0% found this document useful (0 votes)
10 views6 pages

AUC ECNG 4302 Communication Problem Set

This document outlines Problem Set 2 for the ECNG 4302 course at the American University in Cairo, focusing on optimal detection in AWGN. It includes multiple problems related to signal detection, receiver design, and error probability calculations, referencing various textbooks in the field. The problems require students to derive optimal receivers, analyze signal spaces, and calculate probabilities of error for different signaling schemes.

Uploaded by

Ahmed Aly
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
10 views6 pages

AUC ECNG 4302 Communication Problem Set

This document outlines Problem Set 2 for the ECNG 4302 course at the American University in Cairo, focusing on optimal detection in AWGN. It includes multiple problems related to signal detection, receiver design, and error probability calculations, referencing various textbooks in the field. The problems require students to derive optimal receivers, analyze signal spaces, and calculate probabilities of error for different signaling schemes.

Uploaded by

Ahmed Aly
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

American University in Cairo (AUC)

Electronics and Communications Engineering Department

ECNG 4302 Fundamentals of Communications II


Problem Set 2
Fall 2025

Optimal Detection in AWGN


Issued: Sunday, September 28th, 2025 Due: Sunday, October 5th, 2025

The homework problems are compiled/adapted from the following references:


ˆ S. Haykin, “Digital communication systems”, John Wiley & Sons, 1st ed., 2013.
ˆ B. Sklar, “Digital communication: fundamentals and applications”, Prentice-Hall, 2nd ed., 2001.
ˆ B. Lathi, D. Zing “Modern digital and analog communication systems”, Oxford University
Press, 5th ed., 2019.
ˆ J. Proakis, M. Salehi, “Digital communication”, McGraw-Hill, 5th ed., 2008.

Problem 2.1
Fig. 2.1-a shows a pair of signals s1 (t) and s2 (t) that are orthogonal over the observation
interval 0 ≤ t ≤ 3T . The received signal is defined as:

x(t) = sk (t) + w(t)k = 1, 2

where w(t) is Gaussian noise of zero-mean and power spectral density N0 /2.

Figure 2.1-a

1. Obtain the optimal receiver that decides in favor of signals s1 (t) or s2 (t), assuming
that these two signals are equiprobable.

2. Calculate the average probability of symbol error incurred by this receiver for
E/N0 = 4, where E is the signal energy.

1
Problem 2.2
The following equiprobable signals in Fig. 2.2-a are transmitted over the AWGN channel
with PSD of N20 .

1. Find a basis set to represent these signals (You may solve by inspection)

2. Design the optimum receiver. Show the details of the correlators, dot products, .....

3. Clearly mark the optimal decision regions.

4. Using union bound, calculate an upper bound of the probability of error in terms
of A, T , and N0 .

Figure 2.2-a
Problem 2.3
Three equiprobable messages m1 , m2 and m3 are to be transmitted over an AWGN
channel with noise power spectral density N0 /2. The messages are:


  1 0 ≤ t < T /2
1 0≤t<T
s1 (t) = , s2 (t) = −s3 (t) −1 T /2 ≤ t < T
0, otherwise
0, otherwise

1. What is the dimensionality of the signal space?

2. Find an appropriate basis for the signal space.

3. Draw the signal constellation for this problem.

4. Derive and sketch the optimal decision regions D1 , D2 , and D3 .

5. Which of the three messages is most vulnerable to errors and why? In other words,
which of P(error|mi transmitted), i = 1, 2, 3 is largest?

2
Problem 2.4
A quaternary signaling scheme uses four waveforms,

s1 (t) = 4φ1 (t)


s2 (t) = 2φ1 (t) + 2φ2 (t)
s3 (t) = −2φ1 (t) − 2φ2 (t)
s4 (t) = −4φ2 (t)

Where φ1 (t) and φ2 (t) are orthonormal basis signals. All the signals are equiprobable,
and the channel noise is white Gaussian noise with PSD Sn (f ) = 10−4 W/Hz.

1. Represent signals in the signal space, and determine the optimum decision regions.

2. Compute the error probability of the optimum receiver.

Problem 2.5
The four signals shown in the Fig. 2.5-a are used for communication of four equiprobable
messages over an AWGN channel. The noise power spectral density is N0 /2.

1. Find an orthonormal basis, with lowest possible N , for representation of the signals.

2. Plot the constellation, and using the constellation, find the energy in each signal.
What is the average signal energy and what is Ebavg ?

3. On the constellation that you have plotted, determine the optimal decision regions
for each signal, and determine which signal is more probable to be received in error.

Problem 2.6
A source emits four equiprobable messages m1 , m2 , m3 , m4 , encoded by s1 (t), s2 (t), s3 (t),
s4 (t), respectively,

 
2πt
s1 (t) =20 2 sin , s2 (t) = 0
Ts
√ √
   
2πt 2πt
s3 (t) =10 2 cos , s4 (t) = −10 2 cos
Ts Ts
1
where Each of these signal durations is 0 < t < Ts , Ts = 20
, and is zero outside this
interval. The signals are transmitted over AWGN channels.

1. Represent these signals in a signal space.

2. Determine the decision regions.

3. Determine the optimum receiver.

3
Figure 2.5-a
Problem 2.7
In the binary communication system shown in Figure 2.7-a, messages m = 0 and m = 1
occur with a priori probabilities 1/4 and 3/4, respectively. Suppose that we observe r ,

r = m+n,

where n is a continuous-valued random variable with the pdf shown in Figure 2.7-b. The
random variable n is statistically independent of whether message m = 0 or m = 1 occurs.

m r ∧
Source Detector m
m=0 or 1 received ∧
m=0 or 1
message signal
n

Figure 2.7-a

4
p (n)
n

2/3

−3/4 3/4 n

Figure 2.7-b

1. Find the minimum probability of error detector, and compute the associated prob-
ability of error.
2. Suppose that the a priori probabilities are not available at receiver, so it is decided
that a maximum likelihood (ML) detector is to be used. Determine the ML detector
and the associated probability of error.
3. Is the ML detector unique in item 2? Justify your answer. If your answer is no,
construct a different ML detector and then compute the associated probability of
error.

Portfolio Questions (Bonus)


The following questions are not a part of the assignments and will not be graded as an
assignment. All Portfolio questions will be collected and graded once at the end of the
semester as a BONUS.

1. We investigated the case of white noise in lectures. What are would be the difference
in terms of the distribution of noise component if the noise is non-white? Discuss
this using the proof in slide 8 and Figure in slide 12.
2. Consider an additive non-Gaussian white noise channel. After signal projection,
the received N × 1 signal vector is given by:
q = si + n
when message mi is transmitted. The noise vector has independent components
such that, in this case, it has joint probability density function:
N  
Y 1 −|nj |
p(n) = exp
j=1
τ 2τ

Follow the derivations of optimum detector for AWGN and derive the optimum
receiver structure for this non-Gaussian white noise channel. Show (using MATLAB
figures) how the decision regions are different between Gaussian and non-Gaussian
noises in a two-dimensional (N = 2) signal space.

5
3. In the example of binary signaling with unequal priors, provide a closed-form solu-
tion for the optimal threshold vth. . Does the threshold nearer to s1 or s2 ? Explain
intuitively why?

4. We draw the block diagram of the optimal ML receiver in the lectures. Draw the
block diagram of the optimal receiver in the case non-equal prior.

5. For the 256QAM modulation proposed for the new WiFi, do you think that the op-
timal receiver should be implemented using the structure in slide 29 (N correlators)
or the structure in slide 30 (M correlators). Explain Why.

6. In slide 41, we proved the probability of error with equiprobable binary signals s1 ,
and s2 . Repeat the proof for the case when p(s1 ) = p ̸= 21 .

7. Consider the equivalent signal set figures in the bottom of Slide 43. The two signal
sets have the same Pe , nevertheless, the signal set on the left is preferred. Explain
Why?

Common questions

Powered by AI

The minimum probability of error detector in binary communication systems with prior probabilities is computed using a Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT), which incorporates both the observed data and the priors to decide which hypothesis is more likely. When a priori probabilities are unknown, a maximum likelihood detector disregards these priors and chooses the hypothesis with maximal likelihood based on the data alone. This can lead to suboptimal decisions compared to scenarios where priors are considered .

Determining the uniqueness of the maximum likelihood detector is critical because it affects the reliability of the decision-making process. If a detector is not unique, different implementations might yield different behaviors under given conditions. In constructing different detectors, one would look to implement variations in decision rules or leverage additional constraints that provide same error probability but might align better with specific implementation contexts or operational conditions .

The preference for the signal set on the left, despite having the same probability of error, can often be attributed to better geometric properties, such as a more compact constellation or better Euclidean distance between symbols, which generally leads to better performance under real-world conditions like non-ideal channels and implementation constraints. These factors can impact robustness and ease of detection beyond mere probabilistic error analysis .

The dimensionality of the signal space is determined by the number of orthogonal signals that can be derived from the message set, which is equal to the minimum number of orthonormal functions needed to express all transmitted signals uniquely as linear combinations of these functions. An appropriate basis is typically chosen to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio through orthogonalization techniques such as the Gram-Schmidt process .

In a non-Gaussian noise environment, the detector structure is adjusted to account for the actual noise distribution rather than simply using the Gaussian assumptions. This may involve redefining the likelihood ratios or applying different distributions in detector design. Decision regions in a non-Gaussian environment become shaped by this distribution, differing from the common linear boundaries seen in Gaussian noise, potentially requiring more complex decision logic .

The optimal receiver structure in non-equal prior probability scenarios is derived by setting a threshold that equates the weighted costs of choosing each possible signal, typically via a threshold v_th requiring detailed derivations that incorporate both likelihoods and priors. The threshold is affected by these priors, moving closer to the less probable signal to balance the likelihood of errors on either side .

In 256QAM, the choice between N or M correlators is determined by trade-offs between receiver complexity and performance. N correlators might be chosen for simpler implementations where complexity and processing power are constrained. However, M correlators might offer better noise discrimination and more precise adaptation to channel conditions, enhancing performance at the cost of increased complexity. The decision hinges on balancing these operational capacities against performance needs .

An orthonormal basis provides a systematic way to decompose signals for clear energy distribution across dimensions, and ensures efficient representation with minimal redundancy. The signal constellation is a visual representation in signal space that aids in calculating distances between signal points, allowing for direct assessments of error probability based on minimum distance decision-making. These tools help systematically compute average signal energy as a mean across constellation points and analyze the likelihood of error due to signal overlap or noise .

The optimal receiver for deciding between two orthogonal signals s1(t) and s2(t) in an AWGN channel is a matched filter receiver, which correlates the received signal with both signal waveforms and compares the outputs. Since the signals are equiprobable, the decision threshold is zero. The average probability of symbol error P_e can be calculated using Q(E/N0) for orthogonally modulated signals, which in the given case with E/N0 = 4 can be approximated by a Q-function with input derived from the error rate expression for orthogonal signals .

To represent quaternary signals in the signal space, identify the orthonormal basis functions that span the signal set. Then, plot each signal as vectors in this space, ideally showing clear distinction among them. The optimal decision regions are those regions that minimize the distance between the vectors representing the received signal and each signal vector in the presence of AWGN, usually accomplished by constructing bisectors that separate regions around each signal point .

You might also like