Proposed Text for DL subcarrier permutation and UL tile permutation
IEEE 802.16 Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9)
Document Number:
IEEE C802.16m-09/0582r2
Date Submitted:
2009-03-09
Source:
Taeyoung Kim, Jeongho Park, Kichun Cho, Jaeweon Cho,
Hokyu Choi , Heewon Kang
Voice:
E-mail:
+82-31-279-0202
ty33.kim@samsung.com
E-mail:
jong-kae.fwu@intel.com
E-mail:
savant21@etri.re.kr
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
416 Maetan-3, Suwon, 443-770, Korea
Jong-Kae (JK) Fwu, Minh-Anh Vuong, Huaning Niu, Rongzhen Yang,
Yuval Lomnitz, Wei Guan, Sassan Ahmadi, Hujun Yin
Intel Corporation
Jihyung Kim, Wooram Shin, Dong Seung Kwon
ETRI
Venue:
IEEE 802.16m Session#60, Vancouver, Canada
IEEE 802.16m-09/0012, “Call for Comments on Amendment Working Document”.
Base Contribution:
None
Purpose:
Discussion and Approval
Notice:
This document does not represent the agreed views of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group or any of its subgroups. It represents only the views of the participants listed
in the “Source(s)” field above. It is offered as a basis for discussion. It is not binding on the contributor(s), who reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw
material contained herein.
Release:
The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of a
n IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IE
EE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that thi
s contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.16.
Patent Policy:
The contributor is familiar with the IEEE-SA Patent Policy and Procedures:
<http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6> and <http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3>.
Further information is located at <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html> and <http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat >.
Motivation
• In the current IEEE 802.16m Amendment Working Document
(IEEE80216m-09/0010),
– Subcarrier permutation for DL is NOT determined yet
– Tile permutation for UL is NOT determined yet
• This contribution shows the evaluation results under the multicell
environment to compare the permutation rules proposed from many
companies (e.g. Intel, LGE, Samsung)
3/14
Part 1
Uplink Tile Permutation
4/17
Issue
• Different Permutation Approaches
– Intel/Samsung :
Tile(s,n,t) = LDRU,FPi  n + g(PermSeq(), s, n, t)
PermSeq() is permutation sequence generated with SEED={IDcell*1367} mod 210.
g(PermSeq(),s,n, t) = {PermSeq[(n+107*s+t) mod LDRU,FPi]+UL_PermBase} mod LDRU,FPi,
UL_PermBase is set to IDcell.
– LG : Tile ( s, n, t )  ( LDRU , FPi  f (n, s)  g ( PermSeq(), s, n, t )  CellID ) mod( 3 * LDRU , FPi )
where
f (n, s )  (5n  7 s ) mod 3
g ( PermSeq(), s, n, t )  PermSeq( f (n, s)  s  OTP  t )
where
 GCD( LDRU , FPi, DTP ) 
PermSeq(i )  {DTP  i  OTP  i 
} mod LDRU , FPi,
LDRU , FPi


where
DTP  (Cell ID mod( LDRU , FPi  1))  1
5/17
and
i  0,1, , LDRU , FPi  1
 Cell ID 
OTP  
 1
 ( LDRU , FPi  1) 
SLS Verification
• Sector ID Configuration
1. Sequential Case
• Total 57 sectors in 2-tier wrap-around model
• Assign sector ID 0~56 in sequential order
2. Random Case
• Total 57 sectors in 2-tier wrap-around model
• Assign sector ID randomly selected {0~767}
• Resource Setting
1. 10MHz BW, 48PRU  All DRU (total 144 6x6 tiles)
• Parameters for SLS
1. See Appendix I
6/17
SLS Verification
• Sequential Sector ID Case
Sequential PermBase
200
180
5
160
140
4
120
3
100
80
2
60
40
1
20
0
0
1/6
2/6
3/6
4/6
5/6
6/6
Resource Loading Ratio
LG Tput
Samsung/Intel Tput
LG edge
1. Difference is too small. Nothing worth to compare.
7/17
Samsung/Intel edge
5%-tile MS Throughput (Kbps)
Sector Throughput (Mbps)
6
SLS Verification
• Random Sector ID Case
Random Permbase
7.6%
5
4
5.0%
2.7%
0%
200
180
160
12.3%
140
16.3%
120
3
100
80
2
60
40
1
20
0
0
1/6
2/6
3/6
4/6
5/6
6/6
Resource Loading Ratio
LG Tput
Samsung/Intel Tput
LG edge
1. A noticeable tendency in cell edge performance
• Samsung’s is better up to 16.3%
8/17
Samsung/Intel edge
5%-tile MS Throughput (Kbps)
Sector Throughput (Mbps)
6
Theory
• Goal of Permutation
– Interference Averaging, especially not in Full Loading Situation
• Worse Permutation
– Would result in similar logical-physical mapping among neighbor cells
• Eventually
– Higher NI fluctuation results in error rate
– This impacts on cell edge performance
9/17
NI Fluctuation
•
Observed Metric : Histogram of MS’s NI Variance
– MS_NI : NI power of the tones which are assigned to the MS
– MS drop and collect total 570 MSs’ MS_NI
– Calculate variance along time for every MS  V1~V570
• Time duration : total 2700 UL subframes
• Total number of drop : 11 drops
LGE’s has larger Mean{Vi}
LGE’s has larger Var{Vi}
High error rate
Worse Performance
[Note] See Appendix for further cases (e.g. 4/6, 6/6 loading)
10/17
Hitting Count Verification
• Methodology
– Select 2 Sector IDs from total 768
• Total number of cases : combination 2 among 768 = 294528 cases
– Count the number of tiles two sectors share
• Full loading case  obviously 100% hitting
• Not full loading case  worst case is 100% hitting
– Results metric
• Histogram of hitting count
• Average value is not important
• The more high hitting case, the higher IoT. Var.  worse performance
• Assumptions
– Total 48 DRU
– Case 1 : resource loading ratio is 1/6  8 DRU (24 tiles)
– Case 2 : resource loading ratio is 2/6  16 DRU (48 tiles)
Hitting Count Results
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
• Case 2
S/I 1
52204
23694
26140
41699
28712
27739
27077
19337
15746
11771
7615
5251
3234
1969
1100
652
321
149
67
20
17
10
0
0
4
S/I 2
3458
17223
39903
59256
63997
51409
32371
16187
6962
2569
779
244
97
38
17
13
1
0
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
Intel
61440
36864
30720
49152
12288
24576
12288
12288
0
36864
12288
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5760
LGE
19133
17202
5250
54952
45987
54400
22186
20500
6387
10667
16814
2099
3980
4019
1072
202
505
518
1676
129
4076
945
212
480
1137
– For more cases, open this sheet
Number of tiles having collision
Number of tiles having collision
• Case 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
S/I 1
4124
2796
2723
5546
5059
5266
7482
7509
8175
10390
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
1174
932
607
453
293
173
108
70
45
14
3
1
3
4
S/I 2
Intel
0
1
4
8
22
67
173
454
1163
2538
0
0
0
12288
0
0
12288
24576
0
0
LGE
2128
0
0
0
0
512
0
4272
0
949
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5760
803
340
650
203
0
0
0
8684
291
4397
609
195
418
1209
Part 2
Downlink Subcarrier Permutation
13/17
LLS in Multi-cells environment (1)
• Cell ID Configuration
• Evaluation methodology
– Increasing sector ID
– ISD = 1.5km
31
34
37
35
36
38
40
10
11
49
41
43
13
MS
2
16

22
21
23
55
51
53
24
26
18
52
48
50
5
20
15
49
25
3
19
17
45
47
4
0
– Varying parameter of “radius”
– Select 7 strongest interferers
27
29
8
12
46
28
6
1
14
42
44
7
9
• # of IDcell for desired cell = 0
• Radius is variable, but theta is fixed as
30 degree
30
32
33
– User drop on the desired cell,
which is located in (radius, theta)
• Calculating only path-loss according to
the distance between MS and BSs.
• Not considering shadowing
– Calculate SINR
SINR 
54

P0
7
I
1 k
 N0
56
[ Example]
MS is located in (radius, theta) = (0.75*ISD/2, 30)
 7 strongest interferers(I1~I7) = 8, 19, 5, 4, 12, 22, 29
 SINR=6.36dB
LLS in Multi-cells environment (2)
• Simulation conditions
– Working scenarios
Freq. Partition
# of subbands
# of minibands
# of PRUs in FPi
FP0
6
24
48
FP1 ~ FP3
0
0
0
Scenario #1
– Number of DRUs / LRUs / Miniband allocation
• Half loading in DRUs(Ex. # of DRUs = 8, # of LRUs = 4)
• Half loading in Miniband based CRU
– Assuming random QPSK modulated data bursts are transmitted
– Assuming random sequence for CRU/DRU allocation sequence
– Channel condition: PedB, 3km/h
– MIMO configuration: 2x2 SFBC
– Pilot Structure
• Pilot power = 3 dB
• Interlaced pilot structure
FER vs SINR (1)
• Evaluation Results
– # of DRUs=5
– # of DRUs=4
1.E-01
1.E-01
FER
1.E+00
FER
1.E+00
1.E-02
1.E-02
1.E-03
1.E-03
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
SINR [dB]
SINR [dB]
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
FER vs SINR (2)
• Evaluation Results
– # of DRUs=7
– # of DRUs=6
1.E-01
1.E-01
1.E-02
1.E-02
1.E-03
1.E-03
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
FER
1.E+00
FER
1.E+00
SINR [dB]
SINR [dB]
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
FER vs SINR (3)
• Evaluation Results
– # of DRUs=9
– # of DRUs=8
1.E-01
1.E-01
FER
1.E+00
FER
1.E+00
1.E-02
1.E-02
1.E-03
1.E-03
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
SINR [dB]
SINR [dB]
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
FER vs SINR (4)
• Evaluation Results
– # of DRUs=11
1.E+00
1.E+00
1.E-01
1.E-01
FER
FER
– # of DRUs=10
1.E-02
1.E-02
z
1.E-03
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
8.81
8.20
7.59
6.98
6.36
5.68
5.00
4.32
3.64
2.94
2.24
1.52
0.79
0.02
-0.77
-1.58
-2.42
-3.28
-4.16
-5.08
1.E-03
SINR [dB]
SINR [dB]
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
Intel(16QAM )
Intel(QPSK)
LGE_M odified(16QAM )
LGE_M odified(QPSK)
Proposed(16QAM )
Proposed(QPSK)
Conclusion
• Most of permutation rules proposed by Intel, LGE and
Samsung show the similar FER performance under the
multicell environment
• Considering the facility of deployment, the permutation
sequence randomly generated by IDcell should be
necessary
• For UL, it is natural to be same as DL formula and
permutation sequence.
Proposed Text for AWD (1)
[Remedy-1: Change the text from line 35 to 38 on the page 31, in 15.3.5.3.3, as follows:]


PermSeq() is the permutation sequence of length LDRU,FPi and is determined by
SEED={IDcell*1367} mod 210. The permutation sequence is generated by the random sequence
generation algorithm specified in Section 15.3.5.3.4. generated by a function or by a lookup
table;
g(PermSeq(),s,m,l,t) is a function (TBD) with value from the set [0, LDRU, FPi -1], which is defined
as follows.;
g(PermSeq(),s,m,l,t) = {PermSeq[{f(m,s)+s+l} mod LDRU,FPi] +DL_PermBase} mod LDRU,FPi,
where DL_PermBase is an integer ranging from 0 to 31(TBD), which is set to preamble IDcell.

21/14
f(m,s) = (m+13·s) mod LSP,l. is a function (TBD) with value from the set [0, LSP,l -1].
Proposed Text for AWD (2)
[Remedy-2: Insert the text in line 48 on the page 31, in 15.3.5.3.3, as follows:]
15.3.5.3.4 Random sequence generation
The permutation sequence generation algorithm with 10-bit SEED (Sn-10, Sn-9,…,Sn-1) shall generate a permutation sequence of size
M by the following process:
1) Initialization
A. Initialize the variables of the first order polynomial equation with the 10-bit seed, SEED.
•
Set d1 = floor(SEED/25) + 1 and d2 = SEED mod 25.
B. Initialize the maximum iteration number, N=4.
C. Initialize an array A with size M with the numbers 0, 1, … , M-1 (i.e. A[0]=0, A[1]=1, … , A[M-1]=M-1).
D. Initialize the counter i to M-1.
E. Initialize x to -1.
2) Repeat the following steps if i > 0
A. Initialize the counter j to 0.
B. Repetition loop as follows,
a.
Increment x and j by 1.
b.
Calculate the output variable of y = {(d1*x + d2) mod 1031} mod M.
c.
Repeat the above step a. and b., if yi and j<N.
C. If y  i, set y = y mod i.
D. Swap the i-th and the y-th elements in the array (i.e. perform the steps Temp= A[i], A[i]= A[y], A[y]=Temp).
E. Decrement i by 1.
3)
PermSeq[i] = A[i], where 0i<M.
22/14
Proposed Text for AWD (3)
[Remedy-3: Change the text in line 1 on the page 42, in 15.3.8.3.3, as follows:]
Tile(s,n,t) = TBD LDRU,FPi  n + g(PermSeq(), s, n, t)
[Remedy-4: Insert the text in line 13 on the page 42, in 15.3.8.3.3, as follows:]


PermSeq() is the permutation sequence of length LDRU,FPi and is determined by
SEED={IDcell*1367} mod 210. The permutation sequence is generated by the random sequence
generation algorithm specified in Section 15.3.5.3.4.
g(PermSeq(),s,n,t) is a function of s, n, t and PermSeq(), which is defined as follows:
g(PermSeq(),s,n, t) = {PermSeq[(n+107*s+t) mod LDRU,FPi]+UL_PermBase} mod LDRU,FPi,
where UL_PermBase is an integer ranging from 0 to 31(TBD), which is set to preamble IDcell.
23/14
Appendix: NI Fluctuation
•
Observed Metric : Histogram of MS’s NI Variance
24/17