Energy Efficiency for Bisection based Power
Allocation with Proportional Fairness in
Relay-assisted LTE-A Downlink System
Hammad Hassan1 , Irfan Ahmed2 , Rizwan Ahmad1 , Waqas Ahmed3 , Muhammad Mahtab Alam4
1
School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad Pakistan
2
Electrical Engineering Department, Higher Colleges of Technology, Abu Dhabi, UAE
3
Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PIEAS), Islamabad, Pakistan
4
Thomas Johann Seebeck Department of Electronics, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn 19086, Estonia
Email: [13mseehhassan,rizwan.ahmad]@seecs.edu.pk, iahmed3@hct.ac.ae, waqas@pieas.edu.pk, muhammad.alam@ttu.ee
Abstract—LTE-A systems with Orthogonal Frequency Division
Multiplexing (OFDM) based Resource Blocks (RBs) allocation
flexibility offers Spectral Efficiency (SE), in the meantime Energy
Efficiency (EE) has also become a critical metric for future
cellular systems design. So in order to achieve EE and at the
same time balance of throughput and fairness also to be ensured,
we have investigated various RBs allocation schemes in LTE-A
networks. Best performing among these are Hybrid proportional
fairness scheme SAMM and Maximum Throughput (MT). Both
these schemes are simulated with equal power allocation and
with Bisection based Optimal Power Allocation (BOPA) based
on water filling principle. Our proposed scheme SAMM BOPA
gives 10% gain in SE and 26% power saving when compared with
MT BOPA. Whereas when compared SAMM with equal power
allocation to all RBs our proposed scheme gives 77% increase in
EE at the cost of 6.9% decreased SE.
I. I NTRODUCTION
LTE-A allows relays to be incorporated into the network
to take full advantage of channel diversity and increase the
throughput of cell edge users. These are layer 3 (L3) relays
that decode and forward the data to a user [1]. Relay placement
is crucial to improve overall throughput of the system and
therefore, optimum position of the relay should be calculated.
Resource Block (RB) allocation between direct link that is
Base Station (BS) - User Equipment (UE) and two hop
link that is (BS) - Relay Node (RN) - UE can be done
independently or in a shared manner.
In [2] the author has presented a thorough comparison of
basic resource block allocation schemes which are Round
Robin (RR), Proportional Fairness (PF), Maximum Through-
put (MT), Maximum Minimum (MM) and SAMM. System
model considered LTE system with basic resource block struc-
ture [3], 5 MHz bandwidth with fixed 10 users and uniformly
placed over the distance from BS. These schemes have been
compared in terms of sum throughput, individual user through-
put and fairness based on JFI (Jain’s fairness index). Results
show better throughput for SAMM at the cost of fairness
as compared to PF. Cell edge users show some throughput
978-1-5386-7312-6/18/$31.00 2018
c IEEE
gains due to proportional fairness. However, this scheme is not
targeting energy efficiency. Authors present an energy efficient
RB allocation algorithm by resource-reservation, credit-driven,
weight- assignment, and RB-matching mechanisms in a single
cell with base-station. It does not consider the relay-assisted
communications [4]. Alternate to improve throughput of cell
edge users is LTE-A which uses relay and it follows the
same RB structure as in [3]. Authors in [5] considered energy
efficiency for generic OFDMA based downlink system. They
present Bisection based Optimal Power Allocation (BOPA)
algorithm for a given a subcarrier assignment. BOPA works as
an iterative approach based on water filling principle for power
allocation according to the highest rate user. This will benefit
in two folds that is fairness for all users and a proportional
rate constraint to assign a priority to any user.
However, to the best of our knowledge no available literature
discusses LTE-A with L3 relays for throughput and EE consid-
eration. In this work, an energy efficient algorithm for LTE-A
system with L3 relays is considered. Performance comparison
in terms of throughput, fairness, power consumption, EE and
SE is shown between two best performing schemes i.e. SAMM
and MT. The rest of the paper is organized as follows, system
model is described in section II with topology and algorithms
for MT, SAMM and BOPA. Performance evaluation is given
in section III with simulation parameters and graphical results
followed by the conclusions in section IV.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
Consider a single cell scenario of an LTE-A system with a
BS supported by L3 relay. Relays assumed here are of In-band
type 1b [1] and full duplex placed in the center of BS to the
most distant user. A total of K users and N RBs are considered
with users placed at a uniform distance from BS with topology
RN BS
shown in fig. 1. Ptotal and Ptotal are the total power at which
RN and BS transmit respectively. B is the system bandwidth
and W = N B
is the RB bandwidth.hRelay
k,n
link Direct link
and hk,n
are random channel coefficients for user k where k ∈ {1..., K}
on RB n where n ∈ {1..., N } for RN and BS respectively.
Relay link Direct link
gk,n and gk,n are channel gains [2] for user k
on RB n for RN and BS respectively, where channel gain in-
RN/BS
corporates power assigned pk,n and pathloss exponents to
Relay link/Direct link
the channel coefficients hk,n . The capacity
of user k is given by the Shannon Capacity formulas as
N
B 
Rk = μk,n log2 (1 + SN Rk,n ) (1)
N n=1
where μk,n is the RB assignment indicator set, SN Rk,n is the
maximum signal-to-noise ratio for user k out of two possible
links and is given by
Direct link
SN Rk,n = max(E{SN Rk,n }, E{SN Rk,nRelay link
})
(2)
Relay link Fig. 1. Topology.
SN Rk,n is the signal-to-noise ratio for user k via relay
Link and is given by
than the direct link. In second TTI, RN-UE data will be sent.
Relay link backhaul link access link
SN Rk,n = min(SN Rk,n , SN Rk,n ) Transmitter will choose the path with best channel co-efficient
(3) in each TTI, it will minimize the possibility of interference
such that for In-band type of RNs. Full duplexity ensures that RN
BS/RN backhaul link/access link
backhaul link/access link pk,n gk,n may handle uplink data simultaneously with downlink data
SN Rk,n = B
N0 N so that from second TTI onwards BS-RN transmission will be
Direct link pBS Direct
k,n gk,n
link
SN Rk,n = B
carried out simultaneously with RN-UE transmission. We are
N0 N
(4) considering an OFDM based system with MQAM modulation,
using Equation (1) we can calculate the throughput of user k
The Spectrum Efficiency (SE) in terms of bits/s/Hz of the on RB n and this is done for both redundant paths. Capacity
system can be expressed as bottleneck is eliminated via two redundant links having differ-
K 
 N ent channel co-efficients (channel diversity). In first time-slot,
SE = μk,n log2 (1 + SN Rk,n ) (5) RB allocation is done between directly connected UEs and
k=1 n=1 backhaul link of Relay connected UEs. From second time-slot
Likewise, Energy Efficiency (EE) in terms of bits/s/W atts onwards, RB allocation for Relay based access link UE’s and
and corresponding EE optimization problem can be written as directly connected UE’s is done simultaneously. RB allocation
is done via MT or SAMM with equal power allocation to all
 N
K  K 
 N
RBs or power allocated based on BOPA as explained below.
max EE = μk,n log2 (1 + SN Rk,n )/ pk,n
Maximum Throughput: In MT we aim to maximize the
k=1 n=1 k=1 n=1
(6) sum throughput of the system. The maximum throughput
N
K 
criterion in mathematical form is given as Dk = argmax (Rk )
 where Dk is RB allocation matrix and Rk is rate matrix.
subject to pk,n ≤ Ptotal
k=1 n=1 SAMM: In SAMM [2] PF and MT are run one after the
K
 other, i.e. in first TTI PF run for K users and in second TTI
pk,n ≥ 0, μk,n = {0, 1}, μk,n = 1 MT run for K −1 users ignoring the user with highest through-
k=1 put in previous TTI. This results in maximizing fairness and
R1 : R2 : .........RK = α1 : α2 : .........αK throughput alternatively in each TTI.
BOPA Algorithm: Given the RB allocation from MT or
where αk is the proportional rate constraint [6]. Rayleigh SAMM and throughput of each user at equal power allocated
fading is assumed between the BS-RN-UE links. We assume to all RBs we can calculate λ ”rate parameter” as given below:
that channel state information (CSI) is known to the receiver
only and transmitter has exchanged it over an X2 interface R1 R2 RK
λk = = = ... = (7)
[7]. It is also assumed that the RB allocation decision and α1 α2 αK
assignment is done in less than channel coherence time so where Rk is the rate of the each user and αk is proportional
that CSI information can be used to the best of interest. This rate constraint set for fairness [5]. Optimal Power allocation
also poses a limitation on the RB allocation decision algorithm is water filling operation and obtained for single user as
complexity such that it may not be too complex to be resolved  
1 1
in due time (channel coherence time). RN based transmission p̂k,n = max − ,0 (8)
will be carried out in two TTI’s for the first time only. In first θ ln 2 gk,n
TTI, BS will send only those users data to RN that will be where θ is lagrangian multiplier and its value is chosen such
in close proximity of RN or have better channel conditions that Rk is satisfied. Hence, the user power can be expressed
 TABLE I TABLE II
BOPA ALGORITHM SIMULATION PARAMETERS

PARAMETER VALUE
Require: p̂k,n is the optimal power allocation matrix. Cell Radius 1 Km
Ensure: Prior RB allocation through any algorithm and given Noise Density (σ) -171 dBm/Hz

as Dk. No of users (K) 10

1: Getting all the λ then calculate λmax which gives the max
Bandwidth (B) 5 MHz
Number of resource blocks (RB) (N) 25
energy Efficiency by substitution in equation (6). No of subcarriers per RB 12
2: Using λmax set user rate as αk λmax , do water filling Subcarrier bandwidth 15 KHz

using equation (10) and calculate f (λmax ) based on BS Transmitter Power 46 dBm
Relay Power 34 dBm
equation (14). TTI duration 0.5 ms
3: If f (λmax ) ≥ 0 Relay distance from BS 0.55Km
4: Return ; p̂k,n Bit Error Rate (BER) 10−3

5: Else Go to Step 7; OFDM symbols per TTI 7

Relay Type (In-band / Out-band Type 1 / Type 2) In-band with Type 1b (full duplex)
6: End if
7: Set λhigh = λmax , λlow = 0, λcurrent = λmax /2
7
8: Repeat: Set user rate according to αk λmax , do water 10
average Maximum Throughput equal power
filling using equation (10) and calculate f (λmax ) based 10
6 average Maximum Throughput BOPA
average SAMM equal power
on equation (14). average SAMM BOPA
9: If f (λcurrent ) > 0 10
5

10: Set λlow = λcurrent Users throughput in bps 4

11: Else Set λhigh = λcurrent 10

12: End if 3
10
13: Set λcurrent = λhigh + λlow / 2
14: Return p̂k,n 10
2

15: End if
1
10

as Pk (λαk |Dk ) and the 

total transmit power PT (λ) can be
0
10

rewritten as PT (λ) = Pk (λαk |Dk ). Energy Efficiency −1

k∈K 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
can be given as user rate divided by power consumed to User
achieve that rate.

λ k∈K αk Fig. 2. User vs Throughput averaged over thousand times for SAMM and
EE(λ) = (9) MT with equal power and BOPA.
PT
And total transmit power is also limited by λ ≤ λmax .
5
x 10
10
According to [8] if transmit power PT (λ) is strictly convex SAMM Equal Power
SAMM BOPA
in rate then EE(λ) is quasi-concave, global optimal solution 9
MT Equal Power
proof is given in appendix of paper [6] 8 MT BOPA
 
Energy Efficiency bits/sec/Wats

 1 + p̂k,n gk,n 7
f (λ) = PT (λ) − λ ln 2 minn∈Dk αk
gk,n 6
k∈K
(10) 5

III. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 4

A single cell is considered, consisting of a BS, RN and UEs 3

equipped with Omni-directional antennas. The throughput,
2
energy and spectral efficiency is averaged over 1000 TTIs, with
the duration of a TTI being 0.5 ms. Table II below summarizes 1
all simulation parameters used to derive results shown next. 0
Fig. 2 shows the result of average throughput for MT and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Users
SAMM with equal power and BOPA based power allocation.
It can be seen that SAMM curves remain on top of MT curves
Fig. 3. Users vs Energy Efficiency (bits per second per watts) for all four
for most of the users due to inherent fairness which ensures schemes.
all users get due share of RBs.
Fig. 3 shows energy efficiency per user in bits per seconds
per watts. SAMM BOPA outperforms for initial users and remains considerably lower for rest of the users. Whereas MT
 Jains fairnes of Energy Efficiency
1.4 0.5
SAMM Equal Power
SAMM BOPA 0.45
1.2 MT Equal Power
MT BOPA 0.4
Spectral Efficiency bits/sec/Hz

1 0.35

Jains fairness Index

0.3
0.8
0.25
0.6
0.2

0.4 0.15

0.1
0.2
0.05

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4
Users SAMM Equal Power SAMM BOPA MT Equal Power MT BOPA

Fig. 4. Users vs Spectral Efficiency (bits per second per hertz) for all four Fig. 6. Jain’s fairness Index for Energy Efficiency.
schemes.

Jains fairnes of Throughput

0.35 IV. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we have investigated efficient RB allocation
0.3
algorithms that is SAMM and MT and for optimum power
allocation to cater for energy efficiency we have used optimal
0.25
BOPA algorithm. Simulation results show that SAMM BOPA
Jains fairness Index

gives 10% gain in SE and 26% power saving when compared

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0 “Hybrid frequency-time domain proportional fair resource allocation
1 2
SAMM Equal Power SAMM BOPA
Fig. 5. Jain’s fairness Index for Throughput.
BOPA compared to all other schemes performs better for every
user of the system with consistency due to convergence of
BOPA to maximize throughput and minimize energy. Fig. 4
shows spectral efficiency in bits per second per hertz which is
higher for users close to BS due to low path loss. SE is best
for MT equal power followed by MT BOPA. A tradeoff of
EE and SE can be seen here where EE is best for MT BOPA
followed by MT equal power in Fig. 4.
Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 shows fairness Index using Jain’s fairness
Index [9]. Fig. 5 shows SAMM has better fairness in terms of
throughput due to PF in its algorithm and Fig. 6 shows more
fair EE for MT due to better overall throughput. It can be
seen that SAMM with BOPA competes well in sum throughput
with very less consumed power and best EE. Tradeoff has to
be done on SE. Whereas overall considering EE per Hertz for
both EE and SE, MT BOPA performs overall best than all four
schemes.
with MT BOPA. Whereas when compared SAMM with equal
power allocation to all RBs our proposed scheme gives 77%
increase in EE at the cost of 6.9% decreased SE.
R EFERENCES
[1] “3gpp tr 36.836, mobile relay for evolved universal terrestrial radio
access, release 12, v2.0.1 (2012-10).”
[2] A. Al-amri, S. Al-zahrani, M. Al-harthi, M. al qarni, and I. Ahmed,
3 4 scheme for lte downlink,” in 2012 18th IEEE International Conference
MT Equal Power MT BOPA on Networks (ICON), Dec 2012, pp. 286–290.
[3] “3gpp release 8.” [Online]. Available: http://www.3gpp.org/Release-8
[4] W. YouChiun and J. DaiRong, “Efficient allocation of lte
downlink spectral resource to improve fairness and throughput,”
International Journal of Communication Systems, vol. 30,
no. 14, p. e3287, e3287 dac.3287. [Online]. Available:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dac.3287
[5] Z. Ren, S. Chen, B. Hu, and W. Ma, “Energy-efficient resource allocation
in downlink ofdm wireless systems with proportional rate constraints,”
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 2139–
2150, 2014.
[6] Z. Shen, J. G. Andrews, and B. L. Evans, “Adaptive resource allocation
in multiuser ofdm systems with proportional rate constraints,” IEEE
transactions on wireless communications, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 2726–2737,
2005.
[7] S. Essassi, M. Siala, S. Cherif, R. Hamila, and M. O. Hasna, “Centralized-
decentralized rb allocation based on genetic algorithm and coordination
over x2 interface in lte uplink,” in 2015 International Symposium on
Wireless Communication Systems (ISWCS). IEEE, 2015, pp. 121–125.
[8] G. Miao, N. Himayat, and G. Y. Li, “Energy-efficient link adaptation in
frequency-selective channels,” IEEE Transactions on Communications,
vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 545–554, 2010.
[9] R. Jain, D.-M. Chiu, and W. R. Hawe, A quantitative measure of fairness
and discrimination for resource allocation in shared computer system.
Eastern Research Laboratory, Digital Equipment Corporation Hudson,
MA, 1984, vol. 38.