An enhanced wireless technology outcome, which pushed Single input single output technology aside was Multipleinput multiple

output technology (MIMO). MIMO utilizes an array of transmitter and receivers to have higher channel capacity i.e. transmit and receive more data at the same time. Smartly taking advantage of the multipath propagation of signals in wireless environment, antennas work critically, which hikes the receiver signal capturing power by combining the data stream reaching at different time, different path and different angle. Surplus antennas can be utilized to add on receiver diversity in addition to range enhancement.The theoretical channel capacity limits defined by Shannon-Hartely theorem is : Channel Capacity=BW * log2(1+SNR) This clearly calls for increase in signal bandwidth for increase in data rate which would consequently pop out the multipath fading into our solution.
Utilization of the spatial dimension of a communications link, MIMO systems can achieve significantly higher data rates than traditional single-input, single-output (SISO) channels. In a 2 x 2 MIMO system signals propagate along multiple paths from the transmitter to the receiver antennas. Using this channel knowledge, a receiver can recover independent data streams from each of the transmitters antennas. A 2 x 2 MIMO system produces two spatial streams to effectively double the maximum data rate of what might be achieved in a traditional 1 x 1 SISO communications channel. The channel capacity can be estimated as a function of N spatial streams. A basic approximation of MIMO channel capacity is a function of spatial streams, bandwidth, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is: Capacity = N BW log2 (1 + SNR) (2) The equation for MIMO channel capacity enables us to estimate the relationship between the number of spatial streams and the throughput of various implementations of SISO and MIMO configurations .The IEEE 802.11g specs prescribe that a wireless-local-areanetwork (WLAN) channel uses a SISO configuration. With this standard, the maximum coded data rate of 54 Mb/s requires use of a 64-QAM modulation scheme and a code rate of 3/4. As a result, the uncoded bit rate is 72 Mb/s (4/3 x 54 Mb/s). With minimum transmitter error vector magnitude (EVM) at -25 dB, an SNR of 25 dB can be estimated as the requirement for a 64-state quadrature-amplitude-modulation (64QAM) scheme. While EVM and SNR are not equivalent in all cases, we can assume that the magnitude error of a symbol will dominate the signal error as the SNR approaches its lower limit. The maximum data rate of IEEE 802.11g maps closely with the maximum channel capacity dictated by the Shannon- Hartley theorem. According to this theorem, a Gaussian channel with an SNR of 25 dB should produce an uncoded data rate of 94 Mb/s in a 20-MHz channel bandwidth. Thus, the SISO implementation of IEEE 802.11g approaches, but does not exceed, the theoretical maximum channel capacity of the Shannon-Hartley theorem. But the estimated equation would suggest that a MIMO channel with four spatial streams should be capable of four times the capacity of the SISO channela 20-MHz channel with a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 25 dB and four spatial streams should have an uncoded bit rate of 4 x 94 Mb/s = 376 Mb/s. This estimation maps closely with the expected data rates of the draft IEEE 802.11n physical layer specs. IEEE 802.11n is designed to support MIMO configurations with as many as four spatial streams. At the highest data rate, bursts using a 64QAM modulation scheme with a 5/6 channel code rate produce a data rate of 288.9 Mb/s and an uncoded bit rate of 346.68 Mb/s.It can be observed that the bit rate of a 4 x 4 (four spatial stream) MIMO configuration exceeds

that of the Shannon- Hartley limit at all data rates, making MIMO systems attractive for higher data throughput.

SISO refers to a system that has one input and one output, say for instance Fan. A regulator regulates its speed and output is controlled. Only one set point is defined in the case of regulator setting and the outcome is regulated output. In short, we dont have any feedback.Whereas MIMO appreciates the concept that inputs can have set point/feedback,thus output can be controlled. Unlike SISO,systems that use MIMO can send or receive multiple spatial streams at a time. But to realize MIMO we need to have either Mobile device or Access point to support MIMO, preferably both station and AP should support MIMO for optimal response.
While MIMO systems provide users with clear benefits at the application level, the design and test of MIMO devices is not without significant challenges. For example, MIMO systems need antenna designers to deal with the issue of placing multiple antennas. Secondly , transceiver designers must solve the challenge of multi-channel synchronization. Finally, digital-signal processing (DSP) engineers are required to implement more sophisticated baseband processing algorithms to better interpret the channel model. Each channel of the MIMO test system uses a single stage down conversion approach. In order for each acquired baseband I/Q signal to be phase-coherent, it is necessary to share a common local oscillator (LO) and analog-to-digital-converter (ADC) sample clock between each channel. The phase of each channel can be precisely calibrated by adjusting the start phase of the digital downconverter (DDC).But researches are hitting the target nearer due to attractive data rates and resilence to multipath offered by MIMO compared to SISO.

Many researchers find MIMO as a hot topic as it scores high in the areas of data rate and reliability than SISO communication systems.SISO and MIMO OFDM have high throughput in the wireless system domain but the I/Q mismatch not only hampers but also would limit the performance of the MIMO-OFDM system. We can model the effects of the RF impairment-I/Q mismatch on symbols of OFDM system and thus bring about a signal processing based approaches for suppression of this IQ imbalance for MIMO and SISO systems. Few bits of feedback in communication system promises performance boost by exploiting channel conditions. Suppose if we use this feedback to specify a precoding matrix at the transmitter side, this would activate the strongest channel mode. In addition to this, MIMO MC-CDMA and coded MIMO OFDMA when analyzed with low system load, the former outperforms than the latter. But this

result deteriorates as the system load increases. This can be well explained with PEP (pair wise error probability) analysis of MIMO MC CDMA that smartly adapts to the frequency diversity with small no. of users and hence small multiuser interference! But at high load, MIMO OFDMA outperforms the former one, as it is insensitive to multiuser interference. The solution to this is to make available the other users spreading sequence at the receiver of the required user making MIMO MC CDMA perform better than MIMO OFDMA at all loads. An interesting headline for MIMO is the predistorter (PD) design for broadband MIMO-OFDM system which injects lot of implementation challenges. To improve the power amplifier efficiency keeping inband and out-of-band distortion at optimum levels, predistortion techniques are fit into OFDM systems. Baseband PD is hit with imbalance in IQ modulator. Thus the requirement is a MIMO-PD that linearises Power amplifier response and compensate for cross talk too. It is noted from recent Journals that error vector magnitude and adjacent channel power ratio results have a greater impact and improvement with regard to our conventional PD systems. MIMO RFIC designers are also addressing the sinking performance of MIMO due to MIMO wireless transceiver radio frequency integrated circuits imperfections.