{"about":{"site":"https://codewithpapers.app","non_affiliation":"Code with Papers and Syntology are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Papers with Code, Meta, or the pwc-archive mirror.","licence":"CC BY-SA 4.0","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","attribution":"https://codewithpapers.app/attribution","modified":"archive material modified by Syntology; see the attribution page"},"url":"/paper/a-comparative-study-of-deep-learning-and","title":"A Comparative Study of Deep Learning and Iterative Algorithms for Joint Channel Estimation and Signal Detection in OFDM Systems","arxiv_id":"2303.03678","date":"2023-03-07","proceeding":null,"authors":["Haocheng Ju","Haimiao Zhang","Lin Li","Xiao Li","Bin Dong"],"abstract":"Joint channel estimation and signal detection (JCESD) is crucial in orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) systems, but traditional algorithms perform poorly in low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) scenarios. Deep learning (DL) methods have been investigated, but concerns regarding computational expense and lack of validation in low-SNR settings remain. Hence, the development of a robust and low-complexity model that can deliver excellent performance across a wide range of SNRs is highly desirable. In this paper, we aim to establish a benchmark where traditional algorithms and DL methods are validated on different channel models, Doppler, and SNR settings, particularly focusing on the semi-blind setting. In particular, we propose a new DL model where the backbone network is formed by unrolling the iterative algorithm, and the hyperparameters are estimated by hypernetworks. Additionally, we adapt a lightweight DenseNet to the task of JCESD for comparison. We evaluate different methods in three aspects: generalization in terms of bit error rate (BER), robustness, and complexity. Our results indicate that DL approaches outperform traditional algorithms in the challenging low-SNR setting, while the iterative algorithm performs better in high-SNR settings. Furthermore, the iterative algorithm is more robust in the presence of carrier frequency offset, whereas DL methods excel when signals are corrupted by asymmetric Gaussian noise.","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03678v3","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.03678v3.pdf","source":{"archive":"pwc-archive (Hugging Face), CC BY-SA 4.0","snapshot":"2025-07-28","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","row_kind":"abstracts"},"code_links":[{"paper_slug":"a-comparative-study-of-deep-learning-and","repo_url":"https://github.com/j991222/mimo_jcesd","is_official":1,"mentioned_in_paper":1,"mentioned_in_github":1,"framework":"pytorch","reach":null}],"tasks":[{"task_slug":"unrolling","task_name":"Rolling Shutter Correction"}],"methods":[{"method_slug":"1x1-convolution","method_name":"1x1 Convolution"},{"method_slug":"average-pooling","method_name":"Average Pooling"},{"method_slug":"batch-normalization","method_name":"Batch Normalization"},{"method_slug":"concatenated-skip-connection","method_name":"Concatenated Skip Connection"},{"method_slug":"convolution","method_name":"Convolution"},{"method_slug":"dense-block","method_name":"Dense Block"},{"method_slug":"dense-connections","method_name":"Dense Connections"},{"method_slug":"dropout","method_name":"Dropout"},{"method_slug":"global-average-pooling","method_name":"Global Average Pooling"},{"method_slug":"kaiming-initialization","method_name":"Kaiming Initialization"},{"method_slug":"max-pooling","method_name":"Max Pooling"},{"method_slug":"relu","method_name":"ReLU"},{"method_slug":"softmax","method_name":"Softmax"}],"datasets_introduced":[],"methods_introduced":[],"results":[],"syntology":{"atlas_url":null,"mcp":null,"developers":"https://syntology.ai/developers"},"arxiv_metadata":null,"syntology_extracted_results":null}