POLITECNICO DI TORINO

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
College of Electronic Engineering, Telecommunications and Physics (ETF)

Master of Science in Telecommunication Engineering

Master’s Degree Thesis

Advanced receivers for LTE/LTE-A systems
with interference cancellation capabilities

Supervisor
Prof. Marina Mondin
Ing. Bruno Melis
Candidate
Federico Pacifici

March 2014

INDEX
INTRODUCTION

4

CHAPTER 1: From LTE to LTE-Advanced - PHY Overview

6

1.1 Main concepts

6

1.2 Multi antenna techniques

9

1.3 Transmission modes and transmission schemes

10

1.4 Modulation and multiple access technique

13

1.5 Downlink signals

14

1.6 Downlink multi-antenna transmission

17

1.6.1 Layer mapping

18

1.6.2 Transmit diversity

19

1.7 User Equipment categories

20

1.8 A limiting factor of spectrum efficiency

22

1.9 Inter cell Interference modeling: DIP values

23

1.10 Channel profiles

25

CHAPTER 2: ACTIVITIES IN 3GPP ON ADVANCED RECEIVERS

27

2.1 feICIC

28

2.2 CRS-IM

29

2.3 NAICS

30

2.3.1 MMSE

31

2.3.2 MMSE-IRC

31

2.3.3 E-MMSE-IRC

33

2.3.4

34

Symbol level SIC

1

2.3.5

Bit level hard SIC

35

2.3.6

Soft Turbo SIC

36

2.3.7

ML receiver

36

2.3.8

R-ML

38

CHAPTER 3: MMSE-IRC RECEIVER IN REAL SCENARIOS
3.1 Overview

40

3.1 General Architecture of the MIMO OFDMA simulator

41

3.1.1 Data region Mapping/Demapping

43

3.1.2 Subcarrier Mapping/Demapping

45

3.1.3 IFFT/FFT calculation and cyclic prefix insertion/removal

46

3.1.4 Pilots compensation

47

3.1.5 Channel Estimation

48

3.1.6 Space-time Encoder/Decoder

50

3.2 Modeling MMSE-IRC

51

3.2.1 MMSE-IRC for SFBC transmit diversity

51

3.2.2 Building the MMSE-IRC receiver

58

3.3 Performance of MMSE-IRC receiver

61

3.3.1 Interfering signal modeled as Gaussian noise

61

3.3.2 Real Interference signal – Colliding pilot case

63

3.3.3 Real Interference signal – No Colliding pilot case

67

CHAPTER 4: SUCCESSIVE INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION RECEIVERS

2

39

69

4.1 Introduction and comparison

69

4.2 SLIC implementation

71

4.3 BLIC implementation

76

4.4 SLIC and BLIC performance analysis

79

CONCLUSION

85

BIBLIOGRAPHY

86

3

The objective of this Master Thesis is analyzing and simulating advanced receiver schemes with interference rejection capabilities that represent one of the next innovative step in the physical layer of LTE/LTE-A systems providing higher throughput especially at the cell edge. even if the SLIC receiver complexity is higher than MMSE-IRC one. MMSE-IRC has been implemented as an independent block to simplify the development of innovative receivers that use it as elementary building block. A low complexity version of the MMSE-IRC receiver has been implemented in a link level simulator specific for the LTE system.INTRODUCTION The Master Thesis was written after an internship period at Telecom Italia S. MMSE-IRC is also a fundamental block of successive interference cancellation receivers operating at symbol level (SLIC.A (Wireless Access Innovation group). it provides some gain especially in the low SINR region. The MMSE-IRC receiver outperforms the classical detection schemes that treat the inter-cell interference as Gaussian noise. The Master Thesis is structured into four chapters. BLIC is more powerful. the successive interference cancellation functionality must be switched off to avoid the error propagation effect. The analysis showed that. Bit Level Interference Cancellation). especially in case of no colliding pilots between the serving and interfering cells. In the first chapter. a Physical Layer overview of LTE and LTE-Advanced systems is provided. while for higher SINR. so performance results have been obtained showing interesting features and using a low complexity technique for the estimation of the interference covariance matrix. focusing on the aspects that have been considered 4 . The selected receivers are chosen considering the trade-off between complexity and expected gains. but its complexity is very high because it performs the channel decoding also for the interfering signals.p. In a second step of the analysis SLIC and BLIC receivers have been implemented in a simplified link level simulator based on MATLAB and the simulated performances are compared with the other considered receivers. Symbol Level Interference Cancellation) and bit level (BLIC. Several receiver schemes are analyzed and some of them are simulated to obtain performance results in terms of Throughput and Raw BER.

showing simulation performance in terms of throughput and Raw BER.for the receiver implementations. discussing also the performance results. The last chapter describes the SLIC and BLIC receivers. 5 . Chapter two gives an overview of the activity carried out by 3GPP on advanced receivers. The third chapter shows the algorithm and the implementation of the MMSE-IRC receiver in the LTE link level simulator.

1 Main concepts Long Term Evolution (LTE) is a mobile telecommunication system designed to drive the evolution from 3G to 4G wireless communication technologies. but also the total data rate that can be provided on average from each deployed base station and per hertz of licensed spectrum. so the spectral efficiency. Packet switched services and IP are guidelines for a radio interface that support new design parameters such as: high data rate (close to Gbit/s). creating the mobile broadband. moreover there is an increasing demand for more spectrum resources. Many technical aspects are standardized and there are a lot of research groups and companies that invest in these fields. Note that. moreover the evolution tracking and the dominant standards are the result of many partnerships inside 3GPP.CHAPTER 1: From LTE to LTE-Advanced . new frequencies allocation. from the mobile system operator perspective. so innovative mobile systems need to operate in different frequency bands with spectrum allocation of different size and fragmentation. low latency and high capacity. This is the major driver for the evolution of LTE that provide internet protocol services. These developments include all the newest techniques that can provide new services to many users in complex scenarios ensuring the growing users expectation. new advanced technologies. In the last years. it is not only important the peak data rate to end users.PHY Overview 1. Another important constrain that has to be satisfied is the Quality of Service for the end users. In this context. creating an innovative and revolutionary market. the natural development of mobile communication was driven by the necessity to enable internet connectivity for mobile users. there was a strong evolution in terms of competition between mobile operators. One main target for the evolution of mobile communication is to provide the possibility for higher user data rates compared to what is achievable with 3G 6 . All of these design parameters influenced the development of LTE.

to increase the received one. called inter cell interference. an increase of data rate requires a much larger increase in the received signal power. In addition to inter 7 . it is possible reduce the attenuations. known as receive antenna diversity. At the receiver side. Another important target is to provide higher data rates over the entire cell area. Theoretically. planning small cells and increasing the number of cells. the maximum rate is limited by the channel capacity that depends on the channel bandwidth and on the signal to noise ratio. the interference from transmissions in neighboring cells. Fixing a transmit power. This limit can be avoided using multiple antennas at both the transmitter and the receiver side.standards. In conclusion. decreasing the distance. for examples focusing the total transmit power in the direction of the receiver or reducing the noise power density improving the receiver design. when the data rates is equal or higher than the available bandwidth. allowing higher data rates. the AWGN noise is the main negative contribution. so an increase in the available bandwidth does not substantially impact what received signal power is required for a certain data rate. is the dominant source of radio link impairment that usually occurs with a high traffic load. When the bandwidth utilization is low. This is a noise limited scenario. but in real scenarios. Even at transmit side it is possible to use multiple antennas. so the data rate is lower than the available bandwidth. Multiple transmit or receive antennas techniques are efficient up to a certain level beyond which there is only a marginal increase in the data rates. another useful technique to provide high data rates is using additional antennas. In the previous cases. the data rates are always limited by the available received power or by the received signal power to noise power ratio. increasing the data rate requires a higher received power. in the case of high bandwidth utilization. especially in mobile communication fields. the transmission bandwidth should at least be of the same order as the data rates to be provided. including users at the cell edge. On the other hand. using the spatial multiplexing or MIMO. in presence of AWGN noise. so combining signals received at the different antennas the signal to noise ratio can be increased in proportion to the number of antennas. There are also other techniques. so an increase in the bandwidth will reduce the received signal power required for a certain data rate. in which.

Setting a SINR there is an optimal choice of modulation and channel coding to obtain the highest bandwidth utilization. One important difference between interference and noise is that interference. One way to increase the data rate is to use higher order modulations. focusing on the implementations and performances of advanced receivers able to cancel interferences in various scenarios. bandwidth is a scarce and expensive resource. It is necessary to design a transmission scheme that avoids frequency channel selectivity with low complexity. IFFT/FFT digital processing. in contrast to noise. This scheme provides a lot of other benefits such as robustness against Intersymbol Interference (ISI) through cyclic prefix insertion. WCDMA) is used the QPSK modulation.e. typically has a certain structure which makes it. user multiplexing. called intra cell interference in which the useful signal is interfered by other signals within the current cell. so telecom operator would like to provide very high data rates within a limited bandwidth. providing higher data rates within a given bandwidth at the cost of reduced robustness to noise and interference. In 3G systems (i. Higher order modulation are normally combined with channel coding giving more efficiency. This goal can be reached by OFDM. 8 . Wider band transmissions are subjected to frequency channel selectivity that corrupt the frequency domain structure of the signal. predictable and thus possible to further suppress or even remove completely. at least to some extent. emphasizing some aspects that are the main job of this Master Thesis. paying attention that an additional channel coding applied by using a higher order modulation scheme such as 16QAM may lead to an overall gain in power efficiency compared to the use of QPSK.cell interference. multi access etc. leading to higher error rates for a given SINR. In this case. From the operator point of view. More advanced topics about interference cancellation will be addressed carefully in the next chapters. the maximum data rate that can be achieved in a given bandwidth is limited by the SINR (Signal power to Interference and Noise Ratio). there could be another kind of interference. nowadays high order modulations such as 16QAM or 64QAM are used in HSPA to improve the bandwidth utilization.

Using an OFDM scheme.2 Multi antenna techniques Transmission with multiple transmit and receive antennas (MIMO) is supported in the downlink with two or four transmit antennas and two or four receive antennas. the transmission resources over the different antennas are allocated to one user only. Spatial Multiplexing with two users (MU-MIMO). as for these channels dynamic scheduling and H-ARQ are not applicable. Knowing the reference symbols. complemented with Frequency Shift Transmit Diversity (FSTD) in case of four transmit antennas (MIMO 4 x n). The reference symbols are mapped in time and frequency domain in a grid with a high density to combat high frequency and time selectivity. Both Single User MIMO (SUMIMO) and Multi-user MIMO (MU-MIMO) are supported in the 3GPP specifications. the receiver can estimate the channel coefficients around the location of the reference symbols. 1. Transmit diversity is used by common downlink control channels to provide additional diversity. Transmit diversity is based on the so called Space-Frequency Block Coding (SFBC). while MU-MIMO is used to increase the average data rate per sector. Spatial Multiplexing with a single use (SU-MIMO). CDD (superimposed to open loop spatial multiplexing). which allow for multi-layer transmissions with up to four layers. In the next chapters an advanced channel estimation algorithm will be explained. The SU-MIMO is then used in order to increase the user peak data rate (or coverage). while in case of MU-MIMO the transmission resources are allocated to different users. transmit diversity is also applied to user-data 9 . In particular the following multi-antenna transmission techniques are supported in the LTE Release 8 downlink standard: Transmit Diversity (SFBC). single layer Beamforming. Linear Precoding (both for single layer or multiple layer transmission). In the case of SU-MIMO. However. it is possible to estimate the frequency-domain channel taps directly inserting known reference symbols or pilot symbols at regular intervals within the OFDM time-frequency grid.

with four base-station transmit antennas.16. In 3GPP specifications the term antenna port is often used instead of antenna since.1. and a corresponding set of (at least) four receive antennas at the terminal side.9. up to four antennas at both the transmitter (base station) and the receiver (terminal) side are used to provide simultaneous transmission of multiple parallel data streams.18.14)  Channel state Information RS (CSI-RS) (antenna port 15.17.e.21.3).20. up to four layers can be transmitted in parallel over the same radio link. The reference transmission scheme is what is intended for the transmission mode and the other is for fallback operation.10.3 Transmission modes and transmission schemes In LTE Release 8 and LTE Release 10 (i. LTE Advanced). An antenna port is defined by its associated Reference Signal (RS) pattern. SISO).19. The following antenna ports are defined in Release 10:  Cell specific RS (antenna ports 0. In case of spatial multiplexing. nine transmission modes are defined and two different transmission schemes are allowed in each transmission mode. by means of antenna virtualization.8. two/multiple physical antennas can transmit the same information and hence make one antenna port. 1.transmission.13.2. 10  UE-specific RS for single layer beamforming (antenna ports 5). . in particular for cell edge users that experience low Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio (SINR) values. thereby significantly increasing the peak data rates that can be provided over the radio link. effectively quadrupling the peak data rate with respect to a single antenna system (i.  UE-specific RS for multi-layer beamforming (antenna port 7. As an example.12. over a single radio link.21).  Multicast/Broadcast over Single Frequency Network (MBSFN) RS (antenna ports 4). also known as layers.11.e.  Positioning RS (antenna ports 6).

Downlink Reference Transmission Scheme Fallback Transmission Transmission Mode Scheme Mode 1 Single antenna port Mode 2 Notes LTE Rel.8 LTE Rel. Switching between these two modes is decided by the network as a function of the channel conditions. which indicates the estimated number of simultaneous layers that can be received by the UE.8 Mode 4 Closed-loop spatial multiplexing Transmit diversity LTE Rel. The accuracy of RI reporting.9 Table 1: Downlink Transmission Mode Among the transmission modes defined in the 3GPP standard. port 5 LTE Rel.8 Mode 8 Dual layer transmission or single layer Transmit diversity or single-antenna port Transmit diversity Mode 9 Up to 8 layer transmission Transmit diversity LTE Rel. is a critical information for the optimal usage of TxD and SM in a real LTE network.8 Mode 5 Multi-user MIMO Transmit diversity LTE Rel.Table 1 summarizes the transmissions schemes corresponding to each transmission mode. Transmit Diversity (Mode 2) and Open Loop Spatial Multiplexing (Mode 3) are supported in the first equipment and terminal implementations and thus are of importance for the initial roll-out of the LTE network. which is known to the eNode B through the channel state information reported by the UE (CQI and RI). 11 .8 Mode 6 Closed-loop rank=1 precoding Transmit diversity LTE Rel.8 Mode 7 Single-antenna port.8 Transmit diversity Single antenna port Transmit diversity Mode 3 Open-loop spatial multiplexing Transmit diversity LTE Rel.10 LTE Rel.

This figure shows how is convenient to switch in a transmit diversity mode when SINR is low. The access to these services is through the use of a transport channel via the MAC sub-layer. Figure 1: Transmit Diversity and Spatial Multiplexing modes The LTE physical layer offers data transport services to higher layers. The physical layer is designed to perform the following functions:  Error detection through CRC and indication to higher layers  FEC encoding/decoding of the transport channel  Rate matching  Hybrid ARQ (with soft-combining at the receiver)  Power weighting of physical channels  Modulation and demodulation of physical channels  Mapping onto physical channels  Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna processing  RF processing Figura 2: LTE Physical Layer 12 .

where each slot has a duration of 0.1. The total number of subcarriers (i. is equal to 1 ms (compared to the 2 ms of HSPA). Table 2 summarizes the LTE numerology for different channel bandwidths. For example.4 Modulation and multiple access technique The LTE radio interface adopts the S-OFDMA (Scalable OFDMA) as modulation and multiple access technique with fixed subcarrier spacing ∆f equal to 15 KHz. while for LTE the baseband sampling frequency is equal to m/n3. where m and n are integer factors that 13 . in case of a channel bandwidth BW=10 MHz the FFT size is 1024.84 MHz. pilots or control) is equal to 600. data. the FFT size NFFT) is proportional to the channel bandwidth. Each subframe is divided in two slots. for the DC subcarrier and for the guard subcarriers positioned at the edges of the transmission spectrum. In particular the frame duration is equal to 10 ms while the subframe period. In this case the number of subcarriers used for transmission (e. Table 2: LTE numerology An important characteristic of the LTE radio interface is that the frame duration and Transmission Time Interval (TTI) are harmonized with those of UMTS/HSDPA system.84 MHz.e.g. which corresponds to the Transmission Time Interval (TTI). while the remaining subcarriers are left unused.5 ms. Also the sampling frequency of the baseband (BB) signals are harmonized: for UMTS/HSPA the baseband signal is sampled at 3.

depend on the LTE channel bandwidth. are set to zero power for the other antennas). The RS of different antenna ports are orthogonal among each other because resource elements used for RS transmission of one antenna port are not used for any transmission by the other antennas (i. The cell specific downlink reference signals (CRS) consist of known reference symbols inserted in the first and third last OFDM symbol of each slot in the case of Normal CP. The following downlink physical signals are defined in the standard: Reference signal and Synchronization signal. Three types of downlink reference signals (RS) are defined: Cell-specific reference signals (CRS).5 Downlink signals A downlink signal corresponds to a set of resource elements used by the physical layer but does not carry information originating from higher layers.e. MBSFN reference signals. 14 . Figure 3: Pilot pattern for a SISO system There is one reference signal transmitted per downlink antenna port. UEspecific reference signals. 2. or 4. These features reduce the complexity and the cost of dual mode terminals that will support both radio interfaces. associated with MBSFN transmission. The number of downlink antenna ports P equals 1. 1.

Each frequency hopping pattern corresponds to one cell identity group. The DM-RSs are introduced for the support of beamforming techniques. The eNode B can semistatically configure a UE to use the dedicated reference signal as the phase reference for data demodulation of a single codeword. In this way the RSs of different cells have low values of cross-correlation and thus the interference from neighboring cells can be reduced by proper averaging on frequency adjacent reference symbols received at the UE. The cell specific RS sequence is a PN (pseudo random) sequence defined by a length-31 Gold sequence. Figure 4 and Figure 5. the CRS signals for two transmit antennas (MIMO 2x2) and finally CRS signals for four transmit antenna (MIMO 4x4). the pilot pattern for a SISO case when a normal or an Extended prefix cyclic is used. also denoted in the technical documents as DeModulation Reference Signals (DM-RS). The LTE standard foresees also UE-specific reference signals. 15 . The frequency hopping pattern has a period of one frame (10 ms). respectively show.Figure 3. DL control signalling is located in the first n OFDM symbols (n  3) of a subframe and consists of:  Number n of control OFDM symbols per subframe (PCFICH). Figure 4: MIMO 2x2 CRS pattern Frequency hopping (FH) can be applied to the cell-specific reference signals. The pseudo-random sequence generator is initialised with a value that depends on the cell identity (cell-ID) so that different PN sequences are associated to different cells.

each control channel element consisting of a set of resource elements. The modulation used for all control channels is QPSK. Figure 6 shows the mapping between Control and Data symbols. 16 . Transport format. Figure 5: MIMO 4x4 CRS pattern Control channels are formed by aggregation of control channel elements (CCE). resource allocation and hybrid-ARQ information (PDCCH).  Uplink scheduling grant (PDCCH)  ACK/NACK in response to uplink transmission (PHICH) Note that there is not mixing of control signaling and shared data in an OFDM symbol.

Single layer Beamforming and Cyclic Delay Diversity (CDD). Transmit antenna diversity based on SFBC (Space-Frequency Block Coding). 17 . Figure 6: Control and Data REs 1. whilst MU-MIMO is exploited for increasing the aggregate cell throughput. is also supported. In general SU-MIMO is beneficial for increasing user throughput or coverage.Multiple physical downlink control channels are supported and a UE monitors a set of control channels. also referred to as MU-MIMO. also referred to as Single-User MIMO (SU-MIMO) is supported in the LTE standard. Spatial multiplexing of multiple symbol streams to different UEs using the same time frequency resources. the following spatial processing techniques are also supported in the LTE Release 8 standard: Codebook based precoding.6 Downlink multi-antenna transmission Spatial multiplexing (SM) of multiple symbol streams to a single UE using the same time frequency resources. In addition to SU-MIMO and MU-MIMO. In the following a short description of these multi-antenna transmission techniques is provided.

1. the layers) is provided to the block that performs the precoding. Figure7: Layer mapping for two transmit antennas The Figure 8 shows the layer mapping operation for the case of four transmit antennas.6.g. The maximum number of codeword is two. In the MIMO terminology one codeword represents one data stream that is independently encoded and modulated under the control of the AMC (Adaptive Modulation and Coding) procedure.1 Layer mapping Multi-antenna transmission with 2 and 4 transmit antennas is supported. The layer mapping operation is depicted in Figure 7. irrespective to the number of antennas. The mapping of the codewords to the layers depends on the rank of the channel and is performed by a specific block denoted as layer mapping. with fixed mapping of codewords to layers. where CW1 and CW2 are the first and the second codeword respectively and the layer mapping block is represented by the dotted box in blue colour. Figure 8: Layer mapping for four transmit antennas 18 . The output of the layer mapping operation (e.

1. Figure 9: SFBC technique for two transmit antennas An important feature of the Alamouti code is that only simple linear operations are needed at the receiver for decoding.…. Notice that also in this case only one codeword is transmitted. The Figure 9 shows the principle of SFBC encoding where S1 and S2 are the modulated symbols coming from the layer mapping block. It must be noted that only one codeword is transmitted when the TxD technique is used.6. Basically the SFBC + FSTD technique consists in the application of the Alamouti code over pair of antennas. 19 .S4 are the modulated symbols coming from the layer mapping block. The LTE standard includes two different techniques based on SFBC (Space Frequency Block Coding) for the case of two and four transmit antennas respectively: SFBC for 2Tx antennas.2 Transmit diversity Transmit antenna diversity (TxD) is designed to improve transmission reliability and coverage and is typically used for cell edge users that experience low values of SINR and for which it is not advantageous the use of spatial multiplexing. SFBC combined with FSTD for 4-Tx antennas. In case of four transmit antennas the LTE standard adopts a combination of the Alamouti code and the Frequency Switching Transmit Diversity (FSTD) technique. In case of two transmit antennas the SFBC technique is basically the Alamouti code applied in the frequency domain over two adjacent OFDM subcarriers. The Figure 10 shows the principle of SFBC+FSTD encoding where S1.

e. while the category 5 supports the full set of features in the release 8/9 physical layer specifications. In LTE release 10. for example.Figure 10: SFBC+FSTF technique for four transmit antennas The Alamouti code is applied over the antennas 1 and 3 for symbols S1 and S2.7 User Equipment categories From the release 8 to the release 10 user terminals support different features having different physical layer capabilities. while for symbols S3 and S4 the code is applied over the antennas 2 and 4. carrier aggregation). providing higher performance. the low-end category 1 does not support spatial multiplexing. 1. The antenna pairing (1.3) and (2. In LTE release 8/9. 20 .4) is done in order to balance the different pilot density that is lower for antenna 3 and antenna 4 compared to antenna 1 and antenna 2. more useful interesting techniques are used (i.

for categories from 1 to 5. The fourth column represents the total number of soft channel bits available for H-ARQ processing while the last column gives the maximum number of supported layers for spatial multiplexing per UE. 21 . The third column represents the maximum number of DL-SCH transport block bits that the UE is capable of receiving in a single transport block within a DL-SCH TTI. Table 3: UE Category In more detail. The second column in Table 4 defines the maximum number of DL-SCH transport blocks bits that the UE is capable of receiving within a DL-SCH TTI of 1 ms. In case of spatial multiplexing. it is showed a Table 4 containing the downlink physical layer parameters for each category.In Table 3 are showed the eight categories from 1-5 (LTE Release 8/9/10) to 6-8 (LTEAdvanced Release 10). this is the sum of the number of bits delivered in each of the two transport blocks.

e. 102048 received bits in one 1 ms) and that it can support spatial multiplexing with a maximum of two layers.Table 4: Downlink Physical Layer parameters It is possible to notice that a Category 3 user equipment is capable of supporting a downlink peak throughput of about 102 Mbit/s (i.8 A limiting factor of spectrum efficiency The ever increasing user density in cellular systems coupled with the unitary frequency reuse factor selected for the Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard have made interference (both inter-cell and intra-cell) the main limiting factor of spectrum efficiency in LTE-Advanced (LTE-A) system. a receiver affected by interference may have different degrees of knowledge of the interference signals. depending on the transmission conditions and the constraints imposed by the transmission standard. and 22 . and Interference Cancellation (IC) one possible solution that need to be addressed in LTE-A receivers. In this Master Thesis I focus my attention to Multiple Input Multiple Output Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (MIMO-OFDM) schemes and Space Frequency Block Code (SFBC) encoded schemes. and I will describe the corresponding receiver structures. 1. The highend terminals correspondent to the category 5 can support a peak throughput of about 300 Mbit/s with spatial multiplexing over four layers (these terminals thus need to be equipped with four receive antennas). As far as the interference is concerned.

using a so called Space Frequency Block Code (SFBC). 2 is the thermal noise power over the 23 . and generating an initial estimate of the transmitted symbols. transmitting multiple information streams that will be received overlapped at the receiving antennas. to be able to perform what we will denote as MIMO equalization. In presence of prohibitive transmission conditions. defined as: G Iˆor1  I oc Iˆor1 N BS  Iˆ j 2 orj  2 where Iˆorj is the average received power from the j-th strongest base station implies ( Iˆor1 is the serving cell average received power). as a consequence. I am dealing with a multi-antenna scheme. the presence of multiple antennas may also be used to improve performances by introducing redundancy on the space and frequency (or time) dimensions. and. In presence of a SFBC. as a first step. cancelling the mutual interference (this scenario exists also in absence of any intra-cell or inter-cell interference). The availability of multiple transmission antennas will be typically used to improve throughput and capacity. In general. the better the achievable performances. like at the cell boundary. to separate the individual information streams. that will then be fed to the subsequent softdemapper. with typically 2 antennas at the user terminal and 2 or 4 antennas at the base station.as a consequence different IC strategies will be possible.9 Inter cell Interference modeling: DIP values Network interference statistics are computed using geometry factor G. For this reason the considered receivers will have. i.e. 1. non-iterative receivers are often employed. the more elaborate the IC strategies that can be implemented. the more complete the knowledge of the characteristics of the interfering signals. the inter-stream interference is typically null or minimal.

and NBS is the total number of base stations considered including the serving cell. was agreed as a key parameter for defining the interference profiles. 24 . DIPi a is expressed as follows: DIPi s  Iˆors (i1) DIPi a  I oc Iˆora i I oc where the total inter-cell interference plus noise is given by: Ns Na j 2 j 1 a I oc   Iˆors j   Iˆor j N and NBS = NS + Na is the total number of eNodeBs considered including the serving cell. In addition to geometry. An interference profile was defined on the basis of averaging unconditional median DIP values submitted by the different companies. the interference profiles that have been defined as part of the 3GPP feasibility study to assess link level performance of MMSE-IRC receivers. DIP was defined as the ratio of the power of a given interfering cell over the total other cell interference power. the latter conditioned on various geometry values. another measure. DIPi s . DIP of synchronized. Starting from these values. referred to as the Dominant Interferer Proportion (DIP) ratio. and asynchronized interference. DIP values conditioned to the geometry values have also been submitted by the different companies. DIP ratio statistics have been derived obtaining both unconditional DIP CDFs and conditional median DIP values.received bandwidth. are showed in Table 5.

medium and high delay spread environments.5 dB geometry Table 5: Conditional DIP values 1.4 -2. Table 7: EPA Channel 25 .3 Asynchronized NW DIP -3.10 Channel profiles Three channel profiles have been defined in 3GPP for UE and BS conformance testing. These profiles are also used in the link level simulations. The delay profiles are selected to be representative of low.8 -7.1 -5.Profile Based on conditional median values Geometry 0 dB geometry -3 dB geometry Synchronized NW DIP1 DIP2 -3.8 -2. Table 6: 3GPP Channels The link level simulations have been done for the Extended Pedestrian A (EPA) channel profile defined by the 3GPP. The frequency selectivity of the channel is proportional to the delay spread.1 -2.

104) of the equipments (low.101 and TS 36. respectively.g. the correlation coefficient at the transmitter and the correlation coefficient at the receiver. angle of arrival and angle spread of the electromagnetic waves).g. 26 .Table 8: EVA channel The channel is assumed constant in each TTI (Transmission Time Interval of 1 ms). distance. In particular transmit diversity (TxD) appears rather robust whilst Spatial Multiplexing (SM) suffers a severe performance degradation as the correlation increases. The correlation of the fading processes is set according to the three cases defined in 3GPP for the conformance tests (TS 36. The transmission schemes of LTE are differently affected by the correlation. presence of LoS. polarization) and propagation environment (e. The fading correlation is mainly determined by two factors: antenna characteristics (e. medium and high correlation): Table 9: Correlaton of fading processes The  and  correlation values are. number and position of the scatterers.

IRC considered as a starting point.CHAPTER 2: ACTIVITIES IN 3GPP ON ADVANCED RECEIVERS This chapter provides an overview of activities carried out in 3GPP on the topic of advanced receivers with interference cancellation/mitigation capabilities. (Rel. feICIC. Study Item IR (Rel.11) Description Interference Rejection Focus Focus on receiver structures targeting spatial domain interference mitigation. CRS-IM. 12) Interference Cancellation The major difference for NAICS is that the Suppression interference mitigation is now targeted not (RP-130404) only for interfering CRS but also for interfering PDSCH considering also possible improvements deriving from “network assistance” 27 . 11) Heterogeneous network scenarios where the interference is mainly caused by the CRS and Control Channels of the macro cell on the UEs connected to the small cells CRS-IM CRS Interference Mitigation Analyses the cancellation of the interference (Rel. NAICS. feICIC Further enhanced ICIC (Rel. The activities have been carried out mainly in the RAN4 group under the framework of four study/work items: IR. 12) (RP-130393) caused by CRS in synchronized homogenous network scenarios NAICS Network Assisted NAICS is similar to the approach of CRS-IM.

Puncturing is not applicable in several scenarios. two REs used should be punctured simultaneously when one of them was contaminated. with colliding CRS in non-MBSFN ABS because CRE REs of the serving cell cannot be punctured. it sets the LLR of bits of REs undergoing strong interference as zero.2. the procedure requires: the channel estimation from the interfering cells. For SFBC and SFBC-FSTD. regeneration of all the interfering cells CRS signals and subtraction. Also for PDSCH demodulation the CRS cancelling receiver outperforms the CRS puncturing receivers. The results show the better and robust performance and versatility of the CRS cancelling receiver over the CRS puncturing receivers. 28 . PSS/SSS.g. but for the other scenarios it does not perform well. In the other cases. The relatively poor performance of the CRS RE puncturing receiver for transmission mode 2 is because strong interference on one RE affects demodulation of the two symbols that are transmitted through the affected RE via SFBC encoding. e. The main IC candidate techniques for the implementation at the UE side include:  Interference cancellation: signal regeneration and subtraction applicable to CRS.  Puncturing. PBCH. receiver that punctures REs of the wanted signal of the serving cell that are interfered by CRS REs received from one or more dominant interfering cells. In the case of CRS interference cancellation.1 feICIC In the feICIC case the focus is on the heterogeneous network scenarios where the interference is mainly caused by the CRS and Control Channels of the macro cell on the UEs connected to the small cells. CRS puncturing receiver performs reasonably for single non colliding interferer.

other realistic system level parameters (e.g.g.  identify the baseline receiver which can be used for evaluating the gain of CRS IM in a synchronized homogenous network considering the reuse of CRS-IM receiver assumed for Release 11 feICIC and the reuse of MMSE-IRC receiver as the baseline receiver. The second solution is the reuse of MMSE-IRC based receiver with interference covariance matrix estimation. time and frequency offset between cells) and performance metrics for studying the feasibility of CRS-IM in a synchronized homogenous network.e. It can be seen that the CRS assistance information consists of a list of cells which are to be considered as candidates for CRS interference mitigation. traffic and interference models. here the receiver does not differentiate CRS or data interference when suppressing them. the physical cell ID.2 CRS-IM Interference Mitigation (IM) of Cell-Specific Reference Signals (CRS) has been studied in the Rel-11 Work Item on feICIC. The first proposal is the reuse of CRS-IM receiver assumed for Release 11 feICIC to mitigate CRS interference of up to two cells.  evaluate the system level and link level gains of CRS-IM with respect to the baseline MMSE-IRC receiver in a synchronized homogenous network deployment under the various loading levels identified (e.2. antenna port count and MBSFN configuration) are provided to the UE. 29 . Therefore. The main objectives of this Study Item are:  identify the partial traffic loading levels. A new study item has been started in 3GPP on CRS interference mitigation (IM) in homogeneous network deployments. where interference from CRS is dominant assuming data RE muting in ABS subframes. gains of CRS-IM from 1 and 2 aggressor cells CRS shall be evaluated and compared). A way forward on CRS-IM performance evaluation has been agreed. The objectives of the study item explicitly indicate that only Release 11 CRS assistance information should be assumed to be available. for each cell the information related to the CRS transmission (i.

The proposed receiver scheme for the execution of the link level simulations is the MMSE-IRC with/without CRS-IM. and evaluate their performance/complexity trade-off and implementation feasibility.  Evaluate the link-level gain over baseline Rel-11 linear MMSE-IRC receivers and Rel-11 non-linear receivers required for feICIC. Figure 1: MMSE-IRC with CRS-IM 2. 30 . basically it consists in the regeneration and subtraction of the CRS signal from only the 1 st or both the 1st and 2nd strongest interfering cell. and maximal likelihood detection are considered as a starting point for reference IS/IC receivers. Objectives of this Study Item for RAN4 are:  Identify reference IS/IC receivers with and without network assistance. A possible work item on this activity can follow. A possible receiver implementation is depicted below. The major difference for NAICS is that the interference mitigation is now targeted not only for interfering CRS but also for interfering PDSCH. successive interference cancellation.  Based on the RAN1 scenarios agree on co-channel inter and intra-cell interference models for link-level simulation.3 NAICS NAICS is similar to the approach of CRS-IM. Concerning the CRS-IM part of the receiver.  Analyze complexity and feasibility of basic receiver structures: based on linear MMSE-IRC.

In the following part of this chapter.2 MMSE-IRC Using a proper spatially colored interference model.3. In this case. RAN4 studied two approaches of the MMSE-IRC receiver realization. Along with the channel matrix H for the desired signal. MMSE receiver. Indicate (to RAN1) assumptions on the network assistance information for the evaluated receivers under possible network coordination. The MMSE-IRC receiver has the form of: 1 sˆ  H H Rs I n  x 31 . ignores the fact that interfering signals are spatially colored signal.3. 2. In Rel-11 advanced receiver SID. 2. MMSE receivers treat interference as white noise.1 MMSE The Rel-8/Rel-9 baseline receiver. an MMSE interference rejection/combining receiver (MMSE-IRC) is expected to outperform the MMSE receiver in strong interference scenarios. One approach is to use data REs to estimate overall signal-plusinterference-plus-noise covariance matrix Rs  I  n . it will be shown a brief description of the main advanced receivers with interference cancellation/mitigation capabilities. The MMSE receiver can be expressed as: sˆ  H H HH H   I2n I  x 1 The complexity of the Rel-8/Rel-9 MMSE receiver is given by: the channel estimation and the matrix inversion. only interference-plus-noise power  I2 n needs to be estimated by the MMSE receiver.

l   Hˆ  xk . so the estimated received symbol is: 1 P   sˆ  H  HH H   H i H iH   I2 I  x i 1   H 32 . Thus.l yk . the covariance matrix RI  n of inter-cell interference could be calculated based on the channel estimation of dominant interference cell.  the accuracy of covariance matrix may also be improved by allowing averaging across multiple RBs. For example:  In case of dominant interference cell exists e. The above MMSE-IRC approaches can be applied to intra-cell interference suppression in MU-MIMO scenarios as well as to inter-cell interference suppression.l  Hˆ  xk . in HetNet case.g. For the Rel-12 NAICS SID.l  H The RAN4 Rel-11 advanced receiver study shows that CRS or DMRS-based MMSE-IRC receiver outperforms data RE-based MMSE-IRC receiver. for both desired and interference signals.A second approach to realize the MMSE-IRC receiver is using the CRS or DMRS from the serving transmitter to estimate the channel matrix H of the desired signal.lRS k . it would be a logical extension to study the possible performance gain of an MMSE-IRC receiver when the system assists UEs in performing better channel state information estimation. and using the differences of the received reference signal and the re-constructed reference signal with the estimated desired channel on the CRS or DMRS REs to estimate interference-plus-noise covariance matrix RI  n : sˆ  H H HH H  RI n  x 1 RI n   y k . UE may explicitly estimate the channel of dominant interference cell.

Decoding) and parameter extraction. CRS-IC. The number of cells in this case is N with one serving cell and N – 1 interferers.k is the symbol transmitted by the i-th cell in the k-th tone and Pi is the spatial precoding matrix used by the i-th cell and K is the total number of observed tones.3 E-MMSE-IRC Enhanced MMSE-IRC is an MMSE-IRC that considers different interferer channel estimates and new interference knowledge from network signaling or trough blind techniques. A disadvantage of this receiver is the performance gain since it is lower than others receivers (ML.  other receivers require more additional assistance information. k  nk i 0 where.2. ML and SLIC receiver need modulation of interference signals trough blind detection or DCI/RRC signaling). Detection.  throughput gain is significant for high SINR.3. E-MMSE-IRC could achieve significant throughput gain over MMSE-IRC receiver for both CRS-based and DMRS-based transmissions. ρi is the amplitude of the signal transmitted from i-th cell. 33 . there are several advantages using E-MMSE-IRC:  limited complexity. In contrast.k is the channel matrix of the i-th cell on the k-th tone / resource element (RE). H i . k Pi xi .g. CWIC) when SINR is low. The operations can be subdivided in core receiver processing (Channel estimation. given the assistance for UE to perform channel estimation on interference signals and knowing the number of layers. SLIC. the received signal is given by the superposition of one useful signal and N-1 interferer signals with different precoding matrix and different amplitudes: N 1 yk   H i i . In this context. xi . introducing more complexity and less robustness (e.

the performance will be improved compared to the one only using symbol demodulation. In contrast. while in E-MMSE-IRC the channel estimation with CRS-IC scales linearly with the number of interferers. The nulling operation is performed by a front end MMSE filter. there are some key differences:  the interfering signals are modelled using the estimated channels of the interferers. Rel-11 MMSE-IRC receivers suppress the transmission from interfering cells before detecting the desired symbols. At the detector stage. while the complexity of MMSE-IRC is CCE + CFE + CBE. since the channel estimation is made without CRS-IC. For Rel-11 MMSE IRC receivers. The complexity is N(CCE) + CFE + CBE . W. FEC decoding will require that all detailed coding information 34 . using CRS-IC.4 Symbol level SIC There are two types of successive interference cancellation (SIC) receivers: in the first one only symbol demodulation is involved in the SIC process and in the other one the FEC decoding is involved. In the E-MMSE-IRC receiver the complexity is calculated considering the channel estimation complexity (CCE).3. even if E-MMSE-IRC receiver perform some similar functions. The MMSE-IRC complexity is lower than the E-MMSE-IRC one.  for each signal the precoded matrix is needed and it is obtained using UE-side blind estimation or network signaling. 2.Core receiver processing includes symbol level detection of the desired cell’s signals and Turbo decoding. W is constructed using: the channel estimation of serving cell and the total interference and noise estimated using CRS or DMRS. and Wy is the linear estimate of the transmitted symbols. the MMSE-IRC detection complexity (CFE). However.  the interferer signal strength is extracted from network signaling or blind detection at the UE. if the FEC decoding is involved in the SIC process. To completion. CFE is the detection and interference cancellation complexity and CBE is the FEC decoding and turbo decoding. the FEC decoding complexity (CBE) for the core receiver and the parameter extraction. It can be expected that.

the performance advantage of SIC receiver over MMSE-IRC receiver may be questionable. or intra-cell interference in some MU-MIMO cases).and resource allocation information of the interference signal be available to the UE receiver. However. SIC receivers are well suited for some inter-cell interference scenarios (like range extension in HetNet. this requires a lot of system coordination and signalling overhead. The decoded interferers are subtracted step-by-step to the overall signal. Therefore. the interference signal can generally be expected to be weaker or not much stronger than the desired signal. The 35 . This receiver takes advantage of the CRC attached to each transport block before channel coding: if CRC check is successful. power offset and (an estimate of) the channel matrix of the interferers as well. for inter-cell interference in homogeneous networks. It is a general understanding that an SIC receiver can perform well in case that the interference signal is much stronger than the desired signal.5 Bit level hard SIC The receiver attempts to detect and decode one by one the interferers of interest. In this case. The symbol level SIC receiver needs to know the modulation order of the interference signal. also in case of MU-MIMO and/or inter-cell interference cancellation. obtaining at the end the decoded useful signal. The symbol level SIC receiver can be expressed as: P 1   sˆ  H H HH H   n2 I   y   H i ~ si  i 1   where ~ si is the quantized estimation of the interference signal. This requires system assistance in providing the interference modulation order and providing means to estimate the interference channel matrix. the block has been correctly decoded and the interfering signal can be reconstructed (minor the channel estimation errors).3. 2.

the Hard SIC imposes the constraint that the MCS used by the first interferer be more robust than the MCS used for the signal of interest. In the case of Turbo-SIC receivers (also in the Hard SIC).g.7 ML receiver This receiver treats the interference as un-known deterministic QAM signal. a UE cannot access any of these pieces of information related to another UE. Up to Release 11.  DMRS sequence (if demodulation is based on DMRS).3. It is 36 . the situations where the interference power is much higher than the useful signal power and/or when the interference has a robust MCS are favourable situations where it brings significant gains.6 Soft Turbo SIC This receiver scheme performs the soft detection and the Turbo decoding of the UE signals which are repeatedly subtracted from the received signal. Some mechanisms (e. as it will need to be decoded under the interference of the latter. 2. 2. An important parameter of these receivers is the number of Turbo-code iterations for each detection and decoding step.  RNTI. a new signalling) then need to be introduced into the standard in order to provide this information to the victim UE.  Precoding information (if demodulation is based on CRS).3. ML receivers can jointly estimate the desired signal and the interference signals. As a result.  MCS.bit level hard SIC to be efficient needs to find at least one interferer that can be decoded without error (in order to subtract its interference from the useful signal). In case the interference and useful signal have similar powers. the victim UE needs to know the following transmission parameters of the interferers:  PRB assignments.

This is a very large number of possible combinations for a UE receiver to check them.. The ML receiver can be expressed as: P sˆ.. a total of NS=4 layers with M=64 constellation size will require about MNs=644=16 million hypotheses..  is the set of constellation points of the used modulations. requires information of the modulation order and channel matrix of the interference signals. when the number of layers of the desired signal plus interference signals is large and when the modulation orders are high. Some performance-complexity tradeoff has to be taken for this high order modulation and large number of layers. However. could be considered as candidate. ML receiver can be easily extended to joint detection on desired and interfering signals with limited Network Assistance (NA) information.min x  Hs   H i si s . sˆP   arg s. sˆ2 .. For example. interfering signals could be treated as desired signals and joint detected by ML receiver. Assuming UE has the ML detection capability up to 2 layers receptions. sphere detectors.. ML receiver can be used to detect the scheduled Rank 2 transmission. For example if the channel knowledge and modulation order of the interference is available. When UE move to cell edge area (low SNR region) and scheduled 37 .. for example. like the SIC receiver.generally understood that ML receivers provide an optimal performance compared to other receiver structure. when UE is in cell centre area (high SNR region).. It can be expected that the ML receiver would provide good performance in both intracell and inter-cell interference mitigation. Some well-known sub-optimal ML-type receivers.s . SIC receivers can be viewed as sub-optimal realizations of ML receivers with less computational complexity but some performance degradation as compared to ML receivers. the full ML receiver is very computationally complex and may not be feasible to implement.s  1 2 P 2 i 1 where. The ML receiver. There is no difference in ML receiver processing procedure. sˆ1.

and R is the noise covariance matrix. the received signal is: y  H1W1x1  H2 W2 x2  n where.  k  0 .8 R-ML This advanced receiver is a reduced complexity maximum likelihood receiver.with Rank 1 transmission.g. is the useful channel matrix and is the interferer channel matrix. Assuming that there is only one strong interferer.11 MMSE-IRC receiver. about the R-ML. The ML can be expressed as: H H    y  Hx  R1  y  Hx    y  Hx  R1  y  Hx   LLR(bi )  log   e  log e      x0 ( bi )   x1 ( bi )  where  k (bi ) denotes the set of transmit vectors with bi  k. the dominant interfering signals could be jointly detected with limited additional NA information. MLM. LLRs can be also represented by max-log approximation:  LLR  bi   min  y  Hx x0 ( bi )  38  H    R1 y  Hx   min  y  Hx  x1( bi )   H   R 1 y  Hx   .). QR-MLD. It is based on the joint detection of useful and interference modulation symbols in accordance to the ML criterion (e.1 .3. Using a Rel. etc. 2. sphere decoding. the interferer term (the second one inserted in the received signal) can be used to calculate the interferer plus noise covariance matrix R in this way: R  H2 W2 W2H H 2H  E nn H  . Finally. .

 k  0 . but it is more complex than the previous receiver schemes.1 .where H  H1W1 H2 W2  . R-ML is a reduced complexity version of ML. even if it provide sub-optimal performance. CHAPTER 3: MMSE-IRC RECEIVER IN REAL SCENARIOS 39 . x   x1 x2  . y is the received symbols 2x1 matrix and  k (bi ) denotes the set of transmit vectors with bi  k. R is the interferer plus noise covariance T matrix.

BLER and Throughput in presence of single or double interfering cells selecting different spatial correlations and DIPs. performance results are showed and explained carefully. to test the MMSE-IRC code and after to visualize the performance in terms of Raw BER. a brief analysis of the simulation platform is provided. using ideal implementations developed in MATLAB and also with the more realistic simulator based on CoCentric System 40 . Performance results are compared with the baseline receiver based on the Alamouti detection scheme [ref. At the starting point. paper di Alamouti]. Some techniques are used to reduce the computation burden: reducing the complexity of the matrix inversion. The link level simulator is designed for the simulation of MIMOOFDM based wireless communication systems like LTE/LTE-A and represents an effective tool for the research and development of innovative physical layer system components. developed using CoCentric System Studio.3. putting inside the corresponding functionalities. The main implementation constraint for our MMSE-IRC is the low complexity. the MMSE-IRC receiver. focusing on some key blocks that are the core of a MIMO OFDMA link level simulator and that are useful to understand the MMSE-IRC implementation inside it. MMSE-IRC block is intentionally implemented as a unique block. with the objective to have an interferer cancellation receiver that can be accessible and modifiable quickly. into the physical layer simulator. Moreover. taking care to select relevant results that best show the behavior of the receiver. averaging and weighting coefficients computation. since this simulator is composed by a very large number of blocks. Simulations are obtained adding an independent block. The designed MMSE-IRC is a unique simulation block implemented in C language.1 Overview This chapter provides a detailed vision of all the aspects that led to a low complexity implementation of the MMSE-IRC receiver in real scenarios. Interfering scenarios are selected. first of all. It is not possible to describe the overall architecture.

The models (blocks) described in this document are highlighted in green color. showing how in the most cases MMSE-IRC provides a performance gain with respect to Alamouti. 41 . comparing them and showing interesting features in order to develop an adaptive receiver that is able to switch or adapt the interference cancellation algorithm as a function of the channel and interference conditions.1 General Architecture of the MIMO OFDMA simulator The general architecture of an MIMO OFDMA based system like LTE/LTE-A is described by the block diagrams in the figure below. The corresponding input data files (data sets) that allow them to be configured according to a specific standard are also shown. In this sense. the complexity of the functions performed by these blocks is “implicit” in the data sets. The design of the reconfigurable simulation models was done with the aim of having blocks as flexible as possible and the source code in the CoCentric simulation platform as simple as possible.Studio. The same data set can be used by different functional blocks. based on the use of the provided input data files (data sets). 3. this was intended in order to reduce as much as possible the number of data sets. with the relation they have with each block. In the next chapter are also shown two other advanced receiver schemes that exploit the MMSE-IRC algorithm and are based on the symbol level interferer cancellation (SLIC) and bit level interferer cancellation (BLIC) concept.

Figure 2: MIMO OFDMA system architecture 42 .

so just the most important differences will be pointed out. respectively.1 Data region Mapping/Demapping The explanation will be concentrated in the mapping block. For 43 .1. The demapping block basically performs the inverse operations. given in number of subcarriers and OFDMA symbols.3. Figure 3: Data regions mapping block The basic resource unit is a structure constituted by logical subcarriers. The numbering of the subcarriers inside the BRU is shown in the Figure 3. Not necessarily all the subcarriers are filled with data. with rectangular dimensions defined by the parameters BRU_freq_size and BRU_time_size. being possible to reserve some subcarriers for other purposes.

to describe the internal structure of the BRU.example. 44 . such as frequency-first. Figure 4: Basic Resource Unit (BRU) structure The generic resource grid (GRG) represents all the allocable resources within a time/frequency zone. it is also determined the filling order of the structure. given in number of BRUs in frequency and in time. For this reason. in the LTE system. depending on the order the subcarriers indexes are listed. The GRG has rectangular dimensions defined by the parameters GRG_freq_size and GRG_time_size. It is important to remark that all BRUs within a GRG must have the same structure and filling order. it is defined a data set containing the indexes of the subcarriers that can be used for data transmission. with the correspondent dimensions and numbering shown in Figure 5. time-first or any other order. being constituted by BRUs. as previously explained. respectively. Regarding the implementation of the block. The numbering of the BRUs inside the GRG is shown in Figure 4. the BRU (in this case called Resource Elements) has some positions reserved for the pilot subcarriers. it is also useful to view the GRG in terms of subcarriers. By means of this data set.

1. as will be explained in the following.2 Subcarrier Mapping/Demapping The purpose of the mapping block is to map the symbols of different types (data.. other signals) that arrive organized in a logical manner (logically indexed). into theirs correspondent physical resources.e. A physical resource is defined as a physical subcarrier (i. pilots.Figure 5: Generic Resources Grid (GRG) The BRUs inside the GRG are allocated by the specification of GDRs. Figure 6: Resources Grid 3. a given position in the IFFT/FFT) at a given time (in terms of OFDMA symbol offset). The physical resources are positioned over a grid with 45 . BRUs not allocated have all their subcarriers filled with zeroes. given a mapping rule.

performs the IFFT calculation of the spectrum defined by the input subcarriers. such as synchronization signals or control channels in LTE. 3. DC. also equivalent to the rate of the data input port. the maximum offset in time between a logical index and its correspondent physical index). NFFT is the IFFT/FFT size and Nsymb corresponds to the maximum between the pilots pattern repetition period and the extension in time where the mapping rule applies (i.3 IFFT/FFT calculation and cyclic prefix insertion/removal In transmission. the Generic IFFT & Cyclic Prefix Insertion model. as its name already states. and other null subcarriers (when using MIMO. for example). other additional parameters shall be provided to the model:  Ndata: total number of data subcarriers in the grid. The numbering of the physical resources in the grid is done as shown in the Figure 6. also equivalent to the rate of the pilots input port. Figure 7: Physical resources grid for subcarrier mapping Besides NFFT and Nsymb.  Npilot: total number of pilot subcarriers in the grid.  Nother: total number of subcarriers in the grid dedicated to other signals.e. 46 . In general. a logically indexed subcarrier at the input can be mapped into any physical resource in the grid.1. including guard.  Nnull: total number of null subcarriers in the grid..dimensions NFFT x Nsymb.

The FFT size depends on the channel bandwidth being considered. Finally. After doing that. the cyclic prefix is inserted taking a copy of a given number of samples (Cyclic Prefix length) at the end of the useful OFDM symbol (just after the IFFT calculation) and inserting them before it. Figure 9: FFT and Cyclic Prefix removal block 3.4 Pilots compensation The purpose of the generic pilots compensation model is to compensate the received pilots to remove the power boost and the specific pilot sequence. it performs the FFT calculation of the useful OFDM symbol. the value of each pilot symbol represents an estimate of the channel seen by the pilot subcarrier itself. First. based on the knowledge of the transmitted (reference) pilot sequence. considering that the system is ideally synchronized and that time windowing is not performed over the OFDMA symbol. Figure 8: IFFT and Cyclic Prefix insertion block In reception. the Generic FFT & Cyclic Prefix Removal model performs the inverse operations done in transmission. it removes the beginning of the OFDMA symbol corresponding to the cyclic prefix. In sequence. 47 .1.

Figure 10: Channel estimation block 48 . The estimation of the channel coefficients is performed using linear interpolation. linear extrapolation and the hold operation (which is indeed a particular case of linear extrapolation).1.The block operates over the same grid of the subcarriers mapping (see the Figure 3). therefore using the same parameters and data sets (just the necessary ones) to know the location of the pilots subcarriers. The channel estimation is based on the received pilot subcarriers that should be already compensated prior to enter in the block to remove power boost and the specific pilot sequence. 3.5 Channel Estimation The purpose of the generic channel estimation block is to estimate the channel coefficients correspondent to the received data symbols. These estimated values are used in the subsequent blocks of the chain to perform some data processing over the data symbols.

with frequency length equal to the IFFT/FFT size and time duration Nsymb. An interpolation rule is a linear operation involving 3 points in the grid. it is defined an interpolation grid. The parameter Nsymb is not necessarily the same defined in the generic subcarriers mapping model. where at the beginning just the received pilot symbols are known. which contain all the interpolation rules (meaning first operand indexes and weights. starting from the step 0. and destination indexes) to be performed in the grid. The channel estimation is done in steps. 49 . The contents of the grid are the channel estimates of the correspondent subcarriers. A step includes all the interpolation rules that can be defined using all channel estimates known at the end of the previous step. New steps should be included until all the required channel estimates are obtained. This information is then provided to the block by the data sets shown in the Figure 9. The pilots are assumed to be already compensated to remove sequence and power boost.First of all. where the channel estimate of a “destination” subcarrier is obtained from the known estimates of the two “source” subcarriers. considering the 3 points are positioned over a straight line. Therefore. providing the channel estimates of the two “source” subcarriers and the proper weights. equal to the periodicity of the interpolation rules. it is possible to calculate the channel estimate related to a given subcarrier (destination). The weights are a function of the subcarriers indexes and can be precalculated for every defined interpolation rule. second operand indexes and weights.

Figure 11: Interpolation rules 3.6 Space-time Encoder/Decoder The purpose of using the technique of space-time coding and decoding is to support Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna systems in order to also exploit the spatial dimension.1. The spatial multiplexing is based on the transmission of different data streams across the different transmitting antennas with 50 . As consequence. an improvement in the capacity (throughput) or in the reliability (coverage range) of a wireless communication system can be obtained. Figure 12: Space-time encoder (MIMO 2x2) Two possible transmission modes of MIMO systems. the spatial multiplexing (SM) and the space-frequency block coding (SFBC).

avoiding the 4x4 matrix inversion (MIMO 2x2 SFBC). while the space-frequency coding techniques transmit redundant data streams over the multiple antennas for increasing the link reliability and extending the coverage range. In a real context.the goal of increasing the overall throughput. N is the 4x1 noise matrix. considering a MIMO 2x2 SFBC transmit diversity.2 Modeling MMSE-IRC Before implementing a simulation model in C code and creating a block in CoCentric with the associated ports. it is very important to provide a mathematical explanation of the MMSE-IRC receiver. the received signal by UE antennas is: where. but the interference rejection combining require highly accurate channel estimation and covariance matrix estimation that includes inter cell interference.2. the UE receives the summation of many signals plus noise composed by the useful signal (from the serving cell) and interferences (from interfering cells): 51 .1 MMSE-IRC for SFBC transmit diversity MMSE-IRC receiver is based on the MMSE criteria. 3. leading to a trivial 2x2 matrix inversion. It is useful to realize how complexity can be managed and the importance of adapting our mathematical model to a real implementation. is the transmitted useful signals 2x1 matrix. Y is the 4x1 matrix containing the received signals by UE. the covariance matrix is used in a modified version that provides lower complexity. In this scheme. is the channel response in frequency domain 4x2 matrix between the serving cell and the UE. 3. Let’s consider a scenario where there is an UE and some interfering cells. I is the total interference received 4x1 matrix.

is the cells are interferer cells. When SFBC is enabled. in particular the 2x1 matrix composed by two estimated serving cell symbols transmitted by the two antennas: ̂ Where. So. considering two antennas in transmission and two in reception (2x2 MIMO). This matrix formulation can be extended. implementing the MMSE-IRC. sending for each time instant four symbols mapped in subcarrier k (even) and k+1 (odd). the previous matrix equation can be expanded as: [ = [ ] [ ] ] [ ] The UE. is the 4x2 channel frequency response matrix between the c-th cell and the is the 2x1 transmitted signal matrix and serving cell and the other is the 4x1 noise matrix. ̂ [ ̂ ̂ ] is the estimated received symbol at the antenna 1 port and ̂ inverted and conjugated estimated received symbol at the antenna 2 port. the transmitted symbols are Alamouti coded exploiting two adjacent subcarriers and the two antennas.∑ where: UE. The ̂ vector is obtained applying this relation: ̂ 52 is the sign . considering the SFBC transmit diversity in a 2x2 MIMO fashion. estimates the useful signal.

This matrix is generated considering the estimated channel matrix of the useful signal and the interferers plus noise covariance matrix.where. is the estimated useful channel matrix and is the estimated interferences plus noise covariance matrix. is the 2x4 receiver weight matrix calculated considering both code and spatial domains. considering for the antenna 1 port received and for the antenna 2 port received symbol : so. From simulation tests. can be calculated using one of the two following methods: 1th Method where. ̂ ̂ and ̂ ̂ 53 . using this method it was noted that the estimate received symbol have to be normalized through the following normalizing symbol the matrix element function.

the first one is a reduced complexity method because the matrix inversion is done considering only one operand ( with eventually a splitting zero-adding operation. the normalization process is not necessary as the estimated symbols are already normalized (i. in general. The second method can be used when does not contain zero values. the total interference received by the UE on the subcarriers k and k+1 can be expressed as: [ 54 ] .e.2nd Method In this case. it is defined as: where I is the total interference received by the UE. Both methods provide the same result. It can be expressed neglecting the received useful signal ( : ∑ At the UE receiver. the amplitude is correctly scaled for the subsequent symbol to bit demapping operation). The covariance matrix include the interferences and noise components.

is the total received interference at antenna 2 port for the (k+1)-subcarrier. the complexity is much lower in terms of matrix inversion. For simplicity. are statistically zero and thus it is possible to avoid their estimation. also the terms . expectations can be expressed as: [ ] 55 . . so leading to the final matrix: | | | | | | | [ | ] Obviously. ]. the other expectation terms are the correlation functions between the interfering signals at antenna port 1 and port 2. Expanding : | | | | | | | [ | ] the main diagonal represents the received interferer powers at antenna port 1 and port 2.where is the total received interference at antenna 1 port for the k-subcarrier. the null terms are the auto-correlation function of the interference calculated over two adjacent subcarriers that can be assumed equal to zero. but the price to pay is a very small performance degradation. Besides.

In this case: The matrix inversion of [ ] [ ] is simply: [ ] In the following.The last matrix can be rewritten as: [ ] Considering that the interference characteristic changes slowly in time and frequency domains. considering: 56 . the 4x4 matrix can viewed as the composition of two 2x2 matrix. Now. moreover in presence of zero matrix elements. it is only needful is a simpler operation. it possible to write: So. because to calculate knowing and its transpose. [ ] This is an important approximation. the relative sub-carrier indexes k and k+1 are omitted. calculating .

the estimated received symbol at the UE antenna 1 port is: ̂ The coefficients a. it is possible to show the low complexity procedures: [ ] [ ] and. c and d are: 57 . the first method for MMSE-IRC: [ ̂ ̂ ] [ ][ ] [ Imposing that ] . Using.Calculating the inverse matrix. where . b.

Fortunately. is fundamental to build an independent block that accurately represents the MMSE-IRC receiver. covariance matrix estimation). solving several implementation problems. because the approximations and calculus are simple to understand and to realize on paper. but sometimes it is the only way to proceed.Moreover. there are not important simplifications. the description of the main employed simulator blocks and the math procedure. doing complex operations. float symbols_out_I. The math description appears very simple. in the following all the implemented variables are treated as complex values. but a real realization into a real LTE/LTE-A simulator or in a real LTE/LTE-A chipset has to be done opportunely. Extending above formulas. so they must be divided in real parts and imaginary parts. float symbols_out_Q. Choosing to implement all the operations inside the MMSE-IRC receiver (e. CoCentric is able to treat complex values and operations using a specific complex data format. the above values are complex symbols. considering complex values. So. the estimate received symbol at the UE antenna 2 port ( : ̂ It is important to note that. so it is not convenient splitting real part and imaginary part. float symbols_in1_Q.g. engineering some calculus to respect the LTE/LTE-A standard and the simulator software context. 3. the input and output ports are: 58 INPUT PORT OUTPUT PORT float symbols_in1_I. .2 Building the MMSE-IRC receiver As already mentioned.2.

for each OFDM symbol and subcarrier that belong to the CRS resource elements: ̂ where. float reference_pilots_in1_I. so mapping CRS indexes in a data file it is possible to extract the interested data from a PRB. So. float h11_I. pilot subcarrier indexes). to estimate the covariance matrix ̂ . float h12_I. it is very important know exactly the CRS positions.g. float h21_Q. float h11_Q. float reference_pilots_in2_Q. float h22_I. float symbols_in2_Q. float reference_pilots_in2_I. float h21_I. ̂ ̂ ] is the CRS sequence of is the received symbol 59 .float symbols_in2_I. In order to estimate the covariance matrix. ̂ ∑ ̂ ̂ [̂ is the 2x2 estimated covariance matrix. it is considered that the estimation of the total received interferer is obtained subtracting the estimated received signal to the total received signal. float h12_Q. Table 10: Input/Output MMSE-IRC block data Moreover some data set files have to be loaded to know the position of useful data (e. float reliability. the serving cell at k-th subcarrier and l-th OFDM symbol. float h22_Q. float reference_pilots_in1_Q.

f = pilot_subcarriers_indexes_2[n] % NFFT.(c11[j] * p1[l]). /* First index within SW */ idx_high = G_LEFT + (i-1)*12 + Nrew_f-1. the interferer power at the UE antenna 1 and the interferer power at the UE antenna 2 are calculated for each PRB. x = 0. pz_1 += z11*conj(z11) + z12*conj(z12). i++) { for(i = 1.(c12[f] * p2[x]). /* Power of the interference on antenna 1 */ z11 = sig1[j] . pilot_subcarriers_indexes_1[l]. x++. for(n=0.by UE at k-th subcarrier and l-th OFDM symbol. ̂ is the estimate channel response of the serving cell. 60 . if(j >= idx_low && j <= idx_high) { p_idx_w1[m] = n. i <=Nprb-K+1. The following C-code shows the implementation of the sliding window and the estimations of covariance matrix and interferer powers at the UE antenna 1 and 2: for(i = 0. z12 = sig1[f] . n++) { j = pilot_subcarriers_indexes_1[n] % NFFT. p_idx_w2[n]. i < Nsymb*NFFT. { l x j f n<Npw. } } for(n=0. m++. n++) = = = = p_idx_w1[n]. The parameter K establishes the size of the sliding window: for example. is the number of averaged samples. if K=1 the estimated covariance matrix. } if(f >= idx_low && f <= idx_high) { p_idx_w2[x] = n. /* Skip DC */ if(idx_high >= DC_POSITION) idx_high++. The average operation can be done considering a sliding windows to select the number of PRB and so the number of CRS inside the sliding windows. n<Npilot. /* Last index */ if(idx_low >= DC_POSITION) idx_low++. pilot_subcarriers_indexes_2[x]. i++) { idx_low = G_LEFT + (i-1)*12. /* Vector with the pilot indexes within the sliding window */ m = 0.

 Medium Correlation useful signal ( ). colliding or not colliding pilots. it is possible to consider a Gaussian Interference. useful and interferers signal correlations.  QPSK modulation.3 Performance of MMSE-IRC receiver Performance analysis are performed comparing throughput and Raw BER results between the MMSE-IRC and the Alamouti detection scheme.  Allocated PRB (50 for a 10 MHz bandwidth). to test the MMSE-IRC block.  2D-MMSE channel estimation. The selected simulation scenario includes the following parameters: number of interferences. Several schematics are created.3. some useful simulation parameters are:  Extended Pedestrian Channel A (v = 3 km/h). modulation.(c21[j] * p1[l]). // r21 } r11[(i-1)+(K-1)/2] = pz_1/(2*Npw). 61 . channel types (EPA. r21[(i-1)+(K-1)/2] = corrz/(2*Npw). Angle of Arrivals (AoA). /* Correlation of the interference between antenna 1 and 2 */ corrz += (z21)*conj(z11) + (z22)*conj(z12). pz_2 += z21*conj(z21) + z22*conj(z22).(c22[f] * p2[x]).  DL control channel mapping (n=2). 3.  TBS=6200 bits. IMCS.EVA) etc.  IMCS 7. } } 3.1 Interfering signal modeled as Gaussian noise As starting point. DIP values. r22[(i-1)+(K-1)/2] = pz_2/(2*Npw). considering Gaussian interference and real interference./* Power of the interference on antenna 2 */ z21 = sig2[j] . z22 = sig2[f] .

4304 74.Med. correlation 7 000 Throughput [kbit/s 6 000 5 000 4 000 3 000 ALAMOUTI 2 000 MMSE-IRC 1 000 0 ALAMOUTI -12 3 -8 -4 0 4 8 12 147.57 6187.16 6186.4304 259. The following figure shows graphically the MMSE-IRC gain respect to Alamouti receiver.397 1582.3 5765.65574 4 5765.80396 0 3673.59 6200 MMSE-IRC 5.13 4321.99919 -8 147.85 5964. provides a significant gain in the low SINR region.036 -0.565 5964.164 3. in presence of a Gaussian interferer. that is when the interference level is very high as happen when the UE is at cell edge.884 76. The simulated results are shown in the following table: ALAMOUTI SINR [dB] -12 MMSE-IRC THR [Kbit/s] 3 THR [Kbit/s] Gain [%] 5.444571 8 6187.31566 -4 1582.846 17.7).582 1975. the relevant gains happen in the SINR region from -7dB to +3dB: MMSE-IRC MIMO 2x2 performance .298 4321.125 24.884 1975.587 6186.04 6200 SNR [dB] Figure 13: THR comparison (Gaussian Interference) 62 .58 3673.  Pilot boost = +3dB.397 259. Interfering signal modelled as Gaussian noise (correlation=0.02507 12 6200 6200 0 Table 11: MMSE-IRC and Alamouti THR MMSE-IRC.

A script matlab is created to verify if the C code implementation in Cocentric is correct. the next figure shows the Raw BER obtained through a MATLAB  script that represent an ideal implementation of the realistic MMSE-IRC algorithm implemented in Concentric. the real simulator is extended adding two transmission chains to insert real interference cells. the throughput results show the same trend and match the expectations. several simulations are performed changing the angle of arrival (AoA) of the interferer.2 Real Interference signal – Colliding pilot case After having done the preliminary simulations. Fixing the AoA of the useful signal at 0 degree. Moreover. The simulator schematic is showed in the next figure. if the AoA of interferer is 0 degree. For completeness. In the case of one interferer signal.3. the interferer signal is perfectly aligned to the useful signal so the spatial filtering of the interference is very difficult. from 0 degree (worst case) to 45 degree (best case).1dB and DIP2=0. In contrast. so the first interferer power is very high and the second one is about zero. if the AoA of the interferer is 45 degree and AoA of the useful 63 . comparing the ideal channel and interference estimation with the real one: Figure 14: Raw BER comparison (Gaussian Interference) 3. DIP1=-0.001.

also to optimize the network planning. Adjacent cells can use the same pilot pattern in their transmitted frames or a planning can be done selecting different pilot positions for each cell. In general. physical layer simulations for different IMCS). 64 . it is very important knowing performances in different network scenarios (i.signal is 0 degree. the spatial filtering can provide some interference rejection.e.

from 0 degree (worst case) to 45 degree (best case). Fixing the AoA of the 65 .Figure 15: CoCentric MMSE-IRC Double Interferer schematic Moreover. several simulations are performed changing the angle of arrival (AoA) of the interferer.

Obviously.  2D-MMSE channel estimation.  Normalized array element distance =  Pilot boost = +3dB. it is very important knowing performances in different network scenarios (i. In general. the interferer signal is perfectly aligned to the useful signal so the spatial filtering of the interference is very difficult.  IMCS 7.  QPSK modulation. the UEs.  Colliding pilots between useful and interfering signals. in the first case receives interfered pilots (colliding pilots case). the spatial filtering can provide some interference rejection. if the AoA of interferer is 0 degree. specific correlation matrix as a function of the ).  Medium Correlation useful signal (  Real Interfering signal. . Adjacent cells can use the same pilot pattern in their transmitted frames or a planning can be done selecting different pilot positions for each cell. in the second case receives non interfered pilots (no colliding pilots case). showing interesting results. the simulation parameters are:  Extended Pedestrian Channel A (v = 3 km/h). if the AoA of the interferer is 45 degree and AoA of the useful signal is 0 degree.1dB and DIP2=-0. also to optimize the network planning. Let’s start with the colliding single interferer case. physical layer simulations for different IMCS). subjected to a reception of interferer signals.  Array elements = 2. considered AoA 66  DIP1=-0.  TBS=6200 bits.e.  AoA1=0.useful signal at 0 degree.  Allocated PRB (50 for a 10 MHz bandwidth). 30.001. In contrast. 10.  DL control channel mapping (n=2). Both the cases are simulated.  Angle spread = 10. 45.

MMSE-IRC receiver IMCS 7 .e. The gain decreases when the direction of the interference is close to the useful signal one and becomes negative when the interferer is perfectly aligned to the useful signal. the gain of no colliding case is about 6 dB at 5 Mbit/s.AS = 10° Alamouti (AoA interf=45) Alamouti (AoA interf=30) Throughput [kbit/s] 6 000 Alamouti (AoA interf=10) 5 000 4 000 Alamouti (AoA interf=0) 3 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=45) 2 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=30) 1 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=10) 0 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=0) SINR [dB] Figure 16: THR comparison (Real Interference) . in fact. 67 . a pilot pattern shift is applied to the interfering signal). so a better estimation of interfering signal permits to estimate the interferer covariance matrix with higher accuracy.Colliding pilots The above figure shows that the MMSE-IRC receiver provides a gain of 6-7 dB at about 3.Single interfering cell . Since pilot are not colliding.5 Mbit/s when the interferer AoA is 45 degree. channel estimation is more accurate than in the colliding case.Colliding pilots AoA useful = 0° .3 Real Interference signal – No Colliding pilot case The simulation scenario is about the same. changing only the pilot pattern for the interferer signals.EPA channel .The comprehensive simulated throughput figure is: 7 000 LTE MIMO 2x2 .AoA interf = variabile .3. This facts are reflected by the simulation results. when AoA of the interferer signal is 45 degree. modifying appropriately the CRS position inside the resource blocks (i. comparing the colliding case with the no colliding case. For different interferer AoA the gain and throughput are always consistent.Alamouti vs. 3.

as shown in the figure below: Throughput [kbit/s] LTE MIMO 2x2 .AS = 10° Alamouti (AoA interf=45) 7 000 Alamouti (AoA interf=30) 6 000 Alamouti (AoA interf=10) 5 000 Alamouti (AoA interf=0) 4 000 3 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=45) 2 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=30) 1 000 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=10) 0 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 SINR [dB] 6 8 10 12 14 MMSE-IRC (AoA interf=0) Figure 17: THR comparison (Real Interference) . MMSE-IRC receiver IMCS 7 .Single interfering cell .EPA channel . about the no colliding CRS case.Non Colliding pilots AoA useful = 0° . if the interfering AoA is between 0 and 10 degree. Conversely. the MMSE-IRC receiver always provides a gain respect to Alamouti receiver. the Alamouti receiver seems to provide better performances than MMSE-IRC.In the colliding case.Alamouti vs.No Colliding pilots 68 .AoA interf = variabile .

BLIC introduces additional complexity to perform bit-level decoding and re-encoding. The class of IC receivers is especially well suited to handle strong interferers which can be accurately demodulated and regenerated avoiding the error propagation effect. Compared to the baseline MMSE-IRC receivers. Such information may not be easily available unless provided by network signaling. Moreover. The main difference between SLIC and BLIC is that the UE can either use detected symbols to cancel out the interference (SLIC) or it can perform the full decoding of the signals from the i-th interfering cell.CHAPTER 4: SUCCESSIVE INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION RECEIVERS 4. These receivers are expected to overcome the MMSE-IRC in terms of performance. For example. BLIC receivers compared to SLIC receivers. it is very interesting to extend the research to a class of successive interference cancellation receivers operating at symbol level (SLIC) and at bit level (BLIC). Symbol Level Interferer Cancellation receiver (SLIC) and Bit Level Interferer Cancellation receiver (BLIC) use both non-linear IC (Interferer Cancellation) techniques to detect/decoding serving/interfering cells. which may incur significant signaling overhead as well as scheduling constraints.1 Introduction and comparison After having implemented and analyzed the performance of the MMSE-IRC receiver. The performance gain is a function of the amount of interference received by the the UE and thus depends on the actual value of the Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio (SINR). in order to be 69 . also introducing larger latencies in the receiver chain. require the exact encoding scheme information and exact rate matching information (including RB allocation) of each interferer. even if the complexity due to presence of N detecting stages is higher than MMSE-IRC complexity. where N-1 is the number of cancelled interfering signals. the IC receiver achieves better performance due to its ability to cancel interferers and demodulate potentially cleaner signals when decoding the serving cell.

The simulation 70 . since the encoding scheme and entire RB allocation information are needed for all the interferers. In the next paragraphs will be presented the description of SLIC and BLIC receivers.e. the BLIC receiver complexity is higher than SLIC one. On the other hand. even the BLIC decoding is made N times. the UE needs to either know or estimate some of its transmission parameters.able to detect/decode a strong interferer. the decoding procedure is perfomed only once for the serving cell. The SLIC and BLIC complexities are mainly calculated as: where. About SLIC. SLIC receivers are a good choice for interference cancellation because their interference cancellation capability gives a reasonable complexity that scales linearly with the number of interferers. interference parameter estimation is significantly more complex for BLIC. In contrast. so the BLIC complexity is much higher. is the interferer cancellation complexity. is the channel decoding complexity (i. showing implementation details and performance simulation results. Finally. but BLIC can give higher performance due to the turbo decoder that operates on each interferer. The error propagation that may occur in IC receivers due to errors in each stage can contribute to the performance loss compared to ML receivers. typically N turbo decoding operations. is the detection complexity. channel estimation. detection and interferer cancellation are performed N times (N is the number of transmitting cells including serving plus N-1 interfering cells) so the complexity scales linearly. Moreover.     is the channel estimation complexity. Turbo decoding). the complexity of IC receiver is lower than ML. In contrast.

The SLIC receiver.Nlay. The next figure shows the block diagram of the SLIC receiver. only two interferers are considered. This simulator is simplified compared to the one developed in CoCocentric. When a UE receives two interfering signals. y2 is the first interfering signal. but includes: Turbo encoder/decoder. The results show the SLIC gain respect to MMSE-IRC and the SINR window in which it is possible apply the dynamic on/off switching of the interference cancellation functionality. showing that in terms of performance (Throughput and Raw BER).Heff3. 71 . Alamouti encoder/decorder etc.results are presented considering single and double interferers for different spatial characteristics expressed in terms of Angle of Arrivals (AoAs). two estimation steps are made to estimate the useful signal. In this implementation. The scope of the SLIC receiver is to subtract step-by-step the regenerated interfering signals.y3.Heff1. all the main operations are showed and in the following it is provided a mathematical description with the relevant MATLAB instructions. A new block implementing the SLIC receiver is created and all the operations are done inside.Nr.y2.2 SLIC implementation SLIC receiver is implemented using a MATLAB simulator for LTE system that consists of several parts that correspond to the LTE transmission chain.reliability] = slic(y.Heff2. multi-antenna transmission.y1. BLIC simulation results are compared to the others one.Cmod). The input values are:     y is the total received signal (useful plus interferences and AWGN noise)< y1 is the useful signal. can be represented in MATLAB as a function that returns the SFBC decoded symbols r and their reliability: [r. 4. BLIC receiver is the optimal choice to reach the highest throughput when the UE is at the cell edge. viewed as a black box. y3 in the second interfering signal.

      72 Heff1 is the estimated channel matrix of the serving cell. Heff3 is the estimated channel matrix of the second interfering cell. Nr is the number of UE receive antennas (i. MIMO 2x2). Heff2 is the estimated channel matrix of the first interfering cell. Nlay is the number of layers.e. Cmod is a vector of size M (cardinality of modulation) that contains the constellation. .

At the output of the first step an estimation of the first interferer is provided (the Figure 18: SLIC receiver 73 .

the proposed SLIC receiver regenerates the 1th interferer making the following operations: Soft Demodulation (Max log-MAP algorithm) w = soft_demodulator(r2.strongest).Cmod.:)). P1=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc1(1. To improve the estimation.*conj(y_calc1(2.1. As shown in the Figure. knowing the estimated channel matrix of the first interfering signal and the covariance matrix of the residual interference signal.reliability] = mmse_irc(y. r12=1/length(y)*sum(y_calc1(1. P2=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc1(2. The covariance matrix is calculated considering the low complexity formulation treated in the chapter 3. The MMSE-IRC receiver at the first step acts on the total received signal by UE (denoted as y). r21=conj(r12). 74 .Nr. idx = w>0. Hard decision w_hard = zeros(size(w)).Ri).:))). the total received signal y and the estimated covariance matrix considering the residual interference. The symbols r2 represent a rough estimation of the first interferer symbols.Nr.^2).Nlay.Heff2.reliability).:). and it is calculated considering the residual interferer signal viewed excluding the first dominant interferer: y_calc1=y-y2.^2). for the first dominant interferer estimation. Ri=[P1 r12. the MMSE-IRC receiver receives as input the estimated channel matrix of the second interfering signal Heff2.:)). r21 P2]. Ri is a 2x2 matrix that is provided as input to the MMSE-IRC: [r2.

So. it is possible to calculate the regenerated first interferer as: y2_est=Heff2*s_2. r21 P2].:)). P1=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc2(1.w_hard).Ri).^2). Modulation (x-QAM) r2 = modulation(1.^2). This is the input of the second step.w_hard(idx)=0. Ri=[P1 r12.reliability] = mmse_irc(y_2. subtracted to the total received signal y.:))). At the second step. w_hard(idx)=1. idx = w<0. This signal. knowing the regenerated Alamouti encoded symbols s2 and the estimated channel matrix of the first interferer.1.Nr. 75 . in which the second interferer is estimated. Alamouti encoding s_2 = alamouti_enc(r2).:)).*conj(y_calc2(2. [r3. permits to calculate the received signal without the presence of the strongest interferer.Cmod. r21=conj(r12). MMSE-IRC acts on the second interfering signal knowing its channel matrix and the covariance matrix of the residual interferer: y_calc2=y-y3-y2_est.Heff3. y_2=y_1-y2_est. P2=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc2(2.:). r12=1/length(y)*sum(y_calc2(1.

they are showed comparing Throughput and Raw BER of BLIC. Ri=[P1 r12. is: y_3=y_2-y3_est. Applying the MMSE-IRC to this signal. the second interference can be estimated and regenerated: y3_est=Heff3*s_3. [r4. P1=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc3(1. y_3=y_2-y3_est.3 BLIC implementation Bit level interference cancellation receiver is implemented in similar way. So. 76 . hard decision.:)). modulation and alamouti encoding. Finally. the remaining part is composed by the useful signal and thermal noise. knowing the estimated channel matrix of the useful signal (Heff1) and the covariance matrix calculated only for the noise.reliability] = mmse_irc(y_3. it possible to obtain the alamouti decoded useful symbols: y_calc3=y-y1-y2_est-y3_est.^2).:).:))).^2). SLIC.Nr. The useful symbols r4 is then soft demodulated and turbo decoded. r21=conj(r12).After MMSE-IRC. regenerated and subtracted the first and the second interfering signals.1.Heff1. MMSE-IRC and Alamouti receivers. the useful signal plus noise.Ri). P2=1/length(y)*sum(abs(y_calc3(2. the performance measurements can be done. the same procedure is made: soft demodulation. but for each step the interfering signal is re-encoded using a turbo encoder.*conj(y_calc3(2. 4. r12=1/length(y)*sum(y_calc3(1. Having estimated.:)). r21 P2]. So.

77 . So. considering the first step or in other word. modulated and SFBC encoded. Multiplying the channel matrix of the i-th interfering signal it is possible to obtain the regenerated i-th interferer signal. w_hard(idx)=1.enc_bits_interf_2). but instead of applying the hard decision after the soft demodulation. in the BLIC receiver the soft demodulated bits are turbo decoded: w = soft_demodulator(r3.Cmod.f1.w_hard).Nr. a hard decision is done: w_hard = zeros(size(soft_bits_2)).f1. z = layer_demapping(w. data_bits_interf_2] = channel_encoding_data(Ncw. Having regenerated the first interference signal correctly. the re-generated i-th interfering transmitted symbol is turbo encoded. y3_est=Heff3*s_3. For example.z).f2.Nlay. [soft_bits_1 soft_bits_2] = channel_decoding(Ncw.Ncw.The method used for the SLIC receiver applied to MMSE-IRC are the same.n_iter. the regeneration of the strongest interferer signal: enc_bits_interf_2.rate. s_3 = alamouti_enc(r3). w_hard(idx)=0.interf_power.Lp.Cmod.Nlay.f2.M). In the next page is showed in detail the block diagram of the proposed BLIC receiver. paying attention to apply the MMSE-IRC correctly as mentioned before. idx = soft_bits_2<0. After the turbo decoder. r3 = modulation(1. the remaining parts are the same.Lp.reliability). idx = soft_bits_2>0.

Figure 19: BLIC receiver 78 .

4. Considering negative SINR. as expected when there are two 79 Figure 20: Raw BER . Number of layers = 1. Double Interferer case: AoA1=10° and AoA2=10°. SLIC and BLIC reach a minimum that shifts varying the AoA. BLIC and SLIC receivers shows a similar throughput. SLIC and BLIC Raw BER becomes higher than MMSE-IRC ones. Number of transmitted packets = 20000. 45°. considering:   Single Interferer case: AoA=0°. Regarding the Raw BER figure. When SINR is about 2dB. Symbol period = 0. From this simulations seems that SLIC receiver is the optimal choice when the SINR is less than about 3dB. considering a single interferer and double interferer cases. also the Throughput of MMSE-IRC when AoA1=30 and AoA1=45 is comparable to the BLIC and SLIC one.1 and DIP2=-0. for each case.5. Number of receiving antennas = 2. simulation results are provided varying the AoAs.0714. 10°. The simulation parameters are the following:          Number of transmitting antennas = 2. In this case a single interferer is consider. Normalized array element distance = 0. the SLIC (AoA1=10 and AoA1=0) and BLIC AoA1=0 throughput start to decrease and starting from 3dB MMSE-IRC provides higher throughput. Number of codeword = 1. AoA1=30° and AoA2=30°.Single Interferer . 30°. Moreover. AoA1=10° and AoA2=30°. Medium correlation The single interferer case simulation results are showed in the figures 3 and 4. The double interferer case simulation results are shown in the figures 5 and 6. this means that DIP1=-0. AoA1=30° and AoA2=10°.4 SLIC and BLIC performance analysis The SLIC and BLIC simulations are done. Angle spread = 10°. so increasing the SINR. while the MMSE-IRC is optimal (in terms of throughput and complexity) when SINR is higher than about 3dB.001.

for negative SINR. the MMSE-IRC becomes the best receiver because. BLIC receiver is the optimal choice.interfering signals SLIC and BLIC provide higher gain respect to MMSE-IRC and Alamouti receiver in the low SINR region. 80 . does not suffer from the error propagation effect in the regeneration of the interfering signals. When SINR is higher than about 1dB. In this case. rather than SLIC and BLIC. while SLIC performances are comparable to the MMSE-IRC ones.

Figure 3: Throughput - Single Interferer

81

Figure 4: Raw BER - Single Interferer

82

Figure 5: Throughput - Double Interferer

83

Figure 6: Raw BER - Double Interferer

84

UE could be able to sense the interfering signals to switch their IC receivers to the optimal one.e. would be possible to order and filter each interferer signals in the most suiable way. This capacity could be reached implementing in software or directly in the chipset hardware a set of IC receivers. it is possible to subdivide the SINR range in regions in which the selection of the best receiver can be done on performance basis. Clearly. but in presence of single interfering signal or for a UE close to the base station the switching on-off procedure between SLIC and MMSE-IRC represents the optimal choice to respect the trade-off between complexity and performances. limiting the spectrum usage foe transmitting assistance from the network. 85 . Bit level successive interference cancellation is optimal in presence of two interfering signal when SINR is low (at cell edge). in particular to clarify the type of network assistance and to find new network parameters useful to improve the UE interference cancellation capabilities. for example starting from: MMSE-IRC. identifying accurately (tagging) each interferer signals and tracking their received powers. since UE will become more powerful. Moreover. the research must be address to receiver side. From the analysis and simulation tests. SLIC and BLIC that include MMSE-IRC) are very promising. As analyzed in the chapter 4. SLIC and BLIC. Some research activities must be done about the topic of NAICS. it follows that there is no an optimal receiver useful for all the interferer scenarios. but surely a class of receivers becoming to the NAICS (i.CONCLUSION Symbol level successive interference cancellation and interference rejection combining receivers represent a good trade-off between complexity and performance results.

: RAN4 #62bis. 2012. MediaTek. s. 2007. 8. s. Analsysis of LTE physical layer and its evolution . 6. Huawei. ST-Ericsson. : 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 Meeting # 64.l. 10. R4-132020. s. 2. R4122185. 86 . : 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 #63. Sony Mobile. FeICIC baseline receiver assumptions. s.l. : 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 #66bis. : Yusuke Ohwatari. : AP. 2013. Qualcomm.l. : Telecom Italia Lab. Alcatel-Lucent. NTT DOCOMO.l.l.l.Inner Modem V 1. s. 2012.l. 4. 3.0. R4-122479. 9.l. WF on CRS-IM performance evaluation. 4G LTE/LTE-A for Mobile broadband. Verizon. Investigation on Advanced Receiver Employing Interference Rejection Combining. R4-124460. Reconfigurable OFDMA Simulation Platform . R4-123313. 2012. Qualcomm. RP-130393. s. s. 5. CRS Interference Mitigation For Homogeneous Deployments. NEC. : 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 Meeting #63 . Link level simulations for FeICIC with 9dB cell range expansion. 7. Discussion on the reference receiver for FeICIC. Softbank.l. LG Electronics. : Telecom Italia Lab.BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Orange. Ericsson. Complexity and link level performance analysis for feICIC CRS-IC receiver. Ericsson.l. s. Renesas. s. : 3GPP TSG-RAN Meeting # 59. Vol. 2012. s. Ericsson.