Master Thesis
Electrical Engineering Emphasis on Telecommunications
Thesis no: MEE10:78
September 2010.
User Scheduling Algorithm for
MUMIMO System with limited feedback
Sudhir Kumar Burra (8610194717)
Reddy Prasad Reddy Yendrapalli (8608081553)
Under the esteemed guidance of
Prof. Abbas Mohammed
Blekinge Institute of Technology
September 2010
Department of Electrical Engineering
School of Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology
SE37179 Karlskrona
Sweden.
2  P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We express our sincere gratitude to our guide Prof. AB B AS MOHAMME D for his
guidance and constant encouragement throughout the project work. We are very grateful to him
for providing us his valuable time through various sessions to discuss the issues related to our
thesis work which enabled us to take this thesis to fruitful completion.
Special thanks to Mr. MICHAEL ASMAN, Program Manager for DDP in SWEDEN, for
his valuable suggestions and guidance during the entire course work.
We would like to thank Mr. GURUDUTT KUMAR VELPULA, International Coordinator
for DDP, for providing us the opportunity to study in BTH, SWEDEN and also we would like to
thank Dr. MADHAVI LATHA, Coordinator for DDP, JNTU.
We would like to convey our heartful thanks to all the Professors of BTH and JNTU for
their immense help and moral support in completing our course work successfully.
We express our sincere thanks to all my friends at BTH, who supported us during our stay
in SWEDEN and made it really enjoyable and memorable.
We are very grateful to our parents and our sisters for their support and constant
encouragement.
Sudhir Kumar Burra
Reddy Prasad Reddy Yendrapalli.
3  P a g e
ABSTRACT
In conventional cellular systems, each base station (BS) transmits signals intended for a single
user in a particular resource allocation. As bandwidth is a scarce resource, effective utilization of
the available bandwidth in the system is essential in modern wireless systems especially for
applications such as video streaming and voice over internet protocol (VoIP) which demands
high data rate. Fortunately since the users feedback the channel state information to the network,
there is an opportunity for the BS to schedule more than one users data in a single resource
allocation by designing precoders which beamform the data to the intended user. This technique
which is called multiuser multipleinput and multipleoutput (MUMIMO) is adopted in the
evolving radio interface technologies. For properly utilizing the feedback information,
scheduling algorithms are designed which selects pairs of users which would maximize system
capacity. In this thesis we describe MUMIMO technique with codebook based precoding that
has been proposed for the IEEE 802.16m mobile broadband standard. A multiuser proportional
fair (PF) scheduling algorithm is designed to improve both sum capacity and fairness among
users.
Key words: MUMIMO, Bandwidth, Limited feedback, Data rate, Precoder.
4  P a g e
GLOSSARY
AWGN Additive White Gaussian Noise
BS Base Station
CCI CoChannel Interference
CQI Channel Quality Indicator
CL Closed Loop
DR DataRegion
FDD Frequency Division Duplex
LOS Line Of Sight
LTE Long Term Evolution
LTEA Long Term Evolution Advanced
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
MMSE Minimum Mean Square Error
MRC Maximum Ratio Combining
MS Mobile Station
MUMIMO Multi User MIMO
MUI Multilingual User Interface
OFDM Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing
OL Open Loop
PF Proportional Fair
PMI Precoder Matrix Information
QoS Quality of Service
5  P a g e
RF Radio Frequency
SFBC Space Frequency Block Coding
SINR Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio
SISO Single Input Single Output
SNR Signal to Noise Ratio
STBC Space Time Block Coding
UE User Environment
UT User Terminal
VoIP Voice over Internet Protocol
ZF Zero Forcing
6  P a g e
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1 Introduction 9
1.1 Motivation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
1.2 Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3 Back ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.4 Outline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Theory of MIMO System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
2.1 MIMO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
2.2 MIMO System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 MIMO Precoding 15
2.3.1 Optimal Unitary or SVD precoding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
2.3.2 Codebook Based Precoding. . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3.3 Zero Forcing Precoding 16
2.3.4 Dirty Paper Precoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
3 Literature Survey 17
3.1 Multi User MIMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.1 Spatial Diversity Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.2 Spatial Multiplexing Gain. . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7 P a g e
3.1.3 Multi User Diversity Gain. . . . . . 18
3.2 Challenges of MUMIMO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.1 Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.2 Postprocessing. . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.3 Preprocessing/Precoding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
3.2.4 CQI Modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.5 Scheduling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3 Precoding Techniques of MUMIMO . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.1 Zero Forcing Beamforming and Unitary Precoding . . . .21
3.3.2 Channel Inversion Method and Diagnolization Method.21
3.4 System Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.4.1 Uncorrelated Channel Model . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4.2 Correlated Channel Model. . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.5 Proportional Fair Scheduler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4 Mathematical Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..25
4.1 MUMIMO Capacity Formulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.1.1 MMSE Receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.1.2 CQI Calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.2 Procedure 29
5 Results and Discussion 31
6 Conclusions and Future work.. . 36
7 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
7
Ref
eren
ces
8 P a g e
List of Figures
2.1 MIMO system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2 MIMO pre and post processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
3.1 MUMIMO system setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.1 Procedure for MUMIMO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.1 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 with uncorrelated channel. . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 41with uncorrelated channel. . . . . . . . . . .33
5.3 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 with correlated channel. . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.4 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 41 with correlated channel. . . . . . . . . . .. 34
9  P a g e
CHAPTER 1
1. INTRODUCTION
As the demand for high data rate applications like video and audio streaming, VoIP, video
conferencing are increasing, future wireless systems should be able to provide high speed broad
band services for mobile users with sufficient quality of service (QoS) support. As the bandwidth
and power are scarce or limited resources, techniques which lead to efficient utilization of these
resources are quite necessary in the next generation wireless systems. At the same time the
wireless channel creates a challenging environment because of variety of channel impairments.
Thus, future wireless systems are to be designed taking all these factors into consideration.
For scenarios with a large number of users to be served in one cell, high capacity
gains can be achieved by transmitting independent data streams to different users sharing the
same timefrequency resources. This technique is referred to as multiuser multipleinput
multipleoutput (MUMIMO) [1]. It is one of t he techniques which can be used in cellular
systems to increase spectral efficiency.
In MUMIMO operation two or more user environments (UE) share the same time
frequency resources. Several parallel data streams are transmitted simultaneously, one for
each UE. It is assumed that the UE feeds back a quantized version of the observed channel, so
that base station (BS) can schedule in MUMIMO mode terminals with good channel
separation.
Long term evolution (LTE) and its successor LTEAdvanced (LTEA) are some of next
generation wireless systems, which use advanced features like MIMO, link adaptation,
orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) and many other techniques to help in
achieving high spectral efficiencies.
10  P a g e
1.1 MOTIVATION
MIMO systems which employ multiple antennas at transmitter and receiver is a very
useful technique in wireless environments to combat the effects of fading and to use the radio
channel efficiently by transmitting multiple streams to a user in the same resource allocation,
thus achieving diversity gain and multiplexing gain, whi ch i s the first step in achieving high
spectral efficiencies. Transmit diversity (space frequency block coding) is one such scheme
which sends multiple copies of the same data to a user which makes use of multiple replicas of
transmitted data to combat fading. This is a very useful scheme in fast fading environments. Also
the fact that each user experiences different channel conditions and quantized channel state
information is available at the BS, which can be utilized to achieve additional gain by jointly
precoding users which makes them orthogonal to each other. Thus allowing the BS to schedule
more than one user in a resource allocation. This leads to a situation where efficient user
scheduling and pairing algorithms are required, which uses the feedback information
intelligently at BS to maximize the capacity achievable in the system.
11  P a g e
1.2 OBJECTIVE
The main goal is to study and evaluate the performance of MUMIMO
systems using feedback sent by the users.
Create a cellular environment with single or multiple BSs with multiple users with
multiple antennas spread randomly positioned inside the cells.
First the BS will transmit reference symbols which are known to the users.
Calculate signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) and sum capacity.
Plot the graph of sum capacity vs signaltonoise ratio (SNR).
1.3 Background
MUMIMO has generated considerable interest recently. The main idea emerging from
this research is that multiple users can be simultaneously multiplexed to take simultaneous
advantage of multiuser and spatial diversity. The optimal BS interference cancellation strategy
is the so called dirty paper coding (DPC) [6], but it is not directly practical. More realistic linear
multiuser precoding techniques have been developed. BS does not have knowledge of the
channel unless it is feedback by the mobile station (MS) such as in the case of Frequency Division
Duplex (FDD) systems. It is huge amount for MS to feedback the complete channel, hence
quest for finite feedback systems arises. One of the solutions to this problem is codebook based
precoding technique which is a linear precoding technique. Here, a codebook which contains a
set of precoding matrices known to the BS and MS is used.
This thesis describes MUMIMO technique with codebook based precoding that has
been proposed for the IEEE 802.16m mobile broadband standard. A multiuser PF scheduling
algorithm is designed to improve both sum capacity and fairness among users.
12  P a g e
1.4 Outline
Chapter 2
This chapter will give a detailed description of MIMO systems.
Chapter 3
This chapter will give a detailed description of MUMIMO systems.
Chapter 4
This chapter will discuss the actual formulation used to calculate channel quality indicator (CQI)
and capacity of users.
Chapter 5
This chapter includes the MATLAB results and discussion.
Chapter 6
This chapter presents the conclusions.
13  P a g e
CHAPTER 2
2. Theory of MIMO System
2.1 MIMO
The use of multiple antennas allows independent channels to be created in space and it is
possible to achieve spatial diversity, which can be created without any additional bandwidth
and transmit power. In addition to providing spatial diversity, antenna arrays can be used to
focus energy (beamforming) or create multiple parallel channels for carrying unique data
streams (spatial multiplexing). When multiple antennas are used at both the transmitter and the
receiver, it is commonly referred as MIMO system. These systems can be used to:
 Increase the system reliability (decrease the bit or packet error rate).
 Increase the achievable data rate and hence system capacity.
 Increase the coverage area.
 Decrease the required transmits power.
However, these four desirable attributes usually compete with one another. For example, an
increase in data rate will often require an increase in either the error rate or transmit power.
14  P a g e
2.2 MIMO System
Figure 2.1 shows MIMO system where there are M (>1) antennas at the BS and N (>1)
antennas at the MS.
1 1
2 2
BS . H . MS
M N
Figure 2.1: MIMO System
The wireless channel matrix H can be expressed as
11 12 1
21 22 2
1 2
H
M
M
N N NM
NXM
h h h
h h h
h h h
 


=


\ .
(2.1)
where h
ij
is the channel gain from i
th
receive antenna to t he j
th
transmit antenna. In case of
MIMO systems along with diversity, spatial multiplexing can also be exploited which refers
to breaking the incoming high rate data stream into M independent data streams. Assuming that
the streams can be successfully decoded, the nominal spectral efficiency is thus increased by a
factor of M. This is certainly exciting which implies that adding antenna elements can greatly
increase the viability of the high data rates desired for wireless broadband access. The MS has to
estimate M1 transmit vector from N1 receive vector. In order to adjust the number of
streams, some sort of preprocessing also called precoding is done before actual transmission,
which can be thought as a kind of beamforming. More insights about MIMO can be found in
reference [2]. MIMO systems can be classified as:
15  P a g e
 Singleuser or Multiuser
When a singleuser is scheduled in a dataregion it is referred as singleuser MIMO (SU
MIMO). If more than one user is scheduled in a dataregion then it becomes MUMIMO.
These two are differ in terms of precoding and scheduling. The number of streams allocated to
each user is configurable.
 Open loop or Closed loop
When the precoders are fixed to subbands and chosen from a codebook which is known to
BS and MS is referred as Open loop MIMO (OLMIMO). If the precoders are formed by the
scheduler based on the preferred matrix index (PMI) feedback from each of the MSs, then it is
called Closed loop MIMO (CLMIMO).
From the above classification, there are four possible MIMO configurations:
(1) OLSUMIMO (2) OLMUMIMO (3) CLSUMIMO (4) CLMUMIMO.
2.3 MIMO precoding
Precoding is done mainly to map K transmitted symbols to M transmitting antennas. In case of
SUMIMO these K symbols belong to singleuser, whereas in MUMIMO they are intended
for K different users (assuming single stream per user). There are various ways of precoding,
some of them are discussed here in brief.
1
x 1 1
1
x
.
2
x Pre 2 2 Post
2
x
.
. Processing . . processing .
. . . .
K
x M N
k
x
.
Figure 2.2: MIMO pre and post processing.
16  P a g e
2.3.1 Optimal Unitary or SVD precoding
In case of SUMIMO, when the channel is known at the transmitter, the best precoder to use is
the matrix formed by the right singular vectors of the channel, which has proven to achieve the
channel capacity of MIMO systems, at the cost of feeding back signaling of the channel state
information from MS to the BS.
2.3.2 Codebook based precoding
Here a codebook which contains a set of precoders is known at the transmitter and receiver.
In case of OLMUMIMO, precoders are fixed to all the subbands and the user needs to
feedback which precoding vector in the precoder is to be used to precode the data. Detail
description on how code books are designed is found in references [7] and [8].
2.3.3 Zero Forcing (ZF) precoding
For SUMIMO the precoder is just the pseudo inverse of the channel, which can completely
cancel out the inter stream interference and reproduce the data vector transmitted with additive
noise. In case of MUMIMO the precoder has to cancel out multiuser interference, so a block
diagonalization method is proposed in reference [9] which is used to find the precoder under
some constraints.
2.3.4 Dirty Paper Coding (DPC)
All the techniques discussed previously were linear techniques, but DPC is a nonlinear coding
technique that precancels known interference without power penalty. Once the transmitter is
assumed to know the interference signal regardless of channel state information knowledge at
the receiver. This category includes Costa Precoding, TomlinsonHarashima Precoding and the
Vector Perturbation Technique as discussed in references [4] and [5].
17  P a g e
CHAPTER 3
3. Literature Survey of MUMIMO
3.1 MUMIMO
In MUMIMO more than one user can be served in the same bandwidth using appropriate
precoders at BS. This technique is just like SUMIMO where one or more streams transmitted
at a time using multiple antennas belonging to the same user. In MUMIMO each stream could
belong to a different user i.e., instead of stream multiplexing, MUMIMO does user
multiplexing. For scenarios where large number of users is to be served in one cell or to serve a
limited number of users with increased throughput, MUMIMO can be used.
The three gains that are useful in increasing the performance of MUMIMO systems are
defined as follows [11].
3.1.1 Spatial diversity gain
This is the technique for improving communication quality by transmitting and receiving
with multiple antennas. Each pair of transmit and receive antennas provides a signal path by
sending signals that carry the same information through different paths. Hence multiple
independently faded replicas of the data symbol can be obtained and more reliable reception is
achieved.
3.1.2 Spatial multiplexing gain
This is the performance improvement derived from using multiple antennas to transmit
multiple signal flows through space in parallel. For a MIMO system with N
t
transmitting
antennas and N
r
receiving antennas, the maximum achievable spatial multiplexing gain is
minimum of N
t
and N
r
.
18  P a g e
3.1.3 Multiuser diversity gain
The improvement in system throughput derived from using a scheduler which exploits the
disparities fading and interference characteristics between users.
The first two (spatial diversity gain, spatial multiplexing gain) can be typically achieved
using precoders at the transmitter side by using the feedback information sent by UE and using
multiple antennas. But the latter can be achieved by using proper scheduling techniques.
MUMIMO offers additional degrees of freedom when compared to SUMIMO since
multiple users are multiplexed in the same physical channel. This can be achieved by pairing
users whose precoders are orthogonal to each other in a dataregion and then precoding them
appropriately so that each user sees only its own information. As UE feedback quantized
channel information, the users will not be perfectly orthogonal to each other so some remnant
inter user interference will be seen by each of the users who are paired. This can be minimized
by using a minimum mean square error (MMSE) receiver at UE to minimize the effect of
multilingual user interference (MUI) on capacity [17].
The main advantages that lead to MIMO paradigm shift to MUMIMO from SUMIMO
communications are
1. MUMIMO schemes allow for direct gain in multipleaccess capacity (proportional to
number of transmit antennas) because of multiplexing of data of several users in the same radio
channel.
2. MUMIMO schemes are more immune to loss of channel rank because of line of sight
(LOS) conditions or antenna correlation, which is a major problem that causes performance
degradation in SUMIMO communications.
19  P a g e
3.2 Challenges of MUMIMO
MUMIMO has tremendous benefits which are achieved by overcoming some challenges.
Multiple users using the same resources at the same time would lead to several issues that need
to be considered, some of them are mentioned here.
3.2.1 Interference
When multiple users are using the same resources at the same time, there would be
severe interference between their signals. Each user should be capable of decoding his
respective stream by reducing the interference due to other stream. This can be achieved by
careful preprocessing at the transmitter and postprocessing at the receiver.
3.2.2 Postprocessing
In singleuser transmission, MIMO could be used for spatial multiplexing, where
multiple symbols are transmitted to the same user. For example, consi der a 22 singleuser
system, in which the received vector can be represented as
y = Hx + n (3.1)
where the transmitted 21 vector x represents 2 symbols that are transmitted simultaneously
to a particular user, thus doubling the user throughput. In order to decode the 2 symbols from
the received 21 vector y, a simple approach would be to build a linear receiver that
diagonalises the system, i.e., multiply the received vector y by H
1
. This decouples the system
and we get back the two transmitted symbols.
In the MUMIMO case, the effective received vector y, is a concatenation of the
symbols received by geographically separated users, and post processing must be done in such
a way to reduce the interference from the other user. Several receiver configurations such as
MMSE, maximum ratio combining (MRC) and ZF are possible but MMSE receiver is shown to
reduce the interference effectively.
20  P a g e
3.2.3 Preprocessing/precoding
Because of this limitation on the interference cancellation that can be done at the MS,
good precoders need to be designed, such that we beamform efficiently towards the two users.
However this would require good knowledge of the channels to both users at the BS, which
requires heavy amounts of feedback. So we would need to come up with the best possible
precoders to use at the BS, with a limitation on the feedback rate.
3.2.4 Channel Quality Indicator (CQI) modeling
CQI is a feedback by the user in frame (n), for the allocation of modulation and coding
schemes in frame (n+1). CQI modeling is to be done so that the user experiences a good
throughput. In the single input single output (SISO) case, CQI is a function of the channel to a
particular user, which (for low Dopplers shift) does not fluctuate much between adjacent
frames. But in case of MUMIMO, in addition to being a function of the channel to the user,
CQI is also a function of the precoder used at the BS. Hence, better the precoding is lesser is the
interference and higher CQI will be.
3.2.5 Scheduling
When we have a number of users contending for same resource, throughputs can be
increased by scheduling those users who experience a good channel. This increase in system
performance merely because of scheduling the bestset of users at any point of time is known as
multiuser diversity. However, maximizing system throughput must not come as a result of
celledge users (who face poor channel conditions) never being scheduled. System performance
must be maximized and at the same time a certain amount of fairness must be ensured among
the users in the system. A multiuser scheduler that meets these demands needs to be
implemented.
21  P a g e
3.3 Precoding techniques of MUMIMO
3.3.1 Zero Forcing Beamforming (ZFBF) and Unitary precoding
ZFBF and unitary precoding are two useful precoding techniques for MUMIMO in
limited feedback environments. ZF precoding is a potential precoder design for MUMIMO.
The main benefit of ZF scheme is that the interference is precancelled at the transmitter side. It
implies that eNodeB has most of the computational complexity in designing the precoder and each
terminal needs only information regarding its own data streams for reception. However the
quantized channel information has to be precise, so that the multiuser interference becomes
sufficiently low in order to get gains from this scheme. The ZF precoder can be designed using
the moorepenrose psuedo inverse as given below (assuming u users are paired together)
( ) eq eq eq
T
W
H H
= H H H
(3.2)
where
eq H
is the equivalent channel feedback and
T
W
is the precoder used.
3.3.2 Channel Inversion Method and Diagnolization method (BD)
Channel inversion method is one of the linear precoding MUMIMO techniques
which is simple and has capacity limit. When spatial correlation is increased, the multiuser
channel capacity decreases rapidly. BD can perfectly cancel cochannel interference (CCI), but
has antenna constraint at the BS and MS. The computation burden for system is very heavy
when the number of users is very large. Both channel inversion method and BD are based on the
feedback of the MIMO channel matrix, so the feedback is very large. More information about
these techniques can be found in [13][14][15].
22  P a g e
3.4 System Model
Let us consider a MIMO system with M transmitting ant ennas at the BS and N
receiving antennas at each MS as shown in figure 3.1. There is a codebook known a prior to
both the BS and all MSs. If U users are waiting to be scheduled at the BS, the scheduler will
determine K (<U) users according to scheduling algorithm and the feedback sent by the MSs. At
the same time, the scheduler will select a precoding matrix W from the codebook to precode for
the scheduled K users before transmission [3].
1
x
.
User 1
User 1 data
1
x 1
User 2 data
2
x 2
2
x
.
. . . User 2
User U data
k
x M
. .
. .
k
x
.
User K
Feedback: CQI, Precoder Vector index.
Figure 3.1: MUMIMO System setup.
The OFDM technique has become one of the most promising techniques for next generation
wireless communication systems. Since OFDM technique can deal frequency selective fading as
flat fading, so in this thesis, we model the MIMO channel as the flat fading MIMO channel [3].
SCHEDULER
PRECODER
23  P a g e
l
3.4.1 Uncorrelated Channel Model
The received signal vector at the k
th
MS is given by
k k k
y =H Wx+n k = 1,2,.....,U
(3.3)
where
11 12 1 1
2 21 22 2
1 2 1
x and
k k k
M
k k k
M
k
k k k
k N N NM KX
NXM
h h h x
x h h h
H
x h h h
 
(

(

(
= =

(

(

\ .
x
k
is the complex symbol transmitted for k
th
user.
H
k
C
N M
is the NM wireless channel matrix from the k
th
MS to BS and h
ij
CN (0,
1) which represents the channel impulse response coupling the j
th
antenna at the BS to the i
th
antenna at the MS and its amplitude obeys independent and identical Rayleighdistribution.
 
1 2 k
M K
W= v v . . . v
WC is a precoder chosen from the codebook C which contains set of
unitary precoders and v
k
represents precoding vector used to precode k
th
user data, where k is
called stream indicator or precoding vector index.
n
k
CN (0, N
o
I
N
) is noise vector at the k
th
MS.
3.4.2 Correlated Channel model
The antennas at the BS are magnitude correlated i.e., each antenna at the BS sees same
channel gain to all receiver antennas of k
th
user. Now the channel in the previous subsection can
be modified as
2 3 4
1
2 3 4
2
( )
( )
k k k k
k k k k
j j j j
k
j j j j
h e e e e
H
h e e e e
u u u u
u u u u
(
=
(
(
(3.4)
24  P a g e
Here
k
u[/3, +/3] for k
th
user, h
i
is Rayleigh distributed random variable representing
the channel gain between i
th
receive antenna and any of the antennas at BS.
3.5 Proportional Fair (PF) Scheduler
The PF scheduler is designed to take advantage of multiuser diversity while
maintaining comparable longterm throughput for all users. Let R
k
(t) denote the instantaneous
data rate that user k can achieve at time t, and let T
k
(t) be the average throughput for user k
up to time slot t. The PF scheduler selects the user denoted as k
with the highest R
k
(t)/T
k
(t) for transmission. In the long term, this is equivalent to selecting the user with the highest
instantaneous rate relative to its average throughput.
The average throughput T
k
(t) for all users is then updated according to
*
*
1 1
( 1) (1 ) ( ) ( ) k=k
1
= (1 ) ( ) k k
( )
PF Metric =
( )
k k k
c c
k
c
k
k
T t T t R t
t t
T t
t
R t
T t
+ = +
=
(3.5)
Thus consistently underserved users receive scheduling priority, which promotes fairness.
The parameter t
c
controls the latency of the system. If t
c
is large, the latency increases, with the
benefit of higher sum throughput. If t
c
is small, the latency decreases, since the average
throughput values change more quickly, at the expense of some throughput.
There are other schedulers like Round Robin scheduler (RR scheduler) which schedules
users one after another without any priority and greedy scheduler, which schedule the users
based on their instantaneous rates by ignoring the average throughput and sacrificing the
fairness.
25  P a g e
CHAPTER 4
4. Mathematical Procedure
In this chapter we introduce formulation used to calculate CQI and capacity of users.
4.1 MUMIMO Capacity Formulation
Referring to the system model in figure 3.1 the received signal vector for 1
st
user can be
expressed as
1 1 1
x y HW n = +
(4.1)
Now the transmitted symbol for the 1
st
user x
i
is to be estimated from this received vector.
For traditional MIMO detection a linear receiver is used to detect the transmit data. ZF,
MMSE and MRC detection criterions are commonly employed. In order to obtain good
performance, we consider a linear MMSE receiver equation discussed earlier and can be re
written as
 
1
2
1 1 1 2 1 k
k
x
x
y H v v v n
x
(
(
(
= +
(
(
1 1 1 1 1 1
1, 1
K
i i
i i
y H v x H v x n
= =
= + +
(4.2)
The first term represents the desired signal, the second term is inter stream interference
caused by scheduling more than one user and the third term is complex Additive White Gaussian
Noise (AWGN) at the receiver. Let the effective channel after precoding be expressed as
H
1
= H
1
W, where H
1
is N K precoded channel matrix.
26  P a g e
4.1.1 MMSE Receiver
MMSE receiver will try to reduce the MSE between the desired and estimated symbols. The
linear 1 N MMSE receiver b
1
to decode 1
st
user data can be expressed as
1
2 2 *
1 1 1 1 1
min { } min { }
R
b b
b x x x y p
.
= E = E =    
(4.3)
where
R is N N autocorrelation matrix of received vector y
1
.
p is N 1 crosscorrelation vector between the desired symbol x
1
and received
vector y
1
.
Assuming noise and data are i.i.d and uncorrelated random vectors. The total power constraint P
is divided equally among K users, expressions for R and p is calculated as follows
*
1 1
{ } R y y = E
* * *
1
1 1 1
{ } { } XX n n = H E H +E
*
1 1 0 N
P
N I
K
 
H H +

\ .
=
(4.4)
*
1 1
{ } p y x = E
*
1 1 1 1
{ } v x x = H E
1 1
P
v
K
 
H

\ .
=
1
P
h
K
 

\ .
=
(4.5)
27  P a g e
where h
1
= H
1
v
1
= [H
1
]
1
= [H
1
W]
1
and indicates conjugate transpose operation. The
final expression for MMSE filter is written as
1
* * 0
1 1 1 1 N
KN
b h I
P
(
(
= H H +
(
(4.6)
From the matrix inversion term, it is evident that MMSE receiver will try to reduce inter stream
interference but cannot remove it completely. Here the criterion is not to make the inter stream
interference zero but to minimize the MSE.
4.1.2 CQI Calculation
Let us calculate the C QI of the 1
st
user. The estimated symbol at the k
th
MS can be written as
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1, 1
K
i i
i i
x b y b H v x b H v x b n
.
= =
= = + +
(4.7)
where b
l
is MMSE receiver vector. Assuming the total power P is divided equally among K
users, expressions for signal (S), interference (I), and noise powers (N) of 1
st
user is calculated as
follows
*
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
{( )( ) } S b H v x b H v x = E
2 *
1 1 1 1 1
{ } b H v E x x = 
2
1 1 1
P
b H v
K
 

\ .
=  
(4.8)
*
1 1 1 1
1, 1
{( )( ) }
K
i i i i
i i
I b H v x b H v x
= =
= E
* 2
1 1 1 1
1, 1
2
1 1
1, 1
{ }
K
i
i i
K
i
i i
E x x b H v
P
b H v
K
= =
= =
 

\ .
=  
=  
(4.9)
28  P a g e
*
1 1 1 1
N {( )( ) } E b n b n =
* *
1 1 1 1
2
1 0
{ } E b n b
b N =
=b
(4.10)
1
S
I + N
CQI =
2
1 1 1
2 2
1 1 1 0
1, 1
K
i
i i
P
b H v
K
P
b H v b N
K
= =
 

\ .
=
 
+

\ .
 
 
(4.11)
Here
.
indicates norm of the vector. Since noise is assumed to be Gaussian distributed,
Capacity of 1
st
user C
1
can be calculated from Shannons channel capacity theorem as
C
1
= log
2
(1 + C QI
1
)
(4.12)
After calculating all individual capacities, the sum capacity can be calculated by adding
individual capacities.
.
1
K
sum i
i
C C
=
=
(4.13)
29  P a g e
4.2 Procedure
This section explains how abstraction is performed at the BS and MS.
1. In case of MUMIMO each user has to feedback the following information to the BS.
(a) CQI for all the subbands.
(b) Stream Indicator or Precoding vector index for all the subbands.
The above information can be calculated based on the desired and interfering channels to
each user. Note that the feedback sent by the MS during frame number (n) is used to schedule
users in frame number (n+1). Hence the feedback path is indicated as frame (n+1).
2. Now it is the job of PF Scheduler to select which set of K users need to be scheduled out of U
users in a particular subband based on the above feedback.
(a) First the PF Scheduler will calculate the PF metrics for all users.
(b) It will try to find set of K users who prefer different stream indicators.
(c) If there are more than one set of users then it will select those set of users who has
maximum sum PF metric.
(d) If there is no such set of users then scheduler will randomly force the users to use
different stream indicator so that pairing can be done.
3. After scheduling a dataregion the average throughput of all the users are updated. Then the
scheduler will schedule the users for next dataregion. This way scheduler will schedule users
to all dataregions one by one. When there are large numbers of users contending for service then
pairing is not a problem, since there is very high probability that at least K users will choose
different stream indicators.
4. After scheduling, the SINR is calculated at the MS.
5. The SINR calculated in the previous step is used to calculate performance metrics like sum
capacity and throughput.
30  P a g e
BS MS
frame (n) frame (n)
frame (n+1) frame(n)
frame (n+1)
frame (n)
Figure 4.1 Procedure for MUMIMO.
CQI and precoding
vector calculation
Scheduler
Desired and
interfering channel
information
Feedback from
MS:
1) CQI
2) PVI
SINR
calculation
Performance
Metrics:
1) sum capacity
2) Throughput
31  P a g e
CHAPTER 5
5. Results and Discussion
5.1 Matlab Simulation Results
In this section we will discuss how the capacity will effect when multiple users are
paired in a dataregion. Here in total we have 12 subbands and 20 users competing for
resources.
System Parameters
Parameters Values
No. of antennas at BS station
No. of antennas at MS station
Frames transmitted
Channel
Subbands
Iterations
SNR (dB)
Users contending for resource
Users served
Channel repetition across
subbands
2/4
2/4
100
uncorrelated/correlated
12
100
0:1:50
20
[ 2 3 4 ]
1
32  P a g e
Figure 5.1 represents the sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 wi t h uncorrel at ed
channel . In this figure we clearly observe that the sum capacity of 2 users is higher when
compared to 3 users and 4 users. It is well understood that as the number of users increases, the
inter stream interference will increase hence the CQI of each user will decrease and also the
capacity per user decreases. Since the number of antennas at the mobile station are only two, the
receiver can suppress only one interferer effectively resulting in higher sum capacity in case of 2
users when compare to sum capacity of 3 users and 4.
Figure 5.2 represents the sum capacity of MUMIMO for 41 with uncorrelated
channel. In this figure, we can clearly notice that the sum capacity of 2 users is higher when
compared to that of 3 and 4 users. The main difference between the two graphs is that, in figure
5.1 the sum capacity for 2 users increases linearly, where as in case of figure 5.2 the sum
capacity increases exponentially.
Figure 5.3 and figure 5.4 represents the sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 and 41
with correlated channel. Here also, as the number of users increases the sum capacity decreases.
In the case of single receiving antenna (i.e. M=1) the sum capacity of users is smaller when
compared to that of two receiving antenna at the MS. For both correlated and uncorrelated cases,
as the number of users increases, the sum capacity decreases.
33  P a g e
Figure 5.1Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 with uncorrelated channel
Figure 5.2 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 41 with uncorrelated channel
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
SNR in dB
S
U
M
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
p
e
r
s
u
b
b
a
n
d
i
n
s
y
m
b
o
l
s
/
s
e
c
/
H
z
SUM CAPACITY of MUMIMO for 4Tx X2Rx,UnCorrelated channel
2Users
3Users
4Users
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
2
4
6
8
10
12
SNR in dB
S
U
M
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
p
e
r
s
u
b
b
a
n
d
i
n
s
y
m
b
o
l
s
/
s
e
c
/
H
z
SUM CAPACITY of MUMIMO for 4Tx X1Rx,UnCorrelated Channel
2Users
3Users
4Users
34  P a g e
Figure 5.3 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 with correlated channel
Figure 5.4 Sum capacity of MUMIMO for 42 with correlated channel
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
SNR in dB
S
U
M
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
p
e
r
s
u
b
b
a
n
d
i
n
s
y
m
b
o
l
s
/
s
e
c
/
H
z
SUM CAPACITY of MUMIMO for 4Tx X2Rx,Correlated channel
2Users
3Users
4Users
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
2
4
6
8
10
12
SNR in dB
S
U
M
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
p
e
r
s
u
b
b
a
n
d
i
n
s
y
m
b
o
l
s
/
s
e
c
/
H
z
SUM CAPACITY of MUMIMO for 4Tx X1Rx,Correlated channel
2Users
3Users
4Users
35  P a g e
From figures 5.1 to 5.4, we can clearly observe that
As the number of users increases the sum capacity decreases.
The optimum number of users that can be scheduled in a dataregion to achieve
maximum throughput is equal to minimum of the number of antennas at the BS and MS.
The sum capacity increases linearly with SN R (dB) when number of users paired is
not greater than minimum of the number of antennas at the BS and MS i.e., when
K min {M, N} then sum capacity increases linearly, otherwise it saturates at some
point.
36  P a g e
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS
MUMIMO is a promising technique which allows more than one user that can be served
in each subband. An efficient multiuser proportional fair (PF) scheduler algorithm is designed
and implemented in MUMIMO technique with code book based precoding that has been
proposed for the IEEE 802.16m mobile broadband standard. Optimum number of users can be
scheduled in a dataregion to achieve maximum sum capacity, which is equal to minimum
number of antennas at the base station and the mobile station. The sum capacity increases
linearly with SNR (db) when the number of users paired is not greater than the minimum of the
number of antennas at the BS and MS i.e. when Kmin {M, N} then sum capacity increases
linearly, otherwise it saturates at some other point. From the results discussed in the previous
chapter, multiple users can be paired in a dataregion resulting in higher sum capacity. In
addition, we observe that as the number of users increases, the sum capacity decreases.
37  P a g e
REFERENCES
[1] Riberio C. B, Hugl K, Lampinen M, Performance of Linear MultiUser MIMO Precoding
in LTE system, Third International symposium on Wireless pervasive Computing (ISWPC
2008), pp. 410414, 2008.
[2] Ca t r e uxS, Gr e e ns t e i n L. J , Er c e g V, Some results and insights on the performance
gains of MIMO systems, IEEE Journal on selected areas in communications, vol. 21, June
2003.
[3] Fang Shu, Li Lihua, Cui Qimei and Zhang Ping, NonUnitary Codebook Based Precoding
Scheme for MuitiUser MIMO with Limited Feedback, IEEE Wireless Communication and
Networking conference, pp. 678682, 2008.
[4] C. Peel, B. Hochwald, A. Swindlehurst, VectorPerturbation Technique for nearcapacity
muitiantenna muitiuser communication Part I: Channel Inversion and Reguiarization, IEEE
Transactions on Communications, vol. 53, January 2005.
[5] C. Peel, B. Hochwald, A. Swindlehurst, Vector Perturbation Technique for nearcapacity
muitiantenna muitiuser communication Part II: Perturbation, IEEE Transactions on
Communications, vol. 53, January 2005.
[6] M. Costa, Writing on dirty paper, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 29, no. 3,
pp. 439441, May 1983.
[7] Stankovic V and Haardt M, Generaiized Design of MultiUser MIMO Precoding Matrices,
IEEE Transactions on communications, vol. 7, no. 3, March 2008.
[8] Fang Shu, Wu Gang, Xiao Yue, and Li Shaoqian, MultiUser MIMO Linear Precoding
with Grassmannian Codebook, International Conference on Communications and Mobile
Computing, pp. 250255, January 09.
38  P a g e
[9] Shim S, ChanByoung C and Robert W. Heath Jr, A LatticeBased MIMO Broadcast
Precoder with Block Diagonaiization for MuitiStream Transmission, IEEE Global
Telecommunications Conference3, pp. 15, Nov. 2006.
[10] Juho Lee, JinKyu Han, and Jianzhong (Charlie) Zhang, MIMO Technologies in 3GPP
LTE and LTEAdvanced, Proceedings of the EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications
and Networking, May 2009.
[11] Xiaoming She, Lan Chen,Precoding and Scheduling Techniques for Increasing Capacity of
MIMO Channels, Proceedings of the NTT DOCOMO Technical Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 3844.
[12] Love D. J, Heath R.W, Limited Feedback Unitary Precoding for Spatial Multiplexing
Systems, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 51, pp. 29672976, August 2005.
[13] T. Haustein, C. von Helmolt, E.Jorswieck, et al, Performance of MIMO systems with
channel inversion, IEEE 55
th
VTC, vol. 1, pp. 3539, May 2002.
[14] Q. H. Spencer, A. L. Swindlehurst, and M. Haardt, Zeroforcing methods for downlink
spatial multiplexing in multiuser MIMO channels, IEEE Trans. Signal Processing, vol. 52,
no. 2, pp. 461471, Feb. 2004.
[15] L. U. Choi and R. D. Murch, A transmit preprocessing technique for multiuser MIMO
systems using a decomposition approach, IEEE Trans. Wireless Communications, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 2024, Jan. 2004.
[16] http://www.eurecom.fr/~gesbert/papers/TutorialMUMIMOv3.pdf
[17] http://users.ece.utexas.edu/~rheath/papers/2006/SP_mag/paper.pdf
Bien plus que des documents.
Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.
Annulez à tout moment.