Achieving Higher HSDPA Performance and Preserving R99 Soft Handover Control

by Large Scale Optimization in CPICH Coverage Planning

Lei Chen

and Di Yuan

Department of Science and Technology, Link oping University, SE-601 74 Norrk oping, Sweden.
Emails: leich@itn.liu.se, diyua@itn.liu.se
Abstract
Common Pilot Channel (CPICH) power is a crucial
parameter in coverage planning of todays UMTS networks
that implement both HSDPA and R99 services. Adopting a
non-uniform allocation of cell CPICH power and minimizing
its amount necessary for coverage, the resulting power
saving signicantly improves HSDPA performance. At the
same time, it is vital to have the desired level R99 soft
handover, which is heavily inuenced by CPICH. In this
paper, we demonstrate how large scale optimization can deal
with both tasks. Our approach focuses on enhancing cell-
edge HSDPA data rate, subject to requirements of CPICH
coverage and the level of R99 soft(-er) handover. We present
a solution algorithm that optimizes CPICH allocation for
HSDPA performance, and, in parallel, offers accurate con-
trol of R99 soft handover. Experimental results for large and
realistic network planning scenarios demonstrate the benet
of our optimization approach.
1. Introduction
First introduced in 3GPP Release 5 [1], High Speed
Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) is under rapid deploy-
ment worldwide. HSDPA implements adaptive modulation
and coding (AMC), hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)
and fast scheduling. These enable lower link latency and
signicantly higher data rates than earlier UMTS releases,
making HSDPA a key technology for the evolution of mo-
bile broadband. Deploying UMTS/HSDPA network requires
planning and optimization a topic that is attracting research
attention [2], [3], [4], [5].
For HSDPA, transmit power is an important parameter
for network performance. Note that, for power-controlled
services in R99, transmit power is adjusted so that it does
not go over the amount needed for reaching service-specic
signal to interference and noise ratio (SINR) target. In
contrast, allocating additional power to HSDPA raises SINR
and leads to higher data rate. Thus in networks having co-
existing HSDPA and R99 that share power at base stations,
HSDPA directly benets from power saving made on other
channels.
In this paper we rigorously investigate the effect of com-
mon pilot channel (CPICH) power on HSDPA performance
enhancement by means of large-scale optimization. CPICH
is used by a cell to broadcast its pilot signal. Since user
equipments (UEs) use CPICH for channel estimation and
cell selection, CPICH denes the coverage patterns of cells,
and hence has large inuence on network performance.
A rather common setting is to uniformly allocate a con-
stant proportion (about 10% - 15%) of the total power
to CPICH [6]. From a resource consumption standpoint,
however, uniform CPICH power performs poorly. Indeed, it
has been concluded in earlier research that, by non-uniform
CPICH power allocation, power consumption can be reduced
signicantly without sacricing service coverage [7]. More-
over, non-uniform CPICH can improve load balancing [8].
For HSDPA, adopting non-uniform CPICH and minimizing
its amount necessary for coverage make additional power
available to the HSDPA service, and thereby yield higher
performance. Whats more, additional savings are gained on
some other common channels (CCHs), of which the power
consumed is in proportion to CPICH power.
For R99, a potential pitfall of non-uniform CPICH is that
the performance of soft(-er) handover (SHO) may degrade
and drop below the desired level. SHO allows a UE to be
connected with multiple cells simultaneously, resulting in
smoother handover as well as higher signal detection and
antenna diversity gains. Under uniform CPICH power, it is
relatively simple to predict SHO regions, which are solely
determined by signal propagation. With non-uniform CPICH
power allocation, one has to consider the CPICH power
levels of multiple cells in order to nd out the strongest
and second strongest received CPICH, and thereby whether
or not a UE can be in SHO.
To summarize, for networks offering both HSDPA and R99
services, optimizing non-uniform CPICH for higher HSDPA
performance must, at the same time, preserve a desired level
of R99 SHO. We show how large scale optimization can deal
with both tasks in network planning. Our approach focuses
on enhancing HSDPA performance at cell-edges locations
that typically have lowest data rates. The side constraints are
CPICH coverage and adequate level of R99 SHO. It should
be remarked that, in addition to providing a framework of
CPICH optimization targeting at both HSDPA performance
1-4244-2589-1/09/$20.00 c 2009 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and R99 soft handover, a key contribution of the paper is
the design of a solution algorithm, based on Tabu Search,
that can deal with large-scale planning effectively and time-
efciently. Large scale network planning is challenging and
there is no model can nish the planning time efciently.
The author in [9] propose an optimisation model from which
solutions can be obtained for small networks only. Our
approach in this paper overcomes the limitation of the model
and can deal with large scale networks time efciently. In
Section 4, we demonstrate the signicant benet of our
approach by experimental results for large and realistic
network planning scenarios.
2. System Model
2.1. Preliminaries
Consider a UMTS network implementing both R99 and
HSDPA, and denote the set of cells by C. The total power
available in cell i is denoted by p
tot
i
. The service area is
represented by a grid of a large number of test points. This
is a common practice in UMTS network planning[10]. We
use J to denote them and g
ij
the total gain between the
base station antenna of cell i and test point j. This parameter
is obtained by measurements or propagation prediction. In
our planning framework, possible levels of CPICH power
is modeled by a discrete set {p
1
i
, p
2
i
, . . . , p
l
i
, . . . , p
L
i
, i C}.
R99 soft handover requirement is specied by parameter .
In this paper, denotes the minimum percentage of test
points that must be in SHO state, summed over the entire
service area. Note that whether or not a test point is expected
to be in SHO depends on cell coverage patterns, which, in
their turn, are determined by CPICH power allocation.
2.2. Coverage
In order to provide coverage, each test point should
receive at least one CPICH with sufcient strength. Denote
by p
pilot
i
the CPICH power of cell i, test point j is covered
by i if the carrier to interference ratio E
c
/I
o
meets a
threshold
c
[11].
E
c
/I
o
=
p
pilot
i
g
ij

kC
p
tot
k
g
kj
+
0

c
. (1)
To be consistent with the power-sharing assumption in
Section 1, we assume that cells operate at full power in (1),
thus interferences from all the cells (own cell interference
also included since E
c
/I
o
is detected before signal decod-
ing) at point j is

kC
p
tot
k
g
kj
. Parameter
0
is the thermal
noise. Typically, the value of threshold
c
varies between
-20 dB and -18 dB, depending on UE and network. Point
j might be covered by more than one cell, in that case it
chooses the cell giving the strongest signal as the best server.
From (1), one can easily calculate, among the possible
CPICH power levels, the minimum level that cell i has to
use in order to cover j. Denote this power by p
lij
i
. To ease
the presentation, we will henceforth use index l
ij
as a short-
hand notation for p
lij
i
. For later use, we denote by C
j
the
possible covering cells at point j. Since the CPICH power
level is limited by L, a cell can only potentially cover a
limited number of test points. We use J
i
to denote this set
for cell i. We sort the elements of J
i
and C
j
in ascending
order of the CPICH power levels l
ij
.
Note that sometimes a test point can be covered by one
cell only. (Typically, such a point is very near to the base
station antenna of the cell but far away from other antennas.)
Suppose cell i is the only possible covering cell at test point
j, then the CPICH level of i must be at least l
ij
, otherwise
full coverage can not be achieved. By considering test points
having one potential covering cell, we can derive a parameter
lb
i
all power levels below it can be discarded for cell i in
planning CPICH power.
2.3. Cell-Edge HSDPA Power Requirement
For the High Speed Downlink Shared Channel (HS-
DSCH), its SINR for a single-antenna Rake receiver can
be expressed as [11]:
SINR
ij
= SF
hs

p
hs
i
(1 a
j
)I
or
+ I
oc
+
0
. (2)
Where p
hs
i
is the power allocated to HSDPA in cell i,
SF
hs
is the spreading factor (equals 16), a
j
is the orthogo-
nality factor at point j. I
or
and I
oc
are the interference from
the own cell and other cells respectively. The latter amounts
to calculating

kC:k=i
p
tot
k
g
kj
. Provided that cell i is the
best server at point j and rearranging (2), we can derive the
HSDPA power requirement for point j with its best server
i by the formula below. Note that for a specic point, I
or
and I
oc
only depend on the point itself since we assume the
cell is running with full power.
p
hs
ij
=
SINR
ij
p
tot
i
(1 a
j
+
Ioc+0
Ior
)
SF
hs
. (3)
We model HSDPA service availability by a minimum
SINR value. For example, a throughput of 100 Kbps cor-
responds to a SINR of 2.5 dB, if the UE supports 5
channelization codes [11]. By choosing a SINR target, we
can calculate from (3) parameter p
hs
ij
the (minimum) power
necessary to make HSDPA service available to test point j
with cell i as the best server. We refer to this parameter as
the power requirement. Among all the test points that are
served by a cell, the one with the highest HSDPA power
requirement denes the cell-edge. We denote this cell-edge
HSDPA power requirement by p
hs
i
. Note that p
hs
i
depends
on CPICH power allocation.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2.4. SHO
UEs measure CPICH signals from cells. If the signal
levels satisfy the condition of SHO, the UE can connect to
other cells in addition to the serving cell. Typical two-way
soft handover is demonstrated in Figure 1.
Suppose cell i is the best server and cell k is the second
best server at point j, j can be in SHO (two-way) if the
received SINR difference from these two cells stays within
the SHO threshold (3dB in our simulation).
lTo
lTo
3db 3db
S|O
zou
|l
Figure 1: An illustration of the SHO condition.
SHO may occur only if two cells overlap with each
other. We refer to potentially overlapping cells as neighbors.
For cell i, the neighbor cells are derived and denoted by
Neib
i
(i C).
3. SOLUTION ALGORITHMS
3.1. Problem Statement
Based on the previous discussion, we dene an objective
function, taking into account two aspects. First, the function
targets at reducing the power required to provide satisfactory
HSDPA service at cell-edges. The second part of the function
minimizes the total CPICH power necessary for coverage.
These two elements are put together to reect the fact that
power saving from CPICH is re-allocated to HSDPA.
obj :

iC
(p
pilot
i
+ p
hs
i
). (4)
Thus the optimization problem is to allocate the CPICH
power used by cells to minimize (4) subject to CPICH
coverage and R99 SHO constraints.
Given a CPICH power allocation, the cell in C
j
having
the highest power at point j serves as the best server of j,
and the point in J
i
that needs the highest HSDPA power
denes the cell-edge for cell i.
Since the coverage problem in UMTS network planning is
NP-hard, we develop heuristic algorithms to nd high quality
solutions in reasonable computing time. We rst develop
a randomized greedy algorithm to nd an initial solution.
Next, a Tabu Search algorithm is developed by iteratively
increasing and decreasing cell CPICH power. Because a high
value of turns out to be too stringent if the search is
conducted for feasible solutions only, we adopt the notion
of relaxation.
3.2. Greedy Search
Although uniform power allocation can be used as an
initial solution, we develop a randomized greedy search al-
gorithm to nd the initial solution in order to save computing
time.
Starting at the uniform power allocation and an empty cell
set B = , we randomly select a cell i (i C\B) to check if
the CPICH power can be decreased. If the coverage and soft
handover constraints are both kept when we decrease p
pilot
i
by one level, the algorithm will proceed by decreasing the
power level of this cell and start from a new cell. Otherwise,
if either coverage or soft handover constraint is violated,
cell i will be put into set B, thus B = B{i}. The same
procedure is repeated until all the cells are in set B. The
output solution will be used as an initial solution for the TS
algorithm.
3.3. Tabu Search
As a meta-heuristic algorithm, TS utilizes both intensi-
cation and diversication procedure. Intensication utilizes
short-term memory by means of local search and tabu list
to nd the best solution in a restricted region. Tabu list is
used to memorize the recently visited solutions and forbids
the search to visit them within a certain time. Aspiration
criteria is used together with tabu list for the search to visit
solutions still in tabu, provided that the solution is better
than the best we have got. Diversication utilizes long-term
memory to redirect the search to a new unvisited region if
intensication procedure can not nd better solution in a
pre-dened number of steps.
3.3.1. Neighborhood Design. Neighborhood design is im-
portant in TS algorithm. For the problem we discussed
before, if we increase one of the cell CPICH power by one
level, the cell coverage expands and it may cover more test
points. The coverage pattern changes and this may allow
some neighbor cells to lower their power levels. Algorithm
1 illustrates the neighborhood generation procedure. We
denote a solution by p which includes the power allocation
p
i
(i C) with level l
i
and the resulting network condition
including covering cells C
j
(C
j
C
j
, j J), soft handover
pattern S
j
(j J), best server pattern B
j
(j J) and cell-
edge HSDPA power requirement p
hs
i
(i C). We start with
an empty set N(p) which denotes the neighbor solutions of
p. For all the cells, rst we increase the cell CPICH power
by one level. Then, we check all the neighbor cells of this
cell, and try to decrease the power levels of the neighbor
cells as much as possible, provided that the coverage is kept.
Coverage and SHO will be updated after each change of
power. After this, we get one neighbor solution p

and add
it to N(p). Note that when we generate the neighborhood,
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
only coverage is considered, therefore, some neighbor solu-
tions might be infeasible because of insufcient SHO. We
will discuss this shortly. Since in practice, there will be a
constant number of neighbor cells for each cell, the size of
the neighborhood grows linearly with the number of cells.
Algorithm 1 Neighborhood Generation
1: N(p)
2: for i C do
3: p

p
4: p

i
p
li+1
i
5: for j J
i
do
6: update C

j
, S

j
, B

j
, p
hs

j
7: end for
8: for h Neib
i
do
9: for j J
h
do
10: while |C
j
| > 1 do
11: p

h
p
li1
h
12: update C

j
, S

j
, B

j
, p
hs

j
13: end while
14: end for
15: end for
16: N(p) N(p) {p

}
17: end for
3.3.2. Local Search. Algorithm 2 illustrates one step of
local search. The relation between the changing of HS-
DPA power requirement, SHO pattern and the cell CPICH
power is not straightforward. Increasing the power may not
necessarily increase the number of test points in SHO, the
same for HSDPA power requirement. During step 4 to 15 in
Algorithm 1, SHO and cell-edge HSDPA power requirement
will be recalculated according to the power change. During
local search, objective value will lead the algorithm to move
to the neighbor solution. We maintain two tabu lists namely
TI
i
(i C) and TD
i
(i C). Cells in TI are not allowed to
increase their power levels and cells in TD cant decrease
their power levels. We choose tabu length 30 for TI and
15 for TD. A move will change the tabu lists by entering
cells from the previous solution into the lists. As when
SHO requirement is high, it turns out to be a very stringent
constraint and TS can hardly move to good solutions. We
apply the notion of relaxation and penalty to deal with
this issue. For a solution with SHO requirement violated,
a penalty is added to the objective function.
obj :

iC
(p
hs
i
+ p
pilot
i
) + (|J| |S|). (5)
|S| is the current number of points in SHO. The penalty
depends on the the number of additional test points needed
to satisfy the SHO requirement and coefcient (0.09 in our
simulation). Even if the best solution in the neighborhood
is with SHO requirement violated, TS will still move to
Algorithm 2 Tabu Search
Input: p
ini
,TI length,TD length,
ini
,,,
Output: p
opt
1: p
opt
p
ini
2: p
start
p
ini
3: obj
local

4:
ini
5: for p

N(p
start
) do
6: if |S

| < |J| then

7: obj

iC
(p
pilot
i
+ p
hs
i
) + (|J| - |S
local
|)
8: else
9: obj

iC
(p
pilot
i
+ p
hs
i
)
10: end if
11: if obj

< obj
local
then
12: obj
local
obj

13: p
local
p

14: end if
15: end for
16: if |obj
local
| < |J| then
17:
18: else
19:
20: end if
21: for i C do
22: if p
start
i
> p

i
then
23: TI
i
TI length
24: if TD
i
> 0 then
25: TD
i
TD
i
1
26: end if
27: else if p
start
i
< p

i
then
28: TD
i
TD length
29: if TI
i
> 0 then
30: TI
i
TI
i
1
31: end if
32: end if
33: end for
34: if obj
local
< obj
opt
then
35: if |S
local
| |J| then
36: p
opt
p
local
37: p
start
p
local
38: else
39: p
start
p
local
40: end if
41: end if
the solution but scale up with coefcient (1.03 in
the simulation). For solutions satisfying SHO, no penalty
is imposed, and will be scaled down with coefcient
(0.97 in the simulation). So, when infeasible solutions
continuously appear, will keep increasing and penalty will
dominate more in the objective function. This will eventually
lead TS to a feasible solution. Relaxation will help TS nd a
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
better feasible solution by going through infeasible regions.
Even with relaxation, it may still take too long for a better
solution to appear. Diversication is utilized in the algorithm
to direct the algorithm to another region. We implement
diversication by increasing randomly half of all the cells
CPICH power levels by one step.
4. NUMERICAL RESULTS
We conduct simulation of the algorithm on ve networks
from medium to very large ones including both synthesized
and real planning scenarios. The algorithm is implemented
in C++ and runs on HP Compaq 8510p laptop with 2.4GHz
Intel Core2 Duo processor and 2G RAM.
4.1. Test Networks and Scenarios
Table 1 summaries the test network statistics and Table 2
shows the parameters we use for the simulation.
Table 1: Network Statistics.
Net Cells
Grid Uniform Average Maximal
point point grid CPICH HSDPA SHO
size (m
2
) size (points) (W) (W) %
N1 140 9409 40*40 100*100 1.4 5.33 29.99
N2 203 19088 40*40 140*140 1.7 6.60 41.51
N3 255 21678 40*40 150*150 1.5 6.13 38.29
N4 148 22500 50*50 150*150 2.5 10.66 37.28
N5 140 62500 20*20 250*250 2.1 10.57 31.61
Table 2: Simulation Parameters.
Net
Therm CPICH Orthogonality Total
noise threshold factor Tx Power
(dB) (W)
N1 1e-13 -18 0.6 15
N2 1e-13 -18 0.6 15
N3 1e-13 -18 0.6 15
N4 1.5488e-14 -20 {0.327,0.633,0.938} 19.9526
N5 1.5488e-14 -20 {0.327,0.633,0.938} 19.9526
N1 to N3 are synthesized networks by placing a number
of sites randomly over an area and generating isotropic path-
loss predictions by the modied Hata model. The other two
are real networks provided by EU project MOMENTUM
[12]. N4 is a planning scenario for city Berlin and N5 is
for Lisbon. Uniform power takes a constant portion of the
total power. We use 2.5dB for the cell-edge HSDPA SINR
threshold. Average cell-edge HSDPA power requirement and
maximal SHO in Table 1 are derived under uniform power
allocation.
4.2. Simulation Results
We enforce a total search limit of 2000 steps. Every
300 consecutive non-improving moves will trigger diver-
sication. We study the SHO rates () of 20%, 25% and
30% (29.99% for N1 since it is the maximal value) of
the test points and the results are presented in Table 3. In
the table, average cell-edge HSDPA power requirement p
hs
i
has already taken into account CPICH power saving. The
next column (Diver) shows the number of diversication.
Final SHO rate is the soft handover rate with optimized
CPICH power allocation, it might not be exactly the same
as the SHO requirement. It is quite obvious from the results
Table 3: Simulation Results with different SHO requirements
Net SHO Average Average Diver Final
p
pilot
i
p
hs
i
SHO (%)
N1
0.2 0.83 2.27 0 20.06
0.25 0.85 2.33 5 25.00
0.3 1.02 4.36 5 30.00
N2
0.2 0.92 4.10 3 21.79
0.25 0.92 4.13 3 25.08
0.3 0.97 4.30 0 30.00
N3
0.2 0.89 4.21 2 20.77
0.25 0.92 4.31 4 26.03
0.3 0.98 4.52 2 30.00
N4
0.2 0.94 6.02 1 22.00
0.25 0.99 6.25 3 25.00
0.3 1.23 7.07 6 30.00
N5
0.2 0.92 6.72 0 22.71
0.25 0.94 6.86 2 25.01
0.3 1.34 8.46 4 30.01
that with higher SHO requirement, both CPICH power and
HSDPA transmit power grow. So, there is a trade off between
the power consumption and SHO requirement. Figure 2
shows the comparison of CPICH power consumption and
cell-edge HSDPA power requirement for both uniform and
optimized CPICH power allocation.
0
0.
!
!.
?
?.
\! \? \3 \+ \
|u`om
Tu|u30)
Tu|u?)
Tu|u?0)
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

C
P
I
C
H

p
o
w
e
r
(
W
)
0
?
+
b
8
!0
\! \? \3 \+ \
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

c
e
l
l
-
e
d
g
e

H
S
D
P
A
p
o
w
e
r

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t

(
W
)
Figure 2: Comparison of CPICH power and HSDPA Power Re-
quirement
As can be seen from the results, CPICH achieves sig-
nicant decrease. Up to 50% of power can be saved from
control channel in most of the cases even with quite high
soft handover requirement. Moreover, by reallocating these
power saving to HSDPA transmit power, cell-edge HSDPA
power requirement achieves signicant drop, up to 30%
in most of the cases. For city Berlin, average cell- edge
HSDPA power requirement drops by 35% under 25% SHO
requirement.
For the network performance, data throughput can be
denoted by the SINR at the test points. After we reallocate
the CPICH power saving to HSDPA transmit power, SINR is
improved all across the planning scenario. Figure 3 shows
the SINR improvement at test points. Lines in the graph
represent antenna locations and directions. As can be seen
from the graph, up to 2.5dB improvement of SINR can be
gained. In average, we obtain about 1.3dB improvement of
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Figure 3: HSDPA performance improvement (dB)
SINR for this planning scenario which is quite benecial for
the data throughput.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS
We have presented a solution algorithm based on
Tabu Search to improve the HSDPA performance of
UMTS/HSDPA networks while maintaining the R99 SHO
service. By allocating the CPICH power non-uniformly, sig-
nicant power saving can be achieved from control channel.
By reallocating power saving to trafc channel, network
performance achieves improvement. The algorithm targets at
large scale network planning and optimization. Simulations
on both synthesized networks and realistic networks show
signicant power saving and performance improvement.
One possible extension is to include additional opti-
mization parameters like antenna congurations to further
enhance the HSDPA performance. Another very interesting
extension is to include HSUPA which supports soft handover
into the planning framework.
Acknowledgment
The authors wish to thank Dr. Iana Siomina, Ericsson
Research, Sweden, for her discussion and help. The work
of the rst author has been nanced by CENIIT, Link oping
Institute of Technology, Sweden, and the Swedish Research
Council. The work has been carried out within European
COST action 2100 and FP7 project IAPP@Ranplan.
References
[1] 3GPP, Utra high speed downlink packet access (HSDPA),
overall description, stage 2 (release 5), 2004.
[2] A. Eisenbl atter, A. F ugenschuh, E.R.Fledderus, H.F.Geerdes,
B.Heideck, D.Junglas, T.Koch, T.K urner, and A.Martin,
Mathematical methods for automatic optimization of UMTS
radio networks, Project rep. D4.3, IST-2000-28088, 2003.
[3] A. H oglund and K. Valkealahti, Automated optimization of
key WCDMA parameters, Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput.,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 257271, 2005.
[4] I. Siomina and D. Yuan, Optimization of pilot power for ser-
vice coverage and smooth handover in WCDMA networks,
In Proceedings of IFIP/IEEE MWCN05), 2005.
[5] R. T. Love, K. A. Beshir, D. Schaeffer, and R. S. Nikides,
A pilot optimization technique for CDMA cellular systems,
In Proceedings of IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference
(VTC99), pp. 22382242, 1999.
[6] H. Holma and A. T. (eds.), WCDMA for UMTS, radio
access for third generation mobile communications, Wiley
& Sons, 2004.
[7] I. Siomina and D. Yuan, Minimum pilot power for service
coverage in WCDMA networks, Wireless Networks, vol. 14,
no. 3, pp. 393402, 2008.
[8] K. Valkealahti, A. H oglund, J. Parkkinen, and A. Flanagan,
WCDMA common pilot power control for load and coverage
balancing, In Proceedings of Personal, Indoor and Mobile
Radio Communications, pp. 14121416, 2002.
[9] L. Chen and D. Yuan, Automated planning of CPICH
power for enhancing HSDPA performance at cell edges with
preserved control of R99 soft handover, In Proceedings of
IEEE ICC 08, 2008.
[10] E. Amaldi, A. Capone, and F. Malucelli, Planning umts base
station location: optimization models with power control and
algorithms, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications,
vol. 2, pp. 939952, 2003.
[11] H. Holma and A. T. (eds.), HSDPA HSUPA for UMTS: High
speed access for mobile communication, Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[12] IST-2000-28088, http://momentum.zib.de, 2005.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Alcatel-Lucent. Downloaded on June 02,2010 at 10:23:56 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.