Optimization of Channel Quality Indication Signaling

in WiMAX System
Wenwen Chen1, Li Chen1, Xin Zhang1, Yong Zhang2 and Dacheng Yang1
1
Wireless Theories and Technologies (WT&T)
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications (BUPT), Beijing, 100876, China
2
China Mobile Communications Corporation (CMCC), Beijing, China
Email：chenwenwenbupt@gmail.com, alibupt@gmail.com, zhangxin@bupt.edu.cn

Abstract—Proportional fair (PF) scheduling is a widely used
technique in recent wireless communication systems. However,
scheduling will also bring about a lot of signaling overhead
especially in OFDMA based systems which have many
subchannels, assigning these subchannels to users and feeding
back channel quality information to Base Station produce much
overhead. In many situations, neglecting the overhead leads to
wrong performance conclusions. In this paper, we first
theoretically optimize the amount of channel quality indication
signaling fed back by users in WiMAX system so that the net
system throughput can be maximized. Then system level
simulation is used to validate the theoretical conclusion.
Keywords-OFDM; proportional fair scheduling; signaling
overhead; net throughput
I. INTRODUCTION
The proportional fair (PF) algorithm was proposed to
maximize the total throughput and maintain the required
fairness among users at different distances from the Base
Station (BS) in a fading environment, and it was first used in
Qualcomm’s HDR system. Holtzman further analyzed the
algorithm and gave some important properties of the algorithm
in [1] and [2], which are very valuable to this paper.
Recently, for the higher rate data transmission, more
attention is turned to broadband systems such as multi-carrier
transmission systems e.g., orthogonal frequency division
multiple access (OFDMA). There are multiple transmission
channels in those systems, for which scheduling schemes
considering the proportional fairness have been studied [3-5].
We can easily find that PF-scheduling-based OFDM systems
utilize radio resources efficiently and exploit a multi-user
diversity gain.
However, scheduling will bring about a lot of overhead due
to users’ feedback signaling especially in the subchannelized
OFDM systems, e.g., WiMAX, which will reduce the net
system throughput. Some work has been done to lower the
scheduling overhead in CDMA systems [6]. But little such
work can be found in OFDM based systems.
In this paper, we study the optimization of channel quality
indication signaling in WiMAX system in order that the
throughput of the system can be maximized. Channel quality
indication signaling refers to the channel quality information
measured and reported by users to BS. We consider large-scale
fading, small-scale fading, and user distribution in a PF-
scheduling-based WiMAX system and derive the signal to
interference and noise ratio (SINR) distributions of the system
mathematically, then the channel capacity can be calculated
using the derived SINR distributions, finally the scheduling
gain is obtained and the net system throughput is maximized
via optimization of feedback signaling.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II,
the system model is described. In Section III, SINR
distributions and scheduling gain are derived. In Section IV,
we derive the most proper amount of channel quality indication
signaling. Section V presents the simulation result. Finally,
conclusions are presented in Section VI.
II. SYSTEM MODEL
A. Problem Statement
We consider a multi-cell WiMAX system. Only the central
cell with cell radius R is analyzed in this paper, the impact of
other cells imposed on the central cell is modeled as
interference I, which is set to a reasonable constant. Total M
active users are uniformly distributed in the cell. The system
works under TDD mode, time is divided into units (frames) of
duration T. A total bandwidth of W (Hz) at the center frequency
fc is available for data transmission. For this band, a maximum
total transmitting power of PBS is emitted on the downlink. The
available bandwidth is split into n subchannels, subcarriers in
each subchannel are adjacent so that multi-user diversity can be
obtained. Such a subchannelization scheme is called
Contiguous Subchannelization in WiMAX standard [7]. The
total power of BS is assumed to be equally assigned to each
subchannel.
The BS utilizes proportional fair scheduling algorithm. We
assume that all users can detect the SINR of all subchannels,
regardless of whether the subchannel is assigned to it or not. In
each frame, every user measures its received SINR values and
feeds all or part of them back to the BS, called full-feedback or
part-feedback. The BS assigns subchannels to users according
to the channel information they feed back, maximizing the
system throughput and at the same time guaranteeing the
fairness. Each user can be assigned one or more subchannels.
We can easily know that the more channel quality
information users feed back to BS, the better BS can schedule,
which means that greater multi-user gain can be obtained and
more throughput can be achieved. However, more channel

978-1-4244-2517-4/09/$20.00 ©2009 IEEE

quality indication signaling means more overhead, which will
further reduce the net throughput of the system. So our work is
to determine proper amount of channel quality indication
signaling that are fed back to BS in order that the maximum net
system throughput can be achieved. In other words, we try to
find out whether users feedback all the SINR values they
measured or not? If not, what is the best amount of the
feedback signaling from the perspective of net system
throughput?
B. Fading models
In this subsection, we give the large scale fading and small
scale fading models. Assume the distance between user and BS
is r. Then the probability density function (PDF) of r is
2r
f R (r ) = , 0<r ≤ R
R2
The transmitted signals experience both location-dependent
large-scale fading and location-independent small-scale fading.
Let path loss and shadowing represent the large-scale fading
and Rayleigh fading represents the small-scale fading. So the
received SINR varies due to path loss, shadowing and Rayleigh
fading.
For the path loss between BS and the user, denoted by X, a
standard model is assumed as follows
X = K1 + K 2 log10 r (dB)
As parameters, K1 and K2 are variable corresponding to
different propagation environments. The PDF of X can be
derived from (1) and (2), and is given as
f X ( x) =
2 ⋅10−2 K1 / K 2 ⋅ ln10 2 x / K2
⋅10
K2 ⋅ R2
For the shadowing Y, we assume it log-normal-distributed,
characterized by a zero mean and a variance of σ2sh dB. So the
PDF of Y can be expressed as
1 − y2
fY ( y ) = exp( ) (4)
2πσ sh 2 2σ sh 2
The signal envelope amplitude due to Rayleigh fading has a
Rayleigh distribution, and can be expressed as
f (a) = 2a exp(−a 2 ) (a ≥ 0)
where a is the envelope amplitude of the received signal. Here
we have assumed the mean value of Rayleigh fading equals to
1. Considering the impact of Rayleigh fading imposed on the
signal power, we define the Rayleigh factor as α=a2. Let
Z = 10 lg α (dB)
Then Z denotes the fast fading in dB, the PDF of Z can be
derived from (5) and is expressed as
z
ln10 10z − 1010
fZ ( z) = ⋅10 ⋅ e
10
III. SINR DISTRIBUTIONS AND SCHEDULING GAIN
For a certain user indexed i whose average received SINR
without fast fading is γi, the PDF of its received SINR can be
written as si(γ) after we take fast fading into consideration, and
E[si(γ)]=γi since we have taken the assumption that the mean
value of Rayleigh fading equals to 1(linear). Because the fast
fading of all users are independent and identically distributed
(i.i.d.), for any user i, si(γ) has the same distribution, the only
difference is the mean value of si(γ).
Besides, from some important characteristics of the
proportional fair scheduling [1] [2] we know that
• Throughput is inversely proportional to distance.
• Effects of fast fading and distance from the BS are
(1) separable.
• Same distribution of time is assigned to each user on
average.
• Due to the variability of fast fading, each user can be
scheduled at a relatively high SINR value, so the
overall SINR value can be raised. In other words, PF-
scheduling is realized by taking advantage of channel
fluctuations caused by fast fading.
According to the conclusions above, we assume the
received SINR of any scheduled user will be raised by Δ
(2) comparing to that without scheduling. We also know that every
user has equal chance to be scheduled and the sum of the
scheduled probability of all users equals to 1, so we can obtain
the following equation
M ∞
(3) ∑ ∫γ i
s ( γ )d γ = 1
+Δ i
(8)
i =1
Since si(γ) has the same distribution for any i, and PF-
scheduling gets rid of the impact of distance factor represented
by γi, we consider a special case when γi=0, then (8) can be
written as
∞
M ∫ s ( γ )d γ = 1 (9)
Δ
where s(γ) equals to fz(z) expressed in (7) since γi=0 as
mentioned above. Then from (7) and (9) we can get Δ, and Δ is
expressed as
(5)
Δ = 10 lg(ln M ) (10)
We can explain the above equation as follows:
1） When M=1, Δ→-∞, which means that if there is only one
user in the cell, the user can always be scheduled no matter
(6) how small the SINR value is.
2） When M=2, Δ<0, which means that if there are two users
in the cell, they can be scheduled under their average
SINR.
3） When M≥3, Δ>0 and Δ is the monotonic increasing
(7)
function of M, which means that once the number of users
is large enough, multi user diversity can be obtained, so
 for the condition of M≥3, the average SINR of the system fγ s ( x) = fU (125 − x + Δ )
is raised by Δ. ⎧5.7 × 10 −3.1 ⋅ 10( − x + Δ ) /17.5 ⋅ [1 − erf (0.08(Δ − x) − 2.43)] − 54 + Δ ≤ x ≤ 2 + Δ
⎪
= ⎨5.7 × 10 −3.1 ⋅ 10( − x + Δ ) /17.5 ⋅ [erf (0.09(Δ − x) + 3.77) − erf (0.09(Δ − x ) − 1.18)] 2 + Δ < x < 6 + Δ
In the following, we only consider the condition for M≥3. ⎪ −3.1 ( − x + Δ ) /17.5
⎩5.7 × 10 ⋅ 10 ⋅ [1 + erf (0.09(Δ − x) + 3.77)] 6 + Δ ≤ x ≤ 62 + Δ
In order to deduce the scheduling gain, we analyze the SINR
distributions in this subsection. As discussed above, the (17)
received SINR of any scheduled user will be raised by Δ We know that for an OFDM based system whose subcarrier
comparing to its average SINR that without the consideration number is large enough, the channel capacity of the subcarrier
of scheduling, so after taking the benefit of PF-scheduling into is approximately the same as Shannon capacity and the overall
consideration, the average system SINR will be also raised by capacity is the sum of the individual subcarrier capacities [9].
Δ in the long run. Then we can analyze the SINR distributions Having obtained γ0 and γs, the average channel capacity without
in two steps: first, the SINR distribution that without consideration of scheduling, denoted by C0, and the channel
consideration of fast fading is derived; second, SINR capacity after scheduling, denoted by Cs, can be derived,
distribution that with consideration of fast fading is derived. respectively. Note that Cs can be achieved only when users
adopt full-feedback scheme.
As discussed above, large-scale fading U can be expressed
γ0 x
as
C0 = E[W log 2 (1 + 10 10 )] = W ∫ fγ 0 ( x ) ⋅ log 2 (1 + 1010 )dx
U = X +Y (11) (18)
6
= 3.3 × 10 (bit / s )
Then the PDF of U is expressed as γs x
Cs = E[W log 2 (1 + 10 10 )] = W ∫ fγ s ( x) ⋅ log 2 (1 + 1010 ) dx (19)
fU (u ) = ∫ f X (u − y ) ⋅ fY ( y )d y
We define the scheduling gain β as
2 ln10 ⋅10−2 K1 / K 2 ⋅102u / K 2 − y2 (12)
∫10
−2 y / K 2
= exp( )dy β = Cs / C0
(20)
K 2 R 2 2πσ sh 2 2σ sh 2

From the analysis in subsection A and B, we know that for

For K1 =38.6, K2 =35, R=1400m and standard deviation certain M, the scheduling gain β can be achieved only when all
σsh=8dB [7][8], the PDF of U can be written as the M users adopt the full-feedback scheme. However, when
users adopt part-feedback scheme, what will β be? For this
− y2
fU (u ) = 0.33 × 10−10.21 ⋅10u /17.5 ∫ 10− y /17.5 ⋅ exp(
)dy (13) problem, we need to model a scheduling-gain-curve which
128 reflects the relationship between the amount of channel quality
Since the minimum distance between user and BS is 36m indication signaling and the scheduling gain. For different M,
and the radius of the cell is 1400m [8], the range of X is we can obtain a set of β and the total amount of feedback
93≤X≤149 (dB). Assume the shadowing Y is dock-tailed and signaling corresponding to each β, denoted by S. Using a set of
bounded to -30≤Y≤30 (dB). Then the PDF of U can be written S-β pairs, we can obtain an approximate scheduling-gain-curve
as by curve fitting.
⎧5.7 × 10−10.2 ⋅10u /17.5 ⋅ [1 + erf (0.09u − 7.48)] 63 ≤ u ≤ 119 For each subchannel, four bits are needed to carry the
⎪
fU (u ) = ⎨5.7 × 10−10.2 ⋅10u /17.5 ⋅ [erf (0.09u − 7.48) − erf (0.09u − 12.43)] 119 < u < 123 channel quality indication signaling [7]. There are totally n
⎪ −10.2 subchannels, so S corresponding to β is 4nM. Table I lists a
⎩5.7 × 10 ⋅10u /17.5 ⋅ [1 − erf (0.08u − 12.43)] 123 ≤ u ≤ 179
series of M and the corresponding β and S. Here we set n to 30
(14)
[7].
In addition to the large scale fading and interference, other
factors such as receiver noise figure, transmitter antenna gain TABLE I. DATA USED FOR CURVE FITTING
and penetration loss also effect the received SINR, let G1 M 3 4 5 8 10 20 30 50 100
denotes these factors, then the received SINR on each β 1.05 1.20 1.31 1.51 1.60 1.85 1.99 2.15 2.35
subchannel, denoted by γ0, can be expressed as S 360 480 600 960 1200 2400 3600 6000 12000
Using these data, we can obtain the scheduling-gain-curve
γ 0 = PBS − U + G1 − ( N 0 + 10 lg W ) − I (dB) (15) by curve fitting, as seen in Fig. 1.
According to [8], PBS=43dBm, G1 =-2dB, N0 =-174dBm/Hz, The curve can be expressed as
W=10MHz, and I is set to a reasonable value of 20dB, so
γ0=125-U(dB). Then PDF of γ0 can be expressed as f ( x) = −8.031x −0.186 + 3.741 (21)
f γ 0 ( x) = fU (125 − x ) In order to maximize the net system throughput, users
⎧5.7 × 10 ⋅ 10−3.1 − x /17.5
⋅ [1 − erf (−0.08 x − 2.43)] − 54 ≤ x ≤ 2 should not always use full-feedback scheme. Assume each user
⎪ select k out of n subchannels (k<0≤n), and feed back the channel
= ⎨5.7 × 10 −3.1 ⋅ 10− x /17.5 ⋅ [erf (3.77 − 0.09 x) − erf ( −1.18 − 0.09 x)] 2 < x < 6
⎪5.7 × 10 −3.1 ⋅ 10− x /17.5 ⋅ [1 + erf (3.77 − 0.09 x)]
quality information of these k subchannels, then the total
⎩ 6 ≤ x ≤ 62 amount of channel quality indication signaling is 4kM. So the
(16) scheduling-gain-curve can be written as
According to (10) and (14), the PDF of SINR with
f (k , M ) = −8.031(4kM ) −0.186 + 3.741 (22)
consideration of scheduling, denoted by γs, can be expressed as
 We can obtain k
24650
k = min{30, [ ]0.843 } (26)
ρ (4 M )1.186
k is the point at which Thr reaches its extreme value. So for
arbitrary M, there is a unique k defined in (26) that is most
beneficial to the net throughput.
V. SIMULATION RESULTS
In this section, we present the system level simulation
results to illustrate the benefit of channel quality indication
signaling optimization to the performance of WiMAX system.
Also we compare the simulation results to the theoretical
results. In the following, the simulation configuration is
Figure 1. Scheduling Gain Curve presented first, and then simulation result and theoretical result
are shown and analyzed.
IV. THROUGHPUT OPTIMIZATION
A. Simulation Configuration
In this section, we discuss the scheduling signaling and Simulation methodology based on [7] has been adopted to
optimize the net system throughput. Scheduling signaling assess the performance of the proposed feedback strategy in
consists of two parts: downlink signaling and uplink signaling. WiMAX system. The combination of time driven and snap
As for the downlink, it includes assignment information and the shot is used in the simulation. All MSs are randomly
modulation and coding scheme (MCS) has to be signaled for distributed in a layout of 1-tier 7 hexagonal cells. Wrap around
each subchannel. Specifically, downlink signaling information technique is employed to simulate interference from neighbor
consists of the triple: subchannel identification, user address as cells. The radio resource is divided into time-frequency blocks.
well as MCS. We assume all assignments are transmitted, PF scheduling is employed on each time-domain block. Coding
regardless of whether or not an assignment has changed from rate for signaling is set to 1/5 (ρ=5). Other simulation
the previous to the current downlink phase, we also know that parameters are listed in TABLE II.
four bits are needed to carry the modulation and coding
information [7]. Therefore, a cost of ⎡⎢log 2 n ⎤⎥ + ⎡⎢log 2 M ⎤⎥ + 4 TABLE II. SIMULATION PARAMETERS
bits is needed per subchannel per downlink phase. As for the Parameter Value
uplink signaling, we have already discussed in section III and Frequency 2.5 GHz
4kM bits are needed per uplink phase. Due to the importance of Bandwidth 10 MHz
the scheduling signaling, it is usually repeated for some times, Cell Layout 7-cell
here we set the coding rate to 1/ρ, then transmitting all BS-to-BS Distance 2.8 km
scheduling signaling results in a total cost (in bit) of Propagation Model COST 231 Suburban
Log-Normal Shadowing Std 8 dB
Traffic Type FULL Buffer
ς = ρ [n( ⎡⎢ log n ⎤⎥ + ⎢⎡ log 2 M ⎥⎤ + 4) + 4kM ] (23)
2 Antenna Configuration 1*1
Assume only the downlink phase is considered, which Scheduler Proportional Fair (PF)
means that the BS can only receive the channel quality
information but no data from the users. Subtracting signaling B. Results and Discussion
overhead from the channel capacity, the net system throughput Fig.2 illustrates that the number of subchannels fed back by
Thr can be written as each user decreases with the increment of user number. Both
theoretical result and simulation result have this trend. There
ς are several reasons for this phenomenon. First, we can see from
Thr = C0 f ( k , M ) −
T Fig.1 that when the user number of system is relatively small,
ρ [n( ⎡⎢log n ⎤⎥ + 4 + log 2 M ) + 4kM ] scheduling gain increases rapidly with user number, but when
= C0 [3.741 − 8.031(4kM ) −0.186 ] − 2
user number grows larger and larger, scheduling gain increases
T much slower. So scheduling gain dominants the system
(24) throughput when user number is small while the impact of
where n=30, T=5ms [7]. From the above equation we can know signaling overhead becomes more important with increasing of
that the net system throughput is a convex function of k if the users. Second, when there are many users in the cell,
value of M is fixed. So for arbitrary M, there must be a certain k subchannels can be fully used even through few of them are
with which the net throughput can be maximized. By fed back by each user, which can be explained from the
differentiating Thr with respect to k perspective of probability: one subchannel that seems “bad” to
one user may be “good” to another, so the latter user feeds it
⎧ ∂Thr back while the former does not, then the signaling overhead is
⎪ =0 reduced.
⎨ ∂k (25)
⎪⎩0 < k ≤ n
 Figure 2. Optimal Number of Subchannels Fed Back per User
Fig.3 illustrates the net system throughput corresponding to
different number of subchannels that are fed back by each user
when there are 30 users in the cell. Both theoretical curve and
simulated curve show that selecting proper number of
subchannels to feed back can maximized the net system
throughput. Too much or too little signaling overhead will
reduce the net throughput.
Fig.4 compares the system throughput with and without
optimization. Both theoretical results and simulated results
show that the net system throughput without optimization falls
quickly when there are many users in the cell. This is because
the signaling overhead is so large that the scheduling gain
achieved by signaling can not make up the reduction of net
throughput caused by signaling overhead. But after
optimization, condition will be greatly improved. Mention that
simulated throughput is always smaller than the theoretical
result. This is because we use Shannon theory to calculate the
channel capacity during the theoretical analysis procedure, but
it is not reachable in real system.
Figure 3. Variance of Net System Throughput with 30 Users in the System
Figure 4. Comparison of Net System Throughput
VI. CONCLUSION
The main contribution of this paper is presenting a strategy
to optimize the channel quality indication signaling in a PF-
scheduling-based WiMAX system so that the net system
throughput can be maximized. First, we establish a system
model. Then, the signal to interference and noise ratio (SINR)
distributions is formulated and the scheduling gain is also
derived. Finally, we optimize the amount of channel quality
indication signaling so that the net throughput can be
maximized. Both theoretical analysis and simulation results
show that this strategy greatly improves the system throughput
performance.
REFERENCES
[1] Jack M. Holtzman, “CDMA Forward Link Waterfilling Power Control”,
Proc. IEEE VTC2000-spring, vol. 3, pp. 1663-1667, May 2000.
[2] J.M.Holtzman, “Asymptotic Analysis of Proportional Fair Algorithm”,
Proc.PIMRC’ 2001, San Diego, CA, Sept. 30-Oct.3, 2001.
[3] A. Wang et al., “Dynamic resource management in the fourth generation
wireles systems,” Proc. IEEE ICCT’03, 2003, pp. 1095-1098.
[4] V. Lau, “Proportional fair spatial scheduling for wireless access point
with multiple antenna - reverse link with scalar feedback”, Proc.
IEEEGLOBECOM’02, 2002, pp. 763-767.
[5] Hoon Kim, Youngnam Han, “A Proportional Fair Scheduling for
Multicarrier Transmission Systems”, IEEE COMMUNICATIONS
LETTERS, VOL. 9, NO. 3, MARCH 2005.
[6] ZHANG Xin, YANG Da-cheng, “A New Timing Control Scheme for
Synchronous Reverse Link in CDMA Systems with Improved Capacity
and Less Forward Link Overhead”, Proc. PIMRC’ 2003
[7] WiMAX Forum, “Mobile WiMAX-Part I:A Technical Overview and
Performance Evaluation”, May 2006.
[8] WiMAX Forum, “Mobile WiMAX-Part II:A Comparative Analysis”,
August 2006.
[9] Clark, A., Smith, P. J., Taylor, D. P., “Instantaneous Capacity of OFDM
on Rayleigh-Fading Channels”, IEEE Transactions on Information
Theory, Volume 53, Issue 1, Jan. 2007 Page(s):355 - 361