A New Reconfigurable Antenna MIMO
Architecture for mmWave Communication
Mojtaba Ahmadi Almasi∗ , Hani Mehrpouyan∗ , Vida Vakilian∗∗ , Nader Behdad† , Hamid Jafarkhani‡
∗ Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Boise State University, {mojtabaahmadialm,hanimehrpouyan}@boisestate.edu
∗∗ Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Computer Science, California State University, {vvakilian}@csub.edu

arXiv:1803.09314v1 [] 25 Mar 2018

† Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, {behdad}@wisc.edu
‡ Center for Pervasive Communications and Computing, University of California, Irvine, {hamidj}@uci.edu

Abstract—The large spectrum available in the millimeterWave (mmWave) band has emerged as a promising solution for
meeting the huge capacity requirements of the 5th generation
(5G) wireless networks. However, to fully harness the potential
of mmWave communications, obstacles such as severe path loss,
channel sparsity and hardware complexity should be overcome.
In this paper, we introduce a generalized reconfigurable antenna
multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) architecture that takes
advantage of lens-based reconfigurable antennas. The considered
antennas can support multiple radiation patterns simultaneously
by using a single RF chain. The degrees of freedom provided by
the reconfigurable antennas are used to, first, combat channel
sparsity in MIMO mmWave systems. Further, to suppress high
path loss and shadowing at mmWave frequencies, we use a rateone space-time block code. Our analysis and simulations show
that the proposed reconfigurable MIMO architecture achieves
full-diversity gain by using linear receivers and without requiring
channel state information at the transmitter. Moreover, simulations show that the proposed architecture outperforms traditional
MIMO transmission schemes in mmWave channel settings.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Millimeter-Wave (mmWave) technology operating in the 30300 GHz range is emerging as a promising solution for the 5th
generation (5G) wireless communication systems by supporting a larger user base and high speed wireless links [1]. The
existence of a large communication bandwidth at mmWave
frequencies will enable mmWave systems to support multi
Gigabits/sec speeds However, significant path loss, channel
sparsity and hardware limitations are major obstacles for the
deployment of mmWave systems.
In order to combat the severe path loss at mmWave frequencies, researchers have proposed to use large directional
gains and line-of-sight (LoS) links [2]. Another approach
that partially ignores the hardware costs, is based on the use
of massive antenna arrays at the transmitter and receiver to
mitigate the propagation issues at mmWave frequencies [3].
Fortunately, the shorter wavelengths at mmWave frequencies
allows for the deployment of large number of antennas. When
considering such massive antenna structures, three beamforming architectures have been proposed for mmWave systems: a)
digital [4], b) analog [5], [6], and c) hybrid [7]. The latter is
significantly different from the beamforming approaches that
This project is supported in part by the NSF ERAS grant award number
1642865,1642536.

had been proposed for multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
systems intended for the sub-6 GHz band.
The digital approach provides great flexibility in shaping the
transmitted beams. However, it requires one radio frequency
(RF) chain per antenna. This results in significant cost and
complexity in massive mmWave MIMO systems. Further, this
network may result in significant delay due to large number
of channel parameters that must be estimated [8]. As an
alternative, the analog method applies phase shifters to shape
the output beam with only one RF chain for all the antennas [6]. Although it is energy efficient and cost effective, the
network can only provide a highly directional beam which in
no way addresses shadowing and channel sparsity at mmWave
frequencies [8]. A promising beamforming approach for the
mmWave MIMO architecture is based on a combination of
analog and digital beamforming, i.e., hybrid beamforming.
The hybrid architecture aims to use the benefits of digital and
analog architectures. That is, the digital stage deals with the
shadowing and channel sparsity by using several RF chains,
while the analog stage provides directivity gain [8].
Three types of connected networks have been proposed for
the hybrid architecture. The first network is called the fullyconnected network because each RF chain is connected to
all antennas via phase-shifters [9]. While generating highly
directional beams, this network suffers from a complicated
beam selection network. In order to reduce the complexity, the
concept of a sub-connected network has been introduced in [7].
In this architecture, each RF chain is connected to a sub-group
of antennas, which lowers complexity at the cost of reducing
the directionality of the beams. The third methodology has a
completely different structure, where several RF chains are
connected to a lens antenna array via switches [10], [11].
The transceiver antenna is able to generate a few orthogonal
beams to achieve multiplexing gain for better utilization of the
bandwidth, and to preserve low hardware complexity.
Aside from the advantages of the hybrid architecture with
a lens antenna array, high path loss and channel sparsity still
remain big issues in MIMO mmWave systems. Recently, the
idea of using a single reconfigurable antenna in a MIMO
system instead of a massive antenna array was proposed
in [12], [13]. In this work, which is limited to only 2×2 MIMO
systems, two reconfigurable antennas are deployed at the
transmitter in which each antenna steers several beams toward
the receiver that is equipped with omni-directional antennas.

Further, the recently designed lens antennas in [14], [15] might
represent better characteristics compared to that of composite
right-left handed (CRLH) leaky-wave antennas (LWAs) that
was considered in [12], [13]. Reconfigurable antennas for use
in MIMO architectures have also been considered in other
works such as [16]. In [17] the diversity gain of traditional
MIMO systems are improved through the application of both
reconfigurable antennas at the receiver and space-time block
codes (STBCs). Subsequently, the technique in [17] is extended to a system with reconfigurable antennas at both the
transmitter and receiver sides in [18]. Later, a coding scheme
was proposed for reconfigurable antenna MIMO systems over
frequency-selective fading channels in [19]. However, unlike
the work in this paper, the main goal in [17]–[19] is to use
the degrees of freedom provided by reconfigurable antennas to
enhance the diversity order of the system. Hence, the designs
in [17]–[19], in no way address the propagation issues specific
to mmWave MIMO systems, namely the channel sparsity.
In this paper, motivated by the 2 × 2 reconfigurable MIMO
system in [12], [13] and taking advantage of the antenna
architecture in [15], we propose an Nt × Nr reconfigurable
antenna MIMO architecture for mmWave communication. The
reconfigurable antenna in [14], [15] can support the simultaneous transmission of multiple radiation lopes via one RF chain.
When this reconfigurable antenna is used in a MIMO setup,
it can be used to establish a large number of paths between
the transceiver antennas. The number of paths can conceivably
overcome the channel sparsity issue. Subsequently, a rate-one
STBC is used to encode the information symbols to achieve
full-diversity gain, which can be applied to compensate for
severe path loss at mmWave frequencies. Analytical results
show that the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO architecture with STBCs achieves full-diversity gain by using linear
receivers, e.g., zero-forcing (ZF). Further, simulations show
that the proposed architecture outperforms traditional MIMO
transmission schemes in mmWave channel settings.
The paper is organized as follows: Section II presents the
reconfigurable antenna MIMO architecture and the system
model. In Section III, the signal processing algorithm for
the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO architecture is
derived and presented. In Section IV, we present simulations
investigating the performance of the proposed architecture,
while comparing its bit error rate (BER) with that of traditional
MIMO systems. Section V concludes
the paper.
√
Notations: Hereafter, j = −1, small letters, bold letters
and bold capital letters will designate scalars, vectors, and
matrices, respectively. Superscript (·)† denotes the transpose
operator. vec(·) denotes the vectorization of A which is a
column vector obtained by stacking the columns of the matrix
on top of one another. Further, E(·), | · |, and || · ||2 denote the
expected value, absolute value, and norm-2 of (·), respectively.
Finally, A ◦ B stands for the Hadamard product of matrices
A and B.

arrays. Further, we outline the proposed reconfigurable antenna
MIMO system and the corresponding system model.
A. Overview of Lens Antenna Array System
As stated before, the hybrid architecture provides a balance
between the benefits of the digital and the analog architectures.
Recall that three networks have been proposed for the hybrid
architecture. In the first network, each RF chain is fully
connected to all antennas through phase-shifters. In the second
network, each RF chain is connected to the sub-array of
antennas through phase-shifters. The third approach is based
on lens antenna array networks. Unlike the prior two networks,
this network uses a selection network that utilizes RF switches
instead of phase-shifters [11]. Further, the antenna structure is
a feed antenna array placed beneath the lens which provides
significant directivity gain. Thanks to the lens antenna, this
structure generates narrow and high gain beams. The structure
of the transceiver is shown in Fig. 1.(a).
Let us focus on the third beamforming approach above.
Since the mmWave environment does not result in rich scattering, the number of effective propagation paths, p, between
the transceiver antennas is considerably less than the number
of radiation beams, n, i.e., the number of antenna elements
connected to the lens. Hence, the complexity of the selection
network can be reduced as well as the number of RF chains
without significant performance loss [11]. Further, the authors
of [11] show that this hybrid beamforming approach achieves
a multiplexing gain of p at mmWave frequencies. To summarize, this architecture, which is referred to as beamspace
MIMO [10], [11], establishes communication paths between
a single transceiver antenna pair through the multiple beams
rather than multiple transceiver antenna pairs as shown in
Fig. 1.(a). Thus, the system is a beam-based MIMO rather than
the traditional antenna-based MIMO systems. Throughout this
paper, we refer to this system as the lens antenna array system.
Although the methodology in [11] is effective at mmWave
frequencies, it may not be the most efficient approach. This
follows from the fact that mmWave channels are sparse due
to limited scattering and also suffer from dramatic path loss.
Note that the lack of scattering can be attributed to significant
path loss. This lack of scattering and the LoS nature of
communication links, may result in ill-conditioned MIMO
channels. In other words, the lens antenna array structure
in [10] and [11], fundamentally operates as a single inputoutput antenna system with multiple input-output beams in
which the number of beams, n, is always limited to the number
of paths, p, where p  n [11]. Hence, the approach in [11],
in no way provides a solution to overcome channel sparsity
at mmWave frequencies. On the other hand, in this paper we
propose a true MIMO reconfigurable antenna structure that
ensures we have as many paths, p, as the number of antennas.
B. Reconfigurable Antenna MIMO Architecture

II. R ECONFIGURABLE A NTENNA MIMO AND S YSTEM
M ODEL
In this section, we present the advantages and disadvantages
of hybrid beamforming systems, specifically for lens antenna

As mentioned, the lens antenna array system in [11] does
not reflect the definition of the traditional MIMO system. The
basic idea behind the traditional MIMO systems is to increase
the independent paths in a communication link. Unfortunately

Beam Selection Network

RF Chain

.
.
.

.
.
.

5G
5G

...

.
.
.

Beam Bt

Fig. 2. An uplink MIMO system with reconfigurable antennas for 5G
mmWave communications.

...
...
...
...
...

freedom that ensures that the number of MIMO channel
paths is dictated by the number of antennas and not by the
mmWave channel. Further, multiplexing gain is still achievable
through the proposed design. Finally, we will show that merging the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO architecture
with STBCs provides full-diversity gain that can be used to
combat the significant path loss and shadowing at mmWave
frequencies.

...
...

Beam Selection Network

Antenna Nt

.
.
.

.
.
.

...

Beam Selection Network

...

Tapered Slot
Antenna Feeds

. . .

RF Chain

Beam 1

Beam Bt

(a)

RF Chain

.
.
.

Antenna 1

(b)

Fig. 1. Lens antennas with different architectures: (a) Beamspace MIMO
transceiver [11]; (b) The proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO transceiver
based on lens antennas in [15].

the maximum number of the paths in the lens antenna array
is equal to p  n due to the sparsity in mmWave MIMO
channels. One promising solution for this problem is using
lens antenna array in multiple input-output fashion. To make
this idea more practical, the reconfigurable lens antenna design
that is proposed in [14], [15], will be used.
In this paper, by considering the benefits of the reconfigurable antenna in [14], [15], we propose a new MIMO architecture for mmWave communications. The architecture has
two fundamental properties. First, each antenna is connected
to one RF chain that can simultaneously radiate multiple
beams as shown in Fig. 2. (b). Whereas, in the lens antenna
array in [11], each antenna is connected to p RF chains.
However, in comparison to [11], our architecture needs more
beam selection networks and lens antennas. In addition, each
antenna can independently change the phase of each radiation
pattern. Second, unlike the lens antenna array system in [11],
the transmitter and receiver have been equipped with Nt
and Nr reconfigurable antennas, respectively. The proposed
reconfigurable MIMO architecture provides the degrees of

C. System Model
Consider the uplink of a mmWave MIMO system that
connects a single mobile user (MU) and base station (BS)
(see Fig. 2). It is assumed that the MU and BS are equipped
with Nt and Nr reconfigurable antennas, respectively, where
each transmit and receive antenna simultaneously radiate Bt
and Br beams, respectively. Moreover, the channel matrix
between the MU and BS is denoted by H = [hnt ,nr ]Nt ×Nr ,
where its entries are assumed to follow the Rician distribution.
This is motivated by the presence of a LoS component
in mmWave communication systems. Note that in previous
mmWave MIMO systems, because of the large number of
tightly-packed antennas, there is a high levels of antenna correlation. Hence, these works have adopted the Saleh-Valenzuela
channel model. However, since we are using a small number
of antennas, the Rician model would suffice [9]–[11].
As outlined before and in [15], the proposed reconfigurable
antenna can simultaneously change the phase of each radiation
pattern. Mathematically, we represent this property with matrix
Gt = [gnt t ,bt ]Nt ×Bt when the reconfigurable antennas are used
at the transmitter (MU) and Gr = [gbrr ,nr ]Br ×Nr when at the
receiver (BS). These matrices are called the reconfigurable
antenna parameter matrices. Thus, the entries of Gt and Gr
are assumed to be
t

gnt t ,bt = ejθnt ,bt , nt = 1, 2, . . . , Nt , bt = 1, 2, . . . , Bt ,
r

gbrr ,nr = ejθbr ,nr , br = 1, 2, . . . , Br , nr = 1, 2, . . . , Nr ,
(1)

respectively. The number of the radiation patterns (beams) of
each transceiver antenna, i.e., Bt and Br , is assumed to be
constrained to Nr and Nt , respectively.1 Thus, we assume
Bt = Nr and Br = Nt . For instance, the reconfigure
parameter gnt t ,bt is related to the bt th radiation pattern of nt th
antenna for nt = 1, 2, . . . , Nt and bt = 1, 2, . . . , Nr as shown
in Fig. 2.
To realize the connection between the channel matrix and
the reconfigurable parameter matrices, assume that a typical
information signal, s, is sent from the bt th beam of the nt th
antenna and received at the br th beam of the nr th antenna.
First, this signal is multiplied by gnt t ,bt when it is radiated
through the bt th beam of the nt th antenna. The signal, then,
is multiplied by the channel coefficient between the nt th and
the nr th antenna, i.e., s × gnt t ,bt hnt ,nr . At the receiver, it is
multiplied by gbrr ,nr . That is, the received signal is equal to
s×gnt t ,bt hnt ,nr gbrr ,nr without considering the noise term. This
expression indicates that there is a one-to-one mapping among
the entries of Gt and H at the transmitter side and Gr and H
at the receiver side. Hence, the Hadamard product can nicely
describe this mapping. That is, the reconfigurability brings
about a new matrix denoted by the reconfigured channel matrix
or Hg , where
Hg = Gt ◦ H ◦ Gr .
(2)
Hg = (hg,1 , hg,2 , . . . , hg,Nr ) of size Nt × Nr with entries
hg,nr of size Nt × 1. Here, hg,nr denotes the reconfigured
channel between the MU and the nr th receiver antenna at the
BS.
We have defined the reconfigurable parameter and the reconfigured channel matrices. Now, we express the relationship
between the transmit and receive antennas as
Y = X(s)PHg + Z,

assumption can be easily generalized to any Bt and Br values.

III. D ESIGN OF S YSTEM PARAMETERS
In this section, we present the specific steps for selecting
the appropriate values for Gt , Gr , X(s), and P.
In a mmWave MIMO system, the channel state information (CSI) varies rapidly compared to the direction of each
beam which helps to estimate the steering direction and CSI,
separately [20]. Since the steering direction changes slowly,
this information can be useful at the transmitter. However, the
fast varying CSI is of little value at the transmitter by the
time it is estimated at the receiver and fed back. In our design
we assume that there is no CSI available at the transmitter.
However, the steering information is available at both the
transmitter and receiver. In this case, similar to traditional
MIMO systems, the optimum scenario is that the power is
equally allocated at each antenna and beam, i.e., P = I.
Further, the entries of Gt are considered to be one which
yields
Hg = H ◦ Gr .
(4)
Note that the use of the proposed reconfigurable antennas at
the transmitter is motivated by the significant directionality
gain that these antennas provide which is crucial at mmWave
frequencies. Further, we will drop the subscribe r of the Gr
because only the receiver reconfigurable antennas will possibly
effect the system. Hence, we have Hg = H ◦ G where the
entries of G are equal to eθbr ,nr . Thus, only two parameters
θbr ,nr and X(s) remain to be designed.

(3)

where Y = (y1 , y2 , . . . , yNr ) is the T × Nr received signal
matrix. T is the number of time slots in each block. X(s)
is a T × Nt STBC matrix and s = (s1 , s2 , . . . , sL )† is the
L × 1 information signal vector, where its elements are drawn
from constellation A. P is an Nt × Nt precoder matrix and
Hg of size Nt × Nr is defined in (2). The elements of the
T × Nr noise matrix, Z = (z1 , z2 , . . . , zNr ), are modeled
by independent identically distributed (i.i.d) complex Gaussian
random variables with meanp0 and variance σ 2 , i.e., zt,nr ∼
CN = (0, σ 2 ) where σ = E{|zt,nr |2 } for t = 1, 2, . . . , T
and nr = 1, 2, . . . , Nr . Compared to the traditional MIMO
systems, (3) contains the reconfigurable channel matrix (Hg )
rather than the channel matrix (H). The parameter Gt , Gr ,
P, and X(s) in (3) are flexible and should be designed.
It is worth noting that the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO architecture wisely exploits the capability of
the reconfigurable antennas and traditional MIMO systems.
The reconfigurable antennas aim to reconfigure the channel
matrix which possibly results in a better channel condition.
On the other hand, the MIMO structure attains to increase the
dimension of the system (number of the paths) in order to
deploy STBCs and precoders as well. A suitable STBC can
1 This

achieve full-diversity gain, and consequently improve the BER
performance of the system. On the other hand, precoders can
properly allocate the power to further improve performance.

A. Design of θbr ,nr
While a signal is received through multiple paths, the best
technique to increase the received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)
is to use maximum ratio combining (MRC) [21]. Utilizing an
MRC technique requires to weight the signals proportional
to the inverse of the channel coefficient amplitudes before
combining. Based on the proposed antenna design (these
antennas can only change phase of each beam not the gain),
this technique cannot be accomplished.
The alternative technique to improve the received SNR is
the equal gain combining (EGC) [21]. It turns out that EGC is
a suitable technique to design θnb ,nr s. This technique equally
weights and co-phases the signals, which satisfies the proposed
antenna design. Therefore, we have that
θbr ,nr = −∠hnt ,nr , br , nt = 1, 2, . . . , Nt ,
nr = 1, 2, . . . , Nr ,

(5)

where the sign ∠ stands for the phase of hnt ,nr . Thus,
gbr ,nr = e−∠hnt ,nr . Fig. 3 illustrates the receiver structure
of our proposed MIMO system for a specific time slot t. The
signal at each beam is multiplied by gbr ,nr . Obviously, (5)
leads to a non-negative real-valued matrix in (4) while the
channel matrix is complex-valued.

𝑒

of antennas can be found in [23]. All these codes can be
represented by

𝑗 𝜃1,1

X(s) = A1 s1 + A2 s2 + · · · + AL sL .
.
.
.

where Ai s of size T × Nt are Hurwitz-Radon family of
matrices which their entries are restricted to the set {−1, 0, 1}.
Note that the information symbols sl for l = 1, 2, . . . , L in (8)
are drawn from a complex-valued constellation whereas the
STBCs in [23] encode real-valued symbols. Further, in [23],
it is proved that these matrices have the following properties:

𝑒 𝑗 𝜃𝐵 𝑟 ,1
.
.
.

.
.
.

𝑒 𝑗 𝜃1,𝑁 𝑟

Antenna Nr

Detection

𝑧𝑡,1

Antenna 1

.
.
.

𝑧𝑡,𝑁𝑟
𝑒 𝑗 𝜃𝐵 𝑡 ,𝑁 𝑟

Fig. 3. The proposed receiver structure for the mmWave MIMO systems by
regarding reconfigurable antennas.

B. Design of the STBC Matrix X(s)
One of our goals in this paper is to attain full-diversity
gain in the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO structure.
To this end, space-time block coding is a promising method.
STBCs have been designed for both real and complex channels [22]. Normally, real STBCs are used for transmission
over real-valued channels and the complex STBCs are utilized
for transmission over complex-values channels. Note that the
channel matrix, H, in our system is complex-valued and
naturally a complex STBC can be used. However, we suggest
compensating for the channel phase, as done in (5) and the use
of a real STBC. Since rate-one orthogonal STBCs (OSTBCs)
that provide the maximum diversity and a simple symbol-bysymbol decoding exist for any number of transmit antennas,
this will allow us to utilize a rate-one STBC and reduce the
overall complexity by using linear receivers such as ZF. Note
that rate-one complex OSTBCs do no exist for more than two
antennas [23].
A set of real-valued square STBCs for Nt = 2, 4, and 8
has been designed in [23]. These STBCs are good candidates
for our reconfigurable antenna MIMO even though here we
use them with complex constellation points. Two examples of
rate-one X(s) for Nt = 2 and 4 are given by [23]


s1 s2
X(s) =
(6)
−s2 s1
and



s1
−s2
X(s) = 
−s3
−s4

s2
s1
s4
−s3

s3
−s4
s1
s2


s4
s3 
,
−s2 
s1

(8)

(7)

respectively. Note that while the codes are similar to the STBC
in ( [23], Eq. (3) and (4)), the way we use them in the system,
as outlined later, is different. Other codes for any number

A†k Ak = INt ,

k = 1, 2, . . . , L,

A†k Al

1 ≤ k < l ≤ L.

=

−Al A†k ,

(9)

where INt is the Nt × Nt identity matrix.
Diversity analysis: Designing a low-complexity decoding
scheme for rate-one and full-diversity complex STBCs is a
big challenge. Among the available complex STBCs only
the OSTBC in [24] achieves rate-one, full-diversity gain
and a simple symbol-by-symbol decoding. Unfortunately, for
Nt > 2, the full-diversity complex STBCs cannot achieve
rate-one for linear receivers [25]. However, we show that the
STBC in (8) attains full-diversity gain when linear receivers
are considered.
By plunging (8) into (3) and after some manipulations, the
received signal can be rewritten as

ȳ = b1 , b2 , . . . , bL s + z̄,
(10)
where the T Nr × 1 ȳ = vec(Y). Also, letting vec(Hg ) =
vec(hg,1 , hg,2 , . . . , hg,Nr ), bl can be represented as bl =
vec(Al hg,1 , Al hg,2 , . . . , Al hg,Nr ) for l = 1, 2, . . . , L. Finally, z̄ = vec(Z). Defining Hg as the reconfigured equivalent
channel matrix, it can be expressed as

Hg = b1 , b2 , . . . , bL ,
which is a real-valued matrix. This matrix exists when Hg is a
non-zero matrix. Thus, (10) can be rewritten as ȳ = Hg s + z̄.
On the other hand, it is shown by [26] that for any n × 1
vector v we have
v† A†k Al v = δkl v† v, k, l = 1, . . . , L,

(11)

where δk,l is the Kronecker delta function and is 1 when k = l
and 0 when k 6= l. Regarding real-valued Hg and referring to
(11), we can derive that
H†g Hg = ||Hg ||2 IL .

(12)

The above equation contains an important point. The reconfigured equivalent channel matrix is orthogonal which means
the linear receivers will achieve full-diversity gain [25] for the
STBC in (8).
Considering a 2×1 MIMO system, the reconfigured equivalent channel matrix of the code in (6) with h1 = (h1,1 , h2,1 )† ,
and equivalently hg,1 = (hg1,1 = ejθ1,1 h1,1 , hg2,1 =
ejθ2,1 h2,1 )† for the θ1,1 and θ2,1 defined in (5), is given by
 g

h1,1
hg2,1
Hg =
.
(13)
hg2,1 −hg1,1

Similarly, the reconfigured equivalent channel matrix of the
STBC in (7) for Nr = 1 is expressed as

 g
h1,1
hg2,1
hg3,1
hg4,1
hg2,1 −hg1,1
hg4,1 −hg3,1 
.
(14)
Hg = 
g
g
h3,1 −h4,1 −hg1,1
hg2,1 
g
g
g
g
h3,1 −h2,1 −h1,1
h4,1

10 0

10 -1

•

•

•

As mentioned, there is a specific difference between the
SBTCs in [23] and the ones in this paper. The STBC
defined by (8) encodes complex-valued symbols whereas
[23] encodes real-valued symbols. Nevertheless, in both
cases, the code rate is equal to one and the codes facilitate
low complexity decoding.
To encode complex-valued information symbols for
Nt = 2 and 4, the OSTBC [24] and the Quasi-OSTBC
(QOSTBC) [27] are well-suited rate-one codes. However,
those codes are designed for a complex-valued channel
matrix in which s and conjugate of s are encoded to
achieve full-diversity gain. Although the channel matrix in our systems is complex-valued, thanks to the
reconfigurable antennas and (5) the reconfigured channel
matrix becomes real-valued. Therefore, the conjugate of
the information symbols is not required.
While real OSTBCs exist for any number of antennas, for
more than four antennas, low complexity rate-one fulldiversity complex STBCs are not available. As such, in
addition to low complexity and full diversity, the rate
advantage of the proposed system will result in a big
coding gain for large number of transmit antennas.
IV. N UMERICAL R ESULTS

This section discusses the results of the numerical simulation for the proposed structure in Fig. 3 along with the STBCs
in (6) and (7) and ZF receiver. Moreover, for traditional MIMO
systems, the OSTBC and QOSTBC with maximum likelihood
(ML) decoding are considered. Further, it is assumed that the
lens array antenna system in [10], [11] transmits one independent stream of symbols per RF chain to achieve multiplexing
gain when using a ZF receiver. The communication channel
is modeled as a Rician fading channel, i.e.,
r
r
K
1
H=
HL +
HNL ,
(15)
K +1
K +1
where K is the Rician K-factor expressing as the ratio of
powers of the LoS signal and the scattered waves. Throughout
the simulation, K is set to 2 dB. Using this model, H is
decomposed into the sum of the deterministic component HL
and a random component HNL . The former models the LoS
signals. In the simulation, the entries of matrix HL are all
set to one. This is since the optimal LoS MIMO channels are
highly dependent on the distance between the transmitter and
the receiver, and the antenna spacing [28]. These conditions
cannot be easily satisfied in mobile cellular networks. Hence,
here, an ill-conditioned LoS channel has been considered.

10 -2

10 -3

10 -4

Traditional MIMO, 16-QAM
Lens antenna array [11], 4-QAM
Reconfigurable antenna MIMO, 16-QAM

0

5

10

15

20

SNR (dB)
Fig. 4. BER performance of a 2 × 2 traditional MIMO, lens array antenna
and the proposed reconfigurable antenna MIMO.

10 0

10 -1

10 -2

BER

The following remarks are in order:

BER

The above matrices are real-valued and obviously orthogonal.

10 -3

10 -4

10 -5
-4

Traditional MIMO, 16-QAM, ML
Lens antenna array [11], BPSK, ZF
Reconfigurable antenna MIMO, 16-QAM, ZF

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

SNR (dB)
Fig. 5. BER performance of QOSTBC for 4 × 4 reconfigurable antenna
MIMO and the traditional MIMO systems.

HNL accounts for the scattered signals with its entries being
modeled as i.i.d with CN ∼ (0, 1). Further, it is assumed that
for OSTBC and QOSTBC the transceiver antennas are the
traditional omni-directional antennas and for (6) and (7) they
are the reconfigurable antennas as shown in Fig. 1. (b).
Fig. 4 shows the BER performance of (6), OSTBC in
[24] and the lens array antenna [10], [11] versus SNR for
a throughput of 4 bits/s/Hz. The symbols for the traditional
and the reconfigurable antenna MIMO are drawn from 16QAM and for the lens array are drawn from 4-QAM. It is
assumed that the Nt = 2 and Nr = 2. The results show that (6)

and the OSTBC attain identical performance with full-diversity
gain. Whereas, the lens antenna array shows the diversity gain
of one since only there is one path between each transceiver
pair. At low SNR the array slightly outperforms, whereas by
increasing the SNR its performance decreases. This follows
since the STBC in (6) and OSTBCs are designed to achieve
full-diversity gain at high SNRs. We use a ZF receiver for all
simulations in this case.
Fig. 5 compares the BER performance of (7), the QOSTBC
in [27] and the lens array antenna for a 4 × 4 MIMO system.
Similar to the previous scenario the throughput is considered
as 4 bits/s/Hz. The constellation size for the reconfigurable
antenna MIMO is set to 16-QAM and for the lens antenna
array is set to binary phase shift keying (BPSK). For the
QOSTBC, half of symbols are chosen from 16-QAM and other
half are chosen from rotated 16-QAM, where the rotation value
is set to φ = π4 . Further pair-wise ML decoding is used for
QOSTBC. Similarly, while assuming the same throughput, the
lens antenna array has the lowest BER at SNRs of less than 7
dB, but at high SNRs the performance gap between the lens
antenna array approach and the proposed method widens since
the lens antenna array does not achieve the same diversity
order as the proposed system. Further, the result indicates
that both (7) and the QOSTBC achieve full-diversity gain.
However, our proposed MIMO outperforms QOSTBC by 1.6
dB. The reason for this performance is due to the orthogonality
of the reconfigured equivalent channel matrix in (14).
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we discuss the properties of lens array
antenna MIMO. Then, we propose a new reconfigurable
antenna MIMO system for mmWave wireless networks. The
reconfigurable antennas are inspired from the lens antennas.
This MIMO system is proposed to achieve two goals. The
first goal is to combat the sparsity of the MIMO channel at
mmWave frequencies. The proposed reconfigurable antenna
structure provides the system with additional degrees of freedom that can be used to overcome channel sparsity at mmWave
frequencies. The second goal is to suppress the effect of path
loss in mmWave systems. To achieve this goal, we covert the
complex-valued channel matrix to the real-valued one using
the reconfigurable antennas. Then, by applying STBCs, fulldiversity gain is attained. Simulations verify that the proposed
reconfigurable antenna architecture achieves a rate of one
while at the same time reaching full diversity gain.
R EFERENCES
[1] T. S. Rappaport, S. Sun, R. Mayzus, H. Zhao, Y. Azar, K. Wang, G. N.
Wong, J. K. Schulz, M. Samimi, and F. Gutierrez, “Millimeter wave
mobile communications for 5G cellular: It will work!” IEEE Access,
vol. 1, pp. 335–349, 2013.
[2] T. S. Rappaport, R. W. Heath Jr, R. C. Daniels, and J. N. Murdock,
Millimeter wave wireless communications. Pearson Education, 2014.
[3] M. Xiao, S. Mumtaz, Y. Huang, L. Dai, Y. Li, M. Matthaiou, G. K.
Karagiannidis, E. Björnson, K. Yang, C. Lin et al., “Millimeter wave
communications for future mobile networks,” IEEE J. Select. Areas
Commun., vol. 35, no. 9, pp. 1909–1935, 2017.
[4] F. Rusek, D. Persson, B. K. Lau, E. G. Larsson, T. L. Marzetta,
O. Edfors, and F. Tufvesson, “Scaling up MIMO: Opportunities and
challenges with very large arrays,” IEEE Signal Processing Mag.,
vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 40–60, 2013.

[5] J. Kim and I. Lee, “802.11 wlan: history and new enabling mimo
techniques for next generation standards,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 53,
no. 3, pp. 134–140, 2015.
[6] S. Sun, T. S. Rappaport, R. W. Heath, A. Nix, and S. Rangan, “Mimo
for millimeter-wave wireless communications: beamforming, spatial
multiplexing, or both?” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 110–
121, 2014.
[7] X. Gao, L. Dai, S. Han, I. Chih-Lin, and R. W. Heath, “Energy-efficient
hybrid analog and digital precoding for mmWave MIMO systems with
large antenna arrays,” IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 34, no. 4,
pp. 998–1009, 2016.
[8] R. W. Heath, N. Gonzalez-Prelcic, S. Rangan, W. Roh, and A. M.
Sayeed, “An overview of signal processing techniques for millimeter
wave MIMO systems,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 10,
no. 3, pp. 436–453, 2016.
[9] O. El Ayach, S. Rajagopal, S. Abu-Surra, Z. Pi, and R. W. Heath,
“Spatially sparse precoding in millimeter wave MIMO systems,” IEEE
Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1499–1513, 2014.
[10] A. Sayeed and J. Brady, “Beamspace MIMO for high-dimensional
multiuser communication at millimeter-wave frequencies,” in Proc. IEEE
Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), 2013, pp. 3679–3684.
[11] J. Brady, N. Behdad, and A. M. Sayeed, “Beamspace MIMO for
millimeter-wave communications: System architecture, modeling, analysis, and measurements,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 61, no. 7,
pp. 3814–3827, 2013.
[12] V. Vakilian, H. Mehrpouyan, and H. Jafarkhani, “System for resolving
channel sparsity in multiple-input multiple-output systems using (re)
configurable antennas, and methods of making and using the same,”
Oct. 3 2016, US Patent App. 15/284,123.
[13] V. Vakilian, H. Mehrpouyan, Y. Hua, and H. Jafarkhani, “High rate/low
complexity space-time block codes for 2x2 reconfigurable MIMO systems,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.06729, 2015.
[14] B. Schoenlinner, X. Wu, J. P. Ebling, G. V. Eleftheriades, and G. M.
Rebeiz, “Wide-scan spherical-lens antennas for automotive radars,”
IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech., vol. 50, no. 9, pp. 2166–2175,
2002.
[15] M. A. Almasi, H. Mehrpouyan, V. Vakilian, N. Behdad, and H. Jafarkhani, “Reconfigurable antennas in mmWave MIMO systems,” arXiv
preprint arXiv:1710.05111, 2017.
[16] B. A. Cetiner, H. Jafarkhani, J.-Y. Qian, H. J. Yoo, A. Grau, and
F. De Flaviis, “Multifunctional reconfigurable MEMS integrated antennas for adaptive MIMO systems,” IEEE Communications Magazine,
vol. 42, pp. 62–71, Dec. 2004.
[17] A. Grau, H. Jafarkhani, and F. De Flaviis, “A reconfigurable multipleinput multiple-output communication system,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 7, no. 5, 2008.
[18] F. Fazel, A. Grau, H. Jafarkhani, and F. De Flaviis, “Space-timestate block coded MIMO communication systems using reconfigurable
antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 8, no. 12, 2009.
[19] V. Vakilian, J.-F. Frigon, and S. Roy, “Space-frequency block code for
MIMO-OFDM communication systems with reconfigurable antennas,”
in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (GLOBECOM), 2013, pp. 4221–
4225.
[20] Z. Gua, X. Wang, and W. Heng, “Millimeter-Wave channel estimation
based on 2-D beamspace MUSIC method,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 5384 – 5394, 2017.
[21] M. K. Simon and M.-S. Alouini, Digital communication over fading
channels.
[22] H. Jafarkhani, Space-Time Coding: Theory and Practice. Cambridge
University Press, 2005.
[23] V. Tarokh, H. Jafarkhani, and A. R. Calderbank, “Space-time block
codes from orthogonal designs,” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 45,
no. 5, pp. 1456–1467, 1999.
[24] S. M. Alamouti, “A simple transmit diversity technique for wireless
communications,” IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 16, no. 8, pp.
1451–1458, 1998.
[25] Y. Shang and X.-G. Xia, “Space-time block codes achieving full
diversity with linear receivers,” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 54,
no. 10, pp. 4528–4547, 2008.
[26] M. K. Murugan and S. S. Adams, “Hurwitz-Radon inspired maximal
three-dimensional real orthogonal designs,” AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL
OF COMBINATORICS, vol. 54, pp. 151–162, 2012.
[27] H. Jafarkhani, “A quasi-orthogonal space-time block code,” IEEE Trans.
Commun., vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2001.
[28] F. Bohagen, P. Orten, and G. E. Oien, “Design of optimal high-rank
line-of-sight MIMO channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 6,
no. 4, 2007.

