EEL6503: Course Projects


Policy:

The course project is an individual simulation study of systems and algorithms related to the material presented in class. You can conduct your simulation study based on one (or more) of the papers in the list below. Alternatively you can select your own reference papers, provided that we mutually agree on the selection. You have to understand the material in the paper and write your own MATLAB (or C, C++, Fortran, etc) programs to implement and test the algorithms described in the paper. Create your own test scenarios, don't just repeat what are done in the paper. Feel free to modifiy, improve, or extend the original alogrithms and scenarios described in the paper. A ground-breaking research topic is excellent, but not needed. However, you are expected to show a substantial effort in your project.

You should hand in a written report on your project and make the report publishable on the Internet. If you have any problem setting up a homepage for your project report, please contact the instructor. The NCSA HTML Resources is a good starting point to learn how to make your report publishable on the Internet.

You are welcome to discuss your project with me or your fellow students in class. However, you should follow the academic honesty guideline set forth by the University of Florida. A formal academic dishonesty process will be carried out if palgiarism is suspected. Once verified, students involved will automatically receive the failing grade. Further disciplinary actions may also result.

If your project is the continuation of one that you have submitted for another course, you have to clearly state your additional contributions. Otherwise, I will treat this as plagiarism. I strongly encourage you to discuss with me before you select your topic in this case. With my permission, two of you can work on a joint project. However, the collaboration must be a shared effort. Each of you should hand in your individual report indicating your contributions to the joint project. It is not acceptable that one student works on the simulation and the other student writes the report. Both of you have to work on all aspects of the project. If I receive two identical (or very similar) reports, I will treat this as palgiarism.


Goal:

I believe the best way to learn a subject is by working on a project. First, you have to select a topic. In the process, you have to review the class material. You have to learn how to search and select useful information from research papers. The next step is to develop your ideas and work them out. This step helps you to review, consolidate, and practice the knowledge you learn in class. The final step is to write a report on your findings. To do so, you need to organize your ideas and results in a clear and logical manner so that they can be understood by the readers of your report. I believe a well-written report is as important as a good idea. There is no point in doing research if no other person can understand and use the result.


Important Dates:


Grading:

Each student is required to submit the following items for his/her project and each of the items will be counted toward the final project grade according to the table below:
Project proposal: 20%
Final written report: 50%
Project web page: 10%
Peer evaluation: 10%
Reviewing other projects: 2% per project reviewed, max 20%

The project proposal and the final written report are self-explanatory. For a good guideline of how to write them, please refer to Dr. Shea's project page for EEL6509. Your final report should include a brief summary of the algorithms in the reference paper. A significant majority of your report should be on the simulation study you conduct.

A list of all the projects will be included on this page. You can provide me the URL of your project homepage any time before the report due date. You can put whatever you feel appropriate on your project homepage. All students are expected to check the list of the projects and make appropiate comments and suggestions to the authors. Therefore, if you want suggestions and comments from me and your classmates, set up your project page as early as you can. The grading period will start one day after the report due date and will last for one week. You are responsible for reviewing and evaluating your classmates' projects. A standard evaluation form will be provided. Ten percents of your project grade will be based on the peer reviews of your project. Therefore please be as constructive as possible when you evaluate and comment on your fellow classmates' projects. In addition, for each constructive review you submit, 2 bonus points will be added toward your project grade.

Any draft work presented before the grading period will not be counted. So don't worry to put some rough drafts up for comments and suggestions. By setting up the peer review scheme, I hope all of us (not just me) can learn and benefit from all of the projects. Remember that your emphasis should not be on the design of your project homepage, but on the contents of your project.


List of technical papers

  1. R. Lupas and S. Verdu, ``Linear Multiuser Detectors for Synchronous Code-Division Multiple-Access Channels,'' IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 35, pp. 123-136, Jan. 1989.
  2. P. B. Rapajic, and B. S. Vucetic, ``Adaptive Receiver Structures for Asynchronous CDMA Systems,'' IEEE J. Select. Area Commun., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 685-697, May 1994.
  3. U. Madhow and M. Honig, ``MMSE Interference Suppression for Direct-Sequence Spread-Spectrum CDMA,'' IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 42, pp. 3178-3188, Dec. 1994.
  4. S. L. Miller, ``An Adaptive Direct-Sequence Code-Division Multiple-Access Receiver for Multiuser Interference Rejection,'' IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 43, pp. 1746-1754, Feb./Mar./Apr. 1995.
  5. M. Honig, U. Madhow, and S. Verdu, ``Blind Adaptive Multiuser Detection,'' IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 41, pp. 944-960, Jul. 1995.
  6. A. F. Naguib, A. Paulraj, and T. Kailath, ``Capacity Improvement with Base-Station Antenna Array in Cellular CDMA,'' IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 43, pp. 691-698, Aug. 1994.
  7. A. Monk, M. Davis, L. B. Milstein, and C. W. Helstrom, ``A Noise-Whitening Approach to Multiple-Access Noise Rejection---Part I: Theory and Background,'' IEEE J. Select. Area Commun., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 817-827, June 1994.
  8. A. J. Viterbi, ``Very Low Rate Convolutional Codes for Maximum Theoretical Performance of Spread-Spectrum Multiple-Access Channels,'' IEEE J. Select. Area Commun., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 641-649, May 1990.
  9. X. Wang and H. V. Poor, ``Blind multiuser detection: a subspace approach,'' IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 44, pp. 677-690, Mar. 1998.
  10. X. Wang and H. V. Poor, ``Blind equalization and multiuser detection in dispersive CDMA channels,'' IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 46, pp. 91-103, Jan. 1998
  11. S. Kondo, and L. B. Milstein, ``Performance of Multicarrier DS CDMA Systems,'' IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 44, pp. 238-246, Feb. 1996.
  12. M. K. Varanasi and B. Aazhang, `` Multistage detection in asynchronous code-division multiple-access communications,'' IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 509-519, Apr. 1990.
  13. R. D. Yates, ``A framework for uplink power control in cellular radio systems,'' IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1341-1347, Sep. 1995.
  14. S. Ulukus and R. Yates, ``Adaptive power control and MMSE interference suppression,'' Baltzer/ACM Wireless Networks vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 489-496, 1998.

    (More to come ...)

    Some of my papers ;-)

  15. T. F. Wong, T. M. Lok, J. S. Lehnert, and M. D. Zoltowski, ``A Linear Receiver for Direct-Sequence Spread-Spectrum Multiple-Access Systems with Antenna Arrays and Blind Adaptation,'' IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 659-676, Mar. 1998.
  16. T. F. Wong, T. M. Lok, and J. S. Lehnert, ``Asynchronous Multiple Access Interference Suppression and Chip Waveform Selection with Aperiodic Random Sequences,'' IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 103-114, Jan. 1999.
  17. T. M. Lok, T. F. Wong, and J. S. Lehnert, ``Blind Adaptive Signal Reception for MC-CDMA Systems in Rayleigh Fading Channels,'' IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 464-471, Mar. 1999.
  18. T. F. Wong, Q. Zhang, and J. S. Lehnert, ``Decision-Feedback MAP Receiver for Time-Selective Fading CDMA Channels,'' IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 829-840, May 2000.
  19. T. F. Wong and T. M. Lok, `` Doubly spread DS-CDMA for efficient blind interference cancellation,'' IEE Proceedings - Communications, vol. 147, no. 5, pp. 299-304, Oct. 2000.
  20. J. Namgoong, T. F. Wong, and J. S. Lehnert, ``Subspace Multiuser Detection for Multicarrier CDMA,'' IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 48, no. 11, pp. 1897-1908, Nov. 2000.

List of Projects

Name Title
Bo Chen Adaptive receiver structures for asynchronous CDMA systems
Sweungwon Cheung Linear Multiuser Detector for Synchronous Code-Division Multiple-Access Channel
MIke Gordon Subspace applications in CDMA systems
Eunhee Kim Performance of multicarrier DS CDMA systems
Ohbong Kwon Linear Multiuser Detectors for Synchronous Code-Division Multiple-Access Channels
Jau-Jr Lin Linear Receiver for Direct-Sequence Spread-Spectrum Multiple-Access Systems with Antenna Arrays and Blind Adaptation
Wei Liu A Distributed Adaptive Power Control Algorithm with MMSE Interference Suppression
Sean McCarty Blind Adaptive Multiuser Detection
Jangwook Moon Study on the several Interference Cancellation Techniques
Jae Sung Park Study on very low rate turbo codes for maximum theroretical performance of spread-spectrum multiple-access channels
Vishal Patel Capacity improvement with base-station antenna arrays in celluar CDMA
Hong Xiong An adaptive direct-sequence code-division multiple-access receiver for multiuser interference rejection
Wen Yu Performance analysis for MC-CDMA systems with blind adaptive signal reception in rayleigh fading channels
Ying Zhao Adaptive DS/CDMA receiver for multiuser detection
Yu Zheng Adaptive Power Control and MMSE Interference Suppression

Project Evaluation Form

Evaluator:
Project Title:
Author:

Summary of the project (use no more than 100 words):

Evaluate the above project on a scale of 1 to 10 (the best):
1. How would you describe the technical quality of the project?
2. How would you rate the organization of the project report?
3. Is the project report easy to understand?
4. Do you find the topic of the project interesting?
5. Relative to its technical content, is the length of the report adequate?
6. After reading the project report, do you feel that you learn something new?
7. Overall, how would you rate the project?

Comments and suggestions (things that you like and dislike):


[<==] EEL6503 Homepage
Last modified: 12/3/01