Bit Error Rate Analysis of Jamming for OFDM Systems
Jun Luo*, Jean H. Andrian*, Chi Zhou**
*
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Florida International University
**
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology
Emails: {jluo001, Jean.Andrian}@fiu.edu, zhouc@ece.iit.edu
Abstract
The Bit Error Rate (BER) analysis of various jamming
techniques for Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing
(OFDM) systems is given in both analytical form and software
simulation results. Specifically, the BER performance of
Barrage Noise Jamming (BNJ), Partial Band Jamming (PBJ)
and Multitone Jamming (MTJ) in time-correlated Rayleigh
fading channel with Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN)
has been investigated. In addition, two novel jamming
methods — optimal-fraction PBJ and optimal-fraction MTJ
for OFDM systems are proposed with detailed theoretical
analysis. Simulation results validate the analytical results. It
is shown that under the AWGN channel without fading, the
optimal-fraction MTJ always gives the best jamming effect
among all the jamming techniques given in this paper, while
in Rayleigh fading channel the optimal-fraction MTJ can
achieve acceptable performance. Both analysis and simula-
tion indicate that the proposed optimal-fraction MTJ can be
used to obtain improved jamming effect under various
channel conditions with low complexity for OFDM systems.
1. Introduction
Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing (OFDM) is a
promising technology that enables the transmission of high
data rate. The basic idea of OFDM is to use a large number of
parallel narrow-band sub-carriers instead of a single wide-
band carrier to transport information. With its capability of
adapting to severe channel conditions without complex
equalization, OFDM can effectively provide broadband
wireless communication in hostile multipath environments.
Furthermore OFDM is robust against Inter-Symbol Interfer-
ence (ISI) and fading caused by multipath propagation.
Since OFDM is a very important candidate for the core
technique of next generation wireless communication systems,
it is necessary to evaluate its performance under intentional
interference over fading channel. There are some works done
in this area. In [2], the performance of OFDM communication
in the presence of partial-band jamming is presented. The
anti-jamming property of clustered OFDM has been investi-
gated in [3], and [4] gives a detailed study about the effect of
partial band jamming on OFDM systems. Despite of all the
works mentioned, a comprehensive survey about the effects of
different jamming techniques for OFDM systems has not been
carried out. By comparing the Bit Error Rate (BER) perform-
ance of different jamming techniques, the most effective
jamming technique can be identified under various channel
1-4244-0697-8/07/.00 ©2007 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
conditions. This is very critical for both jamming and anti-
jamming applications for OFDM systems.
This paper evaluates the BER performance of different
jamming strategies including Barrage Noise Jamming (BNJ),
Partial Band Jamming (PBJ) and Multitone Jamming (MTJ) in
time-correlated Rayleigh fading channel with Additive White
Gaussian Noise (AWGN). In addition, two novel jamming
methods — optimal-fraction PBJ and optimal-fraction MTJ for
OFDM systems are proposed with detailed theoretical
analysis. The theoretical and simulation results show that the
most effective jamming strategy for OFDM system is the
optimal-fraction MTJ since it can make jamming effect better
obviously through a simple way.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, a brief
overview of OFDM system model is presented. Section 3
details the different jamming models and their analytical BER
form in OFDM systems. Simulation results and related
analysis are shown in Section 4. Finally, the concluding
remarks are given in Section 5.
2. OFDM system and channel model
The overview of OFDM system model is illustrated in
Fig.1. In this paper, we use Binary Phase Shift Keying
(BPSK) and Differential Binary Phase Shift Keying (DBPSK)
as our signal mapping methods. Higher order modulation
techniques can be used as well, but these two are sufficient for
us to analyze the essence of the problem. When applying
DBPSK to OFDM systems, Frequency Domain Differential
Demodulation (FDDD) is used rather than Time Domain
Differential Demodulation (TDDD) since FDDD outperforms
TDDD in frequency-nonselective fading channel [5]. The
Cyclic Prefix is used as Guard Interval to eliminate ISI
between the data blocks since samples of the channel output
affected by this ISI can be discarded without any loss relative
to the original information sequence [1].
The channel is modeled as a flat-fading Rayleigh channel.
For every sub-carrier in OFDM systems, its bandwidth is
relatively small compared with the bandwidth of the channel,
so it is reasonable to make this flat-fading assumption. Based
on the modified sum-of-sinusoids method of Zheng [6], we
construct a time-correlated flat-fading Rayleigh model, in
which the channel has a Rayleigh-distributed envelope and
uniform phase, and the two are mutually independent. We
assume the system is coherent, so the phase can always be
estimated perfectly. Hence we neglect the phase variation of
the channel. Considering the jamming and the signal are both
independently attenuated by the channel, we use two inde-
pendent random variables to describe the jamming channel
 2D 2 Eb (6)
PBPSK (D , E ) Q( )
N0  E 2 N J
1  D 2 Eb (7)
PDBPSK (D , E ) exp( )
2 N0  E 2 N J
Since there are two Rayleigh random variables with the same
variance V 2 , the average BER for BPSK and DPBSK can be
expressed as
ff
2D 2 Eb DE D 2  E 2
PBPSK ³ ³ Q(
0 0
) ˜
N0  E 2 N J V 4
˜ exp(
2V 2
)dDdE (8)
Fig. 1. OFDM System Model ff
1D 2 Eb DE D 2  E 2
power gain GJ and the signal channel power gain Gs , which PDBPSK ³³ 2 exp(N
0  E NJ
2
) ˜ 4 ˜ exp(
V 2V 2
)dDdE (9)
are given as 00

GS D 2 (1) Certainly, the infinite upper limit of integration should be

replaced by finite approximated value in practice.
GJ E 2 (2)
where  and  are independent Rayleigh random variables
3) PBJ under AWGN
with variances V S2 and V J2 respectively. Because jamming and
Partial band Jamming (PBJ) is modeled as additive Gaus-
signal are under the same channel environment, V S and V J sian noise with its power focusing on a portion of the entire
can be regarded as the same value V . bandwidth of the system. This strategy is considered more
effective than BNJ since the jammer can use more power to
3. The effects of various jamming for OFDM interfere with the certain specific bandwidth. We consider the
systems best jamming scenario: The jamming signal bandwidth falls
In this section we investigate several typical jamming into that of the OFDM signal completely. The portion of
techniques. For every jamming type, we first give the BER jamming signal bandwidth can be described by [2]
form under AWGN, then consider more complicated Rayleigh Wj
U (10)
fading channel. Wsig
where W j is the bandwidth of the jamming signal and Wsig is
1) BNJ under AWGN
Barrage Noise Jamming (BNJ) belongs to a broadband the bandwidth of the OFDM signal. To calculate the BER, we
consider two types of frequency bands: the jammed frequency
noise jamming form. In this case, the jammer interferes with
bands and the unjammed frequency bands. Given the average
the whole bandwidth by injecting a band-limited noise to the
PSD of PBJ NJ , the effective PSD of PBJ in the first type of
system. Its effect is the same as that of the AWGN, so the bands becomes N J U , and there is no jamming at all in the
Power Spectrum Density (PSD) of total noise becomes:
second type of bands. Combing those two cases with (4) and
PSDN N 0  N J (3)
(5), the BER for BPSK and DBPSK under PBJ is given as
where N0 is the noise PSD of complex AWGN and NJ is the
2 Eb 2 Eb (11)
PSD of complex BNJ. Since the OFDM system performs no PBPSK ( U ) U ˜ Q ( )  (1  U ) ˜ Q( )
differently from conventional serial systems under the AWGN N0  N J / U N0
[9], the BER for BPSK and DPBSK is given as: U  Eb 1 U E (12)
PDBPSK ( U ) ˜ exp( )( ) ˜ exp( b )
2 Eb 2 N0  N J / U 2 N0
PBPSK Q( ) (4)
N0  N J Since (11) and (12) depend on the value of U , it is necessary
1  Eb to find the optimal jamming fraction U * so that the jamming
PDBPSK exp( ) (5)
2 N0  N J effect is maximized. Assuming the background AWGN is
where Eb is the average energy-per-bit of OFDM signal. small compared to PBJ and applying the following approxi-
mation for the Q function from [8]
x2
2) BNJ under Rayleigh fading channel with AWGN Q ( x ) | exp(  ) /(1.64 x  0.76 x 2  4 ) (13)
In Rayleigh fading channel, the effective energy-per-bit 2
becomes GSEb and the effective PSD of the BNJ becomes Eq. (11), (12) are transformed into
 exp( SIR ˜ U )
GJNJ. Under the assumption that the time correlation coeffi- PBPSK ( U ) U (14)
cient of the channel is close to 1, the time-varying property of (1.64 2 SIR ˜ U  1.52 ˜ SIR ˜ U  4 )
the channel will not affect the analysis of the differential  U
PDBPSK ( U ) exp( SIR ˜ U ) (15)
modulation. After simplifying, we get the BER 2

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 where SIR represents Signal-to-Interference Ratio, which is
equal to Eb / N J . The optimal jamming fraction U * can be
obtained by maximizing (14) and (15) with respect to U for a
given SIR
UBPSK
*
argmaxPˆBPSK(U) (16)
U

U DBPSK
*
arg max PˆDBPSK (U ) (17)
U

(Jamming fraction constraint: 0 d U d 1 ) Fig. 2. Signal Space Model

Let us take the partial derivative of (14) and (15) with respect
axis, we get
to U and set them to 0 to obtain optimal jamming fractions.
SI1,r1 AJ cos(I J )  Eb  VI1 (22)
Here Newton-Raphson approximation is used to get numerical
results. Like constrained control system, the optimal jamming SI1,r 2 AJ cos(I J )  Eb  VI1 (23)
fraction will saturate whenever the boundary constraints
where SI 1,r1 and SI1, r 2 represent the I1 axis projection of
( 0 d U d 1 ) are violated. In practice, the optimal values of
jamming fraction can be generated offline based on different received signals (corresponding to S1 and S 2 respectively),
o
SIR, and then stored in hardware or software as a table. By and VI1 is the AWGN V ’s I1 axis projection. Because the
looking up this table, the jammer can maintain optimal
performance for every value of the SIR. In this paper, this error probabilities for S1 and S 2 are equal, only Pe s1 needs to
special PBJ based on optimal jamming fraction table is named be calculated. Hence the BER for BPSK with MTJ is given as
as optimal-fraction PBJ. PBPSK_ MTJ Pe s1 Pr (SI1, r1  0) (24)

4) PBJ under Rayleigh fading channel with AWGN Here we have two random variables: one is I J , which is
For the time-correlated Rayleigh fading channel, following uniformly distributed over [0,2S ] ; the other is VI1 , which
the same steps as before, the average BER for BPSK and satisfies the Gaussian distribution with N (0, N 0 2) . Now we
DPBSK becomes
ff
2D2Eb 2D2Eb DE D2  E2
define Y A J cos( I J )  Eb , X V I 1 and W X Y .
(18)
P BPSK ³³
(U ˜Q(
00
) (1 U) ˜Q(
N0  E NJ / U
2
)) ˜ exp(
N0
)dDdE
V 4
2V 2
Then
ff
U D Eb2
1 U D Eb DE
2
D  E
2 2
(19) PBPSK _ MTJ Pr ( SI1,r1  0) Pr (W  0) (25)
PDBPSK ³³( 2 ˜ exp(N  E N / U) (
2
2
) ˜ exp( )) ˜ exp(
N0 V4 2V2
)dDdE
00 0 J The Probability Density Function (PDF) of cos() function is
Here we do not consider the optimization of jamming fraction, given in [7] as
since this requires a complicated algorithm in a time-varying ­1 1
Rayleigh fading channel. It is not realistic to do so just for ° z  (1,1) (26)
fZ (z) ®S 1  z2
small improvement in jamming effect. Instead jamming °0
¯
fraction optimization table from previous section is used to
obtain some improvement. The PDF of Y can be represented as
1 (27)
fY ( y)
5) MTJ under AWGN y  Eb 2
Multitone jamming (MTJ) divides its total power into q SAJ 1  ( )
AJ
distinct, equal power, random phase tones. Every jamming where y should satisfy E b  A J  y  E b  AJ
tone can be modeled as
Knowing the PDF of X, the PDF of W is
J (t ) AJ e j ( 2Sf J t  I J ) (20) f

where I J is the random phase, which is uniformly distributed fW ( w ) ³ f X ( w  y ) f Y ( y ) dy

f (28)
over [0,2]. AJ and fJ are the amplitude and frequency, E b  AJ
1 (w  y) 2
1
respectively. We assume that those q jamming tones are ³ SN 0
exp( 
N0
)
y  Eb 2
dy
E b  AJ
perfectly aligned with q sub-carriers of the OFDM system. SAJ 1 ( )
AJ
Then the portion of jamming signal bandwidth is defined as
U q/M (21) Then AJ is the only unknown variable in (28), which can be
where M is the number of FFT points. After FFT in receiver obtained simply through the following equation
block, in signal space, the jamming signal, which has fixed Eb (29)
AJ
length AJ and random phase I J , is added to original signal USIR
o
( S1 or S 2 ) as a vector (Fig. 2), and AWGN V is another Based on the result of (28), we can get PBPSK _ MTJ from (25)

vector added to them. Projecting the compound signal onto I1 easily. Thus the BER for BPSK is given as

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2 Eb which shows good results in the simulation.
PBPSK ( Eb , N 0 , U , SIR) U ˜ PBPSK _ MTJ  (1  U )Q ( )
N0 (30) In MTJ, optimal jamming fraction should also be consid-
0 ered, so that we get the optimal-fraction MTJ. Again,
2 Eb
U ³ fW ( w)dw  (1  U )Q( ) assuming the background AWGN is negligible, from (31)
f
N0
following the same process as PBJ, we can get
If the AWGN is negligible, we can get U*
1 S  0.5˜ SIR
­U S (  arcsin( UBPSK
*
˜ SIR))  BPSK 0 (38)
PBPSK (Eb , U, SIR) = Pes1 = ° S ( 2  arcsin( USIR )) USIR < 1 S 2 S UBPSK˜ SIR(1 UBPSK
* *
˜ SIR )
®
°̄0 Solving it with different SIR will generate MTJ jamming
(31) fraction optimization table of BPSK. For DBPSK, the optimal
For DPBSK, let z(k-1) and z(k) be the reference and re- jamming fraction can be obtained from simulation results. The
optimization tables of BPSK and DBPSK will be used by
ceived symbol vectors respectively. The variable D is given as
optimal-fraction multitone jammer to achieve optimal
D Re(z(k ) z * (k 1)) performance.
(32)
o o
jIJ ( k )  jIJ ( k 1)
Re(( AJ e  s(k )  V (k ))( AJ e  s (k 1)  V (k 1)))
* *
6) MTJ under Rayleigh fading channel with AWGN
where s(k ) and s (k  1) are transmitted constellations at time Similar as before, the average BER for BPSK and DPBSK
k and k-1. D is used by differential detector to decide which for MTJ under Rayleigh fading channel with AWGN is
ff
DE D 2  E 2
symbol was transmitted. Due to symmetry, we can assume a PBPSK ³³ (P (D 2 Eb , N0 , U,D 2 SIR E 2 )) ˜ exp( )dDdE (39)
V4 2V 2
BPSK
given phase difference zero to compute the error probability 00

[1], so s(k ) and s (k  1) can be specified as Eb . Hence ff

DE D 2  E 2
PDBPSK ³³ (P (D 2 Eb , N0 , U,D 2 SIR E 2 ) ˜ exp( )dDdE (40)
V 2V 2
DBPSK 4
D Re(z(k ) z* (k 1)) 00

o
(33) where PBPSK (D 2 Eb , N 0 , U ,D 2 SIR E 2 ) is derived from (30), and
o
Re(( AJ e jIJ (k )  Eb  V (k ))( AJ e jIJ (k 1)  Eb  V * (k 1))) when you calculate it, you should change all Eb and SIR to
If D is less than 0, then a decision error is made. That is, the
D 2 Eb , D 2 SIR E 2 correspondingly. Eq. (37) gives the value of
BER equals to Pr(D  0) when MTJ exists. However, the
PDBPSK (D 2 Eb , N 0 , U ,D 2 SIR E 2 ) . Here Eb and SIR should be
probability of D is difficult to calculate from (33), subse-
quently some approximations are necessary. For SIR >> SNR changed as well.
(Eb/N0), we can neglect some small items in (33), and get 4. Simulation results and analysis
D | Eb  AJ Eb (cos(I J (k ))  cos(I J (k  1)))  Eb (VI1 (k )  VI1 (k  1))
In this section, the BER performance of different jamming
 AJ (cos(I J (k )  I J (k  1)))
2
techniques for OFDM system is evaluated by the means of
(34) software simulation. Based on the 802.11a standard [10], the
Dividing (34) by Eb yields main parameters used in the simulation are summarized as
Table 1. In this table, to simplify the problem, we use 64 as
D | Eb  AJ (cos(I J ( k ))  cos(I J (k  1)))  VI1 (k )  VI1 (k  1)
2
(35) the number of sub-carriers instead of 52 in the 802.11a
AJ standard. Hence the occupied bandwidth is changed from 16.6
 (cos(I J (k )  I J (k  1)))
Eb MHz to 20 MHz correspondingly.
Compared with the case of coherent BPSK (22), there are five Fig. 3 shows the comparison between simulation results and
noise terms instead of two. Approximately, the MTJ is theoretical results of all non-optimal jamming types (BNJ, the
2  1 / USIR times larger than that of BPSK and AWGN is 2 fixed-fraction PBJ and the fixed-fraction MTJ) in the paper.
times larger than that of BPSK, which gives a simple way of In the simulation, every test is repeated 200-1000 times to
getting differential modulation BER from coherent modula- eliminate the fluctuations caused by intrinsic random nature of
tion BER Eq. (30). the OFDM communication system. It is shown that the
SIR (36) simulation results of all non-optimal jamming types are in
PDBPSK ( Eb , N 0 , U , SIR) PBPSK ( Eb ,2 N 0 , U , )
1
(2  )
USIR Table 1: Main parameters used in simulation
This equation is valid only for SIR >> SNR. From simulation, Modulation
Signal bit rate 20 MHz BPSK/DBPSK
scheme
we found that when SIR is close to SNR, the simulation Number of
values of BER will deviate from theoretical values to some 64 Cyclic prefix 0.8 us
sub-carriers
smaller values. In order to compensate this deviation, Eq. FFT length 64
Channel Rayleigh fading
(36) was modified empirically to model channel with AWGN
Doppler OFDM
SIR (37) 40 Hz 3.2 us
PDBPSK ( Eb , N 0 , U , SIR) PBPSK ( Eb , N 0 , U , ) frequency symbol period
1 Signal Jamming Depend on different
(2   0.6) 20 MHz
USIR bandwidth bandwidth jamming techniques

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 agreement with the analytical prediction perfectly under BNJ are compared in Fig. 5. Under AWGN, the optimal MTJ
AWGN. On the contrary, in Rayleigh fading channel, there clearly outperforms the other two for BPSK and DBPSK.
are some small deviations between simulation results and When the channel condition degenerates to the worst case
theoretical values. They are caused by precision errors of channel model — Rayleigh fading channel, BNJ performs best
numerical integration (for all non-optimal jamming types) and since BNJ is the special case of PBJ, whose jamming fraction
equation approximation (only for DBPSK of MTJ). All these equals to 1. From observation it is noticed that even BNJ is
deviations are less than 10%, therefore they are acceptable. best in Rayleigh fading channel, its advantage over optimal-
To verify the optimization process about PBJ and MTJ, fraction MTJ is not so obvious. So it is reasonable to believe
optimal jamming fraction data is listed as Table 2, in which that the optimal-fraction MTJ can be used to obtain improved
SNR is fixed to 20db and SIR is varied from -2db to 10db jamming effect under different channel conditions with low
under AWGN. We show both analytical predictions and complexity.
simulated values for PBJ and MTJ except MTJ for DBPSK, to
which only simulated values are shown since precise theoreti- 5. Conclusion
cal equation is hard to obtain. Since 64-FFT is used in the The BER performance of different jamming strategies for
proposed OFDM system, every U * has been rounded to the OFDM system is investigated. Both analytical form and
simulation values are given. In addition, two new jamming
closest integer multiple of 1/64. In Table 2, the bold part is
methods — optimal-fraction PBJ and optimal-fraction MTJ
the analytical prediction and its right side is the corresponding
are proposed in this paper. Through analysis and simulation, it
simulated results. The biggest error between them is less than
is shown that under the best channel condition (AWGN only),
5%, which validates the correctness of the analytical model.
the optimal-fraction MTJ clearly outperforms other jamming
Fig. 4 shows the comparison between the optimal-fraction
types in the paper, and as the channel condition gets worse
jamming and the fixed-fraction jamming of PBJ and MTJ. It is
into deep fading, the optimal-fraction MTJ still shows
revealed that under AWGN only, the optimal-fraction
competitive performance. The results of the experiment and
jamming always gives the best jamming effect. On the
the analysis of those results show that the optimal-fraction
contrary, this can not be promised in Rayleigh fading channel.
MTJ is a very effective jamming technique for OFDM system
In fact, in Fig. 4 (c), (d), (g) and (h), it is found that the best
in various channel conditions.
jamming effect can be achieved by just setting jamming
fraction to 0.9 simply. Thus in deep fading channel, the
jamming power should be distributed to the whole bandwidth REFERENCES
to gain the best jamming effect. On the other hand, from Fig. [1] A. Goldsmith, Wireless Communications, Cambridge University
4, it is found that the optimal-fraction jamming also performs Press, 2005.
[2] R. F. Ormondroyd and E. Al-Susa, “Impact of multipath fading
quite well even in Rayleigh fading channel. Therefore the
and partial-band interference on the performance of a
optimal-fraction jamming can obtain optimal performance COFDM/CDMA modulation scheme for robust wireless com-
under AWGN (best case channel model) and relatively good munications,” IEEE MILCOM, vol. 2, pp. 673-678, 1998.
performance under Rayleigh fading channel (worst case [3] H. Zhang and Y. Li, “Anti-jamming property of clustered
channel model). In general, the optimal-fraction jamming OFDM for dispersive channels,” IEEE MILCOM, vol. 1, pp.
gives us a simple way to obtain good jamming effect under 336-340, Oct. 2003.
[4] J. Park, D. Kim, C. Kang and D. Hong, “Effect of partial band
various channel conditions.
jamming on OFDM-based WLAN in 802.11g,” ICASSP 2003,
Finally, optimal-fraction MTJ, optimal-fraction PBJ and vol. 4, pp. 560-563, Hongkong, China, 6-10 April 2003.
Table 2: Optimal jamming fraction (SNR = 20dB) [5] S. Lijun, T. Youxi and L. Shaoqian, “BER Performance of
Frequency Domain Differential Demodulation OFDM in Flat
SIR U * U * U * U * U * U * U *
(dB) Fading Channel,” GLOBECOM, vol. 1, pp. 1-5, 2003.
PBJ PBJ PBJ PBJ MTJ MTJ MTJ
BPSK BPSK DBPSK DBPSK BPSK BPSK DBPSK
[6] Y. R. Zheng and C. Xiao, “Improved models for the generation
(A1) (S2) (A) (S) (A) (S) (S) of multiple uncorrelated Rayleigh fading waveforms,” IEEE
-2 1 62/64 1 62/64 1 1 1 Communications Letters, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 256-258, 2002.
-1 57/64 57/64 1 1 51/64 48/64 63/64 [7] A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic
0 45/64 46/64 1 61/64 40/64 41/64 55/64 Processes, 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, Feb. 1991
1 36/64 35/64 51/64 52/64 32/64 32/64 43/64 [8] N. Kingsbury, “Approximation Formulae for the Gaussian Error
2 29/64 31/64 40/64 41/64 25/64 24/64 32/64 Integral, Q(x),” Connexions, June 7, 2005.
3 23/64 26/64 32/64 32/64 20/64 20/64 27/64 [9] L. Hanzo, M. Münster, B. J. Choi, T. Keller, OFDM and MC-
4 18/64 21/64 25/64 25/64 16/64 15/64 21/64 CDMA for Broadband Multi-User Communications, WLANs
5 14/64 15/64 20/64 21/64 13/64 12/64 16/64 and Broadcasting, Wiley-IEEE Press, September 2003.
6 11/64 11/64 16/64 17/64 10/64 11/64 12/64 [10] IEEE 802.11a, “Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control
7 9/64 9/64 13/64 14/64 9/64 8/64 10/64 (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications: High-speed
8 7/64 7/64 10/64 10/64 6/64 7/64 8/64 Physical Layer in the 5GHz Band,” supplement to IEEE 802.11
9 6/64 6/64 8/64 8/64 5/64 5/64 6/64 Standard, Sept. 1999.
10 5/64 4/64 6/64 7/64 4/64 4/64 5/64
* (A1): Analytical * (S2): Simulated
* This table is generated under AWGN channel without Rayleigh fading

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 0 0
10 10

-1
10

-2 -1
BER

BER
10 10

-3
10

-4 -2
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(a) BNJ under AWGN (b) BNJ under Rayleigh fading channel
0 0
10 10

-1
10

-1
BER
BER

10

-2
10

-3 -2
10 10
\ -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(c) PBJ under AWGN ( is fixed to 0.5) (d) PBJ under Rayleigh fading channel ( is fixed to 0.5)

0 0
10 10

-1
10

-2 -1
BER

BER

10 10

-3
10

-4 -2
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(e) MTJ under AWGN ( is fixed to 0.5) (f) MTJ under Rayleigh fading channel ( is fixed to 0.5)

: Analytical BER of BPSK : Simulated BER of BPSK

: Analytical BER of DBPSK : Simulated BER of DBPSK

Fig.3: Comparison between simulation results and theoretical values of

all non-optimal jamming types (SNR is fixed to 10dB)

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 0 0
10 10

-1
10
-1
10

-2
BER

BER
10

-2
10
-3
10

-4 -3
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(a) PBJ under AWGN (BPSK) (b) PBJ under AWGN (DBPSK)
0 0
10 10

-1 -1
BER

BER
10 10

-2 -2
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(c) PBJ under Rayleigh fading channel (BPSK) (d) PBJ under Rayleigh fading channel (DBPSK)

0 0
10 10

-1
10
-1
10

-2
BER

BER

10

-2
10
-3
10

-4 -3
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR

(e) MTJ under AWGN (BPSK) (f) MTJ under AWGN (DBPSK)
0 0
10 10

-1 -1
BER

BER

10 10

-2 -2
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR

(g) MTJ under Rayleigh fading channel (BPSK) (h) MTJ under Rayleigh fading channel (DBPSK)

: Optimal  : =0.1
: =0.9 : =0.5

Fig.4: Comparison between optimal-fraction jamming and fixed-fraction jamming of

PBJ and MTJ (SNR is fixed to 10dB)

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 0 0
10 10

-1
10
-1
10

-2
BER

BER
10

: Optimal-fraction MTJ under AWGN -2 : Optimal-fraction MTJ under AWGN

10
: Optimal-fraction PBJ under AWGN : Optimal-fraction PBJ under AWGN
-3 x x
10 : BNJ under AWGN : BNJ under AWGN
: Optimal-fraction MTJ under Rayleigh fading : Optimal-fraction MTJ under Rayleigh fading
: Optimal-fraction PBJ under Rayleigh fading : Optimal-fraction PBJ under Rayleigh fading
* *
: BNJ under Rayleigh fading : BNJ under Rayleigh fading
-4 -3
10 10
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
SIR SIR
(a) Comparison for BPSK (b) Comparison for DBPSK

Fig.5: Comparison of optimal-fraction MTJ, optimal-fraction PBJ

and BNJ (SNR is fixed to 10dB)

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on May 28, 2009 at 21:22 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.