Wireless Networks

Optimal Base Station Placement Using Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm in LTE

Cellular Network
--Manuscript Draft-Manuscript Number:

WINE-D-16-01154

Full Title:

Optimal Base Station Placement Using Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm in LTE

Cellular Network

Article Type:

Manuscript

Keywords:

Base Station; Radio Network Planning; Non-Dominated sorting genetic algorithm

(NSGAII); Antenna configuration; Long Term Evolution (LTE)

Corresponding Author:

mohamed amine ouamri

Universite de Bejaia
targa ouzemour, ALGERIA

Corresponding Author Secondary

Information:
Corresponding Author's Institution:

Universite de Bejaia

Corresponding Author's Secondary

Institution:
First Author:

mohamed amine ouamri

First Author Secondary Information:

Order of Authors:

mohamed amine ouamri

Abdelkrim KHireddine

Order of Authors Secondary Information:

Funding Information:

Powered by Editorial Manager and ProduXion Manager from Aries Systems Corporation

Manuscript

Click here to download Manuscript Optimal Base Station

Placement Using Multi.docx

Click here to view linked References

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Optimal Base Station Placement Using Multi-Objective Genetic

Algorithm in LTE Cellular Network
Ouamri Mohamed Amine1
ouamrimouhamedamine@gmail.com
1

Abdelkrim KHireddine1
abdelkrim.khired@gmail.com

Laboratoire de Gnie Electrique, Facult de Technologie, Universit De Bejaia, 06000 Bejaia,Algeria

Abstract Base station placement problem is an important step and the fundamental in the
conception of mobile network. In this paper, we introduce a mathematical model for planning of
Long Term Evolution. The objective of model is to maximize coverage and minimize the cost of the
network. The optimization problem is constrained and multi-objective. Genetic algorithm is
considered to solve this problem. Antenna configurations include power transmission, tilt, height
and site coordinates (x, y). In addition field strength at each test point is set as given threshold value
and path loss is calculated using Hata model. The performance of this approach concerns to finding
a set of base stations from a set of candidates list. Result and discussion on the performance of the
algorithm are provided.
Keywords Base Station, Radio Network Planning, Non-Dominated sorting genetic algorithm
(NSGAII), Antenna configuration, Long Term Evolution (LTE)

1. Introduction
Planning of current mobile Network consists of several tasks: radio planning, frequency assignment,
base stations placement, capacity planning etc. The optimized base station (BS) is necessary and an
important process for network operators. It is expected that fourth generation network will provide a
good quality of service (QOS). Therefore, the objective of BS planning is to increase network
coverage with minimum investment cost. However, there is tradeoff between QOS and investment
cost. Hence, there are many research groups are interested in this axis. In several studies, a genetic
algorithm approach has been used to solve BS positioning problem. A simple genetic algorithm
with new representation of antenna placement is applied in [1]. Dynamic traffic load is considered
to determine optimal location of BS using evolutionary optimization algorithm has been suggested
in [2]. In addition, simulated annealing has been adopted for the antenna placement problem in [3]
and particle swarm optimization in [4].
Larry Raisenen et al [5] present a permutation code strategy for multi-objective to select BS sites
and configuration for GSM network where the configurations of each antenna involve power
transmission, tilt, height and azimuth. The objective is to minimize the BS cost and satisfying the
coverage with handover and interference constraints. [6] Used an evolutionary algorithm with local
search for solving the problem of the positioning and configuration of BS in Long Term Evolution.
This approach aims to minimize cost of the network and achieve the balance between the Uplink
and downlink business.
In Earlier, Zimerman [7] introduce an advanced model for antenna placement problem and
mathematical programing model are proposed, which address economical and technical aspects.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Simulated annealing by combining the multi-objectives into single objective is recommended by

Hurley [8]. Two conflicting objective namely coverage maximization and cost minimization are
studied in [9]. The key aspect of this framework is to compare deferent multi-objective algorithm
and choose the most efficient. The author in [10] studied the coverage problem in LTE-Advanced
and propose E-Tree algorithm to accomplish the network planning of two hop relaying. An
optimization approach is proposed in [11] for the planning UMTS cellular network to determine the
base station location, minimizing the installation costs and coverage are maximized.
For finding the optimal positioning of BS, the author of [12] considers the WiMAX networks
planning problem. The objective of this model is to minimize infrastructure cost while maximizing
coverage. The problem of BS positioning for cellular radio network is addressed in [13] and integer
linear programs are developed to determining optimal BS positioning with minimizing interferences
between BSs and minimizing the number of blocked channels. Planning of 3G cellular network is
studied in [14]. He developed a mathematical model of optimization for selecting the optimal BSs
from the set of candidate site. Capacity and quality of service has been considered the constraints.
In [15] genetic approach to radio network for mobile systems is suggested. This research focus on
the radio coverage problem, that is to cover a maximum geographical area at an optimal cost. The
authors of [16, 17] studies the UMTS radio network planning to find a best possible base station
location, where the objective is formulated to maximize coverage while the total network cost is
reduced. Randomized greedy procedures and local search algorithm are also proposed to find an
approximate solution. In order to solve a problem of BS planning [18] present a model for planning
cellular network. He describe the main corresponding mathematical model for planning second and
third generation network and give some computational approach which guarantee an optimum
solution.
In this paper, we build the problem of base station placement and configuration of antenna using
multi-objective genetic algorithm in LTE network. The objective is to maximize coverage and
minimize the network cost with Handover, traffic demand and interference is considered as
constraint. In addition the proposed model must satisfy that all test point receive service. The
parameters of BS involves; (x, y) coordinates, power transmission, tilt and height. The propagation
model used for the calculation path loss is Hukumura HATA [19].
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2, we introduce a mathematical model of base
stations placement. Sections 3 enumerate objective and constraints. Section 4, multi-objective
genetic algorithm is proposed. In section 5 results from simulation are discussed. Finally,
conclusion and future works.
2. Base station placement problem
In this section, we introduce the mathematical model for base station placement and all components
necessary for solving problem. In order to define our BS positioning concept we describe the
following details:
2.1. Basic model
Before introducing the multi-objective genetic algorithm to generate a set of non-dominate solution,
it is suitable to make a mathematical model for BS problem in our study.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Let 1 , de note the set of candidates base stations and 1 is the possible
configuration of BS. The configuration contains the geographical position, transmission power, tilt
of antenna and height. In LTE there are two types of base stations. Namely, large base stations
(LBS) and small base stations (SBS) [20]. If one (LBS) is not deployed in the surface, the (SBS)
belong to its not deployed. The set of test points is given by 1 , . Each TP is served by
only one active BS with in appropriate configuration. Three binary decision variables are
represented in this model:
1
= {
0

LBS works with configuration

others

1
0

others

= {

1
0

= {

SBS works with configuration

others

2.2. Antenna
Three types of antenna are available in cellular radio network namely omnidirectional antenna
(OD), large directional (LD) and small directional (SD) [21]. Each antenna is characterized by its
transmission power, gain and propagation diagram. However, in our case study only
omnidirectional antenna has been considered because it radiates radio wave power uniformly in all
direction in one plane figure1.

Fig 1: Omnidirectional antenna diagram

OD is characterized primary by their power, ranging from 26 to 55 dBm, transmission gain
=11.15dB and antenna vertical diagram loss (AVDL) which is determined using tilt between
mobile and antenna [22]. AVDL can be calculated using equation1.
= min [12 (

, ), = 20]

Where: is side lobe attenuation and 3 = 4.4

(1)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

parameters

Large Base Stations

Small Base Stations

Power

[26 55] dBm

[26 30] dBm

Height

[30 70] m

[10 20] m

Tilt

[0

[0

-15]

-15]

Tab 1: Parameters of LBSs and SBSs

2.3. Testing point
A base station provides a service for a category of users represented as test points in this paper.
Each test point receives the threshold relative to its position in the area network. If the received
signal strength BS is greater than the required quality of service, noted than a service test point
can be communicate. The threshold in our study is fixed at =-90dBm.
2.4. Propagation model
Propagation models have been developed to be able to estimate the radio wave propagation as
accurately as possible. Models have been created from different environments to product the path
loss between the transmitter and the receiver. Hata [19] proposed an empirical model to determine
the path loss which means that is it based on field measurement. The Hata model for path loss
prediction can be written as:
= 69.55 + 26.16() 13.82 log( ) ( ) + 44.9 6.55 log( ) log()

(2)

Where the frequency measured in MHZ, is the height of base station measured in m, is the
Euclidean distance between BS and TP measured in KM and given by equation (4). ( ) is the
mobile antenna correction factor. It is represented as follow:
( ) = (1.1 log() 0.7) (1.56 log() 0.8)
= =1( )
The Okumura Hata model is valid for the frequency ranges 150-1500 MHz and 1500-2000 MHz,
base station antenna height is from 30 to 200 meters and 1 to 10 meters are the mobile antenna
height.

(3)

(4)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Fig 2: Path loss representation

2.5. Field strength measurement
Field strength FS is the received power of any point in area. The FS of antenna at test point is given
by equation (5) based on [5] and [7]. This parameter is calculated by the propagation model,
AVDL, HVDL. In omnidirectional antenna only AVDL is taken into account.
= + ( )

(5)

Where is define the angle of incidence between BS and TP shown figure 3 which is calculated
using equation (6).

Fig 3: Angle of incidence between BS and TP

3. Constraints and objectives formulation
Complexity of future LTE radio networks makes their optimization very hard and expensive.
Finding optimum installation of base stations is very difficult for the optimizer and considered as a
multi-objective problem. Indeed, the objective is to maximize coverage and minimize the number of
base stations used, under constraints of traffic demand, interference and handover.
3.1. Maximizing coverage
The target for coverage is to find optimal location for base stations to reach maximum coverage by
covering maximum test points. With the capacity limited, it is not possible to cover all TPs by one

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

BS. However, total traffic served by a cell cannot exceed 43 Erlang. A particular test points is said
to be covered by antenna if and only if FS is greater than =-92dBm. This objective is formally
expressed by the following formula:

(6)

=1 =1

Subject to:

(7)

3.2. Minimizing cost

Order to guarantee a good quality of service to their users; cellular networks planers are undertaking
several solutions. For example, coverage can be maximizing by increasing the number of antenna.
Consequently the cost related with BS is also increase. For this reason, the second objective is to
minimize the financial cost. The cost related at each BS is given based on its adopted power
transmission see Table 2 [8] and calculated using equation (8)

(8)

=1

Power (dBm)

55

50

45

40

35

Cost

1.7

1.5

1.3

1.1

Tab 2: Antenna cost related to power transmission

3.3. Interference constraint
The communication of a mobile with the base station may be interfered by other signals received
from other base stations. In LTE network, two mobile located in the same cell cannot be interfering
because of multicarrier modulation OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplexing) [23]. Our
work is interested about the constraints of inter-cell interference which is illustrated in figure 4. In
the general case, if one test point covers by more than two BS then overlap occurs. A base station is
classified interfering if it provides signal strength at a service test point that is greater than
90 but is not the BS providing handover not the best server. This constraint allows us to
determine the location of new site as well as the transmitting power with the existing BS.

Fig 4: Inter-cell interference

3.4. Handover constraint

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Handover is a fundamental mechanism and constraint in cellular network it means the operation for
allowing a user to have seamless transfer without losing the connectivity from base station to
another. In Order that handover is successful, it is necessary that the number of neighboring base
station is sufficiently elevated. The condition to achieve the handover constraints is when the field
strength at received from base station 1 is within 7 dB of the field strength at received from a
neighboring base station 2 [24].

(9)

Fig 5: Handover between two base stations

3.5. Traffic demand
Traffic demand is the total number of test points (users) which can connect to the base stations. It is
given as a function of TRx show table 3. The traffic estimation in the network is given in term of
Erlang. However, the maximum handing capacity of one BS cannot exceed 43 Erlang. Due to this
constraint, the maximum traffic capacity has been calculated based on TP attached to any BS
according to the field strength value. Minimum number of antenna required is calculated by
equation (10).

TRX
Capacity

(10)

43

2.9

8.2

15

22

28

35.5

43

Table 3: Transmitters and Traffic capacity

4. Multi-Objective Genetic algorithms

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

4.1. Description of GA
Genetic algorithms (GA) are evolutionary optimization based on the mechanisms of natural
selection and genetics. It is developed by John Holland and these collaborators in 1960s and 1970
[24]. GA have also become increasingly for base stations placement [25, 26, 27, 28].
These approaches predominantly seek to optimize complex nonlinear models. In general, a genetic
algorithm has five basic components, as summarized by Michalewiez [29]:

Genetic representation of solutions to the problem.

A way to create an initial population of solutions.
An evaluation function rating solutions in terms of their fitness.
Genetics operators that alter the genetic composition of children during reproduction.
Values of the parameters of genetic algorithms.

In principle, multi-objective optimization problems are very different from single-objective

optimization. In the single-objective, one attempt to obtain the solution but in the multi-objective
problem there does not exist a solution that is necessarily to respect all objective. Therefore, there
are several genetic algorithms can be adapted to research of multi-objective problem namely the
Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm version II (SPEA2), the Pareto Envelope-based Selection
Algorithm (PESA) and non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGAII) which used in case of
our study. NSGAII is detailed in section (4.3.2).
4.2.

The concept of Pareto solution

In the strict sense, Pareto solution is a concept in multi criteria optimization based on the nondominated solution. In the Pareto optimal solution, it is not possible to enhance the value of any
objective without degrading the quality of the other objective. A point is said to be a Pareto solution
if and only if it is nondominated with respect to all point in the criterion space for a given problem
[30]. In some GA, Pareto solutions are determined in each generation. A nondominated solution in
one generation may become dominated by a new solution emerging in a later generation.
4.3. Proposed Algorithm
An automatic algorithm for base station placement is proposed in this section. The algorithm starts
with initializing the geographical area and the parameters of network. In addition, the set of test
point cover by the appropriate base station are determined calculating field strength. Before
measuring field strength, the Euclidean distance, path loss and angle on incidence are determined
between each TP and BS. Then NSGA II is used as algorithm to find the smallest set which covers
all test point. In order to find the best interaction with different base station already commissioned,
the algorithm adopts a best server model or uses the antenna that deliver the strongest signal. The
results obtained are a set of nondominated solution where coverage and cost are objectives.

Algorithm 1 General procedure for cell planning

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

1: Initialize geographic information and introduce the parameters of network (BS, TP, and
Antenna).
2: Deployed randomly all in the area
3: Determine an appropriate configuration of base station (See algorithm 2)
4: For = 1:
5:
For j = 1: n
6: Calculate the Euclidean Distance, Path Loss, Angle of Incidence and find the Field Strength (FS)
7: From a population of permutation size N=700
8: Coverage and Cost are optimized using NSGA II (see algorithm 4)
9: Save Nondominated solution
In order to find one or more suitable solutions, this algorithm involves exploring the search space of
all possible cell plans and it should check at each stage that all constraints and objectives are
satisfied. We assume that each test points are routinely spaced every 200 meters and all base
stations are uniformly distributed in the work area with an initial configuration that is selected from
the set of possible configuration.
4.3.1. Base stations configuration process
A second algorithm is carried out. It aims to determine the appropriate configuration that allows us
to find the set of test points each base station covers by limiting the traffic load Tmax to 43 Erlang.
It is necessary that call handover from one BS to other without service interruption is obtained. We
propose a method which involves progressing by site in order to select the neighboring cell. Noting
also that overlap is tolerated for the successful of handover, but they must not exceed a certain
threshold which degrades communication. The process of method begins with assigned to each base
station, an omnidirectional antenna. The antenna tilts are incremented at 0 and their height is 30m
for LBS and 20m for SBS. Each BS is adjusted to greatest power transmission raging from [26
55dBm]. Then installation of BS is made according to (x, y) coordinate of site, diagram loss, path
loss, angle of incidence and field strength are calculated using the above equation. We determine
the set of test point cover by base station. Flowing this, If Field strength 90 and a given
configuration do not exceed maximum traffic so we proceed to configure the next BS in such a way
to satisfy the constraint of handover and interference. If this condition is not satisfied then we
change the configuration as shown in the algorithm.

Algorithm 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Configuration process

1: Set traffic demand to 43 Erlang

2: For j=1: n
3: Introduce an omnidirectional antenna for each BS
4: Set value of tilt to minimum = 0
5: Select power transmission at 55dBm
6:

while configuration is not appropriate do

7:

Measure traffic and Handover

8:

if Tmax43 Erlang and 7 then

9:

Reduce power by 2dBm or adjust tilt by 1

10:

else if Tmax43 Erlang and 7 then

11:

Reduce tilt by 1

12:

else

13:

The configuration is adequate

14:

end if

15:

end while

16: end For

4.3.2. Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA II)

Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm is a popular and very effective algorithm for solving
multi-objective optimization problems. It was first proposed by Deb et al. in 2002 [31,32] and used
here to optimize two conflicting objectives: coverage and cost. NSGA II is based on the advanced
concepts of elitism, crowding distance. The objective of this algorithm is to improve the adaptive fit
of a population of solution to a Pareto front. In order to sort a population of size n according to the
level of non-domination, each solution must be compared with every other solution in the
population to find if it is dominated. Initially, a random population is created then apply
recombination, mutation and binary tournament selection to create a child population of size n.
Indeed, the elitism proceeds with combining population = + . Flowing this, the population
is sorted according to nondomination. We declare 1 as the first front. Now, for each solution in the
first front the remaining members in are add to 1 and compared with the current member of 1 .
Finally, the crowding distance is calculated after having remove all current member of 1 from
and set to produce 2 3 etc.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

The concept of crowding distance (CrD) is incorporated in NSGA II. To calculate CrD, we take
average distance between two points on either side of this point. The CrD is then calculated by
estimating the size of the largest cuboid enclosing the point i. In other word, the average side-length
of cuboid is the crowding distance of the ith solution in its front. For each objective w, the crowding
distance is calculated using equation (11).

[] = [] + |( [ + 1]. [ 1]. )|

(11)

Fig 6: crowding distance calculation

The following algorithm is used to calculate the crowding distance of each point in the set F:
= ||

Number of solution

For each , Set [] = 0

Initialize distance

For each objective

= Sort (, )

Sort using each objective value

[1] = [] =
For = 2 ( 1)

for all other points

[] = [] + |( [ + 1]. [ 1]. )|
To guide the selection process at the various stages of the algorithm, NSGA II use a crowded
comparison operator < . For each individual j in a population has two attributes namely
nondomination rank and the crowding distance . We define a partial order as:
<

( < ) (( = )) (( = ))

(12)

The new population +1 is created by adding members from the first front 1 till the size exceedsn.
thereafter, the solutions of the last front are sorted by crowded comparison operator < . Selection,
crossover and mutation are applied to form a new population +1. It is necessary to note that we
use a binary tournament selection, but the selection now is based on the niched comparison factor.

Algorithm 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA II)

1: Create initial population of size n

2: Generate random population
3: Evaluate objective values
4: Assign rank and sort based on Pareto domination
5: Binary tournament selection
6: Recombination and mutation
7:

Create child population of size n

8: Evaluate objective values

9:

For = 1 to do

9:

10:

= fast nondominated-sort ( )

11:

while + < do

Combine parent and children population

= (1 , 2 ) all nondominate front of

12:

Calculate crowding distance using Algorithm 3

13

if + + < then
+ = +

14:
15:

else if

+ + > then

Decreasing sort using crowding distance

16:
17:

end if

18:

= +1

19:

include ith nodominated front in the parent population

end while

20: Calculate crowded comparison operator

21:

<

( < ) (( = )) (( = ))

22: Select parent iteratively from + to create a new population +1 of size n

23: Evaluate objective values +1
24:

=+1

25: end For

5. Simulation Experiment and Analysis

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

To test the efficiency of the proposed model, we designed 250Km 25Km as study area where the
total numbers of test points are distributed and select in equal interval. The purpose of the
experimentation is to determine the effectiveness of the approach using NSGA II. However, this
approach must meet a high quality standard, namely 98% of coverage, 100% handover at minimum
cost and low interference. Table 4 show the parameters used in numerical experiment.
Description
Frequency
Receive Sensitivity
Antenna Gain
Antenna LOSS
Maximum Traffic
Height of mobile

parameters

value
900 MHz
-92 dbm
11.15 db
7.2 db
43 Erlang
1.8m

Table 4: parameters used in the simulation

Initially, the algorithm begins with randomly activates the base station when initializes the
population and defines randomly the configuration for each base station. In this paper, the number
of iteration is 50 and the simulation of NSGA II for base station placement is solved using
MATLAB 2009 and run on PC with Intel core i3 possessor @ 2GHZ with 4GB RAM.
Table 5 show that the average coverage and corresponding cost in the scenario. Optimum base
stations (LBS, SBS) coordinate, tilt and transmission power for some selected base station are
reported in Table 6.
Scenario

Coverage (%)

Cost value

98.78

8.1

97.20

7.8

98.31

7.9

95.16

7.5

Table 5 Average coverage and cost value

BS

()

()

()

()

()

LBS

2.1

8.8

41

37

-10

SBS

3.7

6.8

28

14

-1

LBS

3.8

51

29

-1

SBS

9.2

9.4

30

10

-8

Table 6 Variable of Base station (LBS, SBS) identified using NSGA II

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

The base station positioning model using a multi-objective algorithm is developed in this section,
the results are described below. However, the interpretation of results is mainly focused on the
number of selected BS and the coverage achieved in a particular experimentation. Figure 7 shows
some non-dominated solutions found during each execution. Indeed, coverage is deferent from the
three cases and the percentage of handover is higher in figure (7.c). In figure (7.b), the optimal
coverage was reached 97.20 % and the number of selected BS was found to be (9LBS, 8SBS). The
coverage was slightly lower at 98.78% with a rate of handover which is close to 96.78% figure
(7.a). In order to satisfy the quality of service, it is necessary to select low transmission power as
well as the height of transmitter shows table 6. It should be noted that the minimum number of base
station obtained is (8LBS, 7SBS), and that their location and configuration may change if more
candidate sites with a nether configuration are included in the sets.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Fig 7: Base Station positioning for each scenario

Figure 8 and 9 show the variation of handover and interference according to the coverage when the
cellular capacity is 43 Erlang. However, the handover improves as the coverage increases, it should
be noted that more it is there will be sufficient overlap, the more handover takes place. On the other
hand, when the coverage increases, the interference rises slowly but after 86% of coverage,
interference increases rapidly. The obtained Pareto front is represented in figure 10, it indicates the
performance of the proposed NSGA II algorithm.
100

90

90

80

80

70

70

60

60

Interference

100

50

40

50

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50

Fig 8: Handover variation according to coverage

70

80

90

100

Fig 9: Interference variation according to coverage

8
7.9
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
7
80

60

C o ve r a g e

C o ve r a g e

Cost

Handover

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

C o ve r a g e

Fig 10: Pareto front of NSGA II

98

100

6. Conclusion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

We have introduced the bases station placement problem for LTE cellular network. The objective in
this paper is to maximize the coverage while reducing the network cost, however a multi-objective
genetic algorithm based on non-dominated solution (NSGAII) has been proposed to find the
optimal BS location and antenna configuration. The results obtained show about the performance of
NSGAII for cellular network planning. The simulation results obtained are encouraging. As a future
work, we propose to optimize the position of the base stations in a LTE-advanced network by using
the MNSGAII algorithm and the uses of MIMO antennas for transmission.
Reference
[1]
Young Seouk Choi, Kyung Soo Kim, Nam Kim (2007), The Positioning of Base Station in Wireless
Communication with Genetic Approach, Personal Wireless Communication. PP 217-229.
[2]
N. Lakshminarasimman S. Baskar A. Alphones (2013), Base Station Placement for Dynamic Traffic Load
Using Evolutionary Algorithm, Wireless personal communication, Volume 72, Issue 1. PP 671-691.
[3]

E.H.L. Aarts and J.H.M. Kout (1989), Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines. Wiley, Chichester.

[4]
Marciel Barros Pereira (2014), Particle Swarm Optimization for base station placement IEEE
Telecommunications symposium
[5] Larry Raisanen (2008), A permutation-code evolutionary strategy for multi-objective GSM network planning,
Journals of heuristics Springer. PP 1-21.
[6]
Wentian Mai, Hai-Lin Liu, Lei Chen (2013), Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm for 4G Base Station
Planning, IEEE Computational Intelligence and Security (CIS), PP 85-89.
[7]
Jorg Zimmermann, Robin Hons, Heinz Muhlenbein (2003), an evolutionary algorithm for the antenna
placement problem Computer and Industrial engineering 44, PP 209-226.
[8]
Hurley, Planning Effective cellular mobile radio networks (2002), IEEE Transactions on Vehicle Technology,
51(2), PP 243-253.
[9]
Larry Raisanen, Roger m. Whitaker (2005), Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Objective Genetic
Algorithms for the Antenna Placement Problem, Mobile Network and Applications 10 Springer, PP 79-88.
[10] Fan-Hsun Tseng, Chi-Yuan Chen, Li-Der Chou (2012), IEEE Advanced Information Networking and
Applications (AINA). PP 944-950
[11] Job Munyaneza, Anish Kurien, Ben Van Wyk (2008), Optimization of Antenna Placement in 3G Networks
using Genetic Algorithms, IEEE Broadband Communications, Information Technology & Biomedical Applications,
PP 30-37.
[12] Chitapong Wechtaisong, Chutima prommak (2014), Multi-Objective Planning and Optimization for Base
Station Placement in WIMAX Network IEEE Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and
Information Technology.
[13] Rudolf Mathar, Thomas Niessen (2000) Optimum positioning of base stations for cellular radio networks,
Wireless Network, Volume 6, Issue 6, PP 421-428.
[14] Olinick, E. (2011), Mathematical programming models for third generation wireless network design, Wireless
network design: Optimization models and solution procedures, PP 101125.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

[15]
CalCgari P., Guidec F., Kuonen P., Wagner D (1997), GENETIC APPROACH TO RADIO NETWORK
OPTIMIZATION FOR MOBILE SYSTEMS, IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, PP 755-759.
[16]
Amaldi, E., Capone, A., Malucelli, F., & Signori, F (2002), UMTS radio planning: optimizing base station
configuration. In Proceedings of 56th IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC) Vol. 2, PP 768772.
[17]
Eisenblatter, A., Fugenschuh, A., Geerdes, H., Junglas, D., Koch, T., & Martin, A (2004), Integer
programming methods for UMTS radio network planning. In Proceedings of the Wireless Optimization, Cambridge,
UK.
[18]
Masaharu HATA (1980),Empirical Formula for Propagation Loss in Land Mobile Radio Services, IEEE
Transactions ON Vehicular Technology, VOL. VT-29, NO.3, PP 317-325.
[19]
Ajay. R.Mishra (2007), Advanced Cellular Network Planning and Optimization 2G/2.5G/3G Evolution to
4G, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, PP 544.
[20]
Xueyi Liang, Hai-Lin Liu, Qiang Wang (2015), 4G Heterogeneous Networks Base Station Planning Using
Evolutionary Multi-objective Algorithm, IEEE Computational Intelligence and Security (CIS), PP 248-252
[21]
Michel Vasquez, Jin-Kao Hao (2001), A Heuristic Approach for Antenna Positioning in Cellular Networks,
Journal of Heuristics springer, PP 443-472.
[22]
Osman N. C. Yilmaz, Seppo Hmlinen, Jyri Hmlinen (2009),System Level Analysis of Vertical
Sectorization for 3GPP LTE, IEEE Wireless Communication Systems, PP 453-457.
[23]
Francis Dominique, Christian G.Gerlach, James.P (2010), Selforganizing interference management for LTE,
mobile and wireless communication, Bell Labs Technical journals, PP 19-4
[24]

Holland J.H (1975), Adaptation in Natural and Artificial systems, Univercity of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

[25] I. Laki, L. Farkas and L. Nagy (2001), Cell planning in mobile communication systems using SGA
optimization, in: Proc. of Internat. Conf. on Trends in Communications, Vol. 1 pp. 124127.
[26]
A. Molina, G.E. Athanasiadou and A.R. Nix (1999), The automatic location of base-stations for optimised
cellular coverage: A new combinatorial approach, in: Proc. of the IEEE VTC99 Conf, PP 606610.
[27]
P. Reininger, S. Iksal, A. Caminada and J.J. Korczak (1999), Multi-stage optimization for mobile radio
network planning, in: Proc. of the IEEE VTC99 Conf., Vol. 3, PP 20342038.
[28]
X. Huang, U. Behr and W. Wiesbeck (2000), Automatic cell planning for a low-cost and spectrum efficient
wireless network, in: Proc. of Global Telecommunications Conf. (GLOBECOM), Vol, PP 276 282.
[29]
Zbigniew Michalewicz, (1996), Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs (3rd ed.), springerverlag.
[30]

Mitsuo Gen, Runwei Cheng (2000), Genetic Algorithm & Engineering Optimization, John Wiley & Sons.

[31]

Deb, K. (2001),Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms, Wiley, Chichester.

[32] Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., Meyarivan, T (2000), A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm
for multi-objective optimization: Nsga-ii. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1917, PP 849858