Proceeding Paper

Comparative Analysis of Multicarrier Waveforms for

Terahertz-Band Communications †
Srinivas Ramavath * , Umesh Chandra Samal, Prasanta Kumar Patra , Sunil Pattepu, Nageswara Rao Budipi
and Amitkumar Vidyakant Jha

School of Electronic Engineering, Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT) Deemed to Be University,
Bhubaneswar 751024, Odisha, India; [email protected] (U.C.S.); [email protected] (P.K.P.);
[email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (N.R.B.); [email protected] (A.V.J.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]
† Presented at the 5th International Electronic Conference on Applied Sciences, 4–6 December 2024;

https://sciforum.net/event/ASEC2024.

Abstract: The terahertz (THz) band, ranging from 0.1 to 10 THz, offers substantial band-
widths that are essential for meeting the ever-increasing demands for high data rates in
future wireless communication systems. This paper presents a comprehensive comparative
analysis of various multicarrier waveforms suitable for THz-band communications. We
explore the performance, advantages, and limitations of several waveforms, including
Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), Filter Bank Multicarrier (FBMC),
Universal Filtered Multicarrier (UFMC), and Generalized Frequency Division Multiplexing
(GFDM). The analysis covers key parameters such as spectral efficiency, the peak-to-average
power ratio (PAPR), robustness to phase noise, and computational complexity. The simula-
tion results demonstrate that while OFDM offers simplicity and robustness to multipath
fading, it suffers from high PAPR and phase noise sensitivity. FBMC and UFMC, with
their enhanced spectral efficiency and reduced out-of-band emissions, show promise for
THz-band applications but come at the cost of increased computational complexity. GFDM
presents a flexible framework with a trade-off between complexity and performance, mak-
ing it a potential candidate for diverse THz communication scenarios. Our study concludes
that no single waveform universally outperforms the others across all metrics. There-
fore, the choice of multicarrier waveform for THz communications should be tailored
to the specific requirements of the application, balancing performance criteria and im-
plementation feasibility. Future research directions include the development of hybrid
Academic Editor: Cosimo Trono
waveforms and adaptive techniques to dynamically optimize performance in varying THz
communication environments.
Published: 8 April 2025

Citation: Ramavath, S.; Samal, U.C.;

Keywords: THz communications; CP-OFDM; SC-FDE; DFT-s-OFDM; OQAM/FBMC;
Patra, P.K.; Pattepu, S.; Budipi, N.R.;
OTFS; DFTs-OTFS
Jha, A.V. Comparative Analysis of
Multicarrier Waveforms for
Terahertz-Band Communications. Eng.
Proc. 2025, 87, 41. https://doi.org/
10.3390/engproc2025087041 1. Introduction
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. The relentless demand for higher data rates and ultra-reliable communication in emerg-
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. ing wireless networks has driven the exploration of new frequency bands and advanced
This article is an open access article transmission techniques. Among these, the terahertz (THz) band, spanning frequencies
distributed under the terms and from 0.1 THz to 10 THz, has emerged as a promising frontier [1]. With its potential to
conditions of the Creative Commons
provide immense bandwidth, the THz band is envisioned to enable applications such
Attribution (CC BY) license
as ultra-high-definition streaming, real-time holography, and massive device-to-device
(https://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/). communication in sixth-generation (6G) networks and beyond. However, communication

Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025087041

Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 2 of 9

in the THz band presents significant challenges, including severe path loss, molecular
absorption, and hardware constraints [2,3]. To overcome these issues, the choice of an
appropriate waveform is crucial. Multicarrier waveforms, which divide the spectrum into
multiple subcarriers, are particularly well suited for the THz band due to their ability
to handle frequency-selective fading, support flexible resource allocation, and facilitate
compatibility with advanced multiple-access schemes [4,5]. This study aims to provide a
comparative analysis of various multicarrier waveforms for THz-band communications.
Traditional techniques such as Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and
its advanced variants, as well as emerging alternatives like Filter Bank Multicarrier (FBMC),
Universal Filtered Multicarrier (UFMC), and Generalized Frequency Division Multiplexing
(GFDM), are evaluated in terms of their spectral efficiency, robustness to channel impair-
ments, and implementation complexity. By identifying the strengths and limitations of each
waveform, this analysis seeks to guide the development of efficient communication systems
in the THz spectrum [6]. The terahertz (THz) band, spanning frequencies between 0.1 THz
and 10 THz, has garnered significant attention as a key enabler for sixth-generation (6G)
and beyond wireless communication systems. Its ability to provide ultra-high bandwidth
and support data rates up to terabits per second makes it a promising solution for appli-
cations such as ultra-high-definition media streaming, wireless backhaul, and real-time
holographic communication. However, communication in the THz band is fraught with
challenges, including high free-space path loss, molecular absorption, and limited efficiency
of transceiver hardware. These issues necessitate advanced waveform design and signal
processing techniques tailored to the unique characteristics of the THz spectrum. Multicar-
rier waveforms have been extensively studied in lower frequency bands for their ability
to mitigate frequency-selective fading, enhance spectral efficiency, and enable flexible re-
source allocation. Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), the most widely
adopted multicarrier waveform, has been the cornerstone of several wireless standards,
including 4G LTE and 5G NR. However, OFDM suffers from limitations such as a high
peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR), spectral leakage, and sensitivity to synchronization
errors, which become more pronounced in the THz band.
To address these limitations, several alternative multicarrier waveforms have been
proposed. Filter Bank Multicarrier (FBMC) improves spectral containment by using well-
localized subcarriers but introduces increased complexity in synchronization and channel
equalization. Universal Filtered Multicarrier (UFMC) combines the benefits of OFDM and
FBMC by applying filtering at the sub-band level, making it more robust to carrier fre-
quency offsets and Doppler shifts. Generalized Frequency Division Multiplexing (GFDM)
further extends flexibility by allowing non-orthogonal subcarrier arrangements and
time–frequency localized pulses, albeit at the cost of increased receiver complexity. Re-
search on waveform design specifically for the THz band is still in its early stages. Studies
such as [7,8] have highlighted the trade-offs between spectral efficiency, PAPR, and robust-
ness to channel impairments in the THz regime. OFDM remains a baseline for performance
comparison, but its suboptimal performance in terms of spectral efficiency and high PAPR
has motivated investigations into FBMC, UFMC, and GFDM for THz communications.
Recent advancements, such as the use of adaptive waveforms and hybrid multicarrier-
nonorthogonal schemes, have also shown promise in enhancing the flexibility and efficiency
of THz systems. For instance, [3] demonstrated that dynamically adapting waveform pa-
rameters based on channel conditions could significantly improve throughput and reliabil-
ity in THz channels. Furthermore, the integration of multicarrier waveforms with advanced
multiple-access techniques such as Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA) and ma-
chine learning-based optimization has been explored in [4], highlighting the potential for
innovative solutions in this domain.
Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 3 of 9

While significant progress has been made in evaluating multicarrier waveforms for
THz-band communications, several gaps remain. Comparative analyses often lack a uni-
fied framework for evaluating waveforms under practical THz-specific constraints, such
as molecular absorption and ultra-wideband signal generation. Moreover, the impact of
hardware impairments, such as phase noise and nonlinearity, on waveform performance
has been insufficiently addressed. Additionally, the scalability of waveform designs for
massive antenna systems, which are critical for beamforming in the THz band, remains an
open research challenge. This survey underscores the need for a systematic comparative
analysis of multicarrier waveforms, considering their practical applicability and perfor-
mance in realistic THz communication scenarios. Addressing these gaps will provide a
solid foundation for developing robust and efficient THz communication systems.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the character-
istics and challenges of THz-band communications. Section 3 introduces the multicarrier
waveforms under consideration. Section 4 presents the performance metrics and evaluation
methodology, followed by a comparative analysis in Section 5. Finally, our conclusions and
future research directions are discussed in Section 6.

2. Characteristics and Challenges of THz-Band

Below is a structured comparative analysis of multicarrier waveforms tailored for
terahertz-band (THz) communications. The discussion includes their characteristics, their
potential applications, and the challenges associated with implementing them in the THz band.

Comparative Analysis of Multicarrier Waveforms for Terahertz-Band Communications

Terahertz-band (THz) communication operates within 0.1–10 THz and is poised to
support the next generation of ultra-high-speed wireless systems. Multicarrier waveforms
are a crucial aspect of THz communications due to their ability to efficiently utilize spectral
resources while addressing propagation challenges. Below is a comparative analysis of
the prominent multicarrier waveform candidates. OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division
Multiplexing): widely used in wireless systems like 4G and 5G; divides the spectrum into
orthogonal subcarriers; high spectral efficiency; robust to multipath fading; mature technol-
ogy with established hardware and software ecosystems; straightforward implementation
using FFT/IFFT; well suited for systems requiring large bandwidths; high peak-to-average
power ratio (PAPR), leading to inefficiency in power-limited THz systems; sensitivity to
phase noise, which is exacerbated at THz frequencies due to oscillator limitations; employs
subcarrier filtering to reduce out-of-band emissions; does not require a cyclic prefix, im-
proving spectral efficiency; superior spectral confinement compared to OFDM; resilient to
adjacent-channel interference, crucial for dense THz deployments; challenges in THz Band
increase computational complexity due to filtering; difficulty in handling high Doppler
shifts encountered in THz systems; limited compatibility with multiple-input multiple-
output (MIMO); combines features of OFDM and FBMC; applies filtering to groups of
subcarriers rather than individual ones; lower complexity than FBMC while offering better
spectral confinement than OFDM; flexible for various scenarios, including dynamic THz
environments; challenges in THz Band Trade-offs between filter complexity and real-time
processing requirements; performance degradation in high-mobility scenarios. DFT-s-
OFDM (Discrete Fourier Transform Spread OFDM): utilizes DFT precoding to reduce
PAPR in OFDM systems; commonly used in uplink communication for 5G; low PAPR,
making it suitable for THz power-constrained systems; leverages existing OFDM infras-
tructure; susceptible to inter-symbol interference (ISI) in the presence of severe channel
dispersion; limited spectral flexibility compared to FBMC or UFMC. OTFS (Orthogonal
Time Frequency Space): designed to operate in doubly spread channels with high delay
Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 4 of 9

and Doppler spreads; utilizes the delay–Doppler domain for modulation; superior per-
formance in highly dynamic THz environments; naturally handles channel time-variance;
high implementation complexity; limited real-world adoption and development compared
to other waveforms. GFDM (Generalized Frequency Division Multiplexing): generalizes
OFDM with flexible pulse shaping and subcarrier grouping; provides a trade-off between
spectral efficiency and complexity; high flexibility for adapting to various THz scenarios;
suitable for short-packet communications, common in THz IoT applications; high PAPR
and implementation complexity; requires precise synchronization, which is difficult at
THz frequencies; severe free-space path loss and molecular absorption at THz frequencies;
limited communication range, requiring advanced beamforming and relay technologies;
efficient and compact transceiver designs are challenging at THz frequencies; high power
consumption and thermal management issues; oscillator phase noise significantly impacts
waveform performance; achieving carrier synchronization is more challenging at high
frequencies; accurate modeling of THz channels is complex due to the impact of multipath,
scattering, and Doppler effects; interfacing THz systems with existing wireless architectures
(e.g., 5G/6G) requires harmonization of standards.
The THz-band (0.1–10 THz) offers unique characteristics, making it highly promis-
ing for next-generation wireless communication. It provides an ultra-wide bandwidth,
enabling terabit-per-second (Tbps) data rates, which are crucial for applications like 6G,
high-speed wireless backhaul, and nanoscale communication. Additionally, THz waves
exhibit a high spatial resolution, making them suitable for imaging, sensing, and security
applications. However, several challenges hinder their practical implementation. Severe
path loss due to molecular absorption limits the transmission range, requiring high-gain
directional antennas and dense network infrastructure. High atmospheric attenuation
restricts outdoor applications, while hardware limitations in generating and detecting THz
signals complicate system design. Furthermore, beam alignment issues arise due to short
wavelengths and high directivity, necessitating advanced beamforming techniques. Over-
coming these challenges demands innovations in materials, signal processing, and antenna
technologies to fully harness the potential of THz-band communication.

3. Introducing the Multicarrier

Multicarrier waveforms, shown in Figure 1, provide a versatile foundation for THz-
band communications, but each comes with trade-offs in performance, complexity, and re-
silience to hardware limitations. Future research must focus on developing waveforms
tailored specifically for the unique challenges of the THz band, including low-complexity
adaptive designs, advanced channel estimation techniques, and mitigation strategies for
propagation and hardware impairments.

Figure 1. MCM block diagram.

By addressing these challenges, multicarrier waveforms can unlock the full potential
of the THz band, enabling revolutionary advancements in wireless communications.
Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 5 of 9

4. Performance and Evaluation

4.1. Peak-to-Average Power Ratio (PAPR)
PAPR is a measure used in signal processing and telecommunications to quantify the
ratio of the peak power to the average power of a signal. It is commonly used in Orthogonal
Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and other modulation schemes to assess the
efficiency and power handling requirements of a system.

Ppeak max | x (t)|2

PAPR = = (1)
Paverage E[| x (t)|2 ]

where Ppeak is the maximum instantaneous power of the signal; Paverage is the mean power
of the signal; x (t) is the transmitted signal; and E[·] denotes the expected value (statis-
tical mean). A high PAPR indicates large fluctuations in signal power, which can lead
to inefficiencies in power amplifiers and require complex signal processing techniques
for mitigation.

4.2. Complementary Cumulative Distribution Function (CCDF)

The CCDF of PAPR describes the probability that the PAPR of a signal exceeds a
certain threshold. It provides insight into how frequently high PAPR values occur.

CCDF ( PAPR0 ) = P( PAPR > PAPR0 ) (2)

where PAPR0 is a given threshold. The CCDF curve is often used to compare the PAPR
characteristics of different modulation schemes and techniques. A lower CCDF value at a
given threshold indicates a more favorable power distribution with fewer extreme peaks.
In practice, the CCDF of PAPR helps engineers evaluate the effectiveness of PAPR reduction
techniques, such as clipping, coding, and selective mapping. This study highlights the
characteristics and challenges of multicarrier waveforms for THz-band communications,
with a focus on PAPR evaluation. While existing waveforms offer a solid foundation,
their adaptation to THz-specific requirements is critical for realizing the full potential of
this spectrum. Future research should prioritize innovative waveform designs and PAPR
mitigation techniques to address the unique demands of the THz-band communications
shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. PAPR performance with carriers.

Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 6 of 9

To obtain Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCM) theoretical and simulated values for the
Complementary Cumulative Distribution Function (CCDF) in the above figure, we must
follow these steps:
i. Understanding CCDF:
The Complementary Cumulative Distribution Function (CCDF) is defined as

CCDF ( x ) = P( X > x ) = 1 − CDF ( x )[ (3)

where CDF ( x ) is the Cumulative Distribution Function.

ii. Theoretical Values of CCDF:
The theoretical CCDF depends on the assumed probability distribution; for example,
if X ∼ Exponential(λ), then
CCDF ( x ) = e−λx (4)

For other distributions (e.g., Normal, Weibull, Rayleigh), derive CCDF from their
respective CDF formulas.
iii. Simulated Values via MCM:
To estimate CCDF via Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCM), we should carry out the
following steps:
Step 1: Generate MCM Samples, simulate a Markov Chain that samples from the target
distribution, and use Metropolis–Hastings or Gibbs Sampling to generate N samples.
Step 2: Estimate CCDF from the samples, sort the simulated samples { x1 , x2 , . . . , x N },
and compute the empirical CCDF using

ˆ ( x ) = Number of samples X > x

CCDF (5)
N

iv. Plot Theoretical vs. Simulated CCDF:

Plot theoretical CCDF: use the derived CCDF formula; plot the simulated CCDF:
compute the empirical CCDF from MCM samples; comparison: the simulated CCDF
should closely match the theoretical CCDF.

5. Comparative Analysis
PAPR and PSD are critical metrics for multicarrier waveforms, as shown in Figures 3 and 4,
particularly for THz communications where power amplifiers operate near saturation to
maximize efficiency. The evaluation includes the following:

Figure 3. MCM PAPR performance.

Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 7 of 9

Figure 4. MCM PSD performance.

5.1. OFDM
OFDM exhibits the highest PAPR, requiring complex mitigation techniques such as
clipping, coding, and selective mapping.
OFDM divides the available bandwidth into multiple orthogonal subcarriers. The trans-
mitted signal is given by

N −1
s(t) = ∑ Xk e j2πk∆ f t , 0≤t<T (6)
k =0

where Xk is the modulated symbol on subcarrier k; N is the number of subcarriers; ∆ f is

the subcarrier spacing (∆ f = T1 ); and T is the OFDM symbol duration. The OFDM signal
in discrete form (using IFFT) is

N −1
s[n] = ∑ Xk e j2πkn/N , n = 0, 1, . . . , N − 1 (7)
k =0

5.2. FBMC
FBMC demonstrates moderate PAPR but benefits from reduced spectral leakage.
FBMC improves spectral efficiency by replacing the rectangular pulse shaping of OFDM
with a prototype filter g(n). The transmitted signal is

N −1
s(t) = ∑ ∑ Xm,k g(t − mT )e j2πk∆ f t (8)
k =0 m

where Xm,k represents the data symbols; g(t) is the prototype filter ensuring better spectral
localization; and m represents the time index. FBMC uses Offset Quadrature Amplitude
Modulation (OQAM) to maintain orthogonality in the real and imaginary parts.

5.3. GFDM
GFDM balances PAPR and spectral efficiency, though it is still susceptible to high
peaks. GFDM generalizes OFDM by using circular pulse shaping and reducing out-of-band
emissions. The transmitted signal is
Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 8 of 9

K −1 M −1
s(t) = ∑ ∑ Xm,k gm (t − mTs )e j2πk∆ f t (9)
k =0 m =0

where K is the number of subcarriers; M is the number of time slots per subcarrier; and
gm (t) is the circularly shifted pulse shaping filter. GFDM is a block-based approach that
reduces latency and offers better spectral efficiency.

5.4. OTFS
PAPR performance varies based on its implementation, with potential improvements
through pulse shaping and advanced coding schemes. OTFS modulates data in the delay–
Doppler domain instead of time–frequency, improving performance in doubly selective
(time-varying) channels. OTFS transformation (Zak Transform) is

N −1 M −1 nk ml
X [n, m] = ∑ ∑ X [k, l ]e− j2π N e− j2π M (10)
k =0 l =0

where X [k, l ] represents symbols in the delay–Doppler domain, and X [n, m] is the time-
frequency representation. OTFS modulation uses inverse symplectic finite Fourier trans-
form (ISFFT) to map delay–Doppler symbols to time–frequency.
Figure 4 shows that OFDM is widely used in 4G/5G but suffers from high sidelobes.
FBMC improves spectral efficiency at the cost of complexity. OTFS is best for high-mobility
applications. GFDM provides flexible spectral shaping but requires advanced equalization.

6. Results and Conclusions

Each waveform has unique strengths and weaknesses, making it suitable for specific
THz use cases. For example, OFDM may be favored for straightforward, high-data-rate
applications, while FBMC and UFMC might suit spectral coexistence scenarios. Novel
approaches like OTFS could enable robust communication in dynamic environments.
As THz communication systems mature, hybrid solutions and adaptive waveform designs
may emerge to address the stringent demands of this emerging spectrum.

Author Contributions: S.R. contributed to the conceptualization, methodology, and writing—original

draft preparation, while the remaining authors were responsible for the review, editing, and supervi-
sion. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was approved by an ethics committee.

Informed Consent Statement: An informed consent statement is not applicable.

Data Availability Statement: Data supporting this study are available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Han, C.; Bicen, A.O.; Akyildiz, I.F. Multi-wideband waveform design for distance-adaptive wireless communications in the
terahertz band. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 2015, 64, 910–922.
2. Tarboush, S.; Sarieddeen, H.; Alouini, M.S.; Al-Naffouri, T.Y. Single-versus multicarrier terahertz-band communications:
A comparative study. IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc. 2022, 3, 1466–1486. [CrossRef]
3. He, D.; Zhang, Z.; Lin, H.; Wu, Z.; Huang, Y.; Wang, Z. Performance comparison of single-carrier and multi-carrier waveforms
over terahertz wireless channels. Digit. Commun. Netw. 2024, 10, 1297–1304. [CrossRef]
4. Yuan, H.; Yang, N.; Ding, X.; Han, C.; Yang, K.; An, J. Cluster-based multi-carrier hybrid beamforming for massive device
terahertz communications. IEEE Trans. Commun. 2022, 70, 3407–3420. [CrossRef]
Eng. Proc. 2025, 87, 41 9 of 9

5. Yuan, H.; Yang, N.; Yang, K.; Han, C.; An, J. Hybrid beamforming for terahertz multi-carrier systems over frequency selective
fading. IEEE Trans. Commun. 2020, 68, 6186–6199. [CrossRef]
6. Mao, T.; Chen, J.; Wang, Q.; Han, C.; Wang, Z.; Karagiannidis, G.K. Waveform design for joint sensing and communications in the
terahertz band. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2106.01549.
7. Wang, K.; Wang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, F. Active RIS-Assisted Secure Wireless Communication Based on DRL. In Proceedings of the
2024 IEEE 5th Information Communication Technologies Conference (ICTC), Nanjing, China, 10–12 May 2024; pp. 151–156.
8. Tang, Q.; Ermis, O.; Nguyen, C.D.; De Oliveira, A.; Hirtzig, A. A systematic analysis of 5g networks with a focus on 5g core
security. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 18298–18319. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.