You are on page 1of 27


Md. Ibrahim Khalil (062423) Hasib Md. Abid Bin Farid(062424) Adil Md. Jafor Sadik(062426)

Supervisor: Md. Tawhid Kawser Asst. Professor, EEE, IUT

CoCo-Supervisor: Abduhu Ruhul Hasin Lecturer, EEE, IUT

Collaborator: Md. Nur A Alam LTE Performance Engineer Nokia Sienems Networks Japan

Goal of this Thesis Work:
‡ Performance Analysis of, ‡ Different Transmission Modes of LTE (Completed in 7th semester). ‡ Round Robin and Proportional Fair Scheduling Algorithms for LTE with Proper MATLAB Simulation. ‡ Study of Game Theory in Wireless Network (LTE).

Recapitulation of Previous Semester Works.
Transmission Modes uses following MIMO Techniques: 1. Transmit Diversity 2. Spatial Multiplexing 3. Beamforming. Beamforming. ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ Transmission Mode 1: Using a single antenna at eNodeB. Transmission Mode 2: Transmit Diversity Transmission Mode 3: SU-MIMO Spatial Multiplexing: Open-Loop SUOpenTransmission Mode 4: SU-MIMO Spatial Multiplexing: Closed-Loop SUClosedTransmission Mode 5: MU-MIMO Spatial Multiplexing MUTransmission Mode 6: Beamforming using Closed-Loop Rank-1 Precoding: ClosedRankTransmission Mode 7: Beamforming using UE-Specific Reference Signals. UE-

Recap. (Cont..) Performance Analysis of Tr. Modes.
Simulations were done for the following scenarios: ‡ Pathloss Models: 1. Urban 2. Rural 3. Free Space ‡ For each Pathloss Model simulation was done for two UE positions. ² Far and Near to eNodeB.

Recap.(Cont..) Recap.(Cont..)
Free Space: Near Free Space: Far

Rural: Near

Rural: Far

Urban: Near

Urban: Far

Recap.(Cont..) Recap.(Cont..)
Decision Drawn by Interpreting the simulation results.
Near eNodB Free Space Far from eNodB

TxMode 2 TxMode 3

Near eNodB Urban Far from eNodB

TxMode 1 TxMode 2

Near eNodB Rural Far from eNodB

TxMode 2 TxMode 3

Recap.(Cont..) Recap.(Cont..)
UE Moving with a Constant Speed

Near eNodB Moving UE Far from eNodB

TxMode 2 TxMode 3

Performance Analysis of Scheduling Algorithms.
Function of Scheduler:
The scheduler attempts to make appropriate apportionment of the resources with certain objectives like, ‡ Required QoS for applications. applications. ‡ Optimized spectral efficiency ensuring high cell throughput under existing channel conditions. ‡ Fairness among UEs and applications. ‡ Limiting the impact of interference through special handling of cell edge users. ‡ Load balancing among cells. ‡ Algorithms which are considered: 1. Round Robin. 2. Proportional Fair.

Proportional Fair
‡ The scheduler can exercise Proportional Fair (PF) scheduling allocating more resources to a user with relatively better channel quality. ‡ Offers high cell throughput as well as fairness satisfactorily.

Round Robin.
‡ The scheduler assigns resources cyclically to the users without taking channel conditions into account. ‡ A simple procedure giving the best fairness. ‡ Assumed Performance: It would offer poor performance in terms of cell throughput.

Simulation Parameters.
Parameters Transmission bandwidth Inter-site distance Thermal noise density Receiver noise Àgure Simulation length UE speeds of interest UEs position BS Antenna pattern BS antenna gain Scheduler Thermal noise density TXmode nTX x nRX antennas eNodeB TX power Subcarrier averaging algorithm Uplink delay Macroscopic path loss model 15 DBi [1] Roundrobin, Proportional Fair -174dBm/Hz 1, 2 2x2 43dBm EESM 3TTIs Rural(L=128.1+37.6log10 (R)) Assumptions 2.0GHz 5MHz 500m 9dB 5000 TTI 5km/hr 20UEs/sector, located in target sector only.


Fig.: Mapping of UE under a eNodeB

Simulation Results.

Figure. Sim result for UE position 1

Figure. Sim result for UE position 2.

Simulation Results.

Figure. Simulation result for UE position 3

Figure. Simulation result for UE position 4

Observations & Decision.
‡ Proportional fair provides the UEs close to the eNodeB with higher throughput for both transmission mode 1 and 2. As the UE moves away from the eNodeB, proportional fair allocates less resource and provide reduced throughput due to weaker radio link. ‡ Data-rate increases for round - robin for UEs located further away from eNodeB. ‡ For SISO, overall cell throughput is higher in case of Proportional Fair. ‡ At the cell edge, a combination of round robin and transmit diversity achieves very good data rate.

RR and PF vs UE positions.

Blue: Proportional Fair Red: Round Robin

Study of Game Theory
‡ ‡ Classical applications: economics, but also politics and biology. Recently extensive research is going on to find out its implementation in Wireless Networks.

‡ GT will be used in LTE for developing autonomous, distributed, and flexible mobile networks where the network devices can make independent and rational strategic decisions

Basics of Game Theory
‡ Should a company invest in a new plant, or enter a new market, considering that the competition may make similar moves?

Basics of Game Theory (Cont..)
‡ Some terminology: - In a non-cooperative game, there exist a number of decision makers, called players, who have potentially conÁicting interests. ‡ Strategy - The move/ action of players. ‡ Cost - Represents the energy and computation spent. ‡ Payoff - Difference of the reward and the cost. ‡ Classification of Games: 1. Co-operative Games 2. Non Co-operative Games ‡ Player

The Forwarder·s Dilemma



‡ Assumption: The communication between a player and his receiver is possible only if the other player forwards the packet. ‡ If player -1 forwards the packet of player-2, it costs player-1 a Àxed cost c, 0 <c<< 1 ‡ If player-2 is enabled by player-1 then player-2 will get a reward of 1 ‡ Payoff = Reward - Cost

P-2 P-1 Forward Drop Forward Drop

(1-c, 1-c) (1, -c)

(-c, 1) (0, 0)

Game formulation: G = (P,S,U) P: set of players S: set of strategy functions U: set of payoff functions

The Joint Packet Forwarding Game





‡ Reward for packet reaching the destination: 1 ‡ Cost of packet forwarding: c (0 < c << 1)

P-2 P-1 Forward Drop



(1-c, 1-c) (0, 0)

(-c, 0) (0, 0)

The Multiple Access game

Time-division channel

Reward for successful transmission: 1 Cost of transmission: c (0 < c << 1)

P-2 P-1 Quiet Transmit



(0, 0) (1-c, 0)

(0, 1-c) (-c, -c)

The Jamming game
Transmitter Two channels: C1 and C2
Jammer transmitter: ‡ reward for successful transmission: 1 ‡ loss for jammed transmission: -1 jammer: ‡ reward for successful jamming: 1 ‡ loss for missed jamming: -1

P-2 P-1 C1 C2



(-1, 1) (1, -1)

(1, -1) (-1, 1)

There is no pure-strategy (Nash equilibrium) P=1/2; q=1/2, is a Nash equilibrium

p: probability of transmit on C1 for P-1 q: probability of transmit on C1 for P-2

Dynamic Games
‡ Model for sequential decisions ‡ Game represented by a tree ‡ Example: The Sequential Multiple Access game: Blue plays first, then Green plays.

Time-division channel

strategies for P-1: T, Q strategies for P-2: TT, TQ, QT and QQ

P-2 T

P-1 T Q


P-2 Q

(-c,-c) (1-c,0) (0,1-c) (0,0)

Implementation in LTE or Wireless Network
‡ Power Control ‡ Link level simulator is not adequate for proper simulation. ‡ Define numerous Games and run simulation on them. ‡ ‡ ‡ Scheduling and Resource Allocation. Implementation in Transmission Modes. System Optimization- Autonomously governed devices. (Base stations will be a plug and play device.)

A part of this thesis work has been accepted for publication in the ´International Conference on Future Information Technology,µ which will be held during 14-15 December 2010, in Changsha, China. (ICFIT, 2010) Titled ´Performance Comparison between Round Robin and Proportional Fair Scheduling Methods for LTE.µ Mohammad T. Kawser, Abduhu. R. Hasin, Hasib M. A. B. Farid, Adil M. J. Sadik, Ibrahim K. Razu.