This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
Efficient Low-Resolution ADC Relaying for
Multiuser Massive MIMO System
Peihao Dong, Student Member, IEEE, Hua Zhang, Member, IEEE, Wei Xu, Senior Member, IEEE,
and Xiaohu You, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—In this paper, we investigate a multiuser massive MI-
MO amplify-and-forward (AF) relay uplink, where low-resolution
analog-to-digital convertors (ADCs) are used at the relay station
(RS). Both the base station (BS) and the RS are equipped with
large numbers, i.e., NB and NR , respectively, of antennas. For
both perfect and imperfect channel state information (CSI), we
derive closed-form sum rate expressions with respect to finite
NB and NR . Under some mild assumptions, we demonstrate
that sum rates with perfect and imperfect CSI respectively
increase with α and α2 both logarithmically, where α is linear
quantization gain of ADCs at the RS. We show that low-
resolution, e.g., 2-3 bits, ADCs only cause limited sum rate loss
when NB and NR are relatively large compared to the number
of users, i.e., K. Based on the obtained sum rate expressions,
we further discover the generalized power scaling laws that
guarantee a nonvanishing sum rate as NB and NR grow to
infinity, where we find that low-resolution ADCs at the RS do not
bring substantial impact on power scaling laws. Numerical results
verify the correctness of our theoretical analysis and consequently
justify the large scale antenna arrays at the RS in a low-cost and
energy efficient manner, yet still achieving considerable sum rate
performance.
Index Terms—Multiuser massive MIMO, amplify-and-forward
relaying, low-resolution ADC, sum rate, energy efficiency.
I. I NTRODUCTION
R ELAYING technology [1]−[3] can enhance the transmis-
sion reliability, multiplexing gains and coverage range
significantly, especially for users at cell edge. For multiuser
multiple-input multiple-output (MU-MIMO) networks, relay
stations (RSs) are widely deployed to enhance the communi-
cation quality between base station (BS) and users [4]−[7]. In
recent years, massive MIMO [8]−[13] has attracted tremen-
dous interest due to its ability to improve both spectral and
energy efficiency by orders of magnitude compared to the
conventional MIMO technology. With large scale antenna
arrays, simple linear detection and precoding methods tend
to be optimal and the power amplifier of each antenna can be
more effective and low-cost [14].
Copyright (c) 2015 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted.
However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be
obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
This work of was supported in part by the NSFC under grants 61571118
and 61471114, the Open Research Fund of the State Key Lab of ISN under
ISN18-03, and the Six Talent Peaks project in Jiangsu Province under GDZB-
005. (Corresponding author: Hua Zhang, Wei Xu)
P. Dong, H. Zhang, W. Xu, and X. You are with the National Mobile
Communications Research Laboratory, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096,
China (e-mail: {phdong, huazhang, wxu, xhyu}@seu.edu.cn). P. Dong and
W. Xu are also visiting scholars with the State Key Laboratory of Integrated
Services Networks, Xidian University, Xian 710000, China.
0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
To benefit from both merits of massive MIMO and relaying
technology, researches were conducted on massive MIMO
relay networks. The authors in [15]−[18] studied the mul-
tipair massive MIMO relay networks, where users exchanged
information within each pair through a shared RS with large
scale antennas. The authors in [15] investigated the multipair
massive MIMO using full duplex decode-and-forward (DF)
relay. Closed-form expressions were derived for maximum ra-
tio transmission/maximum ratio combining (MRT/MRC) and
zero-forcing (ZF) processing at the RS. Power scaling laws
and the optimal power allocation scheme were investigated
to improve energy efficiency. Considering a simpler relay
protocol, [16] studied the multipair massive MIMO one-way
amplify-and-forward (AF) relay networks. They derived the
asymptotic sum rates with MRT/MRC and ZF processing used
at the RS, and compared the sum rate performance between
MRT/MRC and ZF under different power scaling laws. To
further improve the spectral efficiency, [17] extensively in-
vestigated the multipair massive MIMO two-way AF relay
networks. Analytical results revealed that very large antenna
arrays in such system can average the small-scale fading,
eliminate the interpair interference, and reduce the total power
consumption. Also for the multipair massive MIMO two-way
AF relay networks, instead of the asymptotic analysis, [18]
derived ergodic rates with finite number of antennas. The
mathematical relationship among the rate gain, the number of
antennas, and the number of user pairs was discussed and the
power scaling laws were presented. Different from the above
literature, [19] investigated MU massive MIMO uplink with
AF relaying, where both the BS and the RS were equipped
with large scale antennas. Asymptotic signal-to-interference-
plus-noise ratio (SINR) expressions were derived under the
practical transmission impairments with ZF detection and
infinite number of antennas.
However, it is worth noting that the increase of the number
of antennas inevitably leads to much higher hardware cost and
power consumption of analog-to-digital convertors (ADCs).
One of the most efficient methods to address this problem
is using low-resolution, e.g., 1-3 bits, ADC at each receiving
antenna. The authors in [20] used the exact nonlinear quanti-
zation model to investigate the massive MIMO uplink based
on MRC, ZF and least square (LS) detection with 1-bit ADC
at each receiving antenna. They showed that massive MIMO
systems exhibit good performance even with 1-bit receive
signal quantization. In contrast, the linear additive quantization
noise model (AQNM) [21], [22] is widely used and effective in
the low-resolution ADC analysis. With the help of AQNM, the
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
authors in [23] derived closed-form sum rate expression for the
massive MIMO uplink with low-resolution ADCs and perfect
channel state information (CSI) in Rayleigh channels. The
authors in [24] investigated the massive MIMO uplink with
low-resolution ADCs and imperfect CSI in Rician channels,
where the impact of low-resolution ADC was only considered
in data detection phase. The results in [23] and [24] revealed
that using low-resolution ADCs can still achieve satisfying
spectral efficiency in massive MIMO systems.
In this paper, we investigate the MU massive MIMO uplink
with low-resolution ADC AF relaying. Both the BS and
the RS are equipped with large numbers, i.e., NB and NR ,
respectively, of antennas to guarantee simultaneous services
for an arbitrary number of remote users and reduce the transmit
power of each user. In general, the purpose of deploying the
RS is to extend the cell coverage and improve the system
capacity with relatively lower cost and power consumption. In
this regard, we employ low-resolution, e.g., 1-3 bits, ADC at
the RS to reduce both hardware cost and power consumption
caused by massive antennas and investigate its impact on the
system performance1 . The main contributions of this paper are
summarized as follows:
1) We derive closed-form sum rate expressions with respect
to finite NB and NR for both perfect and imperfect CSI,
which can be simplified under some mild conditions as
 
K αNR
R̆P,sum = log2 1 + , (1)
2 K
K(T − 2K)

α2 NR
 symmetric complex Gaussian distribution with mean µ and
R̆IP,sum = log2 1 + , (2)
2T K
where K is the number of remote users, α is linear
quantization gain of ADCs at the RS, and T represents
the length of coherence interval. The two compact ex-
pressions explicitly reveal that sum rates with perfect and
imperfect CSI increase with the linear quantization gain
and square of the linear quantization gain, respectively,
both logarithmically. We show that low-resolution, e.g.,
2-3 bits, ADCs cause limited sum rate loss and achieve
considerable sum rate performance when NB and NR
are relatively large compared to K.
2) In contrast to the power scaling laws in [15]−[19] that
only involved some specific cases, we extract the general-
ized power scaling laws to show how the transmit power
of each user and RS can be scaled down to guarantee
maintained sum rate and reveal that low-resolution ADCs
at the RS do not bring substantial impact on power scal-
ing laws. Due to high energy efficiency of low-resolution
ADCs, our analysis justify the large scale antenna arrays
at the RS in a low-cost and energy efficient manner, yet
still achieving considerable sum rate performance.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II
describes the considered MU massive MIMO AF relay uplink
model and signal processing. Section III derives the closed-
form sum rate expression with respect to finite NB and NR and
1 We focus on low-resolution, e.g., 1-3 bits, ADC in this paper since it is
low-cost and energy efficient for the implementation of massive MIMO and
its impact can be dominated among all kinds of hardware impairments due
to very low resolution.
0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
2
F Fs D1F2
G G s D1G2
NB antennas NR antennas User 1
... ...
RS with low- User 2
BS resolution
ADCs
User K
Fig. 1. System model of a MU massive MIMO relay uplink.
perfect CSI, and discovers the generalized power scaling laws
that guarantee a nonvanishing sum rate as NB and NR grow
to infinity. Section IV analyzes the imperfect CSI case, where
the minimum mean square error (MMSE) estimator of the
channel from users to RS under low-resolution ADC impact
is firstly derived. The extension to the scenario with line-of-
sight (LOS) path between the BS and the RS is provided in
Section V. Some numerical results are presented in Section VI
and finally Section VII gives concluding remarks and potential
topics in future work.
Notations: In this paper, we use upper and lower case
boldface letters to denote matrices and vectors, respectively.
k·k, (·)T , (·)∗ , (·)H , tr(·) and E{·} represent the Euclidean
norm, transpose, conjugate, conjugate transpose, trace, and
expectation, respectively. CN (µ, σ 2 ) represents a circularly
variance σ 2 . diag(X) denotes a diagonal matrix composed of
the leading diagonal elements of X. IN denotes an N × N
identify matrix. x  y means that xy ≥ 10. f (x) = O(g(x))
means that 0 < lim fg(x) (x)
< ∞.
x→∞
II. S YSTEM M ODEL AND S IGNAL P ROCESSING
A. System Model
As shown in Fig. 1, we consider the MU massive MIMO
relay uplink which consists of a BS, an AF half-duplex RS
with low-resolution ADCs, and K single antenna users. The
users transmit data to the BS via the RS since there is no
direct link from any user to the BS due to heavy shadowing
and path loss. The BS and the RS are equipped with NB and
NR antennas, respectively, and we assume that NB ≥NR >K.
F ∈ CNR ×K and G ∈ CNB ×K denote the channel matrix from
K users to the RS and the channel matrix from K antennas of
the RS to the BS, respectively. Here we select K RS antennas
to forward the signal in the second time slot due to two facts:
1) Given massive antennas at the BS, using K RS transmitting
antennas is sufficient to achieve considerable performance
while the circuit power consumption caused by activated radio
frequency chains at the RS can be significantly reduced,
which conforms to our purpose of reducing the RS power
consumption; 2) The overhead for pilots transmitted by the
RS can be reduced significantly and the RS does not need to
acquire the CSI from the RS to the BS. Specifically, according
1/2
to [15]−[19], F and G can be expressed as F = Fs DF and
1/2
G = Gs DG , where Fs ∈ CNR ×K and Gs ∈ CNB ×K denote
the corresponding small-scale fading and have independent
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
3

TABLE I yB = GxR + nB , (9)

L INEAR Q UANTIZATION G AIN α F OR D IFFERENT ADC Q UANTIZATION
2
B ITS q where nB ∼ CN (0, σB INB )
is the AWGN at the BS.
At the BS, it separates the received signal yB into K streams
q 1 2 3 4 5 by multiplying it with the MRC receiver matrix AH that
α 0.6366 0.8825 0.96546 0.990503 0.997501 depends on G as
p
rB = AH yB = ακ PU AH GWH FxU
(10)
and identically distributed (i.i.d.) CN (0, 1) elements, while + ακAH GWH nR + κAH GWH nq + AH nB ,
diagonal matrices DF and DG represent the corresponding where the kth element of rB is used to detect the signal
large-scale fading with the kth diagonal elements denoted by originating from the kth user.
βk and η, respectively.
III. C LOSED -F ORM S UM R ATE E XPRESSION AND P OWER
B. Signal Processing
S CALING L AWS WITH P ERFECT CSI
In the first time slot, all users transmit their data signals to
T In this section, we derive the closed-form sum rate ex-
the RS. Let xU = [x1 , . . . , xK ] denote the signals transmitted
pression with perfect CSI, based on which, we extract the
by all users and the energy of xU is normalized as E{xU xH U} = generalized power scaling laws for the considered massive
IK . The received signal at the RS can be written as
p MIMO relay uplink.
yR = PU FxU + nR , (3)
A. Closed-Form Sum Rate Expression
where PU is the transmit power at each user and nR denotes
Theorem 1: The achievable sum rate with perfect CSI is
the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) at the RS with
2 approximately given by
i.i.d. CN (0, σR ) elements. After receiving the analog yR , the
K  
ADCs at the RS quantize the signal before further processing. 1X SP,k
RP,sum ≈ R̃P,sum = log2 1+ ,
According to the widely used AQNM [21], [22], the output 2 IP,k +NP,k1 +NP,k2 +NP,k3
k=1
signal of the low-resolution ADCs at the RS can be well (11)
modeled as where
SP,k = α2 κ2 PU NB NR η 2 βk
p
yR,q = αyR + nq = α PU FxU + αnR + nq , (4)
" K
#
where α = 1 − ρ is the linear quantization gain and nq is
X (12)
× (NB NR +NB +NR )βk + βi ,
the quantization noise uncorrelated with yR . Specifically, ρ is i=1
the ratio of the quantizer error variance over quantizer input K
X K
X
!
variance. For the Gaussian distributed channel input xU , the 2 2
IP,k = α κ PUNBNR η 2
βj NB βk +NR βj + βi , (13)
output of the channel from users to the RS, i.e., the quantizer j6=k i=1
input, yR is also Gaussian with a fixed channel realization F. K
X
!
Therefore, for the distortion-minimizing scalar non-uniform NP,k1 = α κ 2 2
NB NR η 2 σR
2
NB βk + βi , (14)
quantizer, the values of α are listed√ in Table I for q ≤ 5 and i=1
can be approximated by α = 1 − 23π · 2−2q for q ≥ 6 [25],    K
X 
2 2
where we can find that α increases with q. According to [22], NP,k2 = α(1−α)κ NB NR η PU NB βk βk + βl
we can obtain the conditional covariance matrix of nq for a l=1
(15)
fixed channel realization F as K
X  K
X   K
X 
2
+ βi βi + βl +σR NB βk + βi ,
Rnq = αρdiag(PU FFH + σR
2
INR ). (5)
i=1 l=1 i=1
nq is modelled as nq ∼ CN (0, Rnq ) for tractable analysis ac- NP,k3 = 2
NB ησB . (16)
cording to [22], [23], [26], where the assumption of Gaussian
quantization noise is validated. With yR,q available, a MRC The subscript ‘P’ denotes perfect CSI.
processing is conducted by multiplying yR,q with WH that Proof: See Appendix A.
depends on F as Remark 1: To extract the mathematical relationship between
p R̃P,sum and α, we assume that NB  NR  K  1 and β1 =
rR = WH yR,q = α PU WH FxU + αWH nR + WH nq . (6) · · · = βK = β. Defining λ = N NR , after some manipulations,
B

Then the signal is power amplified, and the signal forwarded γP,k in (67) can be rewritten as (17), shown at the top of
by the RS is expressed as the next page, where (a) is obtained by substituting κ given
2
by (62) and (b) is obtained by assuming that PU  σR and
xR = κrR , (7) 2
PR  σB . Then the sum rate can be rewritten in a compact
where κ is the amplification factor satisfying a long-term total form as  
K αNR
transmit power constraint at the RS, i.e. E{xHR xR } = PR , and R̆P,sum = log2 1 + . (18)
can be expressed as (8), shown at the top of the next page. 2 K
In the second time slot, the RS selects K antennas to It can be directly seen that for perfect CSI, both sum rate
forward xR . The received signal at the BS is written as and per user rate increase with α and NR logarithmically,

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
4

s
PR
κ=  H H
 H

. (8)
+ α(1 − α)tr E WH diag(PU FFH + σR
 2
 2I
α2 PU tr E W FF W + σR tr E W W NR )W

α2 κ2 PU λ2 NR4 η 2 β 2 (a) NR (b) αNR

γP,k ≈  2
 ≈ 2
σR KσB 2 ≈ . (17)
2 2 2 3 2 2 σR 1−α
α κ PU λ NR η β K + PU β + α K + λNR σB η2 + K
+ K
PU β α PR λη

while per user rate decreases with K logarithmically. It also Remark 3: For the case b < a = 1, we have
reveals that the impact of decreasing quantization precision can lim γP,k = αβσk2EU . Therefore, with perfect CSI, the
NB ,NR →∞ R
be compensated by increasing NR . We can quantificationally considered system provides the kth user an asymptotic rate
analyze the sum rate loss caused by low-resolution ADCs at equal to half of the capacity of a single hop single-input
the RS, which is defined by single-output (SISO) channel with the received SNR αβσk2EU ,
  R
K α1 NR α2 NR K α1 yet still allowing the power reduction for the user proportional
4R̆P,sum ≈ log2 −log2 = log2 , (19)
2 K K 2 α2 to N1R and the RS power reduction proportional to an arbitrary
where α1 > α2 and we omit the term 1 in the logarithmic number that is the low-order infinitesimal of N1B .
function for analysis simplicity due to NR  K. According
IV. C LOSED -F ORM S UM R ATE E XPRESSION AND P OWER
to (19) and the exact values of α given in Table I, when q > 2,
S CALING L AWS WITH I MPERFECT CSI
decreasing q does not cause significant sum rate loss for small
decrease of α. However, decreasing q from 2 to 1 causes more In this section, the imperfect CSI case is considered. Firstly,
significant sum rate degradation due to larger variation in α. we derive the MMSE estimator of F under low-resolution
Furthermore, when NR grows to infinity, sum rate with each ADC impact. Then the closed-form sum rate expression and
ADC resolution becomes infinite according to (18) while their the corresponding power scaling laws are derived similarly to
rate gap is unchanged and finite according to (19). It implies the perfect CSI case.
that the ADC causes relatively ignorable sum rate loss in the A. Channel Estimation
very large antenna regime regardless of ADC resolution.
For the channel estimation of F, all users simultaneously
B. Generalized Power Scaling Laws transmit mutually orthogonal pilot sequences of length τ1
Based on the closed-form sum rate expression given by (11), (τ1 ≥ K) symbols. The pilot sequences used √ by the K
we further extract the generalized power scaling laws. users can be represented by a τ1 × K matrix τ1 P1 Φ with
Proposition 1: Scale down the transmit power as PU = N EU ΦH Φ = IK , where P1 is the transmit power of a pilot symbol.
a √
√ φn , n = 1, . . . , τ1 , denote the nth row of τ1 Φ, where
Let
R
ER
and PR = N b with EB , ER fixed and a, b ≥ 0. When NB
B P1 φn also denotes the pilot symbols transmitted by all users
and NR grow to infinity with λ bounded, i.e., λ < ∞, we in time instant n. Then the received pilot vector at the RS in
have time instant n is written as

∞ a, b < 1
p

 s[n] = P1 FφTn + nF [n], (21)
ER βk2 η


 σ2 K β 2 a < b = 1

where nF [n] is the AWGN at the RS in time instant n with

 P
B i=1 i
αEU βk 2
lim γP,k = 2
σR
b<a=1 , (20) i.i.d. CN (0, σR ) elements.
NB ,NR →∞
Similar to (4), s[n] is quantized by the low-resolution ADCs

 αEU ER βk2 η
a=b=1




 ζ at the RS and the output signal is given by
0 a > 1 or b > 1
 p
  sq [n] = αs[n]+np,q [n] = α P1 FφTn +αnF [n]+np,q [n], (22)
2 2 K PK
αEU i=1 βi2 + σR 2
P
where ζ = ER βk ησR + σB β
i=1 i . where np,q [n] denotes the quantization noise in time instant
Proof: See Appendix B. n and the subscript ‘p’ denotes the pilot transmission phase.
Proposition 1 shows that both PU and PR can be reduced As φn is deterministic, s[n] is Gaussian for a fixed channel
at most proportionally to N1R and N1B , respectively, while realization F. Then we use the same value of α in the pilot
maintaining a given sum rate. and data transmission phases. The quantization noise of low-
Remark 2: Only the values of a and b determine the resolution ADCs is independent of the transmit signals of the
asymptotic tendency of γP,k , i.e. ∞, bounded values or 0. users, which may be pilot or data signals, but depends on
While the ADC precision only affects the asymptotic values the channel realization F during each coherence interval [27].
of γP,k when b < a = 1 and a = b = 12 . This reveals that Therefore, the conditional covariance matrix of np,q [n] for a
the ADC precision does not bring substantial impact on the fixed channel realization F is similar to (5) and is given by
power scaling laws with perfect CSI. Rnp,q = αρdiag(P1 FFH + σR
2
INR ) (23)
2 When a < b = 1, the asymptotic value of γP,k is independent of the ADC for any n since we assume that the quantization noise is
precision α, which is because that the denominator of γP,k is dominated by
the AWGN at the BS while the power of the AWGN and the quantization temporally uncorrelated and identically distributed, and we
noise at the RS has lower order of magnitude according to (79) and (82). have np,q [n] ∼ CN (0, Rnp,q ).

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
5

Then we use matrix form to denote (22) for the whole pilot B. Closed-Form Sum Rate Expression
transmission phase as
p Theorem 2: The achievable sum rate with imperfect CSI is
Sq = α τ1 P1 FΦT + αNF + Np,q approximately given by
p p XK (24)
= α τ1 P1 fk ϕTk +α τ1 P1 fj ϕTj +αNF +Np,q , T − τ1 − τ2
j6=k RIP,sum ≈ R̃IP,sum =
2T
where sq [n], nF [n], and np,q [n] are the nth column of Sq , NF , K  
X SIP,k
and Np,q , respectively, and fi and ϕi are the ith column of F × log2 1+ ,
and Φ, respectively. By postmultiplying Sq with ϕ∗k , we have IIP,k1 +IIP,k2 +NIP,k1 +NIP,k2 +NIP,k3
k=1
p (30)
z = Sq ϕ∗k = α τ1 P1 fk + αNF ϕ∗k + Np,q ϕ∗k . (25) where
We use z to estimate fk , and the MMSE estimator is written SIP,k = α2 κ2 PU NB NR σg4 σf2k
as f̂k = Qz. The MSE is given by " K
#
X (31)
 2     H  × (NB NR + NB + NR ) σf2k + σf2i ,
E f̂k − fk = tr E f̂k − fk f̂k − fk

i=1
 p    (26)
H H
= tr QRz Q −α τ1 P1 βk Q+Q +βk INR , Ξ, IIP,k1 = α2 κ2 PU NB NR σg2
" K
#
where Rz denotes the covariance matrix of z and is given by 2 2 2 2

2 2 2 2

X 2
(32)
× NB σg εfk+NR εg σfk σfk+ σg εfk+εg βk σfi ,
" K
#
X i=1
 H 2
Rz = E zz =α ατ1 P1 βk + σR +(1 − α)P1 βi INR ,
i=1 IIP,k2 = α2 κ2 PU NB NR σg2
(27) !
K K
which is obtained by first fixing F and then averaging over F. X X (33)
√ × NB σg2 σf2k βj + NR σf4j η + ηβj σf2i ,
Using ∂Q∂Ξ
∗ = 0, we have that Q = α τ1 P1 βk R−1
z . Then,
j6=k i=1
the estimated fk with low-resolution ADCs is written as
p
f̂k = Qz = α τ1 P1 βk R−1 K
!
z z, (28)
2 2
X
NIP,k1 = α κ NB NR σg2 σR
2
NB σg2 σf2k +η σf2i , (34)
where z is given by (25). Considering (27), we can further i=1
obtain the covariance matrix of f̂k as
n Ho  H −1
H    K 
E f̂k f̂k = α2 τ1 P1 βk2 R−1 = α2 τ1 P1 βk2 R−1
X
z E zz Rz 2
z NIP,k2 = α(1−α)κ NB NR σg2 2 2 2
PU NB σg σfk σfk + βl
ατ1 P1 βk2 l=1
= PK INR , σf2k INR . K  K   K 
2 +(1−α)P
ατ1 P1 βk +σR βi
X X X
1 i=1 +η σf2i σf2i + βl 2
+σR NB σg2 σf2k +η σf2i ,
(29)
i=1 l=1 i=1
By dividing α from both the numerator and denominator (35)
of σf2k , we can see that σf2k increases with α. When ideal
NIP,k3 = NB σg2 σB
2
. (36)
ADCs are available, which means that α = 1, σf2k turns into
τ1 P1 βk2
τ1 P1 βk +σR 2 .
If the ADCs have finite number of quantization The subscript ‘IP’ denotes imperfect CSI.
bits, we can eliminate the impact of finite quantization pre- Proof: See Appendix C.
cision by increasing τ1 as lim σf2k = βk . However, this is Remark 4: To extract the mathematical relationship between
τ1 →∞
risky because that additional pilot symbols will occupy more R̃IP,sum and α, we assume that NB  NR  K  1, β1 =
resources within a coherence interval. The MMSE estimation · · · = βK = β = 1 and τ1 = τ2 = K, which lead that σf21 =
αKP1
error vector is denoted by f̃k = fk − f̂k , where from the · · · = σf2K = σf2 = KP 2 . Then after some manipulations,
1 +σR
property of MMSE estimation, f̂k and f̃k are mutually in- γIP,k in (96) can be rewritten as (37), shown at the top of the
dependent. Furthermore, we have f̂k ∼ CN (0, σf2k INR ) and next page, where ε2f = β−σf2 , (c) is obtained by substituting κ
f̃k ∼ CN (0, ε2fk INR ) with ε2fk = βk − σf2k . given by (91) and (d) is obtained by assuming that PU , P1 
2 2
For the estimation of G, the selected K RS antennas σR and PR  σB . Then we obtain the compact form sum
simultaneously transmit mutually orthogonal pilot sequences rate as
of length τ2 (τ2 ≥ K) symbols with total transmit power
α2 NR
 
K(T − 2K)
P2 in a pilot symbol period. Let ĝi denote the MMSE R̆IP,sum = log2 1 + . (38)
estimation of gi , i.e., the ith column of G. From the property 2T K
of MMSE estimation, we have that ĝi ∼ CN (0, σg2 INB ) In contrast to (18), both sum rate and per user rate with
P2 η 2
with σg2 = τ2 Pτ22η+Kσ 2 for any i = 1, . . . , K. The MMSE imperfect CSI increase logarithmically with α2 , which is
B
estimation error vector g̃i = gi − ĝi is independent of ĝi , because that both channel estimation and data detection are
where g̃i ∼ CN (0, ε2g INB ) with ε2g = η − σg2 . influenced by the low-resolution ADCs. Insightfully, (38)

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
6

α2 κ2 PU λ2 NR4 σg4 σf4 (c) NR σf2 (d) α2 NR

γIP,k ≈  2
 ≈ 2 KσB2 σ2 ≈ . (37)
2 2 2 3 4 2 2 σR 1−α 2
α κ PU λ NR σg σf εf + K + PU + α K + λNR σB σg 2 σR
+ K
+ f K
PU α PR λσg2

exhibits a general forms including both perfect and imperfect Case 2: Scale down both the pilot transmit power and data
EU ER
CSI and we can obtain (18) from (38) as transmit power as P1 = PU = N a and P2 = PR = b
NB
R

K(T − 2K)

α2 NR
 with EB , ER fixed and a, b ≥ 0. When NB and NR grow to
R̆IP,sum = log2 1 + infinity with λ bounded, i.e., λ < ∞, we have
2T K 
∞ a, b < 21
 
(e) K(T − τ1 − τ2 ) α · αNR 
= log2 1 + (39) 
 E 2 2 4
η β
2T K 0 < a < b = 12

 R k
 4
P K 4
  
 σB i=1 βi
(f ) K αNR 2 2 2

= log2 1 + = R̆P,sum ,  EP
 R η Qk
a = 0, b = 12
4 K
lim γIP,k = σB2 i=1 Q2i , (42)
2 K α KEU βk 2 2
NB ,NR →∞ 
 σ 4 b < a = 21
where (e) is obtained according to the assumption of τ1 = 
 R
α2 KEU 2
ER 2 4 2
βk η

a = b = 21

τ2 = K and the first α in the logarithm function denotes the 


 ι
impact of low-resolution ADCs on channel estimation and the 0 a > 12 or b > 12

second one denotes the impact of low-resolution ADCs on
αKEU βi2
data transmission, and (f ) is obtained due to τ1 = τ2 = 0 and where Qi = αKE 2
PK , for i = 1, . . . , K, and
Uβi +σR+(1−α)EU j=1 βj
the first α = 1 for perfect CSI. We can also find that imperfect
 PK PK 2 
2 2 2 4 4
ι = ER βk η σR +σB α2 KEU2 4
i=1 βi + σR
4
i=1 βi .
CSI needs to increase more RS antennas to compensate the
Proof: See Appendix D.
impact of decreasing quantization precision from α to ᾱ
Note that the power scaling laws of Case 1 have the similar
than perfect CSI. This is because that the numbers of RS
form to those of perfect CSI given by (20). However, for Case
antennas that need to be increased for perfect and imperfect
2, the case a < b = 21 is divided into two subcases, 0 < a <
CSI are 4NR,P = αNR /ᾱ h− NR = (α/ᾱ − 1) NR and
2 2 2
i b = 21 and a = 0, b = 12 , in which γIP,k tends to two different
4NR,IP = α NR /ᾱ −NR = (α/ᾱ) − 1 NR , respectively, asymptotic values. This is because that as NR grows to infinity,
and 4NR,P < 4NR,IP . Similar to (19), the sum rate loss with σf2i tends to 0 when a > 0 while σf2i is a nonzero constant
imperfect CSI is given by when a = 0. However, we need not divide the case b < a = 12 ,
K(T − 2K) α1 which is explained below (112) in the proof of Proposition 2.
4R̆IP,sum ≈ log2 . (40) In Case 1, with the fixed channel estimation accuracy, PU
T α2
and PR can be reduced at most proportionally to N1R and N1B ,
For imperfect CSI, sum rate also has minor changes with q > 2 respectively, while maintaining a given sum rate. However, in
while degenerates significantly with decreasing q from 2 to 1. Case 2, we can scale down PU and PR at most proportionally
This shows that low-resolution ADCs with q ≥ 2 cause limited to √N 1
and √N 1
, respectively, while maintaining a given
sum rate loss and achieve considerable sum rate performance. R B
sum rate. This is because that the array gain need to offset the
power reduction for both the pilot and data signals.
C. Generalized Power Scaling Laws Remark 5: For both Case 1 and Case 2, the values of a and b
are the only factor that determines the asymptotic tendency of
In this subsection, we extract the generalized power scaling
γIP,k , while the ADC precision only affects some asymptotic
laws based on the closed-form sum rate expression for imper-
values of γIP,k , which reveals that the ADC precision does
fect CSI. Specifically, two cases are considered: 1) The pilot
not bring substantial impact on the power scaling laws with
transmit power is fixed while the data transmit power is scaled
imperfect CSI.
down. 2) Both the pilot transmit power and data transmit power
Remark 6: For the 2case b < a = 1 in Case 1, we have
are scaled down. ασf EU
Proposition 2: Case 1: Fix P1 and P2 while scale down the lim γIP,k = k
σ2
. While for the case b < a = 12
NB ,NR →∞ R
EU ER
data transmit power as PU = N a and PR = b with EB , ER α2 βk2 EU
2
R NB in Case 2, we have lim γIP,k = K σR4 . When EU
fixed and a, b ≥ 0. When NB and NR grow to infinity with NB ,NR →∞
λ bounded, i.e., λ < ∞, we have is large, the asymptotic rate of the kth user is approximately
given by
α2 βk2 EU2
  
∞ a, b < 1 asym T − τ1 − τ2
R̃IP,k ≈ log2 K


ER σf4 σg2 2T σR4


PKk 4 a<b=1

 2  (43)
 σB i=1 σf
 
T −τ1 −τ2 T −τ1 −τ2 αβk EU
 i
2
lim γIP,k = αEU2σfk . (41) ≈ log2 K + log2 1+ 2 .
NB ,NR →∞  σR
b<a=1 2T T σR
4 2

 αEU ER σf σg

 k
a=b=1 Therefore, with imperfect CSI, when the pilot transmit power
ϑ




0 a > 1 or b > 1 is fixed, the considered system provides the kth user an
asymptotic rate equal to T−τ2T1−τ2 times the capacity of a single
ασf2 EU
 PK PK 2 
where ϑ = ER σf2k σg2 σR
2
+σB 2
αEU i=1 σf4i +σR 2
i=1 σfi . hop SISO channel with the received SNR k
2
σR
, yet still

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
7

allowing the power reduction for the user proportional to TABLE II

1 T HREE S CENARIOS C ONSIDERED IN N UMERICAL R ESULTS
NR and the RS power reduction proportional to an arbitrary
number that is the low-order infinitesimal of N1B . When the Channel LOS path between
pilot transmit power and data transmit power are the same characteristic the BS and the RS
and EU is large, the considered system provides the kth user Scenario 1 i.i.d. Nonexistent
an asymptotic rate approximately equal to T−τT1−τ2 times the Scenario 2 i.i.d. Existent
capacity of a single hop SISO channel with the received SNR Scenario 3 Correlated Nonexistent
αβk EU
2
σR
and then plus T−τ2T1−τ2 log2 K, yet still allowing the
1
power reduction for the user proportional to √N and the 2.4
AQNM Approximation, Simulation Results
R
RS power reduction proportional to an arbitrary number that 2.2 AQNM Approximation, Theoretical Results
Actual Achievable Rate
1 2
is the low-order infinitesimal of √N . 1.8
B

Rate (bits/s/Hz)
1.6

1.4
V. E XTENSION TO THE SCENARIO WITH LOS PATH 1.2

BETWEEN THE BS AND THE RS 1

0.8 ADC quantiaztion bits

If the RS is highly elevated like the BS, the propagation 0.6
q=1, 2, 3

environment usually offers insufficient scattering and LOS 0.4

10
1 2
10
NR
path exists between the BS and the RS [28], [29]. Therefore,
in this section, we extend our theoretical analysis and main Fig. 2. Comparison between the rate under AQNM approximation and the
actual achievable rate.
conclusions to this scenario.
With the LOS path, the channel matrix from K antennas of
1/2 K
the RS to the BS is expressed as G = Gs DG and the small    X 
scale fading matrix Gs is given by
Rician
NP,k2 = α(1−α)κ2 NB NR η 2 PU (NB +∆k )βk βk + βl
l=1
h i1/2 h i1/2
−1 −1 K  K   K 
Gs = Ḡ Ω (Ω + IK ) + Gw (Ω + IK ) , (44) X X
2
X
+ βi Υki βi + βl +σR (NB +∆k )βk + βi Υki ,
K×K i6=k l=1 i6=k
where Ω ∈ R is a diagonal matrix with its diagonal ele- (49)
ments [Ω]kk = µk denoting the Rician factor, Gw ∈ CNB ×K Rician 2
denotes the scattering component with i.i.d. CN (0,1) elements, NP,k3 = NB ησB , (50)
Ḡ ∈ CNB ×K denotes the deterministicLOS component whose 2
 2µk +1 µk µi ςki /NB +µk +µi +1
elements are given by Ḡ nk = exp −j(n − 1) 2πd and where ∆k = (µk +1)2 , Υki = , and
 
λw sin θk , (µk +1)(µi +1)
sin(NB π(sin θk −sin θi )/2)
where d, λw and θk denote the antenna spacing, wavelength ςki = sin(π(sin θk −sin θi )/2) . The superscript ‘Rician’
and
and the angle of arrival (AOA) of the kth RS antenna, respec- subscript ‘P’ denote Rician channel model between the BS
tively. Next, we derive the closed-form sum rate expression and the RS and perfect CSI, respectively.
with perfect CSI3 for this scenario.  Proof: Using E |gH k gk |
2
= NB (NB + ∆k ) and
Theorem 3: The achievable sum rate with LOS path between E |gH k g i |2
= N B Υ ki for i 6
= k [30, Lemma 3], we can
the BS and the RS and perfect CSI is approximately given by prove Theorem 3 similarly to Theorem 1.
Rician Rician
Remark 7: When the Rician factor µi → 0, for i =
RP,sum ≈ R̃P,sum Rician
1, . . . , K, i.e., no LOS path between the BS and the RS, R̃P,sum
K
!
Rician becomes R̃P,sum in (11).
1X SP,k (45)
= log2 1+ Rician Rician Rician Rician
, Remark 8: Since the addition of the LOS component
2 IP,k +NP,k1 +NP,k2 +NP,k3
k=1
between the BS and the RS doesn’t change the order of
where magnitude of the desired signal, interference and noise power,
under the same assumption, we can obtain the same compact
Rician
SP,k = α2 κ2 PU NB NR η 2 βk
form of the sum rate as (18) that
(46)
 XK 
 
× (NB + ∆k )(NR + 1)βk + βi Υki , Rician K αNR
i6=k R̆P,sum = log2 1 + , (51)
2 K
Rician
IP,k = α2κ2 PU NB NR η 2 where we can find that in this scenario sum rate with perfect
(47)
 
XK XK CSI also increases with α and NR logarithmically. (18) and
× βj (NB +∆k )βk +NR βj Υkj + βi Υki ,
j6=k i6=k (51) also reveal that the intensity of the LOS path between the
  BS and the RS has very little impact on the sum rate under
XK the condition of NB  NR  K  1, β1 = · · · = βK = β,
Rician
NP,k1 = α2κ2NBNR η 2σR
2
(NB +∆k )βk+ βiΥki , (48) 2 2
i6=k PU  σR and PR  σB .
The power scaling laws with perfect CSI for this scenario
3 In this section, we focus on the different channel model from that in the
are trivial and can be obtained similarly to (20) due to un-
previous sections and therefore we assume perfect CSI. changed array gains [30], and are omitted here for simplicity.

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
8

25 18 45
5
Simulation Results Simulation Results Simulation Results
Theoretical Results, Eq. (11) 16 Theoretical Results, Eq. (30) 40 Theoretical Results, Eq. (30)
4
Asymptotic Results, Eq. (20) Asymptotic Results, Eq. (41) Asymptotic Results, Eq. (42) a=0.2, b=0.3
20
3 14 35
a=0.5, b=0.5
a=0.5, b=0
a=0.5, b=0.5
2 12 30
Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

15 a=0, b=0.5
1 10 a=1, b=0 25
a=1, b=0
0 a=0, b=1 a=0, b=1
1 2 3 8 20
10 10 10 10

6 15

5 4 10 a=0.5, b=0.5
a=0.4, b=0.7
a=1.5, b=0.5 a=1, b=1 a=1, b=1
2 a=1.5, b=0.5 5

0 0 0
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
NR NR NR

Fig. 3. Theoretical and simulation results of the Fig. 4. Theoretical and simulation results of sum Fig. 5. Theoretical and simulation results of the
sum rate with perfect CSI versus NR for different rate with imperfect CSI Case 1 versus NR for dif- sum rate with imperfect CSI Case 2 versus NR for
power scaling cases (q = 2). ferent power scaling cases (q=2, P1=P2=20dB). different power scaling cases (q = 2).

VI. N UMERICAL R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSIONS Fig. 4 shows the theoretical and simulation results of the
sum rate with imperfect CSI Case 1 versus NR for different
In this section, the theoretical sum rate expressions and power scaling cases, where q = 2 and P1 = P2 = 20 dB.
power scaling laws are verified, and the impacts of some The coincidence between the simulation and theoretical results
parameters on sum rate are investigated for three different verifies the correctness of the closed-form sum rate expression
scenarios listed in Table II. We choose K = 10, EU = 20 derived in (30) and the asymptotic tendency for each power
2 2
dB, ER = 25 dB, σR = 2.2 dB, σB = 1.5 dB and scaling case verifies the power scaling laws derived in (41).
T = 100 for all simulations. The lengths of the pilot se- Due to the channel estimation error and the pilot transmission
quences are set as τ1 = τ2 = K except Fig. 8. Except occupation, Case 1 only achieves the sum rate accounting for
Fig. 6, we assume NB = 4NR , and the large-scale fadings 70%−80% of that with perfect CSI.
of the two hops are modeled as βk = (dref /dUk R )ν and
Fig. 5 shows the theoretical and simulation results of the
η = (dref /dRB )ν , respectively, where dref is the reference
sum rate with imperfect CSI Case 2 versus NR for different
distance, dij is the distance between node i and node j,
power scaling cases, where q = 2. Here we plot the simulation
and ν denotes the path loss exponent. We set dref = 100
results in the region of [10, 103 ] of NR , where the simulation
meters, dU R = [287 289 269 468 492 333 322 487 368 275]
results match the theoretical results well so that the correctness
meters, dRB = 250 meters, and ν = 2.4. For AQNM used
of the closed-form sum rate expression derived in (30) is
to model the ADC quantization in the numerical examples,
verified again. However, as Case 2 uses more moderate power
we use the values of α listed in Table
√ I for q ≤ 5 and the
scaling laws, the growth trend to the asymptotic value for
asymptotic approximation α = 1 − 23π · 2−2q for q ≥ 6 [25],
each power scaling case is much slower than that in Fig. 3 or
[31]. Fig. 2 illustrates the comparison between the rate under
Fig. 4. Therefore, we extend the region of NR to 105 for the
AQNM approximation and the actual achievable rate for our
theoretical results and validate the power scaling laws derived
considered relaying system. It can be seen that the rate under
in (42). Figs. 3−5 show the tightness between the simulation
AQNM matches the actual achievable rate well for 1-3 bits
and theoretical results in terms of the sum rate, and as a result,
resolution, although it may provide a trivial underestimation
we use theoretical results for the illustrations in Figs. 7−9.
or overestimation depending on NR [22], [32].
To verify the compact form sum rate expressions given by
(18) and (38), we compare them with their corresponding
A. Scenario 1
simulation results in Fig. 6. We choose β1 = · · · = βK = β =
In this subsection, we give the numerical results for the i.i.d. η = 1, NB = 10NR = 1000, PU = EU , PR = ER for perfect
channel scenario without LOS path between the BS and the CSI and P1 = PU = EU , P2 = PR = ER for imperfect CSI.
RS, which corresponds to the theoretical analysis in Section It can be seen that the compact form theoretical results match
III and IV. their corresponding simulation results well. Therefore, the sum
Fig. 3 shows the theoretical and simulation results of the rates given by (18) and (38) are accurate approximations that
sum rate with perfect CSI versus NR for different power can explicitly reveal the mathematical relationship between
scaling cases, where q = 2. For each power scaling case sum rate performance and the ADC quantization gain. Fig. 6
with specific values of a and b, the simulation result matches also demonstrates that when q ≥ 2 the sum rates with both
the theoretical result well, which verifies the correctness of perfect and imperfect CSI increase tardily, which coincides
the closed-form sum rate expression derived in (11). From our sum rate loss analysis in Remark 1 and Remark 4.
the amplified field in Fig. 3, we can see that there is a Fig. 7 shows the sum rates with perfect and imperfect CSI
tiny mismatch between the simulation and theoretical result versus NR with different values of q. We choose PU = EU ,
for each case when NR is relatively small. While when NR PR = ER for perfect CSI and P1 = PU = EU , P2 = PR =
grows large, the gap tends to vanish and our theoretical results ER for imperfect CSI. Fig. 7 shows that the impact of low-
become more accurate. On the other hand, the curves in Fig. 3 resolution ADC on channel estimation causes additional sum
also validate the power scaling laws formulated in (20). rate degeneration. Moreover, when NR = 200, for imperfect

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
9

20 30 12
q=1
18 q=2 Perfect CSI
25 q=∞ 10
16

14
20 8
Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

12

10 15 6
7.9

8 7.8
10 4
6 Imperfect CSI 7.7

4 Perfect CSI, Simulation Results 7.6 q=1

Perfect CSI, Compact Form Theoretical Results, Eq. (18) 5 2 q=2
2 Imperfect CSI, Simulation Results 7.5 q=3
10 12 14 16 18 20
Imperfect CSI, Compact Form Theoretical Results, Eq. (38) q=∞
0 0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 0 100 200 300 400 500 10 12 14 16 18 20
q NR τ1

Fig. 6. Sum rates with perfect and imperfect CSI Fig. 7. Sum rates with perfect and imperfect CSI Fig. 8. Sum rates versus τ1 with different values
versus q (NB = 10NR = 1000). versus NR with different values of q. of q (NR = 100, τ2 = K).

CSI, the ratio of the sum rate with q = 1 over that with q = ∞
and the ratio of the sum rate with q = 2 over that with q = ∞
are about 0.7 and 0.9, respectively, indicating that the ADC
with q = 1 causes relatively large sum rate loss compared
with that with q ≥ 2 in this case. This again reveals that
low-resolution, e.g., 2-3 bits, ADCs can achieve considerable
sum rate performance when NB and NR are relatively large
compared to K. We can increase NR to compensate the sum
rate loss caused by decreasing q, but imperfect CSI needs more
additional antennas than perfect CSI.
Fig. 8 plots the sum rates versus the length of user pilot
sequence τ1 with different values of q, where NR = 100,
P1 = PU = EU , P2 = PR = ER , and τ2 = K. When
q = 1, increasing τ1 from 10 to 12 indeed improves the sum
rate slightly. However, if we continue increasing τ1 , the sum
rate decreases. When q ≥ 2, increasing τ1 always degenerates
the sum rate performance. Therefore, it is not recommended
to increase the length of user pilot sequence to mitigate the
impact of low-resolution ADCs on channel estimation. In
addition, due to the large variation in α when decreasing q
from 2 to 1, there is a significant rate loss for q = 1 compared
with q = 2.
Fig. 9 plots the ADC energy efficiency curves with perfect
and imperfect CSI versus q with different values of NR . We
choose a = b = 1, a = b = 1, and a = b = 0.5 for perfect
CSI, imperfect CSI Case 1, and imperfect CSI Case 2, respec-
R
tively. The ADC energy efficiency is calculated as EE = P
where R denotes the sum rate, and according to [25], the
ADC power consumption is given by P = c0 NR · 2q + c1
with c0 = 10−4 W and c1 = 0.02 W. For each curve, the
ADC energy efficiency decreases almost exponentially with
q and therefore the superiority of low-resolution ADCs is
significant. Interestingly, when NR is doubled, we can lower
one ADC quantization bit (if permitted) to avoid more power
consumption, e.g., NR · 2q = 2NR · 2q−1 . By doing this, we
can reduce the energy efficiency loss or even achieve higher
energy efficiency.
B. Scenario 2
In this subsection, we give the numerical result for the i.i.d.
channel scenario with LOS path between the BS and the RS,
which corresponds to the theoretical analysis in Section V.
Moreover, we assume d = λw /2, θk uniformly distributed
within the interval [−π/2, π/2], and µ1 = · · · = µK = µ.
Fig. 10 plots the theoretical and simulation results of the
sum rate with perfect CSI versus µ for different q, where
NR = 100, PU = EU and PR = ER . Firstly, for each value
of q, the coincidence between the simulation and theoretical
result verifies the correctness of the closed-form sum rate
expression derived in (45). Moreover, as µ increases, the sum
rate increases and finally converges to a fixed value for each
q while the rate gap between the sum rates under different q
exhibits a minor variation.
C. Scenario 3
In this subsection, we give the numerical result for the
correlated channel scenario without LOS path between the
BS and the RS. More precisely, we use the well known
Kronecker correlation channel model, where the small-scale
fading matrices for users to the RS and the RS to the BS
1/2 1/2
are given by Fs = RR Fw and Gs = RB Gw , respectively,
where RR , RB denote the receiving correlation matrices at
the RS and the BS, and Fw and Gw have i.i.d. CN (0, 1)
elements. Here we leave out the transmitting correlation at
the RS because that we can select K antennas from NR
antennas. The correlation matrices are generated according to
the exponential correlation model [33] and are given by
(
r?j−i i≤j
[R? ]ij = i−j ∗ , (52)
(r? ) i > j
,
where ? ∈ {R, B}, and r? is the correlation coefficient of the
neighboring antennas. Without loss of generality, we assume
that r? is real-valued and 0 ≤ r? ≤ 1.
Fig. 11 plots sum rate with perfect CSI versus correlation
coefficient r for different q, where NR = 100, PU = EU
and PR = ER . It can be seen that the antenna correlations
degenerate the sum rate performance significantly. The antenna
correlation at the RS causes more pronounced impact than
that at the BS, which is because that the former introduces
correlation to signals of both the first and second hops. Fur-
thermore, the rate gap between the sum rates under different
ADC resolutions decreases as the correlation coefficient at BS
or RS (or both) increases.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we investigate a MU massive MIMO uplink
with the low-resolution ADC relaying. For both perfect and

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
10

140 20 16
NR=100

Imperfect CSI NR=200 18 14

120
Case 2
16
ADC Energy Efficiency (bits/J/Hz)

12
100
rR=0, rB=r
14

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

Sum rate (bits/s/Hz)

10 rR=rB=0
80 12
ADC quantiaztion bits 8
Perfect CSI q=1, 2, ∞
60 10
6
8
40
4
6 rR=rB=r
q=1
20 2
4 Simulation Results q=2 rR=r, rB=0
Imperfect CSI
Case 1 Theoretical Results, Eq. (45) q=∞
0 2 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 −10 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
q µ (dB) r

Fig. 9. ADC energy efficiency with perfect and Fig. 10. Theoretical and simulation results of the Fig. 11. Sum rate with perfect CSI versus cor-
imperfect CSI versus q with different values of NR . sum rate with perfect CSI versus µ for different q relation coefficient r for different q (NR = 100,
(NR = 100, PU = EU and PR = ER ). PU = EU and PR = ER ).


imperfect CSI, closed-form sum rate expressions are derived where the last equalityis obtained
according to E |uH u|2 =
with respect to finite NB and NR . We find the relationship (L2 + L)σu4 and E |uH v|2 = Lσu2 σv2 for the L × 1
between sum rate and linear quantization gain of the ADCs at mutually independent vectors u and v with i.i.d. CN (0, σu2 )
the RS and show that low-resolution, e.g., 2-3 bits, ADCs and CN (0, σv2 ) elements, respectively [34, Lemma 2]. Then
only cause limited sum rate loss when NB and NR are we can get
relatively large compared to K so that considerable sum rate
XK
tr E FH FFH F = E FH FFH F ii
  
performance can be achieved. Furthermore, we discover the i=1
(57)
XK XK XK
generalized power scaling laws as NB and NR grow to infinity, = NR2 βi2 + NR βi βl , A1 .
which show that the ADC precision does not bring substantial i=1 i=1 l=1
impact on the power scaling laws. Numerical results verify
Now, we calculate tr E FH diag(PU FFH + σR
 2


INR )F ,
the correctness of our theoretical analysis and show that the
which can be written as
energy efficiency is improved significantly for the ADC with
tr E FH diag(PU FFH + σR2


fewer quantization bits. INR )F
Finally, some topics can be investigated in the future work:
(58)
= PU tr E diag(FFH )FFH + σR 2
tr E FH F .


1) Although the channel correlation is considered numerically
and some discussions are provided in this paper, it appears We write diag(FFH )FFH in an element-wise manner as
difficult to analyze the effect of channel correlation in a more  2 
rigorous theoretical way. It would be an interesting topic K
2
P
|f1i | ···
on conducting effective theoretical analysis on the impact of 
 i=1


channel correlation; 2) Distributed antenna architecture is an H
diag(FF )FF =H 
 .
.. . .. .
..

, (59)
alternative and complementation of centralized massive MIMO  K

2 
due to its flexibility. Distributed massive antenna architecture 
···
P
|fNR i |2

with low-resolution ADCs can be investigated in future work. i=1
A PPENDIX A where fij is the (i, j)th element of F and we only present
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1 the
Pdiagonal elements.
2
By expanding the quadratic terms of
For perfect CSI, the MRC receiver matrices at the RS and K 2
|fli | , l = 1, . . . , NR , in (59) and using the facts
the BS are given by W = F and A = G, respectively. Then κ  i=1 
in (8) is rewritten as (53), shown at the top of the next page. E |fij |2 = βj and E |fij |4 = 2βj2 , we obtain
Rewriting FH F as K K
!
X X
H H
 H   H 

f1 f1 · · · fH

f1 1 fK tr E diag(FF )FF = NR βi βi + βl . (60)
FH F =  ...  f1 , · · · , fK = ... .. .. . (54) i=1 l=1
   
. . 
H
fK H H
fK f1 · · · fK fK Then combining (55), (58), and (60), we have

tr E FH diag(PU FFH + σR 2


It is easy to obtain INR )F

XK n o XK
tr E FH F = E fH

l fl = NR βl . (55) K K
! K
l=1 l=1
X X
2
X (61)
= PU NR βi βi + βl + NR σR βi , A2 .
From (54), the expectation of the ith diagonal element of
i=1 l=1 i=1
FH FFH F is calculated as
Therefore, from (53), the closed-form expression of κ with
X 
K
E FH FFH F ii = E |fH 2
 
f
i l | perfect CSI is given by
l=1
K K (56) s
PR
n o X n o X
= E |fH 2
i fi | + E |fH
i fl |
2
= NR2 βi2 +NR βi βl , κ= PK . (62)
α2 (PU A1 + NR σR 2
l6=i l=1 i=1 βi ) + α(1 − α)A2

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
11

s
PR
κ=  H H
 H

. (53)
+ α(1 − α)tr E FH diag(PU FFH + σR
 2
 2I
α2 PU tr E F FF F + σR tr E F F NR )F

H
α2 κ2 PU |gH
k GF fk |
2
Sk
γk = PK H H
, . (64)
α2 κ2 PU H 2 2 kgH GFH k2
α2 κ2 σR κ2 gH H 2 kg k2 Ik +Nk1 +Nk2 +Nk3
j6=k |gk GF fj | + k + k GF Rnq FG gk + σB k

The kth element of rB in (10) is used to detect the signal Then the inter-user interference is written as
XK
originating from the kth user, which can be written as IP,k = α2 κ2 PU E |gH
 H 2

k GF fj |
j6=k
p p XK
H H
rB,k = ακ PU gH H
k GF fk xk + ακ PU gk GF fj xj (71)
K K
!
j6=k 2 2 2
X X
= α κ PU NB NR η βj NB βk +NR βj + βi .
| {z } | {z }
signal
interference j6=k i=1
+ ακgH GFH nR + κgH GFH nq + gH
k nB .
| k {zk H 2

} Also like (68), we calculate E kgH k GF k in NP,k1 as
noise ( K ! K !)
(63)  H H 2 X
H H
X
H
Then the end-to-end SINR for the kth user, γk , is written as E kgk GF k = E gk gi fi fl gl gk
(64), shown at the top of this page. As a result, the achievable  i=1
 l=1 (72)
XK
ergodic sum rate is expressed as = NB NR η 2 NB βk + βi .
XK 1 XK i=1
RP,sum = Rk = E {log2 (1 + γk )} . (65)
k=1 2 k=1
Then the effect of the AWGN at the RS is given by
According to [30, Lemma 1], we approximate H 2
NP,k1 = α2 κ2 σR 2
E kgH

k GF k
E {log2 (1 + γk )} for large NB and NR as
(73)
 XK 
2 2 2 2
E {log2 (1 + γk )} ≈ log2 (1 + γP,k ), (66) = α κ NB NR η σR NB βk + βi .
i=1
where For NP,k2 , according to (5), we have
E {Sk } H H
γP,k = gH
k GF Rnq FG gk = α(1−α)
E {Ik } + E {Nk1 } + E {Nk2 } + E {Nk3 } i (74)
(67) h
H H H H 2
× PU gH 2 H

SP,k k GF diag(FF )FG gk +σR gk GF ,
= .
IP,k + NP,k1 + NP,k2 + NP,k3
where
In the following, we calculate the terms SP,k , IP,k , NP,k1 , XK XK
H H H H H
NP,k2 and NP,k3 , respectively.
PK H H gH
k GF diag(FF )FG gk = g H
g f
k i i diag(FF ) fj gH
j gk
H
With the help of gHk GF fk = i=1 gk gi fi fk , we have i=1 j=1
(  ) h P i
 K H H 2 K PK
 H H 2 X = H ∗
i=1 gk gi f1i , ··· , H ∗
i=1 gk gi fNR i
diag(FFH )
E |gk GF fk | = E   g g fi fk 
i=1 k i h P iT
K H
PK H
K K X K
× j=1 f1j gj gk , · · · , j=1 fNR j gj gk
X n o X
H
H H
E |gH 2
E gH H
 XNR XK XK
= g f f | + k gi gl gk E{fi fk fk fl }
k i i k = |gH 2 2
k gi | |fmi | |fml |
2
i=1 i=1 l6=i
| {z } m=1 i=1 l=1
=0 NR X
K X
K X
K
K
X
∗
n H 2o X  H 2 n H 2o + gH H 2
k gi fmi fmj gj gk |fml | , B1 + B2 .
= E |gH 2

g
k k | E |fk f k | + E |gk gi | E |fi fk | m=1 i=1 j6=i l=1
i6=k (75)
H
  H H
2
XK The expectation of gHk GF diag(FF )FG gk is calculated as
= NB NR η βk (NB + 1)(NR + 1)βk + βi .
i6=k n o
H H H
(68) E gH k GF diag(FF )FG gk = E {B1 }+E {B2 } = E {B1 }
Then the average power of the desired signal is written as XNR XK
E |gH 2
E |fmi |4
 
SP,k = α2 κ2 PU E |gH H 2 = k gi |

k GF fk | m=1 i=1
" K
# 
(69) XK XK
E |gH 2 2 2
X  
= α2 κ2 PUNBNR η 2 βk (NB NR +NB +NR )βk + βi . +
i=1 l6=i
g
k i | E |fmi | |fml |
i=1 " ! !#
K K K
H

|gH 2
X X X
k GF fj |
Similarly, E in IP,k can be calculated as 2
= NB NR η NB βk βk + βl + βi βi + βl .
(  )
 K H H 2
X l=1 i=1 l=1
(76)
 H H 2
E |gk GF fj | = E  g g fi fj 
i=1 k i
(70) Therefore, considering (72), (74) and (76), the effect of the
quantization noise originating from the low-resolution ADCs
 XK 
2
= NB NR η βj NB βk + NR βj + βi . at the RS is given by
i=1

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
12

   K 
X A PPENDIX C
NP,k2 = α(1−α)κ2 NB NR η 2 PU NB βk βk + βl
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 2
l=1
K
X  K
X   K
X  (77) For imperfect CSI, the MRC receiver matrices at RS and
2 BS are given by W = F̂ and A = Ĝ, respectively. Specifically,
+ βi βi + βl + σR NB βk + βi ,
i=1 l=1 i=1 we have F = F̂ + F̃ and G = Ĝ + G̃, where the ith column
of F̂, F̃, Ĝ and G̃ are f̂i , f̃i , ĝi and g̃i , respectively. Then κ in
The effect of the AWGN at the BS is given by (8) is rewritten as (87), shown at the
 n H
o top of n the next page.
H H
o
2
E kgk k2 = NB ησB 2 H

NP,k3 = σB . (78) Firstly, we have tr E F̂ FF F̂ =tr E F̂ F̂F̂ F̂ +
 n H H o
tr E F̂ F̃F̃ F̂ , where the two terms on the right hand
A PPENDIX B side can be calculated similarly to tr E FH FFH F in (57).


P ROOF OF P ROPOSITION 1 Therefore, we have
K K X K
In this proof, as NB and NR grow to infinity with λ fixed  n H o X X
and bounded, the terms with lower order of magnitude are tr E F̂ FFH F̂ = NR2 σf4i +NR σf2i βl , Â1. (88)
EU ER i=1 i=1 l=1
omitted. Substituting PU = N a and PR =
NBb into γP,k in
R  n H o PK
(67) and after some manipulations, we have Then like (55), we can obtain tr E F̂ F̂ =NR i=1 σf2i .
α2 λEU βk NR1−a Finally, we have
lim γP,k = lim 2
σB
. (79)  n H o  n H o
NR →∞ NR →∞ 2 +
αλσR 2β η
κ2 NR
tr E F̂ diag(PU FFH + σR 2
INR )F̂ 2
= σR tr E F̂ F̂
k
H H H
 n o  n H
o
As κ in (62) is a variable depending on NR , we have +PU tr E diag(F̂F̂ )F̂F̂ +PU tr E diag(F̃F̃ )F̂F̂ ,
2 (89)
σB α(C1+C2+C3 )+(1−α)(C4+C3 )
2 2 = αλb σB
2
NRb−1 , where the last two terms on the right hand
side can be
κ NR βk η ER βk η calculated similarly to tr E diag(FFH )FFH in (60). Then,
 2 (80) we have
1−a PK 2 −a PK
where C1=EUNR i=1 βi , C2=EUNR i=1 βi , C3 = n H
o
PK   tr E F̂ diag(PU FFH + σR2
INR )F̂
2 −a PK PK
σR i=1 βi , and C4 = EU NR i=1 βi βi + l=1 βl . XK  XK  (90)
2 2 2
1) When a, b < 1, we have = NR σfi PU σfi +PU βl +σR , Â2 .
i=1 l=1
α2 λEU βk NR1−a Therefore, from (87), the closed-form expression of κ with
lim γP,k = lim 2
α2 λb σB
= ∞. (81)
NR →∞ NR →∞ 2 + b−1
αλσR ER βk η NR C1
imperfect CSI is given by
s
2) When a < b = 1, we have PR
κ= PK 2 . (91)
2 2
α (PU Â1 + NR σR i=1 σfi ) + α(1 − α)Â2
α2 λEU βk NR1−a ER βk2 η
lim γP,k = lim 2
α2 λσB
= PK . (82)
NR →∞ NR →∞ σB2 βi2 The kth element of rB in (10) with imperfect CSI can be
ER βk η C1 i=1
written as
3) When b < a = 1, we have p H H p  H HXK

rB,k=ακ PU ĝk ĜF̂ f̂k xk +ακ PU Cxk+ĝk GF̂ fj xj
j6=k
α2 λEU βk αEU βk | {z }
lim γP,k = 2 = 2 . (83) signal | {z }
NR →∞ αλσR σR interference
H H
+ ακĝH GF̂ nR + κĝH GF̂ nq + ĝH
k nB ,
4) When a = b = 1, we have | k {zk }
noise
α2 λEU βk NR1−a αEU ER βk2 η (92)
lim γP,k = lim = . H H H
NR →∞ 2
NR →∞ αλσ +αλσ
R
2 αC1 +C
B ER βk η
3 ζ where C = ĝHk ĜF̂ f̃ k + ĝ H
k G̃F̂ f̂ k + ĝH
k G̃F̂ f̃ k .
(84) Then the end-to-end SINR for the kth user, γ̂k , is written
5) When a > 1, we have as (93), shown at the top of the next page. As a result, the
achievable ergodic sum rate is expressed as
α2 λEU βk NR1−a 1 T − τ1 − τ2 XK
lim γP,k = lim = 0, RIP,sum = E {log2 (1 + γ̂k )} . (94)
NR →∞ NR →∞ αλσ 2 +αλb σ 2 N b−1 O(1) 2 T k=1
R B R
(85)
Similar to (66), we approximate E {log2 (1 + γ̂k )} as
regardless of the value of b.
6) When a ≤ 1 < b, we have E {log2 (1 + γ̂k )} ≈ log2 (1 + γIP,k ), (95)

α2 λEU βk NR1−a where

lim γP,k = lim = 0. (86) E{Ŝk }
NR →∞ NR →∞ αλb σ 2 N b−1 O(N 1−a ) γIP,k =
B R R
E{Iˆk1}+E{Iˆk2}+E{N̂k1}+E{N̂k2}+E{N̂k3} (96)
Now, we have covered all the possible values of a and b, SIP,k
and Proposition 1 is proved. = .
IIP,k1 + IIP,k2 + NIP,k1 + NIP,k2 + NIP,k3

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
13

v
u P
κ=t
u h  n H o  n H oi R  n H o . (87)
H 2 tr E F̂ F̂
α2 PU tr E F̂ FF F̂ + σR + α(1 − α)tr E F̂ diag(PU FFH + σR
2I
NR )F̂

H 2
 
α2 κ2 PU ĝH
k ĜF̂ f̂k 

Ŝk
γ̂k= , .
2
K 
P H H  2
2

H H
2
H H H 2 2 ˆ ˆ
Ik1+Ik2+N̂k1+N̂k2+N̂k3
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
α κ PU|C| +α κ PU ĝk GF̂ fj +α κ σR ĝk GF̂ +κ ĝk GF̂ Rnq F̂G ĝk+σB kĝk k
j6=k
(93)

H
n o
In the following, we calculate the terms SIP,k , IIP,k1 , IIP,k2 , H H
E ĝk GF̂ Rnq F̂G ĝk = α(1 − α) H1 + H2 + H3
NIP,k1 , NIP,k2 and NIP,k3 , respectively.     (103)
The derivation of SIP,k is similar to that of SP,k in (69). So 2 H H 2 2 H H 2
+H4 +σR E ĝk ĜF̂ + σR E ĝk G̃F̂ ,
we write the average power of the desired signal directly as
  
H 2 where
SIP,k = α2 κ2 PU E ĝH Ĝ F̂ f̂ = α2 κ2 PU NB NR σg4 σf2k
 n H H H
o
k k
H1 = E ĝH
k Ĝ F̂ diag(P U F̂ F̂ ) F̂Ĝ ĝ k , (104a)
 XK 
× (NB NR + NB + NR ) σf2k + σf2i , H H
n H
o
i=1 H2 = E ĝH
k ĜF̂ diag(PU F̃F̃ )F̂ Ĝ ĝ k , (104b)
(97) n H H H
o
H3 = E ĝH
n o
2 )
For E |C| in IIP,k1 , we decompose it as k G̃ F̂ diag(P U F̂ F̂ F̂G̃ ĝ k , (104c)
H H
   n H
o
 H H 2 H4 = E ĝH
n o
2
E |C| = E ĝk ĜF̂ f̃k  k G̃F̂ diag(PU F̃F̃ )F̂G̃ ĝk . (104d)
      Hn (98)
1 , H2 , H3 , and H4 cano be calculated similarly to
 H H 2  H H 2 H H H
+ E ĝk G̃F̂ f̂k  + E ĝk G̃F̂ f̃k  , E gH k GF diag(FF )FG gk in (76). Then, the effect of
the quantization noise originating from the low-resolution
where the three terms on the right hand side can be calculated ADCs at the RS is written as
H
similarly to E |gH k GF fk |
2
in (68). Then, the interference H
n o
NIP,k2 = κ2 E ĝH k GF̂ R n q F̂G H
ĝk
originating from the channel estimation error is given by    
n
2
o XK
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
IIP,k1 = α κ PU E |C| = α κ PU NB NR σg = α(1−α)κ NB NR σg PU NB σg σfk σfk + βl
l=1


XK 2
 (99) K K K
× NB σg2 ε2fk+NR ε2g σf2k σf2k+ σg2 ε2fk+ε2g βk

   
σf , X
2 2
X
2 2 2
X
2
i=1 i +η σfi σfi + βl + σR NB σg σfk + η σfi .
i=1 l=1 i=1
H
n o
For E |ĝH k GF̂ fj |
2
in IIP,k2 , we can decompose it sim- (105)
ilarly to (98) and The effect of the AWGN at the BS is given by
 each Hdecomposed term can be calculated
2
E kĝk k2 = NB σg2 σB 2

similarly to E |gH k GF f j |2
in (70). Then, the inter-user NIP,k3 = σB . (106)
interference is given by
  A PPENDIX D
2 2
XK  H H 2 2 2 2 P OF P ROPOSITION 2
IIP,k2 = α κ PU E ĝk GF̂ fj  = α κ PUNBNR σg ROOF
j6=k
XK  XK  For Case 1, as the channel estimation accuracy is fixed
× NB σg2 σf2k βj + NR σf4j η + ηβj σf2i , for each hop, the proof is similar to that of Proposition 1.
j6=k i=1
Therefore, to obtain (41), we only need to replace βi and η in
(100)
n H
o (20) by σf2i and σg2 , respectively.
For E kĝH k GF̂ k
2
in NIP,k1 , we decompose it as For the proof of Case 2, as NB and NR grow to infinity with
     
H H 2 H H 2 H H 2 λ fixed and bounded, the terms with lower order of magnitude
E ĝk GF̂ = E ĝk ĜF̂ +E ĝk G̃F̂ , (101)
are omitted. Assume that τ1 = τ2 = K and substitute P1 =
EU ER
PU = N a and P2 = PR = b into γIP,k in (96). Then after
where the two terms on the right hand side can be calculated R NB
H H 2
similarly to E kgk GF k in (72). Then the effect of the some manipulations, we have
AWGN at the RS is given α2 λPU NR σf2k
 by  lim γ IP,k = lim 2 . (107)
H H 2 NR →∞ NR →∞ σB
2+
2 2 2
NIP,k1 = α κ σR E ĝk GF̂ αλσ R 2 2 2
κ NR σg σf 2
k
 (102)
As the value of a determines the order of magnitude of σf2k ,
 XK
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
= α κ NB NR σg σR NB σg σfk + η σfi , we consider the cases a 6= 0 and a = 0, separately. Firstly, the
i=1
case a 6= 0 is considered, where
H
n o
H H
For E ĝk GF̂ Rnq F̂G ĝk in NIP,k2 , considering (5), we α3 λKEU2 βk2 NR1−2a
2 2
decompose it as lim α λP U N R σ fk = lim , (108)
NR →∞ NR →∞ σ2 R

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
14

2
σB λ2b σR
2 2
σB D1 1) When b < 21 , we have
lim 2 2 2 σ2
= lim 2 η2 β 2
NR →∞ κ NR σg fk NR →∞ KEU ER k (109)
a+2b−2
α2 λEU Qk NR
× NR [α (D2 + D3 ) + (1 − α)D4 ] , lim γIP,k= lim 2 D
PK 2
=∞.
NR →∞ NR →∞ 2+ α2 λ2bEUσB 1 i=1 Qi 2b
( αλσR 2 η2 Q
ER k
NR
2
ER η+σB b=0 α2 K 2 EU
3
NR2−3aP
K 4 (118)
where D1= 2 , D2= i=1βi +
σB b 6= 0
4
σR 2) When b = 21 , we have
2 1−2a P
αKEU NR K PK
σR2
2
i=1 βi j=1 βj = O(NR
2−3a
) + O(NR1−2a ), α2 λEU Qk NR ER2 2 2
η Qk
lim γIP,k = lim 4
PK 2
= K
. (119)
NR →∞ α2 λEUσB i=1 Qi
PK
σB i=1Q2i
4
P
D3 = αKEU NR1−a i=1 βi2 = O(NR1−a ), and D4 = NR →∞
2 η2 Q
ER
NR
2 2 3 1−3a P 2 1−2a P k
α K EU NR K 4 αKEU NR K 2
PK
4 i=1 βi + 2 i=1 βi j=1 βj +
σR
1−a PK
σR
1−a
3) When b > 12 , we have
2
αKEU NR i=1 βi = O(NR ). Therefore, the relation-
ship between 2 − 3a and 1 − a determines the order of α2 λEU Qk NR
lim γIP,k = lim 2 λ2bE σ 4
PK 2
= 0. (120)
magnitude of the right hand side of (109). NR →∞ NR →∞ α i=1 Qi
U B
2 2
ER η Qk
NR2b
1) When a, b < 21 , which means 2 − 3a > 1 − a, we have
Now, we have covered all the possible values of a and b,
α3 λKEU2 βk2 NR1−2a and Proposition 2 is proved.
lim γIP,k = lim = ∞,
NR →∞ NR →∞ αλσ 4 + D5 N a+2b−2 O(N 2−3a )
R R R
(110) R EFERENCES
λ2b σR
4 2
σB D1
where D5 = KEU E 2 η2 β 2 is a constant independent of NR . [1] A. Nosratinia, T. E. Hunter, and A. Hedayat, “Cooperative communica-
R k
2) When a < b = 12 , which means 2 − 3a > 1 − a, we have tion in wireless networks,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 42, no. 10, pp.
74−80, Oct. 2004.
α3 λKEU2 βk2 NR1−2a
ER2 2 4
η βk [2] Y. Rong and F. Gao, “Optimal beamforming for non-regenerative MIMO
lim γIP,k= lim 4 K
3
PK . = relays with direct link,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 13, no. 12, pp.
a−1 α3K 2EU i=1βi 2−3a σ 4 4
P
NR →∞ NR →∞
B i=1βi
D5 NR 4 NR 926−928, Dec. 2009.
σR [3] F. Gao, T. Cui, and A. Nallanathan, “On channel estimation and optimal
(111) training design for amplify and forward relay networks,” IEEE Trans.
3) When b < a = 12 , which means 2 − 3a = 1 − a, we have Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1907−1916, May 2008.
[4] W. Xu, X. Dong, and W.-S. Lu, “MIMO relaying broadcast channels
α3 λKEU2 βk2
α2KEU2 βk2 with linear precoding and quantized channel state information feedback,”
lim γIP,k = lim 3 1 4 . = IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 5233−5245, Oct. 2010.
NR →∞ NR →∞ 4 +D N 2b− 2 O(N 2 )
αλσR σR [5] W. Xu, X. Dong, and W.-S. Lu, “Joint precoding optimization for mul-
5 R R
(112) tiuser multi-antenna relaying downlinks using quadratic programming,”
IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 1228−1235, May 2011.
where we can find that whether b is equal to 0 or not has no [6] Y. Rong and Y. Xiang, “Multiuser multi-hop MIMO relay systems with
2
effect on the asymptotic value of γIP,k because the term αλσR correlated fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 10, pp.
dominates the order of magnitude of the denominator on the 2835−2840, Sep. 2011.
σ2 [7] X. Zhang, W. Wang, and X. Ji, “Multiuser diversity in multiuser twohop
right hand side of (107) instead of κ2 N 2 B
σ2 σ2
in this case. cooperative relay wireless networks: system model and performance
R g fk
analysis,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 1031−1036,
4) When a = b = 12 , which means 2 − 3a = 1 − a, we have Feb. 2009.
[8] V. W. Wong, R. Schober, D. W. K. Ng, and L.-C. Wang, Key Technolo-
α3 λKEU2 βk2 2 4 2
α2 KEU2 ER βk η gies for 5G Wireless Systems, Cambridge University Press, 2017.
lim γIP,k = lim −1
= ,
NR →∞ NR →∞ 4 + ι [9] T. Marzetta, “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited numbers
αλσR D5 NR 2 D6 of base station antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 9, no.
1
(113) 11, pp. 3590−3600, Nov. 2010.
1
α3 K 2 EU3
NR2 PK 4 [10] E. Larsson, O. Edfors, F. Tufvesson, and T.Marzetta, “Massive MIMO
where D6= σR4 i=1β i +D 3 = O(NR
2
). for next generation wireless systems,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 52,
1 no. 2, pp. 186−195, Feb. 2014.
5) When a > 2 , which means 2 − 3a < 1 − a, we have
[11] J. Zhu and R. Schober and V. K. Bhargava, “Physical layer security
for massive MIMO systems impaired by phase noise,” in Proc. IEEE
α3 λKEU2 βk2 NR1−2a SPAWC, Edinburgh, UK, Jul. 2016, pp. 1−5.
lim γIP,k = lim = 0, (114)
NR →∞ NR →∞ αλσ 4 +D5 N a+2b−2 O(N 1−a) [12] S. Jin, X. Wang, Z. Li, K.-K. Wong, Y. Huang, and X. Tang, “On massive
R R R
MIMO zero-forcing transceiver using time-shifted pilots,” IEEE Trans.
regardless of the value of b. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 59−74, Jan. 2016.
6) When a ≤ 12 < b, which means 2 − 3a ≥ 1 − a, we have [13] L. Liang, W. Xu, and X. Dong, “Low-complexity hybrid precoding in
massive multiuser MIMO systems,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol.
3, no. 6, pp. 653−656, Dec. 2014.
α3 λKEU2 βk2 NR1−2a [14] L. Lu, G. Y. Li, L. A. Swindlehurst, A. Ashikhmin, and R. Zhang,
lim γIP,k = lim = 0. (115)
NR →∞ NR →∞ D5 N a+2b−2 O(N 2−3a ) “An overview of massive MIMO: benefits and challenges,” IEEE J. Sel.
R R
Topics in Signal Process., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 742−758, Oct. 2014.
Next, we consider the case a = 0, where σf2i = [15] H. Q. Ngo, H. A. Suraweera, M. Matthaiou, and E. G. Larsson, “Multi-
pair full-duplex relaying with massive arrays and linear processing,”
αKEU βi2
2
αKEU βi +σR +(1−α)EU
PK = Qi . For (107) we have IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1721−1737, Sep. 2014.
j=1 βj [16] H. A. Suraweera, H. Q. Ngo, T. Q. Duong, C. Yuen, and E. G.
Larsson, “Multi-pair amplify-and-forward relaying with very large an-
lim α2 λPU NR σf2k = lim α2 λEU Qk NR , (116) tenna arrays,” in Proc. IEEE ICC, Budapest, Hungary, Jun. 2013, pp.
NR →∞ NR →∞
4635−4640.
PK [17] H. Cui, L. Song, and B. Jiao, “Multi-pair two-way amplify-and-forward
σB2 α2λ2bEUσB
2
D1 i=1Q2i 2b relaying with very large number of relay antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
lim 2 σ 2 σ 2 = N lim 2 η2 Q NR . (117)
NR →∞ κ2 NR g fk R →∞ ER k Commun., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 2636−2645, May 2014.

0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVT.2017.2726561, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology
[18] S. Jin, X. Liang, K.-K. Wong, X. Gao, and Q. Zhu, “Ergodic rate analysis
for multipair massive MIMO two-way relay networks,” IEEE Trans.
Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1480−1491, Mar. 2015.
[19] G. Amarasuriya and H. V. Poor, “Multi-user relay networks with massive
MIMO,” in Proc. IEEE ICC, London, UK, Jun. 2015, pp. 2017−2023.
[20] C. Risi, D. Persson, and E. G. Larsson, “Massive MIMO with 1-bit
ADC,” arXiv:1404.7736, 2014.
[21] A. K. Fletcher, S. Rangan, V. K. Goyal, and K. Ramchandran, “Robust
predictive quantization: analysis and design via convex optimization,”
IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 618−632, Dec.
2007.
[22] O. Orhan, E. Erkip, and S. Rangan, “Low power analog-to-digital con-
version in millimeter wave systems: Impact of resolution and bandwidth
on performance,” in Proc. Inf. Theory and Appl. Workshop (ITA), San
Diego, CA, USA, Feb. 2015, pp. 191−198.
[23] L. Fan, S. Jin, C.-K. Wen, and H. Zhang, “Uplink achievable rate for
massive MIMO systems with low-resolution ADC,” IEEE Commun.
Lett., vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 2186−2189, Dec. 2015.
[24] J. Zhang, L. Dai, S. Sun, and Z. Wang, “On the spectral efficiency of
massive MIMO systems with low-resolution ADCs,” IEEE Commun.
Lett., vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 842−845, May 2016.
[25] Q. Bai and J. A. Nossek, “Energy efficiency maximization for 5G
multiantenna receivers,” Trans. Emerging Telecommun. Technol., vol.
26, no. 1, pp. 3−14, Jan. 2015.
[26] W. Tan, S. Jin, C. Wen, and Y. Jing, “Spectral efficiency of mixed-
ADC receivers for massive MIMO systems,” IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp.
7841−7846, Aug. 2016.
[27] E. Björnson, J. Hoydis, M. Kountouris, and M. Debbah, “Massive
MIMO systems with non-ideal hardware: Energy efficiency, estimation,
and capacity limits,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 60, no. 11, pp.
7112−7139, Nov. 2014.
[28] L. K. S. Jayasinghe, N. Rajatheva, P. Dharmawansa, and M. L. Aho,
“Noncoherent amplify-and-forward MIMO relaying with OSTBC over
Rayleigh-Rician fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 62,
no. 4, pp. 1610−1622, May 2013.
[29] S. Zhou, G. Alfano, A. Nordio, and C. F. Chiasserini, “Ergodic capacity
analysis of MIMO relay network over Rayeligh-Rician channels,” IEEE
Commun. Lett., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 601−604, Apr. 2015.
[30] Q. Zhang, S. Jin, K.-K. Wong, H. Zhu, and M. Matthaiou, “Power
scaling of uplink massive MIMO systems with arbitrary-rank channel
means,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics in Signal Process., vol. 8, no. 5, pp.
966−981, Oct. 2014.
[31] J. Max, “Quantizing for minimum distortion,” IEEE Trans. Inform.
Theory, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 7−12, Mar. 1960.
[32] J. Singh, O. Dabeer, and U. Madhow, “On the limits of communication
with low-precision analog-to-digital conversion at the receiver,” IEEE
Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 57, no. 12, pp. 3629−3639, Dec. 2009.
[33] S. L. Loyka, “Channel capacity of MIMO architecture using the ex-
ponential correlation matrix,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 5, no. 9, pp.
369−371, Sep. 2001.
[34] X. Zheng, H. Zhang, W. Xu, and X. You, “Semi-orthogonal pilot
design for massive MIMO systems using successive interference can-
cellation,” in Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM, Austin, TX, USA, Dec. 2014,
pp. 3719−3724.
Peihao Dong received the B.S. degree in com-
munication engineering from Shandong University,
Weihai, China in 2012 and the M.S. degree in com-
munication and information system from Shandong
University, Jinan, China in 2015, respectively. He is
currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the Nation-
al Mobile Communications Research Laboratory,
Southeast University, Nanjing, China. His current
research interests include massive MIMO, relaying
transmission and heterogeneous network.
0018-9545 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
15
Hua Zhang (M’04) received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees from the Department of Radio Engineering,
Southeast University, Nanjing, China, in 1998 and
2001, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree from the
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology in 2004. From 2001
to 2004, he was a Graduate Research Assistant
with Georgia Institute of Technology. From 2004 to
2005, he worked as a Senior System Engineer with
Skyworks Solutions Inc., Irvine, California. From
2005 to 2006, he worked as a Staff Engineer with
MaxLinear Inc., Carlsbad, California. Since August 2006, he has been an
Associate Professor with the School of Information Science and Engineering,
Southeast University, Nanjing, China. He received the best paper awards of
IEEE MAPE in 2013, and IEEE Globecom in 2014. His current research
interests include massive MIMO, software defined radio, and cooperative
communications.
Wei Xu (S’07-M’09-SM’15) received his B.Sc.
degree in electrical engineering and his M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees in communication and information en-
gineering from Southeast University, Nanjing, China
in 2003, 2006, and 2009, respectively. Between 2009
and 2010, he was a Post-Doctoral Research Fellow
with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of Victoria, Canada. He is
currently a Full Professor at the National Mobile
Communications Research Laboratory, Southeast U-
niversity.
He has co-authored over 100 refereed journal and conference papers in
addition to 26 granted patents. His research interests include cooperative
communications, information theory, signal processing and machine learning
for wireless communications. He was an Editor of the IEEE C OMMUNICA -
TIONS L ETTERS in 2012–2017. He has been involved in technical program
committees for many international conferences including the IEEE Globecom,
the IEEE ICC, the IEEE WCNC, the IEEE VTC, and the IEEE PIMRC. He
received the best paper awards from the IEEE MAPE in 2013, the IEEE/CIC
ICCC in 2014, the IEEE Globecom in 2014, and the IEEE ICUWB in 2016.
He was the co-recipient of the First Prize of the Science and Technology
Award in Jiangsu Province, China in 2014.
Xiaohu You (F’12) received the B.S., M.S., and
Ph.D. degrees from Nanjing Institute of Technology,
Nanjing, China, in 1982, 1985, and 1989, respective-
ly, all in electrical engineering. From 1987 to 1989,
he was with Nanjing Institute of Technology as a
Lecturer. Since 1990, he has been with Southeast
University, Nanjing, China, first as an Associate
Professor and later as a Professor. His research
interests include mobile communications, adaptive
signal processing, and artificial neural networks,
with applications to communications and biomedical
engineering. He is the Chief of the Technical Group of China 3G/B3G Mobile
Communication R&D Project. He was a recipient of the Excellent Paper Prize
from the China Institute of Communications in 1987 and the Elite Outstanding
Young Teachers Awards from Southeast University in 1990, 1991, and 1993.
He was also a recipient of the 1989 Young Teacher Award from Fok Ying
Tung Education Foundation, State Education Commission of China.