Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 3   >   >>
Michael.Bergman
User Rank
Rookie
Re: No turning Shannon on its head
Michael.Bergman   2/21/2014 6:50:50 AM
NO RATINGS
With regard to battery life issues: In the architecture described, the real heavy lifting is done at the data center.  The handset could participate in the channel estimation by sending 'pings'.  But it would be better to do it on the fly, with reference carriers or something.  Not enough detail to understand at this level, but I'm still at the "it's pretty slick" point.

One thing seems clear: the handset uplinks are synchronized at the symbol level, as are the AP downlinks.  If a handset transmits its symbol at a random timing offset to the others, no good comes of it.

And a comment from my 14-year-old son: "It all depends on the data center doing its job properly.  If that doesn't work, the whole thing falls apart."

With that in mind--what if the channel model matrix cannot be inverted at the data center?  I have no idea how frequently this can happen in real life, but I assume the fallback is to induce noise until it works...?

Very interesting stuff, and an entertaining thread.  Good luck to the Artemis Networks team.

Mike

AZskibum
User Rank
CEO
Re: No turning Shannon on its head
AZskibum   2/21/2014 3:42:42 AM
NO RATINGS
Mike, if that is indeed what they're doing, it doesn't sound very promising for tracking rapidly changing channel characteristics. Not that the processing power couldn't be brought to bear to do it in real time, but I would suspect the drain on the battery would be substantial.

A static demo is one thing, real-world deployment and satisfied users is quite another.

Michael.Bergman
User Rank
Rookie
Re: No turning Shannon on its head
Michael.Bergman   2/20/2014 9:39:27 PM
NO RATINGS
Well...it appears from the white paper that the data center does channel estimation (with the test signal) on all the AP and receiver paths.  Say there are N AP's and M receivers.  So the data center is looking at complexity of O(N*M) in channel estimation.

After doing the channel estimation, the data center looks at the necessary "clean" waveform that it wants to get to each receiver, inverts the N*M matrix of impulse responses, convolves that with the desired waveform vector, and the result is the transmission vector. 

When the transmission vector passes through all those channels, it is distorted by that N*M set of channels, just as expected from tha channel estimation.  After distortion, the original desired signals all arrive at the receivers.  Slick.

A couple of things I'd be interested in learning more about.  First, the O(N*M) complexity problem, is there a way around that?  Second, you'd probably want to update your channel models quick enough to stay within the coherence time.  But that will eat away at your data rate, unless they're estimating on the fly (which is possible). 

I'm a skeptic with "we broke Shannon's Law" schemes, having seen a few (hey, spiral modulation anyone?), but this looks pretty slick, on the face of it.

Mike

LarryM99
User Rank
CEO
Re: Puzzled
LarryM99   2/20/2014 11:55:25 AM
NO RATINGS
@Rick, this is true. Generally these days you have to scale up to about fifty people before you can sell out to Facebook for $16B or so...

I'm not sure exactly where this technilogy will fit. Cellular as we know it today is one place, but there is also the possibility that there could be something new growing from this. High speed in the local link is only one part of the equation. What kind of backhaul infrastructure would be necessary to support this? Is this really cellular technology (i.e. highly mobile) or potentially the basis for a (finally competitive!) new ISP technology?

rick merritt
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Puzzled
rick merritt   2/20/2014 10:40:07 AM
NO RATINGS
@Zewde: Indeed, cellular disruption with eight people is highly ambitious!

rick merritt
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Puzzled
rick merritt   2/20/2014 10:39:25 AM
NO RATINGS
@DrQuine: The way I understand it, the user devcie can move wherever the user wants and the system tracks it--but this capability has yet to be proven at mass scale.

The radio heads can be placed somewhat randomly and don't have t create traditional radio cell coverage areas since they apparently work by using overlap and interference, but here my understanding gets a bit fuzzy.

I'll ask Steve to jump on and answer your question.

zewde yeraswork
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Puzzled
zewde yeraswork   2/20/2014 9:35:17 AM
NO RATINGS
Sounds pretty ambitious for a startup consisting of just eight full-time engineers. The fact that it is supposed to support different latencies and accomplish so much in so little time is a testament to Perlman's entrepreneurial spirit.

DrQuine
User Rank
CEO
Puzzled
DrQuine   2/20/2014 7:48:16 AM
I'm puzzled by this technology - but very much appreciate the need for strong signals in our local areas and the frustrations so many of us experience with local "dead" areas. The photograph shows a single "head" broadcasting to 8 iPhones yet the text mentions that there is a centimeter sized zone at the cell phone (which would imply that positioning of the phone is critical). Late in the article, there is mention that 350 transmitters could cover San Francisco. Are there regional transmitters and then local repeaters? Do the transmitters synthesize a small region of interest for each phone? At what speed can the transmitter maintain the connection with a moving mobile phone?

Bert22306
User Rank
CEO
Re: No turning Shannon on its head
Bert22306   2/19/2014 8:04:11 PM
NO RATINGS
Rick, I know, that's the paper I was referring to. I re-read it before commenting.

rick merritt
User Rank
Blogger
Re: No turning Shannon on its head
rick merritt   2/19/2014 7:09:28 PM
NO RATINGS
Hi Bert: There was a pretty good discussion of the MIMO-esque nature of the 2011 DIDO paper in a story I refered to here.

Perlman is still keeping some of this secret sauce as any startup would. But it seems to me now this is sort of a mashup up of MIMO, C-RAN and virtualization software.

What do others think?

<<   <   Page 2 / 3   >   >>


Most Recent Comments
Flash Poll
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Rishabh N. Mahajani, High School Senior and Future Engineer

Future Engineers: Don’t 'Trip Up' on Your College Road Trip
Rishabh N. Mahajani, High School Senior and Future Engineer
1 Comment
A future engineer shares his impressions of a recent tour of top schools and offers advice on making the most of the time-honored tradition of the college road trip.

Max Maxfield

Juggling a Cornucopia of Projects
Max Maxfield
7 comments
I feel like I'm juggling a lot of hobby projects at the moment. The problem is that I can't juggle. Actually, that's not strictly true -- I can juggle ten fine china dinner plates, but ...

Larry Desjardin

Engineers Should Study Finance: 5 Reasons Why
Larry Desjardin
37 comments
I'm a big proponent of engineers learning financial basics. Why? Because engineers are making decisions all the time, in multiple ways. Having a good financial understanding guides these ...

Karen Field

July Cartoon Caption Contest: Let's Talk Some Trash
Karen Field
129 comments
Steve Jobs allegedly got his start by dumpster diving with the Computer Club at Homestead High in the early 1970s.

Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)