| Literature DB >> 27399715 |
Kazuki Maruta1, Tatsuhiko Iwakuni2, Atsushi Ohta3, Takuto Arai4, Yushi Shirato5, Satoshi Kurosaki6, Masataka Iizuka7.
Abstract
Drastic improvements in transmission rate and system capacity are required towards 5th generation mobile communications (5G). One promising approach, utilizing the millimeter wave band for its rich spectrum resources, suffers area coverage shortfalls due to its large propagation loss. Fortunately, massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) can offset this shortfall as well as offer high order spatial multiplexing gain. Multiuser MIMO is also effective in further enhancing system capacity by multiplexing spatially de-correlated users. However, the transmission performance of multiuser MIMO is strongly degraded by channel time variation, which causes inter-user interference since null steering must be performed at the transmitter. This paper first addresses the effectiveness of multiuser massive MIMO transmission that exploits the first eigenmode for each user. In Line-of-Sight (LoS) dominant channel environments, the first eigenmode is chiefly formed by the LoS component, which is highly correlated with user movement. Therefore, the first eigenmode provided by a large antenna array can improve the robustness against the channel time variation. In addition, we propose a simplified beamforming scheme based on high efficient channel state information (CSI) estimation that extracts the LoS component. We also show that this approximate beamforming can achieve throughput performance comparable to that of the rigorous first eigenmode transmission. Our proposed multiuser massive MIMO scheme can open the door for practical millimeter wave communication with enhanced system capacity.Entities:
Keywords: channel estimation; channel time variation; first eigenmode; massive MIMO; millimeter wave; multiuser MIMO
Year: 2016 PMID: 27399715 PMCID: PMC4970098 DOI: 10.3390/s16071051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1System model: (a) Multistream transmission per user equipment (UE): Nu = 4 and Ns = 4; and (b) 1st eigenmode transmission per UE: Nu = 16 and Ns = 1.
Figure 2Channel time variation: (a) channel correlation fluctuation of four eigenmodes when Nr = 16; and (b) channel correlation of the 1st eigenmode with increased number of UE antenna elements, Nr.
Figure 3Proposed high efficient channel state information (CSI) estimation.
Computation complexity.
| Precoding Scheme | Complexity |
|---|---|
| Proposed scheme | 10 |
| SVD | 2 |
Simulation parameters.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Carrier frequency | 20 GHz |
| Bandwidth | 400 MHz |
| Number of FFT points | 2048 |
| Number of subcarriers; | 2000 |
| Number of subcarriers for proposed CSI estimation; | 64 (4 subcarriers × 16 antennas) |
| Number of BS antennas; | 256 (16 × 16) UPA, 0.5 |
| Number of UE antennas; | 16 (4 × 4) UPA, 0.5 |
| Number of UEs; | Case 1: 4; Cases 2, 3: 16 |
| Tx streams per UE; | Case 1: 4; Cases 2, 3: 1 |
| SNR | 10 dB @ SISO |
| Channel model | Rician fading, |
| Tx/Rx Angular spread | 5°/5° |
| Precoding | BD/Eigenmode transmission |
| Postcoding | MMSE |
| Symbol duration | 6.67 μs |
| CSI estimation period | 1.334 ms (200 symbol) |
| UE speed; | 10 km/h ( |
Achievable throughput for signal-to-interference plus noise power ratio (SINR).
| MCS Index | SINR (dB) | Throughput (bps/Hz) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | - | 0 |
| 1 | 1.00 | 0.1523 |
| 2 | 3.21 | 0.2344 |
| 3 | 5.43 | 0.3770 |
| 4 | 6.36 | 0.6016 |
| 5 | 8.14 | 0.8770 |
| 6 | 9.93 | 1.1758 |
| 7 | 11.71 | 1.4766 |
| 8 | 13.50 | 1.9141 |
| 9 | 15.29 | 2.4063 |
| 10 | 17.07 | 2.7305 |
| 11 | 18.86 | 3.3223 |
| 12 | 20.64 | 3.9023 |
| 13 | 22.43 | 4.5234 |
| 14 | 24.21 | 5.1152 |
| 15 | 26.00 | 5.5547 |
Figure 4Time variant characteristics within the CSI estimation period. Case 1: Nu = 4, Ns = 4; Case 2: Nu = 16, Ns = 1. (a) Average SINR per stream versus elapsed time. (b) Average throughput per stream versus elapsed time.
Figure 5Cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of SINR per signal stream.
Figure 6CDFs of throughput per signal stream.
Figure 7CDFs of UE throughput.
Figure 8CDFs of System throughput.
Figure 9Average system throughput versus UE speed.
Figure 10Average system throughput versus number of multiplexed UEs.
Figure 11Average beamforming gain versus signal-to-noise power ratio (SNR).