Group:________________________________________________
SP2016
Interview Grading Rubric for ASK/FSK/PSK Simulation and Demod Exercise
Objectives:
1. Demonstrate successful downconversion and hardware capture of a noise-free ASK and FSK
transmission.
2. Apply Matlab to implement an incoherent receiver and demodulate ASK and FSK transmissions.
3. Use Matlab to simulate the performance of ASK, FSK, and PSK coherent receivers in the presence of
varying levels of AWGN and compare these results to theoretical predictions.
4. Apply Matlab to implement receivers to demodulate ASK, FSK, and PSK transmissions with varying
levels of noise.
5. Demodulate ASK and FSK transmissions of a simple audio signal and playback the audio via the PC
sound card.
6. Compare the theoretical predictions and simulated results of an digitally modulated signal.
7. Quantitatively evaluate the differences between theory and simulation.
8. Explain one or more practical benefits of digital communication to transmit information across a
channel.
Criteria:
3
Advanced – Full understanding and mastery of the topic; answers are clear, concise, and
professionally presented.
2
Intermediate – Understands and can address the topic with prompting or outside
assistance (notes/textbook). Supplementary material (figures/table/code) are clean and
concisely documented.
1
Novice – Minimal understanding of the topic; requires heavy assistance from notes, text,
and instructor. Supplementary material (figures/table/code) have errors or lack context.
0
Not addressed/Below Novice – Lack of understanding of the topic; requires on-the-spot EI
in order to address/answer question; missing or unable to explain supplementary material
(figures/tables/code).
Group:________________________________________________
SP2016
Lab 08 Grading
_______ 1.
Demonstrate successful downconversion and hardware capture of a noise-free ASK and FSK
transmission.
Bit Sequence: 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 11 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
3
2
1
0
•
Figures are correct and professionally presented with axes, titles, units, and labels; figures have
correct ranges.
•
Clearly demonstrates captured ASK/FSK signal
•
•
Clearly demonstrates recovered “1/0” bit sequence.
Figures and results are correct, but with gaps in explanation or understanding; figures may have
minor presentation issues.
•
Demonstrates captured ASK/FSK signal
•
•
errors or imperfections (alignment, excess noise, improper bandwidth, etc.).
Demonstrates recovered “1/0” bit sequence with minor errors or imperfections.
Figures and code have errors or gaps; explanation demonstrates only minimal understanding; Figures
have significant presentation flaws.
•
Captured ASK/FSK signal
•
•
•
•
imperfections (e.g., right answer wrong reason).
Recovered “1/0” bit sequence has errors.
Figures and code have major errors.
Demodulation demonstrates lack of understanding.
Cannot recover original bit sequence.
_______ 2.
 (t ) .
y ( t ) and baseband recovered signal m
 ( t ) with minor
y ( t ) and baseband recovered signal m
 ( t ) has significant errors and
y ( t ) and baseband recovered signal m
Use Matlab to implement an incoherent receiver and demodulate ASK and FSK transmissions.
Bit Sequence: 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 11 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
3
•
•
•
2
•
•
1
0
•
•
•
•
Code is fully documented within code and via oral explanation.
Clearly explains theory of operation of incoherent receiver; theory is clearly linked to Matlab
implementation with all code and variables accounted for.
Code documentation contains gaps / explanation of code operation requires prompting or referral to
notes/textbook.
Explains theory of operation of incoherent receiver with prompting or referral to notes; theory is
linked to Matlab implementation but with minor gaps in understanding.
Code documentation and explanation has major gaps, “magic numbers” or missing key
details/information.
Superficially discusses of operation of incoherent receiver or with major gaps and misunderstandings;
theory is only superficially linked to Matlab implementation or with major conceptual errors.
Cannot demonstrate understanding of code operation.
Cannot demonstrate understanding of incoherent receiver operation.
Cannot link theory to Matlab implementation.
Group:________________________________________________
SP2016
Lab 09 Grading
_______ 1. Present Matlab simulation results of the performance of ASK, FSK, and PSK coherent receivers in the
presence of varying levels of AWGN; compare these results to theoretical predictions.
3
•
•
•
•
•
2
•
•
•
1
0
•
•
•
•
•
Predictions are correct and professionally presented.
Clearly and concisely explains the relationship of Eb/No and constellation design on BER.
Clearly discusses differences between predictions and simulated results in the context of
communication theory, implementation, and limitations of simulation.
Predictions are correct, but with gaps in explanation or understanding.
Superficially explains the relationship of Eb/No and constellation design on BER; requires prompting
or referral to notes/textbook.
Superficially discusses differences between predictions and simulated results in the context of
communication theory, implementation, and limitations of simulation.
Predictions have errors or gaps; explanation demonstrates only minimal understanding.
Cannot explains the relationship of Eb/No and constellation design on BER; requires heavy assistance
from notes/textbook.
Links predicted results to simulated results only in most simplistic sense.
Cannot discuss differences between predictions and simulated results in the context of communication
theory, implementation, and limitations of simulation.
Predictions have major errors; explanation demonstrates lack of understanding.
Cannot explain relationship of Eb/No and constellation design on BER.
Cannot explain differences between predictions and simulated results.
_______ 2. Present Matlab demodulation of ASK, FSK, and PSK transmissions with varying levels of noise.
•
3
•
•
•
•
•
2
•
•
•
1
•
•
•
0
•
•
•
•
Figures are correct and professionally presented with axes, titles, units, and labels; figures have
correct ranges.
Clearly and concisely compares theoretical predictions with actual implementation results.
Addresses differences between predictions and implementation results in the context of
communication theory, implementation, and limitations of simulation.
Code is fully documented within code and via oral explanation.
Figures and results are correct, but with gaps in explanation or understanding; figures may have
minor presentation issues.
Superficially compares theoretical predictions with actual implementation results and/or requires
referral to notes/textbook.
Discusses differences between predictions and implementation results in the context of
communication theory, implementation, and limitations of simulation, but with gaps or
misunderstandings.
Code documentation contains gaps / explanation of code operation requires prompting or referral to
notes/textbook.
Figures and code have errors or gaps; explanation demonstrates only minimal understanding; Figures
have significant presentation flaws.
Comparison of theoretical predictions to implementation results has major gaps or misunderstandings.
Discussion of differences between predictions and implementation has major gaps or
misunderstandings.
Code documentation and explanation has major gaps, “magic numbers” or missing key
details/information.
Figures and code have major errors.
Cannot compare predictions to implementation results.
Cannot discuss differences between predictions and implementation.
Cannot demonstrate understanding of how simulation operates.
Group:________________________________________________
_______ 3.
•
•
3
•
2
•
•
1
•
•
•
0
SP2016
Demodulate ASK and FSK transmissions of a simple audio signal and playback the audio via the
PC sound card.
Code is fully documented within code and via oral explanation.
Demodulation is correct with acceptable error performance for the given Eb/No values; audio signal
has appropriate level of noise and no distortion.
Code documentation contains gaps / explanation of code operation requires prompting or referral to
notes/textbook.
Demodulation is correct with higher than ideal error performance for the given Eb/No values; audio
signal has corresponding level of noise and no distortion.
Code documentation and explanation has major gaps, “magic numbers” or missing key
details/information.
Demodulation has flaws resulting in excessive error performance for the given Eb/No values; audio
signal has excessive noise and no distortion but is still intelligible.
Cannot demonstrate understanding of code operation.
Demodulation has major flaws resulting in severe error performance for the given Eb/No values;
audio signal is unintelligible.
_______ 4. Follow-On Questions:
• Qualitatively describe the performance differences between ASK, FSK, and PSK.
• Qualitatively describe the performance differences between Analog and Digital
communications.
• Qualitatively describe the performance tradeoffs of using ASK vs. FSK vs. PSK.
3
2
1
0
Advanced – Full understanding and mastery of the topic; answers are clear, concise, and
professionally presented.
Intermediate – Understands and can address the topic with prompting or outside assistance
(notes/textbook). Supplementary material (figures/table/code) are clean and concisely documented.
Novice – Minimal understanding of the topic; requires heavy assistance from notes, text, and
instructor. Supplementary material (figures/table/code) have errors or lack context.
Not addressed/Below Novice – Lack of understanding of the topic; requires on-the-spot EI in order
to address/answer question; missing or unable to explain supplementary material
(figures/tables/code).