Permutation
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 23

PERMUTATION PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 78 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

PERMUTATION. Evaluation Scenarios. BW = 10 MHz, N PRU = 48 (N 1 = 4, N 2 = 1). Scenario1 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – equal size). Scenario 3 (Reuse 1). Scenario 2 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – unequal size). Scenario 4 (Reuse 3). Evaluation Criteria Description. Diversity gain for distributed resources

Download Presentation

PERMUTATION

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Permutation

PERMUTATION


Evaluation scenarios

Evaluation Scenarios

BW = 10 MHz, NPRU = 48 (N1 = 4, N2 = 1)

Scenario1 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – equal size)

Scenario 3 (Reuse 1)

Scenario 2 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – unequal size)

Scenario 4 (Reuse 3)


Evaluation criteria description

Evaluation Criteria Description

  • Diversity gain for distributed resources

    • Calculate the equivalent SNR of each LRU and plot the histogram

    • Find 10% outage SNR, i.e, the SNR value which can be achieved with outage 0.1.

  • Scheduling gain for contiguous resources

    • Calculate the equivalent SNR of each LRU and select the best LRU for each FFR. Plot the histogram of the best SNR.

    • Find 10% outage SNR, i.e, the (best) SNR value which can be achieved with outage 0.1.

  • Hit ratio for distributed resources

    • Average number of subcarrier pairs hit by neighboring cell.


Permutation

DL Permutation Demonstration Model

DLRU: Distributed LRU


Part i comparison of subband partitioning and miniband permutation proposals

Part IComparison of Subband Partitioning and Miniband Permutation Proposals


Comparison of subband partitioning and miniband permutations

Comparison of Subband Partitioning and Miniband Permutations

  • Compare Intel1, Intel2, LGE, Samsung, Motorola

  • Same subcarrier perm used for all proposals

    • perm_seq() israndom permutation

    • Shift by symbol and subframe index according to Intel’s formula.


Study 1 10 snr values

Study 1: 10% SNR Values

Scenario1 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – equal size)

Scenario 3 (Reuse 1)

Scenario 2 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – unequal size)

Scenario 4 (Reuse 3)


Diversity and scheduling gain in scenario 1

Diversity and scheduling gain in Scenario 1


Diversity and scheduling gain in scenario 2

Diversity and scheduling gain in Scenario 2


Diversity and scheduling gain in scenario 3

Diversity and scheduling gain in Scenario 3


Diversity and scheduling gain in scenario 4

Diversity and scheduling gain in Scenario 4


Conclusions of part i

Conclusions of Part I

  • Proposals from Intel (1&2), LGE, and Samsung have the best performance in terms of diversity and scheduling gain.


Part ii comparison of subcarrier permutation proposals

Part IIComparison of Subcarrier Permutation Proposals


Comparison of subcarrier permutation proposals

Comparison of Subcarrier Permutation Proposals

  • Compare subcarrier permutation proposed by Intel, LGE, Samsung, and random permutation

  • Use Intel1 SB partitioning and Intel MB permutation

  • Random permutation: PermSeq is random, shifted over symbols and subframes according to Intel’s formula.

  • Calculate diversity gain for different subcarrier perms for Scenarios 1, 2, and 3.


Diversity gain 10 snr values

Diversity gain: 10% SNR Values

Scenario1 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – equal size)

Scenario 3 (Reuse 1)

Scenario 2 (Mixed Reuse 1&3 – unequal size)


Diversity gain in scenario 1

Diversity gain in Scenario 1


Diversity gain in scenario 2

Diversity gain in Scenario 2


Diversity gain in scenario 3

Diversity gain in Scenario 3


Conclusions of part ii

Conclusions of Part II

  • Subcarrier permutation methods proposed by Intel and Samsung have the best diversity gain.


Part iii comparison of average hit number

Part IIIComparison of Average Hit Number


Dl hit number comparison

DL Hit Number Comparison

  • Compare the number of hits among different Cell ID pairs for the subcarrier permutations proposed by Intel, Samsung and LGE.

  • 0≤Cell_ID <512, 130816 Cell_ID Pairs

  • Intel

    • PermSeq remains the same for all cells.

  • Samsung and LTE:

    • Different PermSeq for different cells:

    • LGE: different shift as function of Cell_ID

    • Samsung: different SEED as function of Cell_ID


Hit number compari son

Hit Number Comparison

  • k: number of subcarrier pairs hit within an LRU,

  • (0 ≤ k ≤ kmax and kmax = Nsym*Lpair = 48)

  • Calculate the fraction of LRUs hit at k≥12 subcarrier pairs (25%)

Reuse 1, NPRU = 48


Conclusions of part iii

Conclusions of Part III

  • For small number of DRU Intel’s subcarrier permutation has the best performance.

  • Intel and LGE’s subcarrier permutations have the best performance for large number of DRUs.


  • Login