Survey of User Association in 5G HetNets

Hawar Ramazanali , Agapi Mesodiakaki , Alexey Vinel and Christos Verikoukis

School
of Information Technology, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden
Saab Training and Simulation, Huskvarna, Sweden
Karlstad University, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Karlstad, Sweden
Telecommunications Technological Centre of Catalonia (CTTC), Castelldefels, Spain

Email: hawar.ramazanali@saabgroup.com, agapi.mesodiakaki@kau.se, alexey.vinel@hh.se, cveri@cttc.es

AbstractHeterogeneous networks (HetNets) are considered a
key enabling technology to provide high capacity for next gener-
ation, also known as fifth generation (5G), networks. However, in
order to efficiently exploit the advantages of HetNets and strive
towards high network efficiency, efficient user equipment (UE)
association is decisive for targeting network performance goals.
Therefore, in this work, user association algorithms are surveyed
and classified based on the criterion they use for association with
the base stations (macrocells or small cells). Special focus is given
on the suitability of the user association algorithms for 5G as well
as their complexity.
Index TermsUser association, HetNets, small cells, 5G
I. I NTRODUCTION
Heterogeneous networks (HetNets) are envisaged to play an
important role in next generation telecommunication networks,
i.e., fifth generation (5G) networks. A HetNet is composed of
homogeneous cellular macro base stations with high trans-
mission power overlaid (or underlaid) with low power base
stations. The low power base stations are ranging from pico-
cells and femtocells to relay nodes and are commonly referred
to as small cells. HetNets were employed already for GSM
networks. Although HetNets have traditionally used different
frequencies for macro and small cells, high frequency reuse is
expected during the next few years, to cope with the spectrum
scarcity problem in conjunction with the increased capacity
demands.
Through the introduction of different cell sizes as well as
high spectrum reuse, user association becomes challenging,
since it impacts both the user and network performance. User
association is the mechanism in which users are selecting a
serving cell based on certain criteria. The cells can be of
different types and the cell selection decision can be centrally
coordinated, i.e., coordinated by the network, or distributed,
where each user equipment (UE) decides on each serving base
station by itself.
In LTE, which constitutes a step towards the specification of
5G standards made by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project
(3GPP) standardization body, the user association decision is
centralized, i.e. made by the network, based on the measure-
ment reports performed by the UEs. In particular, the UEs send
a measurement cell set, containing the measurement results,
when configurable conditions are met. Two LTE measurements
commonly used for cell association are the reference signal re-
9781509051373/16/$31.00 2016 IEEE
ceived power (RSRP) and the reference signal received quality
(RSRQ). The RSRP measures the average received power over
the resource elements that carry cell-specific reference signals
within certain frequency bandwidth. The RSRQ measures the
portion of received signal power over the total received power
at the UE and hence gives a quality value of the signal.
To that end, the classical user association method of
strongest received signal at the UE has been shown to associate
the majority of UEs to the macro cell (instead of small
cells), due to its stronger downlink (DL) signal. Although the
strongest signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) could
be favorable for DL, this is not the case for uplink (UL),
where all the transmitters (i.e., UEs) have the same capabilities
in terms of transmit power. In other words, a UE that has
been associated to a macro base station due to its stronger
DL signal could have obtained better UL performance if it
had been associated to a nearby small cell with a weaker
DL signal instead. In addition to the better UL performance,
traffic offloading gains to the macro base station could be also
offered. Therefore, the separate study of UL and DL user
association, also known as UL-DL decoupling, is motivated
[1]-[4]. Although UL-DL decoupling has been shown to offer
network throughput, outage, and power consumption gains
[2] at a lower cost compared to its counterparts as well as
improving user fairness [3], most user association algorithms
in the literature focus only on performance optimization of DL
association.
One of the most promising DL user association proposals
hitherto has been cell range extension (CRE), also referred to
as biasing, where a positive bias is added on the small cell DL
signal strength indicator in the case the signal comes from
a small cell. CRE has been shown to achieve performance
improvements by favoring the connection of UEs with small
cells. Thereby, the traffic of the macro base station is offloaded,
while the UEs get access to a higher amount of spectrum
resources (higher spectrum reuse is possible among small
cells). For maximum gains, CRE can be combined with
efficient interference management techniques, such as almost
blank subframes (ABS), to avoid the macro cell interfering the
transmissions of small cells due to its stronger signal strength.
Apart from the aforementioned solutions, there have been
several proposals of efficient algorithms where different crite-
Macro cell (Tier 1)
Small cell (Tier 2)
Small cell (Tier 3)
Small cell (Tier n)
Gateway
Core network
Wireless backhaul link
Fiber link
Fig. 1. Multi-tier HetNet architecture with wireless backhaul.
ria in the user association decision have been employed and
certain network performance metrics have been targeted each
time. Due to the fact that each proposal is evaluated under
specific scenarios and aims at specific performance targets, a
thorough survey, which will compare them under the same
basis, is of utmost importance. To that end, in [5], a detailed
user association survey is presented, which includes some
information on the complexity and the applicability of user
association algorithms in a 5G environment. Nevertheless, for
a proper and fair categorization of the studied algorithms, the
provided information need still to be accompanied by accurate
classification criteria. In [6], although a classification based on
cell association criteria is given, the considered survey is not
thorough since only three papers are evaluated. Hence, in this
paper, in section IV we present a novel classification of user
association algorithms based on the applied criteria for base
station association. Furthermore, in section V, the complexity
of the algorithms is evaluated as well as their applicability to
a 5G HetNet environment.
II. 5G H ET N ET A RCHITECTURE
5G HetNets will be composed of different tiers, where the
macro base station, which would be tier-1, will be connected
to the core network via a wired connection. The small cells,
which constitute different kinds of low power, low complexity
cellular base stations (tier-2 to tier n for n different types of
small cells) will overlay (or underlay) the existing macro cell
network, as depicted in Fig. 1.
The main purpose of small cells is to offer data offloading
from the macro base station, thus resulting in higher network
throughput, higher cell edge rate, less congested macro base
station, and even improved power consumption for both macro
cells and small cells. On the downside, there may be inter-
ference between the macro base station and small cells due
to frequency reuse. Therefore, several interference mitigation
strategies have been proposed by 3GPP, such as ABS, inter-
cell interference coordination (ICIC) and enhanced inter-cell
interference coordination (e-ICIC) [7].
In terms of architecture, the backhaul network is responsible
for connecting the different base stations in each tier and
between different tiers with the core network. Due to the high
number of small cells, fiber connections are prohibitive due
to their high deployment cost. Therefore, given the already
existing fiber connection between the macro cell and the core
network, it is straightforward to exploit this connection and
provide core network connectivity to small cells through it.
Still, new cheap solutions should be found for the connection
of small cells to the macrocell site.
Hence, millimeter wave constitutes a promising solution
due to its high bandwidth availability. However, its high
path loss makes it able to provide good coverage only for
short distances. Nevertheless, given that a short distance is
expected between neighboring small cells, 5G networks will
most probably be characterized by a millimeter wave multi-
hop backhaul architecture.
HetNet architecture plays a key role in the performance
of user association algorithms, since it impacts the way that
the UE traffic is served, e.g., which base station will serve
the UE traffic and through which backhaul link this traffic
will pass until it reaches the core network. Therefore, HetNet
architecture should be also taken into account when designing
efficient user association algorithms.
III. 5G U SER ASSOCIATION CHALLENGES
We assume network coordinated user association, unless
otherwise stated, although the categorization is valid for both
coordination types. To this end, the main user association
challenges can be summarized into:
A. Complexity
As small cell densification in HetNets is foreseen to provide
necessary capacity in hotspots it is also important to reduce
the complexity of the user association algorithms. The large
number of UEs together with the increasing number of base
stations requires simple user association algorithms with min-
imal signaling and processing overhead. At the same time,
the user association algorithms should be context-aware, i.e.,
aware of the UE requirements as well as the HetNet architec-
ture, including the backhaul network. With this information,
simple and efficient user association algorithms can optimize
the radio and energy resource utilization and reduce unwanted
effects such as unnecessary handovers.
B. Energy efficiency
The radio access nodes constitute the major source (57%)
of power consumption in cellular network operation [8], while
as much as a third comes from air-conditioners for isolated
base station sites. By using HetNets certain overhead like air-
conditioning can be eliminated for small cells. Moreover, small
cells have higher efficiency in terms of provided capacity and
energy consumption per coverage area [9]. Energy efficiency
can be obtained by coordinating the advantages of a macro
base station like higher output power and larger coverage
areas together with the more efficient area coverage of small
cells. By context-aware and simple user association algorithms TABLE I
these advantages can be exploited effectively and various D EFINITION OF DIFFERENT COMPLEXITY LEVELS

performance metrics can be targeted and jointly optimized. Complexity Description of criterion Type of cost
level category
C. Spectrum efficiency 1A Criteria already obtainable in No incurred delay
the source device No incurred
The target of spectrum efficiency is to maximize the trans- processing
mitted data rate per spectrum resource unit. Since the available 2A Criteria as complexity 1A but No incurred delay
spectrum is limited, frequency reuse is motivated to maximize also needs additional processing Incurred processing
the utilization of the spectrum for each cell in a HetNet. In 1B Criteria needs to be obtained Incurred delay
such a case, the frequency resource allocation scheme should through communication (with No incurred
other devices or base station) processing
efficiently use the available resources to achieve high spectrum
2B Criteria as complexity 1B but Incurred delay
efficiency, while mitigating the generated interference due to also needs additional processing Incurred processing
frequency reuse. 3AB Criteria may or may not incur Incurred or no
In addition, a fair resource allocation among the UEs should delay but need heavy additional incurred delay
be also targeted. processing, such as optimization Incurred heavy
processing
D. Interference management
With the introduction of CRE such that offloading to small bandwidth, the higher the targeted channel throughput,
cells is taken place, UEs associated to small cells may be the higher the spectrum efficiency (bps/Hz).
interfered by the higher transmitted power of the macro base Backhaul: this criterion is related to whether the user
station. Interference management can be used to mitigate the association algorithm takes also into account the back-
interference at the cell edge UEs and improve the spectrum haul (in terms of backhaul capacity or even also power
efficiency. The interference management schemes can protect consumption).
the resources in 3 dimensions, time, frequency and space and Power consumption: this criterion may refer to network
communicate this to other nodes and UEs in the network. elements, e.g., to the backhaul. When the joint optimiza-
The other network participants are using the protected or tion of power consumption and data rate are targeted, this
unprotected sets of resources in various means to minimize criterion is equivalent to energy efficiency.
interference amongst base stations/cells. Load: this criterion refers to the resource utilization of a
ICIC was already included in 3GPP Release 8/9, which are base station.
finalized versions of LTE. They focus on inter-cell signaling Interference, which is a criterion measuring the power
to assist interference coordination. In release 10, enhanced of unwanted signals. For instance, this criterion is taken
inter-cell interference coordination (eICIC) was introduced, into account when RSRQ or SINR are used to decide a
targeting at time domain interference handling by mechanisms specific user association.
such as protected resources and ABS, to improve cell edge Bias: this criterion refers to the case where the user
performance for UEs. In release 11, coordinated multipoint association is biased towards a base station, based on
(CoMP) was introduced referring to a wide range of techniques criteria, which do not fall under current categorization.
targeting dynamic inter-cell coordination between geograph- CRE belongs to this category, where priority is given to
ically separated base stations to enable and improve inter- the association of UEs with small cells, as explained in
ference coordination. In CoMP new radio interface features Section I.
and terminal capabilities are used to assist this dynamic Other, where the association criterion does not fall in any
coordination. category of the aforementioned ones.
The columns UL/DL, C , T and 5G represent the considered
IV. C ATEGORIZATION access network link, the complexity of the algorithm, the
A. Categorization of user association criteria number of tiers and the applicability of the algorithm within
5G, respectively.
A wide variety of user association algorithms has been
studied and categorized based on the criteria they use for B. Applicability in 5G complexity
association to the base stations, as it can be seen in Table We propose a classification of the user association algo-
II. The association criteria are categorized into: rithms based on the complexity they induce into a 5G network.
Channel conditions, which is a criterion for the signal Five complexity levels are defined in two dimensions namely
quality or received power (which can be the channel incurred delay and incurred processing. Additional delay is
information ultimately obtained at the receiver). This incurred when additional metrics needs to be obtained that
criterion may also include path loss and fading. are not part of the available UE measurements. The different
Channel bandwidth, measured in Hertz, which is closely complexity levels are summarized in Table I and Fig. 2.
related to spectrum utilization efficiency. It can be ex- User association algorithms that achieve scalability and thus
plained by the following relation. For a specific channel can adapt to a changing number of small cells in the network
 Association criteria Other
Ref.
Channel Channel Backhaul Power Load Interference Bias UL/DL C T 5G
conditions bandwidth consumption
[1] X X X X UL/DL decoupling 2B 2 Yes
[8] X UL/DL 2A n No
[11] X X X DL 1B 2 Yes
[12] X X X DL 1B 2 Yes
[13] X X X X DL 2B 2 Yes
[14] X X DL 1B n Yes
[15] X X X X X X X DL 2A 2 Yes
[16] X X DL 2A/2B 2 Yes
[17] X DL 3AB n No
[18] X X DL 2A n Yes
[19] X X X DL 2B n Yes
[20] X UL 2A 2 Yes

complexity to level 1B, since it is not part of the LTE measure-

ment report in the source device and thus it cannot be assumed
Communications

to be directly obtainable without a delay overhead. Biasing or

1B 2B
3AB
1A 2A
Processing
Fig. 2. Two dimensional complexity levels.
can be considered applicable within 5G. Another important
criterion that could define the 5G applicability of a user associ-
ation algorithm is the complexity that it induces in the system.
Complexity levels 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B are considered to be
suitable even with the incurred processing load as in level 2A,
delay as in level 1B, and both delay and processing load as in
level 2B. User association algorithms of level 3AB complexity
may not be suitable for 5G environments. Moreover, certain
cell association algorithms using optimization may neither be
suitable for online applications [10]. Given that backhaul is
expected to play a key role, both in terms of energy and
capacity, algorithms that jointly take into account the access
network and backhaul in the user association decision are
considered the most suitable for 5G networks. By integrating
backhaul as a user association criterion both air interface
and backhaul resources are considered in the design and thus
overall resource utilization can be taken into account [11].
V. D ISCUSSION
Cell association algorithms using RSRP and RSRQ are the
ones with lowest additional communication complexity, since
these parameters have already been specified in LTE. User
association based on these two channel estimation indicators
are evaluated and compared to a SINR-based algorithm in
[11]. It is shown that SINR-based cell selection performs better
considering both downlink cell and cell-edge user throughput
for RSRP but RSRQ based cell selection is better for cell-
edge user throughput. This could be explained by the fact
that RSRQ evaluates the quality of the signal over the used
bandwidth. However, the SINR-based cell selection raises the
CRE is used and the use of interference management ICIC
(protected resources) is also evaluated.
In [12], an SINR-based cell selection algorithm with biasing
(or CRE) is evaluated and it is shown that ICIC improves
the cell throughput for moderate CRE values. With regard
to fairness, higher CRE values can be used without ICIC,
whilst lower CRE values should be used with ICIC. Since
the SINR is not considered to be available in the base
station complexity level 1B is obtained. In [13], time-domain
interference management is assumed and similar to [12], the
importance of ICIC is further reiterated. It is discussed that
the ratio of protected frames is more important than the CRE
value. Therefore, a user association algorithm is proposed
where the criterion is the expected user data rate based on
the ABS ratio and SINR. Hence, it is assumed that the SINR
is measured in the UEs and transmitted to the base station for
processing prior to association decision. This leads to a level
2B complexity algorithm due to incurred delay and processing.
The ABS ratio is assumed to be centrally decided. The work
in [14] belongs to SINR-based user association algorithms
and has contributed with a model for an n-tier HetNet with
the most important performance metrics. Still, no interference
management is taken into account, unlike previous SINR-
based works, e.g., [1], [11]-[13]. The complexity of this work
is similar to [12] in the way that SINR needs to be measured (if
possible) and transmitted to the base station prior to the user
association decision. This could cause extra communication
overhead and incur delay, thus giving a complexity level 1B.
Three of the most common user association algorithms,
RSRP, CRE and minimum path loss (MPL), have been eval-
uated in [15] together with a proposed algorithm for an n-
tier HetNet environment. The network energy efficiency is
maximized using a heuristic algorithm based on the following
context-aware information; the UE measurements and require-
ments, the knowledge of the HetNet architecture with wireless
backhaul connections and the available spectrum resources
of each base station. In particular, the proposed algorithm
prefers cells with fewer hops to reach the core network.
On the contrary, algorithms that are not backhaul-aware may
associate the UEs to cells with a better signal quality but
with more hops, thus leading to higher energy consumption.
Complexity level 2A is obtained since measurement results
already available in LTE are used in addition to processing.
Simple traditionally used user association criteria namely;
max signal quality, pico cell first and minimum path loss have
been evaluated and benchmarked against a joint user associa-
tion, channel allocation and reuse pattern optimization frame-
work in [16]. The provided results show that there is still room
for performance improvement of the traditionally used user
association algorithms. The complexity of the benchmarked
algorithms depends on whether the measurements are available
in the base station or not, making them complexity level A or
B respectively. In the two latter algorithms a comparison of
the measurements is needed giving a complexity level 2.
In [17] it is claimed that simple performance thresholds,
such as minimum SINR or service outage among others, are
not adequate for the analysis of the energy efficiency of a net-
work when spatially- and temporally- varying traffic demands
are considered. Therefore, a joint base station sleeping and
user association algorithm has been developed for minimizing
energy consumption in a HetNet. The user association is
decided based on the location of the base stations, since the
algorithm decides which base stations should serve a particular
location. This work captures the spatio-temporal variations of
the traffic demands and the internal hardware components of
the base stations, which are claimed to be important factors
greatly affecting the actual energy consumption in the network.
Furthermore, it was identified that small cells play a key role in
both capacity and energy efficiency in a HetNet by consuming
a little more than two thirds of the energy while handling
three quarters of the traffic. Contrary to previous results where
small cells always are the most energy efficient solution, it
was shown that larger cells have an important role in energy
efficiency during low and medium network load periods if the
small cells are turned off. Given that the UE location needs to
be obtained and additional heavy processing is needed due to
the optimization problem that should be solved, the complexity
level is 3AB.
In [8], a new design framework of cooperative green
HetNets is proposed aiming at spectrum efficiency, energy
efficiency and Quality of Service (QoS). The architecture
under study consists of separate base band and radio heads
and the cell selection criteria is based on long term channel
information, i.e., path loss and shadowing. A proportional
fair algorithm is used for the cell selection and sum log-
scaled throughput has been maximized to achieve proportional
fairness. It is compared to a SINR-based scheduling algorithm
that achieves better network throughput at the cost of fairness
among UEs. Since the required criteria are considered to be
readily available in the LTE network and some additional
processing is needed, the complexity level is 2A.
An analytical model is proposed in [18], where the user
association is done based on maximum, long-term averaged,
biased received power. Outage probability and spectral effi-
ciency are evaluated in the n-tier network based on a target
SINR. it is shown that CRE biasing is lowering the SINR,
having negative impact on outage and rate of the overall
network. It is assumed the measurement can be obtained
in the base station but need additional processing to obtain
the maximum long-term averaged received power, there the
complexity level is 2A.
In [19], a user association algorithm is evaluated called ref-
erence base station efficiency (RBSE) that takes into account
the network conditions in terms of base station transmitted
power, base station load and required user data-rate. Once a
handover procedure is initiated, according to the 3GPP frame-
work, the proposed algorithm selects as the preferred base
station the one with the highest RBSE value. On the downside,
this work considers different frequency bands for base stations
of different types. As it has been observed by previously
reviewed work, the inter-cell interference handling is of major
importance for the performance of the HetNet together with
ABS. However, the results show a significant improvement in
the number of handovers and the end-to-end delay compared
with two 3GPP reference handover algorithms. Assuming that
the user requirement incurs additional communication delay
since it is not available already in the LTE measurements,
and that additional processing is needed for the algorithm,
complexity level 2B is obtained.
Since there is a difference in transmission power in HetNets
due to the different base station types, the optimal association
of a UE may differ for UL and DL. This stems from the
fact that the UL and DL channel gain may differ and so
does the load. In [20], a recent user association study gives
insights on how to achieve power efficiency with power control
taking into account the interference level due to power control
as well as the traffic delay. The RSRP that is available in
the LTE measurement is used as criterion and due to the
additional processing for the power control, complexity level
2A is obtained.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
In this survey, we have categorized different types of
user association algorithms based on their criteria for cell
association. Special focus was given on the complexity of
the algorithms, which also reflects their applicability in a 5G
HetNet environment.
Our survey stressed the need for low-complexity user
association algorithms for 5G HetNets. Moreover, context-
awareness was shown to play a key role in the design of
low complexity energy and spectrum efficient user association
solutions.
R EFERENCES
[1] H. Elshaer, F. Boccardi, M. Dohler, and R. Irmer, Load backhaul
aware decoupled downlink/uplink access in 5G Systems, in Proc. IEEE
International Conference on Communications (ICC), June 2015, pp.
5380-5385.
[2] F. Boccardi et al., Why to decouple the uplink and downlink in cellular
networks and how to do it, IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 54, no. 3, pp.
110-117, Mar. 2016.
[3] K. Smiljkovikj, P. Popovski, and L. Gavrilovska, Analysis of the
decoupled access for downlink and uplink in wireless heterogeneous
networks, IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett., pp. 173-176, 2015.
 [4] H. Elshaer, M. N. Kulkarni, F. Boccardi, J. G. Andrews, and M. Dohler,
Downlink and uplink cell association with traditional macrocells and
millimeter wave small cells, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 15,
no. 9, pp. 6244-6258, Sep. 2016.
[5] L. Dantong et al., User association in 5G networks: A survey and an
outlook, IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1018-1044,
Secondquarter 2016.
[6] E. Hossain, M. Rasti, H. Tabassum, and A. Abdelnasser, Evolution
toward 5G multi-tier cellular wireless networks: An interference man-
agement perspective, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 3,
pp. 118-127, Jun. 2014.
[7] EUTRA & EUTRAN Overall Description, 3GPP TS 36.300, v. 11.5.0,
Rel. 11, Mar. 2013.
[8] R. Hu and Y. Qian, An energy efficient and spectrum efficient wireless
heterogeneous network framework for 5G systems, IEEE Commun.
Mag., vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 94-101, May 2014.
[9] H. Klessig, M. Gunze, and G. Fettweis, Energy efficiency gains through
data offloading in heterogeneous small cell networks, in Proc. IEEE Int.
Conf. Commun. Systems (ICCS), pp. 117-121, Nov. 2014.
[10] N. Wang, E. Hossain, and V.K. Bhargava, Backhauling 5G small cells:
A radio resource management perspective, IEEE Wireless Commun.,
vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 41-49, Oct. 2015.
[11] J. Sangiamwong et al., Investigation on cell selection methods associ-
ated with inter-cell interference coordination in heterogeneous networks
for lte-advanced downlink, in Proc. European Wireless Conf. Sustain-
able Wireless Technol., pp. 1-6, 2011.
[12] I. Guvenc, Capacity and fairness analysis of heterogeneous networks
with range expansion and interference coordination, IEEE Commun.
Lett., vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 1084-1087, Oct. 2011.
[13] J. Oh and Y. Han, Cell selection for range expansion with almost
blank subframe in heterogeneous networks, in Proc. IEEE Int. Sym.
on Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Commun., 2012, pp. 653-657.
[14] H. Dhillon, R. Ganti, F. Baccelli, and J. Andrews, Modeling and
analysis of K-tier downlink heterogeneous cellular networks, IEEE J.
Sel. Areas in Commun., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 550-560, Apr. 2012.
[15] A. Mesodiakaki, F. Adelantado, L. Alonso, and C. Verikoukis, Energy
efficient context-aware user association for outdoor small cell hetero-
geneous networks, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Commun. (ICC), Jun.
2014, pp. 1614-1619.
[16] D. Fooladivanda, A. Al Daoud, and C. Rosenberg, Joint channel alloca-
tion and user association for heterogeneous wireless cellular networks,
in Proc. IEEE 22nd Int. Sym. on Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio
Commun. (PIMRC), Sept. 2011, pp. 384-390.
[17] E. Chavarria Reyes, I. Akyildiz, and E. Fadel, Energy consumption
analysis and minimization in multi-layer heterogeneous wireless sys-
tems, IEEE Trans. Mobile Computing, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 2474-2487,
Dec. 2015.
[18] H.-S. Jo, Y. J. Sang, P. Xia, and J. Andrews, Heterogeneous cellular
networks with flexible cell association: A comprehensive downlink SINR
analysis, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 3484-
3495, Oct. 2012.
[19] A. Orsino, G. Araniti, A. Molinaro, and A. Iera, Effective RAT selection
approach for 5G dense wireless networks, in Proc. IEEE 81st Vehicular
Technology Conference (VTC Spring), May 2015, pp. 1-5.
[20] Z. Chen, L. Qiu, Y. Jin, and X. Liang, Delay-aware uplink user
association and power control in heterogeneous cellular networks, IEEE
Wireless Commun. Lett., vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 661-664, Dec. 2015.