Enhanced Uplink SC-FDMA: PUSCH+PUCCH Simultaneous Transmission

LTE 'Antenna Ports' and their Physical mapping

People who work with LTE Physical layer and maybe higher layers would be aware of this term called 'Antenna Ports'. I have always wondered how these antenna ports are mapped to physical antennas.

The following is from R&S whitepaper:

The 3GPP TS 36.211 LTE standard defines antenna ports for the downlink. An antenna port is generally used as a generic term for signal transmission under identical channel conditions. For each LTE operating mode in the downlink direction for which an independent channel is assumed (e.g. SISO vs. MIMO), a separate logical antenna port is defined. LTE symbols that are transmitted via identical antenna ports are subject to the same channel conditions. In order to determine the characteristic channel for an antenna port, a UE must carry out a separate channel estimation for each antenna port. Separate reference signals (pilot signals) that are suitable for estimating the respective channel are defined in the LTE standard for each antenna port. 

Here is my table that I have adapted from the whitepaper and expanded. 

The way in which these logical antenna ports are assigned to the physical transmit antennas of a base station is up to the base station, and can vary between base stations of the same type (because of different operating conditions) and also between base stations from different manufacturers. The base station does not explicitly notify the UE of the mapping that has been carried out, rather the UE must take this into account automatically during demodulation (FIG 2).

If there is another way to show this physical mappings, please feel free to let me know.

The R&S Whitepaper is available here if interested.

10 Times Beyond LTE-A (5G maybe?)

Recently when I added a presentation by NSN on whats coming after IMT-Advanced, it was very well received and has already had over 8000 views. There seems to be definitely an appetite for the future networks. Here is another such presentation.

10 Times Beyond LTE-A

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

There is also a video of the presentation if you have the patience to sit, watch and learn.

RAN Release 11 Priorities

New Spectrum for LTE-Advanced Carrier Aggregation

Radio relay technologies in LTE-Advanced

The following is from NTT Docomo Technical journal: 

Three types of radio relay technologies and their respective advantages and disadvantages are shown in Figure 1. 

A layer 1 relay consists of relay technology called a booster or repeater. This is an Amplifier and Forward (AF) type of relay  technology by which Radio Frequency (RF) signals received on the downlink from the base station are amplified and transmitted to the mobile station. In a similar manner, RF signals received on the uplink from the mobile station are amplified and transmitted to the base station. The equipment functions of a layer 1 relay are relatively simple, which makes for low-cost implementation and short processing delays associated with relaying. With these  features, the layer 1 relay has already found widespread use in 2G and 3G mobile communication systems. It is being deployed with the aim of improving coverage in mountainous regions, sparsely populated areas and urban areas as well as in indoor environments.


The RF performance specifications for repeaters have already been specified in LTE, and deployment of these repeaters for the same purpose is expected. The layer 1 relay, however, amplifies intercell interference and noise together with desired signal components thereby deteriorating the received Signal to Interference plus Noise power Ratio (SINR) and reducing the throughput enhancement gain.


The layer 2 relay, meanwhile, is a Decode and Forward (DF) type of relay technology by which RF signals received on the downlink from the base station are demodulated and decoded and then encoded and modulated again before being sent on to the mobile station. This demodulation and decoding processing performed at the radio relay station overcomes the drawback in layer 1 relays of deteriorated received SINR caused by amplification of intercell interference and noise. A better throughput-enhancement effect can therefore be expected compared with the layer 1 relay. At the same time, the layer 2 relay causes a delay associated with modulation/demodulation and encoding/decoding processing. In this type of relay, moreover, radio functions other than modulation/demodulation and encoding/decoding (such as mobility control, retransmission control by Automatic Repeat request (ARQ), and user-data concatenation/segmentation/reassembly) are performed between the base station and mobile station transparently with respect to the radio relay, which means that new radio-control functions for supporting this relay technology are needed. 

The layer 3 relay also performs demodulation and decoding of RF signals received on the downlink from the base station, but then goes on to perform processing (such as ciphering and user-data concatenation/segmentation/reassembly) for retransmitting user data on a radio interface and finally performs encoding/modulation and transmission to the mobile station. Similar to the layer 2 relay, the layer 3 relay can improve throughput by eliminating inter-cell interference and noise, and additionally, by incorporating the same functions as a base station, it can have small impact on the standard specifications for radio relay technology and on implementation. Its drawback, however, is the delay caused by user-data processing in addition to the delay caused by modulation/demodulation and encoding/decoding processing.


In 3GPP, it has been agreed to standardize specifications for layer 3 relay technology in LTE Rel. 10 because of the above features of improved received SINR due to noise elimination, ease of coordinating standard specifications, and ease of implementing the technology. Standardization of this technology is now moving forward.


Layer 3 radio relay technology is shown in Figure 2. In addition to performing user-data regeneration processing and modulation/demodulation and encoding/ decoding processing as described above, the layer 3 relay station also features a unique Physical Cell ID (PCI) on the physical layer different than that of the base station. In this way, a mobile station can recognize that a cell provided by a relay station differs from a cell provided by a base station.


In addition, as physical layer control signals such as Channel Quality Indicator (CQI) and Hybrid ARQ (HARQ) can terminate at a relay station, a relay station is recognized as a base station from the viewpoint of a mobile station. It is therefore possible for a mobile station having only LTE functions (for example, a mobile station conforming to LTE Rel. 8 specifications) to connect to a relay station. Here, the wireless backhaul link (Un) between the base station and relay station and the radio access link (Uu) between the relay station and mobile station may operate on different frequencies or on the same frequency. In the latter case, if transmit and receive processing are performed simultaneously at the relay station, transmit signals will cause interference with the relay station’s receiver by coupling as long as sufficient isolation is not provided between the transmit and receive circuits. Thus, when operating on the same frequency, the wireless backhaul-link and radio-access-link radio resources should be subjected to Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) so that transmission and reception in the relay station are not performed simultaneously.

Scenarios in which the introduction of relay technology is potentially useful have been discussed in 3GPP. Deployment scenarios are shown in Table 1. Extending the coverage area to mountainous and sparsely populated regions (rural area and wireless backhaul scenarios) is an important scenario to operators. It is expected that relay technology can be used to economically extend coverage to such areas as opposed to deploying fixed-line backhaul links. Relay technology should also be effective for providing temporary coverage when earthquakes or other disasters strike or when major events are being held (emergency or temporary coverage scenario), i.e., for situations in which the deployment of dedicated fixed-line backhaul links is difficult. In addition, while pico base stations and femtocells can be used for urban hot spot, dead spot, and indoor hot spot scenarios, the installation of utility poles, laying of cables inside buildings, etc. can be difficult in some countries and regions, which means that the application of relay technology can also be effective for urban scenarios. Finally, the group mobility scenario in which relay stations are installed on vehicles like trains and buses to reduce the volume of control signals from moving mobile stations is also being proposed.


In 3GPP, it has been agreed to standardize the relay technology deployed for coverage extension in LTE Rel. 10. These specifications will, in particular, support one-hop relay technology in which the position of the relay station is fixed and the radio access link between the base station and mobile station is relayed by one relay station.



References
[1] 3GPP TS36.912 V9.1.0: “Feasibility study for Further Advancement for E-UTRA (LTE-Advanced),” 2010.
[2] 3GPP TS36.323 V9.0.0: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) specification,” 2009
[3] 3GPP TS36.322 V9.1.0: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Link Control (RLC) protocol specification,” 2010.
[4] 3GPP TS36.321 V9.2.0: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification,” 2010.
[5] 3GPP TS36.331 V9.2.0: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification,” 2010.
[6] 3GPP TS36.413 V9.2.1: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); S1 Application Protocol (S1AP),” 2010.
[7] 3GPP TR36.806 V9.0.0: “Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Relay architectures for E-UTRA (LTEAdvanced),” 2010.
[8] IETF RFC4960: “Stream Control Transmission Protocol,” 2007.
[9] 3GPP TS29.281 V9.2.0: “General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U),” 2010.

DOCOMO Euro-Labs: LTE/LTE-A Interference Coordination for Femtocells

LTE/LTE‐A Interference Coordination for Femtocells

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

A video of this above presentation is embedded below:

Available to download from here.

LTE/LTE-A SON (for Femtocells)

LTE/LTE-A SON (for Femtocells)

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

A Video presentation of the above is embedded below:



PDF of the above presentation is available here.

LTE Evolution - Soft Cell

LTE Evolution - CoMP

What is coming next after LTE and IMT-Advanced

Interesting presentation from NSN

What is coming next after LTE and IMT-Advanced

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

Other related posts:

• Next Mobile Network (NMN)
• 4G Mobile Broadband Evolution: 3GPP Release-10 and Beyond

Donor eNB (DeNB) and Relay Node (RN)

Extracted from 3GPP 36.300:

The eNB hosts the following functions:

- Functions for Radio Resource Management: Radio Bearer Control, Radio Admission Control, Connection Mobility Control, Dynamic allocation of resources to UEs in both uplink and downlink (scheduling);

- IP header compression and encryption of user data stream;

- Selection of an MME at UE attachment when no routing to an MME can be determined from the information provided by the UE;

- Routing of User Plane data towards Serving Gateway;

- Scheduling and transmission of paging messages (originated from the MME);

- Scheduling and transmission of broadcast information (originated from the MME or O&M);

- Measurement and measurement reporting configuration for mobility and scheduling;

- Scheduling and transmission of PWS (which includes ETWS and CMAS) messages (originated from the MME);

- CSG handling;

- Transport level packet marking in the uplink.

The DeNB hosts the following functions in addition to the eNB functions:

- S1/X2 proxy functionality for supporting RNs;

- S11 termination and S-GW/P-GW functionality for supporting RNs.

E-UTRAN supports relaying by having a Relay Node (RN) wirelessly connect to an eNB serving the RN, called Donor eNB (DeNB), via a modified version of the E-UTRA radio interface, the modified version being called the Un interface. The RN supports the eNB functionality meaning it terminates the radio protocols of the E-UTRA radio interface, and the S1 and X2 interfaces. From a specification point of view, functionality defined for eNBs, e.g. RNL and TNL, also applies to RNs unless explicitly specified. RNs do not support NNSF. In addition to the eNB functionality, the RN also supports a subset of the UE functionality, e.g. physical layer, layer-2, RRC, and NAS functionality, in order to wirelessly connect to the DeNB.

The architecture for supporting RNs is shown in Figure 4.7.2-1. The RN terminates the S1, X2 and Un interfaces. The DeNB provides S1 and X2 proxy functionality between the RN and other network nodes (other eNBs, MMEs and S GWs). The S1 and X2 proxy functionality includes passing UE-dedicated S1 and X2 signalling messages as well as GTP data packets between the S1 and X2 interfaces associated with the RN and the S1 and X2 interfaces associated with other network nodes. Due to the proxy functionality, the DeNB appears as an MME (for S1-MME), an eNB (for X2) and an S-GW (for S1-U) to the RN.

For more details see - 3GPP TS 36.300 : Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN); Overall description; Stage 2 (Release 10)

LTE Advanced HetNet Benefits!

Presentation from Qualcomm Webinar, LTE-Advanced Hetnet benefits.

LTE Advanced HetNet Benefits!

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

Qualcomm is undisputed leader in the LTE chipsets and have been pushing hard for the next generation LTE-A chipsets. Here is a promotional LTE-Advanced Video on Youtube:

MU-MIMO (and DIDO)

Late last month a guy called Steve Perlman announced of a new technology called DIDO (Distributed-Input-Distributed-Output) that could revolutionise the way wireless transmission works and can help fix the channel capacity problem as described by Shannon's formula. A whitepaper describing this technology is available here.

I havent gone through the paper in any detail nor do I understand this DIDO very well but what many experienced engineers have pointed out is that this is MU-MIMO in disguise. Without going into any controversies, lets look at MU-MIMO as its destined to play an important part in LTE-Advanced (the real '4G').

Also, I have been asked time and again about this Shannon's channel capacity formula. This formula is better known by its name Shannon-Hartley theorem. It states:

C <= B log2 (1 + S/N)

where:

C = channel capacity (bits per second)

B = bandwidth (hertz)

S/N = Signal to Noise ratio (SNR)

In a good channel, SNR will be high. Take for example a case when SNR is 20db then log2 (1 + 100) = 6.6. In an extremely noisy channel SNR will be low which would in turn reduce the channel capacity.

In should be pointed out that the Shannon's formula holds true for all wireless technologies except for when multiuser transmission like MU-MIMO (or DIDO) is used.

Anyway, I gave a simple explanation on MU-MIMO before. Another simple explanation of what an MU-MIMO is as explained in this video below:

The picture below (from NTT) gives a good summary of the different kinds of MIMO technology and their advantages and disadvantages. More details could be read from here.

Click to enlarge

As we can see, MU-MIMO is great but it is complex in implementation.

Click to enlarge

Multiuser MIMO technology makes it possible to raise wireless transmission speed by increasing the number of antennas at the base station, without consuming more frequency bandwidth or increasing modulation multiple-values. It is therefore a promising technology for incorporating broadband wireless transmission that will be seamlessly connected with wired transmission in the micro waveband (currently used for mobile phones and wireless LAN, and well suited to mobile communications use), where frequency resources are in danger of depletion. Since it also allows multiple users to be connected simultaneously, it is seen as a solution to the problem specific to wireless communications, namely, slow or unavailable connections when the number of terminals in the same area increases (see Figure 9 above).

There is a good whitepaper in NTT Docomo technical journal that talks about Precoding and Scheduling techniques for increasing the capacity of MIMO channels. Its available here. There is also a simple explanation of MIMO including MU-MIMO on RadioElectronics here. If you want to do a bit more indepth study of MU-MIMO then there is a very good research paper in the EURASIP Journal that is available here (Click on Full text PDF on right for FREE download).

Finally, there is a 3GPP study item on MIMO Enhancements for LTE-Advanced which is a Release-11 item that will hopefully be completed by next year. That report should give a lot more detail about how practical would it be to implement it as part of LTE-Advanced. The following is the justification of doing this study:

The Rel-8 MIMO and subsequent MIMO enhancements in Rel-10 were designed mostly with homogenous macro deployment in mind. Recently, the need to enhance performance also for non-uniform network deployments (e.g. heterogeneous deployment) has grown. It would therefore be beneficial to study and optimize the MIMO performance for non-uniform deployments where the channel conditions especially for low-power node deployments might typically differ from what is normally encountered in scenarios considered so far.

Downlink MIMO in LTE-Advanced has been enhanced in Release 10 to support 8-layer SU-MIMO transmission and dynamic SU-MU MIMO switching. For the 8-tx antenna case, the CSI feedback to support downlink MIMO has been enhanced with a new dual-codebook structure aimed at improving CSI accuracy at the eNB without increasing the feedback overhead excessively. Precoded reference symbols are provided for data demodulation, allowing arbitrary precoders to be used by the eNB for transmission. In many deployment scenarios, less than 8 tx antennas will be employed. It is important to focus on the eNB antenna configurations of highest priority for network operators.

The enhancement of MIMO performance through improved CSI feedback for high priority scenarios not directly targeted by the feedback enhancements in Release 10, especially the case of 4 tx antennas in a cross-polarised configuration, in both homogeneous and heterogeneous scenarios should be studied.

MU-MIMO operation is considered by many network operators as important to further enhance system capacity. It is therefore worth studying further potential enhancement for MU-MIMO, which includes UE CSI feedback enhancement and control signaling enhancement. Furthermore, open-loop MIMO enhancements were briefly mentioned but not thoroughly investigated in Rel-10.

In addition, the experience from real-life deployments in the field has increased significantly since Rel-8. It would be beneficial to discuss the experience from commercial MIMO deployments, and identify if there are any potential short-comings and possible ways to address those. For example, it can be discussed if robust rank adaptation works properly in practice with current UE procedures that allow a single subframe of data to determine the rank. In addition the impact of calibration error on the performance could be discussed.

This work will allow 3GPP to keep MIMO up to date with latest deployments and experience.

Benefits of Self Optimizing Networks in LTE

Self Optimizing Networks : Benefits of SON in LTE - July 2011

View more documents from Zahid Ghadialy

Mobility Robustness Optimization to avoid Handover failures

The following is from 4G Americas Whitepaper on SON:

Mobility Robustness Optimization (MRO) encompasses the automated optimization of parameters affecting active mode and idle mode handovers to ensure good end-user quality and performance, while considering possible competing interactions with other SON features such as, automatic neighbor relation and load balancing.

There is also some potential for interaction with Cell Outage Compensation and Energy Savings as these could also potentially adjust the handover boundaries in a way that conflicts with MRO. While the goal of MRO is the same regardless of radio technology namely, the optimization of end-user performance and system capacity, the specific algorithms and parameters vary with technology.

The objective of MRO is to dynamically improve the network performance of HO (Handovers) in order to provide improved end-user experience as well as increased network capacity. This is done by automatically adapting cell parameters to adjust handover boundaries based on feedback of performance indicators. Typically, the objective is to eliminate Radio Link Failures and reduce unnecessary handovers. Automation of MRO minimizes human intervention in the network management and optimization tasks.

The scope of mobility robustness optimization as described here assumes a well-designed network with overlapping RF coverage of neighboring sites. The optimization of handover parameters by system operators typically involves either focused drive-testing, detailed system log collection and postprocessing, or a combination of these manual and intensive tasks. Incorrect HO parameter settings can negatively affect user experience and waste network resources by causing HO ping-pongs, HO failures and Radio Link Failures (RLF). While HO failures that do not lead to RLFs are often recoverable and invisible to the user, RLFs caused by incorrect HO parameter settings have a combined impact on user experience and network resources. Therefore, the main objective of mobility robustness optimization should be the reduction of the number of HO-related radio link failures. Additionally, sub-optimal configuration of HO parameters may lead to degradation of service performance, even if it does not result in RLFs. One example is the incorrect setting of HO hysteresis, which may results in ping-pongs or excessively delayed handovers to a target cell. Therefore, the secondary objective of MRO is the reduction of the inefficient use of network resources due to unnecessary or missed handovers.

Most problems associated with HO failures or sub-optimal system performance can ultimately be categorized, as either too-early or too-late triggering of the handover, provided that the required fundamental network RF coverage exists. Thus, poor HO-related performance can generally be categorized by the following events:

* Intra-RAT late HO triggering

* Intra-RAT early HO triggering

* Intra-RAT HO to an incorrect cell

* Inter-RAT too late HO

* Inter RAT unnecessary HO

Up to Release 9, a UE is required to send RLF report only in case of successful RRC re-establishment after a connection failure. Release 10 allows support for RLF reports to be sent even when the RRC reestablishment does not succeed. The UE is required to report additional information to assist the eNB in determining if the problem is coverage related (no strong neighbors) or handover problems (too early, too late or wrong cell). Furthermore, Release 10 allows for precise detection of too early / wrong cell HO.

Carrier Aggregation with a difference

Click on picture to enlarge

Another one from the LTE World Summit. This is from a presentation by Ariela Zeira of Interdigital.

What is being proposed is that Carrier Aggregation can use both the licensed as well as unlicensed bands but the signalling should only happen in the licensed band to keep the operator in control.

Note that this is only proposed for Small Cells / Femtocells.

The only concern that I have with this approach is that this may cause interference with the other devices using the same band (especially ISM band). So the WiFi may not work while the LTE device is aggregating this ISM band and the same goes for bluetooth.

Comments welcome!

New Security Algorithms in Release-11

Security in 3GPP

View more presentations from Zahid Ghadialy

I did mention in my earlier blog post about the new algorithm for 3GPP LTE-A Security. The good news is that this would be out hopefully in time for the Release-11.

The following from 3GPP Docs:

The current 3GPP specifications for LTE/SAE security support a flexible algorithm negotiation mechanism. There could be sixteen algorithms at most to support LTE/SAE confidentiality and integrity protection. In current phase, 3GPP defines that there are two algorithms used in EPS security, i.e. SNOW 3G and AES. The remaining values have been reserved for future use. So it is technically feasible for supporting new algorithm for LTE/SAE ciphering and integrity protection.

Different nations will have different policies for algorithm usage of communication system. The current defined EPS algorithm may not be used in some nations according to strict policies which depend on nation’s security laws. Meanwhile, operators shall implement their networks depending on national communication policies. To introduce a new algorithm for EPS security will give operators more alternatives to decide in order to obey national requirements.

Picture: Zu Chongzi

Picture Source: Wikipedia

Some work has been done to adapt LTE security to national requirements about cryptography of LTE/SAE system, i.e. designing a new algorithm of EPS security, which is named ZUC (i.e. Zu Chongzhi, a famous Chinese scientist name in history). Certainly the new algorithm should be fundamentally different from SNOW 3G and AES, so that an attack on one algorithm is very unlikely to translate into an attack on the other.

The objective of this work item is to standardise a new algorithm in EPS. This will include the following tasks:

• To develop new algorithms for confidentiality and integrity protection for E-UTRAN

• To enable operators to quickly start to support the new algorithm

• Not to introduce any obstacle for R8 roaming UE

The following issues should at least be handled in the WI:

• Agree requirement specification with ETSI SAGE for development of new algorithms

• Delivery of algorithm specification, test data and design and evaluation reports

The algorithm is provided for 3GPP usage on royalty-free basis.

The algorithm shall undergo a sequential three-stage evaluation process involving first ETSI SAGE, then selected teams of cryptanalysts from academia and finally the general public.

The documents related to the EEA3 and EIA3 algorithm could be downloaded from here.

If you are new to LTE Security, the following can be used as starting point: http://www.3g4g.co.uk/Lte/LTE_Security_WP_0907_Agilent.pdf

Quick Recap of MIMO in LTE and LTE-Advanced

I had earlier put up some MIMO presentations that were too technical heavy so this one is less heavy and more figures.

The following is from NTT Docomo Technical journal (with my edits):

MIMO: A signal transmission technology that uses multiple antennas at both the transmitter and receiver to perform spatial multiplexing and improve communication quality and spectral efficiency.

Spectral efficiency: The number of data bits that can be transmitted per unit time and unit frequency band.

In this blog we will first look at MIMO in LTE (Release 8/9) and then in LTE-Advanced (Release-10)

MIMO IN LTE

Downlink MIMO Technology

Single-User MIMO (SU-MIMO) was used for the downlink for LTE Rel. 8 to increase the peak data rate. The target data rates of over 100 Mbit/s were achieved by using a 20 MHz transmission bandwidth, 2 × 2 MIMO, and 64 Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (64QAM), and peak data rates of over 300 Mbit/s can be achieved using 4×4 SU-MIMO. The multi-antenna technology used for the downlink in LTE Rel. 8 is classified into the following three types.

1) Closed-loop SU-MIMO and Transmit Diversity: For closed-loop SU-MIMO transmission on the downlink, precoding is applied to the data carried on the Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) in order to increase the received Signal to Interference plus Noise power Ratio (SINR). This is done by setting different transmit antenna weights for each transmission layer (stream) using channel information fed back from the UE. The ideal transmit antenna weights for precoding are generated from eigenvector(s) of the covariance matrix of the channel matrix, H, given by HHH, where H denotes the Hermitian transpose.

However, methods which directly feed back estimated channel state information or precoding weights without quantization are not practical in terms of the required control signaling overhead. Thus, LTE Rel. 8 uses codebook-based precoding, in which the best precoding weights among a set of predetermined precoding matrix candidates (a codebook) is selected to maximize the total throughput on all layers after precoding, and the index of this matrix (the Precoding Matrix Indicator (PMI)) is fed back to the base station (eNode B) (Figure 1).

LTE Rel. 8 adopts frequency-selective precoding, in which precoding weights are selected independently for each sub-band of bandwidth from 360 kHz to 1.44 MHz, as well as wideband precoding, with single precoding weights that are applied to the whole transmission band. The channel estimation used for demodulation and selection of the precoding weight matrix on the UE is done using a cell specific Reference Signal (RS) transmitted from each antenna. Accordingly, the specifications require the eNode B to notify the UE of the precoding weight information used for PDSCH transmission through the Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH), and the UE to use this information for demodulation.

LTE Rel. 8 also adopts rank adaptation, which adaptively controls the number of transmission layers (the rank) according to channel conditions, such as the received SINR and fading correlation between antennas (Figure 2). Each UE feeds back a Channel Quality Indicator (CQI), a Rank Indicator (RI) specifying the optimal rank, and the PMI described earlier, and the eNode B adaptively controls the number of layers transmitted to each UE based on this information.

2) Open-loop SU-MIMO and Transmit Diversity: Precoding with closed-loop control is effective in low mobility environments, but control delay results in less accurate channel tracking ability in high mobility environments. The use of open-loop MIMO transmission for the PDSCH, without requiring feedback of channel information, is effective in such cases. Rank adaptation is used, as in the case of closed-loop MIMO, but rank-one transmission corresponds to open-loop transmit diversity. Specifically, Space-Frequency Block Code (SFBC) is used with two transmit antennas, and a combination of SFBC and Frequency Switched Transmit Diversity (FSTD) (hereinafter referred to as “SFBC+FSTD”) is used with four transmit antennas. This is because, compared to other transmit diversity schemes such as Cyclic Delay Diversity (CDD), SFBC and SFBC+FSTD achieve higher diversity gain, irrespective of fading correlation between antennas, and achieve the lowest required received SINR. On the other hand, for PDSCH transmission with rank of two or higher, fixed precoding is used regardless of channel variations. In this case, cyclic shift is performed before applying the precoding weights, which effectively switches precoding weights in the frequency domain, thereby averaging the received SINR is over layers.

3) Adaptive Beamforming: Adaptive beamforming uses antenna elements with a narrow antenna spacing of about half the carrier wavelength and it has been studied for use with base stations with the antennas mounted in a high location. In this case beamforming is performed by exploiting the UE Direction of Arrival (DoA) or the channel covariance matrix estimated from the uplink, and the resulting transmit weights are not selected from a codebook. In LTE Rel. 8, a UE-specific RS is defined for channel estimation in order to support adaptive beamforming. Unlike the cell-specific RS, the UE specific RS is weighted with the same weights as the data signals sent to each UE, and hence there is no need to notify the UE of the precoding weights applied at the eNode B for demodulation at the UE. However, its effectiveness is limited in LTE Rel. 8 because only one layer per cell is supported, and it is an optional UE feature for Frequency Division Duplex (FDD).

Uplink MIMO Technology

On the uplink in LTE Rel. 8, only one-layer transmission was adopted in order to simplify the transmitter circuit configuration and reduce power consumption on the UE. This was done because the LTE Rel. 8 target peak data rate of 50 Mbit/s or more could be achieved by using a 20 MHz transmission bandwidth and 64QAM and without using SU-MIMO. However, Multi-User MIMO (MU-MIMO) can be used to increase system capacity on the LTE Rel. 8 uplink, using multiple receiver antennas on the eNode B. Specifically, the specification requires orthogonalization of the demodulation RSs from multiple UEs by assigning different cyclic shifts of a Constant Amplitude Zero Auto-Correlation (CAZAC) sequence to the demodulation RSs, so that user signals can be reliably separated at the eNode B. Demodulation RSs are used for channel estimation for the user-signal separation process.

MIMO TECHNOLOGY IN LTE-ADVANCED

Downlink 8-Layer SU-MIMO Technology

The target peak spectral efficiency in LTE-Advanced is 30 bit/s/Hz. To achieve this, high-order SU-MIMO with more antennas is necessary. Accordingly, it was agreed to extend the number of layers of SU-MIMO transmission in the LTE-Advanced downlink to a maximum of 8 layers. The number of transmission layers is selected by rank adaptation. The most significant issue with the radio interface in supporting up to 8 layers is the RS structure used for CQI measurements and PDSCH demodulation.

1) Channel State Information (CSI)-RS: For CQI measurements with up-to-8 antennas, new CSI-RSs are specified in addition to cell-specific RS defined in LTE Rel. 8 for up-to-four antennas. However, in order to maintain backward compatibility with LTE Rel. 8 in LTE-Advanced, LTE Rel. 8 UE must be supported in the same band as in that for LTE-Advanced. Therefore, in LTE Advanced, interference to the PDSCH of LTE Rel. 8 UE caused by supporting CSI-RS must be minimized. To achieve this, the CSI-RS are multiplexed over a longer period compared to the cell-specific RS, once every several subframes (Figure 3). This is because the channel estimation accuracy for CQI measurement is low compared to that for demodulation, and the required accuracy can be obtained as long as the CSIRS is sent about once per feedback cycle. A further reason for this is that LTE-Advanced, which offers higher data-rate services, will be developed to complement LTE Rel. 8, and is expected to be adopted mainly in low-mobility environments.

2) UE-specific RS: To allow demodulation of eight-layer SU-MIMO, the UE-specific RS were extended for SU-MIMO transmission, using a hybrid of Code Division Multiplexing (CDM) and Frequency Division Multiplexing (FDM) (Figure 4). The UE-specific RS pattern for each rank (number of layers) is shown in Figure 5. The configuration of the UE-specific RS in LTE-Advanced has also been optimized differently from those of LTE Rel.8, extending it for SU-MIMO as well as adaptive beamforming, such as by applying twodimensional time-frequency orthogonal CDM to the multiplexing between transmission layers.

Downlink MU-MIMO Technology

In addition to the peak data rate, the system capacity and cell-edge user throughput must also be increased in LTE-Advanced compared to LTE Rel. 8. MU-MIMO is an important technology for satisfying these requirements. With MU-MIMO and CoMP transmission (described earlier), various sophisticated signal processing techniques are applied at the eNode B to reduce the interference between transmission layers, including adaptive beam transmission (zero-forcing, block diagonalization, etc.), adaptive transmission power control and simultaneous multi-cell transmission. When these sophisticated transmission techniques are applied, the eNode B multiplexes the UE-specific RS described above with the PDSCH, allowing the UE to demodulate the PDSCH without using information about transmission technology applied by the eNode B. This increases flexibility in applying sophisticated transmission techniques on the downlink. On the other hand, PMI/CQI/RI feedback extensions are needed to apply these sophisticated transmission techniques, and this is currently being discussed actively at the 3GPP.

Uplink SU-MIMO Technology

To reduce the difference in peak data rates achievable on the uplink and downlink for LTE Rel. 8, a high target peak spectral efficiency of 15 bit/s/Hz was specified for the LTE-Advanced uplink. To achieve this, support for SU-MIMO with up to four transmission antennas was agreed upon. In particular, the two-transmission-antenna SU-MIMO function is required to satisfy the peak spectral efficiency requirements of IMT-Advanced.

For the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), it was agreed to apply SU-MIMO with closed-loop control using multiple antennas on the UE, as well as codebook-based precoding and rank adaptation, as used on the downlink. The eNode B selects the precoding weight from a codebook to maximize achievable performance (e.g., received SINR or user throughput after precoding) based on the sounding RS, which is used for measuring the quality of the channel transmitted by the UE. The eNode B notifies the UE of the selected precoding weight together with the resource allocation information used by the PDCCH. The precoding for rank one contributes to antenna gain, which is effective in increasing cell edge user throughput. However, considering control-information overhead and increases in Peak-to-Average Power Ratio (PAPR), frequency-selective precoding is not very effective in increasing system throughput, so only wideband precoding has been adopted.

Also, for rank two or higher, when four transmission antennas are used, the codebook has been designed not to increase the PAPR. The demodulation RS, which is used for channel estimation, is weighted with the same precoding weight as is used for the user data signal transmission. Basically, orthogonalization is achieved by applying a different cyclic shift to each layer, but orthogonalizing the code region using block spread together with this method is adopted.

Uplink Transmit Diversity Technology

Closed-loop transmit diversity is applied to PUSCH as described above for SU-MIMO. Application of transmit diversity to the Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) is also being studied. For sending retransmission request Acknowledgment (ACK) and Negative ACK (NAK) signals as well as scheduling request signals, application of Spatial Orthogonal-Resource Transmit Diversity (SORTD) using differing resource blocks per antenna or an orthogonalizing code sequence (cyclic shift, block spread sequence) has been agreed upon (Figure 6). However, with LTE-Advanced, the cell design must be done so that LTE Rel. 8 UE get the required quality at cell-edges, so applying transmit diversity to the control channels cannot contribute to increasing the coverage area, but only to reducing the transmission power required.

Qualcomm Video on LTE Advanced: Heterogeneous Networks