HOW MUCH TRAINING IS REQUIRED FOR MULTIUSER
MIMO?
Thomas L. Marzetta
Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
marzetta@lucent.com
ABSTRACT
An M -element antenna array (the base station)
transmits, on the downlink, K < M sequences of QAM
symbols selectively and simultaneously to
K autonomous single-antenna terminals through a
linear pre-coder that is the pseudo-inverse of an
estimate of the forward channel matrix. We assume
time-division duplex (TDD) operation, so the base
station derives its channel estimate from Trp pilot
symbols which the terminals transmit on the reverse
link. A coherence interval of T symbols is expended as
follows: Trp reverse pilot symbols, one symbol for
computations, and (T -1- Trp ) forward QAM symbols
for each terminal. For a given coherence interval,
number of base station antennas, and forward- and
reverse-SINR's we determine the optimum number of
terminals to serve simultaneously and the optimum
number of reverse pilot symbols to employ by choosing
these parameters to maximize a lower bound on the net
sum-throughput. The lower bound rigorously accounts
for channel estimation error, and is valid for all
SINR 's. Surprisingly it is always advantageous to
increase the number of base station antennas, even
when the reverse SINR is low and the channel estimate
poor: greater numbers of antennas enable us to climb
out of the noise and to serve more terminals. Even
within short coherence intervals (T = 10 symbols) and
with low SINR's (-10.0 dB reverse, 0.0 dB forward)
given large numbers of base station antennas
(M >16) it is both feasible and advantageous to learn
the channel and to serve a multiplicity of terminals
simultaneously as well.
1. INTRODUCTION
Broadcast MIMO is characterized by an array-equipped
base station transmitting multiple bit streams selectively
and simultaneously to autonomous terminals. The
concept appears to have originated with Alexanderson in
1919 [1], motivated by a very modem desire to increase
throughput in a limited spectrum. Recent work has
provided a comprehensive theory [2]-[4]. Under
favorable conditions the broadcast sum-capacity is
comparable to the capacity of a point-to-point MIMO
1-4244-0785-0/06/$20.00
link having the same number of transmit and receive
antennas. There are a number of advantages in broadcast
MIMO compared with point-to-point MIMO. Terminals
can be simple and inexpensive. Point-to-point MIMO
can fail to deliver the desired high-thoughput in line-of-
sight propagation conditions; under the same conditions
broadcast MIMO continues to provide high throughput
provided the angular separation of the terminals exceeds
the Rayleigh resolution of the transmit array. Broadcast
MIMO seamlessly handles the transition between line-
of-sight and rich-scattering propagation.
The principle drawback of broadcast MIMO is that the
base station has to know the forward channel. It is
recognized that the acquisition of channel knowledge is
facilitated by time-division duplex (TDD) operation.
Reciprocity implies that the reverse channel matrix is
equal to the transpose of the forward channel matrix, so
the required channel information may be obtained by the
terminals transmitting pilots on the reverse link.
Nevertheless there is a widespread notion that a) under
high mobility conditions there is not enough time before
the channel changes to transmit reverse pilots and then
transmit the forward data streams, b) that under low
SINR conditions an excessive number of pilot symbols
are required to obtain a channel estimate of sufficiently
good quality to enable selective transmission of the data
streams, and c) that under low SINR's there is no
advantage in multiplexing operation. We dispel these
notions by addressing directly the question: how much
training is required for TDD broadcast MIMO?
2. FORWARD AND REVERSE LINKS
A base station that comprises M antennas communicates
with K autonomous single-antenna terminals. The
forward link propagation is characterized by a
K x M propagation matrix, H . Our treatment makes no
distinction between a flat-fading channel and a
frequency-dependent channel. In the latter case H is a
function of frequency typically handled by OFDM. We
further assume Rayleigh fading such that the elements of
H are iid CN(0,1) (i.e. zero-mean, circularly-symmetric
complex Gaussian). We assume TDD so that the reverse
link propagation matrix is the transpose of the forward
propagation matrix.
359
On the foreward link the signal received by the k -th 1 1
terminal is 2 2
M R Channel 3
Xfk = Ihkmsfm +wfk, k =1,...,K. (1) Estimator 3
m=l
M K
The components of the additive noise are iid, CN(0,1),
and there is an average power constraint
Fig. 1 Terminals transmit orthogonal pilot sequences on
the reverse link; through TDD reciprocity the base station
E { ISfm } 1 (2) estimates the forward channel.
tm=1J
Note that the minimum required number of pilot symbols
so that the total forward transmitted power is is equal to the number of terminals, and is independent
independent of the number of base station antennas. The of the number of base station antennas. Likewise the
constant pf is the forward SINR at each terminal. On the mean-square estimation error is independent of the
reverse link the signal received by the m -th base station number of base station antennas.
antenna is
4. FORWARD LINK: PRE-
K
Xrm =
E hksrk + Wrm, m = 1,...,M. (3) CONDITIONING AND QAM SYMBOL
k=1 TRANSMISSION
Again the components of the additive noise are iid, The base station transmits QAM symbols on the forward
CN(O, 1). The power constraint is link selectively and simultaneously to the terminals
through a MxK pre-conditioning matrix, A, that is
E{ISrk I2= 1, k=1,... ,K, . (4) proportional to the pseudo-inverse of the estimate for the
forward channel,
which differs from the forward power constraint: note HH H'
that the total reverse link power increases with the A =
(7)
number of terminals. The constant Pr is the SINR which (jtr fiH
each terminal by itself is capable of producing at each The pred-conditioning ostensibly diagonalizes the
base station antenna. forward channel. The normalization is chosen so that
3. REVERSE LINK PILOTS tr(AHA)= 1. As show in Fig. 2, during each forward
The terminals transmit, on the reverse link, a sequence of transmission symbol the base station multiplies a K x 1
vector of QAM symbols by the pre-conditioning matrix
known pilot signals of duration Trp > K symbols as to produce an M x 1 signal vector which drives the
shown in Fig. 1. The K x Trp pilot signal is antennas, Sf = A q, where the QAM symbols are
Trp uH where T' is a Trp x K unitary matrix, independent, each with expected power of one,
E qk 12 = 1, k = 1,..., K. The signals that are received by
V-fHV' = IK, the superscript "H" denotes
and the terminals, expressed as a vector, are
"conjugate-transpose". The use of orthogonal spreading Xf = pf H.A.q + wf. (8)
sequences permits the terminals to transmit
simultaneously at their full powers of one without 1I 1
interfering with each other. The received Mx Trp pilot 2
Linear 2
signal is q2 Precoder 3
qK AMJXK 3
Yr = rrpHT Vf + Vr (5)
A M K
where V, is the additive noise, which, after de-spreading,
yields the minimum-mean-square linear estimator for the Fig. 2 Base station transmits QAM symbols through a
channel matrix, linear pre-coding matrix on forward link to their respective
terminals.
Hi P= X .T yT
J±PrTrp r (6)

360

5. EXTRA BASE STATION ANTENNAS
ARE AL WA YS BENEFICIAL
From the standpoint of the reverse link pilot, extra base
station antennas are cost-free. We demonstrate
heuristically, in the asymptotic region where M/K >> 1,
that there is a positive benefit in having extra base
station antennas. We note that the elements of H are iid
and proportional to CN(0, 1) random variables. Therefore
lim HH x IK, so the pre-conditioning matrix (7)
M K->co
is proportional to the conjugate-transpose of the channel
estimate. Note in (8) that the effective forward channel is
a K x K matrix that is equal to the product of the actual
propagation matrix and the pre-conditioning matrix,
G _H A (9)
In the asymptotic regime, M/K >> 1, we have
G = H. A c H prcpH+JT Vr )H
prrpH H + H VAF'
H *
We have H -HH M IK, while the elements of
H *.VrVW* are uncorrelated with standard deviation equal
to M. Hence Gc,oc( PrTcrpIK+ ZMz)
where the elements of Z are zero-mean, and
uncorrelated with unit-variance. Consequently the
channel information can be arbitrarily bad, but the use of
more and more antennas in the base station will produce
a better and better approximation to the ideal diagonal
effective channel. In addition the effective gain increases
and more terminals can be served.
6. LOWER BOUND ON SUM-
CAPACITY
We derive a rigorous lower bound on the sum-capacity
by subtracting and adding the mean of the effective
forward channel (9), following the approach of [6].
Although the terminals do not know the effective
channel, they do know its mean. All other terms are
treated as effective noise. We define a random scalar, 0,
as follows
0 (trH(ZZ)
K ) 1
where Z is a K x M random matrix whose elements
iid, CN(0, 1). The lower bound on sum throughput is
Csum > K - lo02 { + l I PrT arpb}]
where 0 is defined by (10).
7. OPTIMIZATION OF NET
THROUGHPUT FOR SHORT
COHERENCE INTERVALS
We now assume that the channel stays constant for
T symbols. Typically a symbol occupies approximately
fifty-microseconds. Within this coherence interval three
activities occur, as shown in Fig. 3: the transmission of
Trp reverse pilots, the computation of the channel
estimate and the pre-conditioning matrix (assumed to
occupy one symbol) and the transmission of the QAM
symbols to the terminals.
<- coherence interval (T OFDM symbols) -
rp
IC I I T- 1 -rp
reverse pilots F\ forward QAM symbols
computation
Fig. 3 During the interval over which the channel is
constant the terminals have to transmit reverse pilots, the
base station has to compute the channel estimate and the
pre-conditioning matrix, and the base station has to
transmit QAM symbols to the terminals.
We assume a given number of base station antennas,
M, and given values for the forward- and reverse-
SINR's, pf and Pr We simultaneously choose the
number of terminals to serve, and the number of reverse
pilots, to maximize the net throughput,
Cnet = max<
Krp T )PCsum(K,Trp) (
(12)
subject to: K < M, Crp 2 K
where Csum ( ) is given by (1 1).
8. NUMERICAL RESULTS
Figs. 4 and 5 display the capacity lower bound (11) as a
function of the number of terminals served for various
numbers of transmit antennas and for two SINRs. The
throughput increases monotonically with the number of
base station antennas, and even at low SINRs it is
advantageous to serve more than one terminal
simultaneously. Figs. 6 and 7 display the optimized net
throughput (12) as a function of the forward SINR for
various numbers of base station antennas and for two
coherence intervals. The dashed curve ("no MIMO")
corresponds to one antenna transmitting to one single-
(10) antenna terminal in conjunction with an optimized
are forward pilot. Large numbers of antennas (8 or 16) give
big throughput improvements compared with "no
MIMO". The net throughput increases with the duration
of the coherence interval, which permits the
( simultaneous servicing of a greater number of terminals.
Fast mobiles have to be served in short slots, but for
maximum throughput slow terminals should be served in
longer slots. For the scenarios of Figs. 6 and 7, Figs. 8,9
and 10,11 display the optimum number of terminals to
361
serve and the optimum number of reverse link pilots to
use. Over-training typically does not pay.

9. CONCLUSIONS
Even in short coherence intervals (say five-hundred
micoseconds) and low SINR's (minus-ten dB reverse,
and zero dB forward) a base station comprising sixteen
or more antennas can both learn the forward channel via
TDD reciprocity, and transmit, with high aggregate
throughput, multiple data streams to multiple single-
antenna terminals. It is always advantageous to increase
the number of base station antennas. One can envision a
new type of cellular structure that comprises inexpensive
single-antenna terminals working with base stations
having fifty or one-hundred antennas, each driven by its
own tower-top amplifier of power no greater than a
typical cell-phone power amplifier. A component of such
a system is an entirely new type of MAC layer that
employs a variable-length slot structure and that groups
terminals for simultaneous service according to their
mobility.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author thanks A. Ashikhmin, S. Borst, H. Huang, A.
Kogiantis, G. Kramer, V. Purohit, D. Romain, J. Salz, S.
Shamai, S. Simon, E. Soljanin, R. Soni, and A. van
Wijngaarden for helpful discussions concerning this
material.

REFERENCES
[1] E. F. W. Alexanderson, "Transoceanic radio Fig. 4 Lower bound on sum-capacity versus number of
communication" Proc. IEEE, vol. 72, no. 5, May 1984; terminals being served for {1,2,4,8,16} base station
reprinted from Trans. American Institute of Electrical antennas, where forward SINR is 0.0 dB and reverse SINR
Engineers, vol. 38, part II, July to Dec. 1919. is -10.0 dB. Effects of imperfect channel knowledge are
[2] G. Caire and S. Shamai, "On the achievable throughput of a rigorously accounted for. Number of reverse pilot symbols
multi-antenna Gaussian broadcast channel", IEEE Trans. equals number of terminals.
Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 7, July, 2003.
[3] P. Viswanath and D. N. C. Tse, "Sum capacity of a vector ISen"
Ma a ton Kngle-antnhha
a minah. K ePNOI
Gaussian broadcanst channel and uplink-downlink duality",
IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 8, Aug. 2003.
[4] S. Vishwanath, N. Jindal, and A. Goldsmith, "Duality,
achievable rates, and sum-rate capacity of Gaussian MIMO
broadcast channels", IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 49,
no. 10, Oct. 2003.
[5] M. Medard, "The effect upon channel capacity in wireless
communications of perfect and imperfect knowledge of the
channel", IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 46, no. 3, May
2000.
[6] B. Hassibi and B. M. Hochwald, "How much training is
needed in multiple-antenna wireless links?, IEEE Trans.
Information Theory, vol. 49, no. 4, April 2003.
[7] 0. Simeone, "Linear signal processing for single/multi-user
MIMO communication systems over frequency-selective Fig. 5 Lower bound on sum-capacity versus number of
channels", Doctoral Dissertation, Politecnio di Milano, 2005. terminals being served for {1,2,4,8,16} base station
[8] T. L. Marzetta, "BLAST training: estimating channel antennas, where forward SINR is 10.0 dB and reverse
characteristics for high capacity space-time wireless", Proc. SINR is 0.0 dB. Effects of imperfect channel knowledge are
3 7th Annu. Allerton Conf Communications, Control, and rigorously accounted for. Number of reverse pilot symbols
Computing, Sept. 22-24, 1999. equals number of terminals.

362
 t KP41m s-gle-aente3
, T.....
ria!m,
E .1.
rhit ar.31enn
"MI to kDplim sigie-3an3tenh
S0 te3t
''~I"""

Fig. 6 Net throughput (bits/sec/Hz) versus forward SINR Fig. 9 Optimum number of terminals to serve versus
(dB) for {1,2,4,8,16} base station antennas and a 10-symbol forward SINR (dB) for the scenario of Fig. 7: 20-symbol
coherence interval. The reverse SINR is ten dB smaller coherence interval. M = 1: solid, black; M = 2: dot, red;
than the forward SINR. M = 4: dash-dot, cyan; M = 8: dash, green; M = 16:
solid, blue.
M tklromt antna1h6{4
s s gW-46100
in>tte la3finals
3, .,

Fig. 7 Net throughput (bits/sec/Hz) versus forward SINR Fig. 10 Optimum number of reverse pilots versus forward
(dB) for {1,2,4,8,16} base station antennas and a 20-symbol SINR (dB) for the scenario of Fig. 6: 10-symbol coherence
coherence interval. The reverse SINR is ten dB smaller interval. M = 1: solid, black; M = 2: dot, red; M = 4:
than the forward SINR.
dash-dot, cyan; M = 8 : dash, green; M = 16 : solid, blue.
3laE3m3ta3:e3n3na r I r
M I Vsingre-ant6nna Vmirab
5 . ... .. , .v .v. ....... ...... M9. Iraniit <anienas ib %tpi3mu.m single-antnh thm3n a
Df

M-A

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I m

Fig. 8 Optimum number of terminals to serve versus

forward SINR (dB) for the scenario of Fig. 6: 10-symbol Fig. 11 Optimum number of reverse pilots versus forward
coherence interval. M = 1: solid, black; M = 2 : dot, red; SINR (dB) for the scenario of Fig. 7: 20-symbol coherence
M = 4: dash-dot, cyan; M = 8: dash, green; M = 16: interval. M = 1: solid, black; M = 2: dot, red; M = 4:
solid, blue. dash-dot, cyan; M = 8 : dash, green; M = 16 : solid, blue.

363