Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271445369

Interference Alignment with Limited Feedback


for Macrocell-Femtocell Heterogeneous
Networks
CONFERENCE PAPER MAY 2015

CITATION

READS

27

1 AUTHOR:
Mohamed Rihan Elmeligy
Egypt-Japan University of Science and Techn
15 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,


letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: Mohamed Rihan Elmeligy


Retrieved on: 06 January 2016

Interference Alignment with Limited Feedback for


Macrocell-Femtocell Heterogeneous Networks
Mohamed Rihan1 , Maha Elsabrouty2

Osamu Muta3 , Hiroshi Furukawa4

School of Electronics, Communications, and Computing


Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (E-JUST)
New Borg Elarab Alexandria, Egypt
Email: mohamed.elmelegy1 , maha.elsabrouty2 @ejust.edu.eg

Center for Japan-Egypt Cooperation in Science and


Technology, Kyushu University, Japan
Email: muta3 , furuhiro4 @ait.kyushu-u.ac.jp

AbstractInterference Alignment (IA) emerged on the communication scene as a solution to the interference problem in all
interference-limited networks, including heterogeneous cellular
systems. However, the performance of IA is greatly related to the
accuracy of the channel state information at transmitters (CSIT),
namely the number of feedback bits. Accordingly, in order to
improve the performance of IA, it would be useful to analyze
the number of feedback bits with respect to the sum rate loss.
Motivated by that, this paper studies a limited feedback-based IA
scheme suitable for two tier macrocell-femtocell heterogeneous
networks. First, an approximate analytical expression for the
upper bound on the total sum rate loss due to limited feedback
in the studied IA system, is derived. Then, a simulation based
evaluation of the sum-rate loss due to the implementation of
limited feedback IA in heterogeneous networks is obtained.
Simulation results confirmed the severe effect of quantization
of CSI on the interference alignment performance.
KeywordsInterference Alignment, Femtocell (IA), Macrocell,
Limited Feedback, Loss rate, Heterogeneous Networks (HetNets).

I.

I NTRODUCTION

Recently, interference alignment (IA) has been viewed as


one of the most successful interference mitigation techniques.
The pioneer work by Cadambe and Jafar [1] proposed IA
for interference mitigation over MIMO interference channel
(MIMO-IC) and indicate the advantage of using IA in terms
of improved sum rate and DoFs. Motivated by these results,
several researchers extended the application of IA to more
complicated scenarios including the interfering broadcast channels (IBC) and interfering multiple access channels (IMAC),
which are typical models for the cellular networks [2]-[3]. In
addition to these classical models, the increasing traffic in cellular networks and the introduction of heterogeneous networks
(HetNets) as a paradigm to serve such aspect, the interference
problem in HetNets becomes more severe [4]. IA techniques
that are suitable for HetNets have been proposed to solve such
interference problem [5]-[6]. However, the advantage of IA
is primarily based on the existence of global channel state
information (CSI) at all transceivers, which is considered as a
significant system overhead.
From a practical perspective, some recent publications
have proposed novel IA schemes with limited feedback [7][10]. In traditional MIMO systems, limited feedback based
on quantization codebook is commonly used[11]. Similarly,
for IA over MIMO-ICs, limited feedback schemes are also
applicable. The authors in [12] introduced a limited feedback

technique for MIMO-IC that are based on quantization on


Grassman manifold. Additionally, the relationship between the
performance of IA and the feedback amount or codebook size
was presented [12]. It is proved that even with limited CSI
feedback, the full sum DoFs of the IC can be achieved. In
[7], the performance analysis and optimization of subspace IA
in uplink cellular systems is presented. However, the above
existing studies for IA in limited feedback condition do not
consider interference conditions in HetNets.
As an IA technique for HetNets, a closed form hierarchical
interference alignment (HIA) has been proposed [6]. In HIA,
the transmit precoding matrices for the femtocell BSs (FBSs)
are calculated first, then those for the macrocell BS (MBS)
are calculated. HIA achieves a higher sum-rate than the other
interference mitigation techniques. However, the performance
of such HIA technique is not addressed in limited feedback
environment.
In this paper, we study the HIA technique in limited
feedback two tier heterogeneous cellular systems. Our main
contribution resides in developing a limited feedback based IA
strategy that fits HetNets. We consider evaluating the performance loss due to limited feedback design for the considered
macrocell-femtocell HetNet scenario. Furthermore, we drive a
closed form expression for the sum rate loss due to limited
feedback design.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follow: section
II is dedicated to review the HIA system. In section III, We
propose a strategy for quantized CSI feedback in macrocellfemtocell model. An approximate sum rate loss upper bound
for the feedback HIA algorithm when employed to HetNets is
derived in Section IV. The simulation results are investigated
in section V, Then the paper is concluded in section VI.
Notations: We use bold upper (lower) letters to denote
matrices (column vectors), ()H to denote conjugate transpose,
E[] to denote the expectation,  to denote the L2 norm, ||
to denote the absolute value. (.) , and (.)T used to denote
conjugate transpose and transpose operators, respectively. The
acronym i.i.d means independent and identically distributed.

978-1-4799-8088-8/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Rtot

4
dk




=
log2 1 +

k=1 i=1


 dk 

(i)

pjk k,f (k) wk

 j=1
j=i


2


 (i)
(i) 

pik k,f (k)  wk


Hk,f (k) vk 




2 
2

 4 dm 



 


(j) 
(i)
(l)
pjm k,f (m) wk Hk,f (m) vm  + 1
Hk,f (k) vk  + 
 m=1 l=1



(3)

m=k

that k th user signal. The signal at user k is given by:


yk = Wk

4


pm k,f (m) Hk,f (m) Vm sm + n


k

(2)

m=1

k = Wk nk is the effective noise vector with cowhere n


variance 2 Wk Wk . Without loss of generality, we can assume
that 2 = 1. For the given set of linear precoding matrices,
Vk and Wk , where k {1, 2, 3, 4}, the achievable sum-rate
at user k is calculated as in Eq.(3), wherein pik denotes the
transmit power of the ith transmit symbol for k th , sik .
Fig. 1.

System model for macrocell-femtocell MIMO HetNet.

B. IA for Macrocell-Femtocell HetNets


II.

S YSTEM M ODEL AND IA D ESIGN

The main concept of this algorithm is to sequentially design


the transmit beamforming matrices in ascending order based
on the number of antennas of the BSs.

A. System Model
We build on the work presented in [6], which introduced
a hierarchical IA (HIA) suitable for macrocell-femtocell HetNets. We consider a macrocell-femtocell HetNet with one
macrocell served by a basestation (BS) BS2 and two shared
spectrum femtocells each served with one femtocell access
point/BS, namely BS1 and BS3 . The femtocell BS (FBS)
serves one user per cell and the macrocell BS (MBS) serves
two users simultaneously, as shown in Fig.1. Each served user
receives d independent data streams. As a typical antenna configuration for macrocell-femtocell scenarios [6], it is assumed
that each FBS and MBS are equipped with N and 2N transmit
antennas, respectively, and all users have N receive antennas.
The received signal at the k th receiver is expressed as:
yk

4


=
pm k,f (m) Hk,f (m) Vm sm + nk

This algorithm concluded in the following three procedures


[6]:

Designing the precoding matrices for the FBSs:


This step aligns the interference signals caused by the
FBs at the MUs with in an N/2 dimensional space.
1

N/2

v4 = eig(H3,3 H3,1 H2,1 H2,3 )|i=1


i
v1

(5)

i
H1
3,1 H3,3 v4


=
1

H3,1 H3,3 vi4

(6)

N/2

where eig(A)|i=1 denotes that matrix consists of the eigen


vectors corresponding to the smallest N/2 eigenvalues of the
matrix A (indexed from 1 to N/2 ).

(1)

Designing the receiving matrices for all users:


This step can be designed by aiming to cancel out all
the interference signals from the FBSs. Therefore,

m=1

where sm is the transmit symbol vector with size d1 intended


for user m. Vm is the precoding matrix for the mth user, where
V1 , V4 CN d and V2 , V3 C2N d . Hk,f (m) is the channel
matrix from the f (m)th BS to the ith user whose entries are
i.i.d according to CN (0, 1), where f (m) indicates the index
of the serving BS of user k, such that f (m) = 1, 2, 2, and 3
when m = 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Similarly, k,f (m) is
large scale fading coefficient that expresses both the pathloss
and shadowing effects between the f (m)th BS to the ith user.
The symbol, pm is the transmit power allocated to the mth
users symbol vector within an average power constraint per
BS, i.e., p1 = p4 = Pf emto , p2 + p3 = Pmacro , where Pf emto
and Pmacro are the total transmit power at each FBS and MBS,
respectively. yk is the N dimensional received signal vector,
and nk is the additive white Gaussian noise with zero mean
and covariance matrix 2 IN .
At the decoder side of each user, a receive-combining
matrix (Wk ) is multiplied by the received signal to recover

W1 = N ((H1,3 V4 ) ),

(7)

W4 = N ((H4,1 V1 ) ),

(8)

W2 = N ((H2,1 V1 ) ) = N ((H2,3 V4 ) ),

(9)

W3 = N ((H3,1 V1 ) ) = N ((H3,3 V4 ) )

(10)

where N () denotes the orthonormal basis for the null space


of a matrix.

Designing the MBS transmit precoding matrices:


These precoding matrices will be designed such that
all interference signals at the FUs and MUs caused by
the MBS can be removed by applying the precoding
and receiving matrices. Therefore,
V2 = N
V3 = N

(W1 H1,2 ) (W4 H4,2 ) (W3 H3,2 )

(W1 H1,2 ) (W4 H4,2 ) (W2 H2,2 )

This IA algorithm guarantees to achieve


and 2N DoF for the whole network [6].

N
2



(11)

(12)

DoF per user

III.

M ACROCELL -F EMTOCELL F EEDBACK A LGORITHM


AND C HANNEL Q UANTIZATION M ODEL

A. Proposed Macrocell-Femtocell Feedback Algorithm


Building on the HIA algorithm [6], Our proposed feedback
algorithm is described in algorithm 1. In this algorithm, we
assume that each mobile user knows its local channel state
information, and is able to feedback it to its serving BS,
whether, it is MBS or FBS. Additionally, we assume that the
links between the MBS and FBSs as well as the link between
the MBS and the IA design unit are error and delay free.

IV.

A PPROXIMATE S UM R ATE L OSS U PPER B OUND FOR


L IMITED F EEDBACK H IERARCHICAL IA S CHEME

In this section, an approximate sum rate loss upper bound


for the limited feedback HIA scheme is derived for the case of
chordal distance based quantization model. The total mean loss
in sum rate can be calculated using Eq.(3), following similar
approaches as in [12]-[14]:
4



tot =
RLtot = E Rtot R
E {RLk }
k=1

Algorithm 1 Limited-Feedback Algorithm for HetNets

(2) Each user k will send the vector indices of all its cross
channels obtained from (1), to its corresponding BS f (m).
(3) Using the same codebooks Ck,f (m) , Each BS construct
k,f (m) .
the quantized version of the channels H
(4) Each of the FBSs forwards the quantized channels of the
FUs users to the MBS through the backhual links. The MBS
will add the quantized cross channels CSIs of its MUs and
forward all the quantized channels to the IA design unit.


k, V
m) ,
(5) Calculate the HIA algorithm transceivers, (W
according to Eqs. (5-12) by using the quantized channels.

In this paper, we use random vector quantization (RVQ),


in which each of the 2B quantization vectors is independently
chosen from the isotropic distribution on the N or 2N dimensional unit shpere using minimum chordal distance.
The quantization effect is examined through averaging over
different channel realizations including the fading and corresponding random codebook choices. Each channel normalized
kj , is constructed as a vertical concatenation of the
vector h
kj , and can be expressed as [14]:
normalized matrix H

hkj +
1 ekj
ekj skj

(13)

kj ,
where skj is isotropically distributed in the nullspace of h
kj is the quantized unit vector
and is independent of ekj . h
codeword selected from the codebook, selected to represent
kj . Also skj is the unit vector representing the direction of the
h
quantization error, and ekj is the corresponding quantization
error magnitude calculated as [14]:

ekj = min

ci C


2


1 H
kj ci 

kj + ekj Skj
1 ekj H

(i)
R
k


(16)


2 
(i) 
i  (i)
pk  wk
Hk,f (k) vk 

2 


(i) 
i  (i)
k
vk 
pk  w
Hk,f (k)
E log2

 dk 
2



(j) 
j (i)


+ E log2
w
v
1
+
p
H
k,f
(k)
k
k
k



j=1

j=i

 
2

dm 
4 


(i)
(l) 
k
vm 
+ 
pjm w
Hk,f (m)

m=1 l=1

RLtot = E

log2

(17)

m=k

= T1 + T2

(18)

where T1 and T2 denotes the first and second two terms of


Eq.(17), respectively. Let us begin by evaluating the upper
bound of T1 . The channel matrix Hk,f (k) , can be expressed by

2
its magnitude Mk,f (m) = Hk,f (k) and normalized matrix
k,f (k) that is given in Eq.(15),
H

2 
 (i)

i
k,f (k) v(i) 
H
(pk Mk,f (m) ) wk
k 




(i)
(i)
i
k
E log2
vk
Hk,f (k)
(pk Mk,f (m) ) 1 ek,f (k) w
2 

(i)
(i) 
k
vk 
+
ek,f (k) w
Sk,f (k)

T1 = E

log2

(19)

In Eq.(19), by assuming large number of feedback bits for


each of the cross channels, the error magnitude ek,f (k) will be
negligible. Consequently, Eq.(19) can be written as:

(14)

2 
 (i)

i
k,f (k) v(i) 
H
(pk Mk,f (m) ) wk
k 

2 



(i)
(i) 
i
k
(pk Mk,f (m) ) 1 ek,f (k) w
vk 
Hk,f (k)
E log2
2 



 (i)
w
k,f (k) v(i) 
H
= E log2
k 
 k
2 



(i)
(i) 
 1 ek,f (k) w
k
vk 
(20)
Hk,f (k)
E log2


where C is the used codebook, and will be subscripted by user


index to specify the codebook generated at specific user. Using
the matrix version of the channels, Eq. (13) can be expressed
in matrix form as:
kj =
H

(i)
Rk

(i)
(i) are the perfect CSIs and limited feedback
where Rk and R
k
based CSIs sum rate for the ith stream of the k th user
respectively. By substituting in Eq.(16) using expression in
Eq.(3) and taking into account that we are trying to get an
upper bound on the loss, we can loosly consider that in the
case of perfect CSI, the interference terms in the denominator
of Eq.(3) are negligible. The attenuation factor related to the
pathloss and shadowing effects can be included in the channel

matrices, so the term k,f (k) Hk,f (k) will be replaced by only
Hk,f (k) . Therefore,

B. Channel Vector Quantization Model

k=1 i=1

(1) Each user k, uses its codebooks Ck,f (m) with Bk,f (m)
k,f (m) .
bits, to quantize each Hk,f (m) , to H

hkj =

dk
4 


(15)

T1 = E

log2


 (i)
w
 k


 (i)
w
E log2
 k


T1 = E

log2

2 

k,f (k) v(i) 
(21)
H
k 
2 



(i)
k,f (k)
vk 
E log2 (1 ek,f (k) ) ,
H

(i)
(i) 2
In Eq.(21), the two terms |wk H
and
k,f (k) vk |
(i)
2

Hk,f (k)
vk | , in which the channels Hk,f (k) and Hk,f (k)
are drawn randomly from a complex unit hypersphere and the
(i) (i)
(i)
(i)
corresponding transceiver vectors (wk , vk ) and (w
vk )
k ,
are formed using the channel information of the entire network,
so they should follow similar distributions with the same
parameters [14]. Therefore T1 term can be expressed as:


T1 = E log2 (1 ek,f (k) )



(22)
= log2 (e) E n(1 ek,f (k) )

2

2

 (i)
 (i)
(j) 
(l) 
k,f (m)
k
k
H
vm  + ek,f (m)  w
vk 
Skj
1 ek,f (m)  w



!
0


 



 (i)
  (i)


(j)
(l)

k,f (m)
k
vm   W
vk  ,
H
+ 2 1 ek,f (m) ek,f (m)  w
Skj
k



!

A2 = E

(i)
|
wk


E

(28)


2
 (i)
(j) 
k
ek,f (m)  w
vk 
Skj

(29)

Inequality in Eq.(27), follows from the relation |a + b|2


(|a|2 + |b|2 ). Since the beamformers design targets zero interference condition, with the design
 equations in Subsection

 (i)


k,f (m) v(l)
k H
II-B, we can consider the term w
m  approximately zero. According to [13],
2

 (i)
1
(j) 
w
vk 
=
Skj
,
 k
N2


E ek,f (m)
A2
N2

Based on the characteristics of the CD based quantization


model proposed in [13] and [15], then the upper bound of the
term T1 can be expressed as:


T1 = E log2 (1 ek,f (k) )
(23)





1
n
B

1+ 2
, 2Bk,f (k) .
= log2 (e) 2 k,f (k)
n
M

1
n=1

where (a, b) is the well known Euler beta function [16].


Now we derive the upper bound for T2 in Eq.(18). T2 can
be expressed as follow:

 dk 
2


(i)
(j) 
k
1 + 
vk 
pjk w
T2 = E log2
Hk,f (k)

j=1

j=i

 
2

dm 
4 



(i)
(l)
k
vm 
+ 
Hk,f (m)
pjm w

m=1 l=1

A1



E ek,f (k)

(32)

N2

Since the magnitude of the distribution of Rayleigh channel


2
squared
is gamma

distribution
 with parameters (N , 1), then

E Mk,f (m) = E Mk,f (k) = N 2 . So, the upper bound of
T2 , can be expressed as:
dk


dm
4 






j
j
T2 log2 1 +
pk E ek,f (m) +
pm E ek,f (m)
m=1 l=1
m=k

j=1
j=i

Using Eqs.(23) and (33) in Eq.(18), we get the upper bound


on the rate loss for downlink HIA for the assumed HetNets
scenario as:

(24)

dk
4 



UB

=
E RL

(33)

k=1 i=1
Bk,f (k)

(log2 (e)) 2

For any concave function (), Jensens inequality leads to


(E[X]) E[(X)]. Therefore,

+ log2 1 +

dk






1
n
B
1+ 2
, 2 k,f (k)
n
N 1
n=1


pk

Bk,f (k)

j=1
j=i

2
dk 



 (i)

(j) 
k,f (k)
k
vk 
H
T2 log2 1 +
pjk E(Mk,f (k) ) E  w

j=1

!

j=i
A1

2

dm 
4 

 (i)

(l) 
k
(25)
vm 
pjm E(Mk,f (m) ) E  w
+
Hk,f (m)

m=1 l=1


!
A2

From Eq.(13), A2 in Eq.(25) can be rewritten as:


2

 (i)
(l) 
w
k,f (m)
vm 
H
 k
2

 (i) 
(l) 
k,f (m) +  ek,f (m) Sk,f (m) )
k
( 1 ek,f (m) H
vm 
= E  w

A2 = E


 

(i)
(l) 
 1 ek,f (m) w
k
vm 
Hk,f (m)
E


 2

(i)
(j) 
 ekj w
k
vk 
+
Skj


(31)

Similarly, we can obtain that,

m=k

m=k

(30)

(26)

(27)

dm
4 

m=1 l=1
m=k


j

pm

Bk,f (m)

N2
B
, 2 k,f (k)
N2 1

(34)


N2
Bk,f (m)

,
2
N2 1

(35)

(36)

V. S IMULATION R ESULTS
In this section, the performance of the limited feedback
HIA scheme to the heterogeneous network, is studied under
limited feedback design. The simulation parameters used for
such scenario are set as { Total number of users (K) = 4,
number of antennas per user (N ) = 2, each FBS serves one
user and have 2 antennas, the MBS serves two users and have
4 anetnnas }. The pathloss and shadowing parameters for the
proposed scenario are the same as listed in [18][17].
In Fig. 2, we compare the total network sum rate of the
HIA algorithm with perfect CSI case and with RVQ based
limited feedback case with different bit resolution ( B = 3,
7, 15 bits), where each CSI is quantized with 2B bits. It is
apparent that the HIA algorithm is very sensitive to the CSI
accuracy, where at (SNR = 30 dB), for example, the sum rate
decreases to 25% of its value with using high resolution value
of (B = 15bits), and an even larger decrease with lower bit
resolution values. Employing high bit resolution values (B =

Average sum rate (bits/sec/Hz)

20

15

10

0
0

VII.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank the Egyptian ministry of higher


education(MoHE)-missions department, and Egypt-Japan University
of Science and Technology(E-JUST) for funding our work.

R EFERENCES
[1] V. R. Cadambe, and S. A. Jafar, Interference Alignment and Degrees of
Freedom of the K-user interference channel, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,
vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 3425-3441, Aug. 2008.
[2] C. Suh and D. Tse, Interference Alignment for Cellular Networks, in
proc. Allerton Conf. on Comm., Cont., and Comp., Berkeley, CA, Sept.
2008, pp. 1037-1044.
[3] C. Suh, M. Ho, and D. Tse, Downlink Interference Alignment, IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 59, pp. 2616-2626, Sept. 2011.
[4] N. Saquib, E. Hossain, Bao Le Long, In Kim Dong, Interference
management in OFDMA femtocell networks: issues and approaches,
IEEE Trans. on Wireless Comm., vol.19, no.3, pp.86-95, June 2012.
[5] Mohamed Rihan, Maha Elsabrouty, Osamu Muta, and Hiroshi Furukawa,
Iterative Interference Alignment in Macrocell-Femtocell Networks: A
Cognitive Radio Approach, accepted at IEEE inter. Symposium on
Wireless Comm. Systems (ISWCS), Barcelona-Spain, August 2014.
[6] Wonjae Shin, Wonjong Noh, Kyunghun Jang, Hyun-Ho Choi, Hierarchical Interference Alignment for Downlink Heterogeneous Networks,IEEE
Trans. on Wireless Comm., vol. 11 no. 12 pp. 4549 - 4559, Oct. 2012 .
[7] S. Cho, K. Huang, D. Kim, H. Seo, Interference Alignment for Uplink
Cellular Systems with Limited Feedback,IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 16,
pp. 960-963, July 2012.
[8] N. Lee, W. Shin, R. W. Heath Jr., and B. Clerckx, Interference Alignment with Limited Feedback for Two-Cell Interfering MIMO-MAC, in
Proc. IEEE ISWCS, Aug. 2012, pp. 566-570.

10

15
20
25
SNR (SignaltoNoise Ratio in dB)

30

35

40

Fig. 2.
Sum rate performance with different bit resolution levels in
comparison with perfect CSI case.
40

Average sumrate loss (Sim) for B = 3bits


Upper bound sumrate loss (Theory) for B = 3bits
Average sumrate loss (Sim) for B = 7 bits
Upper bound sumrate loss (Theory) for B = 7 bits
Average sumrate loss (Sim) for B = 15 bits
Upper bound sumrate loss (Theory) for B = 15bits

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0

10

15
20
25
SNR (SignaltoNoise Ratio in dB)

30

35

40

Fig. 3. Behavior of both the simulation based sum rate loss and the sum rate
loss upper bound obtained from the closed form expression.

C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK

In this paper, we analyzed the limited feedback based hierarchical


interference alignment (HIA) for heterogeneous networks. It is shown
that limited feedback design of HIA can greatly decrease the network
sum rate even with high resolution limited feedback design of the
transmit and receive beamforming matrices. We also evaluate in an
approximate closed form expression the loss rate upper bound for heterogeneous networks. Finally,we compared the results obtained from
the closed form expression with that obtained from the simulations.
As a future work, we can use the obtained rate loss upper bound
expression as a cost function in an optimization problem that aim to
evaluate the transceiver matrices that minimize the rate loss as well
as achieve the HIA conditions.

HIA with Perfect CSI


RVQ based on CD with B = 3 bits
RVQ based on CD with B = 7 bits
RVQ based on CD with B = 15 bits

25

40

Avg. sumrate loss with SNR =35dB.


Upper bound loss with SNR = 35 dB
Avg. sumrate loss with SNR =25dB.
Upper bound loss with SNR = 25 dB
Avg. sumrate loss with SNR =15dB.
Upper bound loss with SNR = 15 dB

35
Sum rate Loss (Bits/Sec/Hz)

VI.

30

Sumrate Loss (Bits/Sec/Hz)

15bits) can lead to double the sum rate value achieved with
low resolution counterparts (B = 3,7 bits), but we are still far
apart from the perfect CSI case due to both the quantization
error resulted from the limited feedback design, and the nature
of the proposed system model where the network suffer from
different types of interference including co-tier and cross-tier
interference.
In Fig. 3, it is apparent that the average sum rate obtained
from the simulations coincides with that obtained from the
closed form expression as the number of feedback bits (B)
becomes larger, where we assume in Eqs. (19) and (21) that
high resolution quantization of the CSI values (large number
of feedback bits for each of the cross channels) is assumed.
Similarly, Fig.4 shows the effect of increasing the number of
feedback bits (B) on the system sum rate loss with different
SNR values. At all SNR values, as the number of feedback
bits increases, the sum rate loss decreases accordingly. Additionally, the simulation results (average summ rate loss) obeys
the results calculated using the derived approximate rate loss
upper bound.

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
4

8
10
12
B (Number of feedback bits)

14

Fig. 4. Effect of bit resolution value (B bits) on the total sum rate loss with
different SNR values (SNR = 35, 25, 15 dB.)
[9] X. Chen and C. Yuen, Performance Analysis and Optimization for
Interference Alignment over MIMO Interference Channels with Limited
Feedback, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 99, pp. 1-10, Feb 2014.
[10] H. Gao, J. Leithon, C. Yuen, and H. A. Suraweera, New Uplink
Opportunistic Interference Alignment: An Active Alignment Approach,
in Proc. IEEE WCNC, Shanghai, China, Apr. 2013, pp. 1123-1127.
[11] D. Love, R. Heath Jr., V. Lau, D. Gesbert, B. Rao, and M. Andrews,
An overview of limited feedback in wireless communication systems,
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1341-1365, Oct. 2008.
[12] R. T. Krishnamachari, and M. K. Varanasi, Interference Alignment
under Limited Feedback for MIMO Interference Channels, IEEE Trans.
Signal Process. vol. 61, no. 15, pp. 3908-3917, Aug. 2013.
[13] N. Jindal, MIMO Broadcast Channels With Finite-Rate Feedback,
IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 5045-5060, Nov. 2006.
[14] R. Bhagavatula and R. W. Heath, Adaptive Bit Partitioning for Multicell Interference Nulling with Delayed Limited Feedback, IEEE Trans.
Signal Proc., vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 3824-3836.
[15] C. K. A. Yeung and D. J. Love, On The Performance of Random Vector
Quantization Limited Feedback Beamforming in a MISO System, IEEE
Trans. Wireless Commu., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 458-462, Feb. 2007.
[16] Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP, Numerical
Recipes 3rd Edition: The Art of Scientific Computing, Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[17] A. Abdelnasser, E. Hossain, Dong In Kim , Clustering and Resource
Allocation for Dense Femtocells in a Two-Tier Cellular OFDMA Network, IEEE Trans. on Wireless Comm., vol. 13, no. 3, pp.1628-1641,
March 2014.
[18] Mohamed Rihan, Maha Elsabrouty, Osamu Muta, and Hiroshi Furukawa, Interference Mitigation Framework Based on Interference
Alignment for Femtocell-Macrocell Two Tier Cellular Systems, IEICE
Trans. on Communications, vol. E98-B, No.03, pp.-, March 2015.