 Research
 Open Access
 Published:
Statistical covariancematching based blind channel estimation for zeropadding MIMO–OFDM systems
EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing volume 2012, Article number: 139 (2012)
Abstract
We propose a statistical covariancematching based blind channel estimation scheme for zeropadding (ZP) multipleinput multipleoutput (MIMO)–orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) systems. By exploiting the block Toeplitz channel matrix structure, it is shown that the linear equations relating the entries of the received covariance matrix and the outer product of the MIMO channel matrix taps can be rearranged into a set of decoupled groups. The decoupled nature reduces computations, and more importantly guarantees unique recovery of the channel matrix outer product under a quite mild condition. Then the channel impulse response matrix is identified, up to a Hermitian matrix ambiguity, through an eigendecomposition of the outer product matrix. Simulation results are used to evidence the advantages of the proposed method over a recently reported subspace algorithm applicable to the ZPbased MIMO–OFDM scheme.
Introduction
Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) combined with guard intervals, in the form of cyclic prefix (CP) or zeropadding (ZP), is an effective transmission scheme through frequency selective fading channels [1]. By further leveraging the spatial resource, the multipleinput multipleoutput (MIMO)–OFDM system has been the key technique for realizing highrate transmission in modern wireless communications [2]. Toward reliable coherent symbol decoding in MIMO–OFDM systems, accurate channel state information is crucial. Blind channel estimation is a technique that alleviates the need for training sequences to identify the unknown channel impulse response from the received signal. Since the requirement of extra bandwidth for training overhead is reduced, this technique has received great research interest [3] and many blind estimation algorithms have been developed for various transmission systems [3–21]. In this article, we will focus on blind estimation of ZPbased MIMO–OFDM systems.
For ZPbased singleinput singleoutput (SISO) OFDM systems, a subspace algorithm is proposed to blindly identify the channels in [20], and is then generalized to MIMO cases [21]. However, this approach is known to suffer a sever performance degradation when the signaltonoise ratio (SNR) is low or moderate [5]. To solve this problem, a statistical covariancematching (SCM) based method which exploits some priori knowledge of the signal structure to improve channel estimation/equalization performances against harsh SNR conditions, is developed for SISO cases [6]. In this article we will propose an SCM based blind channel estimation for ZPbased MIMO–OFDM systems. By exploiting the block Toeplitz channel matrix structure, we show that the linear equations relating the entries of the received covariance matrix and the products of the channel matrix taps can be rearranged into decoupled groups. The outer product of the MIMO channel matrices can be obtained by solving these decoupled linear equation groups. The channel impulse response is then identified, up to a Hermitian matrix ambiguity, through an eigendecompostion of the computed outer product matrix. The proposed approach has the following distinctive features: (i) The identifiability condition is very simple and is more relaxed than the irreducible or column reduced condition [8]; (ii) It can apply to the more transmit antennae case under a certain condition; (iii) Through numerical simulation, it yields improved BER performance in the lowtomoderate SNR region. The rest of this article is organized as follows. Section 2. is the system model and basic assumptions. In Section 3., we propose a blind channel estimation method for the ZP based MIMO–OFDM systems. Simulation results are given in Section 4.. Section 5. concludes this article.
Notations used in this article are quite standard: Bold uppercase is used for matrices, and bold lowercase is used for vectors. A^{T} represents transpose of the matrix A, and A^{∗} represents conjugate transpose of the matrix A. I_{ M } is the identity matrix of dimension M×M, and A⊗B is the Kronecker product of matrices A and B. In addition, we define the following operations that will be used in the derivation of the main result. First, for any m×m matrix A=[a_{k,l}]_{0≤k,l≤m−1}, define ${\Gamma}_{j}\left(\mathbf{A}\right)={[{a}_{0,j}{a}_{1,j+1}\dots {a}_{m1j,m1}]}^{T}$ for 0≤j≤m−1, i.e., Γ_{ j }(A) is the vector formed from the jth superdiagonal of A. Second, for any Jn×Jn matrix B=[B_{k,l}]_{0≤k,l≤n−1}, where B_{k,l} is a block matrix of dimension J×J, define ${{\rm Y}}_{j}\left(\mathbf{B}\right)={[{\mathbf{B}}_{0,j}^{T}{\mathbf{B}}_{1,j+1}^{T}\dots {\mathbf{B}}_{n1j,n1}^{T}]}^{T}$ for 0≤j≤n−1, i.e., Υ_{ j }(B) is the matrix formed from the jth block superdiagonal of B.
System model and basic assumptions
Consider the Kinput Joutput discrete time ZPOFDM baseband model shown in Figure 1. At the transmitter, for $k=1,2,\dots ,K$, each input signal s_{ k }(n) is stacked as a block ${\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{s}}}_{k}\left(i\right)={\left[{s}_{k}\left(\mathrm{iM}\right){s}_{k}(\mathrm{iM}+1)\dots {s}_{k}(\mathrm{iM}+M1)\right]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{M}$, which is multiplied by the inverse FFT matrix F^{∗}, and then padded with P trailing zero entries to form the N=M + P dimensional vector ${\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{u}}}_{k}\left(i\right)={\left[\underset{M\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\text{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{{\left({\mathbf{F}}^{\ast}{\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{s}}}_{k}\right(i\left)\right)}^{T}}}\underset{P\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\text{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{0\dots 0}}\right]}^{T}={\left[\underset{M\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\text{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{{u}_{k}\left(\mathrm{iN}\right)\dots {u}_{k}(\mathrm{iN}+M1)}}\underset{P\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\text{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{0\dots 0}}\right]}^{T}$. The zeropadded ${\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{u}}}_{k}\left(i\right)$ is paralleltoserial converted to obtain u_{ k }(n), which is then transmitted through the MIMO finiteimpulseresponse (FIR) channel. At the receiver, the j th received signal is ${x}_{j}\left(n\right)=\sum _{k=1}^{K}\sum _{l=0}^{{L}_{\mathrm{jk}}}{h}_{\mathrm{jk}}\left(l\right){u}_{k}(nl)+{w}_{j}\left(n\right)$ for $j=1,2,\dots ,J$, where w_{ j }(n) is the channel noise seen at the j th receiver, and $\left\{{h}_{\mathrm{jk}}\right(0\left){h}_{\mathrm{jk}}\right(1)\dots {h}_{\mathrm{jk}}({L}_{\mathrm{jk}}\left)\right\}$ is the impulse response from the k th transmitter to the j th receiver.
Let $\mathbf{x}\left(n\right)={\left[{x}_{1}\right(n\left){x}_{2}\right(n)\dots {x}_{J}(n\left)\right]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{J}$$\mathbf{w}\left(n\right)={\left[{w}_{1}\right(n\left){w}_{2}\right(n)\dots {w}_{J}(n\left)\right]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{J}$, and $\mathbf{H}\left(l\right)=\left[{h}_{\mathrm{jk}}\right(l\left)\right]\in {\u2102}^{J\times K}$ be the channel coefficient matrix for $l=0,1,\dots ,L$, where $L=\underset{j,k}{max}\left\{{L}_{\mathrm{jk}}\right\}$ is the order of the MIMO channel. Assume P≥L and group the sequence of x(n) as $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)={[\mathbf{x}{\left(\mathrm{iN}\right)}^{T}\mathbf{x}{(\mathrm{iN}+1)}^{T}\dots \mathbf{x}{(\mathrm{iN}+N1)}^{T}]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{JN}}$. Then due to zero padding, the inputoutput channel characteristics can be expressed in the following form [21]:
where $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{w}}\left(i\right)\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{JN}}$ is similarly defined as $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)$, and ${\mathbf{H}}_{f}\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{JN}\times \mathrm{KM}}$ is a block Toeplitz matrix with ${[\mathbf{H}{\left(0\right)}^{T}\mathbf{H}{\left(1\right)}^{T}\dots \mathbf{H}{\left(L\right)}^{T}\mathbf{0}\mathbf{\dots}0]}^{T}\in {\mathbf{C}}^{\mathrm{JN}\times K}$ being its first block column and $\left[\mathbf{H}\right(0)0\dots 0]\in {\mathbf{C}}^{J\times \mathrm{KM}}$ being its first block row. ${\mathbf{u}}_{f}\left(i\right)={[\mathbf{u}{\left(\mathrm{iN}\right)}^{T}\mathbf{u}{(\mathrm{iN}+1)}^{T}\dots \mathbf{u}{(\mathrm{iN}+M1)}^{T}]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{KM}}$ with $\mathbf{u}\left(n\right)\in {\u2102}^{K}$ being similarly defined as x(n).
The problem we study in this article is blind estimation of the MIMO channel matrix taps H(m), 0≤m≤L, by using secondorder statistics of the received data. The following assumptions hold throughout the article.

(A)
The source signal $\mathbf{s}\left(n\right)=\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{\left[{s}_{1}\right(n\left){s}_{2}\right(n)\dots {s}_{K}(n\left)\right]}^{T}\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\in \phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{\u2102}^{K}$ is a zero mean white sequence with E[s(m) s (n)^{∗}] =δ(m − n)I_{ K }, where δ(·) is the Kronecker delta function. The noise is white zero mean with $E\left[\mathbf{w}\right(m\left)\mathbf{w}{\left(n\right)}^{\ast}\right]=\delta (mn){\sigma}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{J}$. In addition, the source signal is uncorrelated with the noise w(n), i.e., $E\left[\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathbf{s}\right(m\left)\mathbf{w}{\left(n\right)}^{\ast}\right]\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}=\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{0}_{K\times J}$, ∀m,n.

(B)
The concatenated channel impulse response matrix $\mathbf{H}={[\mathbf{H}{\left(0\right)}^{T}\mathbf{H}{\left(1\right)}^{T}\dots \mathbf{H}{\left(L\right)}^{T}]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{J(L+1)\times K}$ is full column rank, i.e., rank(H)=K.
Blind channel estimation
We first introduce the proposed method, assuming the noise is absent in Section 3.1; the case when noise is present and some distinctive features regarding the proposed method are discussed in Section 3.2.
Proposed approach: noiseless case
When noise is absent, (2.1) can be expressed as $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)={\mathbf{H}}_{f}{\mathbf{u}}_{f}\left(i\right)$. By further defining the block source signal ${\mathbf{s}}_{f}\left(i\right)={[\mathbf{s}{\left(\mathrm{iM}\right)}^{T}\mathbf{s}{(\mathrm{iM}+1)}^{T}\dots \mathbf{s}{(\mathrm{iM}+M1)}^{T}]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{KM}}$, we have ${\mathbf{u}}_{f}\left(i\right)=({\mathbf{F}}^{\ast}\otimes {\mathbf{I}}_{K}){\mathbf{s}}_{f}\left(i\right)$[9], which is a zero mean vector with $E\left[{\mathbf{u}}_{f}\right(i\left){\mathbf{u}}_{f}{\left(i\right)}^{\ast}\right]=({\mathbf{F}}^{\ast}\otimes {\mathbf{I}}_{K}){({\mathbf{F}}^{\ast}\otimes {\mathbf{I}}_{K})}^{\ast}=\left({\mathbf{F}}^{\ast}\mathbf{F}\right)\otimes \left({\mathbf{I}}_{K}{\mathbf{I}}_{K}\right)={\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{KM}}$ according to assumption (A). Then taking expectation of $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}{\left(i\right)}^{\ast}$, we get
Let $\mathbf{J}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{N\times N}$ be a circulant matrix with the first row equal to $[00\dots 01]\in {\mathbb{R}}^{1\times N}$ and $\mathbf{S}={\left[{\mathbf{I}}_{NL}{0}_{(NL)\times L}\right]}^{T}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{N\times (NL)}$. Then the block Toeplitz structure of H_{ f }allows us to write ${\mathbf{H}}_{f}=\sum _{k=0}^{L}\left({\mathbf{J}}^{k}\mathbf{S}\right)\otimes \mathbf{H}\left(k\right)$, and hence
The following proposition, whose proof is given in Appendix 1, shows that the matrix J^{k}S S^{T}(J^{T})^{l} has special structures that allows for the decomposition of (3.2) into a group of decoupled equations.
Proposition 3.1
: Let 0≤k,l≤L be two nonnegative integers. For l=k + j, where 0≤j≤L−k, the upper triangular part of J^{k}S S^{T}(J^{T})^{l}is zero with only the j th upper diagonal nonzero and is given by
where ${\mathbf{q}}_{k}={\mathbf{J}}^{k}{\mathbf{q}}_{0}$, 0≤k≤L−j, and ${\mathbf{q}}_{0}={\left[\underset{(NL)\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{11\dots 1}}\underset{L\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{entries}}{\underset{\u23df}{00\dots 0}}\right]}^{T}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$.
Since ${{\rm Y}}_{j}\left(\left({\mathbf{J}}^{k}\mathbf{S}{\mathbf{S}}^{T}{\left({\mathbf{J}}^{T}\right)}^{l}\right)\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\otimes \phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\left(\mathbf{H}\left(k\right)\mathbf{H}{\left(l\right)}^{\ast}\right)\right)\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}=\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{\Gamma}_{j}\left({\mathbf{J}}^{k}\mathbf{S}{\mathbf{S}}^{T}{\left({\mathbf{J}}^{T}\right)}^{l}\right)$⊗H(k)H(l)^{∗}, it follows from (3.2) and (3.3) that for 0≤j≤L, ${{\rm Y}}_{j}\left({\mathbf{R}}_{f}\right)$ can be described as follows:
where ${\mathbf{F}}_{j}\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}=\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}[{\left(\mathbf{H}\right(0\left)\mathbf{H}{\left(j\right)}^{\ast}\right)}^{T}{\left(\mathbf{H}\right(1\left)\mathbf{H}{(j+1)}^{\ast}\right)}^{T}\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\dots (\mathbf{H}(Lj)$$\mathbf{H}{\left(L\right)}^{\ast}{)}^{T}{]}^{T}\in {\u2102}^{J(Lj+1)\times J}$ is formed from the products of channel matrix taps of the form H(k)H(k + j)^{∗}, and ${\mathbf{M}}_{j}=\left[{\mathbf{q}}_{0}\right(1:Nj,1\left){\mathbf{q}}_{1}\right(1:Nj,1)\dots {\mathbf{q}}_{Lj}(1:Nj,1\left)\right]\otimes {\mathbf{I}}_{J}\in {\mathbb{R}}^{J(Nj)\times J(Lj+1)}$.
Since N>L + 1, the (L + 1) equations in (3.4) are overdetermined and consistent. Since it can be checked that M_{ j } is full column rank for $j=0,1,\dots ,L$ (see Appendix 2), the solution F_{ j }can be obtained as
Let Q be the Hermitian matrix defined by Q=HH^{∗}. Then we obtain Q from (3.5) since Q is Hermitian and Υ_{ j }(Q)=F_{ j }for $j=0,1,\dots ,L$. Since rank(H)=K by assumption (B), Q has rank K. Since Q is Hermitian and positive semidefinite, Q has K positive eigenvalues, say, ${\lambda}_{1},\dots ,{\lambda}_{K}$. We can expand Q as
where d_{ j } is a unit norm eigenvector of Q associated with λ_{ j }>0. We can thus choose the channel impulse response matrix to be
We note H can only be identified up to a unitary matrix ambiguity $\mathbf{U}\in {\u2102}^{K\times K}$[8], i.e., $\hat{\mathbf{H}}=\mathbf{H}\mathbf{U}$, since $\hat{\mathbf{H}}{\hat{\mathbf{H}}}^{\ast}=\mathbf{H}{\mathbf{H}}^{\ast}=\mathbf{Q}$. The ambiguity matrix can be solved using a short training sequence [21].
Discussions

(1)
The noisy case: When noise is present, the received covariance matrix becomes ${\mathbf{R}}_{f}={\mathbf{H}}_{f}{\mathbf{H}}_{f}^{\ast}+{\sigma}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{JN}}$ based on (2.1). Since the matrix ${\mathbf{H}}_{f}\in {\u2102}^{\mathrm{JN}\times \mathrm{KM}}$ is of full column rank, the rank of ${\mathbf{H}}_{f}{\mathbf{H}}_{f}^{\ast}$ is KM. This implies that the assoicated smallest (JN−KM) eigenvalues of R_{ f }are equal to the noise variances ${\sigma}_{w}^{2}$. Hence, in practice we can obtain the estimated noise variance ${\widehat{\sigma}}_{w}^{2}$ as the average of the smallest (JN−KM) eigenvalues of the sample covariance matrix ${\hat{\mathbf{R}}}_{f}$. Then the proposed channel estimation algorithm can directly apply by substracting ${\widehat{\sigma}}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{JN}}$ from ${\hat{\mathbf{R}}}_{f}$. Alternatively, ${\sigma}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{JN}}$ can also be estimated via the method given in [7].

(2)
Channel identifiability: For the proposed method, the channel identifiability condition is assumption ( B ), i.e., rank(H)=K. Hence the channel needs not be irreducible, column reduced [8], or full column rank of H(0) required in the subspace method ([21], p. 1422). Thus the channel identifiability of the proposed method is more relaxed than that of the subspace method.

(3)
Application to the moreinput case: A necessary condition for the concatenated channel matrix H to be of full column rank (assumption ( B )) is
$$J(L+1)\ge K,$$(3.8)i.e., the product of the number of receive antennae (J) and the channel length (L + 1) should be no less than the number of transmit antennae (K). Hence, unlike the subspace method [21], which is exclusive for the moreoutput case, the proposed method is also capable of identifying moreinput channels (K>J), as long as the condition (3.8) is fulfilled.

(4)
Computational complexity: Compared with the subspace method [21], the proposed method requires fewer computations. Detailed flop counts for these two methods are given in Appendix 3.

(5)
Algorithm: We now summarize the proposed approach as the following algorithm:

(1)
Collect the received data as $\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)$, and then estimate the covariance matrix R_{ f }via the following time average
$${\hat{R}}_{f}=\frac{1}{S}\sum _{i=1}^{S}\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}\left(i\right)\stackrel{\u0304}{\mathbf{x}}{\left(i\right)}^{\ast},$$(3.9)where S is the number of symbol blocks.

(2)
Use the method given in this subsection to eliminate the noise component ${\widehat{\sigma}}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{JN}}$ imposing on ${\hat{R}}_{f}$ to get ${\mathbf{R}}_{c}={\hat{R}}_{f}{\widehat{\sigma}}_{w}^{2}{\mathbf{I}}_{\mathrm{JN}}$.

(3)
Form the matrix M_{ j }and compute F_{ j }using (3.5) for $j=0,1,\dots ,L$. (Here we use R_{ c }instead of R_{ f }in (3.5).)

(4)
Form the matrix Q using F_{0}, ${\mathbf{F}}_{1},\dots ,{\mathbf{F}}_{L}$, and obtain the channel impulse response matrix (3.7) by computing the K largest eigenvalues and the associated eigenvectors of Q.

(1)
Simulation
In this section, we use several numerical simulations to demonstrate the performance of the proposed method. We first consider two 2input 2output test channels, both with L=2. Channel A is shown as follows:
and channel B is the same as channel A except $\mathbf{H}\left(0\right)=\left[\begin{array}{ll}0.48+0.24j& 0.32+0.12j\\ 0.24+0.13j& 0.18+0.06j\end{array}\right]$. The length of symbol blocks is M=18, which is zero padded to blocks of length M + P=20. It means P=2(=L) and transmission efficiency is 90%. The number of symbol blocks is S=100. The channel normalized meansquare error (NMSE) is defined as $\mathrm{NMSE}=(1/I)\sum _{i=1}^{I}\parallel {\hat{H}}^{\left(i\right)}\mathbf{H}{\parallel}_{F}^{2}\xb7\parallel \mathbf{H}{\parallel}_{F}^{2}$, where I=200 is the number of Monte Carlo runs, and ∥·∥_{ F } denotes the Frobenius norm. ${\hat{\mathbf{H}}}^{\left(i\right)}={\left[{\hat{H}}^{\left(i\right)}{\left(0\right)}^{T}{\hat{\mathbf{H}}}^{\left(i\right)}{\left(1\right)}^{T}{\hat{\mathbf{H}}}^{\left(i\right)}{\left(2\right)}^{T}\right]}^{T}$ is the i th estimate of the channel impulse response matrix H after removing the unitary matrix ambiguity by the least squares method [8]. The input source symbols are i.i.d. QPSK signals. The SNR at the output is defined as $\mathrm{SNR}=\frac{E[\parallel \mathbf{x}(n)\mathbf{w}(n\left){\parallel}_{2}^{2}\right]}{E[\parallel \mathbf{w}(n\left){\parallel}_{2}^{2}\right]}$. The channel noise is zero mean, temporally and spatially white Gaussian.
In the first experiment, we compare the performance of the proposed method with that of the subspace method [21]. Figures 2 and 3 are the simulation results of zeroforcing equalization for channels A and B, respectively. Figure 2 shows that the proposed method outperforms the subspace method from low to medium SNR, whereas the subspace method gives better performance for high SNR; and Figure 3 shows that the performance of the proposed method is better than that of the subspace method. From Figures 2 and 3, we observe that the performance of the subspace method deteriorates for channel B. This is expected since by computation, the condition number of H(0) for channel B(=47.18) is larger than that of channel A(=12.69), which means H(0) for channel B is closer to singularity (rank deficiency) and tends to violate the identifiability condition of the subspace method ([21], p. 1422).
In the second experiment, we generate 100 3input 2output random channels with L=2 to illustrate the estimation performance of the proposed method for channels with more transmitters than receivers. We use M=18 and P=2. Each channel coefficient in the channel matrix is generated according to the independent complexedvalued Gaussian distribution with zero mean and unit variance. Figure 4 shows that for different numbers of symbol blocks, the proposed method is capable of identifying the moreinput channels. In addition, the NMSE decreases as SNR increases and is roughtly constant for high SNR. A possible explanation is that for sufficiently high SNR, the channel NMSE is contributed mainly due to numerical error than by channel noise. The existence of the error floor at high SNR due to numerical error is a wellknown result, and this common phenomenon can also be observed in some previous works related to blind channel estimation [9–14].
In the third experiment, we apply the proposed method to 200 2input 4out random channels with L=4 to demonstrate the performance. We use M=36 and P=4 to maintain the transmission efficiency at 90%. Each channel coefficient in the channel matrix is still generated according to the independent complexedvalued Gaussian distribution with zero mean and unit variance. Figures 5 and 6 show that as the number of symbol blocks (used to obtain the covariance matrix ${\hat{\mathbf{R}}}_{f}$) increases from 200 to 400, the BER approaches to the ideal case. In addition, these two figures also show that the proposed method outperforms the subspace method from low to medium SNR, and the subspace method performs better for high SNR.
In the literature of blind channel estimation, it is wellknown that subspace methods, such as [18, 21], enjoy the socalled “finite sample convergence” property [15–19, 21], that is, in the noiseless case (or sufficicently high SNR), the channels can be almost exactly identified by using a finite number of samples for covariance estimation. This is the reason why the subspacebased solution can yield improved channel estimation accuracy and the resultant BER in the high SNR region. The proposed method, like most of other solution branches, e.g., [9–14], can be classified as the “SCM” approach, by which exact channel identification is achieved whenever the exact covariance matrix is available. Hence, it is not unexpected that our method is susceptible to finitesample errors in covariance matrix estimation, which leads to an MSE floor in the high SNR region. Such a phenomenon is not uncommon in the literature, and has been seen in many studies, e.g., [9–14]. Despite this, the proposed method can outperform the subspace algorithm in the low SNR region, and hence could be a potential candidate in harsh communication environments.
Conclusion
We propose an SCM based blind channel estimation method for zero padding MIMO–OFDM systems. By exploiting the block Toeplitz channel matrix structure, we solve the channel product matrices from a series of decoupled linear equations obtained from the covariance matrix of the received data. Then the channel impulse response matrix can be obtained by taking eigendecomposition of a Hermitian matrix formed from the channel product matrices. The identifiability condition is more relaxed than that of the subspace method [21]. Unlike most of existing solutions that are only applicable for the moreoutput channels, the proposed approach can also identify the moreinput channels under a quite mild condition. Simulation results are used to demonstrate the performance of the proposed method. Compared with the subspace method [21], the proposed method is shown to have better performance form low to medium SNR or when H(0) tends to be singular.
Appendix 1: Proof of Proposition 3.1
Let e_{ n } be the n th column of the identity matrix I_{ N }. Then for k=0 case,
Hence ${\Gamma}_{j}\left({\mathbf{J}}^{0}{\mathbf{G}}^{2}{\left({\mathbf{J}}^{T}\right)}^{j}\right)={\mathbf{q}}_{0}(1:Nj,1)$ for 0≤j≤L.
For k=1 case,
Hence ${\Gamma}_{j}\left({\mathbf{J}}^{1}{\mathbf{G}}^{2}{\left({\mathbf{J}}^{T}\right)}^{1+j}\right)={\mathbf{q}}_{1}(1:Nj,1)$ for 0≤j≤L.
Following the same process, we can obtain the cases ${\Gamma}_{j}\left({\mathbf{J}}^{k}{\mathbf{G}}^{2}{\left({\mathbf{J}}^{T}\right)}^{k+j}\right)={\mathbf{q}}_{k}(1:Nj,1)$ for $k=2,3,\dots ,L$, through some straightforward manipulation, and assert the result given in Proposition 3.1.
Appendix 2: Proof of full column rank of M_{ j }
Let ${\mathbf{P}}_{j}=\left[{\mathbf{q}}_{0}\right(1:Nj,1\left){\mathbf{q}}_{1}\right(1:Nj,1)\dots {\mathbf{q}}_{Lj}(1:Nj,1\left)\right]\in {\mathbb{R}}^{(Nj)\times (Lj+1)}$ for $j=0,1,\dots ,L$. We note that P_{0} is a Toeplitz matrix with q_{0} being its first column and $[100\dots 0]\in {\mathbb{R}}^{1\times (L+1)}$ being its first row. Hence P_{0}is full column rank.
Also we observe that for $j=1,2,\dots ,L$, P_{ j } is obtained from P_{0} by deleting its last j rows and the last j columns, i.e., P_{ j }is a Toeplitz matrix with q_{0}(1:N−j,1) being its first column and $\left[1\underset{Lj}{\underset{\u23df}{00\dots 0}}\right]\in {\mathbb{R}}^{1\times (Lj+1)}$ being its first row. Thus, for $j=1,2,\dots ,L$, P_{ j } is full column rank.
Since P_{ j } is full column rank, M_{ j }=P_{ j }⊗I_{ J } is full column rank for $j=0,1,\dots ,L$.
Appendix 3: Complexity evaluation
The proposed method is compared with the subspace method [21] in terms of flops, where a “flop” is defined to be a single complex multiplication or addition [22]. Proposed method: Estimate the (Hermitian) covariance matrix R_{ f }using (3.9); this requires $(2S1)\frac{\mathrm{JN}(\mathrm{JN}+1)}{2}+1$ flops. Estimate and eliminate the noise variance to obtain R_{ c }needs 3JN flops. Solving (L + 1) least square problems using QR factorization ([22], p. 254) requires $2{J}^{3}\sum _{j=0}^{L}{(Lj+1)}^{2}[Nj\frac{Lj+1}{3}]$ flops. Eigendecomposition of a J(L + 1)×J(L + 1) requires 12J^{3}(L + 1)^{3}flops. Subspace method: Estimate the covariance matrix requires $(2S1)\frac{\mathrm{JN}(\mathrm{JN}+1)}{2}+1$ flops. Eigendecomposition of a J(L + M)×J(L + M) matrix requires 12J^{3}(L + M)^{3}flops. Singular value decomposition of a (JN−KM)N×J(L + 1) matrix ([22], p. 240) requires 4J^{2}(L + 1)^{2}J(2L + 2 + N^{2})−KMN flops.
According to the above flop computation, for the first experiment simulation in Section 4., the proposed method and the subspace method require about 1.7×10^{5}flops and 9.44×10^{5}flops, respectively. For experiment 3 using 200 symbol blocks, the proposed method and the subspace method require about 5.5×10^{6} flops and 5.99×10^{7}flops, respectively.
References
 1.
Wang Z, Giannakis GB: Wireless multicarrier communications: where Fourier meets Shannon. IEEE Signal Process. Mag 2000, 17(3):2948. 10.1109/79.841722
 2.
Stüber GL, Barry JR, Mclaughlin SW, Li Y, Ingram MA, Pratt TG: Broadband MIMO–OFDM wireless communications. Proc. IEEE 2004, 92(2):271294. 10.1109/JPROC.2003.821912
 3.
Giannakis GB, Hua Y, Stoica P, Tong L: Signal Processing, Advances in Wireless and Mobile Communications Volume I: Trends in Channel Identification and Equalization. (Prentice Hall, PTR, Upper Saddle River, 2001)
 4.
Chen YS, Lin CA: Blindchannel identification for MIMO singlecarrier zeropadding blocktransmission systems. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst.–I: Regular Papers 2008, 55(6):15711579.
 5.
Zhuang X, Ding Z, Swindlehurst AL: A statistical subspace method for blind channel identification in OFDM communications. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust. Speech Signal Process, 5, 2005, 24932496. (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA)
 6.
Backx FD, Vinhozaand TTV, SampaioNeto R: Blind channel estimation for zeropadded OFDM systems based on correlation matching. Proc. IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference – Fall 2007, 13081311. (Baltimore, Maryland, USA)
 7.
Chen YS, Lin CA: Blind identification of MIMO channels in zero padding block transmission systems. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2007, 55(2):764772.
 8.
Ding Z: Matrix outerproduct decomposition method for blind multiple channel identification. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1997, 45(12):30533061. 10.1109/78.650264
 9.
Shin C, Heath Jr. RW, Powers EJ: Nonredundant precodingbased blind and semiblind channel estimation for MIMO block transmission with a cyclic prefix. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2008, 56(6):25092523.
 10.
Ding Z, Qiu L: Blind MIMO channel identification from second order statistics using rank deficient channel convolution matrix. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2003, 51(2):535544. 10.1109/TSP.2002.806986
 11.
Gao F, Nallanathan A: Blind channel estimation for MIMO OFDM systems via nonredundant linear precoding. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2007, 55(2):784789.
 12.
Gao F, Nallanathan A: Blind channel estimation for OFDM systems via a generalized precoding. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol 2007, 56(3):11551164.
 13.
Simois FJ, MurilloFuentes JJ, BoloixTortosa R, Salamanca L: Near the CramérRao bound precoding algorithms for OFDM blind channel estimation. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol 2012, 61(2):651661.
 14.
Khanagha V, Khanagha A, Vakili VT: Modified particle swarm optimization for blind deconvolution and identification of multichannel FIR filters. EURASIP J. Avd. Signal Process 2010, 2010: 716862.
 15.
Tong L, Zhao Q: Joint order detection and blind channel estimation by least squares smoothing. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1999, 47(9):23452355. 10.1109/78.782179
 16.
Zhao Q, Tong L: Adaptive blind channel estimation by least squares smoothing. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1999, 47(12):30003012.
 17.
Yu X, Tong L: Joint channel and symbol estimation by oblique projections. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2001, 49(12):30743083. 10.1109/78.969515
 18.
Moulines E, Duhamel P, Cardoso JF, Mayrargue S: Subspace methods for the blind identification of multichannel FIR filters. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1995, 43(2):516525. 10.1109/78.348133
 19.
Xu G, Liu H, Tong L, Kailath T: A leastsquares approach to blind channel identification. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1995, 43(12):29822993. 10.1109/78.476442
 20.
Scaglione A, Giannakis GB, Barbarossa S: Redundant filter bank precoders and equalizers—Part II: blind channel estimation, synchronization, and direct equalization. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 1999, 47(7):20072022. 10.1109/78.771048
 21.
Zeng Y, Ng TY: A semiblind channel estimation method for multiuser multiantenna OFDM systems. IEEE Trans. Signal Process 2004, 52(5):14191429. 10.1109/TSP.2004.826183
 22.
Golub GH, Van Loan CF: Matrix Computions,. 3rd edn. (The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1996)
Acknowledgements
The research was sponsored by the National Science Council of Taiwan under grant NSC 992221E035056.
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ original submitted files for images
Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, YS., Wu, JY. Statistical covariancematching based blind channel estimation for zeropadding MIMO–OFDM systems. EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process. 2012, 139 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1186/168761802012139
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Keywords
 Blind channel estimation
 Zero padding
 MIMO–OFDM