ISBN 9789175191478
ISSN 03457524
Printed in Sweden by LiUTryck, Linkping 2015
Abstract
The last ten years have seen a massive growth in the number of connected wireless devices. Billions of devices are connected and managed by wireless networks.
At the same time, each device needs a high throughput to support applications
such as voice, realtime video, movies, and games. Demands for wireless throughput and the number of wireless devices will always increase. In addition, there is
a growing concern about energy consumption of wireless communication systems.
Thus, future wireless systems have to satisfy three main requirements: i) having a
high throughput; ii) simultaneously serving many users; and iii) having less energy
consumption. Massive multipleinput multipleoutput (MIMO) technology, where
a base station (BS) equipped with very large number of antennas (collocated or distributed) serves many users in the same timefrequency resource, can meet the above
requirements, and hence, it is a promising candidate technology for next generations
of wireless systems. With massive antenna arrays at the BS, for most propagation
environments, the channels become favorable, i.e., the channel vectors between the
users and the BS are (nearly) pairwisely orthogonal, and hence, linear processing
is nearly optimal.
control scheme, Massive MIMO can oer uniformly good service for all users. In
this dissertation, we focus on the performance of Massive MIMO. The dissertation
consists of two main parts: fundamentals and system designs of Massive MIMO.
In the rst part, we focus on fundamental limits of the system performance under
practical constraints such as low complexity processing, limited length of each coherence interval, intercell interference, and nitedimensional channels. We rst study
the potential for power savings of the Massive MIMO uplink with maximumratio
combining (MRC), zeroforcing, and minimum meansquare error receivers, under
perfect and imperfect channels. The energy and spectral eciency tradeo is investigated. Secondly, we consider a physical channel model where the angular domain
is divided into a nite number of distinct directions. A lower bound on the capacity
is derived, and the eect of pilot contamination in this nitedimensional channel
model is analyzed. Finally, some aspects of favorable propagation in Massive MIMO
under Rayleigh fading and lineofsight (LoS) channels are investigated. We show
that both Rayleigh fading and LoS environments oer favorable propagation.
In the second part, based on the fundamental analysis in the rst part, we propose some system designs for Massive MIMO. The acquisition of channel state
information (CSI) is very important in Massive MIMO. Typically, the channels
are estimated at the BS through uplink training. Owing to the limited length of
the coherence interval, the system performance is limited by pilot contamination.
To reduce the pilot contamination eect, we propose an eigenvaluedecompositionbased scheme to estimate the channel directly from the received data.
The pro
posed scheme results in better performance compared with the conventional training schemes due to the reduced pilot contamination. Another important issue of
CSI acquisition in Massive MIMO is how to acquire CSI at the users. To address
this issue, we propose two channel estimation schemes at the users: i) a downlink
beamforming training scheme, and ii) a method for blind estimation of the effective downlink channel gains. In both schemes, the channel estimation overhead
is independent of the number of BS antennas.
and data powers as well as the training duration allocation to maximize the sum
spectral eciency of the Massive MIMO uplink with MRC receivers, for a given
total energy budget spent in a coherence interval. Finally, applications of Massive
MIMO in relay channels are proposed and analyzed. Specically, we consider multipair relaying systems where many sources simultaneously communicate with many
destinations in the same timefrequency resource with the help of a Massive MIMO
relay. A Massive MIMO relay is equipped with many collocated or distributed antennas. We consider dierent duplexing modes (fullduplex and halfduplex) and
dierent relaying protocols (amplifyandforward, decodeandforward, twoway relaying, and oneway relaying) at the relay. The potential benets of massive MIMO
technology in these relaying systems are explored in terms of spectral eciency and
power eciency.
Populrvetenskaplig
Sammanfattning
Det har skett en massiv tillvxt av antalet trdlst kommunicerande enheter de
senaste tio ren.
ntverk.
Efterfrgan p
trdls datatakt och antalet trdlsa enheter kommer alltid att tillta.
Samtidigt
tiska begrnsningar hos systemet, som lgkomplexitetsbehandling (till exempel linjr behandling av signaler), begrnsad lngd av varje koherensinterval, ofullstndig
kanalknnedom, intercellinterferens och ndligdimensionella kanaler.
Dessutom
undersks ngra aspekter hos frdelaktig utbredning i massiv MIMO med rayleighfdning och kanaler med rakt sikt. Baserat p dessa grundlggande analyser freslr
vi sedan ngra systemkonstruktioner fr massiv MIMO. Mer precist freslr vi ngra
vii
Acknowledgments
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to my supervisor, Prof. Erik G. Larsson,
for his valuable support and supervision. His advice, guidance, encouragement, and
inspiration have been invaluable over the years. Prof. Larsson always keeps an open
mind in every academic discussion. I admire his critical eye for important research
topics. I still remember when I began my doctoral studies, Prof. Larsson showed
me the rst paper on Massive MIMO and stimulated my interest for this topic. This
thesis would not have been completed without his guidance and support.
I would like to thank Dr. Thomas L. Marzetta at Bell Laboratories, AlcatelLucent,
USA, for his cooperative work, and for giving me a great opportunity to join his
research group as a visiting scholar. It has been a great privilege to be a part of
his research team.
Alexei
Ashikhmin and Dr. Hong Yang for making my visit at Bell Laboratories, AlcatelLucent in Murray Hill such a great experience.
I
was
lucky
to
meet
many
experts
in
the
eld.
am
thankful
to
Dr.
Michail Matthaiou at Queen's University Belfast, U.K., for his great cooperation.
I have learnt a lot from his maturity and expertise. Many thanks to Dr. Trung Q.
Duong at Queen's University Belfast, U.K., and Dr. Himal A. Suraweera at University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, for both technical and nontechnical issues during the
cooperative work. I would like to thank Dr. LeNam Tran at Maynooth University,
Ireland, for his explanations and discussions on the optimization problems which
helped me a lot. I am also thankful to all of my coauthors for the collaboration over
these years: Dr. G. C. Alexandropoulos (France Research Center, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.), Prof. HJ. Zepernick (Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden),
Dr. C. Yuen (Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore), Dr. A.
K. Papazafeiropoulos (Imperial College, U.K.), Dr. H. Phan (University of Reading, U.K.), Dr. M. Elkashlan (Queen Mary University of London, U.K.), and Mr.
L. Wang (Queen Mary University of London, U.K.).
The warmest thank to my colleagues at Communication Systems, ISY, Linkping
University, for the stimulating discussions, and for providing the fun environment
in which we have learnt and grown during the past 4+ years.
Special thanks to
my fellow PhD students: Chaitanya, Reza, Mirsad, Johannes, Antonios, Erik Axell,
Victor, Christopher, and Marcus.
ix
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends, for their constant love, encouragement, and limitless support throughout my life.
Abbreviations
AF
AmplifyandForward
AWGN
BC
Broadcast Channel
BER
BPSK
BS
Base Station
CDF
CSI
DF
DecodeandForward
DL
Downlink
DPC
EVD
Eigenvalue Decomposition
FD
Full Duplex
FDD
HD
Half Duplex
i.i.d.
ILSP
LDPC
LowDensity ParityCheck
LTE
LoS
LineofSight
LS
LeastSquares
MAC
MultipleAccess Channel
MIMO
MultipleInput MultipleOutput
MISO
MultipleInput SingleOutput
MMSE
MSE
MeanSquare Error
ML
Maximum Likelihood
MRC
MRT
MUMIMO
Multiuser MIMO
xi
OFDM
QAM
RV
Random Variable
SEP
SIC
SINR
SignaltoInterferenceplusNoise Ratio
SIR
SignaltoInterference Ratio
SISO
SingleInput SingleOutput
SNR
SignaltoNoise Ratio
TDD
TWRC
UL
Uplink
ZF
ZeroForcing
Contents
Abstract
vii
Acknowledgments
ix
Abbreviations
xi
I Introduction
1 Motivation
2.1
2.2
Uplink Transmission
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3
Downlink Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4
Linear Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.5
2.4.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
2.4.2
13
Channel Estimation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
2.5.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
2.5.2
16
3 Massive MIMO
19
3.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1
Channel Estimation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
3.2.2
21
3.2.3
22
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
21
3.3
22
3.4
23
3.4.1
Pilot Contamination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
3.4.2
Unfavorable Propagation
24
3.4.3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
4 Mathematical Preliminaries
24
25
4.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25
4.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
29
5.1
Included Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
5.2
35
37
47
49
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
52
53
2.1
53
2.2
54
2.3
Favorable Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2
3.3
Power Eciency
. . .
55
. . . .
56
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
56
3.1.1
MaximumRatio Combining . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58
3.1.2
ZeroForcing Receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58
3.1.3
59
61
3.2.1
MaximumRatio Combining . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
63
3.2.2
ZF Receiver
3.2.3
MMSE Receiver
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
64
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
64
66
3.3.1
Perfect CSI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
67
3.3.2
Imperfect CSI
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
67
69
4.1
4.2
5
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
69
4.1.1
MaximumRatio Combining . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
70
4.1.2
ZeroForcing Receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
71
72
Numerical Results
5.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
73
73
5.1.1
PowerScaling Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
74
5.1.2
5.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
77
78
Conclusion
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proof of Proposition 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
83
Proof of Proposition 3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
84
79
87
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
90
1.1
Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
91
1.2
Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
92
System Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
92
2.1
92
2.2
93
Channel Estimation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
94
3.1
Uplink Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
94
3.2
4.1
4.2
. . . . . .
95
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
96
98
4.1.1
MRC Receiver
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
98
4.1.2
ZF Receiver
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
99
4.1.3
4.2.2
Numerical Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.1
Scenario I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2
Scenario II
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Proof of Proposition 9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Proof of Corollary 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Proof of Corollary 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
121
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.2.2
. . . . . . . . 127
127
4.1
4.2
4.3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Conclusion
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
137
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
3.2
3.3
. . . . . . . . 145
. . . 146
Numerical Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . 147
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
E Massive MUMIMO Downlink TDD Systems with Linear Precoding and Downlink Pilots
155
1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
2.1
2.2
Downlink Transmission
2.3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
3.2
ZeroForcing
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Numerical Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Proof of Proposition 10
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Proof of Proposition 11
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
. . . . . . 180
3.1
3.2
3.3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Numerical Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
2.1
2.2
2.3
Numerical Results
Conclusion
Proof of Proposition 13
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Phase I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
3.2
3.3
Asymptotic (M
4.1
, K < ) Performance
M . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 213
. . . . . . . . . . 214
4.1.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
Derivation of (4)
Proof of Proposition 14
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
Selfinterference Reduction
of Payload Data
2.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
. . 229
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
2.2.1
2.2.2
Asymptotic
Numerical Results
Conclusion
. . 230
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Channel Estimation
2.2
2.3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
2.2.1
Linear Receiver
2.2.2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
ZF Processing
2.3.2
MRC/MRT Processing
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
. . . . . 252
. . . . . . 252
= ER /Ntx ,
where
ER
is Fixed, and
Ntx )
. . 253
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
Performance Evaluation
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
5.1
Power Eciency
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
5.2
5.3
Numerical Results
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
6.1
6.2
Power Eciency
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
6.3
6.4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Conclusion
Proof of Proposition 17
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
B.1
Derive
B.2
Derive
RSRk
RRD,k
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Part I
Introduction
Chapter 1
Motivation
During the last years, data trac (both mobile and xed) has grown exponentially
due to the dramatic growth of smartphones, tablets, laptops, and many other wireless data consuming devices.
more in future [13]. Figures 1.1 shows the demand for mobile data trac and the
number of connected devices. Global mobile data trac is expected to increase to
15.9
2014.
In
addition, the number of mobile devices and connections are expected to grow to
10.2
billion by 2018. New technologies are required to meet this demand. Related
to wireless data trac, the key parameter to consider is wireless throughput (bits/s)
which is dened as:
Throughput
Bandwidth (Hz)
Clearly, to improve the throughput, some new technologies which can increase the
bandwidth or the spectral eciency or both should be exploited.
In this thesis,
Chapter 1.
Introduction
12.0
10.8 EB
7.0 EB
8.0
4.4 EB
4.0
2.6 EB
1.5 EB
0.0
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
12.0
15.9 EB
16.0
10.2 Billions
8.0
7.0 Billions
4.0
0.0
2012
2013
2014
Year
(a) Global mobile data trac.
2015
2016
2017
2018
Year
(b) Global
mobile
devices
and
connections
growth.
Figure 1.1:
The eort to exploit the spatial multiplexing gain has been shifted from MIMO to
multiuser MIMO (MUMIMO), where several users are simultaneously served by a
multipleantenna base station (BS). With MUMIMO setups, a spatial multiplexing
gain can be achieved even if each user has a single antenna [4]. This is important
since users cannot support many antennas due to the small physical size and lowcost requirements of the terminals, whereas the BS can support many antennas.
MUMIMO does not only reap all benets of MIMO systems, but also overcomes
most of propagation limitations in MIMO such as illbehaved channels. Specically,
by using scheduling schemes, we can reduce the limitations of illbehaved channels.
Lineofsight propagation, which causes signicant reduction of the performance of
MIMO systems, is no longer a problem in MUMIMO systems. Thus, MUMIMO
has attracted substantial interest [49].
There always exists a tradeo between the system performance and the implementation complexity. The advantages of MUMIMO come at a price:
Multiuser interference: the performance of a given user may signicantly degrade due to the interference from other users.
User scheduling: since several users are served on the same timefrequency
resource, scheduling schemes which optimally select the group of users depending on the precoding/detection schemes, CSI knowledge etc., should be
considered. This increases the cost of the system implementation.
The more antennas the BS is equipped with, the more degrees of freedom are oered
and hence, more users can simultaneously communicate in the same timefrequency
resource. As a result, a huge sum throughput can be obtained. With large antenna
arrays, conventional signal processing techniques (e.g. maximum likelihood detection) become prohibitively complex due to the high signal dimensions. The main
question is whether we can obtain the huge multiplexing gain with lowcomplexity
signal processing and lowcost hardware implementation.
In [13], Marzetta showed that the use of an excessive number of BS antennas compared with the number of active users makes simple linear processing nearly optimal.
More precisely, even with simple maximumratio combining (MRC) in the uplink
or maximumratio transmission (MRT) in the downlink, the eects of fast fading,
intracell interference, and uncorrelated noise tend to disappear as the number of
BS station antennas grows large. MUMIMO systems, where a BS with a hundred
or more antennas simultaneously serves tens (or more) of users in the same timefrequency resource, are known as Massive MIMO systems (also called very large
MUMIMO, hyperMIMO, or fulldimension MIMO systems). In Massive MIMO,
it is expected that each antenna would be contained in an inexpensive module with
simple processing and a lowpower amplier. The main benets of Massive MIMO
systems are:
(1) Huge spectral eciency and high communication reliability : Massive MIMO
inherits all gains from conventional MUMIMO, i.e., with
M antenna BS and
M and a multiK , we can obtain a
plexing gain of
By increasing both
and
Chapter 1.
Introduction
pairwisely (nearly) orthogonal. Under favorable propagation, the eect of interuser interference and noise can be eliminated with simple linear signal processing (liner precoding in the downlink and linear decoding in the uplink).
As a result, simple linear processing schemes are nearly optimal.
Another
Massive MIMO, resource allocation as well as system designs are also proposed.
In the following, brief introductions to multiuser MIMO and Massive MIMO are
given in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3, respectively.
Chapter 2
each user can be equipped with multiple antennas. However, for simplicity of the
analysis, we limit ourselves to systems with singleantenna users. See Figure 2.1.
We assume that all
we assume that the BS and the users have perfect CSI. The channels are acquired
at the BS and the users during the training phase. The specic training schemes
depend on the system protocols (frequencydivision duplex (FDD) or timedivision
duplex (TDD)), and will be discussed in detail in Section 2.5.
Let
H CM K
k th column
the k th user
H,
denoted by
hk ,
represents the
M 1
of
vector between
channel
modeled via largescale fading and smallscale fading. But in this chapter, we ignore
largescale fading, and further assume that the elements of
distributed with zero mean and unit variance.
7
Chapter 2.
M antenna
k th user.
Since
M 1 received
K
signal vector at the BS is the combination of all signals transmitted from all
users:
pu
h k sk + n
K
y ul =
(2.1)
k=1
puH s + n ,
(2.2)
M 1
is the average signaltonoise ratio (SNR), n C
is the additive noise
T
vector, and s , [s1 ... sK ] . We assume that the elements of n are i.i.d. Gaussian
where
pu
random variables (RVs) with zero mean and unit variance, and independent of
From the received signal vector
y ul
H.
users.
(
)
Cul,sum = log2 det I K + puH H H .
(2.3)
The aforementioned sumcapacity can be achieved by using the successive interference cancellation (SIC) technique [28].
signal is subtracted from the received signal before the next user is detected.
2.3.
Downlink Transmission
ydl,k
k th
user is given by
= pdh Tk x + zk ,
(2.4)
pd is the average SNR and zk is the additive noise at the k th user. We assume
zk is Gaussian distributed with zero mean and unit variance. Collectively, the
received signal vector of the K users can be written as
y dl = pdH T x + z ,
(2.5)
where
that
where
and
z , [z1 z2 . . . zK ]T .
Csum =
(
)
log2 det I M + pdH D q H T ,
max
qk 0,
{q }
k
K
k=1
(2.6)
qk 1
k th diagonal element is qk .
The sumcapacity
s,
s = arg min yy ul
s S K
where
puH s 2
sk , k = 1, 2, ..., K .
(2.7)
squares (LS) problem with a nitealphabet constraint. The BS has to search over
SK vectors, where S denotes the cardinality of the set S . Therefore, ML has a
complexity which is exponential in the number of users.
The BS can use linear processing schemes (linear receivers in the uplink and linear precoders in the downlink) to reduce the signal processing complexity. These
schemes are not optimal. However, when the number of BS antennas is large, it is
shown in [13, 14] that linear processing is nearlyoptimal. Therefore, in this thesis,
we will consider linear processing. The details of linear processing techniques are
presented in the following sections.
10
Chapter 2.
yul,1
s1
yul,1
s2
yul,2
sK
yul,K
yul,2
yul,M
M K
yul = A H y ul =
y ul
is separated into
pu A H H s + A H n .
A:
(2.8)
Each stream is then decoded independently. See Figure 2.2. The complexity is on
the order of
decode
sk ,
KS.
k th
stream (element) of
is given by
yul,k =
yul ,
H
pua H
h
s
+
p
a k h k sk + a H
k
k
u
k n,
k
{z}

{z
}
k =k
desired signal 
{z
} noise
which is used to
(2.9)
interuser interference
where
ak
denotes the
k th
column of
A.
k th
stream is given by
SINRk =
pu
a H h k 2
pu a
k =k
2
aH
ak 2
a
k h k  + a
(2.10)
a)
2.4.
Linear Processing
k th
11
power(desired signal)
a mrc,k = argmax
a k CM 1
= argmax
a k CM 1
Since
power(noise)
2
aH
pu a
k hk 
.
ak 2
a
(2.11)
2
aH
ak 2 h
hk 2
pu a
pu a
k hk 
hk 2 ,
= pu h
ak 2
ak 2
a
a
ak =
is:
hk .
Plugging
a mrc,k
const
hk ,
a mrc,k =
k th stream
SINRmrc,k =
pu
k =k
2
hH
hk 2
h
k h k  + h
hk 4
h
k =k
hk 4
pu h
2
hH
h
k h k 
as
pu .
(2.12)
(2.13)
Advantage: the signal processing is very simple since the BS just multiplies the received vector with the conjugatetranspose of the channel
matrix
H,
Disadvantage: as discussed above, since MRC neglects the eect of multiuser interference, it performs poorly in interferencelimited scenarios.
This can be seen in (2.13), where the SINR is upper bounded by a constant (with respect to
pu )
when
pu
is large.
b) ZeroForcing Receiver:
By contrast to MRC, zeroforcing (ZF) receivers take the interuser interference into account, but neglect the eect of noise.
interference is completely nulled out by projecting each stream onto the orthogonal complement of the interuser interference.
k th
aH
zf,k h k = 0
aH
zf,k h k = 0,
H.
(2.14)
k = k.
k,
is the pseudoinverse
(
)1
(
)1
yul = H H H
H H y ul = pus + H H H
H H n.
(2.15)
12
Chapter 2.
M K
k th
stream of
yul
n
k
denotes the
SINR of the
k th
k th
sk :
pu sk + n
k ,
element of
is invertible).
is used to detect
yul,k =
where
yul
H HH
(2.16)
(
)1
H HH
H H n.
stream is given by
pu
SINRzf,k = [(
)1 ]
H HH
(2.17)
kk
Advantage:
interferencelimited scenarios.
Disadvantage:
higher implementation complexity due to the computation of the pseudoinverse of the channel gain matrix.
c) Minimum MeanSquare Error Receiver:
The linear minimum meansquare error (MMSE) receiver aims to minimize
H
the meansquare error between the estimate A y ul and the transmitted signal
s.
More precisely,
ACM K
= arg min
A CM K
where
ak
is the
k th
column of
A.
{
2 }
H
A y ul s
E
A
{ H
}
ak y ul sk 2 .
E a
(2.18)
(2.19)
k=1
Therefore, the
k th
a k CM 1
{
2 }
E a H
k y ul sk
1
H
= cov (yy ul , y ul ) cov (sk , y ul )
)1
(
hk ,
= pu puH H H + I M
where
{
}
cov (vv 1 , v 2 ) , E v 1v H
2 ,
where
v1
and
v2
(2.20)
(2.21)
(2.22)
2.4.
Linear Processing
13
pu ),
pu
SINRmmse,k = puh H
k
h ih H
i + IM
hk .
(2.23)
i=k
antennas, x , is a linear combination of the symbols intended for the K users. Let qk ,
{
}
E qk 2 = 1, be the symbol intended for the k th user. Then, the linearly precoded
signal vector
is
x=
where
W q,
W
q , [q1 q2 . . . qK ]T , W CM K
(2.24)
x
E x
= 1.
1
{
}.
W W H)
E tr(W
is a
Thus,
(2.25)
ydl,k =
=
pdh Tk W q + zk
(2.26)
pdh Tk w k qk + pd
h Tk w k qk + zk .
(2.27)
k =k
Therefore, the SINR of the transmission from the BS to the
T 2
hk w k
pd h
SINRk =
.
2
K T
h k w k + 1
pd k =k h
k th
user is
(2.28)
H , for MRT
( T )1
, for ZF
H H H
W =
)
(
H H T H + K I 1 ,
pd K
(2.29)
for MMSE
14
Chapter 2.
x1
antenna 1
q1
q2
Precoding
Matrix
(KxM)
x2
antenna 2
qK
xM
antenna M
Figures 2.4 and 2.5 show the achievable sum rates for the uplink and the downlink
SNR , pu
SNR
,
p
for the downlink, with M = 6 and K = 4. The sum
d
K
k=1 E {log2 (1 + SINRk )}, where SINRk is the SINR of the k th
user which is given in the previous discussion. As expected, MMSE performs strictly
better than ZF and MRC over the entire range of SNRs. In the low SNR regime,
MRC is better than ZF, and vice versa in the high SNR regime.
Thus, the CSI can be obtained by using following scheme (see Figure 2.6):
For the uplink transmission: the BS needs CSI to detect the signals transmit
cal.
users send
BS estimates the channels based on the received pilot signals. This process
requires a minimum of
1 In
channel uses.
practice, the uplink and downlink channels are not perfectly reciprocal due to mismatches
of the hardware chains. This nonreciprocity can be removed by calibration [15, 29, 30]. In our
work, we assume that the hardware chain calibration is perfect.
Channel Estimation
15
35.0
M=6, K = 4
30.0
25.0
MMSE
20.0
15.0
ZF
10.0
MRC
5.0
0.0
20
15
10
5
10
15
20
SNR (dB)
Figure 2.4: Performance of linear receivers in the uplink.
40.0
M=6, K = 4
35.0
2.5.
30.0
ZF
25.0
MMSE
20.0
15.0
10.0
MRT
5.0
0.0
10
5
10
15
20
25
30
SNR (dB)
Figure 2.5: Performance of linear precoders in the downlink.
16
Chapter 2.
K (symbols)
K (symbols)
T (symbols)
For the downlink: the BS needs CSI to precode the transmitted signals, while
each user needs the eective channel gain to detect the desired signals. Due to
the channel reciprocity, the channel estimated at the BS in the uplink can be
used to precode the transmit symbols. To obtain knowledge of the eective
channel gain, the BS can beamform pilots, and each user can estimate the
eective channel gains based on the received pilot signals. This requires at
least
channel uses.
2K
2K < T .
The
channel knowledge at the BS and users can be obtained by using following training
scheme:
users. The
BS antennas transmit
orthog
on the received pilots. Then it feeds back its channel estimates (M channel
estimates) to the BS through the uplink.
channel uses for the downlink and
For the uplink transmission: the BS needs CSI to decode the signals transmitted from the
users.
users transmit
orthogonal pilot sequences to the BS. Then, the BS will estimate the channels
based on the received pilot signals. This process requires at least
channel
2 The
eective channel gains at the users may be blindly estimated based on the received data,
and hence, no pilots are required [31]. But, we do not discuss in detail about this possibility in
this section.
2.5.
Channel Estimation
17
T (symbols)
M (symbols)
K (symbols)
M (symbols)
M +K
channel
of the coherence intervals for the uplink and the downlink are the same and are
18
Chapter 2.
Chapter 3
Massive MIMO
3.1 What is Massive MIMO?
Massive MIMO is a form of MUMIMO systems where the number of BS antennas
and the numbers of users are large. In Massive MIMO, hundreds or thousands of
BS antennas simultaneously serve tens or hundreds of users in the same frequency
resource. Some main points of Massive MIMO are:
TDD operation: as discussed in Section 2.5, with FDD, the channel estimation
overhead depends on the number of BS antennas,
is large, and hence, TDD operation is preferable. For example, assume that
We can see that the FDD region is much smaller than the TDD region. With
TDD, adding more antennas does not aect the resources needed for the
channel estimation.
Linear processing: since the number of BS antennas and the number of users
are large, the signal processing at the terminal ends must deal with large
dimensional matrices/vectors.
19
20
Chapter 3.
Massive MIMO
1000
800
600
TDD
400
200
FDD
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
200
(M, K)
symbols.
A massive BS antenna array does not have to be physically large. For example
consider a cylindrical array with 128 antennas, comprising four circles of 16
dualpolarized antenna elements. At
2.6
antennas is about 6 cm, which is half a wavelength, and hence, this array
occupies only a physical size of 28cm29cm [25].
Massive MIMO is scalable: in Massive MIMO, the BS learns the channels via
uplink training, under TDD operation. The time required for channel estimation is independent of the number of BS antennas. Therefore, the number of
BS antennas can be made as large as desired with no increase in the channel
estimation overhead. Furthermore, the signal processing at each user is very
simple and does not depend on other users' existence, i.e., no multiplexing
or demultiplexing signal processing is performed at the users.
Adding or
dropping some users from service does not aect other users' activities.
3.2.
21
source. The BS then uses the channel estimates together with the linear combining
22
Chapter 3.
Massive MIMO
techniques to detect signals transmitted from all users. The detailed uplink data
transmission was discussed in Section 2.2.
resource. More specically, the BS uses its channel estimates in combination with
the symbols intended for the
fed to
antennas.
users to create
Section 2.3.
(3.1)
that, we can obtain a huge spectral eciency and energy eciency when
and
are large. Without any increase in transmitted power per terminal, by increasing
and
M,
the same time the throughput per user also increases. Furthermore, by doubling
the number of BS antennas, we can reduce the transmit power by
dB, while
Another question is: Why not use the conventional low dimensional pointtopoint
MIMO with complicated processing schemes instead of Massive MIMO with simple
linear processing schemes?
is large, due to the law of large numbers, the channels become favorable.
result, linear processing is nearly optimal.
As a
can be obtained with simple linear processing. Also, by increasing the number of
BS antennas and the number of users, we can always increase the throughput.
3.4.
23
35.0
30.0
MRC
20.0
ZF
15.0
10.0
MMSE
5.0
40
60
80
100
Figure 3.3 shows the sum rate versus the number of BS antennas with optimal
receivers (the sum capacity is achieved) and linear receivers, at
10
K = 10
and
pu =
dB. The sum capacity is computed from (2.3), while the sum rates for MRC,
ZF, and MMSE are computed by using (2.12), (2.17), and (2.23), respectively. We
can see that, when
When
M = K = 10,
8.5
and with the optimal receiver, the maximum sum rate that we can obtain is
bits/s/Hz. By contrast, by using large
we can obtain a sum rate of
24
M,
say
M = 50,
bits/s/HZ.
networks consist of many cells. Owing to the limited availability of frequency spectrum, many cells have to share the same timefrequency resources. Thus, multicell
24
Chapter 3.
Massive MIMO
Furthermore, LTE uses the channel information that is assumed. For example, one
option of the downlink in LTE is that the BS transmits the reference signals through
several xed beams. Then the users report back to the BS the strongest beam. The
BS will use this beam for the downlink transmission. By contrast, Massive MIMO
uses the channel information that is estimated (measured).
Therefore, to reduce
Massive MIMO to practice, new standards are required. On a dierent note, with
Massive MIMO, a costly
40
Chapter 4
Mathematical Preliminaries
4.1 Random Matrix Theory
We now review some useful limit results about very long random vectors [37] which
will be used for the analysis in the rest of the thesis.
Let
T
p , [p1 ... pn ]
and
T
q , [q1 ... qn ]
be
n1
and
are independent.
1 H a.s. 2
p p p ,
n
1 H a.s.
p q 0,
n
where
a.s.
as
n ,
(4.1)
as
n ,
(4.2)
(
)
1
d
p H q CN 0, p2 q2 ,
n
where
25
as
n ,
(4.3)
26
Chapter 4.
Let
Mathematical Preliminaries
X1 , X2 ,
i /sn 0,
as
n .
we have
n
i=1
Xi
sn
CN (0, 1) ,
as
n .
(4.4)
Let X1 , X2 , ...Xn be independent RVs such that E {Xi } = i and Var (Xi ) <
c < , i = 1, . . . , n. Then by applying the Tchebyshev's theorem, we have
1
1
P
(X1 + X2 + ... + Xn ) (1 + 2 + ...n ) 0,
n
n
where
(4.5)
yk =
ak sk
{z}
desired signal
k =k
ak sk + nk ,
{z}
{z } noise
(4.6)
interference
where
from the
nk
and
Since in this thesis, we consider linear processing, the endtoend channel can be
considered as an interference SISO channel, and can be modeled as in (4.6). For
example, consider the downlink transmission discussed in Section 2.4. The received
signal at the
(4.6), where
that
Ck = I (sk ; yk , C) = h (sk ) h ( sk  yk , C)
(a)
= log2 (e) h ( sk yk  yk , C)
(4.7)
(4.8)
(b)
log2 (e) h ( sk yk  C) ,
(4.9)
4.2.
where
(a)
27
and
y,
and the
Since the dierential entropy of a RV with xed variance is maximized when the
RV is Gaussian, we obtain
})}
{
(
{
2
Ck log2 (e) E log2 e E sk yk  C
,
which leads to
1
} .
Ck E log2 {
2
E sk yk  C
= 0
so that
0 yk
0 =
E { yk sk  C}
}
{
2
E yk  C
sk .
(4.11)
}
{
2
E xk 0 yk  C
}
{
2
0 = arg min E sk yk  C .
(4.10)
is
(4.12)
Therefore,
E { ak  C}
}.
{
2
E yk  C
(4.13)
We have
}
}
{
{
}
{
2
2
2
2
E sk yk  C = E sk  E { sk yk  C} E { sk yk  C} +  E yk  C
}
{
2
2
= 1 E { ak  C} E { ak  C} +  E yk  C .
(4.14)
When
= 0 ,
2
}
{
E { ak  C}
2
}
{
.
E xk yk  C = 1
K
2
k=1 E ak  C + 1
(4.15)
Plugging (4.15) into (11), we obtain the following lower bound on the capacity of
(4.6):
E { ak  C}
.
}
{
2
2
k =1 E ak  C E { ak  C} + 1
Ck E log2 1 +
K
(4.16)
28
Chapter 4.
C = .
Mathematical Preliminaries
2
E
{a
}
k
.
}
{
}
Ck log2 1 + {
2
K
2
E ak E {ak } + k =k E ak  + 1
(4.17)
This bound is often used in Massive MIMO research since it has a simple
closedform solution. Furthermore, in most propagation environments, when
the number of BS antennas is large, the channel hardens (the eective channel
gains become deterministic), and hence, this bound is very tight.
2. Full CSI: in this case,
C = {a1 , . . . , aK }.
Substituting
C = {a1 , . . . , aK }
into
(2), we obtain
{
Ck E log2
)}
1 + K
ak 
k =k
ak  + 1
(4.18)
Chapter 5
Summary of Specic
Contributions of the
Dissertation
This dissertation consists of two parts. Firstly, we study fundamentals of Massive
MIMO. The performance of Massive MIMO systems is analysed in terms of spectral
eciency and energy eciency. Eects of pilot contamination and nitedimensional
channel models are also analysed. In addition, some aspects of favorable propagation
in Massive MIMO are investigated.
for Massive MIMO. Specically, the optimal power as well as training duration
allocation is studied.
considered.
29
This work is an
30
Chapter 5.
tion derived from transmitted pilots to extract the individual data streams. The
power radiated by the terminals can be made inversely proportional to the squareroot of the number of base station antennas with no reduction in performance.
In contrast if perfect channelstate information were available the power could be
made inversely proportional to the number of antennas. Lower capacity bounds for
maximumratio combining (MRC), zeroforcing (ZF) and minimum meansquare error (MMSE) detection are derived. A MRC receiver normally performs worse than
ZF and MMSE. However as power levels are reduced, the crosstalk introduced
by the inferior maximumratio receiver eventually falls below the noise level and
this simple receiver becomes a viable option. The tradeo between the energy eciency (as measured in bits/J) and spectral eciency (as measured in bits/channel
use/terminal) is quantied for a channel model that includes smallscale fading but
not largescale fading. It is shown that the use of moderately large antenna arrays
can improve the spectral and energy eciency with orders of magnitude compared
to a singleantenna system.
Paper B: The Multicell Multiuser MIMO Uplink with Very Large Antenna Arrays and a FiniteDimensional Channel
Authored by Hien Quoc Ngo, Erik G. Larsson, and Thomas L. Marzetta.
Published in the IEEE Transactions on Communications, 2013.
This work is an
We analyze the
socalled pilot contamination eect discovered in previous work, and show that this
eect persists under the nitedimensional channel model that we consider. In particular, we consider a uniform array at the BS. For this scenario, we show that when
the number of BS antennas goes to innity, the system performance under a nitedimensional channel model with
bound on the achievable rate of uplink data transmission with a linear detector at
the BS. We then specialize this lower bound to the cases of maximumratio combining (MRC) and zeroforcing (ZF) receivers, for a nite and an innite number
of BS antennas. Numerical results corroborate our analysis and show a comparison
between the performances of MRC and ZF in terms of sumrate.
5.1.
Included Papers
31
Published in the proceedings of the European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), 2014 [40].
Favorable propagation, dened as mutual orthogonality among the vectorvalued
channels to the terminals, is one of the key properties of the radio channel that
is exploited in Massive MIMO. However, there has been little work that studies
this topic in detail. In this paper, we rst show that favorable propagation oers
the most desirable scenario in terms of maximizing the sumcapacity. One useful
proxy for whether propagation is favorable or not is the channel condition number.
However, this proxy is not good for the case where the norms of the channel vectors
are not equal. For this case, to evaluate how favorable the propagation oered by
the channel is, we propose a distance from favorable propagation measure, which
is the gap between the sumcapacity and the maximum capacity obtained under
favorable propagation.
for two extreme scenarios: i.i.d. Rayleigh fading and uniform random lineofsight
(URLoS). Both environments oer (nearly) favorable propagation. Furthermore,
to analyze the URLoS model, we propose an urnsandballs model. This model is
simple and explains the singular value spread characteristic of the URLoS model
well.
estimate approach.
Paper E: Massive MUMIMO Downlink TDD Systems with Linear Precoding and Downlink Pilots
32
Chapter 5.
precoding for the transmission. To reliably decode the signals transmitted from the
BS, each user should have an estimate of its channel. In this work, we consider an
ecient channel estimation scheme to acquire CSI at each user, called beamforming
training scheme.
pilot sequences and forwards to all users. Then, based on the received pilots, each
user uses minimum meansquare error channel estimation to estimate the eective
channel gains.
signals, the users need to know the eective channel gain. In this paper, we propose
a blind channel estimation method which can be applied at the users and which does
not require any downlink pilots. We show that our proposed scheme can substantially outperform the case where each user has only statistical channel knowledge,
and that the dierence in performance is particularly large in certain types of channel, most notably keyhole channels. Compared to schemes that rely on downlink
pilots (e.g., [41]), our proposed scheme yields more accurate channel estimates for
a wide range of signaltonoise ratios and avoid spending timefrequency resources
on pilots.
5.1.
Included Papers
33
We propose
an optimal resource allocation scheme which jointly selects the training duration,
training signal power, and data signal power in order to maximize the sum spectral
eciency, for a given total energy budget spent in a coherence interval. Numerical
results verify the benets of the optimal resource allocation scheme. Furthermore,
we show that more training signal power should be used at low signaltonoise ratio
(SNRs), and vice versa at high SNRs. Interestingly, for the entire SNR regime, the
optimal training duration is equal to the number of terminals.
All
nodes are equipped with a single antenna and channel state information is available
at the relay nodes. Each relay uses very simple signal processing in a distributed
manner, called distributed amplifyandforward (AF) relaying. A closedform expression for the achievable rate is derived. We show that the distributed AF scheme
outperforms conventional orthogonal relaying. When the number of relays is large,
the distributed AF relaying scheme can achieve the capacity scaling given by the
cutset upper bound.
transmit powers of each terminal and of the relay can be made inversely proportional to the number of relays while maintaining a given qualityofservice. If the
transmit power of each terminal is kept xed, the transmit power of each relay can
be scaled down inversely proportional to the square of the number of relays.
34
Chapter 5.
The
The relay
station uses channel estimates obtained from received pilots and zeroforcing (ZF)
or maximumratio combining/maximumratio transmission (MRC/MRT) to process the signals.
two techniques: i) using a massive receive antenna array; or ii) using a massive
transmit antenna array together with very low transmit power at the relay station.
We derive an exact achievable rate expression in closedform for MRC/MRT processing and an analytical approximation of the achievable rate for ZF processing.
This approximation is very tight, particularly for a large number of relay station
antennas. These closedform expressions enable us to determine the regions where
the fullduplex mode outperforms the halfduplex mode, as well as to design an
optimal power allocation scheme.
maximize the energy eciency for a given sum spectral eciency and under peak
power constraints at the relay station and sources. Numerical results verify the effectiveness of the optimal power allocation scheme. Furthermore, we show that, by
doubling the number of transmit/receive antennas at the relay station, the transmit
5.2.
35
power of each source and of the relay station can be reduced by 1.5 dB if the pilot
power is equal to the signal power, and by 3 dB if the pilot power is kept xed,
while maintaining a given quality of service.
M. Matthaiou, G. C. Alexandropoulos, H. Q. Ngo, and E. G. Larsson, Analytic framework for the eective rate of MISO fading channels, IEEE Trans.
H. Q. Ngo, M. Matthaiou, T. Q. Duong, and E. G. Larsson, Uplink performance analysis of multicell MUSIMO systems with ZF receivers, IEEE
Trans. Vehicular Techno., vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 44714483, Nov. 2013.
A. K. Papazafeiropoulos, H. Q. Ngo, M. Matthaiou, and T. Ratnarajah, Uplink performance of conventional and massive MIMO cellular systems with
delayed CSIT, in Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor
H. Phan, T. M. C. Chu, H.J. Zepernick, H. Q. Ngo, Performance of cognitive radio networks with nite buer using multiple vacations and exhaustive
service, in Proc.
36
Chapter 5.
Chapter 6
path loss, the power of the desired signal in a given cell is much stronger
the interference power from other cells. However, owing to the large cellsize
and the eect of path loss, the users that are located around the cell edges
could not receive a good qualityofservice. A suitable design of the cellsize,
frequencyreuse factor during the training, and power control to reduce the
pilot contamination eect should be investigated.
Channel state information acquisition: the acquisition of CSI is very important in Massive MIMO. Channel estimation algorithms are attracting much
attention. There is much ongoing research in this direction. Many questions
are not still appropriately answered:
Can the channel be blindly estimated? Can payload data help improve
channel estimation accuracy? How much can we gain from such schemes?
37
38
Chapter 6.
And
5G wireless systems.
In our work, Paper F, we considered the case where the transmit powers during
the training and payload data transmissions are not equal, and are optimally
chosen. The performance gain obtained by this optimal power allocation was
studied. However, the cost of performing this optimal power allocation may
be an increase in the peaktoaverage ratio of the emitted waveform.
This
In current works, we assume that each user has a single antenna. It would
be interesting to consider the case where each user is employed with several
antennas. Note that in the current wireless systems (e.g. LTE), each users can
have two antennas [48]. The transceiver designs (transmission schemes at the
BS and detection schemes at the users) and performance analysis (achievable
rate, outage probability, etc) of Massive MIMO systems with multipleantenna
users should be studied.
39
40
Chapter 6.
References
[1] Qualcom
line].
The
Inc.,
Available:
100
Data
Challenge,
Oct.
2013.
[On
http://www.qualcomm.com/solutions/wireless
networks/technologies/1000xdata.
[2] Ericson, 5G Radio AccessResearch and Vision, June 2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/whitepapers/wp5g.pdf.
[3] Cisco,
c
Cisco
Forecast
Visual
Update,
Networking
Index:
20132018,
Feb.
Global
Mobile
2014.
[Online].
Data
Traf
Available:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/serviceprovider/visualnetworkingindexvni/whitepaperc11520862.html.
[4] D. Gesbert, M. Kountouris, R. W. Heath Jr., C.B. Chae, and T. Slzer,
Shifting the MIMO paradigm, IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 24, no. 5,
pp. 3646, Sep. 2007.
[5] M. Kobayashi, N. Jindal, and G. Caire, Training and feedback optimization
for multiuser MIMO downlink, IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 59, no. 8, pp.
22282240, Aug. 2011.
[6] V. Stankovic and M. Haardt, Generalized design of multiuser MIMO precoding matrices, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, pp. 953961, Mar.
2008.
[7] G. Caire and S. Shamai, On the achievable throughput of a multiantenna
Gaussian broadcast channel, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 49, no. 7, pp.
16911706, Jul. 2003.
[8] P. Viswanath and D. N. C. Tse, Sum capacity of the vector Gaussian broadcast channel and uplinkdownlink duality IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 49,
no. 8, pp. 19121921, Aug. 2003.
[9] T. Yoo and A. Goldsmith, On the optimality of multiantenna broadcast
scheduling using zeroforcing beamforming, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.,
vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 528541, Mar. 2006.
41
42
References
References
43
[23] C. Studer and E. G. Larsson, PARaware largescale multiuser MIMOOFDM downlink, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 303313,
Feb. 2013.
[24] F. Fernandes, A. Ashikhmin, and T. L. Marzetta, Interference reduction on
cellular networks with large antenna arrays, in Proc. IEEE International
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 16361640, 2001.
[30] R. Rogalin, O. Y. Bursalioglu, H. C. Papadopoulos, G. Caire, and A. F.
Molisch, Hardwareimpairment compensation for enabling distributed largescale MIMO, in Proc. ITA Workshop, San Diego, CA, USA, 2013.
[31] H. Q. Ngo and E. G. Larsson, Blind estimation of eective downlink channel
gains in Massive MIMO, in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Acous
tics, Speed and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Brisbane, Australia, April 2015,
submitted.
[32] J. Jose, A. Ashikhmin, T. L. Marzetta, and S. Vishwanath, Pilot contamination and precoding in multicell TDD systems, IEEE Trans. Wireless
44
References
[35] A. Ashikhmin and T. L. Marzetta, Pilot contamination precoding in multicell large scale antenna systems, in Proc. IEEE International Symposium on
Cambridge,
ence on Communication, Control, and Computing, UrbanaChampaign, Illinois, US, Sep. 2011.
[39] H. Q. Ngo, T. L. Marzetta, and E. G. Larsson, Analysis of the pilot contamination eect in very large multicell multiuser MIMO systems for physical channel models, in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics,
in Proc.
Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, UrbanaChampaign, Illinois, US, Oct. 2013.
[42] H. Q. Ngo, M. Matthaiou, and E. G. Larsson, Massive MIMO with optimal
power and training duration allocation, IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., vol.
3, Dec. 2014.
[43] H. Q. Ngo and E. Larsson, LargeScale Multipair TwoWay Relay Networks
with Distributed AF Beamforming, IEEE Commun. Lett.,vol. 17, no. 12, pp.
22882291, Dec. 2013.
[44] H. Q. Ngo and E. G. Larsson, Spectral eciency of the multipair twoway
relay channel with massive arrays, in Proc. Asilomar Conference on Signals,
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 17211737, Sep. 2014.
[46] H. Q. Ngo, E. Larsson, and T. Marzetta, The multicell multiuser MIMO
uplink with very large antenna arrays and a nitedimensional channel, IEEE
References
45
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 32263239, Sep. 2012.
46
References
Part II
Fundamentals of Massive
MIMO
47
Papers
The articles associated with this thesis have been removed for copyright
reasons. For more details about these see:
http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva112780