Cooperative NOMA-Based D2D Communications:
A Survey in the 5G/IoT Context
Rajaa Elouafadi and Mustapha Benjillali
INPT
Rabat, Morocco
Emails: elouafadi@inpt.ac.ma, benjillali@ieee.org
Abstract—Non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) and
device-to-device (D2D) communications have been recognized
as promising techniques for the fifth generation (5G) networks
due to their potential role in increasing the spectral efficiency.
Cooperative NOMA presents a more attractive option since the
two techniques are combined to provide better benefits and
address some of 5G deployment purposes, and Internet of things
(IoT) constraints and use cases. In this paper, considering recent
and popular cooperative NOMA schemes, we first provide a
compact taxonomical classification of the various approaches
in the literature, and we present a comparative performance
analysis based on outage probability and average throughput.
Then, we illustrate the applicability of cooperative NOMA by a
few use cases in industrial IoT environments. Finally, we discuss
open research challenges that still need to be investigated in this
area.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Based on the targets set by IMT2020 in terms of spectrum
efficiency, connection density, mobility, energy efficiency, and
user experience, the 5th generation (5G) of mobile systems
is under standardization, and the first products are highly
expected to be on the market by the end of next year.
Compared to the previous generations, 5G networks should
be supporting unprecedented numbers of connected devices
as well as considerably larger volumes of data traffic.
Many surveys in the literature discussed the key technolo-
gies to enable the emergence of 5G systems and networks;
both from evolutionary points of view and disruptive revolu-
tionary visions. For example, in [1], the authors have back
then advocated five technologies that could lead to disruptive
approaches to the design of 5G cellular networks, while
the authors of [2] present an extensive discussion of the
architectural changes to the radio access network, and the role
other key technologies can play in the new 5G eco-system.
Device-to-device (D2D) communications are one of the
promising options that have been highlighted by the research
community in the past years, and have been adopted by
several standardization groups. The aim is to boost the per-
formance of conventional cellular networks, e.g. in terms
of power consumption, spectrum efficiency, and throughput,
by exploiting the possibility of direct interactions between
devices in proximity [3]. In the particular context of Internet of
things (IoT) applications and use cases, D2D relaying schemes
present several advantages, and can help improving reliability,
fault tolerance, and network access scalability [4].
978-1-5386-3738-8/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE 132
On the other hand, multiple access techniques are also
being discussed and, by many considerations, redefined to
meet the high spectral efficiency targets of 5G. While the
previous generations of mobile networks have been relying
on user orthogonality in the time/frequency/code domains,
and suffering from the inherently reduced resource allocation
efficiency; the introduction of non-orthogonal multiple access
(NOMA) is a key enabler to alleviate the increasing resource
scarcity issues, and enhancing different performance metrics
(e.g., multiplexing gains, spectral efficiency, scheduling com-
plexity, and latency). We here focus on the power domain
NOMA, where the signals from multiple users are multiplexed
(superposed) on the transmitter side, and multi-user signal
separation is performed on the receiver side based on a
successive interference cancellation (SIC) process [5].
In this paper, we discuss the different approaches to the
implementation of NOMA-based D2D schemes in the context
of emerging 5G and IoT eco-systems. First, as a reminder,
we revisit the performance of basic NOMA (in contrast with
the conventional orthogonal multiple access (OMA)), then
we extend the discussion to cooperative NOMA schemes.
For instance, we propose a taxonomical classification of the
different system models in the literature, and we discuss
their effectiveness through a comparative study showing the
advantages and limitations of each scheme. In addition, in
order to illustrate the discussion with practical examples, we
present D2D use cases in industrial IoT applications. Finally,
we discuss open research challenges, and propose a few
directions of interest that may be investigated by the research
community in the near future.
II. C ONCEPT AND P ERFORMANCE C OMPARISON
We consider a common, basic, system model like the one
in [5] consisting of one base station source BS and two users
UE-1 and UE-2. BS sends two superposed signals x1 and x2
to UE-1 and UE-2, respectively, with transmit powers P1 and
P2 (without any loss of generality, we consider that P2 >
P1 ). The SIC process is implemented at the UE receiver in
the order of decreasing channel gain normalized by noise and
inter-cell interference power, thus in the case of 2 users: UE-
1 first decodes x2 and subtracts its component from received
signal, then, it decodes x1 . UE-2 treats x1 as noise and decodes
x2 . In NOMA, x1 and x2 are superposed as follows:
√ √
𝑥 = 𝑃1 𝑥 1 + 𝑃2 𝑥 2
 Thus, the received signal at UE-i is represented as : III. C OOPERATIVE NOMA
Among the current research works on the cooperative re-
𝑦 𝑖 = ℎ𝑖 𝑥 + 𝑤 𝑖 laying systems using NOMA we selected the articles [6-14].
Fig. 3 summarizes the use cases of the considered system
Where hi is the complex channel coefficient between UE-i models.
and the BS. Term wi denotes additive white Gaussian noise Kim et al. in [6] proposed a cooperative relaying sys-
(AWGN) including inter-cell interference. The power spectral tem (CRS) using NOMA which can achieve more spectral
2 2
density of wi is Ni . We assume that ∣ℎ𝑁11∣ > ∣ℎ𝑁22∣ . Assuming efficiency than the conventional CRS; the destination can
successful decoding and no error propagation, the throughput receive two symbols during two time slots unlike the case of
of UE-i, Ri , is represented as : conventional CRS where it can only receive one symbol. The
( ) ( ) system model consists of a source, a half-duplex (HD) relay,
𝑃1 ∣ℎ1 ∣2 𝑃2 ∣ℎ2 ∣2
𝑅1 = log 1 + , 𝑅2 = log 1 + and a destination, all the links are assumed to be available.
𝑁0,1 𝑃1 ∣ℎ1 ∣2 + 𝑁0,2 In [7] a cooperative NOMA scheme was introduced where
one base station sends a broadcast message to K users in the
For OMA, the bandwidth of 𝛼 (0 < 𝛼 < 1) Hz is assigned to direct transmission phase and each of the K users resends it
UE-1 and the remaining bandwidth, (1 − 𝛼) Hz, is assigned to the users with worst channel conditions in the cooperative
to UE-2. The throughput of UE-i, Ri , is represented as : phase during K time slots. [8] proposed a system model where
( ) a D2D device acts as a HD relay to serve the user with poor
𝑃1 ∣ℎ1 ∣2
𝑅1 = 𝛼 log 1 + channel conditions. In phase 1, the source performs NOMA
𝛼𝑁0,1
to serve UE-l and UE-2. In phase 2, Dl performs NOMA to
serve D2 and to boost UE-2. Lastly, UE-2 performs maximal
( )
𝑃2 ∣ℎ2 ∣2 ratio combining (MRC) using received signal at phase 1 and
𝑅2 = (1 − 𝛼) log 1 + phase 2. This system improves the system reliability and the
(1 − 𝛼)𝑁0,2
spectral efficiency.
We simulate the ergodic capacity of the system for [9] and [10] have considered the case of a full duplex (FD)
both NOMA and OMA schemes. For NOMA case, in relaying. In [9], Zhong et al. considered a two user NOMA
the ergodic capacity simulation we take different values of system where UE-1 directly communicates with the BS, while
𝑎1 = 𝑃1 /(𝑃1 + 𝑃2 ). For the case of OMA, we take 𝛼 = 1/2. UE-2 requires the assistance of a FD relay employing decode-
We present the results in Fig. 1. and-forward (DF). The system performance was compared
with the case of HD relay and showed that it achieves
lower outage probability for both users, and attains higher
10 1
ergodic sum capacity in the low to moderate SNR range.
[10] considered the case of D2D relaying. One source sends
a superimposed signal to two users using NOMA, and the
𝑎1 = 0.3 user with strongest channel conditions acts as a FD relay to
curves converge for high SINR help the weakest user. The authors have also proposed an
𝐸𝑟𝑔𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 [bps/Hz]

adaptive multiple access scheme (AMA) to improve outage

performance, which dynamically switched to a proper mul-
𝑎1 = 0.1 tiple access scheme (OMA, NOMA or Cooperative NOMA)
based on the level of residual self-interference and channel
conditions. In [11], the authors propose a system with a
𝑎1 = 0.05
10 0
buffer aided relay and an adaptive transmission scheme in
which the system adaptively chooses its working mode in
Theoretical NOMA each time slot. In [12] two source-destination pairs share
Simulation NOMA a common half-duplex relay employing decode and forward
Theoretical OMA
Simulation OMA strategy. NOMA is applied at the relay level, both in uplink
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
and downlink. Different from [6-12], [13] and [14] have
𝑆𝑁 𝑅 [dB] considered cooperative NOMA system with multiple relays.
In [13] a two-stage relay-selection scheme was proposed. In
Fig. 1. Ergodic capacity of NOMA and OMA systems
[14], a hybrid decode-forward and amplify-forward relaying
scheme was proposed for a multiple relay cooperative NOMA
Simulation shows that NOMA presents better performance system.
than OMA as regards of system ergodic capacity. This rate
gain depends on the power allocation coefficient chosen. IV. TAXONOMY
Works such as [6] derived a sub-optimal power allocation In this section we categorize the cooperative NOMA models
scheme which maximizes the gain. based on the use of NOMA (uplink or downlink) and based

133
on the relaying type used in the cooperation.
A. First categorization
A first categorization is based on the use of NOMA, either
it is used in uplink at the relay level or in the downlink at the
source level. Fig. IV-A gives a schematic representation.
NOMA SIC at relay &
Cooperative
Multi−users
NOMA
On Downlink user levels
NOMA SIC at relay
Multi−source
On Uplink level
Fig. 2. NOMA use in cooperative NOMA systems
Cooperative NOMA on downlink
The source sends a superimposed signal to the users on the
power domain. The relay performs SIC to extract its own data
and forward the other messages to the related users in one
of the cooperation modes. This is mainly used in the case
of serving far users or with bad channel conditions from one
single base station or source. Papers [6] to [10] considers
the cooperative models with one source.
Cooperative NOMA on uplink
NOMA is used on the uplink channel, one or more relays
receive a data from multiple sources simultaneously, perform
SIC to extract the data and help the destinations to get their
message. The relay can perform on its turn NOMA to serve
the destinations [12] or use another protocol based on the
channel conditions and the quality of received data to serve
the users [14]. Use cases of this model is boosting the spectral
efficiency in serving users linked to two base stations, and/or
are at the edge of the BS’s cells.
B. Second categorization
A second categorization of the cooperative NOMA models
is proposed based on the relaying type used in the cooperation
phase. We distinguish three types: Cooperative NOMA with
dedicated relay, a D2D communications capable user which
acts as relay for other users and a multi-relay scheme, where
the base station uses multiple relays to serve the destination
through one or many of them.
We provide in Fig. 4 a schematic presentation of the
proposed taxonomy.
Dedicated relay
We distinguish between half-duplex (HD) and full duplex
(FD) relays.
HD : [6], [11], [12] and [15] have considered cooperative
NOMA system models with a dedicated half-duplex relay.
Sum rate was used as metric to validate the system per-
formance over conventional cooperation relay system (CRS)
schemes.
134
Compared to CRS scheme, the proposed system in [6] can
achieve more spectral efficiency when SNR is high and source
to relay link is better than those of source to destination and
relay to destination links. Whereas it has worse performance
in low SNR regime. To solve this issue a suboptimal power
allocation scheme is proposed. Simulations show that, then,we
have more rate gain over the conventional CRS. However,
this introduction of suboptimal power allocation scheme adds
complexity to the system, especially in case of multiple users
and in a mobility context where the calculations become
heavy and the base station needs to dynamically change the
power allocation coefficients (suboptimal power coefficient
is dependent on the average channel power of the links).
[11] considers a transmission between a base station and
two users via a buffer relay capable of adaptively choosing
the optimal transmission scheme for fixed users rates. The
proposal improves the system throughput but this is at the
expense of system complexity. Indeed, it is generating addi-
tional signalization between the nodes to provide feedback on
the working mode chosen.
In [12], the authors propose a model where two sources
share the same relay to communicate with their respective
destinations. The authors assumed that the sources send over
the same frequency band, cooperate to adapt their power
transmission coefficient and perfectly synchronize their mes-
sages. This is on the purpose to get a superimposed signal
at the relay level which decodes the messages using SIC and
resend them using NOMA to the destinations. Capacity gain
of this model over OMA depends on the level of residual
interference. It outperforms OMA under perfect SIC, whereas,
under imperfect SIC scenario, the performance is worse in high
and moderate SNR regimes.
Diffrently from the previous mentionned works which all
considered the case of decode and forward relay (DF) (to
adapt the data to be sent depending on the users locations
and channel conditions), [15] has investigated the case of an
amplify and forward (AF) relay to serve a far user.
FD : Zhong et al. in [9] justify the choice of using
a FD relay cooperative NOMA by the fact that with HD,
additional time resource are used for HD cooperation mech-
anism which effectively offsets the spectral efficiency gain
promised by NOMA systems. Simulations are showing that,
in perfect interference cancellation scenario, the proposed FD
cooperative NOMA system attains better performance than the
HD cooperative NOMA system. However, under imperfect
interference cancellation, FD cooperative NOMA system is
better than HD one only in low to moderate SNR regime .
D2D relay
In this category as well we distinguish between the half-
duplex users which are D2D communications capable and the
full duplex ones.
HD : [7] proposes a NOMA multi-user cooperative model
where a base station sends, using NOMA, a superimposed
message to K users in the direct transmission phase, then, the
K users cooperate during K-1 time slots in the cooperation
 Fig. 3. Use cases for NOMA cooperative relaying systems
Cooperative
NOMA
Dedicated Relay D2D user Multi−relay
HD HD Relay selection
FD FD Hybrid DF−AF
Fig. 4. Proposed classification of NOMA cooperative relaying systems
phase. A diversity order of K is achievable by all users
unlike the conventional NOMA where the nth user achieves,
at maximum, a diversity order of n. This configuration is not
very realistic in the case of many users due to the system
complexity for coordinating user cooperation. However, user
pairing is a promising solution to reduce system complexity.
The authors in [8] considered a different pattern, where a
source communicates with two users and a near D2D device
overhears the far users message, decodes it and resends it
to the destination while it is in communication, in parallel,
with another D2D device. This proposal comes with spectral
efficiency benefit; only half of time slot or resources are used
because of D2D NOMA relay compared to traditional D2D
relay.
FD :Differently from [7], the authors in [8] considered a
D2D- NOMA cooperative system at a smaller scale. A source
communicates with a predefined NOMA user pair which has
the capability of FD D2D communications. Compared to [9],
an AMA scheme is proposed which dynamically switches
135
to a proper multiple access scheme based on the level of
residual self-interference and the quality of channels. This
AMA scheme outperforms the cooperative NOMA, conven-
tional NOMA and OMA, but, like in [11], the gain will be
at the expense of the system complexity.
Mutli-relay
[13] is proposing two-stage scheme to select the optimal
relay which can achieve not only the optimal diversity gain,
but also the minimal outage probability. In this scheme, first,
the user with the high quality of service target is served with
its target data rate then the second one is served with a rate as
large as possible. [14] is considering a system model where
two-source communicate with one user through N relays. The
authors propose a hybrid decode and forward (DF)- amplify
and forward (AF) scheme where a group from the total relays,
which can decode the first message, use a DF protocol to
send data from source 1 and the others use an AF protocol to
send the superimposed message. This model is compared with
DF-NOMA Best Relay, the DF-NOMA Multi-Relay, the DF-
TDMA Best Relay and the DF-TDMA Multi-Relay schemes.
Simulations shows that it can achieve larger sum capacity for
high transmit power. The outage performance is, on the other
hand, much worse compared to other schemes.
TABLE I provides a comparative summary of the considered
system models following the proposed taxonomy.
V. I OT INDUSTRIAL USE CASES
The concept of smart industry is not new; it stands mainly
for accelerating the digitalization of industrial processes and
the supply chain from the material supply to the end con-
sumer. IoT technologies and especially D2D communica-
tions technique is a great enabler to this vision. Indeed,
D2D communications enables proximity applications where
 TABLE I
S UMMARY OF THE CONSIDERED MODELS PROPOSING COOPERATIVE NOMA

#Symboles/
Mode Ref. #Users Metric Advantage Complexity
Time slot

[6] 1 2 System-models outperform Scalability: Suboptimal power

Dedicated HD [11] 2 1 Sum Rate OMA in low SNR regimes. calculation can be heavy in the
Whereas, performance is case of many users and in mo-
Relay [12] 3 1 worse in high SNR regime. bility context [6]. Higher sys-
Suboptimal power coefficient tem complexity to adaptively
calculated to maximize the switch between different trans-
gain. mission modes for instance
signalization is heavy [11].

Sum Rate FD scheme outperforms HD FD cooperative NOMA sys-

FD [9] 2 1 & scheme in the low and mod- tem saturates in the high SNR
erate regime. regime where the relay be-
Outage comes interference-limited.

Sum Rate Reception reliability: Diversity When 𝐾 is large, the relia-

[8] 2 1 order of 𝐾 is achievable by bility will be at the expense
D2D HD &
[7] 𝐾 1/𝐾 all users [7]. Only half of the complexity. User grouping is
User Outage time slot is used because of one of the ideas to simplify the
D2D NOMA relay compared system.
to conventional D2D relay.

FD [10] 2 1 Outage Compared to [9], an AMA Like in [11]. The gain will be
scheme is proposed which dy- at the expense of complexity
namically switches to a proper with AMA, which will gener-
multiple access scheme based ate heavy signalization.
on the level of residual self-
interference and the qual-
ity of channels. This AMA
scheme outperforms conven-
tional ones.

Relay The scheme can achieve diver-

Multi- [13] 2 1/2 Outage sity gain and a minimal outage
Selection
Relay probability.

Sum Rate Hybrid DF-AF schemes can Outage performance is worse.

Hybrid achieve larger sum capacity for
[14] 1 2/2 &
DF-AF the transmission compared to
Outage other schemes.

devices can trigger different services, such as local information
exchange, network coverage extension, local advertisement,
etc. [3]. This comes with many benefits for the industrial field
such as increasing productivity, improving product quality,
lowering manufacturing costs and effective advertising. Other
benefits of the D2D communications are listed in [3], we
can cite for instance, higher throughput, lower delay and
energy consumption which are typical characteristics of short-
range communications when compared to long-range commu-
nications. Coverage extension is another key benefit of D2D
communications where devices can act as relays to serve non-
covered areas by the cellular network.
Fig. 5 illustrates some of the applications of D2D and IoT
in the industry.
VI. O PEN RESEARCH CHALLENGES
NOMA and D2D communications are still new emergent
technologies. Intensive researches have been conducted to
elucidate the missing parts and go for standardization, but
still, many areas need to be explored and further studied. The
following are some of the areas that need further investigations
[3], :
∙ Multi user power allocation: as seen in the previous
sections, power allocation is key in achieving the targeted
quality of service. Finding the optimum value is not
always feasible and easy to compute in the case of many
users. A trade-off between system complexity and achiev-
ing targeted data rate need to be further investigated;
∙ Signaling overhead: extra signalization is needed for D2D
users to find and explore others in proximity and to
get channel measurement. This might become intolerable
overhead to the system if it needs instantaneous CSI
feedback. The trade-off between accuracy of CSI and its
resulting overhead needs to be found;
∙ Interference management: this comes as result of resource
allocation problematic, especially in the case of inband

136

Fig. 5. Some of the industrial applications in IoT context
D2D, where D2D pairs use the same resources as cellular
users. Interference need to be monitored to not affect the
cellular users;
∙ Energy consumption: although D2D communications is
supposed to improve the energy efficiency of the UE, this
might be affected if the user equipment needs to wake
up very often to listen to transmit discovery messages
frequently. A proper discovery protocol needs to be
further investigated;
∙ Privacy and security issues, combination with MIMO and
receiver design are other areas that need to be sealed.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this work, we presented a comparison study of some
of the use cases of future radio access networks in the IoT
context. First we gave a reminder on the NOMA concept and
check its performance over OMA scheme, then we presented
the considered system models on cooperative NOMA, pro-
posed a taxonomy based on the use of NOMA whether it is
on uplink or in downlink and another one based on the relay
type used in the cooperation. We discussed the advantage and
complexity of each system model. Lastly we presented some
137
IoT use cases in the industry and shared the open research
challenges on this field.
R EFERENCES
[1] F. Boccardi, R. W. Heath, A. Lozano, T. L. Marzetta, and P. Popovski,
“Five disruptive technology directions for 5G,” IEEE Communications
Magazine, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 74–80, Feb. 2014.
[2] M. Agiwal, A. Roy, and N. Saxena, “Next generation 5G wireless
networks: A comprehensive survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1617–1655, Feb. 2016.
[3] L. Militano, G. Araniti, M. Condoluci, I. Farris, and A. Iera, “Device-
to-device communications for 5G internet of things,” IOT, EAI, vol. 1,
no. 1, pp. 1–15, Oct. 2015.
[4] M. R. Palattella, M. Dohler, A. Grieco, G. Rizzo, J. Torsner, T. Engel,
and L. Ladid, “Internet of things in the 5G era: Enablers, architecture,
and business models,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communica-
tions, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 510–527, Mar. 2016.
[5] A. Benjebbour, Y. Saito, Y. Kishiyama, A. Li, A. Harada, and T. Naka-
mura, “Concept and practical considerations of non-orthogonal multiple
access (NOMA) for future radio access,” in International Symposium on
Intelligent Signal Processing and Communications Systems (ISPACS).
Naha, Okinawa, Japan: IEEE, Nov. 2013, pp. 770–774.
[6] J.-B. Kim and I.-H. Lee, “Capacity analysis of cooperative relaying
systems using non-orthogonal multiple access,” IEEE Communications
Letters, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 1949–1952, Nov. 2015.
[7] Z. Ding, M. Peng, and H. V. Poor, “Cooperative non-orthogonal multiple
access in 5G systems,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 19, no. 8,
pp. 1462–1465, Aug. 2015.
[8] Y. B. Song, H. S. Kang, and D. K. Kim, “5G cellular systems with D2D
assisted NOMA relay,” in URSI Asia-Pacific Radio Science Conference
(URSI AP-RASC). Seoul, South Korea: IEEE, Aug. 2016, pp. 1–3.
[9] C. Zhong and Z. Zhang, “Non-orthogonal multiple access with coopera-
tive full-duplex relaying,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 20, no. 12,
pp. 2478–2481, Dec. 2016.
[10] Z. Zhang, Z. Ma, M. Xiao, Z. Ding, and P. Fan, “Full-duplex device-to-
device-aided cooperative nonorthogonal multiple access,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 4467–4471, May
2017.
[11] S. Luo and K. C. Teh, “Adaptive transmission for cooperative NOMA
system with buffer-aided relaying,” IEEE Communications Letters,
vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 937–940, Apr. 2017.
[12] M. F. Kader, M. B. Shahab, and S. Y. Shin, “Exploiting non-orthogonal
multiple access in cooperative relay sharing,” IEEE Communications
Letters, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1159–1162, May 2017.
[13] Z. Ding, H. Dai, and H. V. Poor, “Relay selection for cooperative
NOMA,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 416–
419, Aug. 2016.
[14] Y. Liu, G. Pan, H. Zhang, and M. Song, “Hybrid decode-forward &
amplify-forward relaying with non-orthogonal multiple access,” IEEE
Access, vol. 4, pp. 4912–4921, 2016.
[15] X. Liang, Y. Wu, D. W. K. Ng, Y. Zuo, S. Jin, and H. Zhu, “Outage
performance for cooperative NOMA transmission with an AF relay,”
IEEE Communications Letters, Mar. 2017.