Throughput Performance Insights of LTE Release 8: Malaysia's Perspective

Abdulaziz M. Ghaleb, David Chieng, Alvin Ting, Ayad Abdulkafi,

Wireless Communication Cluster, MIMOS Berhad, Malaysia.
{abdulaziz.saleh, ht.chieng, kee.ting, ayadatiyah.abdulkafi}@mimos.my
Kim-Chuan Lim, FKeKK, University Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, kimchuan@utem.edu.my
Heng-Siong Lim, FET, Multimedia University, Malaysia, hslim@mmu.edu.my
Abstract LTE wireless mobile broadband networks, in
particularly those based on 3GPP Release 8 (Rel. 8)
specification, have already made strong inroads into the
commercial arena worldwide. In Malaysia, 8 companies have
been allocated spectrum in 2.6GHz Band (LTE band class 7).
This paper aims to provide some high level insights on the
throughput performance of these spectrums. Although a lot of
studies have been undertaken with regards to LTE network
performances, various degrees of discrepancy still exist in
particularly concerning network layer (IP) throughput. A wide
array of factors may contribute to these differences, which
include differences in methodology adopted, levels of
abstraction (or details) used in the simulation model,
environment and/or usage scenarios and so on. Using OPNETs
latest LTE library, we study the effects of duplexing scheme
(FDD vs. TDD), MCS, channel bandwidth, bearer's type (GBR
or non-GBR) for the allocated spectrums. The impact of
multiple users access on the throughput performance is also
analyzed. This work enables us to compare and contrast our
findings with the existing studies while providing more
accurate views on how the main system level configurations
may impact the network layer throughput performance of the
emerging LTE networks in Malaysia.
Keywords LTE, OPNET, Throughput, Performance.
I. INTRODUCTION
LTE or Long Term Evolution UMTS networks, in
particularly those based on 3GPP Rel. 8 specifications, have
already made strong inroads into the commercial arena
worldwide. According to [1] global LTE subscribership is
expected to skyrocket from 9 million in 2011 to more than
560 million in 2016. Global mobile Suppliers Association
(GSA) recently announced that 145 LTE commercial
networks had been launched in 66 countries (as of January
2013) and that the number is expected to increase to 234 in
83 countries by the end the year. In Malaysia 8 companies
have been awarded LTE spectrum at 2.6GHz band. Puncak
Semangat received a lion share of 2x20MHz FDD, five
companies received 2x10MHz FDD and the two WiMAX
mobile broadband providers received 20MHz TDD [2]
Table I: LTE Spectrum Recipients in Malaysia[2]
Licensee Allocation Type
Puncak Semangat 2x20MHz FDD
Maxis 2x10MHz FDD
Celcom 2x10MHz FDD
Digi 2x10MHz FDD
U Mobile 2x10MHz FDD
Redtone 2x10MHz FDD
P1 20MHz TDD
YTL 20MHz TDD
LTE Rel. 8, though marketed as 4G, is in fact only
3.9G. LTE Release 10 (Rel. 10) is the official 4G
technology recognized by ITU/IMT-Advanced [3]. LTE
and LTE-Advanced are primarily the same technology
family, with the Advanced label being added to draw
attention to the relation between LTE Rel. 10 and
ITU/IMT-Advanced. According to Rel. 8 specification, a
peak downlink rate of 299.6 Mbps for 4x4 antennas, and
150.8Mbps for 2x2 antennas using 20MHz channel can be
provided. As for the uplink, the peak rate of about 75.4Mbps
is expected using the same spectrum size. LTE supports
scalable carrier bandwidths ranging from 1.4MHz to 20MHz
and supports both frequency division (FDD) duplexing and
time-division duplexing (TDD) schemes. In terms of
latency, LTE promises low latency in data transfer (<5ms in
optimal condition), handover as well as connection setup
time. Due to that LTE has the ability to manage fast-moving
mobiles (between 350 km/h or 500 km/h). Application wise,
LTE generally supports all conventional multimedia
services with better QoS guarantee including multi-cast and
broadcast streaming services.
A lot of studies have been undertaken in order to evaluate
LTE throughput performance. I. Vukovicv on [4]
investigated the performance of TDD LTE RACH (Random
Access Channel) and computed the normalized throughput
under Poisson load. J. Zhu evaluated the PDSCH link and
system level performance and provided a platform to
estimate the performance for the different transmission
modes [5]. The work done by [6, 7] focused on the downlink
control channel design to reduce the control overhead and
hence, to improve the throughput performance. To the best
of our knowledge, the most comprehensive work with
regards to throughput performance, is done by [8]. The
authors provided performance analysis of LTE physical
layer characteristics by studying the maximum throughput in
uplink and downlink for both FDD and TDD using different
Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) and channel
bandwidth sizes. From our investigation, various degrees of
discrepancy still exist between the above findings. A wide
range of factors may contribute to these differences, such as
differences in methodology adopted; levels of abstraction
(or level of detail) used in the simulation model,
environment and/or usage scenarios and so on.
978-1-4673-2480-9/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE 258

This paper aims to provide fresh insights on the network
layer (or IP layer) throughput performance of LTE, which
represents the PDSCH capacity using a well-known
industrial-grade network simulator called OPNET Modeler
(ver. 17.5). OPNET Modeler is a powerful simulation tool
that offers a comprehensive network simulation platform
with many predefined standard node models. Its library
offers more than 400 out-of-the-box protocols and vendor
device models including IPv6, TCP/UDP, UMTS, WiMAX,
LTE and WLAN. Using its latest LTE Rel.8 library, we
study the effects of duplexing scheme (FDD vs. TDD),
MCS, Channel Bandwidth, Bearer's type (GBR or non-
GBR). The impact of multiple users access on the
throughput performance is also analyzed. The LTE model
greatly benefits from the comprehensive higher layer
protocols and powerful statistical evaluation tools. The level
of details of the LTE model provided by OPNET can be
appreciated in the following sections. This work enables us
to compare and contrast our findings with the existing
studies. Besides, this work provides more accurate views on
how the main system level configurations may impact the
throughput performance of the emerging LTE networks in
Malaysia.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II
provides a quick overview on LTE radio access technology.
We then describe the simulation configuration and setup in
Section III. Different scenarios are studied in Section IV and
finally the conclusions are drawn in Section V.
II. BACKGROUND OF LTE RADIO ACCESS
The LTE standard was primary published in the first
quarter of 2009 as part of the 3GPP Rel. 8 specifications.
LTE significantly improves flexibility and overall system
performance by utilizing wider spectrum bandwidths
wherever and whenever available [9]. Table II summarizes
the acronyms used in this paper.

Table II: List of Acronyms
DwPTS Downlink Pilot Time Slot
FDD Frequency Division Duplex
GBR Guarantee Bit Rate
GP Guard Period
HARQ Hybrid Automatic Repeat-Request
ICIC Inter-Cell Interference Coordination
MBMS Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Services
MCS Modulation And Coding Scheme
MIMO Multiple-Input Multiple-Output
OFDMA Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access
PBCH Physical Broadcast Channel
PCFICH Physical Control Format Indicator Channel
PDCCH Physical Downlink Control Channel
PDSCH Physical Downlink Shared Channel
PUCCH Physical Uplink Control Channel
PHICH Physical HARQ Indicator Channel
PHY Physical Layer
P-SS Primary Synchronization Signal
QCI QoS Class Identifier
SC-FDMA Single Carrier Frequency Division Mulitple Access
SNR Signal-To-Interference Ratio
SRS Sounding Reference Signal
S-SS Secondary Synchronization Signal
TDD Time Division Duplex
UE User Equipment
UpPTS Downlink Pilot Time Slot
*Due to space limitation, not all the parameters can be listed.

LTE uses OFDMA signal for downlink and the SC-FDMA
signal for uplink. SC-FDMA is used to enable higher
terminal power-amplifier efficiency by providing better
peak-to-average power ratio.
Spectrum flexibility is a main feature of the LTE radio-
access technology. This allows LTE to utilize scalable
spectrum (different bandwidth sizes) at difference frequency
bands with different characteristics including different
duplex schemes such as FDD and TDD. MIMO technique is
supported in LTE from its very first release. However, at the
point of writing, this feature has yet to be implemented in
OPNET Modeler.
Channel-Dependent Scheduling and Rate Adaptation are
implemented in Rel.8 in order to match to the rapidly
varying resource requirements, which are key determinants
of the overall system performance. LTE is designed in such
a way that each cell can access the entire available spectrum,
which subsequently improves the system spectral efficiency.
However, one-cell reuse approach causes huge variation in
the SNR and thus in the data rates especially at cell edge.
Due to that, ICIC is implemented to avoid scheduling
transmissions from/to UE at the cell edge at the same time in
the adjacent cells [3].
In LTE, fast HARQ with soft combining is used as error
control method during retransmission. This technique offers
rate adaptation and minimizes the impact of the erroneously
received packets [10, 11].

III. SIMULATION CONFIGURATION AND
PARAMETERS
In order to achieve the peak throughout, only one UE is used
and only with one type of traffic (default bearer mode) in
most scenarios. Only in case study D that the UE is
configured with multiple QCIs as well as multiple UEs with
multiple QCI to study the effects of QCI type and number of
users on the throughput performance. Table III lists the
default parameters unless stated otherwise.

259

Table III: Default parameters.
Parameter Settings
General Parameters
Bearer Type Default
Scheduling Mode No Link Adaptation
Scheduling request error Disabled
Scheduling Info. error Disabled
Scheduling Grant error Disabled
PDCP Compression Disabled
Pathloss Model Free space
PHY
Frequency band 2.6 GHz
Transmission Mode SISO
Cyclic Prefix Normal (7 symbols per slot)
TDD Channel Index Config 6: UL/DL 5:5
Preamble Format Format 0
ACK-to-NACK error Disabled
NACK-to-ACK error Disabled
Antenna types Omnidirectional (UE&eNodeB)
eNodeB antenna gain 18 dBi
eNodeB Max. Tx power 40 Watt
eNodeB antenna gain 0 dBi
UE Maximum Tx power 200mWatt
MCS 1-28
Channel Bandwidth 1.4 to 20MHz
Traffic Characteristics
Traffic Direction Downlink/Uplink
Type of Service Best Effort
Protocol UDP
IP Packet Size 1500 Bytes
Control Signal and Overhead
PDCCH 1 OFDM symbol per subframe
PCFICH Included in PDCCH
PHICH Included in PDCCH
P-SS and S-SS 144 REs every 10ms
PBCH 288 REs every 10ms
Reference signals 8 REs (2 within the PDCCH)
PUCCH 2 OFDM symbols/subframe
SRS Up to 12 REs


Fig. 1: OPNET Simulation Setup
Fig. 1 shows the simulation setup in OPNET. The dashed
blue line represents the traffic flow direction between the
server and the UE. The actual traffic flows through the EPC
or the solid lines, which are configured as 1 Gbit/s Ethernet
duplex links. Our study focuses only on the radio interface
between the eNodeB and the UE.
This section represents study cases and discussion of the
different scenarios (A to E). Scenarios A to D are based on
single UE and single eNodeB, and Scenario E contains
multiple users and one eNodeB. FDD transmission mode is
used throughout the simulation except for one scenario
where FDD and TDD are compared. The results obtained
are analyzed, and sub-conclusions are attained from each
case study. As mentioned earlier at the point of writing,
MIMO configuration is not supported by OPNET. However
based on the baseline performance (SISO mode), we can
easily estimate the gain that MIMO can offer.
IV. SIMULATION SCENARIOS

A. Effects of Channel Bandwidth
Fig. 2 shows the peak uplink and downlink throughput of
FDD LTE using one eNodeB and one UE. The results
represent the maximum possible throughput attainable by a
user (UE). The UE is placed at the distance where the best
MCS index = 28 can be supported. Since there is only one
base station in this setup, there is no interference
experienced between users. The maximum number of RBs,
occupied bandwidth and bandwidth utilization for each
bandwidth are given in Table IV as follows:

Table IV: No. of RBs, Occupied bandwidth and Bandwidth Efficiency
Bandwidth (MHz) 1.4 3 5 10 15 20
No. of RBs 6 15 25 50 75 100
Occupied Bandwidth 1.08 2.7 4.5 9 13.5 18
Bandwidth Utilization 77% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%

The occupied bandwidth refers to the bandwidth that is
actually occupied by the RBs. For the 1.4MHz case, there
are 6 RBs with 180KHz each; hence the actual bandwidth is
6x180KHz, which is 1.08MHz. Bandwidth utilization is
equal to the ratio between the actual bandwidth and the
allocated bandwidth.
From Fig. 2, we can observe that the throughput
performance is proportional with the channel bandwidth
except for the 1.4MHz case. Here, the downlink direction
experiences slightly lower throughput than the uplink. This
is largely due to the synchronization signals and broadcast
signals which are sent at the downlink direction. Hence over
the narrow 1.4MHz bandwidth channel, the relative
overhead becomes comparatively higher. This is due to the
difference in the allocation of control signaling resource. In
our simulation PUCCH occupies 28 REs (for all channel
bandwidths) while PDCCH is set to one symbol (7REs).
This reduces the uplink physical data rate by 10.6% as
compared with the downlink. In addition, SRS occupies up
to 12 REs while Reference Signal occupies 8 REs, which
two of them are included in PDCCH. From Fig. 2, it can be
260

deduced that the 2x10MHz FDD spectrum receipients in
Malaysia can only expect up to 43.2Mbps IP layer
throughput at the downlink and 37.7Mbps at the uplink
using SISO or MISO configuration. The only 2x20MHz
license recipient, on the other hand, can enjoy up to
88.5Mbps and 79.3Mbps at the downlink and uplink
respectively, which is in fact more than double of the
2x10MHz recipients.
1.4MHz 3MHz 5MHz 10MHz 15MHz 20MHz
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Bandwidth
L
T
E

T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t

(
M
b
p
s
)


Uplink
Downlink

Fig. 2: Effects of Channel Bandwidth on Throughput (FDD, MCS=28)
20 TDD 10 FDD
10
20
30
40
50
Bandwidth (MHz)
L
T
E

T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t

(
M
b
p
s
)


TDD
FDD

Fig. 3: Max Downlink Throughput of 10MHz FDD and 10MHz TDD 5:5
(MCS=28)
B. TDD versus FDD
LTE supports both paired and unpaired spectrum through
TDD-LTE. TDD-LTE is different from FDD-LTE in terms
of frame structure, scheduling, HARQ and ACK/NACK
procedures. 3GPP has specified a special subframe that
allows switching between downlink and uplink transmission
TDD-LTE. The special subframe contains DwPTS, GP, and
UpPTS. GP is required to guarantee that uplink and
downlink transmissions do not collide, but larger GP means
lesser capacity. For long distance transmission, larger GP is
necessary to accommodate larger propagation time.
Fig. 3 compares the peak downlink throughput of 10MHz
FDD and 20MHz TDD (5:5) when applying the frequency
reuse of one (inner cell zone). It can be observed that the
downlink throughput 20MHz TDD with 5:5 DL: UL ratio
can only reach up to 41Mpbs as opposed to 43.2Mbps in the
10MHz FDD case. The 5.3% difference is largely due to
higher overhead incurred in the TDD frame because of the
added special subframe.

C. Effects of MCS index
LTE eNodeB supports 29 different MCSs with index
ranging from 0 to 28. Each MCS is mapped to what is
known as transport block size index I
TBS
ranging from 0 to
26 [12]. I
TBS
together with the number of RBs determine the
transport block size, in bits, that can be transmitted within
one TTI. In the downlink direction, MCS with the index 0 -
9 are modulated using QPSK, index 10 - 16 are modulated
using 16QAM and the rest are based on 64QAM. The
coding rate of each MCS is given in Table V as follows.

Table V: MCS indexes and Coding Rates
MCS
Index
Coding
Rate
MCS
Index
Coding
Rate
MCS
Index
Coding
Rate
0 0.16667 10 0.33333 20 0.55556
1 0.2 11 0.35 21 0.6
2 0.23333 12 0.41667 22 0.64444
3 0.26667 13 0.48333 23 0.71111
4 0.33333 14 0.51667 24 0.75556
5 0.4 15 0.58333 25 0.8
6 0.4667 16 0.63333 26 0.84444
7 0.53333 17 0.42222 27 0.88889
8 0.6 18 0.48889 28 1
9 0.66667 19 0.5

In this scenario, we investigate the maximum data rate
that each MCS index can support using 20MHz FDD error-
free channel. As shown in Fig. 4, the performance is quite
linear to the MCS indexes except for MCS 28, which has a
relatively higher data rate due to the use of uncoded
transmission (coding rate is of 1). MCS 9 and 10, which are
modulated QPSK and 16QAM respectively have the same
throughput as they are mapped to the same TBS (I
TBS
=9).
The same goes with MCS 16 and 17. Therefore for users
subscribing to 2x20MHz FDD network, they will get
between 3.22Mbps and 88.5Mbps of IP layer downlink
throughput depending on the signal quality they are
experiencing as well as how many other subscribers are
sharing the downlink channel. Although these results were
generated using in SISO mode, the maximum possible
throughput will remain the same even we have multiple
antennas system at the BS operating in diversity mode.
When operating in spatial multiplexing mode e.g. 2x2
MIMO configuration, we can expect around 1.6 or 1.7x gain
261

in throughput.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
LTE MCS index
L
T
E

T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t

(
M
b
p
s
)

Fig. 4: Effects of MCS index on Throughput (20MHz, FDD)
D. GBR vs. non-GBR Bearers.
LTE scheduler follows certain rules when scheduling the
traffics of different bearers. Generally signaling bearers have
higher priority over data bearers and GBR bearers have
priority over non-GBR bearers. One exception is that non-
GBR bearers with a QCI of "5" have higher priority over
GBR bearers.
In our model, the proportional fair scheduling is adopted
to service the GBR bearers. The scheduler guarantees a
minimum bit rate and a maximum delay bound in the EPS
bearer. Fairness scheduling scheme is used to serve the non-
GBR bearers using the remaining of the frame capacity. In
this scheme, the available resources are shared equally
among bearers with data when they have the same QCI.
In order to demonstrate the effects without having to
populate the model with too many UEs, we use 3MHz
channel bandwidth instead of the 10 or 20MHz. In our
scenario, there are three types of bearers carrying IP traffic
flows of 5Mbps between the server and the UE in the
downlink direction as shown in Fig. 5. Here, the GBR traffic
uses QCI=1 while QCI=5 is assigned for the signaling
non-GBR bearer. The default bearer, which is non-GBR
uses QCI=9.
Fig. 5 shows that the UE starts receiving traffic via the
non-GBR default bearer at 5Mbps. At 150 seconds, the
Server starts transmitting via GBR bearer (QCI=1) at
5Mbps. The resources are first allocated to the GBR bearer,
and the remaining is allocated to non-GBR. The UE receives
~5Mbps via the GBR bearer and 1.5 Mbps via default
bearer. At 180 seconds, the Server starts transmitting 5
Mbps traffic via non-GBR Bearer with QCI=5, which is
normally used to carry signaling traffic. It can be observed
that the resources are reserved for the bearer of QCI 5 first,
and the rest is used to serve the GBR and the non-GBR.
Since the resources are not enough to serve both bearers, the
GBR carries ~ 1.7Mbps and the non-GBR carries no traffic.
Next, a similar scenario is studied but this time the traffics
flow between the Server and three UEs. It can be observed
that Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 produce almost same results. The
results show that bearers remain the means for providing
traffic QoS differentiation regardless of whether there is
only one UE or multiple UEs. Through these mechanisms,
future LTE operators can provide differentiated services to
subscribers.

Fig. 5: GBR and non-GBR bearers (One UE)

Fig. 6: GBR and non-GBR bearers (Multiple UEs)
E. Effects of multiple users on cell throughput
In our scenarios, we set the varying number of users with
the same QoS, all users are using the default bearer and
hence, scheduling overhead is minimal. Since the bearers are
all non-GBR and have the same QCI, they are serviced
using a fair scheduling scheme; where the resources are
shared equally among UEs. It is important to note that
without a scheduling mechanism in place, each user has the
262

capability to saturate the capacity of the LTE cell.
In this scenario, we gradually increase the traffic between
the server and the UEs in order to find the maximum cell
throughput. The same experiment is repeated for different
number of UEs. From Fig. 7, it can be observed that when
varying the number of UEs between one and five, the
maximum LTE system throughput decreases from 9.28Mbps
to 8.89Mbps. The throughput per UE can be calculated by
dividing the system throughput over the total number of
UEs. However, subsequent increment in terms of the
number of users (up to 100 UEs) does not degrade the
maximum system throughput much further. It only
decreases from 8.89Mbps in the case of 10 UEs to
8.72Mbps in the case of 100 UEs. Depending on the
targeted number of subscribers load per cell, the future LTE
operators therefore need to take into consideration that the
maximum system throughput will need to be discounted by
around 6% in actual deployment due to the need to support
multiple users.
1 2 3 4 5 10 25 50 70 100
8.4
8.6
8.8
90
9.2
9.4
9.6
Number of Users
L
T
E

C
e
l
l

T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t

(
M
b
p
s
)


Throughput
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e

U
s
e
r
s

E
f
f
i
c
ie
n
c
y


Efficiency

Fig. 7: Effects of Multiple Users on System Throughput (10MHz BW,
FDD, MCS=9)

V. CONCLUSION

In this paper, we have investigated how the maximum
network layer throughput is affected by the duplex mode,
traffic direction, channel bandwidth, MCS and number of
UEs served by the eNodeB. We have also acquired a better
insight on how different bearer types provide traffic
differentiation for single UE as well as multiple UEs. Table
VI summarizes the key findings of this work with regards to
the recent LTE spectrums allocated in Malaysia.
As for future work, more comprehensive analyses
involving different TDD ratios, application types, traffic
mix, MIMO configurations, and scheduler types and so on
are required.
Table VI: Summary of Findings (Baseline Performance)
2x20MHz
FDD
2x10MHz
FDD
20MHz TDD
(5:5)
BW utilization (%) 90 90 90
Max. DL
throughput(Mbps)
88.5 43.2 41
Max. UL
throughput(Mbps)
79.3 37.7 35.6
Max. No. of 1 Mbps
DL connection per
cell (continuous, no
overbooking )*

83

41

39
* Taking into consideration throughput efficiency loss due to multiple
users
REFERENCES

[1] B. J. Kent and H. Wang, "Driving 4G Adoption: Global Mobile
Innovations " Parks Associates 3Q 2012.
[2] K. Goh, "MCMC assigns 2.6GHz spectrum," Teleco-Mobile
CIMB Group, 5 Jan 2013.
[3] E. Dahlman, et al., 4G: LTE/LTE-Advanced for Mobile
Broadband, 1st ed.: Academic Press, 2011.
[4] I. Vukovic and I. Filipovich, "Throughput analysis of TDD LTE
Random Access Channel," in Personal Indoor and Mobile
Radio Communications (PIMRC), 2011 IEEE 22nd
International Symposium on, 2011, pp. 1652-1656.
[5] Z. Jing and L. Haitao, "On the performance of LTE Physical
Downlink Shared Channel," in Computer Science and Network
Technology (ICCSNT), 2011 International Conference on, 2011,
pp. 983-986.
[6] M. Einhaus, et al., "Performance Study of an Enhanced
Downlink Control Channel Design for LTE," in Vehicular
Technology Conference (VTC Spring), 2012 IEEE 75th, 2012,
pp. 1-5.
[7] R. Love, et al., "Downlink Control Channel Design for 3GPP
LTE," in Wireless Communications and Networking
Conference, 2008. WCNC 2008. IEEE, 2008, pp. 813-818.
[8] F. Rezaei, et al., "LTE PHY performance analysis under 3GPP
standards parameters," in Computer Aided Modeling and Design
of Communication Links and Networks (CAMAD), 2011 IEEE
16th International Workshop on, 2011, pp. 102-106.
[9] QUALCOMM, "LTE Advanced: Heterogeneous Networks "
January 27, 2011.
[10] H. Holma and A. Toskala, LTE for UMTS Evolution to LTE-
Advanced, 2 ed.: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2011.
[11] S. Sesia, et al., LTE, The UMTS Long Term Evolution: From
Theory to Practice, 2 ed.: John Wiley & Sons,Ltd., 2011.
[12] 3GPP, "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA):
Physical layer procedures," ed. 3GPP TS 36.213 V10.5.0 2012.

263