A New Asymptotic Analysis Technique for
Diversity Receptions Over Correlated

arXiv:1707.08200v1 [] 28 May 2017

Lognormal Fading Channels
Bingcheng Zhu∗ , Julian Cheng† , Senior Member, IEEE, Jun Yan∗ , Jinyuan Wang∗ ,
Lenan Wu‡ and Yongjin Wang∗

Abstract
Prior asymptotic performance analyses are based on the series expansion of the moment-generating
function (MGF) or the probability density function (PDF) of channel coefficients. However, these
techniques fail for lognormal fading channels because the Taylor series of the PDF of a lognormal
random variable is zero at the origin and the MGF does not have an explicit form. Although lognormal
fading model has been widely applied in wireless communications and free-space optical communications, few analytical tools are available to provide elegant performance expressions for correlated
lognormal channels. In this work, we propose a novel framework to analyze the asymptotic outage
probabilities of selection combining (SC), equal-gain combining (EGC) and maximum-ratio combining
(MRC) over equally correlated lognormal fading channels. Based on these closed-form results, we
reveal the followings: i) the outage probability of EGC or MRC becomes an infinitely small quantity
compared to that of SC at large signal-to-noise ratio (SNR); ii) channel correlation can result in an infinite
performance loss at large SNR. More importantly, the analyses reveal insights into the long-standing
problem of performance analyses over correlated lognormal channels at high SNR, and circumvent the
time-consuming Monte Carlo simulation and numerical integration.
Index Terms
Communication channels, correlation, diversity methods, lognormal distributions.
Bingcheng Zhu, Jun Yan, Jinyuan Wang and Wang Yongjin are with Grünberg Research Centre, Nanjing University of Posts
and Telecommunications, Nanjing, China, (e-mails: {zbc,yanj,jywang,wangyj}@njupt.edu.cn). Julian Cheng is with the School

of Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada, (e-mail: julian.cheng@ubc.ca). Lenan Wu is with
the School of Information Science and Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China (e-mail: wuln@seu.edu.cn). This work
is supported by National Science Foundation of China (61322112, 61531166004); NUPTSF(NY216008); Young Elite Scientist
Sponsorship Program by CAST.

2

I. I NTRODUCTION
Diversity reception systems combine signals suffering different channel fading in order to
obtain a more reliable output signal [1]. The simplest diversity reception scheme is selection combining (SC) which selects the channel with the highest signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Maximumratio combining (MRC) is the optimal linear diversity reception technique that combines all of
the channels with the optimal weights, but such operation requires phase and fading amplitude
information of the channels. Equal-gain combining (EGC) combines the channels with equal
weights, and it usually provides performance close to MRC without requiring the amplitude
information.
Exact performance analyses of diversity receptions over Rayleigh, Rician and Nakagamim fading channels are relatively straightforward. Closed-form or single-fold-integral outage
probability expressions have been derived for independent channels [2, Chaps. 6, 9] [1, Chap.
7]. Existing works have also provided closed-form or single-fold-integral expressions for error
rates [3]–[6] and outage probabilities [6]–[8] for diversity receptions over correlated channels. In
contrast, performance analysis of diversity receptions over correlated lognormal fading channels
is much more challenging, which leads to (L−1)-fold nested integrals [9] where L is the number
of links, and these integrals are troublesome to be estimated using numerical methods. The time
complexity of numerical integration increases exponentially with the number of channels, thus it
is not practical to perform numerical integration when the number of receptions becomes large.
Even for the dual-branch cases, the exact outage probability expressions of SC over correlated
lognormal fading channels can only be simplified to a single-fold integral [10].
To circumvent the difficulty of the exact performance analyses and numerical estimation,
various approximation techniques have been proposed for the diversity systems over lognormal
fading channels. In [11]–[15], the authors approximated the probability density function (PDF)
of sum of lognormal random variables (RVs) using another lognormal RV by matching their
moments, and these techniques were widely applied in subsequent studies due to its simplicity
[16]–[18]. In [19]–[21], the authors applied the Gaussian-Hermite integration technique to numerically estimate the outage probability of MRC over lognormal fading channels. In [22]–[24],
the authors approximated the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of sum of lognormal in
a transformed domain. In [25], various ways of approximating the sum of lognormal RVs are
compared. However, all of the aforementioned approximation methods cannot provide reliable
estimation in high SNR region. Bounds on the CDF of sum of lognormal RVs were studied
in [10], [26], but these bounds cannot provide accurate outage probability estimation at large
SNR either. Some works rely on more complicated random variables to approximate the sum

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

3

of lognormal RVs, and determine the associated parameters using numerical methods [27]–[29].
However, these approximation techniques suffer larger time complexity and reveal few insights.
Asymptotic analysis is a kind of approximations that can provide accurate performance estimation in large SNR region. Over Rayleigh, Rician, Nakagami-m and most other fading
channels, closed-form asymptotic error rate and outage probability expressions of MRC, EGC
and SC have been obtained with arbitrary correlation structure [30]–[33]. Asymptotic outage
probability expressions have also been derived for free-space optical (FSO) communications
following Gamma-Gamma fading channels [34], [35]. Unfortunately, the classical asymptotic
analysis techniques in [30]–[35] fail to provide meaningful result due to the followings:
•

Moment-generating function (MGF) of lognormal PDF does not have a unified explicit
expression [10]. Therefore, all methods based on MGF fail to work with the lognormal
channels.

•

The Taylor series of the PDF of a lognormal RV is zero at the origin, and this results in
an infinite diversity order [36]. This implies that the asymptotic outage probability is zero,
which is a meaningless result because it cannot quantify the performance gap between two
systems with different branch number and correlation status.

•

CDF of a sum of lognormal RVs does not have a closed-form expression and it is challenging
to be accurately approximated at the origin.

Due to the above difficulties, few works studied the asymptotic outage probabilities of diversity
systems over lognormal fading channels. For EGC and MRC, the problem is equivalent to the
CDF left tail approximation of sum of lognormal RVs, and for SC the problem can be reduced to
the asymptotic approximation of multi-variate lognormal CDF. In [37], the authors used the CDF
tail of another lognormal RV to approximate the CDF tail of sum of independent lognormal RVs,
but it was subsequently proved in [38] that “any lognormal, reciprocal Gamma or log shifted
Gamma cannot be used to fit the left tail, under the independence hypothesis”. The authors in
[38] derived the approximation of the left tail of the PDF of sum of two correlated lognormal
RVs, but asymptotic CDF expression was not derived. In [39], the approximate CDF of the
sum of lognormal RVs was transformed into a quadratic optimization problem, which relies on
recursive algorithms. For lognormal fading channels, asymptotic performance expression is both
theoretically and practically important. This is because the diversity order of lognormal fading
channels is infinite [36], which results in a dramatic decrease in outage probability as SNR
increases, thus it can be unacceptably time-consuming to estimate the performance of diversity
systems using Monte Carlo simulation in large SNR region because it requires many channel
coefficient samples to reliably estimate the ultra-low outage probability (< 10−12 ).
July 27, 2017

DRAFT

4

Since it is challenging to perform exact analyses, accurate approximations and asymptotic
analyses for correlated lognormal channels, much fewer insights have been revealed for FSO
multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) links suffering weak turbulence-induced fading [40] and
wireless MIMO links suffering slow fading [9], [10], which hampers the system design.
In this work, a new theorem is developed to simplify the asymptotic analyses of lognormal
fading channels. Based on this theorem, we derive closed-form asymptotic outage probabilities
of SC, EGC and MRC over equally correlated lognormal fading channels. For SC, the derived
asymptotic outage probability is expressed using elementary functions. For EGC and MRC,
the derived asymptotic outage probabilities are expressed using Marcum-Q functions. Two
properties of lognormal fading channels are revealed: i) the outage probability of EGC or MRC
is an infinitely small quantity compared to the outage probability of SC as SNR approaches
infinity where the channel correlation coefficients are fixed. ii) Channel correlation will induce
infinite SNR loss at high SNR. Both properties are in sharp contrast with the other fading
channels (Rayleigh, Rician, Nakagami-m, Gamma-Gamma, etc.). Compared to the methods
in prior works [38], [39], the derivation in this work is much simpler and has an elegant
geometrical interpretation. Numerical results show that the proposed asymptotic expressions are
highly accurate in medium to high SNR region. More importantly, new insights into the longstanding problem are revealed, and one can efficiently evaluate the performance of a diversity
system over lognormal fading channels without resorting to the expensive Monte Carlo simulation
or numerical integration.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section II introduces the system model
including the channel model, the correlation model and the outage probability of diversity
receptions. In Section III, we propose a key theorem of the integrals of joint Gaussian PDF,
and the theorem is applied in Section IV to derive the asymptotic outage probability expressions
for SC. The asymptotic outage probabilities of EGC and MRC are derived in Section V. In
Section VI, we discuss the essential differences between lognormal fading channels and the
other fading channels, and compare the outage probabilities of SC, EGC and MRC. Numerical
results are presented in Section VII, and Section VIII draws some conclusions.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
A. Correlated Lognormal Fading Channels
h

We assume that the channel coefficients of the L links are c = eG1 , · · · , eGL

iT

, where

[G1 , · · · , GL ]T is a correlated Gaussian random vector, whose elements have identical mean µG

2
and variance σG
, and [·]T denotes the transpose operation. The equality between statistics of

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

5

links is valid in most FSO and wireless MIMO links. σG is known as the “dB spread” in mobile
2
radio environment and σG
is proportional to the Rytov variance in FSO communications. The

received signal vector is
y = cx + n

(1)

where x is a real-value signal; n is an L × 1 Gaussian random vector denoting the additive white

Gaussian noise and we assume E[nnT ] = IL without loss of generality, where IL is an L × L

identity matrix, and E[·] denotes the expectation.

After photoelectric conversion, the average received electrical power of the channels can be
2

calculated as Ēr = E[e2Gl ] = e2µG +2σG , ∀l = 1, · · · , L. The L correlated Gaussian RVs Gl ’s are
generated by L independent Gaussian RVs Xl ’s with the following relationship
























G1 = aX1 + X2 + · · · + XL
G2 = X1 + aX2 + · · · + XL

..
.

(2)

GL = X1 + X2 + · · · + aXL

2
where Xl ∼ N (µX , σX
), ∀l = 1, · · · , L, and a ∈ [1, ∞) is a parameter determining the

correlation coefficients of Gl ’s. According to (2), the parameters between Xl ’s and Gl ’s must

have the relationship µX =
as

µG
a+L−1

2
and σX
=

2
σG
.
a2 +L−1

According to (2), the correlation coefficient between Gm and Gn (m 6= n) can be calculated
ρ=

2a + L − 2
E [(Gn − µG ) (Gm − µG )]
.
= 2
2
σG
a +L−1

(3)

When a → ∞ we have ρ → 0 which corresponds to the independent channels, and when a = 1
we have ρ = 1 which implies that the channels are identical. There must exist at least one real

solution of a given a fixed ρ as
a=

1+

q

1 − ρ (ρ (L − 1) − L + 2)
ρ

(4)

because the discriminant of (3) is 4 (1 − ρ) + 4ρ (1 − ρ) (L − 1) > 0 for ρ ∈ [0, 1).
B. Diversity Receptions Over The Correlated Lognormal Fading Channels
SC selects the channel with the highest fading amplitude, and the instantaneous output SNR
can be expressed as
n

o

γSC = max e2Gl .
l

July 27, 2017

(5)

DRAFT

6

Outage occurs when γSC falls below a predetermined threshold γth . The outage probability of
SC can be calculated as


SC
(γth ) = Pr max {exp(Gl )} ≤
Pout
l

√











γth = Pr max exp aXl +


l



L
X

k=1,k6=l



Xk 


≤

√




γth .


(6)

EGC combines the L branches with equal weights, and the output SNR is
L
1 X
eGl
=
L l=1

γEGC

!2

(7)

and the outage probability of EGC is
EGC
Pout
(γth ) = Pr

L
X
l=1

exp (Gl ) ≤

!

q

Lγth =



L
X
Pr  exp aXl

L
X

+

l=1

k=1,k6=l



Xk  ≤

q



Lγth  .

(8)

MRC combines the L branches with the optimal weights, and the output SNR is
γM RC =

L
X

e2Gl

(9)

l=1

and the outage probability of MRC is
M RC
Pout
(γth ) = Pr

L
X
l=1

!

exp (2Gl ) ≤ γth =

 

L
X
Pr  exp 2 aXl

L
X

+

k=1,k6=l

l=1





Xk  ≤ γth  .

(10)

III. A U SEFUL T HEOREM F OR T HE A SYMPTOTIC A NALYSIS
Lemma: For the joint PDF of L independent Gaussian RVs


1
1
fx,iid (x) = q
exp − 2 |x − µ|2
2σ
(2π)L σ 2L



(11)

where x = [x1 , · · · , xL ]T , and µ = [µ1 , · · · , µL ]T , and σ 2 is the variance, and | · | denotes the

2-norm of a vector, the following equation holds
lim

|µ|→∞
∆

where dx = dx1 · · · dxL and
∆

(

R

fx,iid (x) dx

Ω1 (µ,x0 )

R

fx,iid (x) dx

=0

ω2 (x0 )

Ω1 (µ, x0 ) = x |x − µ| > |x0 − µ| +
where x0 = [x1,0 , · · · , xL,0 ]T and
∆

(

(12)

√

)

Lε + ε

)

ω2 (x0 ) = x |xl − xl,0 | ≤ ε, ∀l = 1, · · · , L
July 27, 2017

(13)

(14)

DRAFT

7

Fig. 1. A diagram illustrating the relationship between the regions ω2 (x0 ) and Ω1 (x0 ), and points x0 and µ in the lemma on
a two-dimensional plane, where |µ1 | < |µ2 | < |µ3 |.

where ε is an arbitrarily small positive constant.
Proof: see Appendix A.
The lemma in (12) essentially states that if the multi-variate independent Gaussian PDF is the
integrand, the integral in an arbitrarily small hypercube ω2 (x0 ) is a high order infinitely large
quantity compared to the integral outside the hyperspherical region centered at µ with radius
√
|x0 − µ| + Lε + ε. Figure 1 illustrates Ω1 (µ, x0 ) and ω2 (x0 ) on a two-dimensional plane.
Theorem: For L-variate independent Gaussian PDF in (11), the following equation holds
lim

R

fx,iid (x) dx

ω1 (µ,x0 )

|µ|→∞

R

fx,iid (x) dx

=0

(15)

Ω2 (x0 )

where ω1 (µ, x0 ) is any region with non-zero volume1 contained by
∆

(

Θ̄ (x0 , µ) = x |x − µ| > |x0 − µ|

)

(16)

and Ω2 (x0 , µ) is any region with non-zero volume contained by
∆

)

(

Θ (x0 , µ) = x |x − µ| < |x0 − µ| .

(17)

Proof: see Appendix B.
The theorem in (15) says that the integral over any region within the hypersphere Θ (x0 , µ)
is always an infinitely large quantity compared to the integral over any region outside Θ (x0 , µ)
1

The volume of an integral region fx (x) < 0 is

R

dx.

fx (x)<0

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

8

Fig. 2. A diagram illustrating the relationship between the sets (Θ̄ (x0 , µ), Θ (x0 , µ), Ω2 (x1 , µ), w1 (µ, x0 ), w2 (x0 ) and w2 (x1 ))
and points (x0 , x1 and µ) in the lemma on a two-dimensional plane.

0.02
0.01
0
-2

2
-1

1
0

0
1

x1

×10 -46

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-2

2
-1

1
0

0

-1
2

(a)

-2

1

x2

x1

fx,iid (x) in region Φ(x) ≤ 0

0.03

fx,iid (x) in region Φ(x) ≤ 0

fx,iid (x) in region Φ(x) ≤ 0

×10 -5

0.04

6
4
2

0
-2

2
-1

1
0

0

-1
2

-2

1

x2

(b)
∆

-1

x1

2

-2

x2

(c)

Fig. 3. Joint PDF fx,iid (x) in a region Φ(x) ≤ 0 where Φ (x) = exp (ax1 + x2 ) + exp (x1 + ax2 ) −

√

2γth . L = 2, a = 5,

σ = 1, γth = 1. (a) µ = [1, 1]T . (b) µ = [3, 3]T . (c) µ = [10, 10]T .

when |µ| → ∞. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between the involved regions in (15) on a

two-dimensional plane. As a result, to obtain the asymptotic value of an integral with Gaussian
integrand, it is valid to approximate the original integral region with its arbitrary subset as long
as the approximating region keeps the dominant term. As an intuitive example, Fig. 3 presents
fx,iid (x) in a region Φ(x) ≤ 0 on a two-dimensional plane with various mean vectors, where
√
∆
Φ (x) = exp (ax1 + x2 ) + exp (x1 + ax2 ) − 2γth . It can be observed that the region containing

dominant PDF values becomes smaller and smaller as |µ| grows.

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

9

IV. A SYMPTOTIC O UTAGE P ROBABILITY

OF

SC OVER C ORRELATED C HANNELS

Based on (6) and (11), by letting σ = σX and µ = µX = [µX , · · · , µX ]T , we obtain
SC
Pout

Z

(γth ) =




max exp axl +
l

axl +

P

P

xk

k6=l

Z

=

fx,iid (x)dx

xk <ln

√



√
< γth

1

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L

k6=l

q

2L
(2π)L σX

(18)

!

1
exp − 2 |x − µX |2 dx
2σX

and the integral region can be denoted as
∆






ΦSC (x) = max exp axl +
l




 √
xk  − γth


X
k6=l

≤ 0.

(19)

Unfortunately, it is challenging to simplify (18) further due to the nested integral region. However,
it can be implied by the theorem in (15) that it is valid to approximate the integral region in
(18) with its subset as long as the subset contains the dominant term. A necessary condition
for the approximating subset to contain the dominant term is that it must contain a continuous
set that contains or touches the nearest point to µX in ΦSC (x), which can be proved by the
theorem in (15) using the method of contradiction. Therefore, we hope to find a subset of the
integral region in (18) that satisfies the followings: i) contains the nearest point to µX ; ii) can be
arbitrarily small so that we can use Taylor series to simplify the Gaussian integrand; iii) results
in closed-form expression of the approximate integral.
According to the theorem in (15), eq. (18) has an asymptotic expression as
SC
Pout

(γth ) =
axl +

P

xk <ln

k6=l

√

Z

1

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L,|x−µX |<|x0 −µX |

q

2L
(2π)L σX

!

1
exp − 2 |x − µX |2 dx
2σX

+ o (· · · )

(20)

as long as the dominant term has a nonempty integral region where o(· · · ) denotes an infinitely

small quantities compared to the other summed terms when µX → ∞. It is proved in Appendix
ln

√

γ

ln

√

γ

th
th T
C that the nearest point to µX inside the integral region in (18) is xSC
nst = [ a+L−1 , · · · , a+L−1 ]

and

√
∆ ln γth
xSC
=
.
nst
a+L−1

We let the L × 1 vector x0 =

√
ln γth
[ a+L−1

ln

√

γ

th
− ε, · · · , a+L−1
− ε]T in (20) where

ε > 0, which ensures that the integral region of the dominant term in (20) contains x0 and has

nonzero volume, and we comment that the volume can be set arbitrarily small by adjusting ε,

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

10

axl + å xk < ( ln g th ) / 2
k ¹l

μX
x - μ X < x0 - μ X

x nst
x0

( ln g th ) / 2 - d < axl + å xk < ( ln g th ) / 2
k ¹l

Fig. 4. A diagram illustrating the relationship of the regions in (21).

which is shown in Fig. 4. It is proved in Appendix D that the integral region in (20) is contained
by another region, i.e.

⊂









x ln

x axl +

√

L
X

xk < ln

k=1,k6=l

√

γth , ∀l = 1, · · · , L, |x − µX | < |x0 − µX |

γth − L (a + L − 1) ε < axl +

L
X

xk < ln

k=1,k6=l

√

γth , ∀l = 1, · · · , L








(21)



when µX → ∞. Therefore, by replacing the integral region of the dominant term in (20) with

the larger region in (21), we obtain
SC
(γth ) =
Pout
ln

√

γth −δ<axl +

P

Z

xk <ln

1
√

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L

k6=l

q

2L
(2π)L σX

!

1
exp − 2 |x − µX |2 dx + o (· · · )
2σX
(22)

∆

where δ = L (a + L − 1) ε can be arbitrarily small when ε is sufficiently small. Note that the

integral regions in (20) and (22) are both subsets of the integral region in (18). Figure 4 illustrates
the relationship of the two regions in (21) on a two-dimensional plane.
In any small neighbourhood of xSC
nst , the integrand in (22) can be well approximated as
1
q

2L
(2π)L σX

!
!

1

L 
 
2
1 X
SC
+
x
−
µ
xl − xSC
exp − 2
X
nst
nst
2σX l=1

1


L  

 
2
1 X
SC
SC
SC
exp − 2
2 xl − xnst xnst − µX + xnst − µX + o(· · · )
2σX l=1

=q
2L
(2π)L σX
=q
2L
(2π)L σX
July 27, 2017

1
exp − 2 |x − µX |2
2σX

(23)
!

DRAFT

11

when |xl − xSC
nst | → 0, ∀l = 1, · · · , L. Substituting (23) into (22), we obtain
SC
Pout

×

ln

1

(γth ) = q
2L
(2π)L σX

√

γth −δ≤axl +

P

k6=l

Z

xk ≤ln

2
L 
exp − 2 xSC
nst − µX
2σX

√

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L

!

!

(24)

L 

xSC − µX X
xl − xSC
exp − nst 2
nst + o (· · · ) dx
σX
l=1

when δ → 0. Then we change the integrating variables xl ’s to gl ’s in (24) following the mapping
rule

g = Ax

(25)

where g = [g1 , · · · , gL ]T , x = [x1 , · · · , xL ]T and


A=













a 1

1



1 a

1

1 

1 1

..

..
.

.





.






1

1 1 ··· a

Based on (25), the integral in (24) can be simplified as

ln

≈

ln

√

√

γth −δ≤axl +

P

k6=l

Z

γth −δ≤gl ≤ln

√

Z

xk ≤ln

√

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L

γth ,∀l=1,··· ,L

!

∂x
∂g

!

L 

X
xSC
nst − µX
SC
x
−
x
+ o (· · · ) dx
exp −
l
nst
2
σX
l=1

L
xSC − µX X
xSC − µX SC
Lxnst
exp − 2 nst
gl + nst 2
σX (a + L − 1) l=1
σX

xSC − µX SC
= exp nst 2
Lxnst |A|−1
σX
when δ → 0, where

(26)

ln

√

Z

γth −δ≤gl ≤ln

√

γth ,∀l≤L

!

∂x
dg
∂g

(27)

!

L
xSC − µX X
exp − 2 nst
gl dg
σX (a + L − 1) l=1

= |A|−1 is the Jacobian determinant. Noting that the integrand and

integral region are symmetrical for all gl ’s, the integral in (27) can be further simplified to

ln

√




=

ln

Z

γth −δ≤gl ≤ln
√

lnZ γth

√

γth −δ

"

√

γth ,∀l≤L

!

L
xSC − µX X
exp − 2 nst
gl dg
σX (a + L − 1) l=1

!

L

σ 2 (a + L − 1)
− µX

g1 dg1  = − X SC
exp − 2
σX (a + L − 1)
xnst − µX

× exp −

xSC
nst

!

xSC
xSC
nst − µX
nst − µX
ln
γ
−
exp
−
th
2
2
2σX (a + L − 1)
σX (a + L − 1)

2
σX
(a + L − 1)
xSC
nst − µX
≈ −
exp
−
ln γth
2
xSC
2σX
(a + L − 1)
nst − µX
July 27, 2017

!L

ln γth
−δ
2

(28)
!!#L

!!L

DRAFT

12

when µX → ∞, where the last approximation is obtained by discarding the higher order term
involving δ. Substituting (28) into (27), we can simplify (24) and obtain


L

!2 



ln γth
σ 2 (a + L − 1) 
L
SC
 X
−
q
− µX  (29)
exp
Pout
(γth ) ≈
ln
γ
2
th
L 2L
2σ
2(a+L
−
1)
µ
−
X
X
|A| (2π) σX
2(a+L−1)
√
2
2
ln Ēr −σG
σG
2
when µX → ∞. Noting that µX = a+L−1
and σX
= a2 +L−1
, we can also express (29) using
1

the standard deviation σG and the transmit power Ēr as2
SC
Pout
(γth ) ≈

q

|A| (2π)


when Ēr → ∞.

2
σG
a2 + L − 1

1
L



!L 
2


ln

(a + L − 1)2

q

q

Ēr /γth −

2
σG

2 

2
 L (a + L − 1)  ln Ēr /γth − σG  
× exp −

2
2σG
a+L−1
2

L


(30)

When a → ∞, the correlation coefficient ρ → 0 according to (3), and the lognormal channels

become independent. In such case, eq. (30) specializes to
SC,i
Pout

L
σG

(γth ) ≈  q
L q
2
ln Ēr /γth − σG
(2π)L



q
L
2
exp − 2 ln Ēr /γth − σG
2σG

2 !

.

(31)

We can also use another simpler approach to obtain (31) as a verification to the proposed analysis
in the case of independent lognormal channels. The exact CDF of a lognormal RV c is known
as

ln x − µc
Fc (x) = 1 − Q
σc

!

µc − ln x
=Q
σc

!

(32)

where µc and σc2 are the mean and variance of the associated Gaussian RV. Based on (6) and
(32), the exact outage probability of SC over the independent lognormal channels is
 q

√ !
2
ln Ēr /γth − σG
SC,i
L µG − ln γth
L
.
Pout (γth ) = Q
=Q
σG
σG

(33)

Based on the well-known asymptotic approximation of Gaussian Q-function [41, eq. (4)]
1
x2
Q (x) ≈ √
exp −
2
2πx
when x → ∞, eq. (33) can be approximated as
SC,i
Pout

L
σG

(γth ) ≈  q
L q
2
ln Ēr /γth − σG
(2π)L

!

(34)



q
L
2
exp − 2 ln Ēr /γth − σG
2σG

2 !

(35)

which agrees with (31).
2

We keep some higher order small quantities to make the asymptotic expression converge faster.

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

13

V. A SYMPTOTIC O UTAGE P ROBABILITIES

EGC

OF

AND

MRC OVER C ORRELATED

C HANNELS
Based on (8), we can express the outage probability of EGC over equally correlated channels
as
EGC
Pout

Z

(γth ) =
L
P



exp axl +

l=1

fx,iid (x) dx

(36)



L
P

√
xk ≤ Lγth

k=1,k6=l

where we assume µ = µX . The integral region in (36) can be expressed as
∆

ΦEGC (x) =

L
X
l=1



exp axl +

L
X

k=1,k6=l

According to the theorem in (15), we obtain
Z

Z

fx,iid (x) dx =



xk  −

ΦEGC (x)≤0,|x−µX |<|

ΦEGC (x)≤0

xEGC
nst −ε−µX

q

|

Lγth ≤ 0.

(37)

fx,iid (x) dx + o(· · · )

(38)

for µX → ∞ where ε = [ε, · · · , ε]T and xEGC
is the nearest point to µX in the region
nst

Φ (x)EGC ≤ 0. Applying the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions, it can be shown that
xEGC
=
nst

h

1
a+L−1

ln

q



γth
L

1
, · · · , a+L−1
ln

q

γth
L

iT

, and the procedures are similar to those in

Appendix C. The integral region ΦEGC (x) ≤ 0 in (37) can be approximated by the following

hyperspherical region
∆

Φ̃EGC (x) =

L
X
l=1

1
xl −
ln
a+L−1

r



γth
(L − 1 + a)
−
L
(1 − a)2

!!2

√ !2
(L − 1 + a) L
−
≤0
(1 − a)2
(39)

where the approximation is valid because if we take x1 as a function of x2 , · · · , xL , for hyper-

surface ΦEGC (x) = 0 and Φ̃EGC (x) = 0, the first-order partial derivatives
at

xEGC
nst

are identical, and so do the second-order partial derivatives

∂x1
, ∀m
∂xm

∂ 2 x1
, ∀m, n
∂xm ∂xn

= 1, · · · , L

= 2, · · · , L.

The proof of the equalities of derivatives is in Appendix E. This implies that the two hypersurfaces ΦEGC (x) = 0 and Φ̃EGC (x) = 0 has arbitrarily small difference in a sufficiently small
neighbourhood of xEGC
nst . One can also regard the approximation as a generalization of the curve
approximation technique using a circle that has the same curvature. For L = 2, the reciprocal
of the radius of (39), i.e.

(1−a)2√
,
(L−1+a) L

is the curvature of the curve at xEGC
nst .

Therefore, according to the theorem in (15), eq. (38) can be approximated as
Z

ΦEGC (x)≤0

fx,iid (x) dx ≈

Z

Φ̃EGC (x)≤0,|x−µX |<|xEGC
nst −ε−µX |

fx,iid (x) dx ≈

Z

fx,iid (x) dx.

(40)

Φ̃EGC (x)≤0

when µX → ∞. An intuitive example for the approximation in (40) is shown Fig. 3, where

the integral region is ΦEGC (x) ≤ 0 for L = 2. Since the dominant term of the integrand is
July 27, 2017

DRAFT

14

condensed into a small region, we only need to accurately approximate the integral boundary
near the dominant term. Based on (39), the last integral in (40) can be expressed as
EGC
Pout
(γth ) ≈

= Pr

=


L
X


l=1

Z

fx,iid (x) dx

Φ̃EGC (x)≤0

1
ln
Xl −
a+L−1







L 
X
 Xl

Pr




l=1 |




where Yl ∼ N 



−

1
a+L−1

ln

q

r

γth
L

σX
{z





(L − 1 + a)
γth
−
L
(1 − a)2
−

(L−1+a)
(1−a)2

}

Yl

µX −



1
a+L−1

√

ln

γth
L

σX



−

(L−1+a)
(1−a)2







2






, 1.

L
P

≤

l=1

!!2

√ !2 
(L − 1 + a) L 

(1 − a)2
(41)

≤



√ !2 


(L − 1 + a) L 

(1 − a)2 σX







Yl2 follows the Lth-order noncentral chi-

squared distribution whose CDF can be expressed as Marcum-Q function defined as QM (a, b) =
∞
R
b

 M −1

x

x
a



exp − x

2 +a2

2



IM −1 (ax) dx where IM −1 (x) is the modified Bessel function of order

M − 1, thus we can simplify (41) as




µ −
√  X
EGC
Pout
(γth ) ≈ 1 − Q L  L 
2



1
a+L−1

ln

q

γth
L

σX



−

L−1+a
(1−a)2

√ 
L
(L
−
1
+
a)

 . (42)
,
2
(1 − a) σX



Equation (42) can also be expressed as a function of the average received power Ēr and the
standard deviation σG as




√ 
EGC

Pout
(γth ) ≈ 1 − Q L 
 L
2

ln

√



2
LĒ r /γth −σG
+ L−1+a
a+L−1
(1−a)2 
,

√ σG
a2 +L−1

√



(L − 1 + a) L 
.

G
(1 − a)2 √a2σ+L−1

(43)

When a → ∞, we obtain ρ → 0 according to (3), thus the channels become independent and
(43) becomes

EGC,i
Pout
(γth )

√  q
 √ !
L
L
2
ln LĒr /γth − σG
+1 ,
σG
σG

≈ 1 − QL
2

(44)

which agrees with the prior result in [42, eq. (14)].
According to (10), the associated integral region for MRC can be expressed as
∆

ΦM RC (x) =

L
X
l=1

 

exp 2 axl +

X
k6=l



xk  − γth ≤ 0

(45)

and using the same technique in Appendix E, the integral region to approximate ΦM RC (x) can
be derived as
∆

Φ̃M RC (x) =

L
X
l=1

July 27, 2017





(L − 1 + a)
γth
1
−
ln
xl −
a+L−1
L
(1 − a)2

!!2

√ !2
(L − 1 + a) L
−
≤ 0.
(1 − a)2
(46)

DRAFT

15

By comparing (8) and (10), it can be observed that the outage probability of MRC is also in
form of the CDF of sum of lognormal RVs like that of EGC. Therefore, noting that 2Xl ∼

2
N (2µX , 4σX
), ∀l = 1, · · · , L, we can obtain





2µ′ −
√  X
M RC
′
Pout (γth ) ≈ 1 − Q L  L 
2



1
a+L−1

2
′2
′
by letting σX
= 4σX
, µX = 2µ′X and γth
=

ln



′
γth
L

′
2σX

√



−

L−1+a
(1−a)2

√ 
 (L − 1 + a) L 

,
′
(1 − a)2 2σX



(47)

Lγth in (42). Equation (47) can also be expressed

as a function of Ēr as
M RC
Pout
(γth ) ≈ 1 − Q L
2







2
ln(LĒ r /γth )−2σG
+ L−1+a
√ 
a+L−1
(1−a)2 
,
 L
σ



G
2 √a2 +L−1

√



(L − 1 + a) L 
.

G
(1 − a)2 √a22σ+L−1

Taking a → ∞, we obtain the MRC outage probability for independent channels as
√ !
√


L 
L
M RC,i
2
ln LĒr /γth − 2σG
+1 ,
Pout
(γth ) ≈ 1 − Q L
2
2σG
2σG

(48)

(49)

which agrees with the prior result in [42, eq. (16)].
VI. D ISCUSSION O N T HE A SYMPTOTIC O UTAGE P ROBABILITIES
A. Comparison Between Lognormal Fading Channels and Other Channels
For most fading channels, such as Rayleigh, Rician, Nakagami-m, Weibull, α-µ, GammaGamma, Negative-exponential etc., the asymptotic outage probability can be expressed as [30]


Pout (γth ) ≈ Oc Ēr

−Od

(50)

where Oc and Od are, respectively, known as the coding gain and the diversity order. Taking
logarithm operation on both sides of (50), we obtain
lg Pout (γth ) = − Od lg (Oc ) −


Od 
10 lg Ēr
10

(51)

where 10 lg Ēr is the average received power in dB. Equation (51) illustrates that on logarithmic
coordinates the outage probability has a straight asymptote whose slope is determined by Od
and the horizontal shift is determined by Oc . For a diversity reception system, prior works [32],
[33], [43] proved that channel correlation and the combining schemes (MRC, SC and EGC) only
influence Oc for the channels with finite diversity orders.
Taking the same logarithm operation on (30), we can obtain


SC
SC
lg Pout
(γth ) = lg Oc,ln
− L lg ln

where

2L
SC ∆ (a+L−1)
Oc,ln
= √ L
|A| (2π)

July 27, 2017



2
σG
a2 +L−1

L
2



q



q

2
SC
2
Ēr /γth − σG
− Od,ln
ln Ēr /γth − σG

2

(52)

2
∆ lg(e)L(a +L−1)
2 (a+L−1)2 .
2σG

SC
and Od,ln
=

DRAFT

16

It can be observed from (52) that the asymptote of the outage probability of SC is not a
SC
straight line on logarithmic coordinates. Similar to that in (51), the first term Oc,ln
determines

the shift of the asymptote, which is related to the correlation coefficient ρ, branch number L and
2
2
the variance σG
. The second term in (52) is related to L, σG
, γth and Ēr , and the double-fold

logarithm operation lg ln(·) greatly suppresses the increase of Ēr , thus the second term will not
induce significant drop in outage probability as Ēr increases. For example, lg ln(105) = 1.06
and lg ln(1015 ) = 1.53. In contrast, the third term in (52) is a second-order polynomial of ln Ēr ,
which will introduce dramatic decrease in the outage probability when Ēr increases. For example,
SC
ln(101 )2 = 5.3019 and ln(102 )2 = 21.2076. The scale Od,ln
of the second-order polynomial will

dominantly determine the dropping speed of the outage probability. If an SC system has higher
SC
Od,ln
than the other SC systems, it will inevitably have lower outage probability when the signal
SC
power is sufficiently large. More importantly, since Od,ln
is a function of a, or the correlation

coefficient ρ, the decreasing speed of the asymptote of the outage probability is related to ρ. In
contrast, the slope of the asymptote is fixed for the other channels with finite diversity order for
different correlation status.
For EGC and MRC, the asymptotic outage probabilities are expressed using Marcum-Q
function in (43) and (48), and it is not straightforward to perform a similar expansion as we did in
(52). However, in [44], the authors proved the property of log-concavity of function 1 − Qv (p, q)
EGC
M RC
with respect to p, which leads to the conclusion that lg Pout
(γth ) and lg Pout
(γth ) are both

log-concave with respect to ln Ēr , or 10 lg Ēr (the average branch SNR in dB) according to
(43) and (48). This result predicts that there is no straight asymptote for the outage probabilities
of MRC and EGC over lognormal fading channels on logarithmic coordinates, and the outage
probabilities drop dramatically fast in high SNR region. Besides, eqs. (43) and (48) both show
that ln Ēr is scaled by a factor related to a, L and σX , which illustrates that the dropping speed
of the outage probabilities is related to the correlation coefficient ρ, branch number L and σG .
In contrast, the diversity orders of MRC, EGC and SC over Rayleigh, Rician and Nakagami-m
channels are not related to the channel correlation in large SNR region [30], [31], [33].
B. Comparison Between SC, MRC And EGC
The theorem in (15) reveals that the asymptotic outage probability is determined by the nearest
point to µX in the integral region. The integrands of the outage probabilities for SC, MRC
and EGC are fx,iid (x). The integral regions of SC and EGC are shown, respectively, in (19)
and (37). Figure 5 shows the relationship between the regions Φ̃EGC (x) ≤ 0, ΦEGC (x) = 0,

Φ̃M RC (x) ≤ 0, ΦM RC (x) = 0 and ΦSC (x) = 0 on a two-dimensional plane. In Appendix C, it
July 27, 2017

DRAFT

17

Fig. 5. Integral regions Φ̃EGC (x) ≤ 0, Φ̃M RC (x) ≤ 0, ΦSC (x) ≤ 0, ΦEGC (x) ≤ 0 and ΦM RC (x) ≤ 0 on a two-dimensional
P
√
plane. The asymptotes for the boundary ΦM RC (x) = 0 are axl +
xk = ln γth , ∀l = 1, · · · , L. The asymptotes for the
k6
=
l
P
√
boundary ΦEGC (x) = 0 are axl +
xk = ln Lγth , ∀l = 1, · · · , L. The nearest points for regions ΦEGC (x) ≤ 0 and
k6=l

ΦM RC (x) ≤ 0 are identical.

has been proved that the nearest point to µX in ΦSC (x) ≤ 0 is xSC
nst =

h

√
ln γth
,···
a+L−1

ln

√
γ

th
, a+L−1

ΦEGC (γth ) ≤ 0 and ΦM RC (γth ) ≤ 0, the nearest points to µX can be proved to be
√
√ #T
" √
√
ln γth − ln L
ln γth − ln L
EGC
M RC
,··· ,
xnst = xnst =
a+L−1
a+L−1

iT

. In

(53)

SC
which is based on the KKT conditions applied in Appendix C. If we make x0 = (xEGC
nst +xnst )/2,

we can obtain
|x0 − µX | =

√

L µX −

ln

− µX =

√

and
xSC
nst

− µX =

L µX −

√

(54)

√ !
γth − ln L
a+L−1

(55)

γth − 12 ln
a+L−1

when µX → ∞. Besides, it can also be calculated that
xEGC
nst

√ !
L

√

ln

√

!
√
ln γth
.
L µX −
a+L−1

(56)

Equations (54), (55) and (56) show
M RC
− µX > |x0 − µX | > xSC
xEGC
nst − µX
nst − µX = xnst

July 27, 2017

(57)

DRAFT

18

10 -1
Asym. PEGC
out

10

Sim. P EGC
out

-2

Asym. PMRC
out
Sim. P MRC
out

Outage Probability

10 -3

Asym. PSC

out

10

Sim. P SC

-4

out

10 -5

10

ρ=0.9

-6

ρ=0.1

10 -7

ρ=0.5
10

-8

5

10

15

20

25

30

Average SNR Over Each Branch (dB)

Fig. 6. Outage probabilities of dual-branch MRC, EGC, SC over independent lognormal fading channels and the outage
probability of a single-branch link. σG = 0.8; γth = 0.1W; ρ = 0.1, 0.5, 0.9. “Asym.” is short for “Asymptotic” and “Sim.” is
short for “Simulation”. The two double-arrow line segments have identical length.

when µX → ∞. Based on (57) and the theorem in (15), we obtain
Z

ΦEGC (γth )≤0





fx,iid (x) dx = o 



Z

ΦSC (γth )≤0,|x−x0 |<|µX −x0 |





Z



fx,iid (x) dx = o 

ΦSC (γth )≤0




fx,iid (x) dx

(58)

when µX → ∞, where the first equality holds because the integral region on the right-hand

side is within the region |x − x0 | < |µX − x0 |, and ΦEGC (γth ) ≤ 0 is outside the region
|x − x0 | < |µX − x0 |. Similarly, we can obtain
Z

ΦM RC (γth )≤0




fx,iid (x) dx = o 

Z

ΦSC (γth )≤0




fx,iid (x) dx

(59)

when µX → ∞. Equations (58) and (59) reveal that the performance gap between SC and EGC

(or MRC) will become infinite when µX (or Ēr ) is sufficiently large. In contrast, for the other

fading channels with finite diversity orders, the performance gaps between different combining
schemes are fixed in high SNR region [30], [31], [33], [43].
VII. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
Figure 6 shows the outage probabilities of SC, EGC and MRC over lognormal channels with
different correlation coefficients. It can be observed that the simulated outage probability values
converge to the asymptotic outage probability for different correlation coefficients. Besides, the

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

19

10 0
EGC
out
EGC
out
MRC
Asym. P
out
MRC
Sim. P out
SC
Asym. P
out
Sim. P SC
out

Asym. P
Sim. P

Outage Probability

10 -2

10 -4
σ G =1.1
10 -6

σ G =0.7
10

σ G =0.9

-8

0

5

10
15
20
Average SNR Over Each Branch (dB)

25

30

Fig. 7. Outage probabilities of SC, EGC and MRC over correlated lognormal fading channels. The correlation coefficients are
ρ = 0.2; σG = 0.7, 0.9, 1.1; γth = 0.1W; L = 3.

performance gap between strongly and weakly correlated channels increases with the transmit
power, and this is in sharp contrast with the other channels (Rayleigh, Rician, Nakagami-m,
etc.) for which the performance gap over weakly and strongly correlated channels approaches a
fixed value in large SNR region. This result agrees with our analyses in (52) that the dropping
speed of the asymptote of outage probability at a large SNR value is determined by the value
Od,ln which is related to the correlation coefficient ρ, and it also agrees with the analyses in
(43) and (48) which show that ρ contributes a scaler of ln Ēr and influences the slope at high
SNR. Another conclusion that can be drawn from Fig. 6 is that the outage probabilities of
SC, EGC and MRC over lognormal fading channels do not have a straight asymptote; instead,
the slope of the asymptote decreases to −∞ when Ēr → ∞. This observation verifies the

prediction in Section VI-A. In Fig. 6, the two double-arrow line segments have the same length,
which reveals that the performance gap between SC and MRC (or EGC) increases with Ēr ,

and this agrees with our discussion in Section VI-B. The converging speed of the asymptotic
expressions for EGC and MRC is observed to be much faster than that of SC, and this is because
the derivation process for SC was based on the approximation of both integral region and the
integrand, while the derivation processes for EGC and MRC were based on the approximation
the integral region. Besides, it can also be observed that when ρ = 0.9, which implies that the
channels are highly correlated, the performance gap between EGC and MRC is negligible. This
comply with the intuition that the weights of MRC for combined branches tend to be identical
for strongly correlated channels, and MRC is equivalent to EGC when ρ = 1.

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

20

Asym. PEGC

10 -1

out

Sim. P EGC

out
MRC
Asym. Pout
MRC
Sim. P
out
SC
Asym. Pout
SC
Sim. P out

10 -2

Outage Probability

10 -3

L=2

10 -4

10 -5
10 -6
L=3
10 -7
L=4
10 -8
10

15

20
25
30
Average SNR Over Each Branch (dB)

35

Fig. 8. Outage probabilities of dual-branch SC, EGC and MRC over correlated lognormal channels. The parameters are σG = 1.2,
γth = 0.1W, ρ = 0.1 and L = 2, 3, 4.

Figure 7 compares the outage probabilities of SC, EGC and MRC over lognormal fading
channels with different σG ’s. It can be observed again that the asymptotic outage probabilities
well approximate the exact outage probabilities in large SNR region. Figure 7 also reveals
that the slopes of the asymptotes at a large SNR value are highly related to σG . For radiofrequency communications where the lognormal parameter σG describes the severity of largescale fading, this result reveals that the outage probability performance becomes much worse
when the obstacles are in large number. For FSO systems, this result reveals that a longer link
distance, which results in a larger Rytov variance, will cause significant performance degradation.
We comment that it requires tens of hours to obtain the simulated results while calculating the
asymptotic outage probabilities costs less than 0.1 second.
Figure 8 compares the outage probabilities of SC, EGC and MRC over lognormal fading
channels with different branch number. It can be observed again that the asymptotic outage
probabilities well match the exact outage probabilities. Besides, Fig. 8 shows that the performance gaps for different diversity schemes increase with the branch number. For example, the
performance gap between SC and MRC is 5dB for L = 4 when the outage probability is 10−7 ,
and the performance gap decreases to 3.5dB for L = 3. Besides, the performance gap between
M RC
EGC and MRC is quite close for different L values, and this is because xEGC
nst = xnst , which

determines the dominant term of the integral of the outage probability.
By observing (8), it can be observed that the asymptotic outage probability for EGC is
√
essentially the CDF of sum of lognormal RVs at Lγth . Therefore, we can reform (43) and

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

21

10 0

FY (y)

10 -2

σ 2G =0.9

10 -4

10 -6

Numerical integration
Left tail approximation
Fenton approximation
Wilkinson approximation
The proposed approximation

σ 2G =0.6

10 -8
-1

-0.5

0

0.5

lg(y)

Fig. 9. CDF of Y = exp(G1 ) + exp(G2 ) and its approximations, where G1 and G2 are independent Gaussian RVs that have
2
2
identical mean µ and variance σG
. The parameters are µ = 0, σG
= 0.3, 0.6. The exact CDF of sum of lognormal RVs is

obtained using numerical integration. Wilkinson, Fenton and left tail approximations are, respectively, based on [11], [12] and
[37].

obtain the CDF of sum of correlated lognormal RVs as
FY (y) = Pr

(

L
X
l=1

)



√

 ln L+µ

exp (Gl ) ≤ y ≈ 1 − Q L  L 
2

G −ln y
+ L−1+a
a+L−1
(1−a)2
√ σG
a2 +L−1

√ 
L
(L
−
1
+
a)
,
.
2
σ
G
(1 − a) √a2 +L−1


Similarly, based on (44), we obtain the CDF of sum of independent lognormal RVs as
√ !
√
L
L
(ln L + µG − ln y + 1) ,
.
FY (y) ≈ 1 − Q L
2
σG
σG

(60)

(61)

Figure 9 compares the tightness of (61) with some existing approximations on sum of lognormal
RVs. All of these considered approximations are based on closed-form formulas and can provide
results in one millisecond. It can be observed that Wilkinson, Fenton and left tail approximations
cannot accurately evaluate the left tail of the CDF. In contrast, the proposed approximation
scheme is accurate in a large range of argument.
VIII. C ONCLUSIONS
Asymptotic outage probability expressions of SC, EGC and MRC over equally correlated
lognormal fading channels were derived. A theorem was developed to greatly simplify the
performance analyses. Based on the derived closed-form expressions, we revealed some unique
properties of diversity receptions over correlated lognormal fading channels. For example, the

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

22

decreasing speed of outage probabilities was proved to be a function of the correlation coefficients; the outage probability ratio between SC and EGC (or MRC) becomes infinitely large
in high SNR region. More importantly, the derivation process and the asymptotic expressions
reveal insights into this long-standing problem, making it possible to evaluate outage probability
of the diversity reception systems without resorting to time-consuming Monte Carlo simulation
or multi-fold numerical integration.
A PPENDIX A
This section proves the lemma in (12).
Proof. Noting that |x − µ| /σ follows chi distribution whose CDF can be expressed using incomplete Gamma function, we obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx =

Ω1 (µ,x0 )



1
L
Γ ,
=
Γ (L/2)
2



Z

√

2σ 2

exp −

(2π)L σ 2L

√
|x−µ|>|x0 −µ|+ Lε+ε

|x0 − µ| +



1
q



1
|x − µ|2 dx
2σ 2
(62)

2 

Lε + ε 


R∞

where Γ (·, ·) is the incomplete gamma function defined as Γ(s, x) =

x

ts−1 e−t dt. Based on

[45, eq. (8.357)], we expand the incomplete gamma function in (62) and obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx=

Ω1 (µ,x0 )



M −1
X
×

 m=0

√

2σ2

2  L2 −1

1  |x0 − µ| + Lε + ε 


Γ (L/2)
2σ 2


(−1)m Γ 1 −

(|x0 −µ|+

√



L
2

!m
2

Lε+ε)



+m


Γ 1−

L
2

 
 |x0

+
O



− µ| +




exp −

√



Lε + ε

2σ 2

|x0 − µ| +

√

2σ 2

2

−M





x→a

Lε + ε 







where O(·) is the big O notation; for two functions f (x) and g(x), if lim sup

2 


(63)
f (x)
g(x)

f (x) = O(g(x)).

< ∞, then

For the integral in the denominator of (12), we have
Z

ω2 (x0 )

fx,iid (x) dx=

Z

1

|xl −xl,0 |≤ε,∀l=1···L

q

(2π)L σ 2L

In the region |xl − xl,0 | ≤ ε, ∀l = 1 · · · L, we can obtain
|x − x0 | ≤
July 27, 2017

√

Lε.





1
exp − 2 |x − µ|2 dx.
2σ

L
P

l=1

(64)

|xl − xl,0 |2 ≤ Lε2 , thus
(65)

DRAFT

23

By applying the triangle inequality, we obtain
|x − µ| = |x − x0 + x0 − µ| ≤ |x − x0 | + |x0 − µ| ≤ |x0 − µ| +

√

Lε

(66)

in the region |xl − xl,0 | ≤ ε, ∀l = 1 · · · L, where the last inequality is based on (65). Therefore,

we can substitute (66) into (64) and obtain
Z

Z

fx,iid (x) dx >



1

exp −

q

(2π)L σ 2L
|xl −xl,0 |≤ε,∀l=1···L


√
1
1
=q
(2ε)L exp − 2 (|x0 − µ| + Lε)2
2σ
(2π)L σ 2L

ω2 (x0 )

√ 2
1 
dx
|x
−
µ|
+
Lε
0
2σ 2


(67)

where the factor “(2ε)L ” in the last equality is the volume of the integral region. The ratio
between (63) and (67) satisfies
R

Ω1 (µ,x0 )

R

(|x0 −µ|+

1
Γ(L/2)

fx,iid (x) dx

2σ2

<

fx,iid (x) dx

√

ω2 (x0 )



M −1
X
×

 m=0



(−1)m Γ 1 −

(|x0 −µ|+

√

1
(2π)L σ

L
+m
2
!
m 
2

Lε+ε)

2σ2

√



Γ 1−

L
2

2

Lε+ε)

! L −1
2



− 2σ12

√



|x0 − µ| + Lε + ε

√
L exp − 1 (|x − µ| +
2
(2ε)
Lε)
0
2σ2
2L
exp


 
 |x0

+
O



− µ| +

√

Lε + ε

2σ 2

2

−M











2 

(68)


√
1  2
= Ψ (|x0 − µ|) exp − 2 ε +2ε(|x0 − µ| + Lε)
2σ
where Ψ (x) is a polynomial of x of finite order. As |µ| → ∞, |x0 − µ| > |µ| − |x0 | → ∞, and


the exponential term is a high order infinitely small quantity, and its order is higher than any
polynomial, thus we obtain (12).
A PPENDIX B
This is the proof to the theorem in (15).
Proof. Since ω1 (µ, x0 ) ⊂ Θ̄ (x0 , µ), we obtain
n

ω1 (µ, x0 ) ⊂ Ω1 (µ, x0 ) = x |x − µ| > |x0 − µ| +

√

Lε + ε

o

(69)

as long as ε is sufficiently small. Therefore, we can obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx <

ω1 (µ,x0 )

Z

fx,iid (x) dx

(70)

Ω1 (µ,x0 )

for small ε. For x1 ∈ Ω2 (x0 , µ), we obtain
ω2 (x1 ) ⊂ Ω2 (x0 , µ)
July 27, 2017

(71)

DRAFT

24

if ε is sufficiently small, where ω2 (x1 ) is an arbitrarily small region defined in the lemma
in (12). According to x1 ∈ Ω2 (x0 ) ⊂ Θ (x0 , µ) and the definition of Θ (x0 , µ), we obtain
|x1 − µ| < |x0 − µ| which leads to

fx,iid (x0 ) < fx,iid (x1 ) .

(72)

Furthermore, noting that ω2 (x0 ) and ω2 (x1 ) are small regions when ε is small, we can expand
fx,iid (x) using Taylor series and obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx =

ω2 (x0 )

Z

fx,iid (x0 ) + o (fx,iid (x0 )) dx = (2ε)K fx,iid (x0 ) + o εK

Z

fx,iid (x) dx = (2ε)K fx,iid (x1 ) + o εK .



ω2 (x0 )



(73)

and similarly


ω2 (x1 )



(74)

According to (72), (73) and (74), we obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx >

ω2 (x1 )

Z

fx,iid (x) dx.

(75)

Z

fx,iid (x) dx.

(76)

ω2 (x0 )

Based on (71) and (75), we obtain
Z

fx,iid (x) dx >

Ω2 (x0 )

ω2 (x0 )

According to (70), (76) and the lemma in (12), we obtain (15).
A PPENDIX C
This section calculates the nearest point to µX inside the integral region ΦSC (x) ≤ 0.

The objective function is the square of the distance between x and µX , which is shown as
d2 (x, µX ) =

L
X
l=1

(xl − µX )2

(77)

and the constraint is the integral region in (18), which can be rewritten as

P
√


xk − ln γth ≤ 0

 ax1 +













k6=1

..
.

axL +

P

k6=L

xk − ln

√

(78)

γth ≤ 0.

The KKT conditions for the minimizer is [46]
2

∇d(x, µ) =

July 27, 2017

L
X
l=1



λl ∇ axl +

X
k6=l

xk − ln

√



γth 

(79)

DRAFT

25

where λl s are the KKT multipliers. Equation (79) can be simplified to
2 (xl − µX ) = λl a + λl (L − 1) , ∀l = 1, · · · , L.

(80)

Assuming the L constraints in (78) are all active, the “≤” signs in (78) become “=”. Together
with the L equations in (80), we can find the minimizers as
xSC
nst = [
and λl s as λ1 = λ2 = · · · = λL =

ln γth
ln γth
,··· ,
]
2(a + L − 1)
2(a + L − 1)

(81)

2(xnst −µX )
.
a+L−1

A PPENDIX D
This is a proof to (21).
Proof. For two integral regions Φ1 = ( x| f (x) < 0) and Φ2 = ( x| g (x) < 0), if f (x) < 0 ⇒
g (x) < 0, then Φ1 ⊂ Φ2 , where “⇒” denotes “results in”. Therefore, we need to prove


























ax1 +
..
.
axL +

L
P

k=1,k6=1

L
P

xk < ln

k=1,k6=L

√

xk < ln

γth

√

γth

|x − µX | < |x0 − µX |











ln

.
⇒  ..








ln

√

√

γth − L (a + L − 1) ε < ax1 +

γth − L (a + L − 1) ε < axL +

L
P

k=1,k6=1

L
P

xk < ln

k=1,k6=L

√

xk < ln

γth

√

γth

(82)

which is rewritten from (21).
The inequality |x − µX | < |x0 − µX | on the left-hand side of (82) can be rewritten as
L
X
l=1

2

(xl − µX ) <

L
X
l=1

ln γth
− ε − µX
2(a + L − 1)

!2

.

(83)

Expanding the squared terms and cancelling µ2X on both sides, we obtain
L
X

ln γth
x2l − 2xl µX < L
2(a + L − 1)
l=1

!2

!

L
X

ln γth
− ε µX .
−
2
2(a + L − 1)
l=1

(84)

By discarding x2l on the left-hand side of (84), we obtain
L
X

ln γth
−2xl µX < L
2(a + L − 1)
l=1

As µX → ∞, eq. (85) leads to

L
X

!2

!

ln γth
− ε µX .
− 2L
2(a + L − 1)
!

ln γth
−ε .
xl > L
2(a + L − 1)
l=1

July 27, 2017

(85)

(86)

DRAFT

26

Noting that (86) was derived from |x − µX | < |x0 − µX |, we can combine (86) with the first
L − 1 inequalities on the left-hand side of (82) and obtain















ax1 +
..
.

L
P

k=1,k6=1

xk < ln

√

γth
(87)

L
P
√



ax
+
xk < ln γth

L−1


k=1,k6=L−1





L

P

ln γth

−ε .
xl > L 2(a+L−1)

l=1

Summing the first L − 1 inequalities in (87) and multiplying both sides by −1, we obtain






− (a + L − 2)

L
P





l=1



xl > L

L−1
P
l=1

xl − (L − 1) xL > − L−1
ln γth
2

ln γth
2(a+L−1)

(88)



−ε .

Multiplying the two sides of the first inequality in (88) by (a + L − 1)−1 and adding the resulted
inequality to the second inequality in (88), after simplification, we obtain
L−1
X

xl + axL > ln

l=1

√

γth − L (a + L − 1) ε.

(89)

Noting that (87) is symmetrical for xl ’s, with similar procedures from (87) to (88), we can obtain
L
X

xk + axl > ln

√

k=1,k6=l

γth − L (a + L − 1) ε, ∀l = 1, · · · , L.

(90)

Combining (90) and the first L inequalities in the left-hand side of (82), we obtain the right-hand
side of (82).
A PPENDIX E
In this appendix, we prove that for the two hypersurfaces ΦEGC (x) = 0 and Φ̃EGC (x) = 0,
the first-order derivatives

∂x1
’s
∂xm

are identical at xnst , and the second-order derivatives

∂x21
∂xm ∂xn

are

also identical at xnst , where x1 is regarded as a function of xm ’s and m, n = 2, · · · , L.
Proof. By taking the partial derivatives of both sides of
ΦEGC (x) =

L
X
l=1

in terms of xm , we can obtain
exp ax1 +

L
X

k=2

xk

!



exp axl +

L
X

k=1,l6=k



xk  −

q

Lγth = 0



!



L
L
X
X
∂x1
∂x1

+
1
+
+1
exp
axl +
xk 
a
∂xm
∂x
m
l=2,m6=l
k=1,l6=k



L
X



∂x1
+ exp axm +
xk  a +
∂xm
k=1,k6=m

July 27, 2017

(91)

!

!

(92)

= 0.

DRAFT

27

Substituting x2 = x3 = · · · = xL = xEGC
into (92) and after some simplification, we obtain
nst
∂x1
= −1.
∂xm

(93)

Taking partial derivatives of both sides of (92) in terms of xn , we obtain
"

exp ax1 +

L
X

xk

k=2





!

!

∂x1
a
+1
∂xn





!

!

L
X
∂x1
∂ 2 x1
a
+ 1 + exp ax1 +
xk a
∂xm
∂xm ∂xn
k=2



!



#


L
L
X
X
∂x1
∂ 2 x1 
∂ 

exp axl +
+ 1 + exp axl +
xk 
xk 
+
∂xm
∂xm ∂xn
k=1,l6=k
k=1,l6=k
l=2,m6=l ∂xn



+

L
X





L
X



∂ 
∂x1
exp axm +
xk  a +
∂xn
∂xm
k=1,k6=m

!



+ exp axm +

Substituting m = n, x2 = x3 = · · · = xL = xEGC
and
nst

∂x1
∂xm

=

∂x1
∂xn

2(a − 1)2
∂ 2 x1
=−
.
∂x2m
(L − 1 + a)

When m 6= n, we substitute x2 = x3 = · · · = xL = xEGC
and
nst

obtain

L
X

k=1,k6=m



xk 

2



∂ x1 
= 0.
∂xm ∂xn

(94)

= −1 into (94), we obtain
(95)

∂x1
∂xm

=

∂x1
∂xn

= −1 into (94) and

(1 − a)2
∂ 2 x1
=−
.
∂xm ∂xn
(L − 1 + a)

(96)

Following a similar procedure, it is straightforward to show that for the hypersurface Φ̃EGC (x) =
0, the first and second order derivatives are
derivatives in (93) for ΦEGC (x) and
2





∂x1
∂xm

= −1 which are identical to the first-order
2

(1−a)
, m 6= n
− (L−1+a)

∂ x1
=
2
∂xm ∂xn 
 − 2(1−a) , m = n
(L−1+a)

(97)

which are identical to the second-order derivatives in (95) and (96) for ΦEGC (x) = 0.
R EFERENCES
[1] A. Goldsmith, Wireless Communications.

New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

[2] M. K. Simon and M.-S. Alouini, Digital Communication Over Fading Channels.

John Wiley and Sons, 2005.

[3] R. K. Mallik and M. Z. Win, “Analysis of hybrid selection/maximal-ratio combining in correlated Nakagami fading,” IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 50, pp. 1372–1383, Aug. 2002.
[4] M. Z. Win, G. Chrisikos, and J. H. Winters, “MRC performance for M -ary modulation in arbitrarily correlated Nakagami
fading channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 301–303, Oct. 2000.
[5] M. Z. Win and J. H. Winters, “Virtual branch analysis of symbol error probability for hybrid selection/maximal-ratio
combining in Rayleigh fading,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 49, no. 11, pp. 1926–1934, Nov. 2001.
[6] M. R. McKay, A. J. Grant, and I. B. Collings, “Performance analysis of MIMO-MRC in double-correlated Rayleigh
environments,” IEEE Trans. on Commun., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 497–507, Mar. 2007.

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

28

[7] N. C. Beaulieu and K. T. Hemachandra, “Novel simple representations for Gaussian class multivariate distributions with
generalized correlation,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 8072–8083, Dec. 2011.
[8] N. C. Sagias and G. K. Karagiannidis, “Gaussian class multivariate Weibull distributions: theory and applications in fading
channels,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 51, no. 10, pp. 3608–3619, Oct. 2005.
[9] D. Skraparlis, V. K. Sakarellos, A. D. Panagopoulos, and J. D. Kanellopoulos, “Performance of N -branch receive diversity
combining in correlated lognormal channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 489–491, Jul. 2009.
[10] M. S. Alouini and M. K. Simon, “Dual diversity over correlated log-normal fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun.,
vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 1946–1959, Dec. 2002.
[11] S. C. Schwartz and Y. Yeh, “On the distribution function and moments of power sums with log-normal components,” Bell
Syst. Tech. J, vol. 61, pp. 1441–1462, Sept. 1982.
[12] L. Fenton, “The sum of log-normal probability distributions in scatter transmission systems,” IRE Transactions on
Communications Systems, vol. 8, pp. 57–67, Mar. 1960.
[13] M. Pratesi, F. Santucci, and F. Graziosi, “Generalized moment matching for the linear combination of lognormal RVs:
application to outage analysis in wireless systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 1122–1132, May
2006.
[14] C. L. J. Lam and T. Le-Ngoc, “Log-shifted gamma approximation to lognormal sum distributions,” IEEE Trans. Vehi.
Technol., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 2121–2129, Jul. 2007.
[15] X. Li, Z. Wu, V. D. Chakravarthy, and Z. Wu, “A low-complexity approximation to lognormal sum distributions via
transformed log skew normal distribution,” IEEE Trans. Vehi. Technol., vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 4040–4045, Oct. 2011.
[16] M. D. Renzo, F. Graziosi, and F. Santucci, “A comprehensive framework for performance analysis of cooperative multi-hop
wireless systems over log-normal fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 531–544, Feb. 2010.
[17] M. Safari and M. Uysal, “Relay-assisted free-space optical communication,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, pp.
5441–5449, Dec. 2008.
[18] S. M. Navidpour, M. Uysal, and M. Kavehrad, “BER performance of free-space optical transmission with spatial diversity,”
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 6, pp. 2813–2819, Aug. 2007.
[19] R. Zhang, J. Wei, D. G. Michelson, and V. C. M. Leung, “Outage probability of MRC diversity over correlated shadowed
fading channels,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 516–519, Oct. 2012.
[20] T. Piboongungon and V. A. Aalo, “Outage probability of L-branch selection combining in correlated lognormal fading
channels,” Electronics Letters, vol. 40, no. 14, pp. 886–888, Jul. 2004.
[21] N. B. Mehta, J. Wu, A. F. Molisch, and J. Zhang, “Approximating a sum of random variables with a lognormal,” IEEE
Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 2690–2699, Jul. 2007.
[22] N. C. Beaulieu and F. Rajwani, “Highly accurate simple closed-form approximations to lognormal sum distributions and
densities,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 709–711, Dec. 2004.
[23] N. C. Beaulieu and Q. Xie, “An optimal lognormal approximation to lognormal sum distributions,” IEEE Trans. Vehi.
Technol., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 479–489, Mar. 2004.
[24] A. S. H. Mahmoud, “New quadrature-based approximations for the characteristic function and the distribution function of
sums of lognormal random variables,” IEEE Trans. Vehi. Technol., vol. 59, no. 7, pp. 3364–3372, Sept. 2010.
[25] N. C. Beaulieu, A. A. Abu-Dayya, and P. J. McLane, “Estimating the distribution of a sum of independent lognormal
random variables,” IEEE Trans. Communications, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 2869–2873, Dec. 1995.
[26] C. Tellambura, “Bounds on the distribution of a sum of correlated lognormal random variables and their application,” IEEE
Trans. on Commun., vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1241–1248, Aug. 2008.
[27] Z. Liu, J. Almhana, and R. McGorman, “Approximating lognormal sum distributions with power lognormal distributions,”
IEEE Trans. Vehi. Technol., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 2611–2617, Jul. 2008.
[28] S. Chen, H. Nie, and B. Ayers-Glassey, “Lognormal sum approximation with a variant of type IV Pearson distribution,”
IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 630–632, Sept. 2008.

July 27, 2017

DRAFT

29

[29] Z. Liu, J. Almhana, F. Wang, and R. Mcgorman, “Mixture lognormal approximations to lognormal sum distributions,”
IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 711–713, Sept. 2007.
[30] Z. Wang and G. B. Giannakis, “A simple and general parameterization quantifying performance in fading channels,” IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 51, pp. 1389–1398, Aug. 2003.
[31] B. Zhu, F. Yang, J. Cheng, and L. Wu, “Performance bounds for diversity receptions over arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m
fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 699–713, Jan. 2016.
[32] B. Zhu, J. Cheng, H. T. Cheng, R. Selea, and L. Wu, “An asymptotic study of hierarchical diversity receptions over Rician
channels with arbitrary correlation,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 3299–3311, May 2016.
[33] X. Song, J. Cheng, and N. C. Beaulieu, “Asymptotic analysis of different multibranch diversity receivers with arbitrarily
correlated Rician channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 5676–5689, Oct. 2014.
[34] F. Yang, J. Cheng, and T. Tsiftsis, “Free-space optical communication with nonzero boresight pointing errors,” IEEE Trans.
Commun., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 713–725, Feb. 2014.
[35] M. R. Bhatnagar and Z. Ghassemlooy, “Performance analysis of gamma-gamma fading FSO MIMO links with pointing
errors,” J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 2158–2169, May 2016.
[36] M. Safari and M. Uysal, “Cooperative diversity over log-normal fading channels: Performance analysis and optimization,”
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1963–1972, May 2008.
[37] S. S. Szyszkowicz and H. Yanikomeroglu, “On the tails of the distribution of the sum of lognormals,” in IEEE International
Conference on Communications (ICC), Jun. 2007, pp. 5324–5329.
[38] X. Gao, H. Xu, and D. Ye, “Asymptotic behavior of tail density for sum of correlated lognormal variables,” International
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, vol. 2009, pp. 1–28, Mar. 2009.
[39] A. Gulisashvili, P. Tankov et al., “Tail behavior of sums and differences of log-normal random variables,” Bernoulli,
vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 444–493, 2016.
[40] X. Zhu and J. Kahn, “Free-space optical communication through atmospheric turbulence channels,” IEEE Trans. Commun.,
vol. 50, pp. 1293–1300, Aug. 2002.
[41] H. Fu, M. W. Wu, and P. Y. Kam, “Explicit, closed-form performance analysis in fading via new bound on Gaussian
Q-function,” in IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Jun. 2013, pp. 5819–5823.
[42] B. Zhu, J. Cheng, J. Yan, J.-Y. Wang, L. Wu, and Y. Wang, “A new technique for analyzing asymptotic outage performance
of diversity over lognormal fading channels,” in to be published in Canadian Workshop on Information Theory (CWIT),
2017.
[43] B. Zhu, J. Cheng, N. Al-Dhahir, and L. Wu, “Asymptotic analysis and tight performance bounds of diversity receptions
over Beckmann fading channels with arbitrary correlation,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 2220–2234, May
2016.
[44] Y. Sun, Á. Baricz, and S. Zhou, “On the monotonicity, log-concavity, and tight bounds of the generalized Marcum and
Nuttall Q-functions,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1166–1186, Mar. 2010.
[45] I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products, 6th ed.
[46] S. P. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization.

July 27, 2017

San Diego: Academic Press, 2000.

UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

DRAFT

