Diversity vs Degrees of Freedom in Gaussian Fading Channels

Abstract

The standard definitions of degrees of freedom (DOF) and diversity both normalize by . When this ruler is wrong, both measurements give zero or become undefined, yet intuitively DOF and diversity ought to be channel properties, not artifacts of a normalization choice. We formalize this for Gaussian fading channels. For fixed-H MIMO, DOF and diversity are both ranks of the bilinear map~HX with different variables free: -covering the image of~X\!\!HX gives DOF on the gauge; expanding across all dimensions of the fading map gives diversity on the linear~ gauge. Covering produces logs; expansion produces linear growth; so in every model studied here the two gauges differ. These geometric definitions do not yield tradeoff curves. We bridge the gap with Bhattacharyya packing, obtaining gauge-DOF and B-diversity as workable proxies -- finite and informative on every gauge, including those where the classical diversity order is zero. Three gauge classes emerge: , , and ()β, β∈(0,1). The main result is a cross-gauge tradeoff for noncoherent fast fading: capacity lives on , but B-diversity lives on , exponentially larger, with matching upper and lower bounds. For coherent MIMO, block fading, and irregular-spectrum channels, the same approach recovers or extends known scaling laws.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…