(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol.
9
, No.
1
, 201
1
Low Complexity Scheduling Algorithm for MultiuserMIMO System
Shailendra MishraKumaon Engineering College,Dwarahat,Uttrakhand ,Indiaemail:skmishra1@gmail.com lineD.S.ChauhanUttrakhand Technical University,Dehradun,Uttrakhand,India(email:pds@gmail.com)
Abstract
— Multiple-input and Multiple-output (MIMO) is oneof several forms of smart antenna technology. Multiuserdownlink scheduling problem with n receivers and m transmitsantennas, where data from different users can be multiplexedis discussed in this paper. Scheduling Algorithm targets tosatisfy user’s Qos by allocating number of transmit antennas.Scheduling performance under two different types of trafficmodes is also discussed: one is voice or web-browsing and theother one is for data transfer and streaming data. We haveproposed scheduling algorithm for MIMO system whichtargets to satisfy user’s QoS by allocating the number of transmit antennas.
Keywords-
MIMO,SM,STC,DIV,SA,STBC,MRC,DPC,IMD
I.
I
NTRODUCTION
The process of technological advancement has given rise todevelop MIMO technology in the field of wirelesscommunication. MIMO system also reduces the expenditurefor using extra bandwidth or the transmit power expenditures and increases in throughput and range are possible at the same bandwidth.MIMO system explores the idea of multipathpropagation to increase data throughput and range, or reducebit error rates rather than attempting to eliminate effects of multipath propagation as traditional SISO (Single-InputSingle-Output) communication systems [1], [8] Multi-user multi-antenna transmission architecture withchannel estimators cascaded at the receiver side is proposed sothat each user can feedback channel state information (CSI)for the further process of antenna resource allocation [2][3].In MIMO, “multiple in” means a WLAN devicesimultaneously sends two or more radio signals into multipletransmitting antennas. “Multiple out” refers to two or moreradio signals coming from multiple receiving antennas. Theseviews of “in” and “out” may seem reversed; but MIMOterminology focuses on the system interface with antennasrather than the air interface. Whatever be the terminology, theMIMO’s basic advantage seems simple, i.e. multiple antennasreceive more signal and transmit more signal [1],[5],[8].Maximal receive combining takes the signals from multipleantennas/receivers and combines them in a way thatsignificantly boosts signal strength[6]. This technique is fullycompatible with standard 802.11a/b/g. It significantlyimproves overall gain, especially in multipath environments.In multipath environments, signals pass through and reflectfrom various objects so that different signal reaches the tworeceiving antennas. Some frequencies tend to be attenuated atone antenna but not the other, which is shown by channelmeasurements in a multipath environment [5],[7].The capacityof the phased array system grows logarithmically withincreasing antenna array size, whereas the capacity of theMIMO system grows linearly[10],[15].II.
MIMO
SYSTEM
A.
MIMO wireless system
MIMO wireless system consists of two antennas N&M. Nantennas transmit the data whereas M antennas are to receivethe data. MIMO system is different from other phased arraysystems where a single information stream, say x(t), istransmitted on all transmitters and then received at the receiverantennas. It can transmit different information streams x(t),y(t), z(t), on each transmit antenna .These are independentinformation streams being sent simultaneously and in the samefrequency band. The received signals r1(t), r2(t), r3(t) at eachof the three received antennas are a linear combination of x(t),y(t), z(t) [6],[8]. The coefficients {aij} represent the channelweights corresponding to the attenuation seen between eachtransmit-receive antenna pair. The affect is that we have asystem of three equations and three unknowns as shown below.R = A [x y z]The matrix, A, of channel coefficients {aij} must be invertiblefor MIMO systems to live up to their promise. It has beenproven that the likelihood for A to be invertible increases as thenumber of multipaths and reflections in the vicinity of thetransmitter or receiver increases . The impact of this is that in aRayleigh fading environment with spatial independence, thereare essentially NM levels of diversity available and there aremin(N,M) independent parallel channels that can beestablished. Increases in the diversity order results insignificant reductions in the total transmit power for the samelevel of performance[15]. On the other hand, an increase in thenumber of parallel channels translates into an increase in theachievable data rate within the same bandwidth.
B.
MIMO Techniques
There are four unique multi-antenna MIMO techniquesavailable to the system designer namely : spatial
60http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol.
9
, No.
1
, 201
1
multiplexing (SM-MIMO), space-time coding (STC-MIMO),diversity systems (DIV-MIMO), smart antenna (SA-MIMO):In spatial multiplexing, a high rate signal is split into multiplelower rate streams and each stream is transmitted from adifferent transmit antenna in the same frequency channel. If these signals arrive at the receiver antenna array withsufficiently different spatial signatures, the receiver canseparate these streams, creating parallel channels free. Spatialmultiplexing is a very powerful technique for increasingchannel capacity at higher Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR)[6].The maximum number of spatial streams is limited by thelesser in the number of antennas at the transmitter or receiver.Spatial multiplexing can be used with or without transmitchannel knowledge. Spatial multiplexing MIMO schemeshave been suggested to solve any and all wirelesscommunication issues.
Spatial multiplexing maximizes thelink capacity, for spatial multiplexing the number of receiveantennas must be greater than or equal to the number of transmit antennas [8]. It makes the receivers very complex,and therefore it is typically combined with orthogonalfrequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) [1], [4].The IEEE802.16e standard incorporates MIMO-OFDMA. The IEEE802.11n standard which is expected to be finalized soon,recommends MIMO-OFDM. Compared to spatialmultiplexing systems, space-time code
STC-MIMO systemsprovide robustness of communications without providingsignificant throughput gains against spatial multiplexingsystems [6], [13].Moreover, to support fully the cellular environments MIMOresearch consortiums including IST-MASCOT, proposed todevelop advanced MIMO communication techniques such ascross-layer MIMO, multi-user MIMO and ad-hoc MIMO.Cross-layer MIMO enhances the performance of MIMO linksby solving cross-layer problems occurred when the MIMOconfiguration is employed in the system. A Cross-layertechnique has been enhancing the performance of SISO linksas well [7]. Examples of cross-layer techniques are Jointsource-channel coding, Link adaptation, or adaptivemodulation and coding (AMC), Hybrid ARQ (HARQ) anduser scheduling. Multi-user MIMO can exploit multiple userinterference powers as a spatial resource at the cost of advanced transmit processing while conventional or single-user MIMO uses only the multiple antenna dimension[4].Examples of advanced transmit processing for multi-userMIMO are interference aware precoding and SDMA-baseduser scheduling.Ad-hoc MIMO is a useful technique for future cellularnetworks which considers wireless mesh networking orwireless ad-hoc networking. To optimize the capacity of ad-hoc channels, MIMO concept and techniques can be applied tomultiple links between transmit and receive node clusters.Unlike multiple antennas at the single-user MIMO transceiver,multiple nodes are located in a distributed manner. So, toachieve the capacity of this network, techniques to managedistributed radio resources are essential like the nodecooperation and dirty paper coding (DPC) [8].III.
MIMO ChannelNew transmit strategies are derived and compared to existingtransmit strategies, such as beamforming and space-time block coding (STBC). Rayleigh fading multiple input multipleoutput (MIMO) channels are studied using an eigenvalueanalysis and exact expressions for the bit error rates andoutage capacities for beamforming and STBC is found[6]. Ingeneral are MIMO fading channels correlated and there existsa mutual coupling between antenna elements. These findingsare supported by indoor MIMO measurements. It is found thatthe mutual coupling can, in some scenarios, increase theoutage capacity[9]. The effects of nonlinear transmitamplifiers in array antennas are also analyzed, and it is shownthat an array reduces the effective intermodulation distortion(IMD) transmitted by the array antenna by a spatial filtering of the IMD. The use of a low cost antenna with switchabledirectional properties, the switched parasitic antenna, isstudied in a MIMO context and compared to array techniques.It is found that it has comparable performance, at a fraction of the cost for an array antenna.In recent years, deployingmultiple antennas at both transmitter and receiver hasappeared as a very promising technology[8]. By exploiting thespatial domain, multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)systems can support extremely high data rates as long as theenvironments can provide sufficiently rich scattering. Todesign high performance MIMO wireless systems and predictsystem performance under various circumstances, it is of greatinterest to have accurate MIMO wireless channel models fordifferent scenarios.
A.
Space–time block code
Space–time block coding is a technique used to transmitmultiple copies of a data stream across a number of antennasand to exploit the various received versions of the data toimprove the reliability of data-transfer Alamouti invented thesimplest of all the STBCs . It is readily apparent that this is arate-1 code. It takes two time-slots to transmit two symbols.Using the optimal decoding scheme discussed below, the bit-error rate (BER) of this STBC is equivalent to 2nR-branchmaximal ratio combining (MRC)[13]. This is a very specialSTBC. It is the only orthogonal STBC that achieves rate-1.That is to say that it is the only STBC that can achieve its fulldiversity gain without needing to sacrifice its data rate[ 13].Strictly, this is only true for complex modulation symbols.Since almost all constellation diagrams rely on complexnumbers however, this property usually gives Alamouti's codea significant advantage over the higher-order STBCs eventhough they achieve a better error-rate performance [14].Tarokh et al, discovered a set of STBCs that are particularlystraightforward, and coined the scheme's name. They alsoproved that no code for more than 2 transmit antennas couldachieve full-rate. They also demonstrated the simple, lineardecoding scheme that goes with their codes under perfectchannel state information assumption [16]
.
One particularlyattractive feature of orthogonal STBCs is that maximum
61http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol.
9
, No.
1
, 201
1
likelihood decoding can be achieved at the receiver with onlylinear processing.We have calculate the error probability achieved by the MRC,showing it to be much smaller than the one corresponding tothe SISO channel, in which no spatial diversity exists. Next,we consider the multiple-input single-output (MISO, multipletransmit antennas, single receive antenna) channel, and wepresent some mechanisms that exploit the transmit diversityoffered by this channel. Specifically, Alamouti’s scheme isanalyzed. Bringing together transmit and receive diversity, theMIMO channel is introduced. The Alamouti-based scheme areshown to achieve full diversity, i.e., they take full advantage of both transmit and receive diversity provided by the MIMOchannel.IVSCHEDULING ALGORITHMMultiuser scheduling is the problem of allocating resources(such as power or bandwidth) in order to perform desirablywith respect to criteria such as throughput or delay. Mostprevious studies limit their scope to time-sharing schedules.Transmitting to the user with the best reception is sum-rateoptimal (achieves maximum throughput) for a single-antennabroadcast channel under infinite backlogs and symmetricchannels. However, in a multiple-antenna broadcast channeltime-division is sub-optimal.Schedules most commonly ignore queuing and randomness inpacket arrivals and hence cannot offer stability guarantees.This is true in some scheduling algorithms that aim to satisfyfairness criteria, such as proportional-fair scheduling:
B.
Multiuser scheduling
Multiuser scheduling is the problem of allocating resources(such as power or bandwidth) in order to perform desirablywith respect to criteria such as throughput or delay. Thisproblem has attracted great interest in the recent years. Mostprevious studies limit their scope to time-sharing schedules, i.e.those where only a single user’s data is transmitted at any time.The computational complexity of broadcast coding, togetherwith the fact that the optimal coding for the MIMO Broadcastchannel was not known until recently, has made time-sharingattractive. In fact, transmitting to the user with the bestreception is sum-rate optimal (achieves maximum throughput)for a single-antenna broadcast channel under infinite backlogsand symmetric channels. However, in a multiple-antennabroadcast channel time-division is sub-optimal. Schedulesproposed in previous literature also most commonly ignorequeuing and randomness in packet arrivals and hence cannotoffer stability guarantees. This is true in some schedulingalgorithms that aim to satisfy a fairness criteria, such asproportional-fair scheduling.A guiding work for incorporating randomness and stabilityissues has been, where the network capacity region is definedas the region of stabilizable input data rates, and it is shownthat this region is achieved by a maximum-weight matching(weights being related to queue sizes). Building on thosedefinitions, [11] considers a broadcast scenario under timedivision and demonstrates a schedule that achieves the network capacity region. Along similar lines, [12] shows that athroughput-optimal policy is a maximum-weight matching inthe form of maxPi _iqiri where qi’s are the queue states of users, and the rates ri are left implicit. Also in the downlink scenario, compares several heuristic scheduling policies such asbeamforming to the user with the shortest remaining job versusmultiplexing several users. To our knowledge, the maximum-weight matching scheduling policy has first been combinedwith channel coding and power control explicitly in [14], forthe multi-access channel.
C.
Scheduling Policies
The Most of the current researches focus on the fairnessamong users. Nevertheless, it has been found however that adilemma exists between fairness and system capacityarrangement. The goal of fairness scheduling is to deliver theequal information bits to users, while that of capacityscheduling is to maximize the utilization of wireless channels.The best way to achieve highest overall throughput of thesystem is to assign higher data rate for those subchannels ingood condition, and to assign lower data rate for those poorsubchannels. Unfortunately, under multi-user systemarchitecture, each subchannel stands for each user so favoringparticular subchannel leads to unfairness issue.
D.
Antenna Scheduling
and selection
For the wireline communications, several schedulingtechniques such as weighted fair queuing and packetizedgeneral processor sharing have been proposed to furnish fairchannel access among contending hosts. However, an attemptto apply these wireline scheduling algorithms to wirelesssystems is inappropriate because wireless communicationsystem presents many new challenges such as radio channelimpairments. Therefore, late researches investigate someresources such as code, power, and bandwidth to exploit moreefficient transmission under wireless MIMO environment[11], [12], [13]. We explore an antenna allocation scheme withdynamic allotment of multiple antennas for each real-time userto satisfy their QoS requirements.Although fairness is animportant criterion in judging the design of a schedulingalgorithm. Overemphasizing it is not good in reality because“fairness” does not equal to user’s satisfaction. Hence wepropose a different algorithm which targets to satisfy user’sQoS by allocating the number of transmit antennas.In thisalgorithm, we have to calculate how many antennas a usershould use in order to satisfy user’s time-varying data raterequests. Since we assume that the SNR and spatial correlationare known at the transmitter and the receive antenna amountsare naturally known. So we can compute the channel capacityas the function of the number of transmit antenna. Whichantenna should be added or taken off as the next step would bedependent upon how many antennas are to be used.VI
SIMULATIONS
R
ESULT
To assess the relative performance of the MIMO system, weconsider as metrics the latency, fairness and average rate
In Fig. 1
62http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Low Complexity Scheduling Algorithm for Multiuser MIMO System
Multiple-input and Multiple-output (MIMO) is one of several forms of smart antenna technology. Multiuser downlink scheduling problem with n receivers and m transmits antennas, where data from different users can be multiplexed is discussed in this…
(More)
691
Reads
2
Readcasts
0
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
