Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Figure 1 shows the performance deterioration due to onoff transition under FL conditions compared against the
complete overlapping case. The complete overlapping
represents a scenario where each cell has same amount of
spectral resource as fractional load but are fully overlapped as
in the full load scenario. The deterioration observed in this
figure provides motivation to develop schemes to avoid
effects of ON-OFF transitions.
I. INTRODUCTION
Within 3GPP the LTE is targeted to improve coverage
and increase data rate [1]. The downlink of 3GPP LTE
system uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access
(OFDMA) as the multiple access technique. Due to inherent
property of OFDMA the intra-cell interference is avoided
however the inter-cell interference remains the main source
of interference which limits the system performance,
especially at the cell edge, which is extremely sensitive to the
interference conditions. Inter-cell interference coordination
(ICIC) is one method to improve coverage and increase cell
edge bit rate [2]. The ICIC has been extensively studied in the
downlink for 3GPP LTE for controlling the interference
between the cells in order to improve the cell edge user
performance [3].
Localized
Distributed
PRBs
6
12
18
24
30
36
42
48
CQI per
PRB
HARQ data
Time Domain
Scheduler
Set of
Users for
FDS
Frequency
Domain
Scheduler
1
T Avg
TAvg
SINR (t,k)
(1)
t =0
NUE CBR
C
(2)
Average
LF
0.32 (low
load)
0.50
(medium
load )
Variable
Type Of Traffic
Best Effort
finite buffer
Best Effort
finite buffer
Traffic Model
with
Fixed Load
with
Markow Model
Settings
Cellular layout
Inter-site distance
Carrier Frequency
System Bandwidth
Effective Bandwidth
Number of Subcarriers
Number of PRBs
Sub-frame duration
Total eNode-B transmit power
UE Receiver
Antenna height
Antenna gain
Penetration loss
Shadowing standard deviation
HARQ model
Ack / Nack delay
CQI log normal std. error
CQI reporting resolution
CQI reporting delay
BLER target
Power delay profile
UE speed
Minimum UE to eNodeB distance
Modulation and coding schemes
Performance metrics
In order to evaluate the performance the following
measures are used as the performance metrics.
A. Throughput per PRB
The throughput is the amount of data sent successfully
over a period of time. Under different loads, different number
of PRBs is used; therefore the cell throughput does not
provide a uniform measure of performance hence, throughput
per PRB is considered, which is the cell throughput over the
mean number of active PRBs. This provides a throughput
indicator independent of load and provides a measure of how
efficiently the PRBs are used.
RPRB = Rcell / NActive PRBs
(3)
B. Coverage
The coverage can be defined as the 5th percentile of the
throughput, i.e. the minimum throughput achieved by the
95% of the users.
Prob. (ruser<Coverage) =.05
(4)
C. Geometry factor (G-factor)
The geometry factor (G-factor) is defined as the ratio
between the desired received signal power that one UE receives
(Ps) and the total inter-cell interference (PI) plus noise (PN)
averaged over fast fading.
G-factor = Ps / ( PI + PN )
(5)
D. Effective SINR
Since, in an OFDMA sub-channel, each sub carrier
might exhibit a different SINR level, these have to be
combined to an effective SINR. The effective SINR has been
calculated as described in [11] and considered as a
performance measure.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
A. Fixed FL Model
Table 3 summarizes the main parameter settings for
different schemes. The numerals of these parameters are
determined by running a set of simulations beforehand. In
order to evaluate the performance of the proposed schemes it
is required to compare against the full load scenario as lower
limit. However the fractional load and full load scenarios
cannot be directly compared in terms of throughput and
coverage due to difference in number of PRBs in use.
Therefore, a complete resource overlapping distribution is
considered as the reference case.
TABLE3 : MAIN PARAMETER FOR DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS
RS
Mask Length
(TTIs)
130
CM
Weight
Low load Medium load
1.75
3.25
length
(TTIs)
130
QE
Averaging
window size
(TTIs)
325
Fig. 4: The effective SINR under low fractional load with different proposed
schemes compared with reference case.
Fig. 7: Throughput per PRB and the coverage under dynamic load.
REFERENCES
[1] 3GPP TR 25.913, Requirements for Evolved UTRA (E-UTRA) and
Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN), v.7.3.0, March, 2006.
[2] 3GPP TR 25.814, Physical Layer Aspects for Evolved Universal
Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA) (Release 7), v.7.1.0, Sep. 2006.
[3] A. Simonsson, "Frequency Reuse and Intercell Interference CoOrdination In E-UTRA," VTC, 2007.
[4] 3GPP TSG R1-07379, Low Load Scenario with CQI-based Interference
Coordination, August, 2007
.
[5] 3GPP Tdoc R1-072974, Downlink Interference Coordination,
Orlando, June 2007.
[6] A. Pokhariyal, G. Monghal, K.I. Pedersen, P.E. Mogensen, I.Z. Kovacs,
C. Rosa and T.E. Kolding, Frequency Domain Packet Scheduling
Under Fractional Load for the UTRAN LTE Downlink, IEEE 65th
Vehicular Technology Conference, April 2007.
[7] A. Pokhariyal, T.E. Kolding and P.E. Mogensen, Performance of
Downlink Frequency Domain Packet Scheduling for the UTRAN
Long Term Evolution, IEEE PIMRC, 2006.
[8] J. Nin Guerrero and I. Ords Villamandos, Autonomous Physical
Resource Block Selection in Fractional Load Scenario for 3GPP Long
Term Evolution Downlink, Master Thesis. 2007, Aalborg University
[9] A. Pokhariyal, K.I. Pedersen, G. Monghal, I.Z. Kovacs, C. Rosa, T.E.
Kolding and P.E. Mogensen, HARQ Aware Frequency Domain
Packet Scheduler with Different Degrees of Fairness for the UTRAN
Long Term Evolution, IEEE 65th Vehicular Technology Conference,
April 2007.
[10] 3GPP Technical Specification 36.300, E-UTRA & E-UTRAN Overall
Description, v. 8.3.0 December, 2007.
[11] R. Yaniv, D. Stopler, T. Kaitz, K. Blum, K. Baum, Y. Blankenship, B.
Classon, M. Cudak, P. Sartori CINR Measurements Using the EESM
Method, IEEE c802.16e-05/141 r1, March 2005.