Exercises
ex-otfs-ch20-01
EasyState the time-frequency uncertainty principle and explain its consequence for OTFS pulse design.
.
Principle
. No pulse can be arbitrarily compact in both domains.
OTFS consequence
Any transmit pulse has bounded time and frequency concentration. Time-compact pulses leak in frequency → ICI. Frequency-compact pulses leak in time → ISI. Design picks the trade-off.
Equality
Gaussian achieves equality: optimally localized in both domains. Good default for high-mobility + sensing.
ex-otfs-ch20-02
EasyState the bi-orthogonality condition for OTFS transmit-receive pulse pair.
Cross-ambiguity at DD grid = Dirac comb.
Condition
Cross-ambiguity
Meaning
Symbol at DD cell reaches receiver at the same cell — no leakage to other cells.
ex-otfs-ch20-03
EasyList the PAPR values (99%-tile) for rectangular + CP, DFT-s-OFDM, and OTFS.
10-11, 5-6, 7-8.
Values
CP-OFDM: 10-11 dB. DFT-s-OFDM: 5-6 dB. OTFS: 7-8 dB.
Ranking
DFT-s OTFS CP-OFDM. OTFS is between.
Implications
OTFS PAPR 2 dB higher than DFT-s. Matters for UE mmWave uplink. OFDM-downlink: PAPR not critical.
ex-otfs-ch20-04
MediumFor an RRC pair with roll-off , what is the critical sampling density, and what bandwidth penalty does the roll-off incur?
.
Critical sampling
For RRC: . Slightly over-critical. Bi-orthogonality holds.
Bandwidth penalty
Excess bandwidth: . For every 1 MHz of useful bandwidth: 1.35 MHz allocated.
Spectral efficiency
Rate: of brickwall (hypothetical). Significant but acceptable for mobility benefits.
Trade-off
: 20% penalty, adequate for vehicular. : 50% penalty, over-engineered for most use cases.
ex-otfs-ch20-05
MediumA 5G NR OTFS deployment has 1024 subcarriers. What window sidelobe level is required for 3GPP OOBE mask compliance?
OOBE ≤ SLL + 10 log M.
Formula
M factor
: dB.
Target
3GPP mask: -30 dBc at 1 MHz. Required SLL: dB.
Window choice
Blackman (-58 dB): insufficient by 2 dB. Nuttall (-98 dB): passes with 38 dB margin. Nuttall required. Or: combine Blackman with steeper RF filter.
ex-otfs-ch20-06
MediumCompare ISI power for rectangular + CP vs RRC in an OTFS system with 1 s delay spread.
CP handles delay; RRC tapers pulse.
Rectangular + CP
CP length delay spread. If CP = 1.5 s (50% margin): ISI power from incomplete CP coverage (all delay spread absorbed).
RRC $\gamma = 0.25$
Tapered pulse. ISI from delay within CP-like region: dB (RRC suppression).
Comparison
Rectangular + CP: ISI = 0 but ICI at Dirichlet level (-13 dB). RRC : ISI -30 dB, ICI -30 dB. RRC is cleaner overall.
Total
RRC total interference: -27 dB. Rectangular + CP: -13 dB (dominated by ICI). RRC better for high-mobility.
ex-otfs-ch20-07
MediumWhat is the Gabor pulse, and why is it optimal in time-frequency concentration?
Gaussian pulse.
Gabor pulse
. Gaussian.
Uncertainty equality
. Achieves uncertainty lower bound. Any other pulse has strict inequality.
OTFS application
Ideal time-frequency concentration. Good for extreme mobility (LEO). Approximate orthogonality via Hermite basis extension.
Practical
Pure Gaussian: non-compact (finite but infinite-support). Truncated Gaussian: approximately compact with small leakage. Common in sensing-heavy OTFS.
ex-otfs-ch20-08
MediumShow that for a rectangular pulse of duration , the frequency response is and the first sidelobe is -13 dB below main lobe.
FT of rect = sinc.
FT
for . .
Main lobe
Peak at : . Width (3 dB): .
First sidelobe
At : . Ratio to main lobe: . In dB: dB.
Why window
-13 dB sidelobes are high; window smooths edges to reduce sidelobes at cost of main-lobe widening.
ex-otfs-ch20-09
HardProve that the RRC cascade (RRC × RRC = RC) satisfies the Nyquist ISI criterion.
RC has zeros at integer .
RC impulse response
Zeros
for (by ). .
Nyquist condition
: ISI = 0 at integer sample times.
2D extension
OTFS 2D: . Bi-orthogonality of RRC pair.
ex-otfs-ch20-10
HardDerive the PAPR of OTFS with RRC pulse () relative to rectangular.
Smoother pulse → lower PAPR.
Rectangular PAPR
99%-tile PAPR: ~11 dB for QPSK + rectangular.
RRC
Smoother envelope: Gaussian-like. PAPR reduces to ~8-9 dB.
Factor
Reduction: ~2 dB from rectangular. Matches empirical measurements.
Why
RRC suppresses time-domain discontinuities. Signal is smoother. Peaks less pronounced.
ex-otfs-ch20-11
HardDesign a 3-filter FB-OTFS for ISAC: data, fine-Doppler sensing, coarse-Doppler sensing. Specify pulse parameters for each.
Hermite basis.
Data (wideband, short-duration)
Hermite (Gaussian), . Wide bandwidth, short duration. Maximizes data rate.
Fine-Doppler (narrowband, long-duration)
Hermite , . Narrow bandwidth, long duration. Doppler resolution: .
Coarse-Doppler (wide-ish, medium duration)
Hermite , . Moderate bandwidth, moderate duration. Coarse-velocity detection.
Resource allocation
Bandwidth: Data 60%, Coarse 25%, Fine 15%. Orthogonality: Hermite family → zero cross-coupling.
Performance
Data: 0.6 × rate of single-pulse. Sensing: 1.5× better fine-Doppler resolution. Trade-off: 40% data rate for 50% better sensing.
ex-otfs-ch20-12
HardExplain why Hamming window is insufficient for 5G NR OTFS compliance at subcarriers.
M-factor penalty.
Hamming SLL
-43 dB per single-tone.
M-factor
: add 30 dB (multiple-tone sum).
Effective OOBE
dB. Far below 3GPP -30 dB requirement.
Solution
Need window with SLL ≤ -60 dB: Nuttall (-98 dB). Or combined Blackman + steep RF filter to gain additional 10-15 dB.
ex-otfs-ch20-13
HardA CommIT-style deployment for LEO-OTFS uses Gaussian pulse with . Compute the ISI and ICI power.
Gaussian tails integrate.
Gaussian pulse
.
ISI (adjacent symbol leakage)
At (next symbol): . : exponent . . ISI power: dB.
ICI (adjacent subcarrier leakage)
Similar analysis in frequency: (Gaussian in frequency is narrow). ICI: dB.
Total
Combined interference: -21 dB. Acceptable for LEO where Doppler is extreme but paths are sparse (P = 1-3).
ex-otfs-ch20-14
HardExplain the Weyl-Heisenberg system for OTFS and its relation to critical sampling .
Riesz basis condition.
Weyl-Heisenberg
The collection is a Weyl-Heisenberg system with density .
Riesz basis
System is a Riesz basis of iff . At : overcomplete (frame). At : incomplete.
OTFS implication
OTFS symbols live in this system. At critical sampling: unique representation (bi-orthogonal dual exists). Below: symbols overlap non-trivially (under-sampled). Above: symbols are redundant.
Design sweet spot
. Gabor pulse + bi-orthogonal partner gives unique clean signal decomposition.
ex-otfs-ch20-15
HardAssess the standardization prospects of FB-OTFS for 6G. What adoption barriers exist?
Complexity, single-pulse baseline.
Technical barriers
FB-OTFS complexity single-pulse OTFS. 3GPP prefers single-pulse for standardization simplicity.
Use case niche
FB-OTFS shines in multi-service ISAC (sensing + data + URLLC). This is a niche, not mainstream 6G.
Timeline
Rel. 21 (2028-2030): single-pulse OTFS only. Rel. 22 (2030+): potential study item for FB-OTFS. Rel. 23+ (2032+): possible FB-OTFS spec.
Adoption
Specialized ISAC deployments (automotive, healthcare) may adopt FB-OTFS independently of 3GPP. Mass 6G stays single- pulse.
ex-otfs-ch20-16
HardDesign a universal OTFS pulse for 6G mixed-mobility deployment: must work for static through LEO scenarios.
Adaptive roll-off.
Approach
Adaptive RRC with selected by scheduler based on expected mobility. Stored values: 0, 0.15, 0.25, 0.35.
Per-scenario
Static: (rectangular + CP). Pedestrian: . Vehicular: . HST / LEO: + Gaussian component.
Hardware
FIR filter coefficients programmable. ROM stores 4-5 pulse families. Per-slot selection. Modest compute.
Adaptation
Scheduler estimates UE mobility from recent channel estimates. Updates every few frames. No hard switching of hardware path.