}
==================

![FER comparison of proposed model and the model of [@Chatzigeorgiou2008] for case 0: general MIMO channels with $N_T=1$, $N=N_R=1,2,4$, uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.case.0"}](FER_MIMO_Comparison_Result_Without_Outaget_Uncoded){width="80.00000%"}

![Average FER of the HRS scheme for case 1: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.case.1"}](UnCoded_L100_case1){width="80.00000%"}

![Theoretical and simulated FER of the HRS scheme for case 4 and 5: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.5"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_5){width="80.00000%"}

![Theoretical and simulated FER of the HRS scheme for case 6 and 7: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.6.7"}](Coded_2n3_case_6_7){width="80.00000%"}

![Average FER of the HRS, AF-RS and PDF-RS schemes for case 4 with $n=4$: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.AF.PDF.N4"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_AF_PDF_HRS_N4){width="80.00000%"}

In this section, we compare the proposed approximate FER expressions with the exact FER obtained by Monte-Carlo simulations. Unless specifically mentioned, the simulations are performed for a BPSK modulation and a frame size of $100$ or $200$ symbols over block Rayleigh fading channels. We consider two basic cases: (1) the *uncoded* case, where none channel code is used; and (2) the *coded* case, where a systematic convolutional code with a code rate of $1/2$ and the generator matrix of $(5,7)_8$ or a code rate of $2/
} 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

! [ FER comparison of proposed model and the model of [ @Chatzigeorgiou2008 ] for case 0: cosmopolitan MIMO groove with $ N_T=1 $, $ N = N_R=1,2,4 $, uncoded.[]{data - label="fig.case.0"}](FER_MIMO_Comparison_Result_Without_Outaget_Uncoded){width="80.00000% " } 

! [ Average FER of the HRS scheme for subject 1: $ \Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1 $, uncoded.[]{data - label="fig.case.1"}](UnCoded_L100_case1){width="80.00000% " } 

! [ Theoretical and fake FER of the HRS scheme for case 4 and 5: $ \Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1 $, coded.[]{data - label="fig.case.4.5"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_5){width="80.00000% " } 

! [ Theoretical and simulated FER of the HRS dodge for case 6 and 7: $ \Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1 $, coded.[]{data - label="fig.case.6.7"}](Coded_2n3_case_6_7){width="80.00000% " } 

! [ Average FER of the HRS, AF - RS and PDF - RS scheme for case 4 with $ n=4 $: $ \Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1 $, coded.[]{data - label="fig.case.4.AF.PDF.N4"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_AF_PDF_HRS_N4){width="80.00000% " } 

 In this section, we compare the nominate approximate FER expressions with the exact FER receive by Monte - Carlo model. Unless specifically mentioned, the simulations are performed for a BPSK modulation and a frame size of $ 100 $ or $ 200 $ symbol over block Rayleigh fading channels. We regard two basic cases: (1) the * uncoded * case, where none channel code is used; and (2) the * code * case, where a systematic convolutional code with a code rate of $ 1/2 $ and the generator matrix of $ (5,7)_8 $ or a code rate of $ 2/
}
==================

![FER comparison of proposed oodel and the model of [@Chatzjgeorgioj2008] for case 0: general MIMO chainelw wity $N_T=1$, $N=N_R=1,2,4$, uncoded.[]{data-lacel="fig.casv.0"}](FER_MIMO_Cimpacison_Result_Withonf_Outageb_Bncodsf){widch="80.00000%"}

![Everage FER of jhe HRS scheke for case 1: $\Okeea_0=\Lmega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.casq.1"}](UnCodec_L100_fase1){width="80.00000%"}

![Theorgticak and simulated FER of the HRS scheme fkr case 4 and 5: $\Omega_0=\Okega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="vig.cwse.4.5"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_5){width="80.00000%"}

![Hheoretical and wimulated FEF of the HGV scheme fkr case 6 and 7: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, codeb.[]{data-label="fug.xasf.6.7"}](Woded_2n3_case_6_7){wmdth="80.00000%"}

![Avvrage FER of bne HRS, AF-RS amd PDF-RS schemcs foc cawe 4 with $n=4$: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1m}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-labgl="fig.case.4.AX.PBF.N4"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_AF_PDF_HRS_B4){wudth="80.00000%"}

It thhs sdxtiun, se ckmpare thx proposed zpproximate FER expressions wiuh eye exact FER kbtainqd by Monte-Carlo simulations. Unless specixiczlly mentioned, the simuoations are performed for a BPFK modulation and a frame size of $100$ or $200$ symbols ovar blkzk Xqyleiey vading channels. We consider two basic cases: (1) ege *ukcoded* case, wherc none channel codr ls osed; and (2) the *zoded* ezss, where a systematlc convjlutiinal code witn a code rate of $1/2$ and the gwnerator matgix if $(5,7)_8$ or a code rate of $2/
} ================== ![FER comparison of proposed model model [@Chatzigeorgiou2008] for 0: general MIMO ![Average of the HRS for case 1: uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.case.1"}](UnCoded_L100_case1){width="80.00000%"} ![Theoretical and simulated FER of HRS scheme for case 4 and 5: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.5"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_5){width="80.00000%"} ![Theoretical and simulated FER the HRS scheme for case 6 and 7: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.6.7"}](Coded_2n3_case_6_7){width="80.00000%"} ![Average FER of HRS, and schemes case 4 with $n=4$: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.AF.PDF.N4"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_AF_PDF_HRS_N4){width="80.00000%"} In this section, we compare the proposed approximate FER expressions the exact FER obtained by Monte-Carlo simulations. Unless mentioned, the simulations are for a BPSK modulation and frame of $100$ $200$ over Rayleigh fading channels. consider two basic cases: (1) the *uncoded* case, where none channel code is used; and (2) the case, where convolutional code a rate $1/2$ and the of $(5,7)_8$ or a code rate
}
==================

![FER comparison of proposed moDel and the mOdel oF [@ChAtzIgEorgIou2008] fOr case 0: general MimO chAnnels with $N_T=1$, $N=N_R=1,2,4$, uncoded.[]{Data-lAbEL="fig.CAsE.0"}](FER_MiMO_CompARiSON_ReSuLt_witHoUT_OUtageT_UnCoded){wiDth="80.00000%"}

![Average fER Of The HRS scheme FOr Case 1: $\Omega_0=\OMegA_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, uncoDed.[]{Data-laBeL="fiG.Case.1"}](UNCoDed_L100_cAse1){widTH="80.00000%"}

![TheorEtical and SiMUlated feR of the hrs sChemE for case 4 and 5: $\Omega_0=\OMEgA_{1I}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{daTa-labeL="fIG.cASE.4.5"}](CoDed_1N2_case_4_5){width="80.00000%"}

![thEoretICal and sIMuLATEd Fer of the HRS scheMe for case 6 anD 7: $\omeGa_0=\OmegA_{1i}=\omeGA_{2i}=1$, codeD.[]{data-LaBEl="fIg.case.6.7"}](Coded_2N3_casE_6_7){width="80.00000%"}

![AveRage FEr Of the HRs, aF-RS and pDF-RS sCheMes For cASe 4 WiTh $n=4$: $\omEGa_0=\OMEgA_{1i}=\OMEga_{2I}=1$, coded.[]{daTa-LaBel="fiG.casE.4.af.pdF.N4"}](COdeD_1n2_caSe_4_AF_PdF_HRS_N4){width="80.00000%"}

In ThiS secTIon, We comPare tHe prOpOsed aPproxiMate FeR Expressions with The eXact FER obTaiNeD by moNte-CaRLo simuLatIonS. Unless SpecifiCAllY mENTIoNed, the simulations aRe PERfOrmed for A BPSK mODuLaTIon and a fRaMe sIze oF $100$ OR $200$ symbOls oVEr Block RayLeigh fADiNg ChannelS. WE consiDeR twO baSic caSEs: (1) thE *uncodEd* case, whEre noNE channel code is USed; and (2) the *codeD* CaSE, WhERe a sYstEmatic convoLutiONal cOde wITh A coDE rate Of $1/2$ and ThE GeNErator matrix of $(5,7)_8$ or a coDe Rate of $2/
}
==================

![FE R comparis on of  pr opo se d mo deland the modelo f [@ Chatzigeorgiou2008] fo r cas e0 : ge n er al MI MO chan n el s wit h$N _T= 1$ ,  $ N=N_R =1, 2,4$, u ncoded.[]{ dat a- label="fig.c a se .0"}](FER_ MIM O_Comparison _Re sult_W it hou t _Outa get _Unco ded){w i dth="8 0.00000%" }![Aver a ge FERo f  t he H RS scheme for cas e  1 :  $\Omega_0=\Om ega_{1 i} = \O m e ga_ {2i }=1$, unco de d.[]{ d ata-lab e l= " f i g.c a se.1"}](UnCod ed_L100_cas e 1){ width= "8 0.0 0 000%"} 

![T he o ret ical and si mula ted FER o f theH RS sche m e for c ase 4and  5:  $\O m eg a_ 0=\ Om e ga_ { 1i }=\ O meg a_{2i}=1 $,  c oded. []{d a t a - labe l=" fig. case. 4.5"}](Coded_ 1n2 _cas e _4_ 5){wi dth=" 80.0 00 00%"} 

![Th eoret ic al and simulate d FE R of theHRS  s che me  forc ase 6and  7:  $\Omeg a_0=\Om e ga_ {1 i } = \O mega_{2i}=1$, code d. [ ] {d ata-labe l="fig . ca se . 6.7"}](C od ed_ 2n3_ c a se_6_ 7){w i dt h="80.00 000%"} 
! [A verageFE R of t he  HR S,AF-RS andPDF-RS  schemes  forc ase 4 with $n= 4 $: $\Omega_0= \ Om e g a_ { 1i}= \Om ega_{2i}=1$ , co d ed.[ ]{da t a- lab e l="fi g.cas e. 4 .A F .PDF.N4"}](Coded_1n 2_ case_4 _AF_P DF_HRS_N4){wi dth="80.00 0 0 0 %"}

Inthis se c tion, we compa re th e proposed approxim ate F ER expre ssions wi t h  the exa ctFER  ob tai n e dby Monte-Carl o simu la tions.Unl ess spe cif ica lly  me nt ioned, th e simula ti on sar e p erfor m ed for a  B PSK  m odu latio n  and a  fram e si ze  o f  $1 00$ or$ 20 0 $  sym bo ls  ove r b lo ck Ra ylei g h f ading c hannels.Wec onsi de rtwo bas ic cases: (1)  t he *uncode d*  ca se, wh e r e none c hannel code is used; an d  (2) th e * coded * ca se, where  asystem ati c  convo lution al co de  wi t h  a co d e  r ate  o f $1/2$ an d the  gene ra tormatrixof $(5,7)_8$ or ac ode  rate of $2/
}
==================

![FER comparison_of proposed_model and the model_of [@Chatzigeorgiou2008]_for_case 0:_general_MIMO channels with_$N_T=1$, $N=N_R=1,2,4$, uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.case.0"}](FER_MIMO_Comparison_Result_Without_Outaget_Uncoded){width="80.00000%"}

![Average_FER of the HRS_scheme for case_1:_$\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, uncoded.[]{data-label="fig.case.1"}](UnCoded_L100_case1){width="80.00000%"}

![Theoretical and simulated FER of the HRS scheme for case 4 and 5:_$\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$,_coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.5"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_5){width="80.00000%"}

![Theoretical and_simulated_FER_of the HRS scheme for_case 6 and 7: $\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$,_coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.6.7"}](Coded_2n3_case_6_7){width="80.00000%"}

![Average FER_of the HRS, AF-RS and PDF-RS schemes for_case_4 with $n=4$:_$\Omega_0=\Omega_{1i}=\Omega_{2i}=1$, coded.[]{data-label="fig.case.4.AF.PDF.N4"}](Coded_1n2_case_4_AF_PDF_HRS_N4){width="80.00000%"}

In this section, we compare the proposed approximate_FER expressions with the exact FER_obtained by Monte-Carlo_simulations._Unless_specifically mentioned, the simulations_are performed for a BPSK modulation_and a frame size of $100$_or $200$ symbols over block Rayleigh fading_channels. We consider two basic cases:_(1) the *uncoded* case, where_none channel_code is used; and (2)_the *coded* case,_where a_systematic convolutional code_with a code rate of $1/2$_and the generator_matrix of $(5,7)_8$ or a code_rate_of $2/