arXiv:1801.02913v1 [cs.IT] 9 Jan 2018

The DMT classification of real and quaternionic
lattice codes
Laura Luzzi

Roope Vehkalahti

ETIS - Université Paris-Seine
(Université de Cergy-Pontoise, ENSEA, CNRS)
Cergy-Pontoise, France
laura.luzzi@ensea.fr

Department of Communications and Networking
Aalto University
Helsinki, Finland
roope.vehkalahti@aalto.fi

Abstract—In this paper we consider space-time codes where the
code-words are restricted to either real or quaternion matrices.
We prove two separate diversity-multiplexing gain trade-off
(DMT) upper bounds for such codes and provide a criterion for
a lattice code to achieve these upper bounds. We also point out
that lattice codes based on Q-central division algebras satisfy
this optimality criterion. As a corollary this result provides a
DMT classification for all Q-central division algebra codes that
are based on standard embeddings.

I. I NTRODUCTION
In [1] the authors proved that for every number of transmit
antennas n there exist a DMT optimal code in the space
Mn (C). These codes are derived from division algebras where
the center of the division algebra is a complex quadratic field.
However, this result is actually more general, and their proof
revealed that as long as a 2n2 -dimensional lattice code in
Mn (C) has the non-vanishing determinant property (NVD),
it is DMT optimal. Yet, this result does not tell us anything
about space-time lattice codes that are not full dimensional in
Mn (C). Such codes naturally appear in the scenario where we
have less receive than transmit antennas and try to keep the
decoding complexity limited.
One natural class of such space-time codes are the codes
derived from Q-central division algebras. In this paper we will
measure their DMT. Unlike the case of complex quadratic
center, Q-central division algebras are divided into two categories with respect to their DMT performance. This division
is based on the ramification of the infinite Hasse-invariant
of the division algebra, which decides if the lattice code
corresponding to the division algebra can be embedded into
real or quaternionic space.
Our DMT classification holds for any multiplexing gain,
extending previous partial results in [2, 3] which were based
on the theory of Lie algebras. We note that the approach used
in this paper is quite different and more general. In the spirit
of [1] we are not just considering division algebra codes, but
all space-time codes where the code matrices are restricted
to Mn (R) (resp. Mn/2 (H)), and provide two different upper
bounds for the DMT of such codes. We then prove that if
we have a degree n2 -dimensional NVD lattice inside Mn (R)
(resp. Mn/2 (H)) then this code achieves the respective upper

bound. As the Q-central division algebra codes are of this
type, we get their DMT as a corollary.
II. N OTATION AND

PRELIMINARIES

Notation: Given a matrix X, we denote its complex
conjugate by X ∗ , its transpose by X T and its conjugate
transpose by X † .
˙ g(ρ) to mean
We use the the dotted inequality f (ρ) ≤
log g(ρ)
log f (ρ)
limρ→∞ log ρ ≤ limρ→∞ log ρ , and similarly for equality.
A. Subspaces and lattices
In this paper we will consider space-time codes that are
subsets of certain subspaces of the 2n2 -dimensional real vector
space Mn (C). The first such subspace consists of all the real
matrices inside Mn (C) and we denote it with Mn (R). The
other subspace of interest consists of quaternionic matrices.
Let us assume that 2 | n. We denote with Mn/2 (H) the set
of quaternionic matrices


A −B ∗
∈ Mn (C),
B A∗

where ∗ refers to complex conjugation and A and B are
complex matrices in Mn/2 (C). Note that quaternionic matrices
form a n2 -dimensional subspace in Mn (C).
The space-time codes we consider in this work are based
on additive groups in Mn (C).
Definition 1: A matrix lattice L ⊆ Mn (C) has the form
L = ZB1 ⊕ ZB2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ ZBk ,

where the matrices B1 , . . . , Bk are linearly independent over
R, i.e., form a lattice basis, and k is called the dimension of
the lattice.
We immediately see that if we have a lattice inside the space
Mn (R) or Mn/2 (H) the maximal dimension it can have is n2 .
Definition 2: If the minimum determinant of the lattice L ⊆
Mn×n (C) is non-zero, i.e. satisfies
detmin (L) :=

inf

06=X∈L

|det(X)| > 0,

we say that the lattice satisfies the non-vanishing determinant
(NVD) property.
Building high dimensional NVD lattices is a highly nontrivial task. A natural source of such lattices are division

algebras. Let D be a degree n Q-central division algebra.
We say that the algebra D is ramified at the infinite place
if D ⊗Q R ≃ Mn/2 (H). If it is not, then D ⊗Q R ≃ Mn (R).
Let Λ be an order in D.
Lemma 1: [2, Lemma 9.10] If the infinite prime is ramified
in the algebra D, then there exists an embedding
ψ : D → Mn/2 (H)
such that ψ(Λ) is a n2 dimensional NVD lattice. If D is not
ramified at the infinite place, then there exists an embedding
ψ : D → Mn (R)
such that ψ(Λ) is a n2 dimensional NVD lattice.
B. Channel model
We consider a MIMO system with n transmit and m receive
antennas, and minimal delay T = n. The received signal is
r
ρ
(1)
Hc X̄ + Wc ,
Yc =
n
where X̄ ∈ Mn (C) is the transmitted codeword, Hc ∈
Mm,n (C) and Wc ∈ Mm,n (C) are the channel and noise
matrices with i.i.d. circularly symmetric complex Gaussian
entries hij , wij ∼ NC (0, 1), and ρ is the signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR). The set of transmitted codewords C satisfies the
average power constraint
1 1 X
2
kXk ≤ 1.
(2)
|C| n2
X∈C

We suppose that perfect channel state information is available
at the receiver but not at the transmitter, and that maximum
likelihood decoding is performed.
In the DMT setting [4], we consider codes C(ρ) whose size
grows with the SNR, and define the multiplexing gain as
r = lim

ρ→∞

1 log |C|
,
n log ρ

and the diversity gain as
d(r) = − lim

ρ→∞

log Pe
,
log ρ

where Pe is the average error probability.
Spherically shaped lattice codes: Let now L be a lattice
in Mn (C). Given M , consider the subset of elements whose
Frobenius norm is bounded by M :
L(M ) = {X ∈ L : kXk ≤ M }.
Let k ≤ 2n2 be the dimension of L as a Z-module. As in [2],
rn
we choose M = ρ k and consider codes of the form
C(ρ) = M

−1

L(M ) = ρ

− rn
k

L(ρ

rn
k

),

which satisfy the power constraint (2). The multiplexing gain
of this code is r.
III. R EAL LATTICE CODES
In this section, we focus on the special case where C(ρ) ⊂
Mn (R), i.e. the code is a set of real matrices.

A. Equivalent real channel
First, we show that the channel model (1) is equivalent to
a real channel with n transmit and 2m receive antennas.
We can write Hc = Hr + iHi , Wc = Wr + iWi , where
Hr , Hi , Wr , Wi have i.i.d. real Gaussian entries with variance
1/2. If Yc = Yr + iYi , with Yr , Yi ∈ Mm×n (R), we can write
an equivalent real system with 2m receive antennas:
  r
  r  
ρ Hr
ρ
Wr
Yr
=
X̄ +
=
H X̄ + W, (3)
Y =
Wi
Yi
n Hi
n
where H ∈ M2m×n (R), W ∈ M2m×n (R) have real i.i.d.
Gaussian entries with variance 1/2.

B. General DMT upper bound for real codes
Using the equivalent real channel in the previous section,
we can now establish a general upper bound for the DMT of
real codes.
Theorem 1: Suppose that ∀ρ, C(ρ) ⊂ Mn (R). Then the
DMT of the code C is upper bounded by the function d1 (r)
connecting the points (r, [(m − r)(n − 2r)]+ ) where 2r ∈ Z.
Proof: This part of the proof closely follows [4]. Given
a rate R = r log ρ, consider the outage probability [5]
Pout (R) =

inf

Q≻0, tr(Q)≤n

P {Ψ(Q, H) ≤ R} ,

(4)

where Ψ(Q, H) is the maximum mutual information per
channel use of the real MIMO channel (3) with fixed H and
real input with fixed covariance matrix Q.1 Following a similar
reasoning as in [5, Section 3.2], it is not hard to see that
ρ
1
Ψ(Q, H) = log det(I + HQH T ).
2
n
As in [4, Section III.B], since log det is increasing on the
cone of positive definite symmetric matrices, for all Q such
that tr(Q) ≤ n we have Q
n  I and


1
T
Pout (R) ≥ P
log det(I + ρHH ) ≤ R .
2

Note that det(I + ρHH T ) = det(I + ρH T H). Let l =
min(2m, n), and ∆ = |n − 2m|. Let λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ · · · ≥ λl > 0
be the nonzero eigenvalues of H T H. The joint probability
distribution of λ = (λ1 , . . . , λl ) is given by [6]2 :
p(λ) = Ke

l
P

−

λi

i=1

l
Y

∆−1
2

λi

Y
(λi − λj )

(5)

i<j

i=1

for some constant K. Consider the change of variables λi =
ρ−αi ∀i. The corresponding distribution for α = (α1 , . . . , αl )
in the set A = {α : α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αl } is
p(α) = K(log ρ)l e

−

l
P

ρ−αi −

i=1

ρ

l
P

Y
αi ( ∆+1
2 )

i=1

i<j


ρ−αi−ρ−αj (6)

1 Unlike [5] and [4], we don’t use a strict inequality in the definition (4),
but our definition is equivalent since the set of H such that Ψ(Q, H) = R
has measure zero.
2 We have slightly modified the expression to be consistent with our
notation. In [6], the author considers a matrix AT A where each element
of A is N (0, 1).

Note that ∀δ, the point αδ such that αδ,i = α∗i + δil is in
A0 ∩ S δ and when δ → 0, αδ → α∗ . By continuity of f ,

Then we have
l
Y
.
(1 + ρλi ) ≤ ρ2r
Pout (R) = P

(

=P

(

l
Y

i=1

(1 + ρ

1−αi

)≤ρ

)

2r

i=1

)

l

lim inf

δ→0 A0 ∩Sδ

.

To simplify notation, we take s = 2r. Note that 1 + ρ1−αi ≤
+
+ .
2ρ(1−αi ) = ρ(1−αi ) , therefore
( l
)
Y
+
(1−α
)
s
i
˙ P
Pout (R) ≥
ρ
≤ρ
≥ P(A0 ),
i=1

where

A0 =

(

(

l
X
(1 − αi )+ ≤ s
α ∈ A : αi ≥ 0 ∀i = 1, . . . , l,
i=1

j
X

= α ∈ A : αj ≥ 0,

)

)

(1 − αi ) ≤ s ∀j = 1, . . . , l . (7)

i=1

In fact, given α ∈ A, let P
t = t(α) be such P
that αt+1 ≥ 1 ≥
j
t
α . Then ∀j = 1, . . . , l, i=1 (1 − αi ) ≤ i=1 (1 − αi ) =
Pt l
+
i=1 (1 − αi ) .
Consider Sδ = {α ∈ A : |αi − αj | > δ ∀i 6= j}. Then
l
l
P
P
Z
(∆+1)αi
Y
ρ−αi −
−
2
i=1
i=1
˙
ρ
e
Pout (R) ≥
(ρ−αi − ρ−αj )dα
A0

≥

Z

e

−

i=1

A0 ∩Sδ

≥

(1 − ρ
el

i<j

l
P

−δ l

)

Z

−αi

ρ

ρ

−

ρ

l
P

i=1

−

A0 ∩Sδ

(∆+1)αi
2

l
P

Y
(ρ−αi − ρ−αj )dα

l
P

In this section, we show that real spherically shaped lattice
codes with the NVD property achieve the DMT upper bound
of Theorem 1. This result extends Proposition 4.2 in [3].
Theorem 2: Let L be an n2 -dimensional lattice in Mn (R),
r
r
and consider the spherically shaped code C(ρ) = ρ− n L(ρ n ).
If L has the NVD property, then the DMT of the code C(ρ) is
the function d1 (r) connecting the points (r, [(m−r)(n−2r)]+ )
where 2r ∈ Z.
Proof: Since the upper bound has already been established in Theorem 1, we only need to prove that the DMT is
lower bounded by d1 (r). The following section follows very
closely the proof in [1], and thus some details are omitted. To
simplify notation, we assume that detmin (L) = 1.
We consider the sphere bound for the error probability for the
equivalent real channel (3): for a fixed channel realization H,
o
n
2
Pe (H) ≤ P kW k > d2H /4

where d2H is the squared minimum distance in the received
constellation:
2
.
min
H(X̄ − X̄ ′ )
d2H = ρ
X̄,X̄ ′ ∈C(ρ), X̄6=X̄ ′

αi Ni

i=1

.
dα =

ρ

A0 ∩Sδ

−

l
P

i=1

αi Ni

=ρ
dα,

. The previous inequality follows from
where Ni = ∆+2l−2i+1
2
the fact that ρ−αi − ρ−αj > ρ−αi (1 − ρ−δ ) for α ∈ Sδ , and
−

C. DMT of real lattice codes with NVD

i<j

Z

ρ−αi

e i=1
≥ 1e if αi ≥ 0. (Note that for a fixed i, there are
l − i possible values for j such that i < j.)
l
P
(q + l + 1 − 2i)αi . Then
Lemma 2: Let f (α) =

1− 2r
n

∗

inf f (α) = (−q−l+2 ⌊s⌋+1)s+ql−⌊s⌋ (⌊s⌋+1) = f (α ),

α∈A0

α∗k−1

α∗k

α∗k+1

where
= ... =
= 0,
= k − s,
= ... =
α∗l = 1.
The proof of Lemma 2 can be found in Appendix A.
Using Lemma
2 with q = ∆ + l, s = 2r, we find that
Pl
inf α∈A0 i=1 Ni αi = inf α∈A0 f (α)
is equal to
2

1
[(−∆ − 2l + 2 ⌊2r⌋ + 1)2r + (∆ + l)l − ⌊2r⌋ (⌊2r⌋ + 1)]
2
⌊2r⌋ (⌊2r⌋ + 1)
= (−2m − n + 2 ⌊2r⌋ + 1)r + mn −
.
2
This is the piecewise function d1 (r) connecting the points
(r, [(m − r)(n − 2r)]+ ) where 2r ∈ Z.
Using the Laplace principle, ∀δ > 0 we have
f (α)
log Pout (R)
≥ inf
.
lim −
ρ→∞
A0 ∩Sδ
log ρ
2

2

kH(X − X ′ )k .

min
r

X,X ′ ∈L(ρ n ), X6=X ′

We denote ∆X = X − X ′ . Let l = min(2m, n), and ∆ =
|n − 2m|. Let λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ · · · ≥ λl > 0 be the non-zero
eigenvalues of H T H, and 0 ≤ µ1 ≤ · · · ≤ µn the eigenvalues
of ∆X∆X T . Using the mismatched eigenvalue bound and the
arithmetic-geometric inequality as in [1], for all k = 1, . . . , l
2r
.
min
d2H = ρ1− n
tr(H∆X∆X T H T )
r
X,X ′ ∈L(ρ n ), X6=X ′

i=1

α∗1

f (α)
f (α∗ )
=
= d1 (r).
2
2

≥ρ

1− 2r
n

l
X

µi λi ≥ kρ

1− 2r
n

i=1

k
Y

λi

i=1
2

! k1

k
Y

i=1

2r

µi

! k1

.

For all i = 1, . . . , n, µi ≤ k∆Xk ≤ 4ρ n , and
n
Y

µi = det(∆X∆X T ) ≥ 1

i=1

due to the NVD property. Consequently, for all k = 1, . . . , l
k
Y

µi =

i=1

det(∆X∆X T )
1
Qn
≥ 2r(n−k) .
µ
j
ρ n
j=k+1

With the change of variables λi = ρ−αi ∀i = 1, . . . , l, we can
write
˙ ρ1− 2r
n ρ
d2H ≥

1
−k

k
P

1

αi

i=1

ρ

2r(n−k)
n

=ρ

1
−k

k
P

i=1

αi +2r−k

!

= ρδk (α,2r)

∀k = 1, . . . , l,

d(r)
8

where we have set α = (α1 , . . . , αl ) and
1
δk (α, s) = −
k

k
X

!

αi + s − k .

i=1

(8)

3

To simplify the notation, we will take s = 2r.
2
Since 2 kW k is a χ2 (2mn) random variable, we have

2
1
2

n
o mn−1
X
dj
2
e−d .
P kW k > d =
j!
j=0

0

Let p(α) be the distribution of α in (6). Note that for i < j,
ρ−αi ≥ ρ−αj and for a fixed i, there are l − i possible values
for j. Consequently
′

p(α) ≤ p (α) = Ke

−

l
P

ρ−αi −

ρ

i=1

l
P

i=1

αi Ni

9
2

(log ρ)l

(9)

1

1
2

2

3
2

r

Fig. 1. DMT upper bounds for real (solid) and quaternion (dashed) codes for
n = 4 and m = 2. The dotted lines correspond to the optimal DMT.

A. Equivalent quaternion channel
First, we derive an equivalent model where the channel has
quaternionic form. We can write



Yc = Y1 Y2 , Hc = H1 H2 , Wc = W1 W2 ,

where Ni = ∆+2l−2i+1
. By averaging over the channel, the
2
error probability is bounded by

Z
Z 
ρδk (α,s)
2
p(α)dα.
Pe = Pe (α)p(α)dα ≤ P kW k >
4

where Y1 , Y2 , H1 , H2 , W1 , W2 ∈ Mm×p (C). Then
r
r
ρ
ρ
Y1 =
(H1 A+H2 B)+W1 , Y2 =
(−H1 B ∗ +H2 A∗ )+W2 ,
n
n
and we have the equivalent “quaternionic channel”:

Finally, we get ∀k = 1, . . . , l,
Z
Z
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα
p′ (α)Φ(d2H )dα ≤
Pe ≤



 


√
H1
H2
A −B ∗
W1
W2
Y1
Y2
= ρ
+
−H2∗ H1∗
−W2∗ W1∗
B
A∗
−Y2∗ Y1∗
|
{z
}
{z
}|
{z
} |
{z
}
|

(10)

A

A

where A = {α : α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αl }, and


2mn−1
X  d j 1
d
2
−d
4
=e
Φ(d) = P kW k >
.
4
4
j!
j=0

(11)

The following Lemma is proven in Appendix B:
Lemma 3:


Z
1
− lim
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα
min
log
ρ→∞ log ρ
k=1,...,l
A
l
X
Ni αi ,
≥ inf
α∈A0

i=1

where A0 is defined in (7).
The proof of the Theorem is concluded using Lemma 2 with
q = ∆ + l, s = 2r.
IV. Q UATERNION

LATTICE CODES

Suppose that n = 2p is even. We consider again the channel
r
ρ
(12)
Hc X̄ + Wc ,
Yc =
n
and we suppose that the codewords X̄ are of the form


A −B ∗
X̄ =
∈ M2p (C),
B A∗
where A, B ∈ Mp (C).



Y

H

X

W

B. General DMT upper bound for quaternion codes
Theorem 3: Suppose that ∀ρ, C(ρ) ⊂ Mn/2 (H). Then the
DMT of the code C is upper bounded by the function d2 (r)
connecting the points (r, [(m − r)(n − 2r)]+ ) for r ∈ Z.
Proof: The quaternionic channel can be written in the
complex MIMO channel form

  
 r 

ρ
H1
H2
Y1
A
W1
+
=
(13)
−Y2∗
B
−W2∗
n −H2∗ H1∗

If r is the multiplexing gain of the original system (12), then
the multiplexing gain of this channel is 2r, since the same
number of symbols is transmitted using half the frame length.
Consider the eigenvalues λ1 = λ′1 ≥ λ2 = λ′2 ≥ · · · ≥ λp =
λ′p ≥ 0 of H † H. Let l = min(m, p) the number of pairs
of nonzero eigenvalues, and ∆ = |p − m|. For fixed H, the
capacity of this channel is [5]
p
X
.
†
log(1 + ρλi ).
C(H) = log det(I + ρH H) = 2
i=1

The joint eigenvalue density p(λ) = p(λ1 , . . . , λl ) of a
quaternion Wishart matrix is [7]3
l

P
l
Y
Y
−
λi
2∆+1
4
i=1
λi
e
(λi − λj )
p(λ1 , . . . , λp ) = K
i<j

3 The

i=1

quaternion case corresponds to taking β = 4 in [7, equation (4.5)].
Note that we modify the distribution to take into account the fact that each
entry of H has variance 1/2 per real dimension.

for some constant K. Considering the change of variables λi =
ρ−αi ∀i = 1, . . . , l, the distribution of α = (α1 , . . . , αl ) is
p(α)=K(log ρ)l e

−

l
P

ρ−αi −2

ρ

i=1

l
P

i=1

αi (∆+1) Y

ρ−αi−ρ−αj

i<j

4

=P

)

.
(1+ρ1−αi ) < ρr = P

i=1

(

l
Y

+

o
Pl
+
where A0 = α : 0 ≤ α1 ≤ . . . ≤ αl ,
i=1 (1 − αi ) < r .
Given δ > 0, define Sδ = {α : |αi − αj | > δ ∀i 6= j}. Then
Pout (R)
l
l
Z
P
P
−
ρ−αi −2
αi (∆+1) Y
i=1
i=1
˙
(ρ−αi − ρ−αj )4 dα
e
ρ
≥
A0 ∩Sδ

≥

(1 − ρ
el

i<j

−δ l

)

Z

ρ

A0 ∩Sδ

−2

l
P

i=1

Ni αi

dα

Pl
where Ni = 2(∆ + 2l − 2i + 1). Let f (α) = i=1 αi Ni .
out (R)
≥
Using the Laplace principle, limρ→∞ − log Plog
ρ
2 inf A0 ∩Sδ f (α) ∀δ > 0. Using Lemma 2 with s = r,
q = ∆ + l, we find that 2 inf α∈A0 f (α) = 2f (α∗ ) is
the piecewise linear function d2 (r) connecting the points
+
+
(r, [2(p − r)(m − r)] ) = (r, [(n − 2r)(m − r)] ) for r ∈ Z.
Note that ∀δ, the point αδ such that αδ,i = α∗i + δil is in
A0 ∩ S δ and when δ → 0, αδ → α∗ . By continuity of f ,
l
2 limδ→0 inf A0 ∩Sδ f (α) = 2f (α∗ ) = d2 (r).
C. DMT of quaternionic lattice codes with NVD
We now show that quaternionic lattice codes with NVD
achieve the upper bound of Theorem 3. This result extends
Proposition 4.3 in [3].
Theorem 4: Let L be an n2 -dimensional lattice in Mn/2 (H),
r
r
and consider the spherically shaped code C(ρ) = ρ− n L(ρ n ).
If L has the NVD property, then the DMT of the code C(ρ)
is the piecewise linear function d2 (r) connecting the points
(r, [(m − r)(n − 2r)]+ ) for r ∈ Z.
Proof: To simplify notation, assume
detmin (L)
n
o = 1. For
2
a fixed realization H, Pe (H) ≤ P kW k > d2H /4 , where
2r
.
d2H = ρ1− n

min
r

′

λ′1

λ′2

Let ∆X = X − X . We denote by λ1 =
≥ λ2 =
≥
· · · ≥ λp = λ′p ≥ 0 the eigenvalues of H † H, and by 0 ≤ µ1 =
µ′1 ≤ · · · ≤ µp = µ′p the eigenvalues of ∆X∆X † . Both sets of
eigenvalues have multiplicity 2 since H and X are quaternion
matrices. Again we set l = min(m, p) and ∆ = |p − m|.
Using the mismatched eigenvalue bound and the arithmeticgeometric inequality as in [1], we find that for all k = 1, . . . , l,
2r
.
d2H = ρ1− n
min
tr(H∆X∆X † H † )
′
′
X,X ∈C(ρ), X6=X

i=1
2

µi

! k1

.

2r

With the change of variables λi = ρ−αi ∀i = 1, . . . , l, we
have ∀k = 1, . . . , l

k
k
P
P
1
1
αi
αi +r−k
−k
r −k
1− p
− r(p−k)
2 ˙
i=1
i=1
p
dH ≥ 2ρ
ρ
= 2ρδk (α)
ρ
= 2ρ
 k

P
where α = (α1 , . . . , αl ) and δk (α) = − k1
αi + r − k .
i=1

2

Since 2 kW k ∼ 2χ2 (2mp), we have


ρδk (α)
2
Pe (H) ≤ P kW k >
2

j
mp−1
δ
(α)
δk (α)
X
ρk
1
−ρ 4
e
=
= Φ(δk (α, r)).
4
j!
j=0

By averaging with respect to the distribution p(α), we get
Z
Z
Pe ≤
p(α)Φ(δk (α, r))dα ≤
p′ (α)Φ(δk (α, r))dα
A

A

where A = {α : α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αl }, and
l

′

p (α) = K(log ρ) e

−

l
P

ρ−αi

i=1

ρ

−

l
P

αi Ni

i=1

,

where Ni = 2(∆ + 2l − 2i + 1). Note that p′ (α) and
Φ(δk (α, r)) have the same form asPin (9) and (11). From
l
Lemma 3 we find d(r) ≥ inf α∈A0 2 i=1 αi (∆+2l −2i+1),
which by Lemma 2 is the piecewise linear function connecting
the points (r, [(n − 2r)(m − r)]+ ) for r ∈ Z.
A PPENDIX
A. Proof of Lemma 2
¯
Let d(s)
= (−q − l + 2 ⌊s⌋ + 1)s + ql − ⌊s⌋ (⌊s⌋ + 1).
Without loss of generality, we can suppose that k − 1 ≤ s < k
for some k ∈ N, i.e. k − 1 = ⌊s⌋, k = ⌊s⌋ + 1.
¯
First, we show that ∀α ∈ A0 , we have f (α) ≥ d(s).
In fact
f (α) = (q − l − 1)

X,X ′ ∈L(ρ n ), X6=X ′

k
Y

1
1
det(∆X∆X † ) 2
Qn
≥ 2r(p−k) = r(p−k) .
ρ n
j=k+1 µj
ρ p

2

kH(X − X ′ )k .

λi

i=1

! k1

1

µi =

i=1

)

ρ(1−αi ) < ρr ≥ P(A0 )

i=1

n

(2µi λi ) ≥ 2kρ

k
Y

1− 2r
n

As before, for all i = 1, . . . , n, µi ≤ k∆Xk ≤ 4ρ n , and
Q
n
† 21
i=1 µi = det(∆X∆X ) ≥ 1 using the NVD property of
the code. Consequently, for all k = 1, . . . , l
k
Y

i=1

l
Y

l
X
i=1

The output probability for rate R = r log ρ is given by
)
( l
X
.
log(1 + ρλi ) < 2r log ρ
Pout (R) = P 2
(

≥ρ

1− 2r
n

l
X

αi + 2

i=1

≥ (q − l − 1) (l − s) + 2

l
X

(l − i + 1)αi

i=1
l
i
XX

αi

i=k j=1

≥ (q − l − 1) (l − s) + 2

l
X
(i − s)
i=k

= (q − l − 1) (l − s) + l(l + 1) − (k − 1)k − 2(l − k + 1)s
¯
= d(s).

¯
Next, we show that ∃α∗ such that f (α∗ ) = d(s).
Let α∗1 = . . . = α∗k−1 = 0, α∗k = k −s, α∗k+1 = . . . = α∗l = 1.
Then
l
X

f (α∗ ) =

(q + l + 1) αi − 2

l
X

iαi

i=1

i=1

= (q + l + 1) (l − s) − 2k(k − s) − l(l + 1) + k(k + 1)
¯
= d(s)

B. Proof of Lemma 3
The proof closely follows [8], which is a preliminary version
of [1]. Note that Φ(ρδk (α,s) ) ≤ 1 since it is a probability.
Given ε > 0, we can bound the integral (10) as follows
Z
l Z
X
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα,
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα +
Pe ≤
Ā

j=1

Aj

(14)
where Ā = {α ∈ A : αi ≥ −ε ∀i = 1, . . . , l} and
Aj = {α ∈ A : αj < −ε}. Note that
Z
Z
′
δk (α,s)
p′ (α)dα
p (α)Φ(ρ
)dα ≤
Aj
Aj


Z ε
YZ ∞
−αj
−αi
≤
e−ρ ρ−αi Ni dαi 
e−ρ ρ−αj Nj dαj
−∞

i6=j



=

YZ

0

i6=j

.
= ρ0

Z

∞

∞

ρε

i −1
e−λi λN
i

log ρ

Z

∞

ρε

λj e−λj
dλj
log ρ

λj e−λj
dλj
log ρ

Ā

α>−ε
δ(α,s)<ε

+

n
X

Z

p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα,

j=1 α>−ǫ,
δj (α,s)≥ε

where the notation α > −ǫ means αi > −ǫ ∀i = 1, . . . , l.
We have
Z
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα
(15)

α>−ǫ,
δj (α,s)≥ε

≤

e

δj (α,s)
4

−ρ

≤

l
Y

2mn−1
X  δj (α,s) t

ρ

4

t=0

α>−ǫ,
δj (α,s)≥ε



Z

e

δj (α,s)
4

−ρ

2mn−1
X  δj (α,s) t

ρ

4

t=0

α1 ,...,αj >−ε
δj (α,s)≥ε

j
P

1 − i=1 Ni
dα1 . . . dαj
ρ
t!

since δj (α, s) is independent of αi for i > j. As δj (α, s) ≥ ε,
αi > −ε implies αi ≤ −jε − s + j, the second integral is
over a bounded region and tends to zero exponentially fast
as a function of ρ, while the first integral has a finite SNR
exponent. Thus, (15) tends to zero exponentially fast.
Finally, the SNR exponent of (10) is determined by the
behavior of
Z
Z
p′ (α)dα
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα ≤
α>−ε
δ(α,s)<ε

α>−ε
δ(α,s)<ε

≤

Z

ρ

−

n
P

i=1

Ni αi

dα

α>−ε
δ(α,s)<ε

The conclusion follows by using the Laplace principle, and
taking ǫ → 0. Note that
)
(
j
X
(1 − αi ) ≤ s ∀j = 1, . . . , l
A0 = α ∈ A : αj ≥ 0,
i=1

= {α : αj ≥ 0, δj (α, s) ≤ 0 ∀j = 1, . . . , l}.

−∞



which vanishes exponentially fast as a function of ρ. For the
first term in (14), we have
Z
Z
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα
p′ (α)Φ(ρδk (α,s) )dα ≤

Z

·

Z

i=j+1α >−ε
i



ρ−αi Ni dαi 

l
1 Y −αi Ni
dα
ρ
t! i=1

R EFERENCES
[1] P. Elia, K. R. Kumar, S. A. Pawar, P. V. Kumar, and H.-F. Lu, “Explicit
space-time codes achieving the diversity-multiplexing gain tradeoff,”
IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 3869–3884, 2006.
[2] R.Vehkalahti, H.-F. Lu, and L. Luzzi, “Inverse determinant sums and
connections between fading channel information theory and algebra,”
IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 59, pp. 6060–6082, Sept 2013.
[3] L. Luzzi, R. Vehkalahti, and A. Gorodnik, “Towards a complete DMT
classification of division algebra codes,” in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), July 2016, pp. 2993–2997.
[4] L. Zheng and D. Tse, “Diversity and multiplexing: A fundamental tradeoff
in multiple-antenna channels,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 49, pp. 1073–
1096, May 2003.
[5] E. Telatar, “Capacity of multi-antenna Gaussian channels,” Europ. Trans.
Telecomm., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 585–595, Nov.-Dec. 1999.
[6] A. Edelman, “Eigenvalues and condition numbers of random matrices,”
Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Math., Massachusetts Inst. Technol., Cambridge,
MA, USA, 1989.
[7] A. Edelman and N. R. Rao, “Random matrix theory,” Acta Numerica,
vol. 14, pp. 233–297, 2005.
[8] P. Elia, K. R. Kumar, S. A. Pawar, P. V. Kumar, and H.-F. Lu, Explicit,
Minimum Delay Space-Time Codes Achieving the Diversity-Multiplexing
Gain Tradeoff. Technical report, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore,
2005.

