| Literature DB >> 31075926 |
Yanzan Sun1, Han Xu2, Shunqing Zhang3, Yating Wu4, Tao Wang5, Yong Fang6, Shugong Xu7.
Abstract
Heterogeneous networks (HetNets), consisting of macro-cells and overlaying pico-cells, have been recognized as a promising paradigm to support the exponential growth of data traffic demands and high network energy efficiency (EE). However, for two-tier heterogeneous architecture deployment of HetNets, the inter-tier interference will be challenging. Time domain further-enhanced inter-cell interference coordination (FeICIC) proposed in 3GPP Release-11 becomes necessary to mitigate the inter-tier interference by applying low power almost blank subframe (ABS) scheme. Therefore, for HetNets deployment in reality, the pico-cell range expansion (CRE) bias, the power of ABS and the density of pico base stations (PBSs) are three important factors for the network EE improvement. Aiming to improve the network EE, the above three factors are jointly considered in this paper. In particular, we first derive the closed-form expression of the network EE as a function of pico CRE bias, power reduction factor of low power ABS and PBS density based on stochastic geometry model. Then, the approximate relationship between pico CRE bias and power reduction factor is deduced, followed by a linear search algorithm to get the near-optimal pico CRE bias and power reduction factor together at a given PBS density. Next, a linear search algorithm is further proposed to optimize PBS density based on fixed pico CRE bias and power reduction factor. Due to the fact that the above pico CRE bias and power reduction factor optimization and PBS density optimization are optimized separately, a heuristic algorithm is further proposed to optimize pico CRE bias, power reduction factor and PBS density jointly to achieve global network EE maximization. Numerical simulation results show that our proposed heuristic algorithm can significantly enhance the network EE while incurring low computational complexity.Entities:
Keywords: HetNets; energy efficiency; interference coordination; stochastic geometry
Year: 2019 PMID: 31075926 PMCID: PMC6540024 DOI: 10.3390/s19092154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The network scenario.
Figure 2The user equipments (UEs) scheduling strategy for macro base station (MBS) and pico base stations (PBS) with the further-enhanced inter-cell interference coordination (FeICIC) scheme.
Notations summary.
| Notation | Description |
|---|---|
| Density of MBS, PBS and UE | |
| Set of user types, indication of the user type | |
|
| Total spectrum bandwidth |
|
| Channel fast fading gain |
|
| Large-scale path loss exponent |
|
| Thermal noise |
| Maximum transmission power of MBS and PBS | |
|
| Power reduction factor |
|
| PSF ratio |
|
| Pico CRE bias |
|
| SINR of a typical UE |
| Full power aggregate interference from macro tier and pico tier | |
| Distance from a UE to its nearest MBS and its nearest PBS | |
|
| Probability of a typical UE belongs to the user type |
| Factor of macro-cell center region, pico CRE region and pico-cell original coverage region | |
|
| Distance from a typical UE |
|
| PDF of the distance between a UE and its serving BS |
|
| Density of BSs associated with user type |
|
| Mean achievable downlink data rate of a typical UE |
|
| Spectrum bandwidth allocated to a typical UE |
| Mean number of UEs with user type | |
| Static power of MBS and PBS | |
|
| Proportion between maximum transmission power of MBS and that of PBS |
|
| Proportion between maximum transmission power of PBS and that of MBS |
|
| Proportion between PBS density and MBS density |
|
| Total network throughput |
|
| Total network power consumption |
|
| Approximate value of power reduction factor |
| Near-optimal value of pico CRE bias, power reduction factor and PBS density | |
| Optimal value of pico CRE bias, power reduction factor, PBS density and EE |
Figure 3The user association probability of unprotected subframes (USF) micro-cell user equipments (MUEs) and protected subframes (PSF) MUEs versus with fixed and fixed .
Figure 4The PSF ratio versus with fixed .
Figure 5The near-optimal power reduction factor versus with fixed .
Network scenario parameters.
| Parameters | Value |
|---|---|
| Carrier frequency | 2 GHz |
| Total spectrum bandwidth | 10 MHz |
| Path loss exponent | 4 |
| Path loss | |
| MBS transmission power | 43 dBm |
| PBS transmission power | 30 dBm |
| MBS static power | 800 W |
| PBS static power | 130 W |
| MBS density |
|
Figure 6The network energy efficiency (EE) versus with fixed .
Figure 7The network EE versus with fixed .
Figure 8The network EE versus with different .
Figure 9The network EE versus with different .
Figure 10The network EE versus with different optimization algorithms.
Figure 11The network EE versus for JBPDO algorithm.