Talk:Quadrature amplitude modulation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project as a "full time member" and/or contribute to the discussion.

1 Two signals on one line?
2 Dialectic inconsistency
3 64 QAM Constellation diagram
4 Analogue QAM
5 Error in equation for BER of Gray coded M-ary QAM
6 Appreciation

[edit] Two signals on one line?

How can you put two signals on a single signal line? I don't get it. How can you double the available data rate?

Thanks, --Abdull 22:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This is possible because two independent properties of the carrier wave are being manipulated simultaneously by the transmitter: the amplitude, and the phase. (You could think of plain old amplitude modulation as being a subtype of QAM, where only the carrier's amplitude is varied while its phase is held constant.)

The receiver can also measure these two properties independently, yielding two continuously-variable quantities and, thus, two signals. In its simplest form (2QAM), this can be used either to multiplex two data streams into one transmission, or to send one data stream at twice the effective rate (i.e. two bits per baud).

(At least, this is how I understand it.)

Simon 18:30, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't really double the maximum available data rate. It merely uses more of it. The maximum possible rate is determined by the Shannon-Hartley theorem, and modulation schemes try to use up as much of it as possible. (Apparently no scheme gets 100%, but some get close.) So QAM enables a higher data rate than a simple amplitude modulation of binary data, but isn't making something out of nothing. It's just using up more of the available theoretical bandwidth. (Right?) - Omegatron 19:42, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yep, that's right—although from the point of view of a terminal sending data over the line, the available data rate has increased. As you point out, there is a theoretical limit on how high this rate can get (before changes to the channel parameters are needed).

Simon 19:27, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that's probably what's confusing. It's the distinction between the maximum bandwidth available from the physical channel and the maximum bandwidth available from the transmission protocol. The transmission protocol can use up all of the channel, and the data being sent can use up all of the protocol. - Omegatron 21:03, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dialectic inconsistency

Hi. Yet another page I want to edit for English usage (my main activity on Wikipedia). I noticed the page uses the word analogue (Commonwealth English spelling) and two words (or forms of words) ending in -ize (American English spelling). The Manual of Style recommends (sensibly) that spelling and usage within an article should be uniform. But I'm not sure which we it should go. It seems that perhaps Commonwealth usage is now dominant, but looking at the page history, I see there were inconsistencies from the beginning. (The very first version has both analog and quantised; perhaps analog is creeping into Commonwealth?) I think at least some comments are necessary before unification is performed. Ddawson 01:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I am the editor who rewrote the article into its current form. I speak British English, being English (and British!). However, I've adopted some Americanis(z)ations owing to the journals I write papers in insisting on American English. So I mix them up. Most of the inconsistencies will be my fault, and I do not mind to which version it is harmonized, but harmonized it certainly should be! Thanks for the vigilance. -Splash 01:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Then I will go with Commonwealth, since it's dominant. Ddawson 03:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

-ize can also be used in British English. It's common in British academic publications. SpNeo 02:28, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, though that is largely (in my personal academic writing experience) because many of those publications are in American journals/conferences and the like. For example, the vast majority of electrical engineering journals are published by IEEE which prefers American English spelling. -Splash^talk 06:32, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

'ize is never wrong' in British English although 'ise' is sometimes wrong - so most sensible writers will always use the 'ize' form. Differential spelling is often useful where an English writer will use American spelling (for example) to distinguish technical or computing items from the 'standard' meanings - eg we can programme the writing of programs or a disk (the device) drive may be made up of a stack of discs (the shape) on a single spindle - SDB51 2006.02.02 @ 21.05 zulu

[edit] 64 QAM Constellation diagram

How can i construct a 64 QAM Constellation diagram?

[edit] Analogue QAM

Although analogue QAM is possible, this article focuses on digital QAM.

This means there's nowhere obvious on Wikipedia to add information about analogue QAM or QAM in general. Perhaps the bulk of this article can be moved to QAM (digital) and the remainder made more mixed? --Dtcdthingy 01:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

If you want to write about analogue QAM, just remove the 'disclaimer', add a new section heading somewhere and dive in. Unless you feel strongly that they should be in different articles. -Splash^talk 01:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that most of the article has been written as if the page was called Digital QAM. You'd have to put all that under a great big Digital QAM subheading and/or rewrite lots of it to say it only applies to digital. It would be better if we just renamed it, even if that means the article here ends up relatively short. --Dtcdthingy 02:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I've gone halfway and split the article into two big sections. The previous situation of completely dismissing analogue QAM was an embarrassment. --Dtcdthingy 12:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Error in equation for BER of Gray coded M-ary QAM

There is a mathematical error on this page in the description of the BER of a M-ary QAM signal in AWGN, where M is even. The BER for a gray coded signal can be directly infered from the PAM signal in each quadrature phase, which are independent from each other.

Thus 64-QAM, which can be regarded as two independent 8-PAM streams, has a BER approximated by 1/3 of symbol error rate of a Gray coded 8-PAM symbol stream.

In general, $BER=\frac{4}{k}\times \left( 1-\frac{1}{\sqrt{M}} \right) \times Q\left(\sqrt{\frac{E_b}{N_0}\times \frac{3k}{(M-1)}}\right)$

Where $k = log 2 M$

Although it is true that both quadrature PAM symbols must be correct for the final QAM symbol to be entirely correct, there is no such dependancy between the bit errors occuring in each quadrature PAM channel of a QAM system!

--Crazzell 23:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)