International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

Revocation of interference for Mobile Cellular Systems

Mandava Bindu Sai Sri* , M.Anil Kumar** *(IV/IV B.Tech, Department of Electronics and communication engineering, K.L.University, Andhra Pradesh) **(Assistant Professor, Department of Electronics and communication engineering, K.L.University, Andhra Pradesh)

I. INTRODUCTION Abstract-Wireless network widely used today include, cellular network, wireless mesh network (WMNs), wireless local area network and personal area network. The increasing demand for these networks has turned spectrum into a precious resource. For this reason, there is always a need for methods to pack more bits/Hz. In this paper, we enumerate the reasons for
this widespread scepticism, and discuss how current and future trends will increase the need and viability of multiuser receivers for both the uplink, where many asynchronous users will be simultaneously detected, and the downlink, where users will be scheduled and largely orthogonalized, but the mobile handset will still need to cope with a few dominant interfering base stations.New results for interference cancelling receivers that use conventional front ends are shown to alleviate many of the shortcomings of prior techniques, particularly for the challenging uplink. This paper gives an overview of key recent research breakthroughs on interference cancellation, and highlights system-level considerations for future multiuser receivers.

Recently, major efforts have been spent on the development of Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Long Term Evolution (LTE) for higher data rate and system capacity.Showing substantial performance improvements in throughput and spectral efficiency, LTE is foreseen to be a solid ground for the future IMT-Advanced (IMT-A) technology [1]. IMT-A will offer a high bandwidth up to 100MHz for higher data rates, global operation and economy of scale supporting a wider range of services. Many candidate radio interface technologies have been submitted to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) to prepare new technology components for LTE to meet IMT-A requirements. Among which, device-to-device (D2D)

communication has received increasing attentions as a promising component to improve spectral efficiency

[13].Unlike the infrastructure based cellular network, D2D users (user equipments or mobile terminals) do not communicate viathe central coordinator (base station, NodeB or evolved NodeB)but operate as an underlay and

Keywords: interference,spectrum,widespread,orthogonalized, Multiuser.

communicate directly with each other or more hops. D2D communication shares the same resources with the cellular system whereas under the control of the evolved NodeB (eNB) of the cellular network. In such a case, eNB can still control the resource and power assigned for D2D transmission to limit the interference to the primary . In the downlink each

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 869

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

receiver only needs to decode a single desired signal from K intracell signals, while suppressing other cell interference from a few dominant sources as shown in Figure 1. On the other hand, in the uplink the base station receiver must decode all K desired users while suppressing other cell interference from many independent sources, as shown in Figure.

Figure 1: In the downlink scenario, each receiver only needs to decode its own signal, while suppressing other cell interference from just a few dominant neighboring cells. Because all K users signals originate at the base station, the link is synchronous and the K 1 intracell interferers can be orthogonalized at the base station transmitter. Typically though, some orthogonality is lost in the channel. For these reasons, downlink receivers at the user terminals will employ relatively simple multiuser receivers that attempt to restore the orthogonality of the intracell users via either a chip-level equalizer (CDMA) or inter-carrier interference suppression (multiuser OFDM), while handling at most a few dominant and unknown other-cell interferers. And although multiuser scheduling may increase throughput and decrease the number of interfering users, at lower spreading factors interference suppression will become even more crucial.

In the uplink, since all users are at different distances from the base station Future cellular systems will employ sophisticated scheduling algorithms in the downlink so the primary function of the mobile unit will be to decode the desired signal in the presence of interference from the neighboring cells. This is fortunate, since the mobile units will still be highly power limited and hence have limited processing power. It is difficult to coordinate and accurately synchronize scheduling Historical

II. MULTIUSER DETECTION

Overview and Shortcomings The idea of simultaneously receiving multiple interfering users is not particularly new. Most current wireless communication systems already have to cope with a large degree of multiple access interference.

algorithms for and have rapidly changing multipath channels. Although this is a more challenging task, the base station receivers will generally have a much higher complexity allowance than their mobile counterparts.

Figure 2: In the uplink scenario, the base station receiver must decode all K desired users, while suppressing other cell interference from many independent users. Because it is challenging to dynamically synchronize all K desired users, they generally transmit synchronously with respect to each other, making orthogonal spreading codes unviable.

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 870

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

In the important special case of CDMA systems like IS-95 and 3G cellular, an interference-limited system is willfully created in order to achieve capacity benefits deriving from voice activity and universal frequency reuse. While simple, proven, and robust, this technique is decidedly suboptimal in most circumstances from an information theory perspective, particularly when the number of interferers is large.For synchronous systems like the cellular downlink, this approach doesnt make sense the better approach would simply be to assign the users orthogonal codes at the transmitter and maintain a simple, single user receiver

original BLAST system and industry adaptations of spatial interference cancellation receivers for multi antenna systems can be used to separate spatially multiplexed streams of data.These types of post processing receivers often

significantly outperform stand-alone linear receivers such as MMSE or zero-forcing in noisy environments. Since the cellular environment will invariably have a high level of noise and background interference (from other cells, for example), these linear interference suppression techniques are not viable as they amplify this noise when inverting the spatial matrix channel.Analogous logic can be applied to multiuser systems, and it is well established that linear (dimensional) multiuser

III. INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION Although the application of interference cancellation to multiuser systems is relatively new and unproven,other forms of interference cancellation have been in widespread use for years. Although the phrase has been used fairly loosely, interference cancellation should be interpreted to mean the class of techniques that demodulate and/or decode desired information, and then use this information along with channel estimates to cancel received interference from the received signal.In the DFE, the desired symbol x[n] at some time n is decoded. Since this symbol will interfere with many future symbols i.e. from times n+1; n+2; : : : given knowledge of the channel, this inter symbol interference can be cancelled. The DFE is known to work well in practice, and achieve far better performance than linear equalizers which suffer from noise enhancement.

detectors have a noise enhancement penalty.

IV. SYNTHESIS OF NEAR-FAR INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION SCHEME IN CELLULAR SYSTEMS. Considering the D2D subsystem is an ad-hoc like system, in our work we assume a Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA) type MAC protocol is applied for D2D transmission, that means a dedicated common control channel is used for the D2D handshaking procedure where all control related signallings are transmitted to facilitate radio resource management (RRM) and D2D data transmission. The peculiarity utilized by the hybrid system is that D2D users operate in an underlay mode which means that the cellular eNB can control D2D users loosely by sending limited assisting information to facilitate D2D RRM. Furthermore, the sensed signals from CCCH are assumed to be reliable. Denote C_UE and D_UE a cellular UE and a D2D UE respectively, the proposed scheme to share cellular UL resources in a hybrid system is presented in detail as follows. Step 1: At the beginning of D2D transmission, eNB broadcasts the reserved resource including time and frequency of D2D CCCH in the broadcasting channel such that all C_UEs and D_UEs can know the information of D2D CCCH.

Figure 3: Block Diagram of the Decision Feedback Equalizer. The same reasoning applies to analogous types of interference, such as multiuser interference or spatial interference. The

Step 2: After that, cellular UEs periodically listen to thesignalings on CCCH from D2D UEs to ensure whether D2D UEs are near to them. Here a

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 871

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) threshold and listening period are needed to identify the adjacent D2D UEs accurately. According to the peculiarity of the cellular system, two criteria are proposed for the cellular users: Criterion I: Cellular UEs only monitor the power ofCCCH regularly without decoding the information they received. Criterion II: Cellular UEs decode the information obtained from CCCH to find the IDs of neighboring D2D UEs and then report their IDs to eNB in the next step. To utilize this, the information such as Cell ID and C-RNTI should be included in the handshaking procedure. Step 3: Once a C_UE senses an SINR from CCCH beyond the predefined threshold, it will report the measurement result to eNB in the earliest available UL time slot in a dedicated channel. According to the two different criteria in step#2, two reporting formats will be utilized. V. MULTIUSER INTERFERENCE CANCELLATION Interference cancellation for multiuser systems has generally been broken into two categories, parallel and successive, although recent developments in iterative interference cancellation have blurred the distinction.Both SIC and PIC have the important advantage over other types of multiuser receivers that error correction coding is integrated into the multiuser detection process. As previously noted, both SIC and PIC are primarily applicable to the uplink in a many user CDMA system. However, for a non-CDMA system, these same powerful techniques, suitably modified,can help suppress other-cell interference in the downlink. Parallel interference cancellation (PIC), as shown in Fig. 4, detects all the users simultaneously. This initial very coarse estimate can then be used to cancel some interference, and then the parallel detection can be repeated. Successive interference cancellation (SIC), shown in Fig. 5, detects just one user per stage. Figure 5: Successive Interference Cancellation. This can be subtracted from the composite received signal, which then allows subsequent users to experience a cleaner signal. All users have improved performance: earlier users because they can have disproportionately high received power, and later users because a large fraction of the total interference has been removed by the time they are detected.There are a variety of trade offs between SIC and PIC. PIC has decreased latency, but higher overall complexity because K users must be detected in parallel, plus there are P cancellation stages. So the latency is proportional to P which is generally much smaller than K for cellular systems, but complexity is proportional to PK. SIC on the other han has complexity and latency proportional to K, and this latency may be prohibitive if there are many users with real-time data. Some authors have Figure 4: Parallel Interference Cancellation. This process can be repeated over several stages, hence PIC is sometimes called multistage interference cancellation . Since the first stage generally results in very noisy data estimates, soft interference cancellation is necessary .

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 872

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

attempted to provide a smoother trade off between these techniques by introducing multistage SIC: a group of users are detected in parallel, and then has their aggregate interference subtracted from the composite received signal, and then another group is detected in parallel. Channel estimation error and error propagation-The entire concept of interference cancellation is based on the premise that the received signal can be reliably estimated. Whereas communication systems are by definition designed to allow the transmitted signal to be recovered, reconstructing the received signal requires an accurate description of both what was transmitted, and what the channel did to that transmission. Inaccurate channel estimation is a problem for both PIC and SIC, especially for SIC since historically, the optimal received power distribution is based on the assumption that interference has been completely cancelled, which is never fully achieved in practice. This residual interference then causes the later users to have unacceptably bad performance, causing a major fairness problem as well as an overall degradation in bit-error rate and system capacity, it can be seen that if the channel estimation error is on average larger than about 20%, then the system was better off without SIC, assuming the traditional power control for SIC is used that assumed perfect interference cancellation. Whereas with a modified power control formulation that accounts for the statistics of the channel estimation error, even with dramatic estimation error as high as 50%, SIC nearly doubles the system capacity relative to no interference cancellation.Whereas parallel interference cancellation

results in power control theory that the optimum SIC power distribution, even with channel estimation error accounted for, can easily be accomplished using binary iterative feedback algorithms. Multipath channels are challenging for all wireless systems, but particularly for multiuser receivers. The reason is that each multipath component can appear to be a user of this system,so the quantity of perceived users grows not just with the number of users K, but also roughly with the number of multipath components L. Although interference cancellation receivers, which are based on conventional receivers, can easily employ a RAKE receiver to handle multipath, it may be difficult to accurately regenerate the interference for cancellation if there are many multipath components. If each multipath component has an independent amplitude and phase, then generally the estimation error for each will be independent. This can cause the capacity to decrease rapidly as the multipath profile worsens,since channel estimation errors effect all the users signals in every dimension when the multipath interference is regenerated in the time-domain by the RAKE encoder.Exploiting the characteristics of GMSK modulation allows signal reception to be split into two virtual paths, which can then be processed using classical linear processing techniques such as ZF or MMSE.However, joint detection is also possible in asynchronous networks provided the mobile terminal platform can handle the complexity. Collectively, these joint detection and hybrid/linear receivers are referred to as Single Antenna Interference Cancellation (SAIC) receivers. It should be noted that these kinds of interference cancelling receivers may employ either maximum likelihood detection or pre-detection processing rather than the post-detection interference cancellation emphasized in this paper.

functions best in the familiar case where all the received powers are equal, we have just seen that successive interference cancellation works best when a specific and unequal distribution of user powers is maintained, and furthermore when the distribution specifically considers imperfect interference cancellation. An unequal received power

distribution has also been shown to be highly preferable for iterative interference cancellation . This apparent complication of CDMA power control has been frequently cited as a major shortcoming of SIC. But recently it has been shown using new

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 873

International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) - Volume4Issue4- April 2013

CONCLUSION Through this paper we can know how interference can be cancelled in mobile cellular systems.MIMO systems are gaining
much more attention and efforts in wireless communication research due to their potential to increase considerable capacity in mobile.

University of Illinois at Urb ana- Champaign, Aug. 1984. [5] Multiuser Detection. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 1998. [6]IEEE Journal of,Volume:36,Issue:4,oct.2005. [7] L. B. Michael, S. Kikuchi, T. Adachi, and M. Nakagawa, Combined cellular/direct in Proc. method IEEE of inter-vehicle Vehicle

The synchronous downlink will likely employ opportunistic scheduling across time, frequency, and/or codes, and so the majority of the interference at the mobile stations will come from a small number of neighboring base stations, rather than the present scenario where much of the interference in intracell. For these reasons, multiuser receivers will play an important, but different, role in the downlink and uplink of future cellular systems. In the uplink, there will be many asynchronous users, although fewer than in a 2G or 3G system as the cells will continue to grow smaller while data will be burstier and higher rate, and hence the spreading factor smaller. This makes interference cancellation techniques all the more desirable and practical. Recent research on interference cancellation, highlighted in this paper, has made significant strides, but more research and development is required to prototype these systems and adapt them to real-world environments.For the downlink, the need will be to attenuate the interference from a small number of neighboring base stations while maintaining the orthogonality of the users within the cell in time, frequency, code,and/or space, as the case may be. This implies that the success of the recent research and implementation of Single Antenna Interference Cancellation (SAIC) techniques for single-carrier GSM systems should be extended through future research to higher-bandwidth and more complex multi carrier and CDMA systems.

communication,

Intelligent

Symposium, Oct. 2000, pp. 534539. [8] X.Wang and H. Poor, Wireless Communication Systems.

REFERENCES [1]S. R0023, High Speed Data Enhancement for CDMA2000 1x-Data Only, 3GPP2, June 2003. [2] High Speed Downlink Packet Access (HDSPA), release 5, 3GPP, 2003. [3] Wideband CDMA Standard, Release 99, 3GPP, 1999. [4] Optimum multiuser signal detection, Ph.D. dissertation,

ISSN: 2231-5381

http://www.ijettjournal.org

Page 874