}
1107: \bibitem{bsr}
1108: B. A. Sethuraman, B. S. Rajan, and V. Shashidhar, ``Full-diversity
1109: high-rate space-time block codes from division algebras,'' {\em IEEE
1110: Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 2596-2616, October 2003.
1111:
1112: \vspace{-1mm}
1113: \bibitem{jsac}
1114: K. Vishnu Vardhan, Saif K. Mohammed, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan,
1115: ``A low-complexity detector for large MIMO systems and multicarrier CDMA
1116: systems,'' {\em IEEE JSAC Spl. Iss. on Multiuser Detection for Adv. Commun.
1117: Systems and Networks}, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 473-485, April 2008.
1118:
1119: \vspace{-1mm}
1120: \bibitem{stbc}
1121: Saif K. Mohammed, Ahmed Zaki, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan,
1122: ``High-rate space-time coded large-MIMO systems: Low-complexity detection
1123: and channel estimation,'' to appear in IEEE Jl. Sel. Topics in Signal
1124: Processing (JSTSP): Spl. Iss. on Managing Complexity in Multiuser MIMO
1125: Systems, December 2009. Online
1126: {\vspace{1mm} \underline{arXiv:0809.2446v3 [cs.IT] 16 Sept 2009}}.
1127:
1128: \vspace{-1mm}
1129: \bibitem{rts}
1130: N. Srinidhi, Saif K. Mohammed, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan,
1131: ``Low-complexity near-ML decoding of large non-orthogonal STBCs using
1132: reactive tabu search,''
1133: {\em Proc. IEEE ISIT'2009}, Seoul, June-July 2009.
1134:
1135: \vspace{-1mm}
1136: \bibitem{pda}
1137: Saif K. Mohammed, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan, ``Low-complexity
1138: near-MAP decoding of large non-orthogonal STBCs using PDA,''
1139: {\em Proc. IEEE ISIT'2009}, Seoul, June-July 2009.
1140:
1141: \vspace{-1mm}
1142: \bibitem{bp1}
1143: Madhekar Suneel, Pritam Som, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan,
1144: ``Belief propagation based decoding of large non-orthogonal STBCs,''
1145: {\em Proc. IEEE ISIT'2009}, Seoul, June-July 2009.
1146:
1147: \vspace{-1mm}
1148: \bibitem{bp2}
1149: Pritam Som, Tanumay Datta, A. Chockalingam, and B. Sundar Rajan,
1150: ``Improved large-MIMO detection based on damped belief propagation,''
1151: {\em to appear in IEEE ITW'2010}, Cairo, January 2010.
1152:
1153: \vspace{-1mm}
1154: \bibitem{las1}
1155: Y. Sun, ``A family of linear complexity likelihood ascent search detectors
1156: for CDMA multiuser detection,'' {\em Proc. IEEE 6th Intl. Symp. on
1157: Spread Spectrum Tech. \& App.,} September 2000.
1158:
1159: \vspace{-1mm}
1160: \bibitem{tabu1}
1161: P. H. Tan and L. K. Rasmussen, ``Multiuser detection in CDMA - A
1162: comparison of relaxations, exact, and heuristic search methods,''
1163: {\em IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.,} vol. 3,
1164: no. 5, pp. 1802-1809, September 2004.
1165:
1166: \vspace{-1mm}
1167: \bibitem{pda1}
1168: J. Luo, K. Pattipati, P. Willett, and F. Hasegawa, ``Near-optimal multiuser
1169: detection in synchronous CDMA using probabilistic data association,'' {\em
1170: IEEE Commun. Letters}, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 361-363, 2001.
1171:
1172: \vspace{-1mm}
1173: \bibitem{pda2}
1174: Y. Huang and J. Zhang, ``Generalized probabilistic data association
1175: multiuser detector,'' {\em Proc. ISIT'2004}, June-July 2004.
1176:
1177: \bibitem{pda3}
1178: P. H. Tan and L. K. Rasmussen, ``Asymptotically optimal nonlinear MMSE
1179: multiuser detection based on multivariate Gaussian approximation,''
1180: {\em IEEE Trans. Commun.,} vol. 54,
1181: no. 8, pp. 1427-1438, August 2006.
1182:
1183: \vspace{-1mm}
1184: \bibitem{bpmud1}
1185: A. Montanari, B. Prabhakar, and D. Tse, ``Belief propagation based
1186: multiuser detection,'' Online arXiv:cs/0510044v2 [cs.IT] 22 May 2006.
1187:
1188: \bibitem{bpmud2}
1189: D. Guo and C-C. Wang, ``Multiuser detection of sparsely spread CDMA,''
1190: {\em IEEE JSAC Spl. Iss. on Multiuser Detection, for Adv. Commun.
1191: Systems and Networks}, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 421-431, April 2008.
1192:
1193: \vspace{-1mm}
1194: \bibitem{lma1}
1195: C. N. Chuah, D. N. C. Tse, J. M. Kahn, and R. A. Valenzuela, ``Capacity
1196: scaling in MIMO wireless systems under correlated fading,'' {\em IEEE
1197: Trans. Inform. Theory,} vol. 48, pp. 637-650, March 2002.
1198:
1199: \vspace{-1mm}
1200: \bibitem{lma2}
1201: R. Muller, ``A random matrix model of communication via antenna arrays,''
1202: {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol. 48, pp. 2495-2506, September 2002.
1203:
1204: \vspace{-1mm}
1205: \bibitem{lma3}
1206: T. Tanaka, ``A statistical-mechanics approach to large-system analysis of
1207: CDMA MUDs,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol. 48, pp. 2888-2910,
1208: November 2002.
1209:
1210: \vspace{-1mm}
1211: \bibitem{lma4}
1212: R. Muller, ``Channel capacity and minimum probability of error in large
1213: dual antenna array systems with binary modulation,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Signal
1214: Processing}, vol. 51, pp. 2821-2828, November 2003.
1215:
1216: \vspace{-1mm}
1217: \bibitem{lma5}
1218: C-K. Wen, Y-N. Lee, J-T. Chen, and P. Ting, ``Asymptotic
1219: spectral efficiency of MIMO multiple-access wireless systems exploring
1220: only channel spatial correlations,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Signal Processing},
1221: vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 2059-2073, June 2005.
1222:
1223: \vspace{-1mm}
1224: \bibitem{lma6}
1225: E. Biglieri, G. Taricco, and A. Tulino, ``Performance of space-time
1226: codes for a large number of antennas,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory},
1227: vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 1794-1803, July 2002.
1228:
1229: \vspace{-1mm}
1230: \bibitem{basu}
1231: A. K. Basu, {\em Measure Theory and Probability}, Prentice-Hall of
1232: India, 2004.
1233:
1234: \vspace{-1mm}
1235: \bibitem{docomo}
1236: H. Taoka and K. Higuchi, ``Field experiment on 5-Gbit/s ultra-high-speed
1237: packet transmission using MIMO multiplexing in broadband packet radio
1238: access,'' {\em NTT DoCoMo Tech. Journ.,} vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 25-31,
1239: September 2007.
1240:
1241: \vspace{-6mm}
1242: \end{thebibliography}
1243: }
1244:
1245: \newpage
1246:
1247: \begin{figure}
1248: \begin{center}
1249: \epsfxsize=10.5cm
1250: \epsfbox{zut1.eps}
1251: \caption{Simulated pdf of $z_{{\bf u}_n,{\bf d}}$ for
1252: $n=2N_t$ for increasing $N_t=N_r$. 4-QAM. The pdf tends towards Dirac
1253: delta function at zero.}
1254: \label{fig0}
1255: \end{center}
1256: \end{figure}
1257:
1258: \begin{figure}
1259: \begin{center}
1260: \epsfxsize=10.5cm
1261: \epsfbox{MMSE_LAS_4QAM.eps}
1262: \caption{Simulated BER performance of the LAS detector for V-BLAST as a
1263: function of average received SNR for increasing values of $N_t=N_r$.
1264: MMSE initial vector, {\bf 4-QAM}. LAS detector achieves near SISO AWGN
1265: performance at high SNRs for large $N_t=N_r$.}
1266: \label{fig1}
1267: \end{center}
1268: \end{figure}
1269:
1270: \begin{figure}
1271: \begin{center}
1272: \epsfxsize=10.5cm
1273: \epsfbox{MMSE_LAS_4QAM_NrNt.eps}
1274: \caption{Average received SNR required to achieve a target BER of
1275: $10^{-3}$ in V-BLAST for increasing values of $N_t=N_r$ for {\bf 4-QAM}.
1276: LAS detector with MMSE initial vector. LAS detector achieves near SISO
1277: AWGN performance for large $N_t=N_r$.}
1278: \label{fig2}
1279: \end{center}
1280: \end{figure}
1281:
1282: \begin{figure}
1283: \begin{center}
1284: \epsfxsize=10.5cm
1285: \epsfbox{MMSELAS16QAM_NrNt_new.eps}
1286: \caption{Average received SNR required to achieve a target BER
1287: of $10^{-4}$ in V-BLAST for increasing values of $N_t=N_r$ for {\bf 16-QAM}.
1288: LAS detector with MMSE initial vector. LAS detector performance approaches
1289: SISO AWGN performance for large $N_t=N_r$.}
1290: \label{fig3}
1291: \end{center}
1292: \end{figure}
1293:
1294: \end{document}
1295: