Evaluation Model for LTE-Advanced 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #53bis 　　　　　　　R1-082573 Warsaw, Poland, June 30 – July 4, 2008 Evaluation Model for LTE-Advanced NTT DoCoMo, Inc. Agenda item: 12 Document for: Discussion and Decision

Contents At the RAN plenary meeting in Prague, target values for Case 1 were agreed Average spectrum efficiency, i.e., capacity, and cell-edge user throughput for each antenna configuration Propose Necessity of modified Case 1 with wider bandwidth Simulation assumptions for respective radio environments including traffic models and simulation methodologies

Necessity of Modified Case 1 with Wider Bandwidth Case 1 with 10 MHz bandwidth is necessary to clarify the gains of technologies applied to LTE-Advanced Moreover, performance evaluations for low rate services such as VoIP are to be conducted in Case 1 Modified Case 1 with wider bandwidth However, transmission bandwidth for Base coverage urban environment in ITU-R is wider than 20 MHz In addition, performance of high rate service should be evaluated under assumptions relevant to deployment of LTE-Advanced Hence, modified case 1 with wider transmission bandwidth should be added to Case 1 as Basic urban environment Target values in modified Case 1 are the same or slightly modified considering increasing frequency diversity

Traffic Models (1) In LTE-Advanced, finite buffer models should be considered in addition to infinite buffer, i.e., full-buffer model for the following reasons Traffic model with constant offered load (equal served traffic model) is more realistic than full buffer model because it simulates services such as streaming and downloads Equal served traffic model affects inter-cell interference management, coordinated multi-cell transmission/reception, etc., since interference variation level becomes high in multi-cell operation Hence, equal served traffic model should be used in addition to full buffer model

Traffic Models (2) Required traffic models to evaluate LTE-Advanced Full buffer model: Simple and full network load model  Used to assess performance for LTE-Advanced especially in terms of capacity and peak spectrum efficiency Equal served traffic model: Node B offers the constant served traffic [1]  Used to assess performance for the same network load especially in terms of cell edge throughput [1] Ericsson, R1-050762

Simulation Methodology (1) In LTE-Advanced, coordinated multi-cell transmission/reception will be more important. Thus, more realistic simulation model considering actual interference variation in multi-cell environment should be considered Possible simulation models including those used in LTE are listed in the next slide Appropriate simulation methods should be employed according to technologies or performances to be evaluated [2] [2] Qualcomm, R1-081956

Simulation Methodology (2) Link-level System-level With single link With multiple links Quasi dynamic Dynamic Techniques or performance to be evaluated Comparison of techniques assuming single UE in a single cell Comparison of techniques assuming multiple UEs or/and in multi-cells Multi-cell operations considering realistic other-cell interference Multi-cell operations considering dynamic UE mobility Other-cell interference Gaussian Explicitly modeled for dominant cells and Gaussian for others Explicitly modeled (time and frequency variations are modeled) Multiple access interference (MAI) Explicitly modeled for dominant UEs and Gaussian for others Path loss Constant Time varying Shadowing Instantaneous fading Cell change N/A Applied (rarely happens) Applied (long observation time needed) 7

Simulation Assumption for Respective Radio Environments Subsequent slides show detailed simulation assumptions for respective radio environments as a starting point for discussion, although we need modification according to ITU discussion The values in “black” represent the agreed values at the Kansas meeting (R1-082186) The values in “red” represent the proposed values If the agreed value at the Kansas meeting has a range, the value in red after “” represents the proposed value

System Simulation Scenario (1) Inter-cell interference Parameter Case 1 (Modified Case 1) Micro Indoor Rural/ High speed Inter-cell interference Cellular Isolated Inter-site distance 500 m [200 – 300 m]  200 m N/A (larger than Case 1)  1732 m Carrier frequency 2 GHz (3.4 GHz) 3.4 GHz 800 MHz Bandwidth 10 MHz (DL Approx. 50 MHz UL 20 MHz) Wider than 20 MHz  DL 100 MHz UL 40 MHz (T.B.D.)  10 MHz eNB Tx power 46 dBm (49 dBm) (lower)  30 dBm >= 46 dBm  46 dBm Penetration loss 20 dB  10 dB UE speed 3 km/h  3 km/h (mixed)  120 km/h

System Simulation Scenario (2) Parameter Case 1 (Modified Case 1) Micro Indoor Rural/ High speed Distance-dependent path loss* L= 128.1 + 37.6log10(R) L = 136.2 + 38.4log10(R) (assuming carrier frequency of 3.4 GHz and antenna height of 10 m) T.B.D. L= 113.2 + 34.4log10(R) (assuming carrier frequency of 800 MHz and antenna height of 35 m) Shadowing standard deviation 8 dB Correlation distance of Shadowing 50 m T.B.D Shadowing correlation Between cells 0.5 - Between sectors 1.0 Antenna pattern (horizontal) (For 3-sector cell sites with fixed antenna patterns) No sectorization = 70 degrees, Am = 20 dB * Path loss L is tentatively derived from the equation in TR 25.942 (5.1.4.2 Macro cell propagation model) L= 40(1-4x10-3Dhb) Log10(R) -18Log10(Dhb) + 21Log10(f) + 80 dB where Dhb is the base station antenna height (15 m assumed for Case 1)

System Simulation Scenario (3) Parameter Case 1 (Modified Case 1) Micro Indoor Rural/ High speed Channel model TU early simulations SCM later simulations Simple model *** early simulations SCM-based later simulations UE power class 24 dBm Inter-cell Interference Modelling Explicit modelling - Minimum distance between UE and cell >= 35 m >= 10 m T.B.D. UE placement Uniform *** Simple model extended to 100 MHz for Micro and Indoor scenarios