BC Mac

Multi-User MIMO Transmission
389.168 Advanced Wireless Communications 1
stefan.schwarz@nt.tuwien.ac.at
Contents
1 Recapitulation of Previous Lecture
2 Motivation for Multi-User MIMO
3 MIMO MAC Capacity Regions
4 MIMO BC Capacity Regions
5 Multi-User MIMO Transceivers
6 Conclusions
Slide 2 / 95
Contents
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 3 / 95
Recapitulation of Previous Lecture
Single-User MIMO Capacity

Deterministic channel and fast-fading channel with perfect CSIT
SVD precoding with water-filling power allocation
Asymptotic strategies
Maximum eigenmode transmission (low SNR)
Equal power allocation over non-zero eigenmodes (high SNR)
Fast-fading with no CSIT : ergodic capacity

1
C = E log2 det INr + 2 H[k]Qx H[k]H
,
z
Ps
IN
Qx 0, tr (Qx ) Ps , e.g. Qx =
Nt t
(1)
(2)
Fast-fading with channel distribution information (CDIT )

Optimization of ergodic capacity with respect to Qx
Slow-fading with no CSIT (constant target rate)
Outage capacity
Slide 4 / 95


1
,
z
Ps
IN
Nt t
(1)
(2)

Outage capacity
Slide 4 / 95


1
,
z
Ps
IN
Nt t
(1)
(2)

Outage capacity
Slide 4 / 95


1
,
z
Ps
IN
Nt t
(1)
(2)

Outage capacity
Slide 4 / 95
Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Slow-Fading Channels
Achievable rate at high SNR

R gs log2 (SNR) , SNR =
Ps
z2
(3)
Outage probability at high SNR

pout SNRgd (gs )
(4)
The curve gd (gs ) formulates the diversity-multiplexing tradeoff
Slide 5 / 95
Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Slow-Fading Channels
Achievable rate at high SNR

R gs log2 (SNR) , SNR =
Ps
z2
(3)
Outage probability at high SNR

pout SNRgd (gs )
(4)
The curve gd (gs ) formulates the diversity-multiplexing tradeoff
Slide 5 / 95
Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Rayleigh Fading Channels
Diversity gain gd(gs)
{0,NtNr}
{1,(Nt-1)(Nr-1)}
{2,(Nt-2)(Nr-2)}
{gs,(Nt-gs)(Nr-gs)}
{min(Nt,Nr),0}
Spatial multiplexing gain gs
Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of i.i.d. slow Rayleigh fading channels [Zheng and Tse, 2003]
Point {0, Nt Nr }: the maximum diversity is achieved with fixed transmission rate
(robust transmission)
Point {min(Nt , Nr ), 0}: the maximum multiplexing gain is achieved with fixed
outage probability (no protection against fading)
Slide 6 / 95
Spatial Multiplexing: V-BLAST Architecture
data bits
Layer
mapper
Coder
Coder
z[k]
p1[k]
s[k]
x[k]
x
x
F[k]
Nt
^
s[k]
y[k]
+
H[k]
Nr
Detector
Nr
pL[k]
L parallel data streams (layers)

Unitary precoding with power-allocation
No coding across layers (vertical separation)
Achieves capacity with perfect CSIT through SVD precoding
Achieves ergodic capacity through unitary precoding and MMSE-SIC or ML
detection
Does not achieve the optimal diversity-multiplexing tradeoff
Slide 7 / 95
data bits
Layer
mapper
Coder
Coder
z[k]
p1[k]
s[k]
x[k]
x
x
F[k]
Nt
^
s[k]
y[k]
+
H[k]
Nr
Detector
Nr
pL[k]

detection
Slide 7 / 95
data bits
Layer
mapper
Coder
Coder
z[k]
p1[k]
s[k]
x[k]
x
x
F[k]
Nt
^
s[k]
y[k]
+
H[k]
Nr
Detector
Nr
pL[k]

detection
Slide 7 / 95
data bits
Layer
mapper
Coder
Coder
z[k]
p1[k]
s[k]
x[k]
x
x
F[k]
Nt
^
s[k]
y[k]
+
H[k]
Nr
Detector
Nr
pL[k]

detection
Slide 7 / 95
Successive Interference Cancellation
y[k]
ZF/MMSE
receiver 1
Detect
stream 1
Subtract
stream 1
ZF/MMSE
receiver 2
Detect
stream 2
Subtract
1,2,...,L-1
ZF/MMSE
receiver L
Detect
stream L
^
Concat. s[k]
streams
Detect one layer after the other and subtract interference

Select the transmission rates according to the SINR
Major problem: error propagation
Slide 8 / 95
Space-Time Block Coding D-BLAST

receive
suppress
cancel
receive
Antenna 1
Antenna 2
time k
receive
cancel
Illustration of the basic idea of D-BLAST for two transmit antennas
Spread symbols over space and time

Successive detection:
Detect block 1 (SINR1 )
Detect block 2 with block 1 as interference (SINR2 )
Successful decoding: log2 (1 + SINR1 ) + log2 (1 + SINR2 ) R
Achieves the optimal diversity-multiplexing tradeoff
Slide 9 / 95
Space-Time Block Coding D-BLAST

receive
suppress
cancel
receive
Antenna 1
Antenna 2
time k
receive
cancel
Illustration of the basic idea of D-BLAST for two transmit antennas
Spread symbols over space and time

Successive detection:
Detect block 1 (SINR1 )
Detect block 2 with block 1 as interference (SINR2 )
Successful decoding: log2 (1 + SINR1 ) + log2 (1 + SINR2 ) R
Achieves the optimal diversity-multiplexing tradeoff
Slide 9 / 95
Matlab Example Single-User Transceiver Comparison
s*1
s*2
z2
12
z2
22
s*3
z2
32
z2
2
n-1
z2
n2
Capacity achieving SVD transceivers with water filling - requires perfect CSIT
Equal power allocation with MMSE receiver - no CSIT
Equal power allocation with MMSE-SIC receiver - no CSIT
Slide 10 / 95
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 11 / 95
Motivation for Multi-User MIMO
Limitations of Single-User MIMO
Remember Single-User MIMO:

Only one user served at each time instant
Maximum multiplexing gain
L rank (H) min (Nr , Nt )
(5)
Practical limitations:
Often Nr Nt or Nt Nr especially in cellular networks (downlink/uplink)
Limited space and complexity of mobile devices
Multiplexing capabilities of base station are often not exploited
Excess antennas only provide an SNR gain
C L(Nt , Nr ) log2 (1 + SNR(Nt , Nr ))
Slide 12 / 95
(6)
Limitations of Single-User MIMO
Remember Single-User MIMO:

Only one user served at each time instant
Maximum multiplexing gain
L rank (H) min (Nr , Nt )
(5)
Practical limitations:
Often Nr Nt or Nt Nr especially in cellular networks (downlink/uplink)
Limited space and complexity of mobile devices
Multiplexing capabilities of base station are often not exploited
Excess antennas only provide an SNR gain
C L(Nt , Nr ) log2 (1 + SNR(Nt , Nr ))
Slide 12 / 95
(6)
Limitations of Single-User MIMO - Antenna Correlation

Antenna correlation impacts performance at realistic SNR
Consider Kronecker correlation model:
1/2
1/2
C ,
H = Cr H
t

CH = E vec (H) vec (H)H = Ct Cr CNt Nr Nt Nr
(7)
(8)
Cr CNr Nr receive-side correlation, Ct CNt Nt transmit-side correlation

Achievable rate determined by singular values of H
Squared singular values of H are equal to the eigenvalues of HHH

CN (0, 1)
Assume H
ij
HHH CW Nr (Nt , CH )
(9)
Complex Wishart distribution

Dimension Nr , Nt degrees of freedom and scale matrix CH
pdf of eigenvalues known in closed form [Zanella et al., 2009]
Slide 13 / 95

1/2
1/2
C ,
H = Cr H
t

(7)
(8)


CN (0, 1)
Assume H
ij
(9)

Slide 13 / 95

1/2
1/2
C ,
H = Cr H
t

(7)
(8)


CN (0, 1)
Assume H
ij
(9)

Slide 13 / 95
Limitations of Single-User MIMO - Antenna Correlation (2)

0.2
correlation 0
0.18
Empirical probability density
0.16
0.14
correlation 0.6
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
correlation 0.9
0.04
0.02
0
0
10
15
Squared magnitude of largest singular value
20
25

CN (0, 1)
Consider Nt Nr = 4 2 and H
ij
Assume Ct = INt and

Cr =
Slide 14 / 95

,
{0, 0.6, 0.9}
(10)

3
Empirical probability density
2.5
correlation 0.9
2
1.5
1
correlation 0.6
0.5
correlation 0
0
0
2
3
4
Squared magnitude of smallest singular value

CN (0, 1)
ij
Assume Ct = INt and

Cr =
Slide 14 / 95

,
{0, 0.6, 0.9}
(10)

18
Ergodic capacity with CSIT [bit/s/Hz]
16
14
correlation 0
12
3.7 dB
10
correlation 0.6
8
correlation 0.9
6
4
2
0
5
10
Signal to noise ratio [dB]
15
20
25

CN (0, 1)
ij
Assume Ct = INt and

Cr =
Slide 14 / 95

,
{0, 0.6, 0.9}
(10)
Achievable rate with MMSE detection [bit/s/Hz]
18
16
14
12
correlation 0
10
8
correlation 0.6
6 dB
correlation 0.9
6
4
2
0
10
10
15
Signal to noise ratio [dB]
20
25
30

CN (0, 1)
ij
Assume Ct = INt and

Cr =
Slide 14 / 95

,
{0, 0.6, 0.9}
(10)
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 15 / 95
MIMO MAC Capacity Regions
MIMO MAC System Model

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Multiple access channel
Multiple access channel (MAC) cellular network uplink

Multiple users transmitting to one receiver (base station)
Received signal at the base station
(UL)
y[k] = Hu
[k]xu [k] +
U
X
(UL)
Hj
[k ]xj [k] + z[k] CN1 ,
(11)
j=1,j6=u
(UL)
Hu

[k] CNMu , xu [k] CMu 1 , z[k]CN 0, z2 IN
(12)
Notice, we now use Mu for user antennas and N for base station antennas
(instead of Nr and Nt )
We omit (UL) if it is clear from the context
Slide 16 / 95
MIMO MAC System Model

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Multiple access channel (MAC) cellular network uplink

Multiple users transmitting to one receiver (base station)
Received signal at the base station
(UL)
y[k] = Hu
[k]xu [k] +
U
X
(UL)
Hj
[k ]xj [k] + z[k] CN1 ,
(11)
j=1,j6=u
(UL)
Hu

[k] CNMu , xu [k] CMu 1 , z[k]CN 0, z2 IN
(12)
Notice, we now use Mu for user antennas and N for base station antennas
(instead of Nr and Nt )
We omit (UL) if it is clear from the context
Slide 16 / 95
Definition of the Capacity Region of Deterministic Channels
In single-user MIMO: capacity is a single number

In multi-user systems: achievable rate Ru of user u depends on the rate of the
other users capacity region
Let us consider deterministic channels first Hu [k] = Hu , k
The capacity region C (H1 , . . . , HU ) is the set of all rate tuples {R1 , . . . , RU }
that allow simultaneous reliable (error-free) transmission of users 1, . . . , U.
Any rate tuple not inside C (H1 , . . . , HU ) leads to transmission errors
Slide 17 / 95
Definition of the Capacity Region of Deterministic Channels
In single-user MIMO: capacity is a single number

In multi-user systems: achievable rate Ru of user u depends on the rate of the
other users capacity region
Let us consider deterministic channels first Hu [k] = Hu , k
The capacity region C (H1 , . . . , HU ) is the set of all rate tuples {R1 , . . . , RU }
that allow simultaneous reliable (error-free) transmission of users 1, . . . , U.
Any rate tuple not inside C (H1 , . . . , HU ) leads to transmission errors
Slide 17 / 95
Definition of the Capacity Region of Deterministic Channels (2)
Interesting rate tuples are the points on the border of C (H1 , . . . , HU )

Specifically, sum-rate capacity of C (H1 , . . . , HU )
C = max
U
X
Ru ,
(13)
u=1
subject to: {R1 , . . . , RU } C (H1 , . . . , HU )
(14)
This can be very unfair:

Most rate provided to users with high SNR
Users with low SNR may not be served at all
Slide 18 / 95

C = max
U
X
Ru ,
(13)
u=1
(14)

Slide 18 / 95

C = max
U
X
Ru ,
(13)
u=1
(14)

Slide 18 / 95
Capacity Region Three User Example
R3
not achievable
capacity region
R2
achievable (inefficient)
R1
achievable (efficient)
Pareto efficiency:
A rate tuple is called Pareto efficient/optimal if the rate of any user cannot be
increased without reducing the rate of another user.
Slide 19 / 95
Achievable Rate Tuples of the MIMO MAC
Consider transmission of a single user u

1
,
Ru log2 det IN + 2 Hu Qx,u HH
u
z

E xu [k]xu [k]H = Qx,u , tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u
(15)
(16)
Individual power constraints Ps,u

Maximization of (15): SVD precoding + water-filling
the rate of each user u is upper bounded by the single user capacity
Ru
n
X
i=1
Slide 20 / 95
log2
1+
2
i,u
z2
!
si
, n = min (Mu , N)
(17)
Achievable Rate Tuples of the MIMO MAC
Consider transmission of a single user u

1
,
Ru log2 det IN + 2 Hu Qx,u HH
u
z

E xu [k]xu [k]H = Qx,u , tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u
(15)
(16)
Individual power constraints Ps,u

Maximization of (15): SVD precoding + water-filling
the rate of each user u is upper bounded by the single user capacity
Ru
n
X
i=1
Slide 20 / 95
log2
1+
2
i,u
z2
!
si
, n = min (Mu , N)
(17)
Achievable Rate Tuples of the MIMO MAC (2)

N
Mi
Mj
UE i
UE j
Consider transmission and joint detection of any subset S = {i, . . . , j} of users

HS = Hi , . . . , Hj CNMS ,
MS =
Mu ,
(18)
uS

Qx,S = diag Qx,i , . . . , Qx,j CNMS ,
tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u , u S
(19)
Information is not shared between users (block-diagonal Qx,S )

This leads to the following upper bound on the achievable sum-rate

1
1 X
H
H
RS =
Ru log2 det IN + 2 HS Qx,S HS = log2 det IN + 2
Hu Qx,u Hu
z
z uS
uS
X
(20)
Slide 21 / 95
Achievable Rate Tuples of the MIMO MAC (2)

N
Mi
Mj
UE i
UE j
Consider transmission and joint detection of any subset S = {i, . . . , j} of users

HS = Hi , . . . , Hj CNMS ,
MS =
Mu ,
(18)
uS

Qx,S = diag Qx,i , . . . , Qx,j CNMS ,
tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u , u S
(19)
Information is not shared between users (block-diagonal Qx,S )

This leads to the following upper bound on the achievable sum-rate

1
1 X
H
H
RS =
Ru log2 det IN + 2 HS Qx,S HS = log2 det IN + 2
Hu Qx,u Hu
z
z uS
uS
X
(20)
Slide 21 / 95
Achievable Rate Region Two User Example

R2
R1
Consider a two user MIMO MAC
Upper bound on the rate of user 1: single-user capacity C1
TDMA achieves the line-segment between C1 and C2
Upper bound on the sum-rate
Slide 22 / 95

R2
R1 C1 R1
Slide 22 / 95

R2
R2 C2
R1 C1 R1
Slide 22 / 95

R2
R2 C2
TD
R1 C1 R1
Slide 22 / 95

Pareto optimal front
R2
R2 C2
R1
TD
+R
...
R1 C1 R1
Slide 22 / 95
Achievable Rate Region Two User Example (2)

R2
R2 C2
R1
TD
+R
2
...
(A)
R1 C1 R1
Consider transmission at corner point (A):

1
R1 = log2 det IN + 2 H1 Qx,1 HH
R2 = R1+2 R1
1
z

1
1
1
H
log2 det IN + 2 H1 Qx,1 HH
1 + 2 H2 Qx,2 H2
1
z
z
z

1
2
H
H
= log2 det IN + z IN + H1 Qx,1 H1
H2 Qx,2 H2
(21)
Slide 23 / 95

R2
R2 C2
(B) R1 +
R
TD
...
(A)
R1 C1 R1
Similarly at corner point (B):

1
R2 = log2 det IN + 2 H2 Q0x,2 HH
2
z

1
0
H
R1 = log2 det IN + z2 IN + H2 Q0x,2 HH
H
Q
H
1
2
x,1 1
(21)
Everything in-between (A) and (B), e.g., through time-sharing
Slide 23 / 95
y[k]
Subtract
user 2
MMSE
receiver 2
Detect
user 2
MMSE
receiver 1
Detect
user 1

1
1
z

1
H
R2 = log2 det IN + z2 IN + H1 Qx,1 HH
H
Q
H
2
x,2
1
2
(22)
MMSE-SIC detection
In the inverse order corner point (B) is achievable
This method generalizes to U users
Slide 24 / 95
y[k]
Subtract
user 2
MMSE
receiver 2
Detect
user 2
MMSE
receiver 1
Detect
user 1

1
1
z

1
H
R2 = log2 det IN + z2 IN + H1 Qx,1 HH
H
Q
H
2
x,2
1
2
(22)
MMSE-SIC detection
In the inverse order corner point (B) is achievable
This method generalizes to U users
Slide 24 / 95
Achievable Rate Region Optimization of Input Covariances

R2
(a)
C2
(a)
R1
R1
Situation (a): user 2 has maximum interference-free rate, user 1 gets the rest
Situation (b): user 1 has maximum interference-free rate, user 2 gets the rest
Time-sharing between (a) and (b)
Situation (c): input-covariances jointly selected to obtain maximum sum rate
Upper bound on capacity region is determined by (a), (b), (c)
Actual capacity region is in general smooth (no polyhedron)
Slide 25 / 95

R2
(a)
C2
(b)
R2
(a)
R1
(b)
C1
R1
Slide 25 / 95

R2
(a)
C2
(b)
R2
(a)
R1
(b)
C1
R1
Slide 25 / 95

R2
(a)
C2
(c)
R2
(b)
R2
(c)
R1
(a)
R1
(b)
C1
R1
Slide 25 / 95

capacity upper bound
R2
(a)
C2
(c)
R2
(b)
R2
(c)
R1
(a)
R1
(b)
C1
R1
Slide 25 / 95

R2
capacity region
(a)
C2
(c)
R2
(b)
R2
(c)
R1
(a)
R1
(b)
C1
R1
Slide 25 / 95
Definition of the MAC Capacity Region for Deterministic Channels
The capacity region CMAC of the Gaussian MIMO MAC for deterministic
channels H1 , . . . , Hu is the union of all achievable rate tuples {R1 , . . . , RU }:
{R1 , . . . , RU } :
Qx,u ,u
X
uS
Ru log2 det IN +
1 X
Hu Qx,u HHu
z2 uS
!
,
(23)
subject to: Qx,u 0, tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u , u, S {1, . . . , U}
For given input covariances, this region is achievable through MMSE-SIC detection
Slide 26 / 95
MAC Sum-Rate Capacity of Deterministic Channels
Set of sum-rate optimal input covariance matrices
{Qx,1 , . . . , Qx,U }
U
X
1
H
= argmax log2 det IN + 2
Hu Qx,u Hu ,
z u=1
(24)
subject to: Qx,u 0, tr (Qx,u ) Ps,u , u

Necessary and sufficient condition:
Each Qx,u is the optimal single-link water-filling covariance matrix of
channel Hu with effective noise (treating interference as noise)
z2 IN +
U
X
Hj Qx,j HH
j
(25)
j=1,j6=u
These input covariances can be determined iteratively by fixing all

covariance matrices but one and iterating between users [Yu et al., 2004]
Slide 27 / 95
MAC Sum-Rate Capacity of Deterministic Channels
Set of sum-rate optimal input covariance matrices
{Qx,1 , . . . , Qx,U }
U
X
1
H
Hu Qx,u Hu ,
z u=1
(24)

Necessary and sufficient condition:
Each Qx,u is the optimal single-link water-filling covariance matrix of
channel Hu with effective noise (treating interference as noise)
z2 IN +
U
X
Hj Qx,j HH
j
(25)
j=1,j6=u
These input covariances can be determined iteratively by fixing all

covariance matrices but one and iterating between users [Yu et al., 2004]
Slide 27 / 95
Example: 2-User SISO MAC

R2
preferred in terms of fairness
R1
R2 ...
(B)
TDM
A
+R
2
.
(A) ..
R1 ...
R1
SISO: N = 1, Mu = 1, u
1/2
H1 = 1
1/2
h1 , H2 = 2
h2 ,
1 2
1 , h
2 microscopic fading (complex-valued)
1 , 2 channel gain (real-valued), h
Capacity region is determined by

2 2
1 2
|h1 | Ps,1 , R2 log2 1 + 2 |h
2 | Ps,2
2
z
z

1 2
2 2
R1 + R2 log2 1 + 2 |h1 | Ps,1 + 2 |h2 | Ps,2
z
z

R1 log2
1+
Transmit powers are the optimization variables

Maximum power should be used by each user
even with single antennas we may do better than time-sharing
Slide 28 / 95
Example: 2-User SISO MAC

R2
preferred in terms of fairness
R1
R2 ...
(B)
TDM
A
+R
2
.
(A) ..
R1 ...
R1
SISO: N = 1, Mu = 1, u
1/2
H1 = 1
1/2
h1 , H2 = 2
h2 ,
1 2
1 , h
2 microscopic fading (complex-valued)
1 , 2 channel gain (real-valued), h
Capacity region is determined by

2 2
1 2
|h1 | Ps,1 , R2 log2 1 + 2 |h
2 | Ps,2
2
z
z

1 2
2 2
R1 + R2 log2 1 + 2 |h1 | Ps,1 + 2 |h2 | Ps,2
z
z

R1 log2
1+
Transmit powers are the optimization variables

Maximum power should be used by each user
even with single antennas we may do better than time-sharing
Slide 28 / 95
Matlab Example Iterative Water-Filling
{Qx,1 , . . . , Qx,U }
U
1 X
H

Hu Qx,u Hu ,
z u=1
(26)
Iterative solution: initialize Qx,u = 0, u

Iterate until the sum rate converges:
for u = 1 to U

Qx,u = argmax log2 det Ru + Hu Qx,u HH
u ,
U
X
Ru = z2 IN +
Hj Qx,j HH
j
(27)
(28)
j=1,j6=u
end
Converges within few steps [Yu et al., 2004]
Slide 29 / 95
Matlab Example Weighted Sum-Rate Optimization

Consider SIC detection
Assume user U is decoded first, user U 1 second,. . . , user 1 last
User u sees users 1, . . . , u 1 as interferers:

H
1
Ru = log2 det IN + R
u Hu Qx,u Hu ,
u = 2 IN +
R
z
u1
X
(29)
Hj Qx,j HH
j
(30)
j=1
Multiplying with the denominator we obtain
Ru =
log2 det z2 IN
u
X
j=1
Hu Qx,u HH
u
log2 det z2 IN
u1
X
Hu Qx,u HH
u
j=1
(31)
Slide 30 / 95
Matlab Example Weighted Sum-Rate Optimization

Consider SIC detection
Assume user U is decoded first, user U 1 second,. . . , user 1 last
User u sees users 1, . . . , u 1 as interferers:

H
1
Ru = log2 det IN + R
u Hu Qx,u Hu ,
u = 2 IN +
R
z
u1
X
(29)
Hj Qx,j HH
j
(30)
j=1
Multiplying with the denominator we obtain
Ru =
log2 det z2 IN
u
X
j=1
Hu Qx,u HH
u
log2 det z2 IN
u1
X
Hu Qx,u HH
u
j=1
(31)
Slide 30 / 95
Matlab Example Weighted Sum-Rate Optimization (2)

The capacity region can be determined by weighted sum-rate
optimization [Kobayashi and Caire, 2006]
{Qx,1 , . . . , Qx,U } = argmax
U
X
wu Ru ,
(32)
u=1

where users are ordered according to their weights:
w1 w2 . . . wU
(33)
This can also be formulated as
max
U
X
(wu wu+1 )log2 det z2 IN +
u=1
u
X
,
Hu Qx,u HH
u
(34)
j=1
with wU+1 = 0
This problem is convex and can hence be solved
Slide 31 / 95
Matlab Example Weighted Sum-Rate Optimization (2)

The capacity region can be determined by weighted sum-rate
optimization [Kobayashi and Caire, 2006]
{Qx,1 , . . . , Qx,U } = argmax
U
X
wu Ru ,
(32)
u=1

where users are ordered according to their weights:
w1 w2 . . . wU
(33)
This can also be formulated as
max
U
X
(wu wu+1 )log2 det z2 IN +
u=1
u
X
,
Hu Qx,u HH
u
(34)
j=1
with wU+1 = 0
This problem is convex and can hence be solved
Slide 31 / 95
Ergodic Capacity Region of Fast Fading MIMO MAC
With perfect CSIT (CSI at the users), input covariances can be adjusted to the
fading state
Achievable rate region for given covariance matrices
U
X
1
H
Ru E log2 det IN + 2
Hu [k ]Qx,u [k]Hu [k] , Qx,u [k] 0 (35)
z u=1
u=1
U
X
Short-term power constraint: tr (Qx,u [k]) Ps,u , k

Long-term power constraint: E (tr (Qx,u [k])) Ps,u
Capacity region: union over all possible rate regions
Slide 32 / 95
Ergodic Capacity Region of Fast Fading MIMO MAC (2)
Sum-rate capacity optimization leads to algorithms similar to iterative water-filling

Similarly, with CDIT , Qx,u are fixed over time and can only be optimized with
respect to the channel distribution
still sum rate capacity scales linearly with SNR
CCDIT min N,
U
X
Mu log2 (SNR)
(36)
u=1
(assuming full rank channel matrices)

This holds true even without CSIT
Slide 33 / 95
Outage of the Slow Fading MIMO MAC
MAC outage event for transmission of subset S = {i, . . . , j}
X
1 X
H
Ru
Hu [k]Qx,u Hu [k]
OS : log2 det IN + 2
z uS
uS
(37)
MAC outage probability for transmission with rate tuple {R1 , . . . , RU }

!
pout ({R1 , . . . , RU }) = min P
Qx,u
OS
, S {1, . . . , U}
(38)
MAC -outage capacity region: all achievable rate tuples with

pout ({R1 , . . . , RU })
Slide 34 / 95
(39)
X
1 X
H
Ru
Hu [k]Qx,u Hu [k]
z uS
uS
(37)

!
pout ({R1 , . . . , RU }) = min P
Qx,u
OS
, S {1, . . . , U}
(38)

pout ({R1 , . . . , RU })
Slide 34 / 95
(39)
X
1 X
H
Ru
Hu [k]Qx,u Hu [k]
z uS
uS
(37)

!
pout ({R1 , . . . , RU }) = min P
Qx,u
OS
, S {1, . . . , U}
(38)

pout ({R1 , . . . , RU })
Slide 34 / 95
(39)
Diversity-Multiplexing Trade-off
Consider transmission with a tuple of multiplexing gains {gs,1 , . . . , gs,U }
gs,u =
lim
SNR
Ru (SNR)
log2 (SNR)
(40)
The achieved MAC diversity gain is defined as

gd,MAC ({gs,1 , . . . , gs,U }) =
lim
SNR
pout ({R1 , . . . , RU })
log2 (SNR)
(41)
The per-user multiplexing gain is bounded as

gs,u min (N, Mu )
(42)
The total multiplexing gain is bounded as
gs,sum =
U
X
u=1
Slide 35 / 95
gs,u
min N,
U
X
Mu
(43)
u=1
Diversity-Multiplexing Trade-off
Consider transmission with a tuple of multiplexing gains {gs,1 , . . . , gs,U }
gs,u =
lim
SNR
Ru (SNR)
log2 (SNR)
(40)
The achieved MAC diversity gain is defined as

gd,MAC ({gs,1 , . . . , gs,U }) =
lim
SNR
pout ({R1 , . . . , RU })
log2 (SNR)
(41)
The per-user multiplexing gain is bounded as

gs,u min (N, Mu )
(42)
The total multiplexing gain is bounded as
gs,sum =
U
X
u=1
Slide 35 / 95
gs,u
min N,
U
X
Mu
(43)
u=1
Diversity-Multiplexing Trade-off Symmetric i.i.d. Rayleigh Fading

Lightly loaded regime
Heavily loaded regime
Diversity gain gd,MAC(gs)
{0,M N}
{1,(M-1)(N-1)}
{2,(M-2)(N-2)}
{gs,(M-gs)(N-gs)}
gs,sum=N U
U+1
gs= N
U+1
{min(M,N/U),0}
Spatial multiplexing gain gs

N
Diversity-multiplexing trade-off for M U+1
Symmetric scenario: Mu = M, gs,u = gs , same pathloss u
gd (gs )

gs min M,

gd,MAC (gs ) =
gd (U gs ) gs min M,
N
,
U+1
N
,
U+1
with Nt = M, Nr = N
with Nt = U M, Nr = N
gd (gs ) single-user MIMO diversity-multiplexing trade-off (see previous lectures)

Lightly-loaded: each user can achieve same diversity as in single-user MIMO
Slide 36 / 95
Matlab Example Diversity-Multiplexing Trade-off
Example: N = 24, M = Mu = 12, U = 2

N
= 12,
gs,max = min M,
U
(44)
gd,max = NM = 288
(45)

Lightly loaded: gs min M,
N
U+1
=8
gd (gs ) = (N gs )(M gs )
(46)
gd = (N Ugs )(UM Ugs )
(47)
Heavily loaded: gs 8
huge MIMO system with U M transmit antennas and U gs multiplexing gain
Slide 37 / 95
Example: N = 24, M = Mu = 12, U = 2

N
= 12,
gs,max = min M,
U
(44)
gd,max = NM = 288
(45)

N
U+1
=8
(46)
(47)
Slide 37 / 95
Example: N = 24, M = Mu = 12, U = 2

N
= 12,
gs,max = min M,
U
(44)
gd,max = NM = 288
(45)

N
U+1
=8
(46)
(47)
Slide 37 / 95
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 38 / 95
MIMO BC Capacity Regions
MIMO BC System Model

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Broadcast channel
Broadcast channel (BC) cellular network downlink

Input-output relationship of user u
(DL)
yu [k] = Hu
(DL)
[k]xu [k] + Hu
[k]
U
X
xj [k] + zu [k] CMu 1 ,
(48)
j=1,j6=u
(DL)
Hu
[k] CMu N ,
U
X
u=1
xu [k] CN1 ,
tr (Qx,u ) =
U
X

2
zu [k] CN 0, z,u
I
Ps,u Ps (short-term)
(49)
u=1
Sum power constraint versus individual power constraints!

Slide 39 / 95

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Broadcast channel

(DL)
yu [k] = Hu
(DL)
[k]xu [k] + Hu
[k]
U
X
xj [k] + zu [k] CMu 1 ,
(48)
j=1,j6=u
(DL)
Hu
[k] CMu N ,
U
X
u=1
xu [k] CN1 ,
tr (Qx,u ) =
U
X

2
zu [k] CN 0, z,u
I
(49)
u=1

Slide 39 / 95

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Broadcast channel

(DL)
yu [k] = Hu
(DL)
[k]xu [k] + Hu
[k]
U
X
xj [k] + zu [k] CMu 1 ,
(48)
j=1,j6=u
(DL)
Hu
[k] CMu N ,
U
X
u=1
xu [k] CN1 ,
tr (Qx,u ) =
U
X

2
zu [k] CN 0, z,u
I
(49)
u=1

Slide 39 / 95
Example: 2-User SISO BC

Single antennas: N = Mu = 1, Two users: U = 2
Apply the same approach as in the MAC: successive interference cancellation
Detect, e.g., user 2 first treating user 1 as interference
R2,max = log2
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
(50)
Subtract interference at user 1 and detect noisy signal
R1,max = log2
1+
1 Ps,1 2
|h1 |
2
z,1
!
(51)
But for this, user 1 also must successfully detect user 2s signal!
R2,max log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
!
(52)
Own signal is treated as interference

User 2s signal now has two upper bounds to fulfil!
Slide 40 / 95

R2,max = log2
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
(50)
R1,max = log2
1+
1 Ps,1 2
|h1 |
2
z,1
!
(51)
R2,max log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
!
(52)

Slide 40 / 95

R2,max = log2
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
(50)
R1,max = log2
1+
1 Ps,1 2
|h1 |
2
z,1
!
(51)
R2,max log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
!
(52)

Slide 40 / 95
Example: 2-User SISO BC (2)
Successful detection leads to an ordering of users
R2,max = log2
(n)
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
2 |2
1 |2
2 |h
1 |h
(n)
= 1 . . . normalized channel gains

2
2
z,2
z,1
Otherwise, detect in reversed order intrinsic ordering of users

Notice: in the MAC arbitrary decoding orders are possible because the signal of
each user is only received at one single point (base station)
Slide 41 / 95
R2,max = log2
(n)
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
2 |2
1 |2
2 |h
1 |h
(n)

2
2
z,2
z,1

Slide 41 / 95
R2,max = log2
(n)
1+
2 |2 Ps,2
2 |h
2
2 |2 Ps,1
z,2 + 2 |h
!
log2
1+
1 |2 Ps,2
1 |h
2
1 |2 Ps,1
z,1 + 1 |h
2 |2
1 |2
2 |h
1 |h
(n)

2
2
z,2
z,1

Slide 41 / 95
Matlab Example 2-User SISO BC
Lets consider the following specific example:

(n)
(n)
= 1 2
{1, 10, 50}
The strong user can detect and subtract the signal of the weak user

(n)
R2,max = log2 1 + 2 Ps,2
(53)
The weak user treats the strong users signal as interference

(n)
R1,max = log2
Slide 42 / 95
1+
1 Ps,1
(n)
1 + 1 Ps,2
(n)
!
log2
1+
!!
2 Ps,1
(n)
(54)
1 + 2 Ps,2
Example 2-User SISO BC vs. MAC

R2
R2
(n)
(n)
R2
(n)
2 > 1
(n)
(n)
2 = 1
M
TD
MA
TD
TD
M
45
45
R1
(n)
2 < 1
A
45
R1
R1
SISO BC rate regions for different channel gains
The weak user cannot cancel the strong users interference, as the rate of the
strong user is too high
The transmission of the weak user is impacted by
Weak channel gain
Interference from the strong user
MAC versus BC:
Arbitrary decoding order (sum-rate constraint)
Individual versus sum power constraint
Slide 43 / 95
Example 2-User SISO BC vs. MAC

(n)
R2,BC log(1+2 P )
(n)
R2,MAC log(1+2 P2)

(B)
TDM
R1
+R
2
.
(A) ..
(n)
R1,MAC log(1+1 P1)
TD
MA
45
(n)
R1,BC log(1+1 P )
Comparison of SISO BC and MAC rate regions
The weak user cannot cancel the strong users interference, as the rate of the
strong user is too high
The transmission of the weak user is impacted by
Weak channel gain
Interference from the strong user
MAC versus BC:
Arbitrary decoding order (sum-rate constraint)
Individual versus sum power constraint
Slide 43 / 95
Example: 4-QAM Superposition Coding Practical SIC
weak users symbols

strong users symbols
The weak user detects only the quadrant

The strong user first detects the quadrant to cancel the weak users signal and
then detects the intended signal
To achieve capacity, this idea in general has to be extended to N dimensions
with N very large
Slide 44 / 95
Tomlinson-Harashima Precoding
Alternative approach to SIC detection:
Instead of SIC at the receiver, pre-cancel interference at the transmitter
Assumes that interference is acausally known at the transmitter
Avoids error-propagation problematic of SIC
Consider a general interference-afflicted transmission over an AWGN
channel:
y = x(s) + i + z
(55)
x(s) transmitted signal with power Px , s actual information symbol with power Ps
i interference with power Pi , e.g., inter-symbol/multi-user interference
z additive white Gaussian noise with variance z2
Interference-ignorant transmitter: x(s) = s, Px = Ps
Achievable rate if receiver treats i as noise

R log2
Slide 45 / 95
1+
Ps
Pi + z2

(56)
channel:
y = x(s) + i + z
(55)

R log2
Slide 45 / 95
1+
Ps
Pi + z2

(56)
channel:
y = x(s) + i + z
(55)

R log2
Slide 45 / 95
1+
Ps
Pi + z2

(56)
Tomlinson-Harashima Precoding (2)
i
s
Naive approach: subtract interference

x(s) = s i y = s + z
(57)
Problem: significant signal power penalty for large i

Px Pi
Px = E |x(s)|2 = Ps + Pi R log2 1 +
z2
Slide 46 / 95
(58)
i
s
Naive approach: subtract interference

x(s) = s i y = s + z
(57)
Problem: significant signal power penalty for large i

Px Pi
Px = E |x(s)|2 = Ps + Pi R log2 1 +
z2
Slide 46 / 95
(58)
i
s
Extension of the symbol alphabet (lattice)

Transmit signal selected with respect to the nearest equivalent symbol
x(s) = Qs (i) i y = Qs (i) + z
(59)
Receiver detects signals in equivalence classes

[Tomlinson, 1971, Harashima and Miyakawa, 1972]
Slide 47 / 95
Qs(i)
Extension of the symbol alphabet (lattice)

Transmit signal selected with respect to the nearest equivalent symbol
x(s) = Qs (i) i y = Qs (i) + z
(59)
Receiver detects signals in equivalence classes

[Tomlinson, 1971, Harashima and Miyakawa, 1972]
Slide 47 / 95

1.6
Achievable rate [bit/s/Hz]
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
Interference ignorant
Naive interference cancellation
Dirty paper coding
0.2
0
0
10
15
20
Signal to interference ratio [dB]
25
Achievable rate comparison in dependence of Px /Pi for
30
z2
= 0.01
With Tomlinson-Harashima precoding x is always bounded irrespective of i

Assuming random interference i, Ps is only slightly below Px
Extending the idea to N dimensional space (N very large), the AWGN channel
capacity with Px = Ps is achieved dirty paper coding (DPC) [Costa, 1983]

R log2
Slide 48 / 95
1+
Ps
z2

(60)
Capacity Region of Deterministic SISO BC
(n)
Consider U ordered users with deterministic 1
(n)
(U)
. . . 2
The capacity region is the set of all rate tuples {R1 , . . . , RU } given by
{R1 , . . . , RU } : Ru log2 1 +
subject to:
U
X
2
z,u
u |2 Ps,u
u |h
,
u |2 Pu1 Ps,j
+ u |h
(61)
j=1
Ps,u = Ps , Ps,u 0, u
u=1
The capacity region is achieved by SIC detection and by DPC

The sum-rate capacity is achieved by allocating all available power to the
strongest user due to the sum-power constraint
Remember: in the MAC we had simultaneous transmissions to exploit the
transmit power of all users
Slide 49 / 95
Capacity Region of Deterministic SISO BC
(n)
Consider U ordered users with deterministic 1
(n)
(U)
. . . 2
The capacity region is the set of all rate tuples {R1 , . . . , RU } given by
{R1 , . . . , RU } : Ru log2 1 +
subject to:
U
X
2
z,u
u |2 Ps,u
u |h
,
u |2 Pu1 Ps,j
+ u |h
(61)
j=1
Ps,u = Ps , Ps,u 0, u
u=1
The capacity region is achieved by SIC detection and by DPC

The sum-rate capacity is achieved by allocating all available power to the
strongest user due to the sum-power constraint
Remember: in the MAC we had simultaneous transmissions to exploit the
transmit power of all users
Slide 49 / 95
Capacity Region of the Deterministic MIMO BC

Difficulty with MIMO: users channels cannot be ranked any more
non-degraded channel
DPC can also achieve the MIMO BC capacity region [Weingarten et al., 2006]
Consider DPC with a specific user ordering {1, . . . , U}
1 User 1s signal is encoded treating all other users as Gaussian noise
2 User 2s signal is encoded removing the interference by user 1 through
DPC and treating all other users as Gaussian noise
3 User 3s signal is encoded removing the interference by user 1 and user 2
through DPC and treating all other users as Gaussian noise
4 ...
5 User Us signal is encoded removing the interference by all other users
through DPC
Slide 50 / 95

4 ...
through DPC
Slide 50 / 95

4 ...
through DPC
Slide 50 / 95

4 ...
through DPC
1
X
2
z,u

(62)
Ru = log2 det IMu + Hu Qx,u HH
IMu + Hu
Qx,j HH
u
u
j>u
Slide 50 / 95
Capacity Region of the Deterministic MIMO BC (2)

With the user ordering {1, . . . , U} we obtain a rate tuple {R1 , . . . , RU }
With another ordering {(1), . . . , (U)} we get {R(1) , . . . , R(U) }
all possible permutations must be considered
The capacity region CBC of the Gaussian MIMO BC for deterministic channels
H1 , . . . , Hu is the convex hull of the union of all achievable rate tuples
{R(1) , . . . , R(U) } over all permutations of user orderings:
[
[
cvx
{R(1) , . . . , R(U) },
(63)
Qx,(u) ,u
subject to: Qx,(u) 0,
U
X

tr Qx,(u) Ps
u=1
The convex hull cvx of a set {A, B, . . . , Z } is the set of all convex combinations
(
)
X
z
cvx{A, B, . . . , Z } = a A + b B + . . . + z Z
i = 1, i 0
(64)
i=a
Slide 51 / 95

[
[
cvx
{R(1) , . . . , R(U) },
(63)
Qx,(u) ,u
U
X

tr Qx,(u) Ps
u=1
(
)
X
z
cvx{A, B, . . . , Z } = a A + b B + . . . + z Z
i = 1, i 0
(64)
i=a
Slide 51 / 95

[
[
cvx
{R(1) , . . . , R(U) },
(63)
Qx,(u) ,u
U
X

tr Qx,(u) Ps
u=1
(
)
X
z
cvx{A, B, . . . , Z } = a A + b B + . . . + z Z
i = 1, i 0
(64)
i=a
Slide 51 / 95
Example 2-User MIMO BC
R2
only 2
Ps,2 = Ps
only 1 R1
Ps,1 = Ps
Slide 52 / 95
R2
only 2
Ps,2 = Ps
con
vex
hu
ll
=T
DM
A
only 1 R1
Ps,1 = Ps
Slide 52 / 95
R2
only 2
Ps,2 = Ps
DPC(2,1)
Ps,u = Ps/2
only 1 R1
Ps,1 = Ps
Slide 52 / 95
R2
only 2
Ps,2 = Ps
DPC(1,2)
Ps,u = Ps/2
DPC(2,1)
Ps,u = Ps/2
only 1 R1
Ps,1 = Ps
Slide 52 / 95
R2
only 2
Ps,2 = Ps
DPC(1,2)
Ps,2 > Ps,1
DPC(1,2)
Ps,u = Ps/2
DPC(2,1)
Ps,u = Ps/2
DPC(2,1)
Ps,1 > Ps,2
only 1 R1
Ps,1 = Ps
(Notice: some of the shown points may not lie on the boundary but in the interior)
Slide 52 / 95
Ergodic and Outage Capacity Region

Ergodic capacity region with perfect CSIT and instantaneous power constraint
Expected value of deterministic capacity region
Ergodic capacity region with perfect CSIT and long-term power constraint
Union over all possible power control policies
Ergodic capacity region with CDIT
Not known for the general case
When all users have the same channel statistics TDMA is optimal
no multi-user multiplexing gain in contrast to the MAC
Outage capacity region of slow fading BC can be defined similar to the MAC
With perfect CSIT the spatial multiplexing gain is bounded as
gs,u = min (N, Mu ) ,
gs,sum = min N,
U
X
Mu
(65)
u=1
Slide 53 / 95

gs,sum = min N,
U
X
Mu
(65)
u=1
Slide 53 / 95

gs,sum = min N,
U
X
Mu
(65)
u=1
Slide 53 / 95

gs,sum = min N,
U
X
Mu
(65)
u=1
Slide 53 / 95
BC-MAC Duality
The MAC capacity region is simple compared to the BC
The BC capacity region can be expressed in terms of a dual MAC region
SISO BC combined input-output relationship
yu =
u xu + u h
u
u h
xj + zu ,
(66)
j6=u
"
yDL =
xDL =
y
y1
,..., U
z,1
z,U
U
X
#T
= hxDL + zDL ,

xu , E |xDL |2 Ps ,
zDL CN (0, IU )
(67)
#T
1
U hU
1 h
,...,
z,1
z,U
"
h=
u=1
The dual SISO MAC is defined as

yUL = hT xUL + zDL ,
xUL = [x1 , . . . , xU ]T ,
U
X
u=1
Slide 54 / 95
zDL CN (0, 1)
Ps,u =
U
X
(68)
|xu |2 Ps
u=1
BC-MAC Duality
yu =
u xu + u h
u
u h
xj + zu ,
(66)
j6=u
"
yDL =
xDL =
y
y1
,..., U
z,1
z,U
U
X
#T
= hxDL + zDL ,

xu , E |xDL |2 Ps ,
zDL CN (0, IU )
(67)
#T
1
U hU
1 h
,...,
z,1
z,U
"
h=
u=1

xUL = [x1 , . . . , xU ]T ,
U
X
u=1
Slide 54 / 95
zDL CN (0, 1)
Ps,u =
U
X
(68)
|xu |2 Ps
u=1
BC-MAC Duality
yu =
u xu + u h
u
u h
xj + zu ,
(66)
j6=u
"
yDL =
xDL =
y
y1
,..., U
z,1
z,U
U
X
#T
= hxDL + zDL ,

xu , E |xDL |2 Ps ,
zDL CN (0, IU )
(67)
#T
1
U hU
1 h
,...,
z,1
z,U
"
h=
u=1

xUL = [x1 , . . . , xU ]T ,
U
X
u=1
Slide 54 / 95
zDL CN (0, 1)
Ps,u =
U
X
(68)
|xu |2 Ps
u=1
BC-MAC Duality (2)

R2
(dual)
CMAC
Ps,2 >> Ps,1
CBC
(dual)
CMAC
Ps,2 Ps,1
(dual)
CMAC
Ps,2 << Ps,1
R1
The capacity region of the SISO BC with compound channel h, transmit power
Ps and unit receiver noise variance is equal to the union of the capacity regions
of its dual MAC over all power allocations
CBC (Ps , h) =
(dual)
CMAC ({Ps,1 , . . . , Ps,U }, h),
(69)
Ps,u ,u
subject to: Ps,u 0,
U
X
Ps,u Ps
(70)
u=1
Similar results exist for the reverse direction (MAC-BC duality) and for MIMO
Slide 55 / 95
Matlab Example BC-MAC Duality
N = Mu = 1, U = 2
Determine the SISO BC capacity region of a deterministic channel
Directly, using the approach of the previous Matlab example
Indirectly, exploiting BC-MAC duality
Slide 56 / 95
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 57 / 95
Multi-User MIMO Transceivers
Uplink Multi-User MIMO (MIMO MAC)

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
No cooperation between users independent precoding

SVD based precoding with water-filling
STBC to achieve transmit diversity
Single-user precoding strategies are applicable
Joint detection at the base station to separate user signals
ZF/MMSE detection low complexity
MMSE-SIC/ML detection capacity achieving
Total number of spatial streams L restricted by N
With cooperation: weighted sum-rate optimization [Kobayashi and Caire, 2006]
achieves all points on the border of the capacity region in combination with SIC
Slide 58 / 95

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2

Slide 58 / 95

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2

Slide 58 / 95
Downlink Multi-User MIMO (MIMO BC)

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Broadcast channel
Total number of streams L Mu , u

Users have enough antennas to separate all spatial streams
CSIT not essential to achieve a multiplexing gain
CSIT can only provide an additional beamforming and diversity gain
Single-user MIMO schemes are applicable
More interesting: L > Mu
Precoding is essential to exploit the available transmit antennas
We consider this case in more detail
Slide 59 / 95
Downlink Multi-User MIMO (MIMO BC)

N
M4
M1
M3
eNodeB
UE 1
M2
UE 4
UE 3
UE 2
Broadcast channel
Total number of streams L Mu , u

Users have enough antennas to separate all spatial streams
CSIT not essential to achieve a multiplexing gain
CSIT can only provide an additional beamforming and diversity gain
Single-user MIMO schemes are applicable
More interesting: L > Mu
Precoding is essential to exploit the available transmit antennas
We consider this case in more detail
Slide 59 / 95
Downlink Multi-User MISO
Lets consider the extreme case Mu = 1, u

Capacity achieving transceivers:
Superposition coding with SIC detection
Dirty paper coding with MMSE detection
Practically more relevant:
Linear transmit and receive filters, i.e., matrix multiplications
Reduced complexity
H
su = gu hH
u fu su + gu hu
fj sj + zu ,
fu , hu CN1
(71)
j6=u
Slide 60 / 95
Downlink Multi-User MISO

h1
s1
s2
s3
s^1
g1
UE1
z
h1
h2
BS
UE2
N
g2
h3
^
s2
h3
UE3
g3
^
s3
y
h2
Downlink multi-user MISO with three users and linear transceivers
Lets consider the extreme case Mu = 1, u

Capacity achieving transceivers:
Superposition coding with SIC detection
Dirty paper coding with MMSE detection
Practically more relevant:
Linear transmit and receive filters, i.e., matrix multiplications
Reduced complexity
H
su = gu hH
u fu su + gu hu
fj sj + zu ,
fu , hu CN1
(71)
j6=u
Slide 60 / 95
Random Beamforming with Beam Selection

z
h1
h3
~
fb
~
fa
y
~
fc
h2
The base station generates N random orthonormal transmit beams

n
o

f1 , . . . , fN ,
fi = 1, fH
i fj = 0, j 6= i
2
(72)
Each user determines the best beam in terms of SINR
i = argmax
i{1,...,N}
(i)
SINRu ,
(i)
SINRu
=
2
z,u

H 2
hu fi
P 2
+ j6=i hH
u fj
(73)
The users feedback the index i and the corresponding SINR partial CSIT
The base station serves on each beam the user with the largest SINR
Slide 61 / 95

z
h1
h3
~
fb
~
fa
y
~
fc
h2

n
o

f1 , . . . , fN ,
fi = 1, fH
i fj = 0, j 6= i
2
(72)
i = argmax
i{1,...,N}
(i)
SINRu ,
(i)
SINRu
=
2
z,u

H 2
hu fi
P 2
+ j6=i hH
u fj
(73)
Slide 61 / 95

z
h1
h3
~
fb
~
fa
y
~
fc
h2

n
o

f1 , . . . , fN ,
fi = 1, fH
i fj = 0, j 6= i
2
(72)
i = argmax
i{1,...,N}
(i)
SINRu ,
(i)
SINRu
=
2
z,u

H 2
hu fi
P 2
+ j6=i hH
u fj
(73)
Slide 61 / 95
Matched Beamforming (Maximum Ratio Transmission)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
f2
h2
Maximize power of intended signal (full CSIT)

2
2

max hH
u fu , subject to: kfu k = Ps,u ,
(74)
fu
1/2
hu = u
1/2
hu = u
1/2
fu = Ps,u fu ,

u ,

hu 2 h

fu = 1,
2
u = hu ,
h

hu 2
fu = h
u ,
(75)
Hfu = 1
h
u
(76)
Achievable user rate
Ru = log2 1 +
Slide 62 / 95
2
z,u
2
u Ps,u
hu 2

2 P
H 2

+ u hu 2 j6=u Ps,j hu fj
(77)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
f2
h2

2
2

max hH
(74)
fu
1/2
hu = u
1/2
hu = u
1/2
fu = Ps,u fu ,

u ,

hu 2 h

fu = 1,
2
u = hu ,
h

hu 2
fu = h
u ,
(75)
Hfu = 1
h
u
(76)
Ru = log2 1 +
Slide 62 / 95
2
z,u
2
u Ps,u
hu 2

2 P
H 2

(77)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
f2
h2

2
2

max hH
(74)
fu
1/2
hu = u
1/2
hu = u
1/2
fu = Ps,u fu ,

u ,

hu 2 h

fu = 1,
2
u = hu ,
h

hu 2
fu = h
u ,
(75)
Hfu = 1
h
u
(76)
Ru = log2 1 +
Slide 62 / 95
2
z,u
2
u Ps,u
hu 2

2 P
H 2

(77)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
f2
h2

2
2

max hH
(74)
fu
1/2
hu = u
1/2
hu = u
1/2
fu = Ps,u fu ,

u ,

hu 2 h

fu = 1,
2
u = hu ,
h

hu 2
fu = h
u ,
(75)
Hfu = 1
h
u
(76)
Ru = log2 1 +
Slide 62 / 95
2
z,u
2
u Ps,u
hu 2

2 P
H 2

(77)
Matched Beamforming (2)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
y
x

H 2 H 2
The term h
u fj = hu hj determines the interference between users
orthogonal projection of interfering precoder onto the users channel
Power allocation, e.g., to maximize the sum-rate
max
Ps,u ,u
subject to:
Ru ,
(78)
Ps,u = Ps
(79)
Notice, this involves an intrinsic selection of served users
Slide 63 / 95
Matched Beamforming (2)

z
h1
h3
f1
f3
y
x

H 2 H 2
The term h
u fj = hu hj determines the interference between users
orthogonal projection of interfering precoder onto the users channel
Power allocation, e.g., to maximize the sum-rate
max
Ps,u ,u
subject to:
Ru ,
(78)
Ps,u = Ps
(79)
Notice, this involves an intrinsic selection of served users
Slide 63 / 95
Zero-Forcing Beamforming
z
h1
h3
y
h2
Select precoders to achieve zero interference between users

Consider the precoder of user three:
!
H
hH
1 f3 = h2 f3 = 0,
H
[h1 , h2 ] f3 =
!
H f3 =
H
3
(80)
0
(81)
3 = [h1 , h2 ]
f3 is in the left null space of H
Similar for the other users
Slide 64 / 95
z
h1
h3
y
h2

!
H
hH
1 f3 = h2 f3 = 0,
H
[h1 , h2 ] f3 =
!
H f3 =
H
3
(80)
0
(81)
3 = [h1 , h2 ]
Slide 64 / 95
z
h1
h3
f3
y
h2

!
H
hH
1 f3 = h2 f3 = 0,
H
[h1 , h2 ] f3 =
!
H f3 =
H
3
(80)
0
(81)
3 = [h1 , h2 ]
Slide 64 / 95
z
h1
h3
f1
f3
f2
h2

!
H
hH
1 f3 = h2 f3 = 0,
H
[h1 , h2 ] f3 =
!
H f3 =
H
3
(80)
0
(81)
3 = [h1 , h2 ]
Slide 64 / 95
Zero-Forcing Beamforming (2)

Consider the general case with U users and N transmit antennas
User us precoder has to lie in the left null space of
u = [h1 , . . . , hu1 , hu+1 , . . . , hU ] CN(U1) ,
H

u
fu null H
(82)
(83)
Dimension of left null space: D = max (N (U 1), 0)

The left null space is non-empty iff U N: feasibility condition
number of served users restricted by the number of transmit antennas
In case D > 1 we can additionally maximize the intended signal power

2

max hH
u fu ,
fu
u ,
subject to: fu null H
kfu k2 = Ps,u
Slide 65 / 95
(84)
(85)
(86)

u = [h1 , . . . , hu1 , hu+1 , . . . , hU ] CN(U1) ,
H

u
fu null H
(82)
(83)


2

max hH
u fu ,
fu
u ,
kfu k2 = Ps,u
Slide 65 / 95
(84)
(85)
(86)

u = [h1 , . . . , hu1 , hu+1 , . . . , hU ] CN(U1) ,
H

u
fu null H
(82)
(83)


2

max hH
u fu ,
fu
u ,
kfu k2 = Ps,u
Slide 65 / 95
(84)
(85)
(86)

u , e.g., using an SVD
Define an orthonormal basis Bu for null H
u = U
u
H,
uV
H
u

Bu = Uu {:,ND+1:N}
(87)
(88)
(Matlab notation)
Decompose the beamformer as: fu =
p
Ps,u Bu qu
!
2
H
kfu k2 = Ps,u qH
u Bu Bu qu = Ps,u kqu k = 1
(89)
Optimization in terms of qu
max
qu ,kqu
k2 =1
H H
H
H

hu Bu qu 2 = max qu Bu hu hu Bu qu
qu
qH
q
u u
This is a Rayleigh quotient with solution: qu =
Slide 66 / 95
(90)
BH
u hu
|BHu hu |

u = U
u
H,
uV
H
u

Bu = Uu {:,ND+1:N}
(87)
(88)
(Matlab notation)
p
Ps,u Bu qu
!
2
H
kfu k2 = Ps,u qH
(89)
max
qu ,kqu
k2 =1
H H
H
H

qu
qH
q
u u
Slide 66 / 95
(90)
BH
u hu
|BHu hu |

u = U
u
H,
uV
H
u

Bu = Uu {:,ND+1:N}
(87)
(88)
(Matlab notation)
p
Ps,u Bu qu
!
2
H
kfu k2 = Ps,u qH
(89)
max
qu ,kqu
k2 =1
H H
H
H

qu
qH
q
u u
Slide 66 / 95
(90)
BH
u hu
|BHu hu |

Solution of the zero forcing (ZF) beamformer
fu =
Bu BH hu
Ps,u H u
Bu hu
(91)
Notice, the joint solution can also be written in closed form as

fu =
fu
p
Ps,u
,
kfu k
h
i

f1 , . . . , fU = [h1 , . . . , hU ] = H HH H 1
|
{z
}
(92)
ZF beamforming behaves very bad if users channels are close to each other

H
|hH
i hj | cond H H
HH H

1
1
y = HH F = HH H HH H
diag kf1 k, . . . , kfU k
,
1
kfu k =
1 i
HH H
u,u
Received intended signal power diminishes
Slide 67 / 95

fu =
Bu BH hu
Ps,u H u
Bu hu
(91)

fu =
fu
p
Ps,u
,
kfu k
h
i

f1 , . . . , fU = [h1 , . . . , hU ] = H HH H 1
|
{z
}
(92)

H
|hH
i hj | cond H H
HH H

1
1
,
1
kfu k =
1 i
HH H
u,u
Slide 67 / 95

fu =
Bu BH hu
Ps,u H u
Bu hu
(91)

fu =
fu
p
Ps,u
,
kfu k
h
i

f1 , . . . , fU = [h1 , . . . , hU ] = H HH H 1
|
{z
}
(92)

H
|hH
i hj | cond H H
HH H

1
1
,
1
kfu k =
1 i
HH H
u,u
Slide 67 / 95

fu =
Bu BH hu
Ps,u H u
Bu hu
(91)

fu =
fu
p
Ps,u
,
kfu k
h
i

f1 , . . . , fU = [h1 , . . . , hU ] = H HH H 1
|
{z
}
(92)

H
|hH
i hj | cond H H
HH H

1
1
,
1
kfu k =
1 i
HH H
u,u
Slide 67 / 95
Regularized Zero-Forcing Beamforming
Avoid misbehaved inverse through regularization

= H HH H + IU
F
1
(93)
Regularization parameter
Improves the condition number
Determines the amount of tolerable interference
In case
Ps,u
2
z,u
= SNR is equal u
= Nr
1
SNR
(94)
maximizes the SINR [Peel et al., 2005]
Slide 68 / 95
Regularized Zero-Forcing Beamforming
Avoid misbehaved inverse through regularization

= H HH H + IU
F
1
(93)
Regularization parameter
Improves the condition number
Determines the amount of tolerable interference
In case
Ps,u
2
z,u
= SNR is equal u
= Nr
1
SNR
(94)
maximizes the SINR [Peel et al., 2005]
Slide 68 / 95
Sum-Rate Optimal Beamforming

Find beamforming vectors that maximize the achievable sum rate
Assume independent encoding and receivers treating interference as noise
Rsum = max
U
X
f1 ,...,fU
log2 1 +
u=1
subject to:
U
X
2
z,u
H 2
h fu
u

2 ,
P

+ j6=u hH
u fj
kfu k2 = Ps
(95)
(96)
u=1
This problem is known to be non-convex

no efficient optimal solution is known
There exist iterative algorithms finding local optima that exploit:
Necessary conditions for the structure of the optimal precoder (similar to
regularized ZF) [Stojnic et al., 2006]
Uplink-downlink duality [Shi et al., 2008]
Relationship between sum-rate and MMSE [Christensen et al., 2008]
Slide 69 / 95

Rsum = max
U
X
f1 ,...,fU
log2 1 +
u=1
subject to:
U
X
2
z,u
H 2
h fu
u

2 ,
P

+ j6=u hH
u fj
kfu k2 = Ps
(95)
(96)
u=1

Slide 69 / 95

Rsum = max
U
X
f1 ,...,fU
log2 1 +
u=1
subject to:
U
X
2
z,u
H 2
h fu
u

2 ,
P

+ j6=u hH
u fj
kfu k2 = Ps
(95)
(96)
u=1

Slide 69 / 95
Asymptotic Performance
Investigate the sum-rate performance of the presented schemes for U , N
fixed and i.i.d. Rayleigh fading
TDMA achieves for comparison [Sharif and Hassibi, 2007]
E (RTDMA ) log2 (1 + Ps log U) ,
lim
E (RTDMA )
=1
log2 (1 + Ps log U)
(97)
gs = 1, double-logarithmic growth with U multi-user diversity

As benchmark consider DPC [Sharif and Hassibi, 2007]

E (RDPC ) N log2
1+
Ps
log U
N

(98)
gs = N and multi-user diversity

According to [Yoo and Goldsmith, 2006, Sharif and Hassibi, 2007] the presented
schemes all achieve the DPC scaling law
E (RDPC ) E (RRBF ) E (RMBF ) E (RZBF ) E (ROBF )
(99)
However, with finite U the performance is distinct
Slide 70 / 95
lim
E (RTDMA )
=1
log2 (1 + Ps log U)
(97)


E (RDPC ) N log2
1+
Ps
log U
N

(98)

(99)
Slide 70 / 95
lim
E (RTDMA )
=1
log2 (1 + Ps log U)
(97)


E (RDPC ) N log2
1+
Ps
log U
N

(98)

(99)
Slide 70 / 95
lim
E (RTDMA )
=1
log2 (1 + Ps log U)
(97)


E (RDPC ) N log2
1+
Ps
log U
N

(98)

(99)
Slide 70 / 95
Performance Comparison
90
80
Random
Matched
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
5
10
15
SNR [dB]
20
25
30
35
U = 8 users served over N = 8 antennas with equal power allocation

Random beamforming and matched beamforming are interference limited
Matched beamforming improves intended signal power
ZF beamforming has poor performance at low SNR due to noise enhancement
Regularized ZF outperforms trades off residual interference for signal power
7-8 dB gap compared to sum-rate capacity (DPC)
Slide 71 / 95
90
80
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
Random
Matched
Zero forcing
Regularized ZF
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
5
10
15
SNR [dB]
20
25
30
35

Slide 71 / 95
90
80
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
Random
Matched
Zero forcing
Regularized ZF
Sumrate capacity
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
5
10
15
SNR [dB]
20
25
30
35

Slide 71 / 95
Receive Antenna Combining

H1
UE1
M1
^
s1
g1
M1
s1
s2
s3
H2
F
BS
M2
H3
M3
UE3
M3
UE2
g3
M2
g2
s^2
s^3
Downlink multi-user MIMO with three users, linear transceivers and single streams per user
Users with Mu 1 receive antennas

Reduce residual interference
Improve intended signal power
Input-output relationship with linear transceivers
H
su = gH
u Hu fu su + gu Hu
fj sj + gH
u zu ,
(100)
j6=u
gu CMu 1 , Hu CMu N , fu CN1 , zu CN 0, IMu
Slide 72 / 95
(101)
Receive Antenna Combining

H1
UE1
M1
^
s1
g1
M1
s1
s2
s3
H2
F
BS
M2
H3
M3
UE3
M3
UE2
g3
M2
g2
s^2
s^3
Downlink multi-user MIMO with three users, linear transceivers and single streams per user
Users with Mu 1 receive antennas

Reduce residual interference
Improve intended signal power
H
su = gH
u Hu fu su + gu Hu
fj sj + gH
u zu ,
(100)
j6=u
gu CMu 1 , Hu CMu N , fu CN1 , zu CN 0, IMu
Slide 72 / 95
(101)
Receive Antenna Combining (2)

Maximizing the achievable throughput
Joint optimization of beamformers and antenna combiners
Iterative schemes for MMSE, SINR, rate optimization
[Shi et al., 2007, Codreanu et al., 2007, Liu and Chen, 2012]
VERY complex, large signalling overhead
Low complexity alternative
Independent beamforming and receive antenna combining
Preselect antenna combiners
Calculate beamformers for effective channels
N1
hu,e = HH
u gu C
(102)
reduced signalling overhead (CSI feedback)
Slide 73 / 95
Receive Antenna Combining (2)

Maximizing the achievable throughput
Joint optimization of beamformers and antenna combiners
Iterative schemes for MMSE, SINR, rate optimization
[Shi et al., 2007, Codreanu et al., 2007, Liu and Chen, 2012]
VERY complex, large signalling overhead
Low complexity alternative
Independent beamforming and receive antenna combining
Preselect antenna combiners
Calculate beamformers for effective channels
N1
hu,e = HH
u gu C
(102)
reduced signalling overhead (CSI feedback)
Slide 73 / 95
Maximum Ratio Combining
Maximize the SNR of the effective channel

gu = argmax
H 2
Hu g
2 kgk2
z,u

2
= argmax tr gH VH
u u Vu g ,
(103)
(104)
g,kgk=1
Hu = Uu u VH
u,
gu = vmax
= [Vu ]{:,1}
u
(105)
(106)
Might be bad choice in terms of interference
Slide 74 / 95
Maximum Ratio Combining
Maximize the SNR of the effective channel

gu = argmax
H 2
Hu g
2 kgk2
z,u

2
= argmax tr gH VH
u u Vu g ,
(103)
(104)
g,kgk=1
Hu = Uu u VH
u,
gu = vmax
= [Vu ]{:,1}
u
(105)
(106)
Might be bad choice in terms of interference
Slide 74 / 95
Maximum Expected SINR Combining

Maximize the expected SINR without knowledge of the precoders
gu = argmax
g
gH
gH Hu Qx,u HH
ug

P
+ Hu j6=u Qx,j HH
u g
(107)
2 I
z,u
Mu
As the beamformers are unknown, we assume isotropic input distributions

Qx,u
Ps
= 2 IN fu =
N

1
Ps
fu , E fufH
IN
u =
N
N
(108)
Hence, the optimization problem reduces to
gu = argmax
g
Ps
N2
gH Hu HH
ug
2 I
gH z,u
Mu +
Ps
(U
N2
1)Hu HH
u g
= argmax
g
gH Ag
gH Bg
(109)
This generalized Rayleigh quotient is solved by

gu = max eigenvector B1 A
(110)
This solution, however, can be shown to be equivalent to MRC

without prior knowledge about beamformers MRC maximizes the SINR
Slide 75 / 95

gu = argmax
g
gH
gH Hu Qx,u HH
ug

P
+ Hu j6=u Qx,j HH
u g
(107)
2 I
z,u
Mu

Qx,u
Ps
= 2 IN fu =
N

1
Ps
fu , E fufH
IN
u =
N
N
(108)
gu = argmax
g
Ps
N2
gH Hu HH
ug
2 I
gH z,u
Mu +
Ps
(U
N2
1)Hu HH
u g
= argmax
g
gH Ag
gH Bg
(109)

(110)

Slide 75 / 95

gu = argmax
g
gH
gH Hu Qx,u HH
ug

P
+ Hu j6=u Qx,j HH
u g
(107)
2 I
z,u
Mu

Qx,u
Ps
= 2 IN fu =
N

1
Ps
fu , E fufH
IN
u =
N
N
(108)
gu = argmax
g
Ps
N2
gH Hu HH
ug
2 I
gH z,u
Mu +
Ps
(U
N2
1)Hu HH
u g
= argmax
g
gH Ag
gH Bg
(109)

(110)

Slide 75 / 95

gu = argmax
g
gH
gH Hu Qx,u HH
ug

P
+ Hu j6=u Qx,j HH
u g
(107)
2 I
z,u
Mu

Qx,u
Ps
= 2 IN fu =
N

1
Ps
fu , E fufH
IN
u =
N
N
(108)
gu = argmax
g
Ps
N2
gH Hu HH
ug
2 I
gH z,u
Mu +
Ps
(U
N2
1)Hu HH
u g
= argmax
g
gH Ag
gH Bg
(109)

(110)

Slide 75 / 95

gu = argmax
g
gH
gH Hu Qx,u HH
ug

P
+ Hu j6=u Qx,j HH
u g
(107)
2 I
z,u
Mu

Qx,u
Ps
= 2 IN fu =
N

1
Ps
fu , E fufH
IN
u =
N
N
(108)
gu = argmax
g
Ps
N2
gH Hu HH
ug
2 I
gH z,u
Mu +
Ps
(U
N2
1)Hu HH
u g
= argmax
g
gH Ag
gH Bg
(109)

(110)

Slide 75 / 95
MMSE Combining
Optimal linear receiver for known beamformers
Minimize the estimation MSE

2
gu = argmin |su
su |2 = argmin su gH yu
g
(111)
2
Interference treated as additional noise of variance i,u
gu = Hu fu
(112)
matched filter; equivalent to maximum ratio combining

P

H
Correlation matrix of interference is known Ri,u = E Hu j6=u fj fH
j Hu

1
gu = n2 IMu + Ri,u
Hu fu
(113)
Instantaneous interference is known interference aware MMSE receiver

1
gu =
n2 IM
u
+ Hu
H
fj fH
j Hu
Hu fu
(114)
j6=u
Slide 76 / 95
MMSE Combining

2
gu = argmin |su
g
(111)
2
gu = Hu fu
(112)

P

H
j Hu

1
gu = n2 IMu + Ri,u
Hu fu
(113)

1
gu =
n2 IM
u
+ Hu
H
fj fH
j Hu
Hu fu
(114)
j6=u
Slide 76 / 95
MMSE Combining

2
gu = argmin |su
g
(111)
2
gu = Hu fu
(112)

P

H
j Hu

1
gu = n2 IMu + Ri,u
Hu fu
(113)

1
gu =
n2 IM
u
+ Hu
H
fj fH
j Hu
Hu fu
(114)
j6=u
Slide 76 / 95
MMSE Combining

2
gu = argmin |su
g
(111)
2
gu = Hu fu
(112)

P

H
j Hu

1
gu = n2 IMu + Ri,u
Hu fu
(113)

1
gu =
n2 IM
u
+ Hu
H
fj fH
j Hu
Hu fu
(114)
j6=u
Slide 76 / 95
Simple Heuristic Iterative Transceiver Design
Joint beamformer and independent receive antenna combiner calculation
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Initialize antenna combiners according to MRC
Calculate the corresponding effective channels
Determine the RZF beamformers for the effective channels
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Iteration:
1 Determine the optimal antenna combiner of each user
interference aware MMSE filter
2 Calculate the corresponding effective channels
3 Determine the RZF beamformers for the new effective channels
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Iteration:
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Iteration:
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Iteration:
Slide 77 / 95

Initialization:
Iteration:
This method, however, is in general not Pareto efficient

joint optimization required [Codreanu et al., 2007]
Slide 77 / 95
Comparison of Single-Stream Transceivers

100
MRC receiver
90
80
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
15
20
SNR [dB]
25
30
35
40
U = 8 users with M = 4 receive antennas served over N = 8 antennas with

single stream per user and equal power allocation
MRC receivers with RZF beamformers
RZF beamformers (for MRC) with MMSE interference aware receivers
Heuristic iterative scheme
Slide 78 / 95

100
90
MRC receiver
MMSEIA combining
80
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
15
20
SNR [dB]
25
30
35
40

Slide 78 / 95

100
90
MRC receiver
MMSEIA combining
Iterative scheme
80
Sum rate [bit/s/Hz]
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10
15
20
SNR [dB]
25
30
35
40

Slide 78 / 95
Multi-Stream Transmission Schemes

H1
UE1
M1
G1
L1 ^s1
M1
L1
s1
s2
s3
L3
H2
F
BS
N
M2
H3
M3
UE3
M3
UE2
G3
M2
G2
L2 ^s2
L3 ^s3
Downlink multi-user MIMO with three users, linear transceivers and multiple streams per user
Transmission of Lu 1 stream per user

Increase single-user rate through multiplexing
u = Gu Hu Fu su + Gu Hu
s
Fj sj + Gu zu ,
(115)
j6=u
Gu CLu Mu , Hu CMu N , Fu CNLu , zu CN 0, IMu
(116)
We restrict to Lu = Mu ; presented antenna combiners exist for Lu 1 as well
Slide 79 / 95

H1
UE1
M1
G1
L1 ^s1
M1
L1
s1
s2
s3
L3
H2
F
BS
N
M2
H3
M3
UE3
M3
UE2
G3
M2
G2
L2 ^s2
L3 ^s3

s
Fj sj + Gu zu ,
(115)
j6=u
(116)
Slide 79 / 95

H1
UE1
M1
G1
L1 ^s1
M1
L1
s1
s2
s3
L3
H2
F
BS
N
M2
H3
M3
UE3
M3
UE2
G3
M2
G2
L2 ^s2
L3 ^s3

s
Fj sj + Gu zu ,
(115)
j6=u
(116)
Slide 79 / 95
Block-Diagonalization Precoding
Extension of ZF beamforming to multiple streams per user [Spencer et al., 2004]
To simplify notation assume: Mu = M, u and Lu = L, u
Also, let us set M = L (else use effective channels including antenna combining)
Zero interference condition
Hj Fu = 0, j =
6 u
H1
..
.
Hu1
Hu+1
..
.
HU
Fu = 0
(117)
Select the precoder Fu in the left null space

u H
H Fu = 0,
Fu null H
u
(118)

u = HH , . . . , HH , HH , . . . , HH CN(U1)M
H
1
u1
u+1
U
(119)
Slide 80 / 95
Hj Fu = 0, j =
6 u
H1
..
.
Hu1
Hu+1
..
.
HU
Fu = 0
(117)

u H
H Fu = 0,
Fu null H
u
(118)

u = HH , . . . , HH , HH , . . . , HH CN(U1)M
H
1
u1
u+1
U
(119)
Slide 80 / 95
Hj Fu = 0, j =
6 u
H1
..
.
Hu1
Hu+1
..
.
HU
Fu = 0
(117)

u H
H Fu = 0,
Fu null H
u
(118)

u = HH , . . . , HH , HH , . . . , HH CN(U1)M
H
1
u1
u+1
U
(119)
Slide 80 / 95
Block-Diagonalization Precoding (2)
Rank constraint to support L = M streams

u
rank (Hu Fu ) = M rank (Fu ) = M rank null H
u
rank null H
= D = max (N (U 1)M, 0) ,
N
M
feasibility condition
(120)
(121)
(122)
General solution in case D M

Fu = Bu Ku , Ku CDM ,
u
Bu CND . . . orthonormal basis for null H
Slide 81 / 95
(123)
(124)
Rank constraint to support L = M streams

u
rank (Hu Fu ) = M rank (Fu ) = M rank null H
u
rank null H
= D = max (N (U 1)M, 0) ,
N
M
feasibility condition
(120)
(121)
(122)
General solution in case D M

Fu = Bu Ku , Ku CDM ,
u
Bu CND . . . orthonormal basis for null H
Slide 81 / 95
(123)
(124)
Achievable rate of block-diagonalization (BD) precoding

H H
H H H
Ru = log2 det IM + Hu Bu Ku KH
u Bu Hu = log2 det IM + Ku Bu Hu Hu Bu Ku
(125)
Rate optimization through SVD precoding and water-filling
Ku = Vu diag (p1 , . . . , pM ) ,
MD
Hu Bu = Uu u VH
u C
(126)
Joint water-filling over all users or individual water-filling

Equal power allocation with unitary precoding
r
Ku =
Slide 82 / 95
Ps
[Vu ]:,1:M
MU
(127)

H H
H H H
(125)
Ku = Vu diag (p1 , . . . , pM ) ,
MD
Hu Bu = Uu u VH
u C
(126)

r
Ku =
Slide 82 / 95
Ps
[Vu ]:,1:M
MU
(127)

H H
H H H
(125)
Ku = Vu diag (p1 , . . . , pM ) ,
MD
Hu Bu = Uu u VH
u C
(126)

r
Ku =
Slide 82 / 95
Ps
[Vu ]:,1:M
MU
(127)
Regularized Block-Diagonalization Precoding

Similar to ZF beamforming, BD precoding does not have great performance at
low SNR
Improvement through regularization [Stankovic and Haardt, 2008]
Two-step precoder calculation
1 Residual interference and noise trade off
(obtained through MMSE optimization)

1

(a)

(a)

(a)
(a)
Fu = F
CNN ,
u diag [Fu ]{:,1} , . . . , [Fu ]{:,N}
u(a) = V
u
H
F
u u + IN
1/2
u = U
u
H
uV
H
u
(128)
(129)
(130)
. . . regularization constant
e.g., =
Slide 83 / 95
2
Mz,u
Ps
[Stankovic and Haardt, 2008]

Similar to ZF beamforming, BD precoding does not have great performance at
low SNR
Improvement through regularization [Stankovic and Haardt, 2008]
Two-step precoder calculation
1 Residual interference and noise trade off
(obtained through MMSE optimization)

1

(a)

(a)

(a)
(a)
Fu = F
CNN ,
u diag [Fu ]{:,1} , . . . , [Fu ]{:,N}
u(a) = V
u
H
F
u u + IN
1/2
u = U
u
H
uV
H
u
(128)
(129)
(130)
. . . regularization constant
e.g., =
Slide 83 / 95
2
Mz,u
Ps
[Stankovic and Haardt, 2008]
(a)
2 Optimize transmission over the effective channel Hu Fu

(a)
(a)
(a)
Hu Fu = Uu u
(b)

(a)
Vu H ,
(a)
Fu = Vu diag (p1 , . . . , pM )1/2 CNM
(131)
(132)

The regularized block-diagonalization (RBD) precoder is then
(a) (b)
Fu = Fu Fu
Slide 84 / 95
(133)
Iterative Optimization to Achieve Sum-Rate Capacity

Sum-rate capacity is achieved by DPC
Input covariances have to be chosen to maximize
BC
Csum
=
U
X
max
Qx,1 ,...,Qx,U
Ru ,
(134)
u=1
subject to: {R1 , . . . , RU } CBC
(135)
This problem is non-convex and thus hard to solve

However, duality can be exploited to determine sum-rate capacity from the dual
uplink [Vishwanath et al., 2003]:
MAC,dual
Csum
=
max
Qx,1 ,...,Qx,U
MAC,dual
BC
Csum
= Csum
,
U

X
MAC
MAC
H
,
log2 det IN +
Hu Qx,u Hu
(136)
(137)
u=1
subject to: Qx,u 0,
U
X
tr (Qx,u ) Ps ,
(138)
u=1
NMu
HMAC
= HH
u
u C
Slide 85 / 95
(139)
Iterative Optimization to Achieve Sum-Rate Capacity

Sum-rate capacity is achieved by DPC
Input covariances have to be chosen to maximize
BC
Csum
=
U
X
max
Qx,1 ,...,Qx,U
Ru ,
(134)
u=1
subject to: {R1 , . . . , RU } CBC
(135)
This problem is non-convex and thus hard to solve

However, duality can be exploited to determine sum-rate capacity from the dual
uplink [Vishwanath et al., 2003]:
MAC,dual
Csum
=
max
Qx,1 ,...,Qx,U
MAC,dual
BC
Csum
= Csum
,
U

X
MAC
MAC
H
,
log2 det IN +
Hu Qx,u Hu
(136)
(137)
u=1
subject to: Qx,u 0,
U
X
tr (Qx,u ) Ps ,
(138)
u=1
NMu
HMAC
= HH
u
u C
Slide 85 / 95
(139)
Iterative Optimization to Achieve Sum-Rate Capacity (2)
Notice, we have almost seen this problem before: iterative

water-filling [Yu et al., 2004]
However, now there is a sum-power constraint!
Coupling between users joint water level
Iterative water-filling does (often) not converge in this case
Extension: sum power iterative water-filling with extended
memory [Jindal et al., 2005]
Notice, the covariances obtained from the dual uplink optimization can be
transformed to corresponding downlink covariance
matrices [Vishwanath et al., 2003]
Slide 86 / 95
Iterative Optimization to Achieve Sum-Rate Capacity (2)
Notice, we have almost seen this problem before: iterative

water-filling [Yu et al., 2004]
However, now there is a sum-power constraint!
Coupling between users joint water level
Iterative water-filling does (often) not converge in this case
Extension: sum power iterative water-filling with extended
memory [Jindal et al., 2005]
Notice, the covariances obtained from the dual uplink optimization can be
transformed to corresponding downlink covariance
matrices [Vishwanath et al., 2003]
Slide 86 / 95
Matlab Example Sum Power Iterative Water-Filling
Repeat until the sum rate converges:

1 Generate effective channel matrices at iteration n
(n)
Hu,eff
= Hu IN +
U1
X
1/2
HH
[u+j]U
(nU+j)
Q[u+j]
U
H[u+j]U
(140)
j=1
[u + j]U = (u + j 1) mod U + 1
(141)
(Notice, this has a memory of length U 1)

(n)
2 Determine new input covariances Qu , u by SVD precoding and joint

(n)
water-filling over all effective channels Hu,eff , u
Alternative: use any convex optimization solver, e.g., CVX
Slide 87 / 95

(n)
Hu,eff
= Hu IN +
U1
X
1/2
HH
[u+j]U
(nU+j)
Q[u+j]
U
H[u+j]U
(140)
j=1
[u + j]U = (u + j 1) mod U + 1
(141)

(n)

(n)
Slide 87 / 95

(n)
Hu,eff
= Hu IN +
U1
X
1/2
HH
[u+j]U
(nU+j)
Q[u+j]
U
H[u+j]U
(140)
j=1
[u + j]U = (u + j 1) mod U + 1
(141)

(n)

(n)
Slide 87 / 95
Matlab Example MIMO-BC Precoder Comparison
Consider N = 8, Mu = 2, u, U = 4
Comparison of the achievable rate of
BD precoding with equal power allocation
RBD with water-filling
Sum-rate capacity as benchmark
Slide 88 / 95
Contents
6 Conclusions
Slide 89 / 95
Conclusions
Summary and Conclusions
Advantages of multi-user MIMO

Not restricted by UE capabilities (antennas)
Less susceptible with respect to antenna correlation
Uplink multi-user MIMO MIMO-MAC
CSIT not necessary to obtain a multi-user multiplexing gain
MMSE-SIC achieves (ergodic) capacity
Downlink multi-user MIMO MIMO-BC
CSIT required to obtain a multi-user multiplexing gain as mostly Mu < N
DPC achieves all points in the capacity region
Practically more relevant: linear transceivers
Slide 90 / 95
Conclusions

Slide 90 / 95
Conclusions

Slide 90 / 95
Conclusions
Multi-User MIMO Transmission

389.168 Advanced Wireless Communications 1
stefan.schwarz@nt.tuwien.ac.at
Abbreviations I
BC
BD
CDIT
CSI
CSIT
DPC
MAC
MIMO
MMSE
MRC
MSE
RBD
RZF
SIC
SINR
SISO
SNR
SVD
TDMA
ZF
Slide 92 / 95
broadcast channel
block-diagonalization
channel distribution information at the transmitter
channel state information
channel state information at the transmitter
dirty paper coding
multiple access channel
multiple-input multiple-output
minimum mean squared error
maximum ratio combining
mean squared error
regularized block-diagonalization
regularized zero forcing
successive interference cancellation
signal to interference and noise ratio
single-input single-output
signal to noise ratio
singular value decomposition
time division multiple access
zero forcing
Abbreviations
References I
Christensen, S., Agarwal, R., Carvalho, E., and Cioffi, J. (2008).
Weighted sum-rate maximization using weighted MMSE for MIMO-BC beamforming design.
IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 7(12):47924799.
Codreanu, M., Tolli, A., Juntti, M., and Latva-aho, M. (2007).
Joint design of tx-rx beamformers in MIMO downlink channel.
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 55(9):46394655.
Costa, M. (1983).
Writing on dirty paper (corresp.).
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 29(3):439 441.
Harashima, H. and Miyakawa, H. (1972).
Matched-transmission technique for channels with intersymbol interference.
IEEE Transactions on Communications, 20(4):774780.
Jindal, N., Rhee, W., Vishwanath, S., Jafar, S., and Goldsmith, A. (2005).
Sum power iterative water-filling for multi-antenna gaussian broadcast channels.
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 51(4):15701580.
Kobayashi, M. and Caire, G. (2006).
Iterative waterfilling for weighted rate sum maximization in MIMO-MAC.
In IEEE 7th Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications, pages 15.
Liu, Q. and Chen, C. W. (2012).
Joint transceiver beamforming design and power allocation for multiuser MIMO systems.
In IEEE International Conference on Communications, pages 38673871.
Slide 93 / 95
References
References II
Peel, C., Hochwald, B., and Swindlehurst, A. (2005).
A vector-perturbation technique for near-capacity multiantenna multiuser communication-part I: channel
inversion and regularization.
IEEE Transactions on Communications, 53(1):195 202.
Sharif, M. and Hassibi, B. (2007).
A comparison of time-sharing, DPC, and beamforming for MIMO broadcast channels with many users.
Shi, S., Schubert, M., and Boche, H. (2007).
Downlink MMSE transceiver optimization for multiuser MIMO systems: Duality and sum-MSE minimization.
Shi, S., Schubert, M., and Boche, H. (2008).
Rate optimization for multiuser MIMO systems with linear processing.
Spencer, Q., Swindlehurst, A., and Haardt, M. (2004).
Zero-forcing methods for downlink spatial multiplexing in multiuser MIMO channels.
IEEE Trans. on Signal Processing, 52(2):461 471.
Stankovic, V. and Haardt, M. (2008).
Generalized design of multi-user MIMO precoding matrices.
Stojnic, M., Vikalo, H., and Hassibi, B. (2006).
Rate maximization in multi-antenna broadcast channels with linear preprocessing.
Slide 94 / 95
References
References III
Tomlinson, M. (1971).
New automatic equaliser employing modulo arithmetic.
Electronics Letters, 7(5):138139.
Vishwanath, S., Jindal, N., and Goldsmith, A. (2003).
Duality, achievable rates, and sum-rate capacity of gaussian MIMO broadcast channels.
Weingarten, H., Steinberg, Y., and Shamai, S. (2006).
The capacity region of the Gaussian multiple-input multiple-output broadcast channel.
IEEE Trans. on Info. Theory, 52(9):3936 3964.
Yoo, T. and Goldsmith, A. (2006).
On the optimality of multiantenna broadcast scheduling using zero-forcing beamforming.
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 24(3):528541.
Yu, W., Rhee, W., Boyd, S., and Cioffi, J. (2004).
Iterative water-filling for gaussian vector multiple-access channels.
Zanella, A., Chiani, M., and Win, M. (2009).
On the marginal distribution of the eigenvalues of Wishart matrices.
Zheng, L. and Tse, D. (2003).
Diversity and multiplexing: a fundamental tradeoff in multiple-antenna channels.
Slide 95 / 95
References

BC Mac

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

BC Mac

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Multi-User MIMO Transmission

389.168 Advanced Wireless Communications 1

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Single-User MIMO Capacity

Fast-fading with channel distribution information (CDIT )

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Single-User MIMO Capacity

Fast-fading with channel distribution information (CDIT )

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Single-User MIMO Capacity

Fast-fading with channel distribution information (CDIT )

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Single-User MIMO Capacity

Fast-fading with channel distribution information (CDIT )

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Slow-Fading Channels

Achievable rate at high SNR

Outage probability at high SNR

The curve gd (gs ) formulates the diversity-multiplexing tradeoff

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Slow-Fading Channels

Achievable rate at high SNR

Outage probability at high SNR

The curve gd (gs ) formulates the diversity-multiplexing tradeoff

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Diversity-Multiplexing Tradeoff of Rayleigh Fading Channels

Diversity gain gd(gs)

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Spatial Multiplexing: V-BLAST Architecture

L parallel data streams (layers)

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Spatial Multiplexing: V-BLAST Architecture

L parallel data streams (layers)

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Spatial Multiplexing: V-BLAST Architecture

L parallel data streams (layers)

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Spatial Multiplexing: V-BLAST Architecture

L parallel data streams (layers)

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Successive Interference Cancellation

Detect one layer after the other and subtract interference

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Space-Time Block Coding D-BLAST

Illustration of the basic idea of D-BLAST for two transmit antennas

Spread symbols over space and time

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Space-Time Block Coding D-BLAST

Illustration of the basic idea of D-BLAST for two transmit antennas

Spread symbols over space and time

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Matlab Example Single-User Transceiver Comparison

Recapitulation of Previous Lecture

Motivation for Multi-User MIMO

Limitations of Single-User MIMO

Remember Single-User MIMO:

C L(Nt , Nr ) log2 (1 + SNR(Nt , Nr ))

Motivation for Multi-User MIMO

Limitations of Single-User MIMO

Remember Single-User MIMO:

C L(Nt , Nr ) log2 (1 + SNR(Nt , Nr ))

Motivation for Multi-User MIMO

Limitations of Single-User MIMO - Antenna Correlation