Link 16 Preamble Detection With Selective Interference Mitigation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing Link 16 wireless communication networks face challenges in interference mitigation due to high demands on FPGA resources and potential degradation of performance when no interference is present, limiting the effectiveness of interference mitigation techniques.
Innovation Solution
Implementing interference mitigation in a Link 16 receiver by processing message symbols both with and without mitigation, using multiple Delay and Add pipelines for preamble detection, and giving precedence to unmitigated sums to maintain baseline performance without excessive additional FPGA resources.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Object-affected harmful factors
If interference mitigation techniques are applied to multiple frequency channels in Link 16 receivers, then interference protection capability is improved, but FPGA resource consumption increases excessively
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the 8 frequency channels into two groups: a first group of channels (e.g., 4 channels) receives interference mitigation processing, while a second group of channels does not receive interference mitigation processing. This segmentation allows the system to apply interference protection selectively to certain channels while conserving FPGA resources on other channels, thus resolving the contradiction between interference protection capability and FPGA resource consumption.
2Measurement precision
If interference mitigation is applied to all frequency channels, then interference detection accuracy is improved, but system performance degrades when no interference is present
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic selection of interference mitigation processing by channel group, allowing the system to adaptively adjust processing intensity based on interference conditions. The first group of channels undergoes interference mitigation while the second group does not, enabling the system to maintain high detection accuracy where needed while preserving stable performance in clean channels, thus resolving the contradiction between detection accuracy and performance stability.
3Device complexity
If selective interference mitigation is applied to only one frequency channel, then FPGA resource usage is reduced, but overall interference protection effectiveness is limited
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies different processing qualities to different channel groups: the first group of channels receives full interference mitigation processing (higher quality), while the second group receives no interference mitigation processing (standard quality). This local quality differentiation allows the system to optimize resource usage by applying enhanced protection only where most needed, rather than uniformly across all channels, thus resolving the contradiction between resource usage and protection effectiveness.
Data Source
AI summary
A method for implementing interference mitigation in wireless network such as a Link 16 network does not require interference recognition and does not degrade signal detection even in the absence of interference. An unmitigated correlation score is obtained by correlating received, unmitigated preamble symbols with expected symbols. At least one of the input signals is also correlated after mitigation to obtain a mitigated signal. A mitigated correlation sore is obtained from the mitigated signals, and a mixed correlation score is obtained by combining mitigated and unmitigated signals. A signal is detected if any of the correlation scores exceeds a corresponding threshold. Embodiments use the unmitigated correlation for subsequent message time of arrival determination if the unmitigated correlation score is above its detection threshold. In embodiments, mitigation is applied to only one of the message frequencies. Implementation of the disclosed method does not require excessive additional electronic resources.