Two-dimensional Pilot Allocation for Massive
MIMO/TDD Systems
Osamu Muta† , Kouki Matsuzaki†† and Haris Gacanin‡
† Center for Japan-Egypt Cooperation in Science and Technology, Kyushu University, Japan
†† Graduate School of Information Science and Electrical Engineering, Kyushu University, Japan
‡ Nokia Bell Labs, Antwerpen, Belgium
Abstract— In this paper, we propose a two-dimensional pilot
allocation scheme over frequency- and delay-time domains (2D-
PFD) for channel estimation in massive multiple-input multiple-
output (MIMO)/time division duplex (TDD) system, where two-
dimensional pilot resources are simultaneously allocated to each
user for their uplink channel estimation. We evaluate bit error
rate (BER) performance of massive MIMO/TDD system using
the 2D-PFD scheme by computer simulation in order to clarify
the effectiveness of the proposed pilot allocation compared with
single dimensional pilot allocation over either delay-time domain
or frequency domain, respectively.
keywords−Massive MIMO, two dimensional pilot alloca-
tion, channel estimation
I. I NTRODUCTION
Massive multi-input multiple-output (mMIMO) has been
considered as a promising technology to improve spectrum
efficiency. In mMIMO, multiple users are served with the
same time/frequency resource by adopting space division
multiplexing with downlink precoding [1]-[5]. In general, the
number of served users is much lower in comparison with the
number of antennas. Thus, accurate channel state information
(CSI) should be available at base station (BS) side.
In the case of downlink pilot, the BS send pilots from
all transmit antennas, leading to huge pilot overhead. This
limits achievable transmission efficiency. In addition, the
estimated CSI at user terminals has to be fed back to the
BS resulting in increasing uplink overhead. On the other
hand, if channel estimation based on uplink pilot is used,
each served user needs to send an orthogonal pilot. Since
the number of served users is less than number of BS
antennas, the number of the required pilots in uplink is
less than those of downlink. Therefore, the uplink pilot is
usually used for mMIMO systems with time division duplex
(TDD) fashion, where the channel reciprocity is utilized (i.e.,
uplink channel estimate can be used as downlink channel
estimate if channel variation in time is slow enough during
channel estimation). In this paper, we focus on uplink channel
estimation for mMIMO/TDD systems. We assume that an
uplink communication is established in two phases: (i) pilot
and (ii) data signaling. For pilot phase, orthogonal pilot design
is an important issue, since each pilot needs to be extracted
without CSI. Thus, pilot designs such as frequency-domain
pilot and delay-time domain pilot have been widely inves-
tigated for mMIMO systems [6]-[10]. In frequency domain
pilot allocation, channel estimation accuracy is degraded if
frequency domain pilot is sparse compared with coherent
bandwidth of channel, while in delay-time domain pilot time-
synchronization of all users is needed to keep orthogonality
among receive pilots at BS. Hence, pilot design to cope with
these issues is important.
In this paper, we expand early work [11] on a two-
dimensional pilot allocation scheme for estimation of up-
link CSI in mMIMO with TDD. In the proposed scheme,
978-1-7281-1220-6/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
i.e., over two-dimensional pilot allocation frequency and
delay-time domain (2D-PFD), user pilots are allocated over
frequency-domain or delay-time or a combination of both.
The estimation accuracy of CSI with 2D-PFD improves in
comparison with frequency-domain only, while relaxing time-
synchronization constraint among different users compared
with CSI estimation by using delay-time domain (PD). We
also discuss a non-orthogonal delay-time domain pilot allo-
cation under various scenarios and clarify that bit error rate
(BER) performance is improved compared with frequency-
domain pilot allocation when CSI estimation errors occur
due to aliasing noise in the PF scheme and multi-user pilot
interference in the PD scheme.
II. S YSTEM MODEL
Figure 1 shows block diagram of massive MIMO/TDD
system considered in this paper, where uplink and downlink
are operated on the same frequency band and downlink pre-
coding weight is obtained with uplink channel estimate. BS
is equipped with M antennas and serves N (N < M ) single-
antenna users, where m = 1, 2, . . . , M and n = 1, 2, . . . , N
denote antenna index and user index, respectively. During
uplink training phase, N users send their pilots to BS. The
channel estimate of the n-th user to M antennas at BS is
obtained by correlating the received pilot with allocated one.
After receiving all orthogonal pilots, channel estimates of
the path between M antennas and N users are given as the
following matrix form.
H = [h1 , h2 , · · · , hN ]T
where hn = [hn1 , hn2 , · · · , hnM ] denotes channel estimate
of the n-th user.
During downlink data transmission phase, after subcarrier
modulation of data symbols, zero-forcing (ZF) precoding is
adopted by utilizing the uplink channel estimate H. After
that, inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT) is used as OFDM
modulation at each antenna. Cyclic prefix is added to each
OFDM symbol as guard interval (GI) in order to remove inter-
symbol interference due to multi-path channel. The signal is
passing through multi-path Rayleigh fading channel. No path-
loss and no shadowing are assumed. At the receiver side,
after GI removal and OFDM demodulation with FFT, data
demodulation is carried out to detect the data.
III. P ILOT ALLOCATION SCHEMES
For pilot training, design of orthogonal pilots is important
since uplink pilots need to be detected at BS without utilizing
channel information. Pilot designs such as frequency-domain
pilot and delay-time domain pilot have been widely investi-
gated for mMIMO systems. In frequency-domain orthogonal
pilot allocation scheme, each user uses different frequency
 Base Station User #1
a Antenna #1 a
Channel Estimation -GI FFT Demod. ෡࢔
ࡰ
FFT -GI
‫ܐ‬ଵଵ

• • •
b AWGN
AWGN b
+GI IFFT Pilot Symbol

• • •

• • •
FFT -GI
‫ܐ‬ேଵ

• • •
AWGN
‫ܐ‬ଵெ
Pre-Coding

ࡰ࢔ Mod. IFFT +GI a Antenna #M

・
・
・
b User #N
ࡰࡺ Mod. IFFT +GI ‫ܐ‬ேெ

Fig. 1. System model.

carriers as orthogonal pilot. Although there is no need to

consider time-synchronization among pilots in this scheme,

Frequency response
4Δ
channel estimation accuracy is degraded if frequency domain
pilot is sparse compared with coherent bandwidth of channel

CIR
(i.e., frequency-domain sampling theorem is not met). On the
other hand, in delay-time domain pilot allocation scheme, ݂ ߬
different pilots are multiplexed at different delay time over 0 0 1
4Δ
2
4Δ
3
4Δ
T
delay-time domain if channel delay spread is small enough Frequency domain Delay-time domain
to accommodate these users’ CIRs. However, in this scheme,
time-synchronization among user pilots is required to keep (a) Transmit pilot.
orthogonality among different user pilots. alias
Windowing
Frequency response

Estimated CFR
A. Pilot allocation over frequency domain (PF scheme)
4Δ
The concept of the PF scheme is illustrated in Fig. 2,

CIR
where four user pilots are allocated over frequency-domain.
In this scheme, multiple users use different frequency carriers 0
݂
0 1 2 3 T
߬
as pilots, e.g., each user uses every N ∆f subcarriers when 4Δ 4Δ 4Δ

N users are served with BS, where ∆f = T1 denotes the CFR CIR
subcarrier spacing and T is OFDM symbol duration. (b) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (4 user case)．
Let us consider an example in Fig. 2(a) where each pilot
Actual CFR
uses every four subcarriers in frequency domain. In this case, Windowing
alias

channel impulse response (CIR) appears periodically with Estimated CFR

Frequency response

cyclic period 4∆f 1

= T4 in delay-time domain. According 8Δ
CIR

to the frequency-domain sampling theorem, if the normalized

maximum delay time of multi-path channel τmax is shorter
than the cyclic period T4 , CIR of the interest user can 0
݂
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T
߬

be extracted without causing aliasing noise by applying a CFR

windowing function which removes both alias and additive
noise on the receiver side (Fig. 2(b)). However, if τmax is
greater than T4 , aliasing noise occurs and it degrades channel
estimation accuracy where CIR of the interest is overlapped
with its neighboring aliases as in Fig. 2(c). In other words,
the PF scheme requires τmax < T4 to recover CIR of the
interest user without aliasing noise (i.e., sampling interval in
frequency-domain, 4∆f need to be short enough to recover
the original CIR on the receiver side).
B. Pilot allocation over delay-time domain (PD scheme)
The concept of the PD scheme is illustrated in Fig. 3,
where four user pilots are allocated over delay-time domain.
In this scheme, multiple user pilots are allocated with different
delay time offset where all user pilots are time-synchronized
each other to keep orthogonality among receive pilots at BS.
Similarly to the PF scheme, when N users are served with BS,
channel delay spread (CIR length) need to be short enough
to accommodate these users (i.e., τmax < N T
). To enable the
PF scheme, BS needs to allocate different delay-time offset
8Δ 8Δ 8Δ 8Δ 8Δ 8Δ 8Δ
CIR
(c) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (8 user case)．
Fig. 2. Channel estimation with frequency-domain pilot allocation．
to each user pilot and adjust them so as to avoid overlapping
with other pilots (i.e., multi-user pilot interference).
Let us consider an example of pilot allocation over delay-
time domain in Fig. 3, where four users are served with BS.
In Fig. 3(a), four user pilots are allocated different delay-time
offset in delay-time domain, where the n-th pilot is allocated
at (n − 1) T4 , n = 1, 2, 3, 4. If the maximum delay time
of the channel τmax is less than T4 and delay-time offset
is adjust so as to keep orthogonality, CIR of the interest
user is orthogonally detected on the receiver side at BS as
in Fig. 3(b). On the other hand, in Fig. 3(c), 8 user pilots
are accommodated and thus the CIR is overlapped with other
CIRs (i.e., τmax > T8 ). Since the CIR is interfered by CIR
of other users, channel estimation error occurs as depicted
 Pilot 1 Pilot 2 Pilot 3 Pilot 4
2Δ Pilot 1&2 Pilot 3&4

Frequency response
Pilot 1 Pilot 2 Pilot 1 Pilot 2
Frequency response

Pilot 3 Pilot 4 Pilot 3 Pilot 4

CIR
CIR
݂  1 1  ߬
0 0  T

 4 2Δ 2Δ 4
0 0  2 3 T
4 (a) Two dimensional pilot (pilot 1-4)
4 4
Frequency domain Delay-time domain Pilot 1 Pilot 2
2Δ

Frequency response
(a) Transmit pilot-1.

CIR
Frequency response

Windowing
݂ ߬
 1 1 
0 0  T
CIR

4 2Δ 2Δ 4
(b) Even number frequency pilot (pilot 1 and 2)


0

Frequency response
0  2 3 T Pilot 3 Pilot 4

4 4 4 2Δ

CIR
CFR CIR

(b) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (4 user case)．

݂ ߬
0  1 1  T
0 
Actual CFR (Pilot 1) 4 2Δ 2Δ 4
Frequency response

Estimated CFR (Pilot 1) Windowing (c) Odd number frequency pilot (pilot 3 and 4)

Fig. 4. Channel estimation with two dimensional pilot allocation, where

CIR

pilots 1 and 2 are not time-synchronized with pilots 3 and 4．

0 0  2 3 4 5 6 7 T
8 8 8 8 8 8 8
CFR CIR
(c) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (8 user case)． Pilot 1 & 2
Windowing Pilot 3 & 4
Frequency response

Fig. 3. Channel estimation with delay-time-domain pilot allocation． Estimated CFR

CIR
in Fig.3(c). In this paper, we consider such a non-orthogonal 0
݂ 1 1  ߬
pilot multiplexing and evaluate the influence of estimation 0  T

4 2Δ 2Δ 4
error due to non-orthogonal pilot allocation in delay-time CFR CIR
domain.
(a) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (4 user case)．
C. Two dimensional pilot allocation over frequency and
delay-time domain (2D-PFD scheme) Actual CFR
Pilot 1~4
Pilot 5~8
The concept of the proposed two dimensional pilot allo- Windowing
Frequency response

Estimated CFR
cation over frequency and delay-time domain is illustrated
in Figs. 4, where four user pilots are allocated. Examples of
CIR

estimated CIR and CFR are also illustrated in Fig. 5, where

four user pilot and eight user pilot cases are considered. In 0
݂  1 1  2 2  3 3  ߬
this scheme, both frequency-domain and delay-time domain 0 T
8 4Δ 4Δ 8 4Δ 4Δ 8 4Δ 4Δ 8

are utilized simultaneously for pilot allocation. Let NP F and CFR CIR
NP D denote the possible numbers of user pilots allocated (b) Channel estimate with pilot-1 (8 user case)．
over frequency-domain and delay-time domain, respectively.
Fig. 5. Channel estimation with two dimensional pilot allocation．
The total number of user pilots are given as N = NP F ·NP D .
In delay-time domain, NP D different delay-time offsets are
assigned to each user (i.e., the same pilot subcarriers are used
by NP D users). On the other hand, in frequency-domain,
NP F different subcarrier groups are assigned to each user
(i.e., the same every NP F subcarriers are allocated to each of user pilots in the 2D-PFD scheme is the same as that of
user). single dimensional schemes such as PF and PD schemes if all
An example of 4 user pilot allocation is illustrated in Fig. 4, user pilots are orthogonal each other. However, it should be
where transmit and receive pilots are depicted, respectively. noted that aliasing noise can be minimized in the 2D-PFD
In this figure, a pair of pilots (i.e., pilot1 and 2) can be scheme by adjusting the number of pilots over frequency
distinguished from the other pair of pilots (i.e., pilot 3 and 4) domain and delay-time domain so as to meet the sampling
in frequency-domain (Fig. 4(a)), while pilot 1 and 2 can be theorem. In addition, in the 2D-PFD scheme, there is no need
extracted respectively in delay-time domain (Fig. 4(b)). This to achieve time-synchronization among all users unlike PD
discussion can be applied to a pair of pilot 3 and 4 (Fig. 4(c)). schemes, although pilots which use the same subcarriers need
In principle, it is obvious that the maximum possible number to be time-synchronized.
 TABLE I
S IMULATION PARAMETERS . 100
PD
Channel model MIMO attenuated Rayleigh fading
Subcarrier modulation QPSK PF
Number of subcarriers 256 2D
Number of BS antennas M 16, 24, 48
Number of users 8 10-1
Pre-coding ZF (Zero-forcing)

Bit Error Rate

Normalized delay spread τ /T 0.047 M=16

10-2
CIR 1 CIR 2 CIR 3 CIR 4 M=24

M=48

10-3
τerror Delay-time

Timing Multi-user pilot interference

error 10-4
-9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9
Fig. 6. Simulation scenario (the second scenario). Transmit Eb/N0 dB

Fig. 7. BER performance in the first scenario.

IV. P ERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Simulation parameters are summarized in Table I. Sys- 100

tem block diagram is the same as in Fig. 1, where N

users are served with BS with M antennas. ZF precoding
is applied where ZF weight is calculated with the uplink
channel estimate. We assume uncorrelated MIMO channel 10-1
with independent attenuated six path quasi-static Rayleigh PF
CCDF

fading. The received signal at each user is affected by additive

white Gaussian noise (AWGN). In this study, we evaluate the
influence of channel estimation errors due to aliasing noise in
the PF scheme and multi-pilot interference in the PD scheme. 10-2
PD
For performance evaluation, we assume two scenarios. (i) PFD

In the first scenario, all user pilots are time-synchronized

perfectly. (ii) In the second scenario, all user pilots are time-
synchronized except one user in the PD scheme as illustrated 10-3
in Fig. 6, where timing error is denoted as τerror . Thus, -10 -5 0 5 10

interference between user pilots is increased as timing error MSE in dB

increases. In the PF and the 2D-PFD schemes, users who

use the same frequency pilots need to time-synchronize their
pilots since there is no need to time-synchronize pilots which
use different frequency carriers.
Figure 7 shows downlink BER performance of massive
MIMO/TDD system in case of the first scenario where all
user pilots are time-synchronized perfectly. Here, normalized
delay spread is τ /T = 0.048 and the number of antennas is
M = 16, 24, and 48. The number of served users at BS is 8,
where non-orthogonal pilots are used in the PF and the 2D-
PFD schemes while aliasing noise occurs in the PF scheme.
BER performance of the 2D-PFD scheme is compared with
single dimensional pilot allocation approach (i.e., the PD
and the PF schemes). Since this scenario assumes no time-
synchronization error among user pilots, it is clear that BER
performance of the 2D-PFD scheme is the same as that of the
PF scheme. In case with the PF scheme, BER performance
is deteriorated because of channel estimation error due to
aliasing noise. On the other hand, although BER performance
of the 2D-PFD and the PD schemes is also degraded due
to channel estimation error caused by inter-pilot interference
(i.e., multi-user-pilot interference), we can see that the 2D-
PFD and the PF schemes achieves better BER performance
than that of the PF scheme. This is because no aliasing noise
Fig. 8. CCDF of instantaneous MSE.
occurs in these schemes as the frequency-domain sampling
theorem is satisfied. It should be noted that channel estimation
error caused by multi-user-pilot interference in the 2D-PFD
and the PD schemes is lower than that due to aliasing noise in
the PF scheme. The reason is explained in the next paragraph.
Figure 8 shows the complimentary cumulative distribution
function (CCDF) of normalized instantaneous mean square
error (MSE) in cases of the 2D-PFD, the PD scheme, and
the PF scheme. The MSE is defined as normalized square
error between ideal channel estimate and achieved one. In
this evaluation, block Rayleigh fading is assumed, i.e., fading
coefficients are kept constant during OFDM symbol period.
From this figure, it can be seen that CCDF of the 2D-PFD
is the same as the PF scheme since the same multi-user pilot
interference and no aliasing error occurs in both schemes.
On the other hand, the PF scheme shows higher MSE than
other two schemes because of aliasing noise. This means that
probability of high MSE occurrence in the 2D-PFD and the
PD scheme is lower than that in the PF scheme. The reason is
 thus the amount of multi-user pilot interference takes different
value depending on channel coefficients unlike aliasing noise.
Windowing Hence, probability that high MSE occurrence in the 2D-PFD
and PD scheme can be reduced compared with the PF scheme.
Figure 10 shows downlink BER performance of massive
CIR

MIMO system with uplink channel estimation in the second

ߝ஺ ߝௐ scenario, where timing error τerror exists as in Fig.6. Here,
normalized delay spread is τ /T = 0.048 and the number

of antennas is M = 16, 24, and 48. In the PD scheme,
0 1 2
a fixed timing offset as τerror is given to one of the user
Δ Δ pilots in the PD scheme. Here, τerror /T = 64 1
is assumed
(a) PF case． and channel estimation error occurs due to multi-user pilot
interference caused by τerror . In the 2D-PFD and the PF
schemes, only user pilots which use the same frequency
Windowing carriers are time-synchronized each other. From this figure, it
can be seen that the 2D-PFD scheme achieves the best BER
performance compared with the other two schemes because
CIR

pilots in the 2D-PFD scheme are never affected by neither

ߝ୙ ߝௐ aliasing noise nor influence of timing-error unlike other two
 single dimensional schemes.
0
2
V. C ONCLUSION
  In this paper, we have investigated two dimensional pilot
(b) PD or PFD case． allocation scheme over frequency- and delay-time domains
Fig. 9. Illustration of windowed CIR in the PF and PD schemes. for uplink channel estimation in massive MIMO/TDD sys-
tems. We evaluate BER performance of downlink massive
MIMO system, where downlink precoding is adopted with
100 uplink channel estimate. Simulation results clarified that the
proposed pilot allocation (2D-PFD) scheme is effective in
PD
PF
improving channel estimation accuracy with the PF scheme
2D-PFD
while the propose scheme alleviates time synchronization
M=16 requirement among pilots compared with the PD scheme
10-1 which needs time synchronization among all pilots.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Bit Error Rate

M=24
This research was partially supported by the JSPS KAK-
10-2 ENHI (JP17K06427) and the Telecommunications Advance-
M=48 ment Foundation.
R EFERENCES
[1] T．L．Marzetta，“Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited
numbers of base station antennas，” IEEE Trans，Wireless Commun． ，
10-3 vol. 9，no．11，pp．3590-3600，Sept．2010．
[2] H．Q．Ngo，Massive MIMO: Fundamentals and system designs，Vol．
1642，Linköping University Electronic Press，2015．
[3] J．C．Marinello，and T．Abrão，“BER analysis of multi-
cellular MIMO systems with increasing number of BS
antennas，”arXiv:1406.3753v1，Jun 2014．
10-4 [4] A．Chockalingam and B．S．Rajan，Large MIMO Systems． ，Cam-
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 bridge University Press，2014
Transmit Eb/N0 dB [5] N．Fatema，G．Hua，Y．Xiang，D．Peng，and I．Natgunanathan，
“Massive MIMO linear precoding: a survey”，IEEE Systems Journal，
2017．
Fig. 10. BER performance in the second scenario. [6] O．Elijah，C．Y． Leow，T．A．Rahman，S．Nunoo，and S．Z．Iliya
“A comprehensive survey of pilot contamination in massive MIMO—
5G system，” IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials，18.2：
905-923，2016．
[7] J．Jose，A．Ashikhmin，T．Marzetta，S．Vishiwanath，“Pilot con-
tamination and precoding in multi-cell TDD systems，” IEEE Trans．
illustrated in Figs. 9 (a) and (b). In these figures, both CIRs Commun． ，Vol．10，No．8，pp．2640-2651，Aug． 2011．
in the PF and PD schemes are truncated with windowing [8] W．Hao，O．Muta，H．Gacanin，and H．Furukawa，“Pilot allocation
operation. It is clear that errors due to truncated CIR (ϵW ) for multi-cell TDD massive MIMO systems，” IEEE VTC 2017-Fall，
Sept．2017．
are the same in both cases. Beside, in the PF scheme, aliasing [9] K．Yokomakura，S．Sampei，H．Harada，N．Morinaga，“A carrier
noise is added as ϵA in Fig. 9(a). The aliasing noise is the interferometry based channel estimation technique for MIMO-
same as the truncated part of CIR, i.e., ϵA = ϵW . On the OFDM/TDMA systems，” IECIE Trans．Commun． ，Vol．E90-B，No．
5 pp．1181-1192，May 2007．
other hand, in the PD scheme, multi-user pilot interference [10] P．Y．Tsai，and T．D．Chiueh，“Frequency-domain
occurs as illustrated with ϵU in Fig. 9(b), where different user interpolation-base channel estimation in pilot-aided OFDM systems，”
CIRs are interfered each other. Unlike the aliasing noise, the IEEE VTC 2004-Spring，May 2004．
estimation error due to multi-user pilot interference is not the [11] H. Gacanin, “Methods for multiplexing and assigning uplink reference
signals in a radio communication system with a firsts network node and
same as error in truncated CIR (i.e., ϵU ̸= ϵW .), because a second network node,” European Patent Office, EP3119023 (A1), July
each CIR is passing through different fading channel and 2015.