**<<THE PREVIOUS PAGE**

CDMA system capacity is known to be interference-limited since the same spectrum is shared by many users and there exists near-far problem due to multiple access interference (MAI). Multiuser receiver is highly regarded as one of the promising interference mitigation techniques improving spectrum efficiency and achieving high-data rate for wireless multimedia communication. It has been intensively investigated over the last two decades and received much attention for next-generation radio access network [Andrews 05, Wang 05]. Optimum multiuser receivers and conventional multiuser receivers are known to be able to solve the near-far problem at the knowledge of the signature information of all users [Verdu 98]. However this assumption isn't always consistent with practical situations where the receiver may only know the signatures of expected signals not interfering signals. Recent research work is mostly devoted to semiblind or blind multiuser receiver design and also signal signature estimation [Verdu 98, Madhow 98, Andrews 05]. It is known that most blind implementation of conventional multiuser receivers achieve the same performance as conventional multiuser receivers providing enough pilots or training available [Honig 95, Torlak 97, Wang 98, Zhang 02]. For example, with sufficient training on receiver, blind minimum mean squared error (MMSE) receiver is known to achieve the performance of conventional MMSE detector [Verdu 98]. If enough symbols are available for signal subspace separation or signal signature estimation, subspace-based blind multiuser receivers achieve the performance of various conventional multiuser detectors too [Wang 98]. As long as the signal structure of interference is stable during the signal detection, these blind multiuser receivers can work well with constant performance. They may not function well when the multiuser channel or system load experiences dynamic changes. However, this happens frequently in reality, especially when the channel coherence time is not large enough. Therefore it is important to design multiuser receiver that requires a limited number of previous symbols with better channel tracking capability and low implementation complexity. It is also interesting to understand how the number of employed previous symbols affect the performance of blind multiuser receivers and what are the tradeoffs between the complexity and the performance of blind multiuser receiver design.

In the development of advanced multiuser receivers, it is known that a proper received signal model can give a lot of help with multiuser receiver design in addition to the understanding of received signals. There are two most popular multiuser signal models which have extensively been discussed and employed for receiver design and performance analysis. They are the conventional multiuser signal model and the subspace-based multiuser signal model [Verdu 98, Wang 98]. In the conventional signal model, each received symbol is expressed as a linear combination of actual signal signatures with their amplitude and timing [Verdu 98, Honig 95, Zhang 02]. The theory of optimal multiuser receivers and the conventional receivers are well developed with this model [Verdu 98]. Most related blind multiuser receivers are also developed either by explicitly estimating the signal signature [Torlak 97] or by removing interfering signal components using adaptive filtering techniques, e.g., blind receiver design with Wiener [Honig 95] and Kalman filter [Zhang 02] techniques. Though the conventional signal model provides a natural view of received signals, most involved signature waveforms information is unknown in reality and it requires considerable processing to obtain them before detection. To compensate for the weakness of the conventional signal model, the subspace signal model was developed with the statistic signal spectral analysis techniques termed subspace-based signal processing [Wang 98]. Subspace-based signal processing techniques were previously developed for array signal processing since about 1970s [Schmidt 86, Hero 98]. The subspace signal model also is the result of parametric signal modelling, which provides an in-depth description of the received signals. In the multiuser subspace signal model, each received signal is taken as a linear combination of signal subspace bases, which are obtained by subspace analysis on the correlation matrices of the received signals. Though the subspace-based approach does not require explicit estimation of each user's signature waveform and the adaptivity speed can be improved with some subspace tracking techniques [Yang 95], the signal subspace formation procedure itself is not trivial.

On the other hand, for a better design of multiuser receivers, the evaluation and understanding of multiuser receiver is traditionally based on the link-level parameters like * asymptotic multiuser efficiency* (AME) and

**(NFR) in addition to**

*near-far resistance***(SINR) and**

*signal-to- interference/noise ratio***(BER) [Verdu 98]. These parameters show the capability of a multiuser receiver to reject various interference. Among them, One of the most important measurements is SINR and most other parameters can be derived from it. For example, the AME of a multiuser receiver is the ratio between the actual multiuser receiver output SINR and the corresponding single-user output signal-to-noise (SNR) in high SNR region. The AME shows how steep the slope of a multiuser is when its BER goes to zero in logarithmic scale. The best achievable AME value is 1, which means the receiver works exactly the same way as if there is no interference at all. The worst value is close to 0 when the outputs of a multiuser receiver are completely determined by interference. The NFR of a multiuser receiver is defined by the minimum AME over the received energies of all other users. It shows the receiver's ability to reject the worst-case interference. However, link-level evaluation usually depends on the actual employed receiver structure and the signature waveforms. Recently several large-system measurements are developed to evaluate multiuser receiver's behaviors in a system with large processing gain and lots of users [Tse 99]. In a large-scale system, one concept termed**

*bit-error rate***describes how the total received interference can actually be taken as a sum of other individual user's effective interference. Effective interference itself is independent to the particular realization of random signal signatures. Extended from the concept of effective interference,**

*effective interference***and**

*effective bandwidth***are the terms describing how the system resource, in terms of power and degree of freedom, are assigned to users for achieving their target SINRs. We will show that these parameters can also be derived from**

*user capacity***too. One interesting thing here is these large-system evaluations only depend on the power distribution, system load, target SINR and receiver design, not the actual employed signal signatures for each user. This make it easy for giving some insights of multiuser receiver behaviors in an actual wireless communication environment.**

*asymptotic SINR*

**REFERENCE**

[1] J. G. Andrews. Interference cancellation for cellular systems: A contemporary overview. *IEEE Wireless *

*communications*, pages 19–29, April 2005.

[2] S. Wang et al. Towards forward-link interference cancellation. In *CDMA Development Group (CDG) Tehnical Forum*, San

Francisco, CA, April 2006.

[3] S. Verdu. *Multiuser Detection*. Cambridge University Press, 1998.

[4] U. Madhow. Blind adaptive interference suppression for direct-sequence cdma. *Proceedings of the IEEE*, 86(10):2049–

2069, October 1998.

[5] M. Honig, U. Madhow and S. Verdu. Blind adaptive multiuser detection. *IEEE Trans. on Information Theory*, 41:944–

960, July 1995.

[6] M. Torlak and G. Xu. Blind multiuser channel estimation in asynchronous cdma systems. *IEEE Trans. on Signal *

*Processing*, 45:137–147, January 1997.

[7] X. Wang and H. V. Poor. Blind multiuser detection: A subspace approach. *IEEE Trans. on Information Theory*, 44:677-691, March 1998.

[8] X. Zhang and W. Wei. Blind adaptive multiuser detection based on kalman filtering. *IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing*.

[9] Schmidt R. Multiple emitter location and signal parameter estimation. *IEEE Trans. on AP*, 34(3):267–280, 1986.

[10] A. Hero, H. Messer. Highlights of statistical signal and array processing. *IEEE Signal Processing Magazine*, 15(5):21–64, September 1998.

[11] B. Yang. Projection approximation subspace tracking. *IEEE Trans. on Signal Processing*, 43:95–107, January 1995.

[12] D. N. C. Tse and S. V. Hanly. Linear multiuser receivers: Effective interference, effective bandwidth and user capacity.

*IEEE Trans. on Information Theory*, 45:641–657, March 1999.

[Globecom 2008: Analysis of A Novel Blind Multiuser Receiver Framework, New Orleans, LA]

[CDG Technology Forum 2006: Toward Forward-Link Interference Cancellation, San Francisco]

[WCNC 2006: Blind Multiuser Receiver Design in ISI Channels, Las Vegas, Nevada]

[3GPP2 AIE Ad hoc 2005: The Feasibility of Forward-Link Interference Cancellation, Maui, Hi]

[Globecom 2005: Blind Adaptive Multiuser Detection, St. Louis, Missouri]

[IEEE EIT 2005: Semi-Blind Adaptive Multiuser Detection For Asynchronous CDMA, Lincol, NE]

[WCNC 2003, Semi-Blind Decorrelating Multiuser Detection for Synchronous CDMA, Louisiana]

[ISWC 2002, On Soft Interference Cancellation for Synchronous CDMA, Victoria, BC, Canada]