1 Joint source-channel coding with feedback arXiv:1501.07640v1 [cs.IT] 30 Jan 2015 (extended) Victoria Kostina Yury Polyanskiy Sergio Verd´u California Institute of Technology Massachusetts Institute of Technology Princeton University Pasadena, CA 91125 Cambridge, MA 02139 Princeton, NJ 08544 vkostina@caltech.edu yp@mit.edu verdu@princeton.edu Abstract This paper quantifies the fundamental limits of variable-length transmission of a general (possibly analog) source over a memoryless channel with noiseless feedback, under a distortion constraint. We consider excess distortion, average distortion and guaranteed distortion (d-semifaithful codes). In contrast to the asymptotic fundamental limit, a general conclusion is that allowing variable-length codes and feedback leads to a sizable improvement in the fundamental delay-distortion tradeoff. In addition, we investigate the minimum energy required to reproduce k source samples with a given fidelity after transmission over a memoryless Gaussian channel, and we show that the required minimum energy is reduced with feedback and an average (rather than maximal) power constraint. Index Terms Variable-length coding, joint source-channel coding, lossy compression, single-shot method, finiteblocklength regime, rate-distortion theory, feedback, memoryless channels, Gaussian channels, energydistortion tradeoff, Shannon theory. I. I NTRODUCTION A famous result of Shannon [1] states that feedback cannot increase the capacity of memoryless channels. Burnashev [2] showed that feedback improves the error exponent in a variable-length This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant CCF-1016625, by the NSF CAREER award under Grant CCF-1253205, and by the Center for Science of Information (CSoI), an NSF Science and Technology Center, under Grant CCF-0939370. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 2 setting. Polyanskiy et al. [3] showed that allowing variable-length coding and non-vanishing error-probability ǫ boosts the ǫ-capacity of the discrete memoryless channel (DMC) by a factor of 1 − ǫ. Furthermore, as shown in [3], if both feedback and variable-length coding are allowed, C is approached at a fast speed O logℓ ℓ as the average allowable delay the asymptotic limit 1−ǫ ℓ increases:1 (1 − ǫ) log M ⋆ (ℓ, ǫ) = ℓC + O (log ℓ) (1) where M ⋆ (ℓ, ǫ) is the maximum number of messages that can be distinguished with error probability ǫ at the average delay ℓ, and C is the channel capacity. This is in contrast to channel coding at fixed blocklength n where in most cases only a O √1n convergence rate is attainable, even when feedback is available, see [3], [4]. Thus, variable-length coding with feedback (VLF) not only boosts the ǫ-capacity of the channel, but also markedly accelerates the speed of approach to it. Moreover, zero-error communication is possible at an average rate arbitrarily close to capacity via VLFT codes, a class of codes that employs a special termination symbol to signal the end of transmission, which always recognized error-free by the receiver [3]. As discussed in [3], the availability of zero-error termination symbols models that common situation in which timing information is managed by a higher layer whose reliability is much higher than that of the payload. In [5], we treated variable-length data compression with nonzero excess distortion probability. In particular, we showed that in fixed-to-variable-length compression of a block of k i.i.d. source outcomes, the minimum average encoded length ℓ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) compatible with probability ǫ of exceeding distortion threshold d satisfies, under regularity assumptions, r kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 2 ℓ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) = (1 − ǫ)kR(d) − e + O (log k) 2π (2) where R(d) and V(d) are the rate-distortion and the rate-dispersion functions, and Q is the standard normal complementary cumulative distribution function. The second term in the expansion (2) becomes more natural if one notices Q−1 (ǫ)2 1 E [Z · 1{Z > Q−1 (ǫ)] = √ e− 2 . 2π 1 Unless explicitly noted, all log and exp in this paper are to arbitrary matching base, which also defines units of entropy and mutual information. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 3 As elaborated in [5], the expansion (2) has an unusual feature: the asymptotic fundamental limit is approached from the “wrong” side, e.g. larger dispersions and shorter blocklengths reduce the average compression rate. In this paper, we consider variable-length transmission of a general (possibly analog) source over a DMC with feedback, under a distortion constraint. This variable-length joint sourcechannel coding (JSCC) setting can be viewed as a generalization of the setups in [3], [5]. Related work includes an assessment of nonasymptotic fundamental limits of fixed-length JSCC in [6]–[8], a dynamic programming formulation of zero-delay JSCC with feedback in [9], and a practical variable-length almost lossless joint compression/transmission scheme in [10]. Various feedback coding strategies are discussed in [11]–[17]. Practical feedback communication schemes in the literature that implement VLF include [18]–[21]. We treat several scenarios that differ in how the distortion is evaluated and whether a termination symbol is allowed. In all cases, we analyze the average delay required to achieve the objective. The summary of our results in Section III, where as before, C, R(d), V(d) denote the channel capacity, and the source rate-distortion and rate-dispersion functions, is: • Under average distortion criterion, E [d(S k , Sˆk )] ≤ d, the minimal average delay ℓ⋆ (k, d) attainable via VLF codes transmitting k source symbols satisfies ℓ⋆ (k, d)C = kR(d) + O (log k) . (3) • Under excess distortion criterion, P[d(S k , Sˆk ) > d] ≤ ǫ, the minimal average delay attainable • via VLF codes transmitting k source symbols satisfies r kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 2 e + O (log k) . (4) ℓ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) C = (1 − ǫ)kR(d) − 2π Under guaranteed distortion criterion, P[d(S k , Sˆk ) > d] = 0, the minimal average delay attainable via VLFT codes transmitting k source symbols satisfies ℓ⋆t (k, d, 0) C = kR(d) + O (log k) . (5) Similar to (1), approaching the limits in (3), (4) and (5) only requires an extremely thin feedback link, namely, the decoder sends just a single acknowledgement signal once it is ready to decode (stop-feedback)2 . Note that (4) exhibits significant similarities with (2): the 2 Stop-feedback is not to be confused with the termination symbol, which is a special symbol that the encoder can transmit error-free in order to tell the decoder that the transmission has ended and it is time to decode. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 4 asymptotic limit is approached from below, i.e. in contrast to the results in [6], [22], [23], smaller blocklengths and larger source dispersions are beneficial. Note also that the first term of the expansion in (4) can be attained with variable-length codes without feedback. Interestingly, naive separated source/channel coding fails to attain any of the limits mentioned. For example, even the sign of the second term in (4) is not attainable. This observation led us to believe, initially, that competitive schemes in this setting should be of successive refinement and adaptation sort such as in [24], [25], or dynamic programming-like as in [9], [26]. It turns out, however, that like the fixed-length JSCC achievability schemes in [6], [7], attaining limits (3)(5) requires a rather simple variation on the separation architecture: one only needs to allow a variable-length interface between the source coder and the channel coder. Note that typically, separation is understood in the sense that the output of the source coder (compressor) is treated as pure bits, which can be arbitrarily permuted without affecting performance of the concatenated scheme [8], [27]. Similarly, the performance of a variable-length separated scheme is insensitive to permutations (but not additions or deletions) of the bits at the output of the source coder. These semi-joint achievability schemes are the subject of Section II. Energy-limited codes are the subject of Section IV. The optimal energy-distortion tradeoff achievable in the transmission of a general source over the AWGN channel is studied in Section V. In that setting, disposing of the restriction on the number of channel uses per source sample, we limit the total available transmitter energy E and we study the tradeoff between the source dimension k, the total energy E and the fidelity of reproduction. Related prior work includes a study of asymptotic energy-distortion tradeoffs [28] and a nonasymptotic analysis of energy per bit required to reliably send k bits through an AWGN channel [29]. The main results in Section V are the following: • Under average distortion constraint, the total minimum energy required to transmit k source samples over an AWGN channel with feedback satisfies log e Ef⋆ (k, d) · = kR(d) + O(log k) , N0 where N20 is the noise power per degree of freedom. • (6) Under excess distortion constraint, the total minimum energy required to transmit k source samples over an AWGN channel without feedback satisfies p log e E ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) · = kR(d) + k (2R(d) log e + V(d))Q−1 (ǫ) + O (log k) N0 February 2, 2015 (7) DRAFT 5 • Under excess distortion constraint, the total minimum average energy3 required to transmit k source samples over an AWGN channel with feedback satisfies r kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 log e 2 = kR(d)(1 − ǫ) − e Ef⋆ (k, d, ǫ) · + O (log k) N0 2π (8) Particularizing (8) to ǫ = 0 also covers the case of guaranteed distortion. The first term in the expansion (8) can be achieved even without feedback, as long as ǫ > 0 and the power constraint is understood on the average over the codebook. We point out the following parallels between the variable-length codes and energy-limitedcodes. • Under average distortion, in both cases the fundamental limit is approached at speed O (3), (6)). • log k k (cf. Allowing a non-vanishing excess-distortion probability and variable length (or variable power) boosts the asymptotic fundamental limit by a factor of 1 − ǫ. • Allowing both feedback and variable length (or power) leads to expansions (4), (8), in which shorter blocklengths are beneficial. • In both variable length coding with termination and average energy-limited coding, guaranteed distortion (ǫ = 0) can be attained, even though the channel is noisy, as long as feedback is available. II. F EEDBACK CODES FOR NON - EQUIPROBABLE MESSAGES In this section we consider joint source-channel coding assessing reliability by the probability that the (possibly non-equiprobable) message is reproduced correctly. Our key tool will be two extensions of the channel coding bounds for the DMC with feedback from [3]. VLF and VLFT codes are formally defined as follows. Definition 1. A variable-length feedback code (VLF) transmitting message W (taking values in W) over the channel {PYi |X i Y i−1 }∞ i=1 with input/output alphabets A/B is defined by: 1) A random variable U ∈ U revealed to the encoder and decoder before the start of the transmission. 3 The energy constraint in (7) is understood on a per-codeword basis. The energy constraint in (8) is understood as average over the codebook. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 6 2) A sequence of encoding functions fn : U × W × Bn−1 7→ A, defining the channel inputs Xn = fn U, W, Y n−1 (9) 3) A sequence of decoding functions gn : U × Bn 7→ W, n = 1, 2, . . . 4) A non-negative integer-valued random variable τ , a stopping time of the filtration Fn = σ {U, Y1, . . . , Yn }. which satisfies4 c is computed at the time instant τ The final decision W c = gτ (U, Y τ ) W (10) The value E [τ ] is the average transmission length of the given code. A very similar concept is that of an VLFT code: Definition 2. A variable-length feedback code with termination (VLFT) transmitting W ∈ W over the channel {PYi |X i Y i−1 }∞ i=1 with input/output alphabets A/B is defined similarly to VLF codes with the exception that condition 4) in the Definition 1 is replaced by 4’) A non-negative integer-valued random variable τ , a stopping time of the filtration Gn = σ{W, U, Y1 , . . . , Yn }. The idea of allowing τ to depend on the true message W models the practical scenarios (see [3]) where there is a highly reliable control layer operating in parallel with the data channel, which notifies the decoder when it is time to make a decision. The two special cases of the above definitions are stop-feedback and fixed-to-variable codes: 1) stop-feedback codes are a special case of VLF codes where the encoder functions {fn }∞ n=1 satisfy: fn (U, W, Y n−1 ) = fn (U, W ) . (11) Such codes require very limited communication over feedback: only a single signal to stop the transmission once the decoder is ready to decode. 4 Note that ℓ need not be an integer. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 7 2) fixed-to-variable codes, defined in [30], are also required to satisfy (11), while the stopping time is5 τ = inf{n ≥ 1 : gn (U, Y n ) = W } , (12) and therefore, such codes are zero-error VLFT codes. h i c ≤ For both VLF and VLFT codes, we say that a code that satisfies E [τ ] ≤ ℓ and P W 6= W ǫ, when averaged over U, message and channel, is an (ℓ, ǫ) code for source/channel W, {PYi |X i Y i−1 }∞ i=1 . The random variable U serves as the common randomness shared by both transmitter and receiver, which is used to initialize the codebook. As a consequence of Caratheodory’s theorem, the amount of this common randomness can always be reduced to just a few bits: as shown in [3, Theorem 19], if there exists an (ℓ, ǫ) code with |U| = ∞, then there exists an (ℓ, ǫ) code with |U| ≤ 3. Allowing for common randomness does not affect the asymptotic expansions, but leads to more concise expressions for non-asymptotic achievability bounds. Furthermore, if the channel is symmetric no common randomness is needed at all [3, Theorem 3]. First, we quote an achievability result [3, (107)-(118)]: Theorem 1 ([3]). For every DMC with capacity C, any M and probability of error ǫ there exists an (ℓ, ǫ) stop-feedback code for the message W taking M values6 such that Cℓ ≤ log M + log 1 + a0 , ǫ where a0 , max log x1 ,x2 ,y1 ,y2 PY |X (y1 |x1 ) , PY |X (y2 |x2 ) (13) and the maximum is taken over all pairs (xi , yi ) with PY |X (yi |xi ) > 0, i = 1, 2. We note that a similar result is also contained in many other works, starting from [2] and later in [31], [32]. Next, we tighten Theorem 1 in the case of non-equiprobable messages. 5 As explained in [30], this model encompasses fountain codes in which the decoder can get a highly reliable estimate of τ autonomously without the need for a termination symbol. 6 Although the result in [3] is stated for average (over equiprobable messages) error probability, it in fact applies to arbitrary distribution of messages, so W need not be equiprobable. Furthermore, if we do not insist on |U| ≤ 3, Theorem 1 even applies to maximal probability of error. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 8 Theorem 2. For every DMC with capacity C and random variable W there exists an (ℓ, ǫ) stop-feedback code for W with Cℓ ≤ H(W ) + log 1 + a0 ǫ (14) where a0 is defined in (30). Proof: If H(W ) = ∞ then there is nothing to prove, so we assume otherwise. Let PY∗ be the capacity achieving output distribution of the DMC. We define information density as usual: △ ıX;Y (a; b) = log n n ıX n ;Y n (a ; b ) = n X PY |X (b|a) PY∗ (b) (15) ıX;Y (ai ; bi ) (16) 1 . PW (m) (17) i=1 △ ıW (m) = log where we used the memorylessness assumption in (16). In the achievability scheme of [3, Theorem 3], at time n the decoder observes Y n , computes M information densities ıX n ;Y n (Cn1 ; Y n ), . . . , ıX n ;Y n (CnM ; Y n ), where Cn1 , . . . , CnM are the codewords, and stops once any of them exceeds a threshold. Instead of one common threshold, we assign lower thresholds to the more likely messages. Code construction: We define the common randomness (revealed to the encoder and decoder before the transmission starts) to be a random variable U as follows: PU , PX ∞ × . . . × PX ∞ {z } | (18) |W| where X ∞ consists of i.i.d. copies drawn from (any) capacity-achieving input distribution. A ∞ realization of U defines |W| infinite dimensional vectors C∞ m ∈ A , m ∈ W. Having observed that the value of W equals m ∈ W, the encoder transmits channel symbols Xn as follows: △ Xn = fn (m) = Cnm (19) At time n, the decoder computes the values In (m) = ıX n ;Y n (fn (m); Y n ) − ıW (m), (20) The decoder defines the stopping times: τm = inf{n ≥ 0 : In (m) ≥ γ} February 2, 2015 (21) DRAFT 9 c is made by the decoder at the where γ > 0 is an arbitrary constant. The final decision W stopping time τ ⋆ : τ ⋆ = min τm (22) m∈W c = g(Y τ ⋆ ) = argmin τm . W (23) m∈W where the tie-breaking rule is immaterial. Analysis: We claim that, averaged over U, we have: c ] ≤ exp{−γ} P[W 6= W CE [τ ⋆ ] ≤ H(W ) + γ + a0 . (24) (25) Indeed, let us set for convenience △ τ = τW . Then from the union bound we have, cf. [3, Theorem 3]: X c |W = m0 ] ≤ P[W 6= W P[τm ≤ τ |W = m0 ] (26) (27) m∈W\{m0 } (28) Due to memorylessness of the channel, ıX n ;Y n (X n ; Y n )−nC is a martingale. By Doob’s optional stopping theorem (e.g. [33]) we have E [ıX τ ;Y τ (X τ ; Y τ )] = CE [τ ] (29) CE [τ ] − H(W ) = E [Iτ (S)] ≤ γ + a0 (30) so where a0 is an upper bound to the maximum jump size of the process {ıX n ;Y n (X n ; Y n )}∞ n=1 . Next, as in [3, (111)-(118)] we have by a change of measure argument for every m 6= m0 : P[τm = n|W = m0 ] ≤ exp{−ıW (m) − γ}P[τm = n|W = m] . (31) P[τm ≤ τ |W = m0 ] ≤ P[τm < ∞|W = m0 ] (32) ≤ exp{−ıW (m) − γ} , (33) Consequently, February 2, 2015 DRAFT 10 where we used that P [τ < ∞] = P [τm < ∞|W = m] = 1, which in turn follows from (30). Summing (33) over all m 6= m0 and using (27) we get (24). The estimate of average length (25) follows from τ ⋆ ≤ τ and (30). The result (14) follows by taking γ = log 1ǫ . Remark 1. A slightly less sharp bound could also be derived via a variable-length separated scheme: compress W losslessly into a variable-length string {0, 1}∗ with average length less than H(W ), cf. [34], then send the length via O(log H(W )) channel symbols and very small probability of error and finally send the data bits. Next, we extend the zero-error bound in [3, Theorem 10] to the case of non-equiprobable messages: Theorem 3. For every DMC with capacity C there exists a constant a1 such that for every discrete random variable W there exists an (ℓ, 0) VLFT code with Cℓ ≤ H(W ) + a1 (34) Proof: Without loss of generality, we assume that H(W ) < ∞ and W takes values in positive integers. The codebook is a countable collection of infinite strings C∞ m , m = 1, 2, . . .. Given the codebook and the realization of W = m, the encoder sends △ Xn = f n (m) = Cnm The decoder outputs m error-free at the stopping time τ ⋆ given by: ⋆ τ = inf In (m) > max In (j) , n j<m (35) (36) where In (m) = ıX n ;Y n (Cnm ; Y n ) − ıW (m). (37) According to (36), if the true message is m the transmission stops at the first instant n when In (m) exceeds all In (j), j < m. Note that τ depends on the transmitted message m, as permitted by the paradigm of VLFT codes. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 11 Analysis: P [τ ⋆ > n|W = m] = P " [ j<m # {In (j) > In (m)} |W = m (38) ∞ Applying the random coding argument, we now assume that the codebook strings C∞ 1 , C2 , . . . are drawn i.i.d. from PX ∞ = PX × PX × . . ., where PX is the capacity-achieving channel input ¯ n an independent copy of X n and taking the expectation of the right distribution. Denoting by X side of (38) with respect to the codebook, we have " # [ PW (j)PY |X (Y |Xj ) P ≥1 P (m)P (Y |X ) W Y |X m j<m " ( m−1 )# ¯ n) X PW (j)PY n |X n (Y |X ≥ 1 | X n, Y n ≤ E min 1, P n |X n ) n n (Y P (m)P W Y |X j=1 " ( m−1 )# ¯ n )|Y n X PW (j) E PY n |X n (Y n |X ≤ E min 1, PW (m) PY n |X n (Y n |X n ) j=1 (39) (40) (41) = E exp(−|ıX n ;Y n (X n ; Y n ) − ıW (m)|+ ) , + where we used the union bound and min{1, a} = exp − log a1 . Applying (41) we get ⋆ E [τ ] = ∞ X P [τ ⋆ > n] (42) n=0 ≤ ∞ X n=0 E exp(−|ıX n ;Y n (X n ; Y n ) − ıW (W )|+ ) . (43) Finally, (43) implies (34) by applying the result [3, (162)-(179)]: ∞ X γ E exp(−|ıX n ;Y n (X n ; Y n ) − γ|+ ) ≤ + a1 . C n=0 III. A SYMPTOTIC (44) EXPANSIONS OF THE RATE - DISTORTION TRADEOFF A. Definitions We move from the setup of Section II where a discrete message is transmitted over the feedback channel to a more general scenario of Section III, in which a possibly analog signal is transmitted over a channel with feedback, under a fidelity constraint. We will consider the following scenarios: February 2, 2015 DRAFT 12 1) excess distortion: A VLF code transmitting memoryless source (S k , S k ) with reproduction alphabet Sˆk and separable distortion measure d : S k × Sˆk 7→ [0, +∞] is called a (k, ℓ, d, ǫ) excess-distortion code if E [τ ] ≤ ℓ (45) P[d(S k , Sˆk ) ≤ d] ≤ ǫ (46) The corresponding fundamental limit is △ ℓ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) = inf{ℓ : ∃ an (k, ℓ, d, ǫ) VLF code} . (47) 2) average distortion: A VLF code satisfying, instead of (46), an average constraint E [d(S k , Sˆk )] ≤ d (48) is called a (k, ℓ, d) average-distortion code. The corresponding fundamental limit is △ ℓ⋆ (k, d) = inf{ℓ : ∃ an (k, ℓ, d) VLF code} . (49) 3) guaranteed distortion: A VLFT code transmitting memoryless source (S k , S k ) with reproduction alphabet Sˆk and separable distortion metric d is called a (k, ℓ, d, 0) guaranteeddistortion code if it achieves ǫ = 0 in (46). The corresponding fundamental limit is △ ℓ⋆t (k, d, 0) = inf{ℓ : ∃ an (k, ℓ, d, 0) VLFT code} . (50) We will use the following notation for the various minimizations of information measures: RS (d) , RS (d, ǫ) , Hd,ǫ (S) , min PZ|S : S7→Sˆ : E[d(S,Z)]≤d min I(S; Z) PZ|S : S7→Sˆ : P[d(S,Z)>d]≤ǫ I(S; Z) min c : S7→Sˆ : P[d(S,c(S))>d]≤ǫ H(c(S)). (51) (52) (53) The quantity in (53) is referred to as the (d, ǫ)-entropy of the source S [35]. The (ǫ, 0)-entropy is also known as just ǫ-entropy [35]: Hd,0 (S) , February 2, 2015 min c : S7→Sˆ : d(S,c(S))≤d a.s. H(c(S)). (54) DRAFT 13 Provided that the infimum in (51) is achieved by some transition probability kernel PZ ⋆ |S , the d-tilted information in s ∈ S is defined as [23] S (s, d) , − log E [exp (−λ⋆ d(s, Z ⋆ ) + λ⋆ d)] (55) λ⋆ = −R′S (d). (56) where In the almost-lossless compression, Z ⋆ = S and S (s, d) , ıS (s) , log 1 . PS (s) (57) (58) B. Regularity assumptions on the source We assume that the source, together with its distortion measure, satisfies the following assumptions: A1 The source {Si } is stationary and memoryless, PS k = PS × . . . × PS . P A2 The distortion measure is separable, d(sk , z k ) = k1 ki=1 d(si , zi ). A3 The distortion level satisfies dmin < d < dmax , where dmin is the infimum of values at which the minimal mutual information quantity RS (d) is finite, and dmax = inf z∈M c E [d(S, z)], where the expectation is with respect to the unconditional distribution of S. A4 The rate-distotortion function is achieved by a unique PZ⋆ |S : RS (d) = I(S; Z⋆). A5 E [d12 (S, Z⋆ )] < ∞ where the expectation is with respect to PS × PZ⋆ . The rate-dispersion function of the source satisfying assumptions A1–A5 is given by [23] V(d) = Var (S (S, d)) . We showed in [5] that under assumptions A1–A5 for all 0 ≤ ǫ ≤ 1 r RS k (d, ǫ) kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 2 + O (log k) . = (1 − ǫ)kR(d) − e 2π k Hd,ǫ (S ) February 2, 2015 (59) (60) DRAFT 14 C. Average distortion Theorem 4. Under assumptions A1–A5 we have Cℓ∗ (k, d) = kR(d) + O(log k) . (61) Proof: Achievability: fix 1 < p ≤ 12, ǫ > 0, source codebook c1 , . . . , cM and consider a separated h i c c c scheme S − f(S) − X − Y − W − c(W ) such that P f(S) 6= W ≤ ǫ and f(sk ) = arg min m∈{1,...,M } d(sk , cm ) c(m) = cm sk ∈ S k (62) m ∈ {1, . . . , M} (63) The average distortion is bounded by h n oi k k k c ≤ E d(S , cW ) + E d(S , cW E d S , cW c )1 W 6= W c p1 1− 1 ≤E min d(S k , cm ) + E dp (S k , cW ǫ p c) m∈{1,...,M } (64) (65) where (65) is by H¨older’s inequality. Taking an expectation of both sides over c1 , . . . , cM drawn i.i.d. from PZk⋆ , we conclude via a random coding argument that there exists a separate source/channel code with average distortion bounded by 1 d ≤ d¯ + E dp (S k , Z1 ) ǫ1− p , where we denoted d¯ , E min m∈{1,...,M } k d(S , Zm ) , (66) (67) and PS k Z1 ...ZM = PS k PZk⋆ . . . PZk⋆ . The work of Pilc [36] (finite alphabet) and Yang and Zhang [37] (abstract alphabet) shows that under assumptions A1–A5, ¯ + O(log k). log M = kR(d) (68) 1 Letting ǫ = k p −2 , we conclude by assumption A5 that the second term in (66) is bounded by 1 , i.e. d ≤ d¯ + k1 . Finally, by Theorem 1, Cℓ ≤ log M + O (log k), and the ‘≤’ direction in (61) k follows by the differentiability of R(d) in the region of assumption A3. Converse: By data-processing inequality and [2, Lemma 1-2] we have kR(d) ≤ ℓC (69) for any (k, ℓ, d) VLF code. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 15 D. Excess distortion Theorem 5. Under assumptions A1–A5 and any ǫ > 0 we have r kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 2 + O (log k) ℓ⋆ (k, d, ǫ)C = (1 − ǫ)kR(d) − e 2π (70) Proof: Achievability: Pair a lossy compressor S k → W with excess-distortion probability ǫ′ = ǫ − √1k and H(W ) = Hd,ǫ′ (S k )7 with a VLF code from Theorem 2 transmitting W with probability of √1 . k error Apply (60) to (14)8 . Converse: Apply the data-processing inequality and [2, Lemma 1-2] to get: ℓC ≥ RS k (d, ǫ) (71) for every (k, ℓ, d, ǫ) VLF code. E. Guaranteed distortion Theorem 6. Under assumptions A1–A5, we have ℓ⋆t (k, d, 0)C = kR(d) + O (log k) (72) Proof: For the achievability we note that the estimate of the Hd,ǫ (S k ) in (60) applies with ǫ = 0 and thus Hd,0 (S k ) = kR(d) + O(log k) . (73) Then, we can pair the mapping achieving Hd,0 (S k ) with the zero-error VLFT code from Theorem 3. 7 Although the optimal mapping c⋆ that achieves (d, ǫ)-entropy is not known in general, the existence of good approximations satisfying the constraint in (53) that approach Hd,ǫ (S k ) to within log2 Hd,ǫ (S k ) bits is guaranteed by a random coding argument, see [5]. 8 Note that (60) also holds if ǫ in the left side is replaced by ǫ + O February 2, 2015 √1 k DRAFT 16 Conversely, repeating the argument of [3, Theorem 4], with the replacement of the right side of [3, (67)] by RS (d, ǫ) we conclude that any (ℓ, d, ǫ) VLFT code must satisfy RS (d, ǫ) ≤ Cℓ + log(ℓ + 1) + log e . (74) F. Discussion We make several remarks regarding the rate-distortion tradeoff in all three settings considered above: 1) The case d = dmin is special and is excluded in the assumptions of Theorems 4–6. However, in the most important special case of a distortion measure that satisfies dmin , a=b d(a, b) = , > dmin, a 6= b (75) d = dmin corresponds to almost-lossless transmission, and both Theorems 4 and 5 apply with R(d) and V(d) equal to the entropy and the varentropy of the source, respectively, as long as the source is stationary and memoryless and the third moment of ıS (S) is finite. 2) For almost-lossless transmission of finite alphabet sources, the asymptotic expansion (70) can be achieved by reliably (i.e. with probability of error ∼ k1 ) sending through the channel the type of the source outcome first, and then reliably sending each message whose type is one the most likely types with total mass 1 − ǫ. 3) Even if the channel is not symmetric, the asymptotic expansions in Theorems 4–6 can be achieved without common randomness U, by using constant composition channel codebooks. For instance, consider the scheme in Theorem 2 with PX ∞ drawn from the distribution equiprobable over the capacity-achieving type. Since E [τ |X ∞ ] = E [τ ] a.s., almost every such codebook attains the bound in (30) up to logarithmic terms, resulting in a deterministic construction attaining (70). 4) Note that (70) is achieved by a stop-feedback code. We can further show that even without any feedback one can still achieve the optimal first order performance p ℓC ≤ (1 − ǫ)kR(d) + O( k log k), February 2, 2015 (76) DRAFT 17 provided variable-length channel coding is allowed. Indeed, one can first use the variablelength excess-distortion compressor from [5] on S k to get a binary string of average length √ (1−ǫ)kR(d)+O( k), see (2). Then, truncating the length at k 2 and transmitting 2 log k data 1 , k2 we can reliably inform the encoder about the total number of data √ bits b to be sent next. We may then use a capacity-achieving code of length Cb +O( b log b) bits with reliability to send the data bits with reliability 1 k [22]. 5) The naive separation achieves at most: p ℓC ≥ (1 − ǫ)kR(d) + a k log k, a > 0. (77) Indeed, according to Theorem 1, the number of messages M that can be transmitted via VLF code and error probability η satisfies log M ≥ ℓC + O (log ℓ) . 1−η (78) On the other hand, the number of codewords of a source code with probability of exceeding distortion d no greater than ζ satisfies [23] log M ≤ kR(d) + Optimizing over η + ζ ≤ ǫ yields (77). p kV(d)Q−1 (ζ) + O (1) . (79) 6) The Schalkwijk-Bluestein [38] (see also [39]) elegant linear feedback scheme for the transmission of a single Gaussian sample S ∼ N (0, σ 2) over the AWGN channel achieves the mean-square error σ2 , (1+P )n after n channel uses, where P is the average transmit SNR. In other words, the minimum delay in transmitting a Gaussian sample over a Gaussian channel with feedback is given by ℓ⋆ (1, d) = as long as R(d) C R(d) , C (80) is integer.9 Note that (80) is achieved with fixed, not variable length, and average, not maximal, power constraint. If there are k Gaussian samples to transmit, repeating the scheme for each of the samples achieves ℓ⋆ (k, d) = k 9 If R(d) C R(d) , C (81) = 1, no feedback is needed. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 18 which implies, in particular, that in general our estimate of O (log k) in (61) is too conservative. Beyond Gaussian sources and channels, a sufficient condition for a fixed-length JSCC feedback scheme to achieve (81) is provided in [16]. IV. E NERGY- LIMITED FEEDBACK CODES FOR NON - EQUIPROBABLE MESSAGES In this section, we study the transmission of a message over an AWGN channel under an energy constraint. We would like to know how much information can be pushed through the channel, if a total of E units of energy is available to accomplish the task. Formally, the codes studied in this section are defined as follows. Definition 3. An energy-limited code without feedback for the transmission of a random variable W taking values in W over an AWGN channel is defined by: 1) A sequence of encoders fn : W 7→ A, defining the channel inputs Xn = fn (W ) satisfying P "∞ X j=1 2) A decoder g : B ∞ 7→ W. (82) # Xj2 ≤ E = 1 (83) Definition 4. An energy-limited feedback code for the transmission of a random variable W taking values in W over an AWGN channel is defined by: 1) A sequence of encoders fn : W × Bn−1 7→ A, defining the channel inputs Xn = fn W, Y n−1 satisfying ∞ X j=1 2) A decoder g : B∞ 7→ W. E Xj2 ≤ E (84) (85) An (E, ǫ) code for the transmission of random variable W over the Gaussian channel is a h i c ≤ ǫ. code with energy bounded by E and P W 6= W February 2, 2015 DRAFT 19 Definitions 3–4 do not impose any restrictions on the number of degrees of freedom n, restricting instead the total available energy. The problem of transmitting a message with minimum energy was posed by Shannon [40], who showed that the minimum energy per information bit compatible with vanishing block error probability converges to N0 loge 2 as the number of information bits goes to infinity, where N0 2 is the noise power per degree of freedom. Recently, Polyanskiy et al. [29, Theorem 7] showed a dynamic programming algorithm for the error-free transmission of a single bit over an AWGN channel with feedback that attains exactly Shannon’s optimal energy per bit tradeoff E = N0 loge 2. (86) The next non-asymptotic achievability result leverages that algorithm to transmit error-free a binary representation of a random variable over the AWGN channel by means of a variablelength separate compression/transmission scheme. Theorem 7. There exists a zero-error feedback code for the transmission of a random variable W over the AWGN channel with energy E < N0 loge 2 (H(W ) + 1) (87) Proof: The encoder converts the source into a variable-length string using the Huffman code, so that the codebook is prefix-free and the expectation of the encoded length ℓ(W ) is bounded as E [ℓ(W )] < H(W ) + 1 . (88) Next each bit (out of ℓ(W )) is transmitted at the optimal energy per bit tradeoff N0 loge 2 using the zero-error feedback scheme in [29, Theorem 7]. Transmissions corresponding to different bits are interleaved diagonally (see Fig. 1): the first bit is transmitted in time slots 1, 2, 4, 7, 11, . . ., the second one in 3, 5, 8, 12, . . ., and so on. The channel encoder is silent at those indices allocated to source bits ℓ(W ) + 1, ℓ(W ) + 2, . . . For example, if the codeword has length 2 nothing is transmitted in time slots 6, 9, 13, . . .. The receiver decodes the first transmitted bit focusing on the time slots 1, 2, 4, 7, 11, . . . It proceeds successively with the second bit, etc., until it forms a codeword of the Huffman code, at which point it halts. Thus, it does not need to examine February 2, 2015 DRAFT 20 Bit number Sequence of time slots 1 1 2 4 7 2 3 5 8 ··· 3 .. . 6 9 ··· ··· ℓ(W ) Fig. 1. Illustration of the diagonal numbering of channel uses in Theorem 7. the outputs of the time slots corresponding to information bits that were not transmitted, and in which the encoder was silent. Since the scheme spends N0 loge 2 energy per bit, The total energy to transmit the codeword representing W is ℓ(W )N0 loge 2. (89) Taking the expectation of (89) over W and applying (88), (87) follows. For concreteness, in the proof of Theorem 7 we have referred to the degrees of freedom as time slots. In practice, decoding in finite time is feasible if the channel is not bandlimited. In the converse direction, we have H(W ) ≤ E log e. N0 (90) Indeed, due to the zero-error requirement and data processing, H(W ) = I(W ; g(Y ∞ )) ≤ I(X ∞ ; Y ∞ ), which in turn is bounded by the right side of (90) [40]. Our next achievability result studies the performance of a variable-length separated scheme. Theorem 8. Fix positive E1 and E2 such that E1 + E2 ≤ E. Denote ε(E, m) , 1 − √ February 2, 2015 1 πN0 Z ∞ −∞ (91) √ m−1 2 + E −x 1 − Q x q e N0 dx. (92) N0 2 DRAFT 21 Assume that W takes values in {1, 2, . . . , M}. There exists an (E, ǫ) non-feedback code for the transmission of random variable W over an AWGN channel without feedback such that ǫ ≤ E [ε (E1 , W )] + ε(E2 , ⌊log2 M⌋ + 1) (93) where ℓ(W ) denotes the length of W . Proof: Assume that the outcomes of W are ordered in decreasing probabilities. Consider the following variable-length separated achievability scheme: the source outcome m is first losslessly represented as a binary string of length ⌊log2 m⌋ by assigning it to m-th binary string in {∅, 0, 1, 00, 01, . . .} (the most likely outcome is represented by the empty string). Then, all binary strings are grouped according to their encoded lengths. A channel codebook is generated for each group of sequences. The encoded length is sent over the channel with high reliability, so the decoder almost never makes an error in determining that length. Then the encoder makes an ML decision only between sequences of that length. A formal description and an error analysis follow. Codebook: the collection of M + ⌊log M⌋ + 1 codewords p cj = E1 ej , j = 1, 2, . . . , M p cj = E2 ej , j = M + 1, M + ⌊log2 M⌋ + 1 (94) (95) where {ej , j = 1, 2, . . .} is an orthonormal basis of L2 (R∞ ). Encoder: The encoder sends the pair (m, ⌊log2 m⌋) by transmitting cm + cm+⌊log2 m⌋+1 . Decoder: Having received the infinite string corrupted by i.i.d. Gaussian noise z, the decoder first (reliably) decides between ⌊log2 M⌋ + 1 possible values of ⌊log2 m⌋ based on the minimum distance: ℓˆ , argmin kz − cj k, j = M + 1, . . . , M + ⌊log2 M⌋ + 1 (96) As shown in [41, p. 258]), [42], [29, Theorem 3], the probability of error of such a decision is given by ε(E, ⌊log2 M⌋ + 1). This accounts for the second term in (93). The decoder then ˆ ˆ decides between 2ℓ messages10 j with ⌊log j⌋ = ℓ: ˆ ˆ cˆ , argmin kz − cj k, j = 2ℓ , . . . , min{2ℓ+1 − 1, M} 10 (97) ˆ More precisely, 2ℓ messages if ℓˆ ≤ ⌊log 2 M ⌋ − 1 and M − 2⌊log2 M ⌋ + 1 ≤ 2⌊log2 M ⌋ messages if ℓˆ = ⌊log 2 M ⌋. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 22 The probability of error of this decision rule is similarly upper bounded by ε (E, m), provided that the value of ⌊log2 m⌋ was decoded correctly: ℓˆ = ⌊log2 m⌋. Since 2⌊log2 m⌋ ≤ m, this accounts for the first term in (93). Normally, one would choose 1 ≪ E2 ≪ E1 so that the second term in (93), which corresponds to the probability of decoding the length incorrectly, is negligible compared to the first term, and the total energy E ≈ E1 . Moreover, if W takes values in a countably infinite alphabet, one can truncate it so that the tail is negligible with respect to the first term in (93). To ease the evaluation of the first term in (93), one might use i ≤ 1 . PW (i) In the equiprobable case, this weakening leads to E [ε (E1 , W )] ≤ ε (E1 , M). If the power constraint is average rather than maximal, a straightforward extension of Theorem 8 ensures the existence of an (E, ǫ) code (average power constraint) for the AWGN channel with ǫ ≤ E [ε (E1 (⌊log2 W ⌋), W )] + ε(E2 , ⌊log M⌋ + 1), (98) where E1 : {0, 1, . . . , ⌊log2 M⌋} 7→ R+ and E2 ∈ R+ are such that E [E1 (⌊log2 W ⌋)] + E2 ≤ E. V. A SYMPTOTIC (99) EXPANSIONS OF THE ENERGY- DISTORTION TRADEOFF A. Problem setup This section focuses on the energy-distortion tradeoff in the JSCC problem. Like in Section IV, we limit the total available transmitter energy E without any restriction on the (average) number of channel uses per source sample. Unlike Section IV, we allow general (not neccesarily discrete) sources, and we study the tradeoff between the source dimension k, the total energy E and the fidelity of reproduction. Thus, we identify the minimum energy compatible with target distortion without any restriction on the time-bandwidth product (number of degrees of freedom). As in Section III-A, we consider both the average and the excess distortion criteria. Formally, we let the source be a k-dimensional vector S k in the alphabet S k . A (k, E, d, ǫ) energy-limited code is an energy-limited code for (S k , S k ) with total energy E and probability ≤ ǫ of exceeding d (see (46)). Similarly, a (k, E, d) energy-limited code is an energy-limited code for (S k , S k ) with total energy E and average distortion not exceeding d (see (48)). The February 2, 2015 DRAFT 23 goal of Section V is to characterize the minimum energy required to transmit k source samples at a given fidelity, i.e. to characterize the following fundamental limits: Ef⋆ (k, d) , {inf E : ∃ a (k, E, d) feedback code} , (100) Ef⋆ (k, d, ǫ) , {inf E : ∃ a (k, E, d, ǫ) feedback code} (101) as well as the corresponding limits E ⋆ (k, d) and E ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) of the energy-limited non-feedback codes. B. Literature review If the source produces equiprobable binary strings of length k, Shannon [40] showed that the minimum energy per information bit compatible with vanishing block error probability converges to E ⋆ (k, 0, ǫ) → loge 2 = −1.59 dB kN0 (102) as k → ∞, ǫ → 0. The fundamental limit in (102) holds regardless of whether feedback is available. Moreover, this fundamental limit is known to be the same regardless of whether the channel is subject to fading or whether the receiver is coherent or not [43]. Polyanskiy et al. refined (102) as [29, Theorem 3] E ⋆ (k, 0, ǫ) p 1 log e = k + 2k log e Q−1 (ǫ) − log k + O (1) N0 2 (103) log e = (1 − ǫ)k + O (1) N0 (104) for transmission without feedback, and as [29, Theorem 8] Ef⋆ (k, 0, ǫ) for transmission with feedback. Moreover, [29, Theorem 7] (see also (86)) shows that in fact E ⋆ (k, 0, 0) log e = kN0 , (105) i.e. in the presence of full noiseless feedback, Shannon’s limit (102) can be achieved with equality already at k = 1 and ǫ = 0. For the finite blocklength behavior of energy per bit in fading channels, see [44]. For the transmission of a memoryless source over the AWGN channel under an average distortion criterion, Jain et al. [28, Theorem 1] pointed out that as k → ∞, E ⋆ (k, d) log e → R(d). k N0 February 2, 2015 (106) DRAFT 24 Note that (106) still holds even if noiseless feedback is available. Unlike Polyanskiy et al. [29], we allow analog sources and arbitrary distortion criteria, and unlike Jain et al. [28], we are interested in a nonasymptotic analysis of the minimum energy per sample. C. Energy-limited feedback codes Our first result in this section is a refinement of (106). Theorem 9. Let the source and its distortion measure satisfy assumptions A1–A5. The minimum energy required to transmit k source symbols with average distortion ≤ d over an AWGN channel with feedback satisfies Ef⋆ (k, d) · log e = kR(d) + O(log k) N0 (107) Proof: Achievability. The expansion in (107) is achieved by the following separated source/channel scheme. For the source code, we use the code of Yang and Zhang [37] (abstract alphabet) that compresses the source down to M representation points with average distortion d such that log M = kR(d) + O(log k). (108) For the channel code, we transmit the binary representation of M error-free using the optimal scheme of Polyanskiy et al. [29, Theorem 7], so that log M = E log e. N0 (109) Converse. By data processing, similar to (90), kR(d) ≤ E log e. N0 (110) For the transmission of a Gaussian sample over the feedback AWGN channel, the SchalkwijkBluestein scheme [38], [39] attains exactly the fundamental limit Ef⋆ (k, d) · log e = kR(d) N0 (111) for k = 1. For k Gaussian samples, transmitting the Schalkwijk-Bluestein codewords corresponding to i-th source sample in time slots i, k + i, 2k + i, . . . attains (111) exactly for all k = 1, 2, . . .. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 25 Theorem 10. In the transmission of a source satisfying the assumptions A1–A5 over an AWGN channel with feedback, the minimum average energy required for the transmission of k source samples under the requirement that the probability of exceeding distortion d is no greater than 0 ≤ ǫ < 1 satisfies, as k → ∞, log e Ef⋆ (k, d, ǫ) = (1 − ǫ)kR(d) − N0 r kV(d) − (Q−1 (ǫ))2 2 + O (log k) e 2π (112) Proof: Achievability. Pair a lossy compressor S k → W with excess-distortion probability ǫ and H(W ) = Hd,ǫ (S k ) with the achievability scheme in Theorem 7 and apply (87) and (60). Converse. Again, the converse result follows proceeding as in (90), invoking (60). Comparing (112) and (70), we observe that, similar to the setup in Section III, allowing feedback and average power constraint reduces the asymptotically achievable minimum energy per sample by a factor of 1 − ǫ. As in Section III, that limit is approached from below rather than from above, i.e. finite blocklength helps. D. Energy-limited non-feedback codes Our next result generalizes [29, Theorem 3]. Loosely speaking, it shows that the energy E, probability of error ǫ and distortion d of the best non-feedback code satisfy r E 2E log e − kR(d) ≈ kV(d) + log e · Q−1 (ǫ) . N0 N0 I.e. source and channel dispersions add up, as in the usual (non-feedback) joint source-channel coding problem [6], [8]. More precisely, we have the following: Theorem 11 (Asymptotics, no feedback). In the transmission of a stationary memoryless source (satisfying the assumptions A1–A5) over the AWGN channel, the minimum energy necessary for achieving probability 0 < ǫ < 1 of exceeding distortion d satisfies, as k → ∞, E ⋆ (k, d, ǫ) p log e = kR(d) + k (2R(d) log e + V(d))Q−1 (ǫ) + O (log k) N0 (113) Proof: February 2, 2015 DRAFT 26 Achievability: We let total energy E be such that p log e a −1 E + b log k, = kR(d) + k (2R(d) log e + V(d))Q ǫ− √ N0 k (114) and we show that a > 0 and b can be chosen so that the excess distortion probability is bounded by ǫ. We consider a good lossy code with M = exp(2kR(d)) representation points, so that the probability that the source is not represented within distortion d is exponentially small. We show that a combination of that code with the variable-length separated scheme in Theorem 8 achieves (114). First, we prove the following generalization of Theorem 8 to the lossy case: for any M, there exists an (k, E, d, ǫ′ ) code for the AWGN channel (without feedback) such that h M i 1 k k ′ (B (S ))) , + ε(E , ⌊log M⌋ + 1) + E 1 − P ǫ ≤ E ε E1 , k d 2 Z⋆ PZ⋆ (Bd (S k )) (115) where Bd (sk ) , {z k ∈ Sˆk : d(sk , z k ) ≤ d}. (116) Towards that end, let the representation points Z1 , Z2 , . . . , ZM be drawn i.i.d. from PZk⋆ . The source encoder goes down the list of the representation points and outputs the index of the first d-close match to S k : W , min{i : d(S k , Zi ) ≤ d} (117) (if there is no such index, it outputs 1). Averaged over Z1 , . . . , ZM , the probability that no dclose match is found is upper bounded by the third term in (115) (e.g. [23, Theorem 10]). The index W is then transmitted over the channel using the scheme in Theorem 8, with the total probability of error averaged over all lossy codebooks given by h M i ǫ′ ≤ E [ε (E1 , W )] + ε(E2 , ⌊log M⌋ + 1) + E 1 − PZk⋆ (Bd (S k ))) (118) Since conditioned on S = s, W is geometrically distributed with success probability PZk⋆ (Bd (sk )), we have E W |S k = sk = 1 PZk⋆ (Bd (sk )) (119) Noting that ε(E, m) is a concave function of m, we have by Jensen’s inequality E [ε (E, W )] ≤ E ε E, E W |S k } , (120) which gives the first term in (93). February 2, 2015 DRAFT 27 We proceed to show that with the choice of E1 = E − c log E, (121) for an appropriate c > 0, and M = exp(2kR(d)), the right side of (115) is upper bounded by ǫ. A reasoning similar to [23, (108)–(111)] and the Cram´er-Chernoff bound yield h M i E 1 − PZ k⋆ (Bd (S k )) ≤ exp(−ka1 ) for some a1 > 0. On the other hand, (103) [29, Theorem 3] implies 1 . ε (E, m) = P [log m > G(E)] + O √ k D 2 E 1 E 2E where G(E) = N N0 log e − 2 log N0 , N0 log e (122) (123) Applying (122) and (123) to (93), we conclude that the excess-distortion probability is bounded above by P log 1 1 > G(E − c log E) + P [log (log M + 1) > G (c log E)] + O √ . PZ k⋆ (Bd (S k )) E (124) The second term in (124) can be made to decay as fast as O √1E for large enough c. To evaluate the first term in (124), we recall [23, Lemma 2], which states that for k large enough, " # k X 1 K P log (125) ≤ S (Si , d) + C log k + c0 ≥ 1 − √ k PZ k⋆ (Bd (S )) k i=1 where c0 and K are constants, and C is a constant explicitly identified in [23, Lemma 2]. Letting b = c+C− 1 2 and applying (125) to upper-bound the first term in (124), we conclude by the Berry-Ess´een theorem that a 1 1 > G (E − c log E) ≤ ǫ − √ + O √ P log , PZ k⋆ (Bd (S k )) k k (126) Since a can be chosen so that (124) is upper bounded by ǫ for k large enough, this concludes the proof of the achievability part. Converse: The result in [6, Theorem 1] states that: k inf2 P S k (S , d) − ıX;Y¯ (x; Y) ≥ γ | S − exp (−γ) ǫ ≥ sup sup E γ>0 February 2, 2015 PY ¯ x : kxk ≤E (127) DRAFT 28 where S k (sk , d) is the d-tilted information in sk ∈ S k defined in (55), ıX;Y¯ (x; y) , log dPY|X=x (y), dPY ¯ and PY|X=x and PY¯ are specialized to N0 N 0, PY¯ = (128) 2 k=1 ∞ Y N0 D (129) N xk , PY|X=x = 2 k=1 kxk2 2kxk2 D ıX;Y¯ (x; Y) = N log e, log e (130) N0 N0 P Next, we let in (127) γ = 21 log NE0 . Since S k (S k , d) = ki=1 S (Si , d) is a sum of independent D ∞ Y random variables, the Berry-Ess´een bound applies to the probability in (127), and the converse direction of (114) follows since kxk2 ≤ E. If the maximal power constraint in (83) is relaxed to (85), then Ea⋆ (k, d, ǫ), the minimum average power required for transmitting k source samples over an AWGN channel with the probability of exceeding distortion d smaller than or equal to 0 < ǫ < 1 satisfies, under assumptions A1–A5: Ea⋆ (k, d, ǫ) p log e k log k , = R(d)(1 − ǫ)k + O N0 (131) i.e. the asymptotically achievable minimum energy per sample is reduced a factor of 1 − ǫ if a maximal power constraint is relaxed to an average one. This parallels the result in (76), which shows that variable-length coding over a channel reduces the asymptotic fundamental limit by a factor of 1 − ǫ compared to fixed-length coding, even without feedback. Proof of (131): Observe that Theorem 10 ensures that a smaller average energy than that in (131) is not attainable even with full noiseless feedback. In the achievability direction, let (f ⋆ , g⋆ ) be the optimal variable-length source code achieving the probability of exceeding d equal to ǫ′ (see [5, Section III.B]). Denote by ℓ(f ⋆ (s)) the length of f ⋆ (s). Let M be the size of that code. Set the energy to transmit the codeword of length ℓ(f ⋆ (S k )) to p ℓ(f ⋆ (S k ))N0 loge 2 + k log k (132) As shown in [5], E [ℓ(f ⋆ (S))] is equal to the right side of (70) (with ǫ replaced by ǫ′ ). Choosing ǫ′ = ǫ − √a k for some a, we conclude that indeed the average energy satisfies (131). Moreover, (123) implies that the expression inside the expectation in (98) is O √1k . It follows that for a large enough a, the excess distortion probability is bounded by ǫ, and the proof is complete. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 29 VI. C ONCLUSION We have considered several scenarios for joint source-channel coding with and without feedback. Our main conclusions are: 1) The average delay vs. distortion tradeoff with feedback, as well as the average energy vs. distortion tradeoff with feedback, is governed by channel capacity, and the source ratedistortion and rate-dispersion functions. In particular, the channel dispersion plays no role. 2) In variable-length coding with feedback, the asymptotically achievable minimum average length is reduced by a factor of 1 − ǫ, where ǫ is the excess distortion probability. This asymptotic fundamental limit is approached from below, i.e., counter-intuitively, smaller source blocklengths may lead to smaller attainable average delays. 3) Introducing a termination symbol that is always decoded error-free allows for transmission over noisy channels with guaranteed distortion. 4) Variable-length transmission without feedback still improves the asymptotic fundamental limit by a factor of 1 − ǫ, where ǫ is the excess distortion probability. 5) In all the cases we have analyzed the approach to the fundamental limits is very fast: O logk k , where k is the source blocklength. This behavior is attained, under average distortion, by a separated scheme with stop-feedback. 6) The setting of a wideband Gaussian channel with an energy constraint exhibits many interesting parallels with the variable-length coding setting. Allowing a non-vanishing excess distortion probability ǫ and an average (rather than maximal) energy constraint reduces the asymptotically achievable minimum energy by a factor of 1−ǫ. In the presence of feedback, just as in the variable-length coding, this asymptotic fundamental limit is approached from below. 7) Error-free transmission of a random variable W over the AWGN channel with feedback, with almost optimal energy consumption, is possible via a variable-length separated scheme. 8) More generally, variable-length separated schemes perform remarkably well in all considered scenarios. R EFERENCES [1] C. E. Shannon, “The zero error capacity of a noisy channel,” IRE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 8–19, Sep. 1956. February 2, 2015 DRAFT 30 [2] M. V. Burnashev, “Data transmission over a discrete channel with feedback: Random transmission time,” Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 10–30, 1976. [3] Y. Polyanskiy, H. V. Poor, and S. Verd´u, “Feedback in the non-asymptotic regime,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 4903–4925, 2011. [4] S. L. Fong and V. Y. F. Tan, “Asymptotic expansions for Gaussian channels with feedback under a peak power constraint asymptotic expansions for gaussian channels with feedback under a peak power constraint,” ArXiv preprint arXiv:1410.2390, Oct. 2014. [5] V. Kostina, Y. Polyanskiy, and S. Verd´u, “Variable-length compression allowing errors (extended),” ArXiv preprint, arXiv:1402.0608, Jan. 2014. [6] V. Kostina and S. Verd´u, “Lossy joint source-channel coding in the finite blocklength regime,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 2545–2575, May 2013. [7] A. Tauste Campo, G. Vazquez-Vilar, A. Guill´en i F`abregas, and A. Martinez, “Random-coding joint source-channel bounds,” in Proceedings 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, Saint-Petersburg, Russia, Aug. 2011, pp. 899– 902. [8] D. Wang, A. Ingber, and Y. Kochman, “The dispersion of joint source-channel coding,” in Proceedings 49th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control and Computing, Monticello, IL, Sep. 2011. [9] T. Javidi and A. Goldsmith, “Dynamic joint source-channel coding with feedback,” in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, Istanbul, Turkey, July 2013, pp. 16–20. [10] G. Caire, S. Shamai, and S. Verd´u, “Almost-noiseless joint source-channel coding-decoding of sources with memory,” in Proc. Fifth International ITG Conference on Source and Channel Coding (SCC), Jan. 2004, pp. 295–304. [11] I. A. Ovseevich, “Capacity of a randomized channel with feedback and matching of the source,” Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 52–59, 1968. [12] R. Fang, “Optimum linear feedback scheme for matching colored Gaussian sources with white Gaussian channels,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 789–791, 1970. [13] V. Chande, H. Jafarkhani, and N. Farvardin, “Joint source-channel coding of images for channels with feedback,” in Proceedings 1998 IEEE Information Theory Workshop, Feb. 1998. [14] V. Kafedziski, “Joint source channel coding of images over frequency selective fading channels with feedback using dct and multicarrier block pulse amplitude modulation,” in Proceedings Asilomar Conf. Signals, Systems and Computers, vol. 1, 1998, pp. 37–41. [15] J. Lu, A. Nosratinia, and B. Aazhang, “Progressive joint source-channel coding in feedback channels,” in Proceedings 1999 Data Compression Conference, 1999, pp. 140–148. [16] M. Gastpar and B. Rimoldi, “Source-channel communication with feedback,” in Proceedings 2003 IEEE Information Theory Workshop, Paris, France, 2003, pp. 279–282. [17] R. Manakkal and B. Rimoldi, “A source-channel coding scheme for discrete memoryless channels with feedback,” in Proceedings 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, Adelaide, Australia,, 2005, pp. 1511–1515. [18] M. Horstein, “Sequential transmission using noiseless feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 136–143, 1963. [19] J. M. Ooi and G. W. Wornell, “Fast iterative coding techniques for feedback channels,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 44, no. 7, pp. 2960–2976, 1998. [20] R. Ahlswede, “A constructive proof of the coding theorem for discrete memoryless channels with feedback,” in Transactions February 2, 2015 DRAFT 31 of the Sixth Prague Conference on Information Theory, Statistical Decision Functions, Random Processes, Prague, Sep. 1971. [21] O. Shayevitz and M. Feder, “Optimal feedback communication via posterior matching,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 1186–1222, 2011. [22] Y. Polyanskiy, H. V. Poor, and S. Verd´u, “Channel coding rate in finite blocklength regime,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 2307–2359, May 2010. [23] V. Kostina and S. Verd´u, “Fixed-length lossy compression in the finite blocklength regime,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 3309–3338, June 2012. [24] N. Farvardin and V. Vaishampayan, “Optimal quantizer design for noisy channels: An approach to combined source-channel coding,” IEEE Trans. on Information Theory, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 827–838, 1987. [25] A. Amanullah and M. Salehi, “Joint source-channel coding in the presence of feedback,” in Proc. 27th Asilomar Conf. Sig. Syst. Comp., 1993, pp. 930–934. [26] S. Gorantla and T. Coleman, “Information-theoretic viewpoints on optimal causal coding-decoding problems,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1102.0250, 2011. [27] B. Hochwald and K. Zeger, “Tradeoff between source and channel coding,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1412–1424, 1997. [28] A. Jain, D. Gunduz, S. R. Kulkarni, H. V. Poor, and S. Verd´u, “Energy-distortion tradeoffs in Gaussian joint source-channel coding problems,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 3153–3168, 2012. [29] Y. Polyanskiy, H. V. Poor, and S. Verd´u, “Minimum energy to send k bits through the Gaussian channel with and without feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 4880–4902, 2011. [30] S. Verd´u and S. Shamai, “Variable-rate channel capacity,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 2651–2667, 2010. [31] A. Tchamkerten and E. Telatar, “Variable length coding over an unknown channel,” vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 2126–2145, May 2006. [32] M. Naghshvar and T. Javidi, “Active sequential hypothesis testing,” The Annals of Statistics, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2703–2738, 2013. [33] E. C ¸ inlar, Probability and Stochastics. Springer, 2011. [34] A. Wyner, “An upper bound on the entropy series,” Information and Control, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 176–181, 1972. [35] E. C. Posner, E. R. Rodemich, and H. Rumsey, “Epsilon-entropy of stochastic processes,” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1000–1020, 1967. [36] R. Pilc, “The transmission distortion of a discrete source as a function of the encoding block length,” Bell Syst. Tech. J., vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 827–885, July/August 1968. [37] E. Yang and Z. Zhang, “On the redundancy of lossy source coding with abstract alphabets,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1092–1110, May 1999. [38] J. Schalkwijk and L. Bluestein, “Transmission of analog waveforms through channels with feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 617–619, 1967. [39] T. J. Cruise, “Achievement of rate-distortion bound over additive white noise channel utilizing a noiseless feedback channel,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 583–584, Apr. 1967. [40] C. E. Shannon, “Communication in the presence of noise,” Proceedings of the IRE, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 10–21, 1949. [41] J. M. Wozencraft and I. M. Jacobs, Principles of communication engineering. February 2, 2015 John Wiley & Sons, 1965. DRAFT 32 [42] Y. P. Pyatoshin, “Some properties of m-ary communication systems with coding,” Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 45–51, 1968. [43] S. Verd´u, “Spectral efficiency in the wideband regime,” (Invited Paper) IEEE Trans. Information Theory, Special Issue on Shannon Theory: Perspective, Trends and Applications, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1319–1343, June 2002. [44] W. Yang, G. Durisi, and Y. Polyanskiy, “Minimum energy to send k bits over Rayleigh-fading channels,” in IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, submitted, 2015. February 2, 2015 DRAFT

© Copyright 2017 ExploreDoc