Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Bo Hagerman
Radio Communication Systems Laboratory
Abstract
One method to achieve high capacity in cellular
radio systems involves interference cancellation techniques at the
receivers. To design and evaluate the performance of such
interference cancellation receivers, it is essential to use realistic
models of the co-channel interference. In the paper we study the
ordered statistic of the relative co-channel interferepce, i.e. the
ratio between the power level of i:th strongest interferer and the
total co-channel interference power. Results from Monte-Carlo
simulations show that for base stations on a symmetric grid,
hexagonal cells or half-square Manhattan like street cells, the
probability density functions (pdf) of the interference ratios are
almost independent of the cluster size and of the base station
activities. The results demonstrate the dominance of the
strongest interferer and show that this dominance is even more
pronounced in those situations when the signal to interference
ratio is low. The presented results provide a base for more
realistic models for performance evaluation in cellular systems
than the commonly used Gaussian interference model.
I. INTRODUCTION
In cellular radio systems, the limited available bandwidth is
one of the principal design constraints. For future high
subscriber density systems, frequency reuse is one of the
fundamental approaches for efficiency spectrum usage and for
achieving the demands of required capacity. The possibility to
reuse the same channels, the frequency bandwidth, in different
cells is limited by the amount of co-channel interference
between the cells. The minimum allowable distance between
nearby co-channel cells (or the maximum system capacity) is
based on the maximum tolerable co-channel interference at
the receivers in the system. Receivers resistant to co-channel
interference allow a dense geographical reuse of the spectrum
and thus a high system capacity. This can be achieved by
using interference cancellation techniques that take advantage
of the structure of the co-channel interference [l-31. Fully
centralized detection algorithms may be feasible in a base
station receiver since the active users signaling waveforms
can be distributed via a backbone network. Even though the
task requires a high degree of implementation complexity,
these type of algorithms may be acceptable in a base station
which demodulates information from a subset of all mobile
stations. However, the mobile station is the destination of
information from only one base station in the downlink case.
The implementation costs of centralized algorithms may be
unacceptably high for this case. In the downlink there may
also exist restrictions on the amount of information that can be
366
11. CELLULAR
MODELS
In planning a cellular system, the whole service area is
divided into non overlapping cells that cover the area without
gaps [4].The cells are grouped into clusters, wherein the
available channels are not allowed to be reused. The cluster
size C, defined as the number of cells per cluster, determines
how many channel sets the available spectrum must form.
Smaller cluster sizes provide more channels per cell and
thereby offering more capacity per cell. Therefore, with fixed
cell size the system capacity is increased for a decreased
cluster size.
A. Hexagonal Cell Coverage Model
Fig 1 A hexagonal cell pattem example The reused coverage of one channel
group for cluster size 7 is shown
C. TrafJic Model
RH = ,.J%.
(2)
+j2, i,j>O,
(3)
RSG = f i .
(4)
An important distance in this kind of environment is the
distance to the nearest LOS (Line Of-Sight) co-channel
neighbor. Normalized to the ci:ll/block length, we can write
the nearest line of sight co-channel neighbor distance as [5]
C
( 5)
RSL = j
j
z
m
3
where gcd(i,j) denotes the grealest common divider of i and j .
367
9-
Activity 50%
Cluster sizes
11.3, 4. 7. 9. 121
-20
-30
-m -40 ,
-An\
c
S -50Y
-70 -80
-100
50
100
150
200
Distance [m]
250
300
350
400
G(xc,Y) = GL O S ( p N L 0 S O : )
(9)
In (9) xc is the distance from the base station to the corner and
y is the distance along the NLOS street. The results in [6]
suggest the following choices to represent a typical city
environment: inl = 2, m, = 5, xo = 1 m, xL = 200 m, nl = 2, n2
= 6,yo = 3.5 m, y L = 250 m and q = 4. In Figure 3. the distance
attenuation given in (7) and (9) with the above parameter
values is presented. A signal from a base station can reach a
NLOS receiver through many paths. Since a corner implies a
strong attenuation, we will only regard co-channel
interference that has passed maximum one corner. The
shadow fading was found in [6] to be well modelled as lognormal fading with a suggested standard deviation os= 3.5
dB. The total aggregate attenuation is then modelled as the
product of the distance attenuation and the log-normal
component.
IV. CO-CHANNEL
INTERFERENCE
In interference limited systems, the receiver performance is
368
10
Base Activity ["/I
6
5
-",5
I
4
\ \h
d strongest interferer
.
I
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
-0
0.1
0
0
'
Ix I
0.1
0.2
0.4
IX / I
Fig. 7. Examples of the pdf:s for the three strongest interference ratios in a
Manhattan street environment.
10
0.8,
Cluster size 3
Base Activity [%]
(17, 33, 50, 67, 83, 1001
Cluster sizes
[I 2.4, 5. 8, 91
I
061 P=0.17
d strongest interferer
7
6
nd strongest inlerferer
3
2
1
0
'
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
11.5
l</l
0.6
0.7
0.8
09
4
5
6
7
x [Interference strength number]
10
Fig. 6 . Examples of the pdfs for the three strongest interference ratios in a
Manhattan street environment.
Fig. 8. Examples of the mean and the standard deviation for the ten strongest
interference ratios in a hexagonal environment.
369
0.8-[
[/.I
Activity 50%
Cluster size 3
SIR Threshold T [dB]
[Int.. 15, 9, 31
9-
Base Activity
(17. 33, 50. 67. 83,1001
8-
76-
T=lnf.
4~
3
0.2
2
Std(lx I
0.1
4
5
6
7
x [Interference strength number]
0
0
10
Fig. 9. Examples of the mean and the standard deviation for the ten strongest
interference ratios in a Manhattan street environment.
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1x11
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
10. Examples of the pdf:s for the two strongest interference ratios in a
hexagonal environment
VI. DISCUSSION
0.1
Activity 50%
Cluster size 2
SIR Threshold T [dB1
[Inf.. 15. 9. 31
98-
7.
Stronqest interferer
370