http://tecno.americaeconomia.

com/articulos/cuanto-creceran-las-lineas-4g-
lte-en-colombia.

SUMMARY

This tutorial, presented by Moray Rumney of Keysight Technologies, takes a broad look at
the emergence of the fifth generation of mobile communications. How did we get here?
What can we learn from previous generations? Who is setting the agenda and what might
5G requirements look like? From this foundation the tutorial will look at some of the new
technologies being considered for 5G and the associated design and measurement
challenges that follow.
TITULO:

Taking 5G from visión to reality

Brough by: keysight technologies

- A brief hystory of keysight technologies:

1938-1998:Hewlett-packard years; A company founded on electronic measurement innovation.

1999-2013: Agilent technologies years; Spun off from HP, Agilent became the world’s premier
Measurment company. In september 2013, it announced the spinoff of its electronic measurement
business.

2014: Keysight begins operations ; November 1, keysight is an independent company focused 100
%, on the electronic measurement industry.

- Agenda :

Cellular evolution

- Motivation and high-level drivers for 5G

- A brief history of how we got here

5G Overview

- Expectation. Opportunities, major players and timing.

- 5G Requerments frame work.

Enabling Technologies and measurement challenges

- Understandind celular performance.

- Exploiting the spatial domain at mmWave
- Working with wideband signals at mmWave.
- Spectrum aspects.

Business considerations.

CELLULAR EVOLUTION:

- Human tipically regenerate every 25 years or so:

- Mobile pone generation appear each 10 years
- 1G: 1983.
- 2G:1993.
- 3G: 2003
- 4G: 2013
- 5G: 2023.
b) high-level drivers for 5G:

- mobile demand more from your broadband.

- Saving energy

- pay less money for what they are getting

- new demands for hight reability.

c) Learning from the past:

In order to make sense of 5G it is prudent to have a firm, understanding of how we got to this
point. In particular whats working well today and Whats no working so well and why. From this
perspective we can make informed choices about which of the levers available to us are most
vailable to pull.

d) Wireless Evolution 1990-2020 +

- 2G: this Works severals services based on naroband systems whith speech and text messages as a
prymary services / 802.11b y 802.11 a/g

-3G: broad the first broadband services with énfasis on mobile video. The next evolution of 3G
where a packages data services were broadband kent we really start to see broad band taqui off.

802.11h/n. y 802.16d wibro ( korea)

-4G: LTE-802.16e evoluciono a LTE adv-802.16m ( Wimax 2). Increasy spectrum efficiency, highband
and high date base.

802.11ac-802.11ad

- 5G: 60 GHz. 802.11 ax NG 60. An unified 5G standard?comming together or isolated technolgy.

In all the evolution , we can see: increasing efficiency,bandwith and date rates.

e) 5G overview expectations.

- Massive Growth in Mobile Data Demand.

- Massive Growth in No of connected Devices.

- Internet of things

- Exploding diversity of wireless aplications

- Dramatic change in user expectations of the Network.

- Fort he user: Amazingly fast, Great service in a crowd, Best experience follow you, super real time
and reliable communications.

- Ubiquitiuos things communicating.

- in terms technical aspects:

Increase X100 data rage.

Increase X 1000 in network capacity

Increase X 100 densification

1 ms Latency.

Reliability 99.999 %.

Increase x 100 Energy efficiency.

All founded on a solid business model.

g) 5G overview: opportunities to innovate.

Enabling technologies:

- New internet technolgies..6 GHz..new physycal air mac technologies.

- Huge opportunity broad band mm wave frequency band with potencial for massive mimol.
- Full dúplex communication.
- >>400 GB/S fiber
- Hyper-fast data buses in equipment
- C ran- & New NW Topologies.

To do list:

- Design, Simulate, Emulate, Calibrate, Validate in any solutions.

Who is driven th 5G BUS??

International Telecomunication Union ( ITU). Rdio communication sector.

Has a group: Working party 8F ( Now WP 5D): They are responsable for the definition of previus
generation:

- IMT 2000 (3G).

- IMT advanced (4G).
- IMT -2020 ( 5G).

All IMT ( International Mobile Telephony) technologies have Access to designated IMT spectrum.
ITU-R WP 5D timelines for IMT 2000 (3G), IMT- Advanced (4G) and IMT 2020 (5G).
2020 timeline provived some detalils of whats going on¡??

Observations on IMT 2020 timeline.

 - The IMT-2020 process will be similar to previous generations:
 The IMT- Advanced process took 12 years.
 LTE-Advanced (3GPP Release 10) met the requirements.
 LTE-A was highly leveraged from LTE ( 3GPP Release 8)
- FOR IMT 2020 timing:
 The process is 8 years yet the scope and difficulty are MUCH higher.
 There is no pre-existing standard upon which to leverage IMT 2020
 Spectrum allocation for IMT 2020 wont be negotiated until WRC-19.

These factors make significant ww Wave deployment in 2020 unlikely – but this date remains a
target to focus the industry.
The big 5G debate:

Compared to previous generations the interesr and broad scope of the 5G debate is unprecedent:

Some reasons for this level of engagement:

1) A reaction to the forecast of exponential demand.

2) Academic research into new technology.
3) Governments taking the initiative to promote geographic leadership.
4) Vendors looking for the next big technology rollover.
5) A potentially disruptive transition for new entrants & new IP.
6) A general fear of being left behind.
7) A chance to fix everything that’s not right with legacy networks
8) Opportunity to address Green issues like energy efficiency, fair Access.
9) Emerging markets like the lot and medical.
Some of the bodies influencing 5G.

- Horizon 2020 and 5GPPP:EUU research program of 1 billion dollar to spent over the next
several years. Involved consortial of companys of industry, academia and small enterprises.
- IMT 2020 promotion Group: Chinise government/industry Alliance.
- ARIB 2020 Beyond and hoc : Japanese government / industry Alliance.
- Future Forum: Industry consortium ( China).
- New york University Wireless: University led consotium (usa).
- UK 5GIC: University led consotium (UK).
- TU Dresden IPP: University led consotium (Germany).
- METIS EU Project: Mobile and wireless communications enablers for the 20-20 information
society.
- 5GNOW EU Project: millimetre wave evolution for backhaul and Access.
- MiWAVES EU Project: Beyond 2020 heterogeneous Wireless Network with mm W small
cells.
 5G requirements framework ..what do wee need for 5G to be successfull?

We need a bold visión¡ However..

- The visión must first obey the laws of physics.
- Must lead to a mature and sustainable market.: No flagpoles on mountain tops.

For an industry to be mature requires that:

- Consumers must understand product performance-what to expect.

- From this they can assess the value to them.

But successful industry aalso has to be sustainable so:

- Revenue is generated when consumers buy ( value exceeeds the Price)

- Profits is generated when the cost of delivery is lower tan the Price.
Requirements framework:

- Latency (ms) = 1ms.

- Bit rate (bits/s)= 10^9
- Capacity Density ( bits/s/hz/km)= 10 ^6.
- Spectral Efficiency ( bits /s/hz) = 30
- Mobility (km/h)=10^3.
- Energy Efficiency (J/bit) = 10^-8.
- UE battery life ( days)= 10 ^3.
- Availability of Service = critical
- Terminal cost ($) = 1
- Conncetion density (users / km ^2). = 10 ^6.

Tension exists between the performance factors vs availability, cost and efficiency.

This suggest no singlesolutions for 5G.

- 2G foccussed on low bit rate voice and SMS services woth low spectral efficiency and
correpondingly high availability at the cell edge.
2.5G Requirements:

Later evolutions for packet data (GPRS and EDGE) traded off higher efficiency to get higher bit rates
with correspondingly lower availability at cell edge.
3G requirements IMT-2000:

- #G requirements for high mobility covered just single-user peak bit rates of 384 kb/s.
- With talk of 2 Mbp/s everywhere, no requirements for cell and no packet data and 3G fell
far short of expectations.
- The later introduction of packet data with HSPA and scheduling improvements solved
many of the early issues.
ITU recommendation ITU-R. 1645. Also known as the “van” diagram.

- But what does this look like when probability of coverage is considered?
- Voice and sms are near 100%.
- Data becomes less probable with increased mobility and rate.
4G Requirements IMT – Advanced:

The 4G requirements were more comprehensive tan 3G by adding latency and spectral efficiency
( average and cell edge) but the headlines were still about single-user peak data rates at low
mobility.
5G possibilities High performance

- The upper half contains some of the high performance targets being discussed for 5G.
- The consequences on attributes of availability, cost and efficiency using today’s technology
then follow.
5G possibilities MTC/IoT targets ( Internet of things)

- By contrast the contrasting demands of static Machine Type Communications ( MTC) and
IoT look very different.
- The key attributes are driven from the lower half of spider diagram with the likely
performance attributes being impacted.
5G Possibilities Public safety targets

- Looking at public safety a further difference emerges in priorities.

- The consequence of the contrasting targets for 5G means there will need to be more tan
one technical solution.
5G Possibilities Could this be 5G

- By overlaying contrasting demands of different types of services an aggregate picture of 5G

emerges.
- Caveat: Describing 5G only as an aggegate of all possibilities is not helpful as no such
system could be designed and built.
Enabling technologies and measurement challenges

- Understanding celular performance

- Exploiting the spatial domain at mmWave
- New modulation formats.
- Working with wideband signals at mmWave.
- Spectrum aspects.
Building an intutive understanding of celular performance

Before looking at 5G enabling technologies it is useful to review the major factors that determine
celular performance.

- We intuitively understand peak performance.

- So do marketing departments.
- But what determines average performance?
- Why can the capacity of a network drop if higher data rates are used?
- And why does performance vary so much across the cell?

The behaviour of celular networks is not intuitive- but we do all understand road transportation so
let’s build on that.
Building an intuitive unsderstanding of celular performance speed versus capacity.

- This resul is not immediately pbvious but we can understand it.

- The reason is that the relationship between the speed (v) and the safe distance ( d) is non-
linear.
- So operating at speeds above 40 mph is good for some but reduces capacity
- Capacity will only increase with a new control system like driverless cars in celular (d)
equates to interference.

Principle: Top speeds grab headlines capacity generates revenue.

Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance the problema of handover

- At junctions capacity drops from the perfromance on the infinitely long road.
- Negotiation at the end of the junction is like an intra-cell ( same frequency) handover.
- In the celular analogy, the length L of the road between junctions equates to the cell size.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance variation of performance across área

- Co-channel interference explains the fundamental behaviour of celular systems sharing the
same frequency between cells .
- The effects can be mitigated by interfuis canccelation techniques but they are always
present.
- Principle: Average performance cannot be delivered or implied from peak performance.
Interference in a typical loaded urban microcell

- This plot complimentary cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of the variation in SINR
across a typical outdoor urban microcell cell.
- Princiiple: Highest performance requires high SINR –only available to a few users near the
cell centre can cover half the cell área.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance Variation of throughput across a cell
in a loaded network

-Ratio can be reduced at expense of cell capacity with proportional fair ascheduling and fractional
frequency reuse.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance Maximizing capacity in a given área:

Capacity can be increased in three ways:

1) Improve efficiency:
- Roads: Reduce safe distance ( New control system).
- Cellular: Higher spectral efficiency. (interference mitigation)
2) Use wider channels:
- Roads: Add lanes (also in 3D).
- Celular: Use more spectrum ( Wider and more channels)
3) Increase density:
- Roads: More shorter roads ( preferably connected)
- Reduce inter-cell distance ( more smaller cells / higher frequency reuse).
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance

1) Improve Efficiency
- Reducing the safe distance between vehicles requires new control mechanisms
- The technology is available now but not yet widely adopted
- There is no direct celular equivalent to the driverless car but there are many initiatives
aimed at improving spectral efficiency such as MIMO, interference, cancellation, new
coding algorithm , etc.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance

2) Use wider channels:

- Capacity scales linearly with lanes.
- For celular that means wider channels.
- Wider channels also provide additional trunking gains when scheduling bursty traffic.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance

3) Use wider channels- in 3D

- THis is the celular equivalent of two channels in a homogenous network.
- This is the celular equivalent of multiple channels in a heterogeneous network
- Note: carrier aggregation of multiple channels doesn’t increase network capacity other tan
trunking gains.
Building an intuitive understanding of celular performance

4) Increase density:
- Planned network of connected cells.
- Unplanned isolated femtocells on the macro frequency.
- If co-channel femtocells ae sufficiently hidden ( in not spots). Or maanaged with
interference mitigation, they can provide additional capacity without significanly degrading
the macro network.
Exploiting the spatial domain at mmWave A celular network capacity model

Base don the preceding road transport analogy it should be avident that the ability of a celular
system to deliver services is defined by three ortogonal properties:

- THe bandwidth of the available radio spectrum- in MHz

- The efficient use of that spectrum- bits/second/Hertz
- THe number of cells – this equates to spectral reuse.
- The volumen created by the multiplication of these ortogonal properties represents the
capacity of the resulting celular network.
The very first radio “network”

- In predicting the capacity of future celular systems it is useful to look back at how far we
have come.
- The first comercial radio communications system was that operated by Marconi for
shipping.
- The signal was generated by a 5 Kw spark gap transmitter carrying morse code.
- Communication over hundreds of miles was posible due to the ionosphere.
- But the limiting factor was interference between transmitters sharing the same broadband
spark gap frequency band.
The very first radio “ network” LImited by inter-cell interference.

Complains about interference between transmitters of the first Marconi system led to the later
introduction of frequency selection.

Until then, it was estimated that the earth could support only eleven cells.
Historical celular capacity growth

- 1960-2010: capacity x 1000000.

- Principle: Historically, cell size has dominated the growth of cellalar capacity by a factor of
100:1 over spectrum usage and spectral efficiency.
Future celular capacity growth (< 6 Ghz)

- Capacity: x 600.
- The efficiency and spectrum growth are probably optimistic. The cell number growth
represents a change from one macrocell per 1000 subscribers to one hotspot or femtocell
per 10 subscribers.
- Principle: Cell size continues to dominate the potential for capacity growth.
Analysis of cell size

-Spectral efficinecy is essentially constant, data density varies 37.5B:1.

Future celular capacity grownth using mmWave

- 1 based on a single 802.11 ad hotspot in ideal conditions vs a loades celular system. Does
not take into account massive MIMO or the potentiaal to co-locate cells.
- 2 x20 spectrum base don 10 GHz mmwave vs 500 Mhz RF in any geographic área.
- Principle: mmWave changes the balance in favor of spectrum
- Caveat: mmWave spectrum for mobile communications has yet to be allocated.
Increasing nnwave capacity trough co-located cells

- The narrow beam widths posible at mmWAve frequencies mean cllas can be much closer
tan is posible RF.
- This effect could be described as either an opportunity to incresae cell count in a given
área or as an increase in the spectral efficiency in the área of one cell.
- The other approach is to implement massive MIMO from a single cell which enables
beamforming coordination across UEs
Are we there yet?

Demostration of 72 closely located mmwave transceivers

- 36 bi-directional links in an área of 30m2

- Simultaneous file transfer and video streaming with an aggregate data rate 100 gb/s.
- Ap3 Gb/s/m2- about 1000x RF celular density.
- But doing this from one cell requires massive MIMO.
Co-location Vs Massive MIMO

The following diagrams from IEEE illustrate how an 802.11ad ystem might be modified to enable
closely-located single-link radios fed from a single baseband Vs a MIMO implementation from a
single radio. THis is not yet Massive MIMO.
Co-location Vs Massive MIMO

- With today’s technology, the potential gains from Massive MIMO are probably of a similar
magnitude to the difficulty in making affordable solutions.
- The approach of co-locating or closely locating simpler single radios for similar
performance gains is therefore attractive
 Beamforming coordination (null steering) across multiple usuers would not be posible.
 However co-location has already been demonstrated usin 802.11ad with linear scaling of
cost and complexity.

In the meantime research into Massive MIMO continues.

Massive MIMO tutorial

For a more in-depth discussion of Massive MIMO see:

Massive MIMO and nnWAVE TEchnology Insights and Challenges

To date, massive MIMOresearch has been largely theoretical and with much of the published work
in a form that is either unapproachable by tha average engineer or so overly simplified as to be
unhelpful. This presentation strives to provide an intuitive understanding of massive MIMO
technology and its challenges, while taking care to completely avoid th math. Included will be a
demonstration on the qualitive impact of cannel characteristics on power amplifier requirements.
Spectral efficiency at mmWave

- The potential for beamsteering of mmWave changes the way we can think about spectral
efficiency.
- At lower frequencies signals are more omnidirectional and so cells need to be physically
separate in order not to interference. This means that for any given spectrum cell size
defines the capacity of the área.
- At mmwave, antennas are much smaller making beamforming with arrys feasible
- This enables higher área capacity through close location or co-location of cells.
Increasing mmWAve capacity with Massive MIMO

The four beam patterns below are simultaneously transmitted to separate UE from a 50 element
linear array of omnidirectional elements at ½ʎ spacing.
New modulation formats..time for a change?

With minor exceptions each mobile generation has been characterized by a new modulation
format:

- 1G= FM
- 2G= GMSK/CDMA
- 3G= W-CDMA.
- 4G= OFDMA/ SC-FDMA.
- 5G= NOMA ( non-orthogonal multiple Access).
New modulation formats

There are many factors to consider when evaluating new modulation formats:

- Spectral fficiency
- Latency
- Computational complexity
- Energy efficiency
- Adjacent cannel performance for co-existence
- Synchronization requirements.
- Implementation costs
- Resistence to narrow and broadband ineterference.

New formats being studied include:

FQAM- Frquency Quadrature Amplitude Modulation.

NUCs- Non-uniform constellations.

FBMC – filter Bank Multi Carrier.

UFMC – Universal Filtered Multi Carrier.

GFDM- Generalized Frequency Division MUltiplexing.

BFDM- Bi-orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing.

The importance of realistic simulation

-simulations are only as good as the assumptions upon which they are based.

- It is therefore essential to study all aspects of design including cannel impairments, antennas and
limitations of real hardware.
FBMC performance analysis Applying signal conditioning

- Real transmitters modify ideal signals to optimize the balance between in-channel and out
of cannel performance.
- SystemVue supports various windowing and crest factor reduction ( CFR) tolos as well as
PA models.
REcent history of terrestrial mobile spectrum @ WRC ITU-R proposals for WRC -07

- In 2006 ITU-R developed report M.2078 “ Estimated spectrum bandwidth requirements for
the future development of IMT-2000 and IMT – Advanced”.
- THis predicted total spectrum requirements for 2020 to be 1280 MHZ and 1720 Mhz for
low and high user demand scenarios
- These proposals resulted in the allocation new spectrum for terrestrial mobile
communications of:
 320 Mhz globally
 72 Mhz specific to Europe and Asia ( regions a nd 3)
 164 MHz specific to the americas ( región 2).
WRC-12 mobile spectrum allocations:

- There were no agenda ítems at WRC-12 for the alloxation of terrestrial mobile spectrum.
- There were however two resolutions passed (232 & 233) to enable WRC-15 to discuss 694-
790 MHz for región 1 ( Europe) and “ IMT below 6 GHz”.
 Home

 Research

 library

 Request paper

 listing
Massive

(Very

Large)

MIMO

Systems

Multiple-antenna (MIMO) technology is becoming mature for wireless communications

and has been incorporated into wireless broadband standards like LTE and Wi-Fi. Basically,
the more antennas the transmitter/receiver is equipped with, the more the possible signal
paths and the better the performance in terms of data rate and link reliability. The price to
pay is increased complexity of the hardware (number of RF amplifier frontends) and the
complexity and energy consumption of the signal processing at both ends.

Massive MIMO (also known as Large-Scale Antenna Systems, Very Large MIMO,
Hyper MIMO, Full-Dimension MIMO and ARGOS) makes a clean break with current
practice through the use of a very large number of service antennas (e.g., hundreds or
thousands) that are operated fully coherently and adaptively. Extra antennas help by
focusing the transmission and reception of signal energy into ever-smaller regions of space.
This brings huge improvements in throughput and energy efficiency, in particularly when
combined with simultaneous scheduling of a large number of user terminals (e.g., tens or
hundreds). Massive MIMO was originally envisioned for time division duplex (TDD)
operation, but can potentially be applied also in frequency division duplex (FDD)
operation.
Other benefits of massive MIMO include the extensive use of inexpensive low-power
components, reduced latency, simplification of the media access control (MAC) layer, and
robustness to interference and intentional jamming. The anticipated throughput depends on
the propagation environment providing asymptotically orthogonal channels to the
terminals, and experiments have so far not disclosed any limitations in this regard. While
massive MIMO renders many traditional research problems irrelevant, it uncovers entirely
new problems that urgently need attention; for example, the challenge of making many
low-cost low-precision components work effectively together, the need for efficient
acquisition scheme for channel state information, resource allocation for newly-joined
terminals, the exploitation of extra degrees of freedom provided by an excess of service
antennas, reducing internal power consumption to achieve total energy efficiency
reductions, and finding new deployment scenarios.

On this page we provide lists of research papers in the emerging area of very large MIMO
systems. The intention is to list some key papers that address different research problems
that appear in massive MIMO. These lists might serve as an accessible entry-point for those
who want to study this field.

This massive MIMO info-point has grown out from a literature survey website originally
created and hosted by the communication systems group at Linköping University. The page
is now maintained by the FP7-MAMMOET project.

If you want your paper to be listed here, please fill out the form here or contact Hien Ngo
directly.

Además de ofrecer redes centralizadas programables que pueden atender dinámicamente las
necesidades de las empresas,SDN provee los siguientes beneficios:

 Reduce el Capex (Capital Expenditures): Mediante la posibilidad de reutilizar el hardware

existente, SDN limita la necesidad de invertir en hardware nuevo.

 Reduce el Opex (Operating Expense): SDN permite control algorítmico de la red de

elementos de red, como switches/routers (hardware y software) que cada vez son más
programables, haciendo más sencillo la configuración y gestión de las redes. Además, esto
permite una reducción del tiempo de gestión por parte de los administradores, lo que
reduce la probabilidad de error humano.

 Agilidad y flexibilidad: SDN permite a las organizaciones desplegar aplicaciones, servicios e

infraestructuras rápidamente para alcanzar los objetivos propuestos por empresas en el
menor tiempo posible.

 Permite innovación: Permite crear nuevos tipos de aplicaciones y modelos de negocio por
parte de las empresas, que las beneficia y aumenta el valor de sus redes.