Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/1390r0 Submission Nov. 2013 Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 1 PHY Abstraction for HEW System Level Simulation Date: 2013-11-11 Authors:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /0111r0 Zhanji Wu, et. Al. December 2012 Submission A Physical-layer Network Coding Relay scheme for IEEE Date: Authors:
Advertisements

PHY Abstraction for TGax System Level Simulations
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0353r0 March 2014 Dongguk Lim, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Suggestion on PHY Abstraction for Evaluation Methodology Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1387r0 Submission Nov Yan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 1 HEW channel modeling for system level simulation Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /1214r1 September 2014 Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson ABSlide 1 Impact of correlated shadowing in ax system evaluations.
2005/12/06OPLAB, Dept. of IM, NTU1 Optimizing the ARQ Performance in Downlink Packet Data Systems With Scheduling Haitao Zheng, Member, IEEE Harish Viswanathan,
Doc.: IEEE /1174r0 SubmissionYakun Sun, et. al. (Marvell)Slide 1 PHY Abstraction with Time Varying Interference Date: Authors: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1080r0 September 2013 Joseph Levy, InterDigital Communications Inc..Slide 1 Markov Modeling of the Channel for HEW System Level.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0383r0 Impact of number of sub-channels in OFDMA Date: Slide 1Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson March 2015 Authors:
Modeling OFDM Radio Channel Sachin Adlakha EE206A Spring 2001.
Doc.: IEEE /1187r1Sep 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /1227r3 SubmissionSlide 1 OFDMA Performance Analysis Date: Authors: Tianyu Wu etc. MediaTek Sept 2014 NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /0811r2 SubmissionYakun Sun, et. al. (Marvell)Slide 1 Overview on RBIR-based PHY Abstraction Date: Authors: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /0818r1 July 2014 SubmissionYonggang Fang et. al. (ZTE) Synchronization Requirements Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0803r1 July 2014 Wookbong Lee, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Packet Length for Box 0 Calibration Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /1452r0 November 2014 Leif Wilhelmsson, EricssonSlide 1 Frequency selective scheduling in OFDMA Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0623r1 May 2015 Guido R. Hiertz, Ericsson et al.Slide 1 TGax simulation scenario “Box 5” – calibration results Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0335r0 SubmissionYakun Sun, et. al. (Marvell)Slide 1 Instantaneous SINR Calibration for System Simulation Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1391r0 Submission Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 1 About SINR conversion for PHY Abstraction Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0489r1 Submission May 2010 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 1 PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1392r0 Submission Nov Yan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 1 Methodology of Calibrating System Simulation Results Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0330r2 SubmissionSameer Vermani, QualcommSlide 1 PHY Abstraction Date: Authors: March 2014.
Automatic Rate Adaptation Aditya Gudipati & Sachin Katti Stanford University 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0647r2 SubmissionSlide 1 PHY abstraction method comparison Date: Authors: Tianyu Wu etc. MediaTek May 2014 NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
A 4G System Proposal Based on Adaptive OFDM Mikael Sternad.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0612r0 May 2014 Jiyong Pang, et. al. HuaweiSlide 1 Calibration Procedures towards Integrated System Level Simulation Date:
Doc.: n-proposal-statistical-channel-error-model.ppt Submission Jan 2004 UCLA - STMicroelectronics, Inc.Slide 1 Proposal for Statistical.
Submission Sep doc.: IEEE XXXXr1 Zhigang Wen,et. al (BUPT)Slide 1 Discussion on Massive MIMO for HEW Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1484r1 Submission November 2011 Hongyuan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 1 11ah Data Transmission Flow Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1059r0 September 2013 Dongguk Lim, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 PHY Abstraction for HEW Evaluation Methodology Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0909r0 Submission July 2012 Jong S. Baek, AlereonSlide 1 Analysis, simulation and resultant data from a 6-9GHz OFDM MAC/PHY Date:
Doc.: IEEE /663r3 Submission May 2012 Zhanji Wu, et. Al.Slide 1 Low-rate compatible BCC for IEEE ah lowest MCS Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0383r0 Submission Considerations on evaluation methodology for candidate HEW PHY&MAC techniques Date: March 2014 Le Liu, et.
Doc.: IEEE /0112r0 Zhanji Wu, et. Al. January 2013 Submission Joint Coding and Modulation Diversity for the Next Generation WLAN Date:
Doc.: IEEE hew Submission March 2014 Submission Zhanji Wu, et. Al. Joint Coding and Modulation Diversity with RBD pre-coding MU-MIMO Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1125r1 Submission Sept 2013 Hongyuan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 1 HEW Outdoor Channel Model Discussions Date: Authors: Name AffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /1229r1 Submission November 2009 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 1 Application of 60 GHz Channel Models for Comparison of TGad Proposals.
Doc.: IEEE /1051r0 Submission September 2013 Ron Porat, Broadcom Evaluation Methodology Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.:IEEE /0820r0 Submission July 13, 2010 Sudhir Srinivasa et al.Slide 1 MCS Selection and Padding Equations Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /1214r0 September 2014 Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson ABSlide 1 Impact of correlated shadowing in ax system evaluations.
Doc.: IEEE /0386r0 SubmissionSlide 1 Discussions on MCS selection for SLS calibration Date: Authors: Tianyu Wu etc. MediaTek March.
Doc.: IEEE /0818r1 Submission Further Analysis of Feedback and Frequency Selective Scheduling (FSS) for TGax OFDMA July 2015 Slide 1 Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0889r3 Submission June 2014 Nihar Jindal, Broadcom Performance Gains from CCA Optimization Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE 11-04/0304r0 Submission March 2004 John S. Sadowsky, Intel PER Prediction for n MAC Simulation John S. Sadowsky (
Doc.: IEEE /1484r4 Submission January 2012 Hongyuan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 1 11ah Data Transmission Flow Date: Authors:
Accurate WiFi Packet Delivery Rate Estimation and Applications Owais Khan and Lili Qiu. The University of Texas at Austin 1 Infocom 2016, San Francisco.
Doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission February 2004 John Ketchum, et al, QualcommSlide 1 PHY Abstraction for System Simulation John Ketchum, Bjorn Bjerke,
Packet Appending for BICM-ID
Diversity Lecture 7.
PHY abstraction method comparison
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
Packet Appending for BICM-ID
RBIR-based PHY Abstraction with Channel Estimation Error
Consideration on PER Prediction for PHY Abstraction
Joint Processing MU-MIMO
Further Discussions on PHY Abstraction
Synchronization Requirements
Marvell Semiconductor
<month year> <doc.: IEEE doc> January 2013
PHY Abstraction based on PER Prediction
Overview on RBIR-based PHY Abstraction
Joint Coding and Modulation Diversity for ac
LDPC Investigation for 11bd
Consideration on PER Prediction for PHY Abstraction
PHY Abstractions Types For HEW System Level Simulations
PHY Performance Evaluation with 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models
Performance Analysis of Outer RS Coding Scheme
Link Performance Models for System Level Simulations in LC
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 1 PHY Abstraction for HEW System Level Simulation Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Introduction System simulation has been adopted as a powerful tool in investigating network performance. –Critical to evaluate HEW, whose target includes improving system and edge-of-network throughput. –Simulate multiple BSSs simultaneously on the intra- and inter-BSS interactions. Physical layer abstraction is used to simplify the complicated simulation of a large number of APs and STAs. –Relieve system simulation from transmitting and decoding real PHY packets, and align simulator behaviors from different companies. –Predict if a packet can be successively received from instantaneous channel conditions. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 2

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission How Does PHY Abstraction Work? System simulator transmitter “sends” a virtual encoded packet over frequency-selective channels. –No encoding or signal generation actually happens. –No packet travels through channels but channel realizations are generated. System simulator receiver “receives” the virtual packet by calculating the post-processing SINR values per subcarrier. –Equalizer/MIMO impact on performance kicks in. PHY abstraction predicts instantaneous PER based on the SINR values (given the current channel realization). –Namely, a function with a vector of SINR values as input and a PER as output. –This function depends on the coding scheme (BCC, or LDPC)  one table per coding scheme. System simulator takes the predicted PER to decide if this virtual packet has passed through. –Flip a coin based on PER. This approach has been widely used in IEEE m [1] and 3GPP [2]. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 3

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Challenge on PHY Abstraction PHY abstraction function maps a vector to a scalar –f: R N  R; where N is the number of SINRs over frequency/time. This is a very challenging task: –It is impossible to pre-store the mapping table due to N-to-1 mapping, as well as arbitrary types of fading channels. –It is, however, fairly easy to store a set of SNR vs. PER tables for AWGN channels (i.e., 1-to-1 mapping). The solution is to find an AWGN channel at an equivalent SNR level having PER performance the same as the fading channel. –In other words, map (compress) a vector of SINR values to a single SNR scalar  effective SNR mapping (ESM). The key factors of ESM are –(1) simple, (2) accurate, (3) channel independent (the ESM method, and the parameters do not change across different channel types). –For example, linear/dB average SINR is NOT a good ESM method. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 4

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission ESM for PHY Abstraction Effective SINR Mapping has been adopted in system level simulation for IEEE m[1] and 3GPP LTE [2,3]. Effective SINR is an average mapped equalizer-output SINR over all subcarriers. –Hedge factors alpha and beta can be used to calibrate and compensate any residual errors. OFDM transmission is modeled as an AWGN channel with one effective SINR. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 5

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission SINR Mapping Functions A list of well-known SINR mapping functions Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 6 PHY AbstractSINR Mapping EESM [1, 2, 3]Exponential mapping MIESM (RBIR) [1, 2, 4] Mutual information per symbol MMIB [1, 2, 5] Mutual information per bit

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission MIESM for BICM Suppose a SISO channel, RBIR in the previous table is mutual information for such a SISO channel, achieved by coded modulation. BICM is widely used for advanced wireless systems including WiFi. –CM based mutual information (RBIR) is overestimated for BICM. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 7

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission MIESM for BICM (2) Considering BICM, MIESM can be given as [6] –Referred as “RBIR-BICM” Mutual information for each bit is given as Mutual information for this channel use is given by Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 8

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Difference of RBIR Mapping RBIR and RBIR-BICM are close but with some gap. –At most 1dB apart for 64QAM. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 9

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Performance of PHY Abstraction 11ac, 1x1, 8000 bit per packet, MCS0-MCS7, BCC –EESM is not considered here without well known parameters for BCC. –Channel D-NLOS, AWGN Effective SNR vs. PER curves for D-NLOS are referenced to SNR vs. PER curves for AWGN channels. –The closer, the better! All three methods (MMIB, RBIR, RBIR-BICM) provides good PER results referenced to AWGN. –RBIR-BICM and MMIB (both bit-level MI) are closer than RBIR (symbol level MI) to AWGN performance except MCS0. –All three methods perform the same for MCS0 (BPSK). Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 10

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Performance of PHY Abstraction Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 11 The gap between effective SNR to SNR is no more than 0.6dB across MCSs.

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission RBIR-BICM Fine Tune Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 12 After applying some hedge factors per MCS (basically dB shift), RBIR- BICM can provides almost exact PER results as AWGN.

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Comments on RBIR-BICM RBIR-BICM matches AWGN performance better than RBIR. RBIR is easier to extend to high modulation than MMIB for the availability of theoretical expressions. –Although still requires numerical evaluation (or via Monte Carlo), it does not require any curve fitting/parameter (a_k, c_k) optimization as for MMIB. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 13

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission Summary Both MMIB and RBIR can effectively predict OFDM performance. RBIR-BICM and MMIB perform better than RBIR referenced to AWGN results. RBIR-BICM is easier to extend to high modulations than MMIB. RBIR-BICM with some dB shift can almost exactly match AWGN performance. Suggest to take RBIR-BICM as the PHY abstraction technique for HEW system simulations. Nov Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 14

doc.: IEEE /1390r0 Submission References [1] IEEE m-08/004r5, Jan [2] R , “Text Proposal: Simulation Assumptions and Evaluation for EUTRA”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #41bis, June, 2005 [3] R , “LTE Downlink System Performance Evaluation Results”, 3GPP TSG RAN1 #45, May, 2006 [4] hew-phyabstraction-for-hew-system-level-simulation [5] hew-phy-abstraction-for-hew-evaluation-methodology [6] “Bit-Interleaved Coded Modulation”, Giuseppe Caire, Giorgio Taricco, and Ezio Biglieri, IEEE Trans. Of Info. Theory, Sept 2013 Yakun Sun, et. Al.Slide 15