Re: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
If you can, please also include your continuous time filter assumptions - these will allow us to understand the loss due to suboptimal receiver filtering prior to the baud-rate sampler. Better yet would be to compute the corresponding optimal DFE SNR at the sampler for the same system configuration - this will help us to get calibrated, which will be important since we're talking about fractions of a dB here.
From: stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG on behalf of Vivek Telang
Sent: Sat 7/17/2004 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
In addition to the optimum DFE method, I think there is value in also evaluating the performance using the finite-length MMSE equalizer method, since this will also allow us to compare estimates of the receiver complexity. I will publish my results to the reflector in the next few days.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Sailesh Rao
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 6:56 AM
Subject: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
I would like to propose the following process for resolving the robustness of PAM8 vs. PAM12 towards external noise.
1. Compute the Optimum DFE SNR Margin for PAM8 and PAM12 using solarsep_varlen7a.m for Models 1 and 3 using default cancellation parameters and -150dBm/Hz background noise.
2. Compute the input-referred RMS noise power at the slicer by integrating the residual noise in the Optimum DFE solution. I volunteer to add this code to solarsep_varlen7a.m unless someone else wants to do so.
3. Compute the input-referred external noise power that can be tolerated for a BER of 1E-12 for both systems using the results from (1) and (2) above. I volunteer to add this code to solarsep_varlen7a.m unless someone else wants to do so.