See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/345766978

Throughput Analysis over 5G NR Physical Uplink Shared Channels

Conference Paper · November 2020

DOI: 10.1109/GPECOM49333.2020.9247906

CITATIONS READS
0 1,673

2 authors:

Muhammad Ali Yasin Kabalci

University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Nigde Ömer Halisdemir University
12 PUBLICATIONS   33 CITATIONS    81 PUBLICATIONS   1,127 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

String inverter for solar plants View project

IEEE GPECOM-2019 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammad Ali on 12 November 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2020 2nd Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (IEEE GPECOM2020), October 20-23, 2020, Online Conference
Throughput Analysis over 5G NR Physical Uplink
Shared Channels
Yasin Kabalcı
Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University
Niğde, Turkey
yasinkabalci@ohu.edu.tr
Abstract—The high throughput with low latency, massively
connected devices, and effective utilization of spectrum for current
wireless communication systems can be realized by adopting
the fifth-generation (5G) new radio (NR) air interface. The key
remarkable features that 5G NR presents are Ultra-Reliable Low-
Latency Communications (URLLC), enhanced Mobile Broadband
(eMBB), and massive Machine Type Communications (mMTC). To
meet thereof features, 5G NR exerts different multiple access and
modulation techniques. This paper addresses the physical layer of
5G NR and more explicitly explores the transmission of 5G NR
over the physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) considering
several parameters. For example, different sub-carrier spacings
(SCSs) are taken into account for analyzing the performance
of PUSCH in terms of throughput versus Signal-to-Noise Ratio
(SNR). Moreover, the effect of the well-known modulation tech-
niques such as Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK), different
order of Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) (i.e., 16, 64,
and 256) on throughput is studied. Later on, the number of base
station (BS) and user equipment (UE) antennas are varied. Lastly,
the performance of PUSCH over different propagation channel
models (clustered delay line (CDL) and tap delay line (TDL)) is
also investigated in this paper. The extensive simulation studies
have proved that QPSK exhibits finer outcomes in low SNR regions
while 256-QAM shows remarkable results in high SNR regions.
The maximum throughput can be realized even in low SNR regime
if the number of BS antennas is increased. In addition, high
throughput value can be attained by increasing SCS.
Index Terms—5G, NR air interface, physical uplink shared
channel, throughput, SNR.
I. I NTRODUCTION
About more than one trillion diverse connected devices are
anticipated in wireless communication systems by the end
of 2030 using the internet of things (IoT) technology [1]–
[4]. However, it is very challenging to facilitate such a huge
number of devices with a reasonable data rate, speed, and un-
interruptible communication. Moreover, high-resolution real-
time applications, which are foreseen to increase in upcoming
wireless communication systems demand low latency. The cur-
rent communication systems have low potentials to meet these
crucial demands in efficient manner [5]–[7]. Therefore, the
wireless communication industry is aiming to facilitate approx-
imately 1000 times more data traffic than available (around 100
* Muhammad Ali is also affiliated with Department of Electrical Engineer-
ing, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Muzaffarabad, Pakistan.
978-1-7281-6264-5/20/$31.00 © 2020 IEEE
345
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Omer Halisdemir Universitesi. Downloaded on November 10,2020 at 11:21:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Muhammad Ali*
Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University
Niğde, Turkey
muhammad.ali@mail.ohu.edu.tr
gigabits per second (Gbps)). This can engage massively con-
nected devices, allow high resolution-application with nominal
delay, and facilitate continuous communication in the upcoming
Fifth Generation (5G) wireless communication systems [8]–
[11]. The selection of proper multiple access technologies
is also crucial to handle a huge number of irregular-traffic
generating devices in modern communication systems [12]–
[14]. Therefore, for the smooth functioning of IoT, Smart Grids
(SGs), Machine-to-Machine (M2M) and Vehicle-to-Everything
(V2X) while maintaining the Quality-of-Service (QoS) at the
same time, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
plans to launch a latest wireless access technology for 5G
known as New Radio (NR) developed by International Mobile
Telecommunication (IMT) by the year 2020 (IMT-2020) [15].
The 5G NR presents Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Commu-
nications (URLLC), enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB),
and massive Machine Type Communications (mMTC), which
can solve the aforementioned issues in more efficient manner
[16]–[18]. The URLLC addresses reliability, availability, and
unwanted delays problems in SGs, V2X, and remote monitoring
and control applications, whereas the eMBB provides uninter-
rupted and flexible services to the users. However, mMTC is
responsible to provide massive connected devices with limited
power consumption in 5G systems. Moreover, the advanced
antenna technologies, interoperability among different ranges
of frequency bands, provision for low latency, and streamlined
transmission can also be realized using 5G NR [19]–[21]. The
5G NR interface is divided into a physical layer and some
higher layers like medium access control (MAC) and radio
resource control (RCC) whose specs are explained in [22]–[26].
The key objective of this study is to analyze the physical
layer of 5G NR interface. In this context, the performance
of Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) is studied in
terms of throughput versus Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) con-
sidering different performance metrics via simulation studies.
Throughput analysis of PUSCH is examined for the Sub-
Carrier Spacing (SCSs) (15 kHz, 30 kHz, 60 kHz), modulation
schemes like Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK), different
order of Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) (16, 64,
and 256), variable antennas at both the base station (BS) and
user equipment (UE) sides, and performance of communication
 2020 2nd Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (IEEE GPECOM2020), October 20-23, 2020, Online Conference
LDPC base
Payload CRC
graph
Addition
selection
OFDM signal Resource
Precoding
Generation Mapping
Fig. 1. Block diagram of physical layer processing for 5G NR PUSCH.
system over different propagation channel models such as
Clustered Delay Line (CDL) and Tapped Delay Line (TDL).
The extensive simulation studies have shown that throughput
can be maximized by increasing the SCSs. It is also noticed
that QPSK is a better option in low SNR values while better
throughput results can be achieved using 256-QAM in high
SNR values. The maximum throughput value can be acquired
even in very low-quality SNR regimes by deploying larger
the number of antennas. The response of different propagation
channel models is also analyzed in this study. It is found that
the 5G NR PUSCH performs exceptionally well when CDL is
considered as compared to its counterpart.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section II
presents a brief overview of 5G NR PUSCH. The throughput
analysis of PUSCH is studied in Section III by considering all
the performance metrics. Lastly, the conclusion is provided in
Section IV.
II. PRELIMINARIES
This section presents a general overview of 5G NR PUSCH
along with its block diagram describing the physical layer
processing. It is worth noting that the selection of a suitable
radio waveform is a very crucial task for mobile access tech-
nologies and plays a vital role on the performance of the system
[27], [28]. In this context, the 5G NR considers Orthogonal
Frequency Division Multiplexing along with a Cyclic-Prefix
(CP-OFDM) as a most suitable candidate for its operation.
Therefore, it is utilized in both the downlink (DL) and uplink
(UL) transmissions for 5G NR with the recommendation of
Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). The primary
motives behind the selection of this technique are its lower
implementation complexity, lower cost of operations for wide
bandwidth, and adaptive features with Multiple Input Multiple
Output (MIMO) systems.
Figure 1 shows a general block diagram describing the
processing of physical layer 5G NR PUSCH. The UP shared
channel (UL-SCH) is the actual transport channel that carries
the UL payload block. The figure clearly indicates that the
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Omer Halisdemir Universitesi. Downloaded on November 10,2020 at 11:21:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Segmentation Rate Code block
of code block Matching interlinking
Codeword
Data and
Control
Multiplexing
Layer
Modulation Scrambling
Mapper
processing of physical layer UL payload block is similar to
the processing of a DL payload block with minor modifications
[29]. First, the 5G NR PUSCH provides an additional feature of
carrying multiplexed control information and user application
data. Second, the structure of the channel defined by the 5G
NR standard is a modified form of PUSCH channel specified
by the 4G LTE standard [30]. The 5G NR offers much more
flexibility and reliability as compared to its predecessor. It
incorporates more malleable pilot arrangements and facilitates
both CP-OFDM and Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT)-Spread-
OFDM (DFT-s-OFDM) waveforms. In addition, the PUSCH
supports only one codeword at a time that can be mapped
up to 4 layers. The most important aspect of PUSCH is the
transmission of control information along the data information.
Mainly three types of UL control-information i.e., ACK/NACK,
channel-state report and scheduling request are sent to the BS.
It can be seen from the Fig. 1 that Cyclic Redundancy Check
(CRC) is first added along the payload. It helps to detect the
available error if any, and then, a specific graph based upon
Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) coding technique compat-
ible with quasi-cyclic is selected for the transmission over
the physical layer. Generally, there are two graphs that are
decided on the basis of payload sizes, one is developed for
smaller payload blocks while other for larger payload sizes.
This payload is also referred to as a transport block in literature.
Latter, segmentation of code blocks is performed, which are
LPDC encoded. In order to produce synchronization among all
the code blocks, rate matching is performed. After obtaining
harmonized code blocks, code blocks concatenation is realized
to generate codeword that can be transmitted after multiplexed
control information as discussed before. After that first, the
scrambling process is performed, and then, a specific modula-
tion technique is applied on the scrambled bits (depending upon
the PUSCH requirements) to get complex-valued modulation
symbols. The PUSCH channel selects the QPSK modulation
scheme when only a single pair of the scrambled bit is required
to transform into its equivalent complexed-valued modulation
symbols. However, 16-QAM, 64-QAM, and 256-QAM are
346
 2020 2nd Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (IEEE GPECOM2020), October 20-23, 2020, Online Conference

utilized when two, three, and four pairs of the scrambled bits are
required to transform into their equivalent complexed-valued
modulation symbols, respectively. Later on, layer mapping of
complex-valued modulated symbols is executed depending on
the vacant antenna ports. Next, for each layer, complex-valued
modulated symbols are transmit on antenna ports with the aid of
precoding. Finally, the complex-valued modulated symbols are
mapped to a Resource Block (RB), which generate the OFDM
signal for all the antenna ports. The OFDM signal is then sent
over the channel. In this study, two channel models are consid-
ered (i.e., CDL and TDL). Each channel model comprises of
two line-of-sight (LOS) and three non-LOS (NLOS) channel
types. These channel models facilitate maximum bandwidth of
up to 2 GHz with the operating frequency ranging from 500
MHz to 100 GHz. In the CDL model, the signal is scattered
when arrived at the receiving antenna. Due to this scattering, the
delay, power, and four types of angles such as azimuth angles of
arrival (AoA) and angles of departure (AoD), and zenith AoA
and AoD are required for each cluster. In simpler words, the Fig. 2. Performance evaluation of 5G NR PUSCH based on throughput versus
SNR for different SCSs.
CDL model describes the scattering environment and helps to
analyze the performance of wireless communication systems.
Therefore, the CDL model is generally consider for MIMO clearly indicates that much better throughput can be realized by
systems. In contrast, only the power delay profile of each tap utilizing high SCSs while the low value of SCSs offers much
is required for the entire channel in the case of the TDL model. lower throughput value. For instance, a throughput of about
Thus, the TDL is considered a simpler model than the CDL, 0.11 Mbps is experienced when 15 kHz of SCS is adopted
and the aforementioned angles are not required in this model. whereas 0.22 Mbps of throughput is achieved when 30 kHz
Therefore, the TDL channel model is generally exploited for of SCS is considered. However, the maximum throughput of
indoor applications. 0.44 Mbps is realized when SCS is increased from 15 kHz to
III. S IMULATION R ESULTS 60 kHz. This fact shows that throughput is linearly increasing
with the increase of SCS as expected.
The performance of 5G NR PUSCH in terms of throughput
Figure 3 illustrates the performance analysis of throughput
versus SNR is provided in this section for different performance
versus SNR by considering different modulation schemes i.e.,
metrics with the aid of simulation studies. All the results are
QPSK and different order of QAM (16, 64, 256). The 60
evaluated for the SNR range in between −25 dB to 15 dB
kHz of SCS is considered in this case. However, the rest of
values. The study is performed for different SCSs, modulation
schemes, varying number of antennas at both the BS and UE,
and to analyze the performance of communication system over
different propagation channel models (CDL and TDL). The
summary of considered simulation parameters is also shown
in Table I.
Figure 2 provides the first outcome of the study where
different SCSs are chosen to analyze the performance in terms
of throughput versus SNR over 5G NR PUSCH. In this analysis,
we used 16-QAM as a modulation technique, BS and UE
are equipped with 8 and 2 antennas, respectively while CDL
is considered as a propagation channel model. The Fig. 2

TABLE I
S IMULATION PARAMETERS FOR PUSCH

Parameters Values
Sub-Carrier Spacing (SCS) 15 kHz/30 kHz/60 kHz
Frame Duration 10 ms
Modulation Technique QPSK/16-QAM/64-QAM/256-QAM
Base Station Antenna (BS) 2/4/8/16/32/64
User Equipment Antenna (UE) 2/4/8 Fig. 3. Throughput analysis of 5G NR PUSCH for different modulation
Propagation Channel Model CDL/TDL schemes.

347
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Omer Halisdemir Universitesi. Downloaded on November 10,2020 at 11:21:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2020 2nd Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (IEEE GPECOM2020), October 20-23, 2020, Online Conference

Fig. 4. Throughput analysis of 5G NR PUSCH for varying BS antennas. Fig. 5. Throughput analysis of 5G NR PDSCH for varying UE antennas.

the parameters are the same as Fig 2. Fig. 3 suggests that in low SNR values by increasing the number of BS antennas.
it is suitable to utilize QPSK when the quality of SNR is Similar to the Fig. 4, Fig. 5 presents the performance analysis
poor, whereas 256-QAM provides better outcomes when a fine of 5G NR PUSCH in terms of throughput using different
quality of SNR is available. For example, in between of −25 antenna number at UE side (i.e., 2, 4 and 8) by considering the
dB to −10 dB SNR values, QPSK offers more than 0.22 Mbps same parameters. However, BS is equipped with 64 number of
of throughput value whereas in the same region 16-QAM, 64- antennas in this scenario. It is observed from the Fig. 5 that
QAM and 256-QAM attain the throughput value of about 0.176 identical throughput results are experienced even by changing
Mbps, 0.139 Mbps and 0.176 Mbps, respectively. This fact the number of UE antennas. For instance, in low SNR values,
encourages to utilize QPSK in low SNR regions. In contrast, about 0.13 Mbp throughput value is experienced while the
256-QAM achieves a maximum throughput of about 0.88 Mbps throughput value of 0.65 Mbps is realized in high SNR values
in high SNR regime especially in between of −5 dB to 15 dB for all the considered antenna variation at the UE side. It is
SNR values whereas 64-QAM, 16-QAM and QPSK experience therefore better to deploy 2 antennas at the UE side to save the
throughput of about 0.65 Mbps, 0.44 Mbps and 0.22 Mbps cost and energy consumption.
in the same region, respectively. Thus, it is efficient to utilize
256-QAM in high SNR regimes. According to these results,
it is very important to properly decide the suitable modulation
scheme for any system in order to get optimal results.
The next output is shown in Fig. 4, which displays the
throughput analysis of 5G NR PUSCH by varying the number
of antennas at BS side (i.e., 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and 64). In this case,
64-QAM is considered as a modulation scheme while remain-
ing parameters are considered similar to previous scenarios.
Although no variation in throughput value (i.e., constant 0.65
Mbps) is experienced in high SNR values (in between 0 to
15 dB) by varying the number of BS antennas, still significant
improvement in throughput values are observed in low SNR
values by using larger number of antennas at BS side. More
specifically, maximum throughput value can be achieved by
deploying 64 numbers of antennas at BS side. It can be clearly
observed from the Fig. 4 that the utilization of 64 numbers of
antennas offers throughput value of about 0.26 Mbps at −15
dB of SNR value whereas the utilization of 32, 16, 8, 4 and
2 number of antennas achieve 0.17, 0, 0, 0 and 0 Mbps of
throughput values, respectively. Moreover, the outcomes of this Fig. 6. Throughput analysis of 5G NR PUSCH over different propagation
analysis suggest that better throughput results can be realized channel models.

348
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Omer Halisdemir Universitesi. Downloaded on November 10,2020 at 11:21:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2020 2nd Global Power, Energy and Communication Conference (IEEE GPECOM2020), October 20-23, 2020, Online Conference
The Fig. 6 presents the final outcome of this work that
evaluates performance analysis of 5G NR PUSCH in terms
of throughput versus SNR over CDL and TDL propagation
channel models. The SCSs are also varied in this study to see
their impact on throughput values. The Fig. 6 confirms that
much better throughput results can be realized over the CDL
propagation channel model than the TDL in low SNR values.
Moreover, overall throughput performance is enhanced when
the value of SCSs is increased. If we closely observe the figure,
it can be seen that at SNR value of −5 dB and onward, the
identical throughput value is attained over both the CDL and
TDL propagation channels for 15 kHz, 30 kHz and 60 kHz,
respectively. However, the same throughput value is achieved
one step before over the CDL propagation channel model than
TDL in low SNR values for all the selected SCSs. Therefore,
it is better to select the CDL propagation channel model to get
finer result as compared to TDL.
IV. CONCLUSION
The performance of 5G NR PUSCH has been investigated
in this study. The key objective was to analyze the throughput
in terms of SNR by varying system parameters (i.e., SCSs,
modulation schemes, number of antennas at BS and UE, and
propagation channel models (CDL and TDL)). Extensive simu-
lation studies have validated that throughput can be maximized
by increasing SCS. For example, higher values of throughput
can be achieved by 60 kHz of SCS rather than by using 15
and 30 kHz SCSs. Our results also confirmed that QPSK is
a better option in low SNR regions while 256-QAM provides
better results in high SNR regions. Simulation studies suggest
the utilization of larger number of BS antennas, which benefit to
achieve maximum throughput value even in very low quality of
SNR regime. Finally, the behavior of the propagation channel
models is analyzed in this study. It is concluded the 5G NR
PUSCH performs well in terms of throughput versus SNR over
CDL than its counterpart.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. Perera, C. H. Liu, S. Jayawardena, and M. Chen, “A survey on internet
of things from industrial market perspective,” IEEE Access, vol. 2, pp.
1660–1679, 2014.
[2] Y. Li, X. Cheng, Y. Cao, D. Wang, and L. Yang, “Smart choice for the
smart grid: Narrowband internet of things (NB-IoT),” IEEE Internet of
Things Journal, pp. 1–1, 2017.
[3] M. Centenaro, L. Vangelista, A. Zanella, and M. Zorzi, “Long-range
communications in unlicensed bands: The rising stars in the IoT and
smart city scenarios,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 23, no. 5, pp.
60–67, 2016.
[4] A. D. Zayas and P. Merino, “The 3GPP NB-IoT system architecture for
the internet of things,” in Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops),
2017 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2017, pp. 277–282.
[5] X. Lin, J. Li, R. Baldemair, T. Cheng, S. Parkvall, D. Larsson, H. Koora-
paty, M. Frenne, S. Falahati, A. Grövlen et al., “5G new radio: Unveiling
the essentials of the next generation wireless access technology,” arXiv
preprint arXiv:1806.06898, 2018.
[6] Z. Ding, X. Lei, G. K. Karagiannidis, R. Schober, J. Yuan, and V. K.
Bhargava, “A survey on non-orthogonal multiple access for 5G networks:
Research challenges and future trends,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas
in Communications, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 2181–2195, 2017.
349
Authorized licensed
View publication stats use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Omer Halisdemir Universitesi. Downloaded on November 10,2020 at 11:21:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[7] A. Osseiran, F. Boccardi, V. Braun, K. Kusume, P. Marsch, M. Maternia,
O. Queseth, M. Schellmann, H. Schotten, H. Taoka et al., “Scenarios for
5G mobile and wireless communications: the vision of the metis project,”
IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 26–35, 2014.
[8] T. O. Olwal, K. Djouani, and A. M. Kurien, “A survey of resource
management toward 5G radio access networks,” IEEE Communications
Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1656–1686, 2016.
[9] D. Jiang and G. Liu, “An overview of 5G requirements,” in 5G Mobile
Communications. Springer, 2017, pp. 3–26.
[10] J. G. Andrews, S. Buzzi, W. Choi, S. V. Hanly, A. Lozano, A. C. Soong,
and J. C. Zhang, “What will 5G be?” IEEE Journal on selected areas in
communications, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1065–1082, 2014.
[11] Y. Kabalci, “5G mobile communication systems: Fundamentals, chal-
lenges, and key technologies,” in Smart Grids and Their Communication
Systems. Springer, 2019, pp. 329–359.
[12] X. Dai, Z. Zhang, B. Bai, S. Chen, and S. Sun, “Pattern division
multiple access: A new multiple access technology for 5G,” IEEE Wireless
Communications, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 54–60, 2018.
[13] B. Toghi, M. Saifuddin, H. N. Mahjoub, M. Mughal, Y. P. Fallah, J. Rao,
and S. Das, “Multiple access in cellular V2X: Performance analysis in
highly congested vehicular networks,” 2018 IEEE Vehicular Networking
Conference (VNC), pp. 1–8, 2018.
[14] P. Ping and Y. Petrenko, “The flexible multiple access control algorithm
in 5th generation mobile wireless system,” Informatics, vol. 15, no. 3, pp.
93–101, 2018.
[15] I. SG05, “Draft new report ITU-R m.[imt-2020. tech perf req]-minimum
requirements related to technical performance for IMT-2020 radio inter-
face (s),” ITU-R SG05 Contribution, vol. 40, 2017.
[16] X. Lin, J. Li, R. Baldemair, J.-F. T. Cheng, S. Parkvall, D. C. Larsson,
H. Koorapaty, M. Frenne, S. Falahati, A. Grovlen et al., “5G new
radio: Unveiling the essentials of the next generation wireless access
technology,” IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 3, no. 3,
pp. 30–37, 2019.
[17] H. Ji, S. Park, J. Yeo, Y. Kim, J. Lee, and B. Shim, “Ultra-reliable and
low-latency communications in 5G downlink: Physical layer aspects,”
IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 124–130, 2018.
[18] F. Hasegawa, A. Taira, G. Noh, B. Hui, H. Nishimoto, A. Okazaki,
A. Okamura, J. Lee, and I. Kim, “High-speed train communications
standardization in 3GPP 5G NR,” IEEE Communications Standards
Magazine, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 44–52, 2018.
[19] E. Dahlman and S. Parkvall, “NR-the new 5G radio-access technology,”
2018 IEEE 87th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), pp. 1–6,
2018.
[20] B. Bertenyi, S. Nagata, H. Kooropaty, X. Zhou, W. Chen, Y. Kim, X. Dai,
and X. Xu, “5G NR radio interface,” Journal of ICT Standardization,
vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 31–58, 2018.
[21] C.-P. Li, J. Jiang, W. Chen, T. Ji, and J. Smee, “5G ultra-reliable and
low-latency systems design,” 2017 European Conference on Networks
and Communications (EuCNC), pp. 1–5, 2017.
[22] J. Campos, “Understanding the 5G NR physical layer,” Keysight Tech-
nologies release, 2017.
[23] 3GPP:, “NR; physical layer; general description,” Tech. Rep., TS 38.201,
2018.
[24] GPP:, “NR; services provided by the physical layer,” Tech. Rep., TS
38.202, 2018.
[25] GPP:, “NR; physical channels and modulation,” Tech. Rep., TS 38.211,
2018.
[26] GPP:, “NR; physical layer procedures for control,” Tech. Rep., TS 38.213,
2018.
[27] Y. Kabalcı and M. Ali, “Downlink performance evaluation of NOMA
systems based on different OFDM waveforms,” 2019 1st Global Power,
Energy and Communication Conference (GPECOM), pp. 106–111, 2019.
[28] Y. Kabalcı and M. Ali, “Investigation of inter-user interference effect
on 5G uplink communications,” 2019 1st Global Power, Energy and
Communication Conference (GPECOM), pp. 112–116, 2019.
[29] Y. Kabalcı and M. Ali, “Performance analysis of physical downlink shared
channels for 5G new radio,” International Turkic World Congress on
Science and Engineering, pp. 921-929, Nigde, Turkey, 17-18 June 2019.
[30] N. Hou, K. Niu, Z. He, and S. Sun, “Test and performance analysis
of PUSCH channel of LTE system,” in 2013 5th IEEE International
Symposium on Microwave, Antenna, Propagation and EMC Technologies
for Wireless Communications. IEEE, 2013, pp. 110–114.