LTE Advanced Description

LTE Advanced Description
Contents
Summary on single site studies COMP Classification Positioning of COMP technologies Requirements on the X2 Enabling technologies Efficient feedback
Feedback compression Discrete feedback: Best companion
Receivers: SIC and IRC Pilot design and concepts Summary and way forward Outlook: ARTIST-4G project proposal
2 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009
All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009
Recent single site studies on R8

Downlink study for 6 sectors versus 3 sctors Same number of users per site, same number of antenna elements Spectral efficiency increased by 50 to 60 % for 6 sectors 6 sectors were evaluated for 30,35,40 deg. Of hor. Beam width Cell edge data rates decreases with beam width Cell edge data rate stays equal in best case
Downlink Study of Closed loop TX diversity vs. Open loop SFBC At low velocities
CL wins : Spectral efficiency is increased by 20% and cell edge thpt. by 40%
At high velocities 30 km/h to 250 km/h

CL wins for the cell edge data rate ( it is equal or better ) OL wins for the spectral efficiency (slight gain at 30km/h, 50% gain at 250 km/h)
LTE Advanced
Targets for LTE, LTE advanced

LTE
(3GPP,) Peak data rate DL Peak data rate UL Peak spectrum efficiency DL Peak spectrum efficiency UL 100Mb/s @20MHz 1Gb/s (low mobility) (2RX) 100 Mb/s (high mobility) 50 Mb/s (1TX) 5 bit/s/Hz (2RX) 2.5 bit/s/Hz (2RX)
3 ..4 times R6 1.69 bits/Hz (2x2 ant)
2 ..3 times R6 0.028 bits/Hz (1x2 ant) 2 .. 3 times R6 0.05 bits/Hz (1x2 ant)
LTE advanced
LTE-A:
High spectrum flexibility, e.g. spectrum allocations up to 100 MHz Service: 60 VoIP channels / MHz Backward compatibility to LTE
Performance targets in 3GPP TR 36.913 v8.0.0 Requirements for Further Advancements for E-UTRA (LTEAdvanced), June 2008
500 Mb/s 30 bit/s/Hz (8x8 ant) 15 bit/s/Hz (4x4 ant)
Average spectrum efficiency DL

Average spectrum efficiency UL Cell edge spectrum efficiency DL
3.7 bit/s/Hz (4x4 ant)

2 bit/s/Hz (2x4 ant) 0.12 bit/s/Hz (4x4 ant)
Cell edge spectrum efficiency UL

2 .. 3 times R6 0.028 bits/Hz (1x2 ant)
0.07 bit/s/Hz (2x4 ant)

How to reach LTE-A targets? Following the Cellular paradigm
Alternative: increase sectorization
Increase the re-use of spectrum per km (using smaller cells) => Move the traffic from the air into the fixed part
But there are economic constraints: Base station sites are expensive ( Mainly OPEX for acquisition, backhaul, maintenance, energy ) The approach does not improve the situation at cell edge
6 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009 All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009
Options within one cell
Keep the number of antennas: Improve the bits / Hz for single link Improve receivers, channel feedback, link adaptation, scheduling Introduce layered transmission (RDMA) Increase the number of antennas Improve the link budget ( by Beamforming ) Increase the re-use of spectrum per km (using MU MIMO / SDMA) Take contribution from SU MIMO operation (for UEs in good radio conditions)
Multi-cell situation: two approaches

Interference avoidance Network MIMO
Reduce / Avoid inter-cell interference (using space and frequency) Interference co-ordination Coordinated scheduling Use beamforming Use signals from neighbor cell constructively Network MIMO
Candidate Technologies for Performance Improvements with LTE Advanced

Enabling Technology Lower Backhauling Latency Candidate Technology for LTE Advanced
Coordinated multi-point transmission and reception Mobility enhancements
Accelerated Procedures (Access, HO)
Additional Standardized Measurements
Collaborative MIMO/ Network MIMO
Beamforming/ Spatial Component ICIC
Time/Freq. Dynamic ICIC
SON Management
Dynamic Spectrum Access
Larger Bandwidths
Support of wider bandwidth up to 100 MHz
KPIs used for assessments

Performance: Net cell throughput and cell-edge rate (5%)
Reference signal and signalling overhead to be subtracted (e.g., dedicated versus common RS) CSI overhead (Quantized PMI, Channel magnitude and Phase) to be subtracted
Cost: Backhaul requirements (bit rate, latency) Computational complexity Preferred antenna configuration; No Sectors: 3,6,12; number of TX and RX Synchronization and calibration requirements
Other aspects Sensitivity to practical impairments Scalability of the solution ( can it be extended over the network?) Central or distributed processing not a KPI
Selection process for COMP methods
1 Fundamental phase
Prioritize MIMO and COMP options, eliminate options as far as possible according to their complexity and performance. using basic considerations and fundamental calculations for performance assessment.
2 Real-world asessment phase

First analysis to rank the options Include real-world aspects like:

amount of pilot and signalling overhead required Influence of real-world receivers: channel estimation errors .. Cost of opportunity : e.g. HARQ gain is reduced or HARQ not useable, constraints for backhauling and antenna deployments.
System simulations to focus on winning options Use NGMN compliant system simulation Use results for decisions and standardization inputs ( Work Item )
3 Standardisation phase.
Include status in standardization Re-adjust models according to decisions already taken in 3GPP. Further assess solutions in comparison to other options in 3GPP.
COMP/ Network MIMO
Classification of COMP schemes / 3GPP for LTE

Downlink
High potential gains -pilot overhead - Backhaul requirements
Uplink
backhaul requirements
Joint processing coherent combining
(bandwidth, latenmcy)
Joint processing coherent superposition

(Radio samples or softbits)
spectral efficiency
Joint processing non-coherent combining
Collaborative MIMO : Lower potential gains than coherent
High gains - Backhaul requirements!
Coordinated scheduling (per sector or per beam) Efficient interference reduction

Coordinated scheduling
Network MIMO: Potential performance gains under ideal conditions

30 Throughput (bps/Hz/base) 25 20 15 10 5 0 Factor of 3
Uplink: Users to Bases [V07]
Downlink: Bases to Users [KFV06]

Factor of 5
(1,1)
(2,2)
(4,4)
(1,1)
(2,2)
(4,4)
Conventional: SU MIMO, no coordination
(Base antennas, terminal antennas)
Hexagonal cellular network with coordination up to 4 rings of cells. Uplink: MMSE detection among coordinating bases Downlink: DPC transmission among coordinating bases Eliminate 10% of users with lowest SINR; maximize minimum rate supported by remaining users. Equal rate criteria for a given channel realization. Ideal assumptions: perfect channel knowledge, synchronization, etc.
Network MIMO
DL Network MIMO (coherent case) What is needed to make it real?

Large gains for large coordinated areas (e.g. 4 rings/ 182 sectors) Multiple TX sites increase delay spread - long CP costs 20% of resources CSI: data to be compressed and transferred with low delay and a minimum of uplink resources. Requires large number of DL pilots (orthogonal in code, time and/or freq) LTE R8:17% DL resources for 4 orthogonal pilots Requires dedicated pilots per stream
Synchronization between eNB required
traffic CSI backhaul
Strong increase of backhaul traffic
CSI: Amount of DL channels to be estimated explodes for increasing number of coordinated cells.
Enabler for DL Network MIMO Robust multi-cell channel estimation* (HHI)

* Volker Jungnickel et al, Multi-Cell Channel Estimation using Virtual Pilots, in IEEE 67th Vehicular Technology Conference, VTC2008-Spring, Singapore, May 2008.
cell planning
Common pilots are scrambled with cell-specific sequence in time domain (low mobility). Sequence design exploits partical correlation (e.g. Hadamard, DFT). Closer cells are identified by sequences which can be orthogonalized already using shorter correlation window, distant cells by sequences which need a larger window.
Enabler for DL Network MIMO Calibration of distant antennas

Basic principle: Distribute optically RF carrier to neighboring sites
Required phase jitter: 50 ps Jitter due to polarization mode dispersion: 2 ps for 20 km link
Case 2 : (C)WDM multiplex for digital & clock
Central Unit
Reference oscillator
Remote Radio Head

RF modulation D/A digital in
WDM link clock+radio data
Analog E/O transmitter Digital baseband Digital E/O transmitter
System is static for ~ 1s

Summary on DL Network MIMO

Situation today Highest theoretical gains among all DL COMP methods
For Downlink FDD: Theoretical gains of the method are consumed by impairments
e.g. Uplink is consumed by Channel state signalling Pilots consume large part of Downlink
We need further progress on enablers Synchronization and antenna calibration Principles are established Pilots First proposals Efficient channel feedback ideas for single sector, to be extended We think that coherent COMP will not be available in the next 3 years!
Coordinated scheduling simple approach
Coordination area
around every cell is defined a coordination area with the cell in the center a cell coordinates only with cells within its coordination area
Establish data basis for interference estimation

correlation matrix describing every channel between every BS antenna and UE antenna within a given coordination area around each cell
requires knowledge of inter-cell channels BS measures all inter-cell channels within its coordination area
BSa ca2 ca1 UE1 cell 1 UE2
Coordinated uplink sounding
cell 2 BSb cb2 cb1
Optimize scheduling & beamforming/Tx power per UE within coordination area

1. select UEs with lowest mutual interference to be scheduled on same resource and 2. balance their SINR/throughput by adapting Tx power/beam pattern/direction
Coordinated scheduling simple approach

1-tier coordination Distributed computation by prioritization of cells
cell includes results from higher priority cells within its coordination area as constraints to own optimization (B includes 3xA, C includes 3xB & 3xA)
prevents conflicting results in the overlap of coordination areas fairness among cells achieved by permuting priority assignments over time
B A C B A C B A C A C C B A C B A C B A C B A B A C B
3A 2B 1C 2C 3B 4A 4B 5A 3C
0 1 2
Our View Stable algorithm This approach with scheduling coordination has been pursued for WiMAX 802.16m
0A 4C 5B
3
4 5
5C 1A 0B
1B 0C 2A
multiple sub-frames scheduled according to computation
Optimize for a number of sub-frames, not for single allocations in order to reduce communication load time
Coordinated scheduling Combination with SDMA using 4x2 Grid-of-fixed beams

1000 900 1x2 SIMO 2x2 SU-MIMO (TxDiv + PARC) 4x2 Grid-of-fixed-beams 4x2 SDMA (GoFB) 4x2 SDMA (GoFB) + intra-site Coop
5-percentile throughput [kbps]
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0
0.5
1 1.5 2 spectral efficiency [bit/s/Hz]
2.5
+ Inter-Node B Co-ordination + Intra-Node B BF co-ordination
7x3 cells with wrap around, av. 10 users per cell 10 MHz BW Control and pilot overhead considered Score based proportional fair scheduling NGNM case 1 parameter set: 500m ISD, 3km/h, 20 dB Penetr. loss
SDMA w/o BF co-ordination
COMP in Uplink / Macro diversity

Single sector
Reception in 2 sectors
Inter-site
COMP
Simpler situation than DL: single point of transmission

Forwarding of radio samples Forwarding of softbits ( soft combining ) Forwarding of data (selection combining)
UL COMP Reception over 2 sectors (result from Uni Stuttgart)
Results: Joint Link Adaptation (II)

Case II: Proportional-Fair scheduler, with HARQ (baseline)
Spectral Efficiency
Average Spectral Efficiency [bit/s/Hz/sector]
Cell-Edge Throughput
400
5 % Cell Edge Throughput [kbps]
1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 LMMSE LMMSE-SIC Joint detection only Joint detection & link adaptation No cooperation
350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
Joint detection only Joint detection & link adaptation No cooperation
+17% +21%
+19%+26%
+21% +22%
+24%+30%
LMMSE
LMMSE-SIC
As before, additional gains relatively small compared to gains due to joint detection alone and gains generally significantly smaller than for (dumb) RR scheduling
March 4, 2009
COMP in Uplink - (Distributed RRH case)

(Berlin set-up)
Remote Radio Head
Princple
Simulation results for 1x4 antenna
configuration
(QPSK 1/3, near-uncorrelated antennas)

Block Error Rate
Normalized Throughput
100 90 80
Throughput (kbps)
Remote Radio Head
(1st transmission, with 95% confidence interval)
100,0%
10,0%
BLER
70 60 50 40 30 20
AWGN 2 Rx PedB3 4 Rx PedB3 2 Rx AWGN 4Rx
1,0%
SM fibre, 1,25 Gb/s
10
0,1% -8,0 -3,0 2,0 7,0
0 -8,0 -3,0 2,0 7,0
actual avg. SNR [dB]
actual avg. SNR [dB]
Smart NodeB Central Unit
for frequency-selective channel
Up to 4.5 dB SNR gain
especially on cell edge
Throughput gain
Clear improvement of Uplink throughput for UEs at cell edge Improved fairness Candidate for LTE advanced
Classification of COMP schemes and backhaul requirements

Downlink
X2 Backhaul Additional BW at coordinator1 8- 14 Gbps (samples or CSI, in) 11 or 6 Gbps (IQ samples+, out) Latency < 1 ms*
Uplink
High gains - pilot overhead (-TDD only) - backhaul requirements! High gains - backhaul requirements
Joint processing coherent combining

Additional BW2 30 Mbps (CSI, in) 45 Mbps (user data, out)3 Latency < 3 ms*
backhaul requirements (bandwidth)
Joint processing coherent superposition

X2 Backhaul
Additional BW4 5 Mbps (control traffic, in & out) Latency: 10ms for decoupled (lower gains!)) < 1 ms*/arbitrary (scheduling and coordination coupled)
calculation assumptions: 10 MHz system BW, 4 antennas per cell, 20 UEs per cell + time and frequency domain IQ samples (in this order) * latency is site to site one way, includes eNB processing time!
spectral efficiency
Joint processing non-coherent combining
Non-coherent combining: lower gains than coherent Moderate backhaul
Additional BW incoming2 coherent: 3.7 or 2 Gbps (IQ samples+) non-coherent: 250 Mbps (softbits) 30 Mbps (user data) Latency < 3 ms*
Efficient interference reduction low latency helps!
same as downlink
1 3 sites with 3 cells each, coordinator co-located at one site 2 2 slave cells 3 30 % of UEs in CoMP mode 4 7 cell coordination area, 3-step coordination cycle
Enabling technologies
- Efficient feedback - pre-coding schemes - IRC and SIC receivers
Example for Enablers: Feedback compression

Downlink data transmission and pilots
BS MIMO channel
MS
Channel estimation
Uplink feedback of compressed channel state information
Feedback compression
Challenge for FDD systems:

Transfer channel information from the UE to the Base Station
MIMO channel state information (CSI) Frequency-selective channel quality information (CQI)
with strongly limited feedback signalling bandwidth
Approach:
Source coding for CSI/CQI
Example for Enablers: Feedback compression

OFDM channel feedback compression based on a RAKE approach
CE
CTF
IDFT
CIR
E{ }t,ant
PDP
Fingers
delays f, powers pf
Reduction on fingers Common pilots Quantized short-term feedback
Quantized long-term feedback
Principle: based on time/frequency domain transformations separating of short-term and long-term feedback (using a RAKE-receiver-like fingerapproach) Focus on CSI compression: Complex-valued coefficients per Tx-Rx antenna channel LTE-A T-Docs
Uplink CSI feedback signalling Collection at Rx and synthesis to CIR DFT CTF
Efficient feedback concepts: The best /worst companion concept

BS 2
Codebook
Index 1 2 Weight vector w1 w2
FDD DL Reference symbols BS 1
User 1
PMI, CQI + BCI/WCI, Delta CQI for BS 2, BS3 Backhaul connection
BS 3
UEs measure channel and report best beam index (preferred rank 1 PMI) for their serving cell UEs further measure channels from a set of dominant interfering cells UEs report best-companion (BCI) or worst-companion PMIs (WCI) for the set of interfering cells UEs report CQI for the case that the best-companion PMIs are not used and for the case that the best companion PMIs are used (Delta-CQI).
Additional low-rate-feedback enabling COMP beam coordination based on coordinated scheduling

MU-MIMO with and without Best Companion signaling (multi-link simulation result)
Relative gain in total average sector throughput
140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Urban macro Urban micro min. Beam dist. Best Comp.
Simulation assumptions (see appendix A.5) Using a subset of the LTE-codebook DL FDD 10MHz@2.1 MHz
4 Tx linear array, 2 Rx
MU-MIMO pairing of 2 users Intra-cell interference fully modeled Inter-cell interference taken from Geometry of 19*3 sector system with 500m ISD and statistically modeled
SCME channel
subband SINR cdf 1 0.9 0.8 BCI no BCI
subband SINR cdf 1 0.9 0.8 BCI no BCI
SINR per subband at decoder input

Urban micro
cumulative probability
cumulative probability
0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -40
Urban macro
0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -40
Conclusion: With very small additional feedback signaling overhead (0.8 kbit/s), throughput gains in the order of 20%
20 30 40
-30
-20
-10
0 SINR dB
10
20
30
40
-30
-20
-10
0 SINR dB
10
Optimized pre-coding Closed Loop MIMO, optimized codebooks

600
Comparison of different Antenna Systems and Pre-coding Matrices, 500m ISD

500 1x1 Single Antenna TX 500 1x2 Single Antenna TX
optimized codebook
Cell Border Throughput [kbit/s]
500
500 2x2 CL TX Div & PSRC (36.211) 500 4x2 CL TX Div & PSRC (36.211)
Gains with optimum codebook

4x2 2x2 36.211 codebook
400
500 4x2 Directional CL TX Div & PARC, 4 Beams, 4 Wts 500 4x2 Directional CL TX Div & PARC, 16 Beam, 8 Wts
300
1x2
200
1x1
100
0 1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Spectral Efficiency [bit/s/Hz/sector]
1.8
1.9
2.0
We go for downloadable codebooks in 3GPP: pre-coding will be adaptable per cell. Low impact on UE.
Summary :
We aim at a smooth introduction of LTE-A into the field System should adapt to available spectrum System should extend on LTE (antenna) deployment System should allow to select optimum COMP scheme
depending on available backhauling capabilities (bandwidth and latency ) Depending on existing antenna sites and configurations
Thank you! www.alcatel-lucent.com

www.alcatel-lucent.com

LTE Advanced Description

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LTE Advanced Description

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LTE Advanced Description

2 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

Recent single site studies on R8

At high velocities 30 km/h to 250 km/h

3 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

4 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

Targets for LTE, LTE advanced

500 Mb/s 30 bit/s/Hz (8x8 ant) 15 bit/s/Hz (4x4 ant)

Average spectrum efficiency DL

3.7 bit/s/Hz (4x4 ant)

Cell edge spectrum efficiency UL

2 .. 3 times R6 0.028 bits/Hz (1x2 ant)

0.07 bit/s/Hz (2x4 ant)

How to reach LTE-A targets? Following the Cellular paradigm

Alternative: increase sectorization

Options within one cell

Multi-cell situation: two approaches

8 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

Candidate Technologies for Performance Improvements with LTE Advanced

Additional Standardized Measurements

Collaborative MIMO/ Network MIMO

Beamforming/ Spatial Component ICIC

Time/Freq. Dynamic ICIC

Dynamic Spectrum Access

Support of wider bandwidth up to 100 MHz

9 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

KPIs used for assessments

10 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

Selection process for COMP methods

2 Real-world asessment phase

First analysis to rank the options Include real-world aspects like:

11 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

COMP/ Network MIMO

12 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

Classification of COMP schemes / 3GPP for LTE

Joint processing coherent combining

Joint processing coherent superposition

Joint processing non-coherent combining

Collaborative MIMO : Lower potential gains than coherent

High gains - Backhaul requirements!

Coordinated scheduling (per sector or per beam) Efficient interference reduction

13 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

Network MIMO: Potential performance gains under ideal conditions

Uplink: Users to Bases [V07]

Downlink: Bases to Users [KFV06]

Conventional: SU MIMO, no coordination

(Base antennas, terminal antennas)

DL Network MIMO (coherent case) What is needed to make it real?

Synchronization between eNB required

traffic CSI backhaul

Strong increase of backhaul traffic

15 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

Enabler for DL Network MIMO Robust multi-cell channel estimation* (HHI)

16 | Advanced LTE Description | June 2009

All Rights Reserved Alcatel-Lucent 2009

Enabler for DL Network MIMO Calibration of distant antennas

Case 2 : (C)WDM multiplex for digital & clock