You are on page 1of 6

IEEE ICC 2014 - Wireless Communications Symposium

Zero-Forcing Beamforming in Massive MIMO
Systems with Time-Shifted Pilots
Shi Jin, Xiaoyu Wang, and Zheng Li

Kai-Kit Wong

National Mobile Communications Research Laboratory
Southeast University
Nanjing, China
Email: {jinshi, xiaoyu wang, lizheng}

Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering
University College London
London, United Kingdom

Abstract—By deploying a substantial number of antennas
on the base station (BS) side, massive MIMO system has
been demonstrated to achieve unprecedented spectral efficiency.
However, its performance is still limited by pilot contamination
due to unavoidable reuse of pilot sequences from user terminals
in other cells. In this paper, we focus on the performance analysis
of zero-forcing beamforming in a finite-antenna massive MIMO
system using a time-shifted pilot scheme, which was shown to
combat pilot contamination effectively with infinite BS antennas
and conjugate beamforming. We derive rigorous expressions for
sum-rate lower bounds and associated signal to interference plus
noise ratios of both forward link and reverse link. Based on
these expressions, we provide some engineering rules of thumb
to design a time-shifted pilot system achieving higher sum-rate
performance. Besides, our system model is proved to cover a
series of previous works as special cases as well.

Massive multi-input multi-output (MIMO) time-division duplexing (TDD) systems, as a novel and one of the most promising cellular network architectures, provide breakthrough data
rate by using a large excess of service-antennas over active
user terminals (UTs) [1]–[4]. In the pioneering work [1], it has
been shown that simple single-user conjugate beamforming
in a massive MIMO system without any base station (BS)
joint processing is able to achieve huge gain in spectral efficiency. With unlimited BS antennas, additive Gaussian noise
and uncorrelated interference vanish, and the only remaining
impairment is the correlated inter-cell interference due to pilot
contamination, which is inevitably caused by the finite length
pilot sequences reused by UTs from different cells.
Pilot contamination, as a fundamental bottleneck of the
massive MIMO transmission, brings about the quick saturation
of system performance and cannot be overcome by simply
increasing the number of BS antennas [5]–[7]. Accordingly,
several approaches have been proposed to alleviate the damages caused by pilot contamination through either novel precoding algorithms [7], [8] or coordinated channel estimation
[9]. In [10], a time-shifted pilots based scheme was proposed
which combats pilot contamination by rearranging reverse-link
pilot transmission order without consuming additional system
resources. It has been menifested that in a massive MIMO
system equipped with indefinite number of BS antennas, using
time-shifted pilots combined with conjugate beamforming can

978-1-4799-2003-7/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE

achieve remarkable signal to interference ratio (SIR) gain
compared to the traditional synchronized pilot scheme.
Although the time-shifted pilot scheme is quite attractive
in enhancing system performance, it is unclear whether it
would still be functional with finite number of BS antennas. In
this paper, we investigate the performance of the time-shifted
pilot scheme with zero-forcing (ZF) beamforming in both the
finite and infinite antenna regimes. Rigorous expressions for
throughput lower bounds and the associated signal to interference plus noise ratios (SINRs) are given as a foundation to
deduce a series of informative conclusions. These conclusions
shed light on the proper choices of several system parameters,
including transmission power, antenna number and the number
of cell groups (a parameter related to the time-shifted pilot
scheme). Besides, our system model is also a good and exact
generalization of several previous works.
Consider a cellular network of L hexagonal cells, each comprising an M-antenna BS at the center and K single-antenna
UTs sharing the same bandwidth. All UTs are randomly and
uniformly distributed over each cell except for a central disk
of radius rh . We assume that all the BSs and UTs are perfectly
synchronized in each symbol and operate a TDD protocol.
A. Propagation Model
Consider a flat-fading channel model on a single frequency
band or subcarrier. The channel vector between the i-th BS
and the k-th terminal of the l-th cell is 

hikl = βikl gikl ,
k = 1, 2, ..., K, i, l = 1, 2, ..., L
where the small-scale fading row vectors, gikl ∼ CN (0, IM ),
are assumed to be statistically independent across UTs and
βikl is the large-scale fading accounting for both geometric
attenuation and shadow fading and factors as follows:
βikl = 

where rikl is the distance between the k-th terminal in the l-th
cell and the BS in the i-th cell, η is the decay exponent, and
αikl is a log-normal random variable with standard deviation


and qj = [q1j . To diminish the severe interference due to simultaneous pilot transmission. we analyze the forward-link sum rate lower bound and the associated SINR. here we focus on group Aγ . In the time-shifted pilot scheme. users send reverse-link pilot sequences of length τ .. w2j . ... In a traditional TDD scheme... except for one group Aγ  which is sending reverse-link pilots. UTs send orthogonal pilot sequences of length τ .... the l-th BS’s received signal matrix is pilot YB = l K   √ ρr τ hlk j ϕ k j∈Aγ k =1 +  j ∈A / γ cj K  √ where ρr and ρf are the normalized reverse. which takes N symbol periods. |ϕk t | = 1/τ are the mutually orthogonal ϕk ϕ †k | = δk .. wKj ] is the beamforming matrix for the j-th cell. 1 depicts this scheme with four cell groups and a coherence interval of 14 symbols.Wireless Communications Symposium 3LORW3URFHVVLQJ)RUZDUGOLQN5HYHUVHOLQN $ $ $ $ Fig. We further assume a time block fading model. Channel Estimation In order to obtain channel estimates. . pilot sequences reused in each cell. q2j . F ORWARD -L INK ACHIEVABLE R ATE A NALYSIS In this section. 1). Instead of investigating the M → ∞ scenario which can largely simplify the analysis. . We assume cell l ∈ Aγ and the number of scheduled UTs in each cell is K (K ≤ τ ). Then during any symbol interval of the first three phases. whose entries are independent and identically distributed CN (0. provided only pilot and forward-link data transmission are considered. 1. σshadow corresponding to shadow fading. . and between the i-th and the l-th cells. qKj ]T is the corresponding message-bearing symbol vector whose elements are uncorrelated with unit variance. y2l . ϕk τ ]. wuj ∈ CM ×1 is the corresponding beamforming vector and cj is the normalization factor to ensure the total expected power constraint per cell is met as in [11]   (4) E s†j sj = 1 where sj = cj Wj qj . uk1 ik2 l and Bil denote the channel coefficients between the k1 -th terminal of the i-th cell and the k2 -th terminal of the l-th cell.. • then.. B. which is determined as τ =  TΓ . C. • second.. . Then we stack the processed channel vectors together as Yl = [y1l . Similarly. AΓ . yKl ] to compute the beamforming matrix Wl ∈ CM ×K for the l-th cell  −1 (7) Wl = Yl Yl† Yl which is used in both forward-link data transmission and reverse-link data processing at the l-th BS.. After the processing stage. N = 1. Time-Shifted Pilot Transmission Scheme Under the assumption of channel reciprocity and TDD operation. respectively..k . since all the groups are at their pilot stage alternately and follow the same transmission pattern. All cells are divided into four groups. i. Fig. we focus on a more practical case where the number of BS antennas is finite.. each cell in the system conduct the above four phases synchronously.   E qj q†j = IK (5) Then the l-th BS obtains the processed channel vector about pilot by ϕ †k the k-th user in Aγ and itself by multiplying YB l  √ ykl = ρr τ hlkj j∈Aγ +  j ∈A / γ cj K  √ ρf Blj wuj quj ϕ †k + zkl (6) u=1 where we define zkl  Zlϕ †k . BSs extract channel vector estimates from these pilots. where |ϕ M ×τ Zl ∈ C is the additive noise. we use reverse-link pilots to obtain channel estimates and divide each coherence interval into four phases: • first. in which channel vectors are constant during coherence intervals of T symbols and independent in different coherence intervals. also known as the align pilot scheme [10]. III. Time-shifted pilot scheme with τ = 3. there is only one group of cells sending reverse link pilots while the rest are transmitting forward-link data. Wj = [w1j .and forwardlink powers so that they are proportional to the radiated power of BSs and UTs divided by the noise variance. quj ∈ C1×τ is the message-bearing symbol vector for the u-th UT in the j-th cell. the BSs in group Aγ transmit data to their corresponding UTs. BSs transmit precoded forward-link data to their users using the channel estimates for D symbols. Then during group Aγ ’s pilot phase. • all the users in the system transmit reverse-link data to their BSs for U symbol periods. the received signal of the k-th user in the cell l ∈ Aγ is  √  √ xkl = ρf cj h†jkl Wj qj + ρf cj h†jkl Wj qj j ∈A / γ ∪Aγ  j∈Aγ (3) ρf Blj wuj quj + Zl + √ ρr τ  K  uk1 jkl ϕk1 t + zkl j∈Aγ  k1 =1 (8) u=1 4802 . when all the other groups are transmitting data to their respective UTs as well. During one of the symbol intervals in this phase.IEEE ICC 2014 . A2 .e. ϕk 2 .. [10] proposed a timeshifted pilot scheme which partitions the whole system into Γ exclusive cells groups denoted by A1 . ϕ k = [ϕk 1 . D = 8 and U = 2.

In a massive MIMO system with finite BS antennas. and zkl ∼ CN (0. time-shifted pilot scheme and zero-forcing beamforming.j=l λkj . the third term represents interference coming from users in group Aγ  . Theorem 1.Wireless Communications Symposium where the first two terms represent the forward-link signal from all the BSs but those in group Aγ  . 1) is the additive noise.IEEE ICC 2014 . With the expression in (8). the forward-link sum rate lower bound of the l-th cell is K    τ +N +U  f Clf = 1 − log2 1 + Skl (9) T k=1 f Skl represents the effective SINR of the k-th UT in the where l-th cell and can be expressed as f Skl and = 2 ρf ρr τ βlkl K −1 u=1 λul kl (M − K) λ2  2 ρf ρr τ βjkl R1 = K −1 2 u=1 λuj j∈Aγ . we can derive the worse-case sum rate as follows.

group number of timeshifted pilot scheme. 2   ρr τ βjkl βjkl − + ρf R2 =ρf λkj j ∈A / γ ∪Aγ  + ρr K   βjkl (9c) βk1 jkl + 1 j∈Aγ  k1 =1 λkl  1 + ρf (9b)  βls + ρr τ s∈A / γ  βlks (9d) s∈Aγ Proof. the numbers of BS antennas and the scheduled UTs. and the SINR Skl in (9a) reduces to a simpler expression. To start with. including transmit power.j=l λkj . in the following we analyze how those elements affect the SINR and sum rate lower bound so as to gain some insights for system design. See Appendix A. etc. Based on this observation. we present one special case in which the number f of time-shifted groups are equal to one. Note that the effective SINR in (9a) is related to several parameters. f Skl = where 2 ρf ρr τ βlkl K −1 u=1 λul kl (M − K)R1 + R2 L  2 ρf ρr τ βjkl K −1 2 u=1 λuj j=1.

8 8. more BS antennas will always provide better performance.. if users are symmetrically located and log-normal shadowing is not considered as in [12].e. When the group number of the time-shifted pilot scheme Γ = 1. TABLE I S IMULATION PARAMETERS PARAMETERS Number of cells L Number of UTs per cell K Number of finite BS antennas M Coherence interval T Processing phase length B Cell radius rc (from center to vertex) Protection distance rh Decay exponent η Shadow fading standard deviation σshadow Normalized BS transmit power ρf Normalized UT pilot power ρr Normalized UT data transmission power Pk i (10) (10a) (10b) βjks Proof. When a single-cell system and small-scale fading only are considered. Corollary 1. U = 0 when the forward-link sum rate lower bounds are under study.1 km 3. The simulation parameters are given in Table I and will remain the same if they are not specified otherwise. Furthermore. The sum rate starts saturating due to the unavoidable pilot contamination when Γ = 9 and M > 107 . the SINR and capacity lower bound grow infinitely when M → ∞. i. In Fig.. while they will saturate with smaller group number. the forward-link effective SINR of the k-th user in the l-th cell is (M − K) λ2 L  s=1 (9a) (M − K)R1 + R2 j∈Aγ λkj = 1 + ρr τ VALUES 37 5 256 185 symbols 1 symbol 1. i. Besides. This result can be obtained straight from (9a) by setting Aγ to L. which suggests that in practice. By substituting Aγ with l and Aγ with l respectively in (9a).. R1 = 0. in the one-cell-pergroup case the SINR grows linearly and indefinitely with antenna number in the studied regime. Therefore. Corollary 1 is also consistent with Theorem 2 of [12].0 km 0. UTs’ SINR can be simplified as f Ssingle−cell = M −K ρf ρr τ · K ρf + 1 + ρr τ (11) which is in accordance with the result in [11]. we diplay the cell sum rate lower bounds1 for different strategies. which means that given the number of scheduled UTs K when Γ = 1.0 dB 105 104 3 × 104 1 We assume that there is no reverse-link data transmission. i. L 2  ρr τ βjkl βjkl − +1 R2 =ρf λkj j=1 R1 = (10c) In the align pilots scenario. the sum rate the SINR Skl lower bound in (9) is negatively related to the length of pilot sequences. we notice that in the one-cell-per-group scenario.e. 4803 . if the system is interference limited. then λkj is proportional to the pilot length τ and f is independent of τ . pilot contamination can be fully eliminated. the align pilot scheme is adopted.e. Contrarily. the pilot length that maximize the lower bound is τ = K. 2. the conclusion in [11] is a special case of Corollary 1. Hence.

From Fig. Intuitively. We assume λkl is constant across all the cells and λkl /λk l independent of ρf . The M × 1 received signal vector for the BS l ∈ Aγ is r yB = l L  K   Pk i hlk i qkr  i + zl (13) i=1 k =1 where Pk i and qkr  i are the normalized transmit power of reverse-link data and uncorrelated message-bearing signal with unit variance of the k  -th user in the i-th cell respectively.. For each curve in Fig. When ρf is relatively small. one of the most basic design factors is how to choose a proper number of cell groups to 2 Cell-edge reference SNR is the interference-free SNR at the cell edge. so does the maximum number of simultaneously scheduled UTs. Furthermore. a larger ρr corresponds to a larger optimal ρf . Then we approximate (9a) to f ≈ Skl where E1 = ρ2f ⎛ E2 = ⎝ρr τ M −K 2 K ρf ρr τ βlkl E1 + E2 + E3  βjkl j ∈A / γ  s∈Aγ ⎞⎛ βlks + 1⎠ ⎝ρr  βls s∈A / γ K   (12) (12a) ⎞ βk1 jkl + 1⎠ j∈Aγ  k1 =1 (12b) and the third term E3 in the denominator is proportional to ρf . there exists an optimal cell-edge reference SNR2 (or ρf ) to maximize the sum rate. and zl ∼ CN (0. the number of group should be chosen as large as possible when the constraints of τ =  TΓ  and K ≤ τ can be met. Consequently. Based on the observation of curves in Fig. The choice threshold of these two strategies can ba obtained by using the results in Theorem 1 which avoids the complexity of Monte Carlo simulations. as shown in (12c) at the top of the next page. the denominator of (12) increases with the growth of ρf while the numerator remains unchanged. we consider the effect of transmit power on the sumrate performance. and the noise power is set accordingly. larger Γ. 2. roughly an order of magnitude higher than ρr . 3. Cell throughput lower bounds vary with the number of BS antennas for different cell group number Γ. In a time-shifted pilot system. which shows that the choice for data transmission power and pilot power should not be separated. resulting in the disfunction of channel estimation. the SINR and rate lower bound will grow with ρf . When ρf is large enough so that E2 can be ignored. the lengths of pilot sequences for different Γ can be determined accordingly.Wireless Communications Symposium 20 3 Γ=9 Γ = 37 18 ρ = 10 r 4 Sum rate lower bound Cl (bps/Hz) 100 16 ρ = 10 r 14 f f Sum rate lower bound Cl (bps/Hz) 150 50 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 10 10 6 8 10 BS antenna number M 10 0 −30 10 10 Fig. R EVERSE -L INK ACHIEVABLE R ATE A NALYSIS After all the groups have finished their channel coefficients estimation. The two curves correspond to ρr = 103 and 104 respectively and Γ = 9 maximize the system throughput. the multiplication of the two summations in E1 is small enough to be neglected compared with E2 and E3 . only accounting for BS transmit power and path-loss. On the other hand.e. we focus on the BS transmit power and leave the UTs’ pilot power unchanged. i. we can conclude that when the number of scheduled users is not that large (K ≤ 24 in our simulation scenario). 4. all the UTs send message-bearing signals to their BSs simultaneously. a smaller number of cells transmitting pilots simultaneously. 4 we can gain some insights for the choice of group number.IEEE ICC 2014 . given the length of coherence interval which is determined by the UTs’ mobility. −20 −10 0 10 Cell−edge reference SNR (dB) 20 30 Fig. Forward-link sum rate lower bounds vary with cell-edge reference SNR and constant normalized pilot power ρr . We now apply the concept of zero-forcing reception to obtain the data symbol 4804 . IV. Next. Given the coherence interval length T . which comprises the SINR. a large group number leads to a short pilot-sequence length. resulting in the reduction of the maximum number of served UTs and relatively high channel estimation error. IM ) is the additive noise vector. Since the forward link is investigated. the pilots will be submerged by the signals from BSs in other groups. 3. means less pilot contamination and higher SINR on the one hand. This trend is because when the forward-link power is too large. while align pilots should be chosen if the number of users is relatively large. which compromises system capacity.

but unlike forward link. Here we omit the description for brevity. The data transmission efficiency is chosen as U T = 0. In a massive MIMO system with finite BS antennas. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of China under Grant 61222102. In Table II. while with the growth of cell group numbers. estimates for each UT.LINK SUM RATE LOWER BOUNDS IN BPS /H Z HH Γ 1 H M HH 400 11. the cell group number and the number of BS antennas and scheduled UTs. This observation demonstrates that the selection of a proper Γ should mainly depend on the forward-link performance. we derived the sum rate lower bounds and the associated SINRs for both forward link and reverse link in a massive MIMO system using the time-shifted pilot transmission scheme with zero-forcing beamforming and large but finite number of BS antennas. Forward-link sum rate lower bounds vary with the number of scheduled UTs K for different group number Γ. and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant BK2012021.17 3 7 9 15.29 32. 15 10 Γ = 1. Hence. it is expected and can also be proved that they have the similar properties as described in Section III-A.i=l Pki βlki kl and 30 l Capacity lower bound Cf (bps/Hz) 40 0 10 20 30 40 Number of scheduled users K 50 60 Fig. 4805 . Based on the sum rate and SINR expressions. the benefit brought from pilot contamination reduction is rapidly canceled out by the interference from UTs in other groups. This is because time-shifted pilots can decrease the interference caused by pilot contamination. which provided insights for the design of a massive MIMO system with time-shifted pilots.04 Theorem 2. time-shifted pilot scheme and zero-forcing beamforming. we can get the following results.3. the reverse-link sum rate lower bound of the l-th cell is Clr = K U  r log2 (1 + Skl ) T (15) k=1 r where Skl is the associated SINR of the k-th UT in the l-th The reverse-link sum rate lower bound and the associated SINR given in Theorem 2 resemble those in the forward link in form.87 15. V. the National Science and Technology Major Project of China under Grants 2013ZX03003004.42 46. The number of BS antennas is M = 400. τ = 42 Γ = 9. time-shifted pilot approach is able to improve the sum rate performance. τ = 14 5 0 2 (M − K)Pkl ρr τ βlkl 2 +λ Q (M − K)ρr τ i∈Aγ . TABLE II R EVERSE .IEEE ICC 2014 . It is interesting to notice that for reverse link.51 51. more groups won’t promise a substantially higher rate with limited BS antennas. we give the reverse-link lower bounds for different cell group number Γ with both finite and infinite BS antennas.Wireless Communications Symposium  M −K E3 =ρf K + ρf  2 ρr τ βjkl + ρf j ∈A / γ j∈Aγ . C ONCLUSIONS In this paper. τ = 63 Γ = 3.j ∈l / ⎛ K   βls ⎝ρr  ⎛ βjkl ⎝ρr τ ⎞  βlks + 1⎠ s∈Aγ βk1 jkl + 1⎠ − ρf ρr τ j∈Aγ  k1 =1 s∈A / γ ⎞  (12c) βjkl j∈Aγ cell 45 r Skl = 35 Q=1+ 25 L  K  Pk i βlk i − ρr τ i=1 k =1 20 (15a) K 2   Pk i βlk i (15b) l λ k  i∈Aγ k =1 Proof. 4. The estimated signal for the k-th user in the l-th cell is given as † r † r qˆkl = wkl yBl = wkl L  K   † Pk i hlk i qkr  i + wkl zl (14) i=1 k =1 Adopting the similar analysis method for the forward link. The length of coherence interval is 126 symbols. we investigated how the system performance influenced by the transmit powers. See Appendix B.69 ∞ 16.24 15. 61320106003.

Wireless Communications Symposium A PPENDIX A P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1 From ykl in (6) we can get the MMSE linear estimates of the M × 1 channel vector √ ˆ lkj = ρr τ βlkj ykl h (16) λkl ˆ lkj . 8. 2640–2651. Ramprashad. 4806 . “A coordinated approach to channel estimation in large-scale multiple-antenna systems. Jun.. vol.” in Proc. Signal Process. Larsson. [2] F. Seoul. pp. Inf. pp. Wireless Commun.. 9. IL. vol. C. 2000. Yw ∈ CN (0.. 3590–3600. 10. 2013. pp. “Novel generic bounds on the sum rate of MIMO ZF receivers. 9. [5] J.” IEEE Signal Proces. using the result about inverse l Wishart matrix given in [15] [16] we get   1 † E wkl (22) wkl = λkl (M − K) j ∈A / γ ∪Aγ  j∈Aγ √ and compute each term’s power. [3] E. Hoydis. 192–201. 545–550. Larsson. Sel.” IEEE Trans. Ml ∼ −1 CWK M. 3464–3467. T. G. Ngo. C. A. F. 40–60. 2013. we calculate the power of each term in (17). 2012. Ashikhmin. Inf. A. K. Inf. 1. 2184–2188... E. pp. 4. Yang and T.. and M. Hochwald. Gesbert. the estimate h Then we reorganize (8) following the method in [8]  βlkl √ βjkl √ + ρf ρr τ cj qkj xkl = ρf ρr τ cl λkl λkj j∈Aγ . “How much training is needed in multiple-antenna wireless links?” IEEE Trans. . Zhong. then we have wkl = Yl mkl and     † E wkl wkl = E (Ml )k. Gupta. Using the theorem about first negative moment of eigenvalues of semi-correlated channel in [13].” IEEE Trans.. Huh. λ2j .3862v2 [13] M... L. vol. “Massive MIMO for next generation wireless systems.Control. “Inter-cell interference in noncooperative TDD large scale antenna systems. no. Ratnarajah. Kraus. Fernandes. T. and T. [Online].” in Proc. and S.k represents the k-th diagonal element of Ml . the sum rate lower bound can be obtained as in (9). using Theorem 1 in [14].org/abs/1304. Q. Radar. Czech Repulic. L.. R−1 . Maiwald and D. 2. [16] D. related   are   some of which −1 † to the expectation E wkl wkl . 113. Jul. vol. 2010. “Performance of conjugate and zeroforcing beamforming in large-scale antenna systems. RemarkMl is a complex inverse Wishart matrix. i. λKj }. Available: http://arxiv.. Theory (ISIT’09). Matthaiou. Debbah. “Scaling up MIMO: Opportunities and challenges with very large arrays. L. Marzetta. Edfors. the normalized factor can be expressed as M −K c2j = K −1 u=1 λuj (19) and the forward-link SINR in (9a) can be derived accordingly. 162–168.” IEE Proc. Comput. “Pilot contamination precoding in multicell large scale antenna systems. O. May 2011. Larsson. Symp. H. D. [14] B. Mag. Korea. In order to obtain an explicit expression for the forward-link SINR. pp. Tufvesson. “Matrix calculation of moments of complex Wishart and complex inverse Wishart distributed matrices. Marzetta. [10] F. Available: http://arxiv. Areas Commun. O. Rusek. no. “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited numbers of base station antennas. Ten Brink. Symp. Theory.k (21) K    i∈A / γ k =1 † Pk i hlk i qkr  i + wkl zl (20) [1] T. 2009. 49. 1137–1141. Marzetta. 264–273. Hassibi and B. no. Define Ml  Yl† Yl = (m1l . Lau. Therefore.. 2011. Theory (ISIT’12). IEEE International Conference on Acoustics. no.” IEEE J. [6] J. 265–288. Cambridge. L.” IEEE J.” Acta applicandae mathematicae. Sonar and Navigation. m2l . 1)M ×K . IEEE Annu. 2011. K. pp. Nagar and A. Since the desired signal and all the additive interference terms are uncorrelated. T. [11] H. Yin. 2011. pp. Sel. and T. and E. Areas Commun. j ∈ Aγ . Wireless Commun. “Massive MIMO: How many antennas do we need?” in Proc. IEEE Int. B. 2.i=l  K   ˜ lk i q r  Pk i h k i i∈Aγ k =1 † + wkl Substitute (22) into the power expressions of each term in (20). L. L. M. M. and Rj = diag {λ1j . 59. A. vol. Ashikhmin. MA. Sep. IEEE Int. Prague. and T. K. R EFERENCES j∈Aγ  k1 =1 † − wkl where (Ml )k. and S. pp. A PPENDIX B P ROOF OF T HEOREM 2 The proof of Theorem 2 is similar to that of Theorem 1. “Analysis of the pilot contamination effect in very large multicell multiuser MIMO systems for physical channel models. Jose. 2. “Expectations of functions of complex Wishart. Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP’11). 30. pp. no. [7] ——. 3.” in Pro. 2003. 31. [12] H. Marzetta. Sel. Urbana-Champaign. Marzetta. Commun. 2013. uncorrelated with ˜ lkj = hlkj − h The estimation error is h ˆ lkj due to the property of MMSE estimation.6690v2 [4] H. no. 2011. Recall (4) and (7). 172–179. vol. no. Tufvesson.IEEE ICC 2014 .. and F. D. Marzetta. and we can get    −1  −1 (18) c2j = E tr Yj† Yj where Yj = Yw Rj . “Pilot contamination problem in multi-cell TDD systems.j=l  √  ˜† √ − ρf cj hjkl Wj qj + ρf cj h†jkl Wj qj + ρr τ K   uk1 jkl ϕk1 t + zkl (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)  skl qkl + wkl + wkl + wkl + wkl + wkl (17) (1) where skl qkl is the desired signal and the terms from wkl (5) to wkl are mutually uncorrelated noise. G. vol. some of which are related to the factor cj . 951–963. pp. Edfors. Areas Commun. 2011.e. . 147. pp.. 2013.” IEEE J. “Achieving ”massive MIMO” spectral efficiency with a notso-large number of antennas.mKl ). Filippou. [8] A. S. pp. G. [15] D. Marzetta. no. 4. Caire. 31. “Pilot contamination and precoding in multi-cell TDD systems. vol. Papadopoulos.” May 2013.” IEEE Trans. vol. 4341–4353. Allerton Conf. vol. pp. First we rewrite (14) as √  ρr τ   βlkl r r r qˆkl = Pkl ρr τ qkl + Pki βlki qki λkl λkl i∈Aγ . and Y. G. Liu. and Theorem 2 can be validated accordingly. Ashikhmin and T. [Online]. Marzetta. Vishwanath. 31. 11. L. no. [9] H. pp.” Sep.. no.