Automatic Cell Planning

Automatic Cell Planning
Abstract
An effective and efficient mobile telephone service relies, in part, on the deployment and configuration of network infrastructure. This
thesis describes some of the problems faced by the network planners in providing such a service. Novel algorithmic methods are
presented for designing networks that meet both the subscriber’s demand for a high quality of service and the operator’s requirement
for low infrastructure overheads. Automatic Cell Planning (ACP) is the generic name for these network optimising techniques. Existing
research into ACP is extended through the introduction of ‘interference surrogates’, which give the network designer greater control
over interference in a wireless network. Interference management is the central theme of this thesis. The accurate simulation and control
of interference leads to a more efficient use of the available radio spectrum (a limited and expensive commodity). Two approaches to
ACP are developed: in the first, network performance (in terms of subscriber coverage) is given priority over the cost of network
infrastructure; in the second, these priorities are reversed. These two distinct approaches typify a trade off that lies at the heart of the
problem of network design - a trade off between spectral efficiency and the cost of network infrastructure.
Keywords: automatic cell planning, ACP, cellular mobile telephone network optimisation, cell plan optimisation, cell optimisation, cell
dimensioning, base station placement, wireless networks, spectral efficiency, spectrum efficiency, channel assignment, CAP, frequency
assignment, FAP, interference surrogates, signal freedom.
Contents
ABSTRACT
CO NTENTS
LIST O F FIGURES
LIST O F TABLES
GLO SSARY O F TERMS
GLO SSARY O F SYMBO LS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 OUTLINE O F PRO BLEM
1.2 PREVIO US WO RK
1.3 THESIS AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
1.4 TEST PLATFO RM
1.5 THESIS OUTLINE

CHAPTER 2 NETWORK MODEL
2.1 SIMULATIO N ISSUES
2.2 DESCRIPTIO N O F M O DEL
2.3 PERFO RMANCE EVALUATIO N
2.4 DATA SETS
CHAPTER 3 NETWORK DESIGN – PART 1
3.1 CHO ICE O F OPTIMISATIO N ALGO RITHMS
3.2 INITIALISATIO N ALGO RITHMS
3.3 SEARCH ALGO RITHMS
3.4 FACTO RS LIMITING SEARCH PERFO RMANCE
CHAPTER 4 CHANNEL ASSIGNMENT
4.1 PRO BLEM DEFINITIO N
4.2 PERFO RMANCE EVALUATIO N
4.3 DATA SETS
4.4 CO MMO N ALGO RITHMIC CO NCEPTS
4.5 INITIALISATIO N ALGO RITHMS
4.6 SEARCH ALGO RITHMS
4.7 CO MPARISO N O F RESULTS
CHAPTER 5 INTERFERENCE SURROGATES
5.1 RO LE O F THE INTERFERENCE SURRO GATE
5.2 INTERFERENCE SURRO GATE DESCRIPTIO NS
5.3 M ETHO DO LO GY O F CO MPARISO N
5.4 RESULTS
5.5 CO NCLUSIO N
CHAPTER 6 NETWORK DESIGN – PART 2
6.1 EVALUATIO N O F TWO -STAGE NETWO RK DESIGN PRO CESS
6.2 NETWO RK DESIGNS WITH ‘HIGH’ CO MPUTATIO NAL INVESTMENT
6.3 NETWO RK DESIGNS WITH M INIMAL INFRASTRUCTURE

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
7.1 THESIS CO NCLUSIO NS
7.2 NETWO RK M O DEL ENHANCEMENTS
7.3 IMPRO VEMENTS TO OPTIMISATIO N M ETHO DO LO GY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: The simplified path of a call between a wireless telephone and a wireline telephone.
Figure 1.2: An example of different switching technologies connecting both wireless and wireline telephones.
Figure 1.3: A pictorial illustration of radio signal propagation in wireless and wireline networks.
Figure 1.4: The relationship between re-use distance D and cell radius R in co-channel cells.
Figure 1.5: A channel re-use pattern for 7 different sets of channels.
Figure 1.6: The translation of a political map into a colouring constraint graph.
Figure 1.7: Some received power levels at a mobile station; this data may be measured or predicted.
Figure 2.1: An abstracted traffic cover problem using multiple servers.
Figure 2.2: Rasterisation of the network working area.
Figure 2.3: The test point layout in NetworkA3.
Figure 2.4: The test point traffic volumes in NetworkA3.
Figure 2.5: The test point service thresholds in NetworkB1.
Figure 2.6: The site positions in NetworkB1.
Figure 2.7: The geometry of the horizontal loss calculation for directional antennae.
Figure 2.8: The geometry of the vertical loss calculation for antennae.
Figure 2.9: The angles-of-incidence for a site in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.10: Two active base stations in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.11: The propagation gain from a site in NetworkA2.
Figure 2.12: The signal strength due to an active base station in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.13: An example of serviced test points in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.14: An example CIR calculation for two active base stations in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.15: An example of test point cover for two base stations in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.16: Comparison operator for network performance metrics.
Figure 2.17: NetworkA1 (a) test points, (b) traffic densities, and (c) candidate site positions.
Figure 2.21: NetworkB1 (a) test points, (b) traffic densities, (c) candidate site positions, and (d) service thresholds.
Figure 3.1: Algorithm InitBlank.
Figure 3.2: Algorithm InitRandomA.
Figure 3.3: An example network design produced by InitRandomA.
Figure 3.4: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.5: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.6: The distribution of site occupancy for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.7: The distribution of number of base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.8: Graph of traffic cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.9: Graph of traffic cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.10: Graph of test point cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.11: Graph of test point cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.12: A subsection of the example network generated by InitRandomA.
Figure 3.13: Algorithm InitRandomB.
Figure 3.14: An example network design produced by InitRandomB.
Figure 3.15: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.16: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.17: Graph of traffic cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.18: Graph of traffic cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.19: Graph of test point cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.20: Graph of test point cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.21: Algorithm InitRandomC.
Figure 3.22: An example network design produced by InitRandomC.
Figure 3.23: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomC on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.24: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomC on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.25: Algorithm SearchRandomB.
Figure 3.26: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.27: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchRandomC on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.28: Algorithm SearchHillClimbA.
Figure 3.29: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchHillClimbA on NetworkA4 (run 1).
Figure 3.32: Algorithm SearchConstructA.
Figure 3.33: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchConstructA on NetworkA1.
Figure 3.34: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchConstructB on NetworkA1.
Figure 4.1: The comparison operator for assignment performance metrics.
Figure 4.2: CAP problem CapA2-10 generated from NetworkA2.
Figure 4.3: Algorithm InitRandomD.
Figure 4.4: Algorithm InitConstructA.
Figure 4.5: Algorithm SearchRandomD.
Figure 4.6: The performance of the best assignment produced vs. time for SearchRandomD on CapA2-90.
Figure 4.7: Algorithm SearchHillClimbB.
Figure 4.8: The performance of the best assignment produced vs. time for SearchHillClimbB on CapA3-90.
Figure 5.1: The performance of an ideal (hypothetical) interference-surrogate.
Figure 5.2: An illustration of the attenuation of interference by channel separation.
Figure 5.3: The performance of an imperfect interference surrogate, in which one pair of designs violate the IS Condition.
Figure 5.4: The performance of an imperfect interference surrogate, in which three pairs of designs violate the IS Condition.
Figure 5.5: The normalised inaccuracy of three ISs vs. time for NetworkA1.
Figure 5.6: Graph of overlap vs. test point cover for 10 designs in NetworkA1.
Figure 5.7: Graph of non-dominance vs. test point cover for 10 designs in NetworkA1.
Figure 5.8: Graph of signal freedom vs. test point cover for 10 designs in NetworkA1.
Figure 6.2: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchHillClimbA on NetworkA4.
Figure 6.3: Algorithm SearchPruneA.
Figure 6.4: The performance of the best BSCP solution vs. time for composite search on NetworkA2.
Figure 6.5: Algorithm SearchPruneB.
Figure 6.6: Algorithm SearchHillClimbC.
Figure 6.7: Graph of network infrastructure vs. time for algorithm SearchPruneB on NetworkA1.
Figure 6.8: Algorithm SearchConstructC.
Figure 7.1: Graph of test point cover vs. base station activity for ten candidate designs in NetworkA1.
Figure 7.5: A pathological example of receiver cover for two transmitters.
Figure 7.6: A pathological example of receiver cover for three transmitters.
Figure 7.7: Graph of subscriber cover vs. network infrastructure.
Figure 7.8: Graph of the effect of computational investment on the pareto-optimal trade off between subscriber cover and network
infrastructure.
Figure 7.9: Target performance positions on the pareto-optimal graph.
Figure 7.10: Number of base stations vs. computational investment for a fixed subscriber cover.
Figure 7.11: Infrastructure cost vs. number of base stations.
Figure 7.12: The determination of optimal computational investment by comparison of computational cost and network infrastructure
cost.
List of Tables
Table 1.1: Test platform specification.
Table 2.1: Traffic capacity vs. number allocated base station channels.
Table 2.2: Summary of statistics for network data sets.
Table 3.1: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomA.
Table 3.2: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomB.
Table 3.3: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomC.
Table 3.4: A summary of results for initialisation algorithms.
Table 3.5: The performance of the best network designs for SearchRandomB.
Table 3.6: The performance of the best network designs for SearchRandomC.
Table 3.7: Example moves for SearchHillClimbA.
Table 3.8: The performance of network designs for SearchHillClimbA.
Table 3.9: The initial and final traffic covers for multiple executions of SearchHillClimbA.
Table 3.10: The performance of the best network designs for SearchConstructA.
Table 3.11: The performance of the best network designs for SearchConstructB.
Table 3.12: A summary of results for all search algorithms on all networks.
Table 3.13: Computational complexity of network performance evaluation.
Table 4.1: Summary statistics for CAP problem instances.
Table 4.2: The performance of the best assignments produced by InitConstructA.
Table 4.3: The performance of the best assignments produced by SearchRandomD.
Table 4.4: The performance of the best assignment produced by SearchHillClimbB.
Table 5.1: An example of IS performance vs. time.
Table 5.2: The final IS inaccuracy values for NetworkA1.
Table 5.6: A summary of IS inaccuracy results.
Table 6.1: The performance of the best BSCP solutions for SearchRandomC and SearchHillClimbA.
Table 6.2: The performance of the best network design (after channel assignment) for SearchRandomB.
Table 6.3: The performance of the best BSCP solution for composite search.
Table 6.4: The performance of the best network design for seven day optimisation.
Table 6.5: A comparison of actual network infrastructure with theoretic minimum.
Table 6.6: The performance of the final network designs produced by SearchPruneB.
Table 6.7: The effect on network infrastructure of algorithm SearchPruneB.
Table 6.8: The performance of the best network designs produced by the composite constructive search algorithm.
Glossary of Terms
ACP Automatic Cell Planning
AI Angle of Incidence
BNDP Broadcast Network Design Problem
BSPP Base Station Placement Problem
CAP Channel Assignment Problem
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
CIR Carrier to Interference Ratio
CNDP Capacitated Network Design Problem
FAP Frequency Assignment Problem
FDMA Frequency Division Multiple Access
FSP Fixed Span Problem
GCP Graph Colouring Problem
GOS Grade Of Service
GSM Global System for Mobile communications
ICR Interference to Carrier Ratio

QOS Quality Of Service
TDMA Time Division Multiple Access
VSP Variable Span Problem
WCNDP Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem
Glossary of Symbols
CIR cover threshold
Average CIR of non-covered test points
Average ICR of all test points
Angle-of-Incidence from site to test point
Set of all base stations available in N
Set of active base stations
j th base station in B
Active status of base station b
Antenna used by base station b
Azimuth of the antenna used by base station b
Cell of base station b

The k th channel used by base station
Demand (number of channels) required by base station b
Site occupied by base station b
Tilt of the antenna used by base station b
Transmission power used by base station b
Set of all channels available in N
k th channel in C
Set of all antenna types available in N
Set of omni-directional antennae
mth antenna in D
Horizontal loss function for antenna type d
Vertical loss function for antenna type d
Function describing signal attenuation due to channel separation
Propagation loss from site to test point
Fuzzy server threshold gain constant

Total non-dominance
Total overlap
Total signal freedom
Length of side of each grid point in the network working area
Mobile telephone network
Number of channels required to accommodate call traffic t
Number of active base stations
Maximum number of base stations per site
Maximum number of channels per base station
Number of covered test points in N
Number of occupied sites
Horizontal (east-west) resolution of network working area
Vertical (north-south) resolution of network working area
Number of serviced test points in N
Number of discrete power steps
Signal strength at test point due to base station

Maximum transmission power
Minimum transmission power
Set of all test points in N
Set of covered test points in N
Set of serviced test points in N
ith test point in R
CIR at test point r
Best server of test point r
Service non-dominance at test point r
Service overlap at test point r
Signal freedom at test point r
Field strength service threshold of test point r
Fuzzy server set for test point r
Expected volume of call traffic in test point r
Position vector of r within the working area of N
Set of all sites available in N

Set of occupied sites in S
lth site in S
Position vector of s within the working area of N
Traffic carrying capacity of n channels
Total volume of call traffic covered in N
Total volume of call traffic serviced in N
Weighted test point cover
Chapter 1
Introduction
An effective and efficient mobile telephone[1] service relies, in part, on the deployment and configuration of network infrastructure. This
thesis tackles some of the problems faced by the network planners in providing that service. Novel algorithmic methods are presented
for automatically designing networks that meet both the subscriber’s demand for a high quality service and the operator’s requirement
for low infrastructure overheads. Automatic Cell Planning (ACP) is the generic name for these network optimising techniques.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 1.1 presents an outline of the problem domain considered, Section 1.2 contains a
review of resources and research related to the problem domain, Section 1.3 sets out the aims and objectives of the thesis, and Section
1.4 summarises the contents of each subsequent thesis chapter.
1.1 Outline of Problem

The growth of the mobile telephone industry has been enormous. In the early 1980’s cellular[2] mobile telephones were introduced; by
the Year 1990 the number of subscribers worldwide was 11 million, and by the Year 2000 that figure had risen to 500 million. This
growth shows no sign of slowing, and it is estimated that by 2010 the number of mobile-telephone subscribers will be 2 billion - when it
will exceed the number of subscribers to wireline telephones[3] [1]. In order to keep pace with the enormous increase in demand,
faster and more efficient methods are required for the design of mobile telephone networks [2,3].
Wireless communication requires sophisticated technology. Consider GSM[4] networks, they employ advanced devices such as Very
High Frequency (VHF) radio transceivers, high-speed digital signal processors, optical fibre, microwave dishes, and data compression.
Until recently the cost of using mobile telephone networks has been too high for the majority of consumers, however, advances in
integrated-circuit design (amongst other things) have reduced these costs sufficiently to make mass-market wireless communications
viable.
Figure 1.1: The simplified path of a call between a wireless telephone and a wireline telephone.
Consider the simplified example, shown in Figure 1.1, of a call between a wireless telephone and a wireline telephone (this example is
adapted from [4]). The call passes through a variety of network switches. Speech data leaving the wireline telephone travels as
electrical impulses through copper wire; these impulses are digitally encoded by the Public Land Network (PLN)[5] and transmitted,
via optical fibre, to the wireless subscriber’s Mobile Switching Centre (MSC). The MSC determines the destination of the data[6] and
re-transmits it to the correct Base Station Controller (BSC), and then the optically encoded data is decoded and transmitted via a
microwave link to the Base Transceiver Station (BTS) currently hosting the wireless telephone. The BTS identifies which of the wireless
telephones in its service area (known as a cell) is the intended recipient, and forwards the data using a VHF radio link.
Figure 1.2: An example of different switching technologies connecting both wireless and wireline telephones.
The worldwide wireless and wireline telephone networks contain millions of communication switches, and care is required in their
deployment. Figure 1.2 shows an example of the connectivity in a simplified communications network. Both wireless and wireline
equipment is connected together using switches, each of which has a maximum call carrying capacity. In addition to creating an effective
network (one which can handle all the call traffic) the network designer must strive to minimise infrastructure costs. Striking the correct
balance between these competing goals takes skill and effort - both of which are expensive commodities in themselves.
1.1.1 The Capacitated Network Design Problem
All communications switches have a limited call carrying capacity - at any one time each switch may act as a conduit for only a finite
number of telephone calls. Although this maximum capacity varies widely for different technologies, it is a fundamental limitation in the
design of all communication systems (see [5] for a more detailed explanation).
In abstraction, the Capacitated Network Design Problem[7] (CNDP) involves the provision of communication conduits between
pairs of users[8] (see [6] for a generic problem formulation). A network with insufficient, or poorly deployed, switching elements will
not be able to transport all of the required call traffic, which will lead to lost revenue and customer dissatisfaction. Conversely, a
network that deployed too many switches would have a high running cost and, hence, reduced profitability. A network designer must
also take account of many other issues including fault-tolerance (by including ‘redundant’ switching elements), call delay from long
wires, and switch site availability. These problems tend to be technology specific (and hence, network specific) so are often ignored in
the study of ‘pure’ CNDPs.
Note that the CNDP is similar to the Broadcast Network Design Problem[9] (BNDP), in which a large number of users receive
identical data. However, solutions for the BNDP often exploit ‘economies of scale’ that are not present in the CNDP, and separate
solutions must be sought for this problem (this is discussed in more detail in Section 1.2.3.1).
1.1.2 The Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem

Wireless communication has two main advantages over wireline communication:
· Mobility: a wireless user is freer to move around than their wireline counterpart. This is even more relevant in the case of multiple
mobile-users, where wires would soon get tangled.
· Economy: in a wireline network a significant portion of the wires are those that terminate with the user. For example, from the
switch on a telegraph pole to a subscribers house (commonly known as the last mile problem). Using a wireless connection for
this portion of the network gives a significant saving in cable installation[10].
Conversely, wireless communication has two main disadvantages compared with wireline communication:
· Poor signal propagation: a signal’s strength and quality will deteriorate more for wireless transmission than for wireline transmission
over the same distance. The wire acts as a ‘wave guide’ for the signal, allowing precise propagation control.
· Poor noise immunity: wireline signals are shielded from noise sources, whereas wireless signals may be easily contaminated by
‘stray’ radio waves.
Figure 1.3: A pictorial illustration of radio signal propagation in wireless and wireline networks.
Figure 1.3 shows the contrast in noise immunity between the two types of network. In both cases there are three telephones (red, green
and blue) receiving information from three respective transmitters (shown as filled circles). In the wireline network, telephones only
receive a signal from the desired transmitter, whereas in the wireless network each telephone receives additional signals from interfering
transmitters. These unwanted signals will cause the quality of the desired signal to degrade.
To take advantage of the benefits of wireless communication, the disadvantages must be addressed in both the design of the technology
(e.g. high quality receivers) and in its deployment. In the Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem (WCNDP) the particular
deficiencies inherent in deploying wireless technology are addressed, principally:
1. The reliable propagation of data between wireless users and network base stations.
2. The management of the radio spectrum to avoid interference between wireless users.
The solution of the WCNDP requires the location and configuration of network base stations such that mobile subscriber demand is
satisfied. This must be done in such a way as to minimise the cost of deploying and running the network.
A key factor in creating high quality solutions to the WCNDP is the management of the available radio spectrum. The restrictions
imposed on base station deployment will vary between different technologies, but limited spectrum availability remains a problem in all
wireless networks. The division of the spectrum (known as the multiple access scheme) might be frequency based, as in Frequency
Division Multiple Access (FDMA), or it might be code based, as in Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) (see [7] for further
information). Regardless of the multiple access scheme used, the same ‘piece’[11] of radio spectrum cannot be re-used in the same
place at the same time, as this would result in interference.
1.2 Previous Work

This section contains an overview of previous approaches to solving the WCNDP, and solutions to related problems are also included.
The exact formulation of the WCNDP is technology dependent and, as such, a variety of models have arisen in which different aspects
of the problem are emphasised. This has led to the development of many different design techniques. The heterogeneity of network
models makes a quantitative comparison of design techniques impossible, and therefore all comparisons must be made on a qualitative
basis.
Some of the previous research (such as that on the problem of channel assignment) relates only to a small part of the WCNDP. In this
section these subproblems are discussed and placed in the wider context of the WCNDP.
1.2.1 General Background Reading
A good introduction to radio communication can be found in [7]. More specific information on mobile wireless communications can be
found in [8-10], and a highly accessible overview of the issues involved in designing wireless networks is given in [11].
Information on the practical application of combinatorial optimisation can be found in [12,13], and valuable insights into the theoretical
aspects of combinatorial optimisation can be found in [14,15]. An overview of the application of combinatorial optimisation to
problems in the field of telecommunications is given in [16].
1.2.2 Channel Assignment
The Channel Assignment Problem[12] (CAP) is a well studied area of wireless network design, and it is a sub-problem of the
WCNDP (as described in Section 1.1.2). In the CAP, only the channels assigned to base stations may vary, and all other network
design parameters (such as antenna selection or transmitter placement) are fixed. This section contains a brief overview of the CAP, but
a more complete taxonomy of problems and solutions can be found in [17-19].
In the CAP a network is assumed to consist of a set of transmitters (TXs) and receivers (RXs), where each RX requires an interference
free signal from one or more TX. The strength of the radio signal from each TX to each RX is known. The interference each RX
experiences is dependent on the separation between the channel used by the serving TX and the channels used by interfering TXs – the
greater the separation (in ‘channel space’), the smaller the contribution of that signal to the total interference.
Given an unlimited radio spectrum, channel assignments could all be unique and generously spaced, but unfortunately only a limited
range of frequencies are suitable for mobile communication, and it is smaller than the total number of channels required worldwide. To
maximise spectrum availability, portions of the spectrum must be reused. This is only possible when RXs that share a common channel
(or use channels that are close enough to interfere) have sufficient electromagnetic isolation from one another. As the range of wireless
communication signals is small, typically line-of-site[13], this is not an insurmountable problem. Furthermore, in cities (where the
demand for channels is at its highest) the buildings provide RXs with extra shielding from interfering TXs, and this allows the network
designer more precise control over interference (an observation made in [11]).
1.2.2.1 Fixed and Variable Spectrum
The CAP is usually stated in one of two forms: as a Variable Span Problem (VSP) or as a Fixed Span Problem (FSP). The solution of
the VSP requires all the RXs to have a usable signal (i.e. to have acceptably low interference) whilst the difference between the lowest
and highest channels used (known as the span of the assignment) is minimised. The solution of the FSP requires the maximum number
of RXs to have a usable signal given a fixed span of channels from which assignments may be made.
Network operators bidding for new spectrum licenses might adopt the VSP, as they would need to know how much spectrum to buy.
Another application might be in the day-to-day allocation of spectrum in a theatre-of-war, as the reliance on radio communications in
modern warfare means that efficient spectrum management is crucial.
Instances of the FSP are much more common than those of the VSP. The biggest users of radio spectrum are commercial network
operators (such as broadcasters, mobile telephone companies, and taxi firms) and they usually have exclusive rights to a particular
portion of the radio spectrum[14]. Commercial networks typically have a consumer base of subscribers (or potential subscribers) who
require interference free radio-communication either one-way (e.g. TV broadcasts) or two-ways (e.g. mobile telephone calls); they
wish to maximise the number of subscribers covered (and hence revenue) using the spectrum they have available. It will be assumed
that all CAPs are FSPs for the remainder of this thesis.
1.2.2.2 Geometric Solutions
One approach to the CAP has been the division of TX cells into discrete geometric regions. Fundamental to this approach is the
concept of re-use distance; this is the minimum separation (in space) between cells that use the same channel or set of channels. The
ratio of re-use distance (D) to cell size (R) gives an indication of the amount of interference expected; this is illustrated in Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4: The relationship between re-use distance D and cell radius R in co-channel cells.
The available spectrum is divided into N distinct sets, and this division will dictate the acceptable D/R ratio. From this relationship the
network designer can estimate the trade off between capacity and interference. Cell plans for different D/R ratios may be created using
hexagonal tessellations (Figure 1.5 shows the re-use pattern for N = 7).
Figure 1.5: A channel re-use pattern for 7 different sets of channels.
For large areas with a near-uniform subscriber distribution, this approach is fast and effective. If subscriber density varies then cell size
and capacity must vary, and this leads to a disjointed tessellation, which is difficult to analyse using geometry. For a more in depth
treatment of the geometric approach see [9]. Regular geometric shapes do not bound real cells, and this simplification leads to
inaccuracies in the models prediction of interference (see [20] for further analysis of the shortcomings of this approach).
1.2.2.3 Graph Colouring
As Figure 1.5 illustrates, the assignment of channels to cells has a similarity with the problem of colouring political maps – no adjacent
regions may have the same colour. In political maps this is to ensure that the contours of adjacent countries can be clearly distinguished,
but in cell plans it is to ensure that adjacent cells do not interfere with one another.
Figure 1.6: The translation of a political map into a colouring constraint graph.
The general form of the political-map colouring problem is known as the Graph Colouring Problem (GCP). Figure 1.6 shows the
relationship between a political map and a mathematical graph. Each region of the map becomes a vertex on the graph, and if two
regions are adjacent then an edge will exist between the corresponding vertices. A colouring of the graph in which no two adjacent (i.e.
edge sharing) vertices have the same colour can be translated into a map colouring where no two adjacent regions share a colour.
Graphs that represent channel assignment constraints may be generated in the same way, and this allows the migration of many results
and techniques from graph theory to the problem of channel assignment.
Translating a CAP into a GCP can be lengthy and complicated. Furthermore, the method is usually specific to the type of wireless
network in use; this leads to the translation process being difficult to ‘port’ between different types of network model.
The political-map colouring problem is a subset of the GCP, whereas the CAP is not a subset of the GCP (there are many ways to
create a GCP from a CAP). This has led to variants of the GCP being adopted that better approximate the CAP. Examples include the
addition of weighting to the graph edges, as described in [21], and the generalisation from binary graphs (graphs with only two vertices
per edge) to hyper graphs (graphs with many vertices per edge), as described in [18].
The advantage of adopting a graph theoretic approach lies in the wealth of techniques already derived for the GCP. A good example of
this is lower-bounding [22], which can provide an estimate of the minimum number of distinct colours required to satisfy a given graph.
1.2.2.4 Radio Signal Analysis
The ambiguity in translation between CAPs and GCPs means that even if the GCP is solved to optimality, the corresponding CAP
solution may not be optimal. A more exact approach relies on the direct estimation of radio signal interference. Given a particular
channel assignment, the total interference each RX will experience can be estimated based on measured or predicted signal strengths.
Figure 1.7 shows an example of received power levels for a single RX; in order to achieve a tolerable noise level, the interfering signals
must be small or sufficiently attenuated by channel separation.
Figure 1.7: Some received power levels at a mobile station; this data may be measured or predicted.
This approach gives the most accurate representation of the CAP, as it takes account of everything that can be either measured or
predicted. Some studies of the effectiveness of this approach have been done (examples include [23]), and it has been shown to deliver
the highest quality solutions of any of the channel assignment methods. The computational requirements of this approach are high, and
this has meant that less exact methods (such as graph colouring) have dominated the creation of channel assignments. On-going
improvements in areas such as microprocessor speed, compiler technology, and software engineering have increased the size of
problem for which this technique can deliver superior solutions; some studies have been made of the scalability of this approach versus
less exact methods (see [24]) but the results remain inconclusive.
1.2.3 Cell Planning
At the time of writing, there are many commercial Computer Aided Design (CAD) systems for cell planning available; examples include
ATOLL (by FORSK), Wizard (by Agilent Technologies), deciBell Planner (by Northwood), and Asset (by AIRCOM). An
introduction to the issues involved in CAD for mobile telephone networks can be found in [20,25]. All current CAD systems require a
user to decide base station locations and configurations; feedback about network performance (information such as area coverage and
infrastructure costs) comes from a computer simulation.
The elimination of the user from the ‘design loop’ is a natural progression of the CAD paradigm (as concluded in [20]). The user should
be required to specify the desired network performance, and not be required to specify the details of the network design needed to
achieve it. The following subsections describe research into the automation of the network design process.
1.2.3.1 Automatic Base Station Placement
The Base Station Placement Problem (BSPP) is a subproblem of the WCNDP, and there are two common formulations of this
problem. In the first, known as uncapacitated, the subscribers only require a usable (i.e. sufficiently strong) radio signal. In the second,
known as capacitated, base stations are limited by the maximum number of subscribers they can serve. The uncapacitated problem
(referred to as the BNDP in Section 1.1.1) is typical of the requirements a television distribution network might have. The simplest
solution to this problem is typified by satellite television technology, in which one transmitter (the satellite) can transmit information to an
entire country. This type of solution is not well suited to capacitated networks, where each subscriber requires different data streams; in
fact, a single-satellite solution would only allow the available spectrum to be used once for the entire area covered by the satellite[15].
Models for the BSPP are further divided in their approach to site availability. In some previous work (such as [26]) a pure BSPP is
formulated, in which base stations may be placed anywhere within the working area of the network. Whereas in other work (such as
[27]) a subset BSPP is formulated, in which the set of candidate sites is decided by the user and the computer selects a subset for
occupation. The subset BSPP represents the majority of practical problems, as network operators find it more efficient to select sites
based on their cost, availability, and practicality rather than on their suitability for radio communications (see [3] for similar reasoning).
It is interesting to note that base station (or transmitter) placement in network design has much in common with the Facility Location
Problem (FLP) (see [28] for a comprehensive description of the FLP).
Research on the BSPP for uncapacitated networks can be found in [29-32]; a common goal in previous work has been the
maximisation of cover (the number of receivers with a sufficiently strong signal) coupled with the minimisation of infrastructure cost. The
application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to the uncapacitated BSPP is explored in [33], where an expert system is developed as a ‘drop
in replacement’ for the network designer. In [34] graph theory is used to simplify the solution of the uncapacitated BSPP; this work
was part of the STORMS project [35]. Complexity analysis for a generic model of the uncapacitated BSPP is described in [36]. A
comparison of heuristic and meta-heuristic approaches can be found in [27], and the performance of a large number of local-search
algorithms is evaluated in [37]. A genetic algorithm is applied to the uncapacitated BSPP in [38]. Interference is explicitly considered in
[39], where the co-channel interference experienced by a mobile receiver is calculated and used to give an improved estimate of area
coverage.
In [40] a small CDMA network is considered as a capacitated BSPP, where base stations are located such that the predicted bit error
rate of data from mobile subscribers does not exceed a given threshold; a set covering approach is augmented with various heuristics
tailored to the problem. A broad approach to the problem is taken in [4], where base station placement is included as part of the wider
network design problem (including the layout of the wireline ‘backbone’). In [41] the process of ‘cell splitting’ (dividing large macro-
cells into smaller micro-cells) is automated; the goal being the minimisation of call blocking probabilities (for new or handed-over calls)
using the minimum number of base stations.
1.2.3.2 Automatic Base Station Configuration
The Base Station Configuration Problem[16] (BSCP) is the selection of all operational parameters of the base station except the
assigned channels; these may include position, transmission power, antenna type, or antenna down-tilt. The BSCP is a superset of the
BSPP (because it includes site selection) and a subset of the WCNDP (because it does not include channel assignment).
Some work has been done on base station configuration using an uncapacitated network model. However, the networks considered
tend to be of a specific type and the solutions derived may not necessarily be generic. A good example can be found in [42], which
assesses the advantage of deploying adaptive antenna arrays in an indoor environment.
The majority of work relating to the BSCP is based on a capacitated network model, and some solutions to the general problem of
base station configuration can be found in [43,44]. In [45] the evolution of a network over time is considered, which is an important
concern in commercial networks where subscriber demand is constantly changing and generally increasing. The ‘connectivity’ of cell
coverage is discussed in [46]; cells that are irregular or fragmented have a detrimental effect on network performance, specifically they
make channel assignment more difficult and they increase the probability of handover for mobile subscribers. In most of the network
models studied, only the transmission of a radio signal from the base station to the mobile station (the downlink) is considered, and it is
assumed that the uplink is either easy to maintain or difficult to model. In [47] simulation of both the uplink and downlink is considered,
and its effect on the optimisation process discussed. The Pareto optimality of the cell planning problem is discussed in [48]; this
approach can provide network designers with valuable insights into the intrinsic compromise’s that must be made in solving a multi-
objective problem such as cell planning.
Some work on the BSCP explicitly considers the channel assignment that follows the completion of a cell plan. In [49] a simple
network model is augmented with channel assignment constraints. A novel approach to including channel assignment in the cell planning
process is used in [50], where lower bounding techniques (as described in Section 1.2.2.3 and [22]) are used as an indicator of the
‘difficulty of channel assignment’ without actually producing a complete assignment. The most comprehensive treatment of the full
WCNP is detailed in [72], in which channels are assigned to optimised cell plans, but the relationship between the cell plan and the
channel plan is not explored in detail.
1.2.4 Shortcomings of Previous Work
This subsection describes some of the shortcomings of previous approaches to the WCNDP. It is important to separate the underlying
network model, by which all candidate network designs must be judged, from the optimisation algorithms employed to create candidate
designs. Much effort has been expended on the application of combinatorial algorithms to classical problems, which, by definition, have
a standard formulation (see [51] for example). Optimisation algorithms can be ‘tailored’[17] to the classical problems because the
underlying evaluation function does not change, and this allows assumptions to be made and shortcuts to be taken in the optimisation
procedure. However, the WCNDP has not reached a universally agreed formulation, and assumptions may not be valid over the set of
all formulations. This implies that the tailoring of algorithms to a particular problem formulation may prove ‘wasted effort’ even if the
formulation of the problem is altered only slightly. Worse still, the bias introduced by a tailored algorithm could exclude sets of good
solutions. In this thesis, more attention is paid to the formulation of the problem than to the design of ‘clever’ optimisation techniques,
and care has been taken to ensure that the optimisation algorithms are generic; that is to say, they do not introduce bias by excluding
possible solutions and, hence, remain applicable to future formulations of the WCNDP. An alternative approach would be to develop a
simpler formulation of the WCNDP and search for the ideal optimisation algorithm with which to solve it. This ideal algorithm would be
highly specific to the problem formulation and, hence, potentially inapplicable to a wider set of problems, furthermore the particular
WCNDP used may not be sufficiently complex to be relevant to industry.
This thesis builds upon the model of a GSM network described in [2]. This model was developed by industry, and is known to be used
by at least two major European mobile telephone network operators. The high availability of data (problem instances) for this model
also favoured its adoption. Other authors have extended this basic model to take account of a variety of different problems (for
example [45] describes a network ‘roll-out’ scenario), and in this thesis an interference model was added, which considered channel
assignments. Channel assignment has been considered in the wider context of cell planning (in work such as [49] and [50]) but only
simple models were used; no work to date had explicitly considered the relationship between cell planning and channel assignment. This
significant omission was addressed in this thesis.
1.3 Thesis Aims and Objectives

The aim of this thesis was the development of techniques for solving the WCNDP, and this general aim was divided into two objectives
that were further divided into specific tasks. The completion of tasks and objectives is explicitly mentioned in the thesis text, and they
are enumerated here to facilitate those references.
1.3.1 Objective O1: Statement of Problem
Previous formulations of the WCNDP do not completely represent the requirements of the mobile telephone network designer, and an
objective of this thesis was the formulation of a more comprehensive WCNDP. The following tasks were completed in order to meet
this objective:
Task T1: Acquisition of industrial data for the simulation of mobile telephone networks. The quality of the data obtained dictates the
accuracy of the simulations and, hence, the relevance of the network designs produced.
Task T2: Mathematical specification of the simulator. To communicate the details of the network simulator concisely and without
ambiguity a mathematical description was derived. Without a clear description the model could not be effectively criticised
or accurately reproduced.
Task T3: Specification of network performance requirements. It was necessary to identify a set of objectives that each network
design must fulfil, as this is the mechanism by which one candidate design may be judged against another. Although such a
specification of requirements is typical in the engineering process, automatic design techniques require that it be expressed
algorithmically.
1.3.2 Objective O2: Development of Solutions
The formulation of the WCNDP derived to meet O1 provided a test-bed for the development of optimisation algorithms. The effective
application of automatic optimisation to the WCNDP is broken down into the following stages:
Task T1: Simple optimisation algorithms were implemented and applied to the WCNDP. The validity of this approach was
demonstrated by the production of high quality network designs in a reasonable time.
Task T2: Assessment of the advantages of separating the CAP from the rest of the WCNDP. In Section 1.2.4 it was observed that
the CAP is rarely considered as part of the WCNDP, and channel assignment (if required) is only done when all other
parameters have been fixed.
Task T3: The optimisation procedures that produced the best network designs were identified. Finding the ‘best’ optimisation
algorithm was not the principal goal of this thesis (as observed in Section 1.2.4), but it was still of interest.
Task T4: The specification of improvements that may be desirable to both the network model and the optimisation methodology.
1.4 Test Platform

When assessing the performance of an optimisation algorithm, the best solution produced must be placed in context by the amount of
computer power that was required to produce it. It is not easy to accurately describe computer power by any single figure (such as the
number of floating point operations performed) as it depends on many factors (such as memory size and hard disk access speed). All of
the results generated in this thesis were done using the same computer operating under the same conditions, as this approach eliminates
(as far as possible) the distortion of results due to platform heterogeneity. Table 1.1 contains all of the defining characteristics of the test
platform, which corresponds to best practice as identified in [52].
Manufacturer Intel
Motherboard Model SE440BX-2
Bus Speed 100MHz
Manufacturer Intel
Processor Model P III
Speed 700 MHz
Size 640 MB
Memory
Speed 100 MHz
Manufacturer Fujitsu
Model MPD3084AT
Hard Disk Size 8·4 GB
Bus EISA ATA-3
Max Transfer Speed 66·6 MB/s
Vendor Microsoft
Name Windows NT
Operating System
Version 4.00.1381 + Service Pack 6
File System NTFS
Vendor Microsoft
Name Visual C++ Professional Edition
Version 6.0 with SP 4
Compiler
Language Used C++
Compile Type Release
Additional Flags /G6 /MD /GX /Ox /Ot /Og /Oi /Op /Ob2
Table 1.1: Test platform specification.
It is important to note that all of the data sets used in this thesis fitted within the (relatively large) RAM of the test platform. Therefore,
the experiment run times were not hampered by overspills into virtual memory, which cause the hard disk to ‘thrash’.
1.5 Thesis Outline

This thesis is divided into eight chapters; this section contains a summary of each chapter’s contents.
Chapter 2 describes the development of a simulation environment for modelling mobile telephone networks, and it includes a
description of data obtained from leading industrial sources. The specific goals of the WCNDP are stated in this chapter.
Chapter 3 presents the results of applying combinatorial optimisation techniques to the WCNDP. A number of simple techniques are
described, tested, and compared.
Chapter 4 describes new approaches to the CAP (part of the WCNDP). The traditional form in which this problem has been
expressed is challenged, and a more realistic approach is described that aims to better represent the problem of spectrum management.
Chapter 5 describes interference surrogates and evaluates them with respect to their ability to predict subscriber cover.
Chapter 6 contains a comparison of the approach described in Chapter 3 to the two-stage process discussed in Chapter 5.
Chapter 7 contains the conclusions that may be drawn from the thesis results, and suggestions for future research on the WCNDP
(including improvements to the design process, and extensions of the underlying network model).
Chapter 2
Network Model
This chapter describes a mathematical model of a cellular mobile-telephone network. It is based around, but not exclusive to, GSM.
The model was developed for the purpose of this thesis, and it is intended to represent industrial models currently in use. It takes
account of network coverage and capacity requirements, and it also considers the effect that channel assignment has on interference.
The Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem (WCNDP), as outlined in Section 1.1.2, is formulated in this chapter.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 2.1 explains some of the issues raised by the specification of the model, Section 2.2
contains a description of the actual model used, and Section 2.3 contains details of the network data sets used in this thesis.
2.1 Simulation Issues

This section contains an explanation of the key design decisions made during the specification of the network simulator. All the data sets
used have been obtained from companies that operate mobile telephone networks, and this has meant that some design decisions are
‘inherited’ and, therefore, inflexible.
2.1.1 Limitations on Prediction Accuracy
Some aspects of mobile telephone networks are impossible to model exactly, for example it is not possible to say at what times a
particular subscriber will make or receive calls. Quantities such as this may only be modelled on a probabilistic or statistical basis, e.g.
80% of telephone calls will be made between the hours of 9am and 5pm. The prediction of network performance (the model’s output)
is limited by the accuracy of network data (the model’s inputs), but it is not easy to quantify the effect that errors in the model’s input
have on the model’s output.
2.1.2 Discretisation
For networks to be simulated using a computer, the data which defines them must be discretised (or digitised). Some network data is
inherently discrete, e.g. the number of base stations, whereas other data is continuous (or analogue), e.g. the azimuth of a directional
antenna. Discretisation of an analogue quantity introduces inaccuracies (or noise). All of the data used in this thesis had been prepared
by network operators, and most decisions regarding discretisation (such as the resolution of the terrain model) cannot, therefore, be
changed.
2.1.3 Rasterisation
A raster is a discrete, regular, and rectangular grid of data. Typically it is two-dimensional (e.g. the picture elements, or pixels, in a
television picture). A co-ordinate vector can uniquely identify the data elements in the grid, and the datum at a particular grid location
may be digital or analogue. The process of converting data into a raster format is known as rasterisation or, sometimes, rendering.
The model used for a mobile telephone network brings together data from a variety of sources. This data does not necessarily conform
to a common standard, which makes interoperability difficult. Rasterisation facilitates interoperability between data sources such as:
· The terrain databases derived from topographical relief maps.
· The vector based building models used for radio propagation prediction in urban areas.
· The call traffic density information. This is sometimes derived from postcode information, which describes discrete regions but is not
constrained by a raster grid.
Not all data needs to be rasterised, for instance the location of base station sites can be described as a free-vector within the network
region without conflicting with other data formats.
2.1.4 Spatial Dimensionality
The model used is essentially two-dimensional. Although some data, such as propagation information, may have been derived from
three-dimensional models, the result is ultimately amalgamated into cells of a two-dimensional raster. The choice of a two-dimensional
model limits the accuracy of prediction, and this is especially true in dense, urban areas where calls may occur in tall buildings. The
advantage of two-dimensional models is in the speed of evaluation.
2.1.5 Call Traffic Prediction
A statistical approach is used to assess the number of subscribers covered. The call traffic (number of calls per hour) expected during
the ‘busy hour’ is amalgamated into a single figure (measured in Erlangs) for each geographic area. This is a typical, conservative,
approach to network capacity planning, i.e. it is implicitly assumed that a network that can accommodate the peak traffic will be able to
accommodate traffic for all other times.
2.1.6 Uplink and Downlink
The network model only simulates the link from the base station to the mobile station (known as the downlink or forward link), and the
uplink is ignored. In general, the quality of the circuitry in the base stations is higher than in the mobiles, and hence the uplink signal can
be more easily distinguished than that of the downlink (making the downlink the limiting factor). The computational complexity of uplink
simulation is prohibitive, and the decision to ignore uplinks is inherited from the network operators (i.e. they do not consider the uplink
in the majority of their network simulations). In this thesis, the simulation techniques used by operators have been adopted in order to
maximise the industrial relevance of the optimisation algorithms developed, but it is worth noting that uplink is considered to be a limiting
factor in CDMA networks and may be explicitly considered during the optimisation process (see [40] for an example).
2.1.7 Fixed Base Station Sites
Base station site rental represents a significant portion of the cost of running a network, typically the sites desired by network designers
(based on their suitability for wireless communications) are not always easy to obtain and may be subject to planning regulations. A
strategy popular with network operators has been to make site-acquisition largely independent of the network design requirements, as
this allows the identification of a large number of potential sites that are easy to obtain (short lead-time) and relatively cheap to occupy
- in the network model these are known as candidate sites. This approach increases the burden on the network design process, as
undesirable sites (such as electricity pylons) must be more intelligently utilised than those that are highly desirable (such as the Eiffel
Tower).
2.1.8 Radio-Propagation Prediction
The radio signal propagation in the network area was precalculated and provided as part of the network data set. The prediction
algorithms used in the network model are based on the COST231 Walfish-Ikegami models (see [53] for further information), but these
propagation algorithms are computationally intensive. The fast simulation of a network relies on the fact that (potentially slow)
propagation predictions can be precomputed, and this is possible for the following reasons:
· Only the downlink is simulated. This means that (potentially complex) uplink propagation predictions can be avoided.
· Base station sites are fixed. Downlink propagation predictions are made from each of the candidate sites to each of the possible
mobile station locations.
· The propagation calculation can be performed independently of most base station parameters. The relative (normalised)
propagation gain can be included in the calculation of signal strength as an independent factor.
Note, base station height does affect the relative propagation, however, the data sets obtained for this thesis do not permit this
parameter to vary. If height were desired to be a variable then each different height could be treated as a different site, as this would
allow the pre-computation of propagation.
The frequency of a radio signal also affects its propagation, but across the range of permitted frequencies the variation in propagation
will be small, therefore the mean frequency is used for the propagation calculation.
2.1.9 Best Server
When modelling the behaviour of base stations in a network it is necessary to know how much call traffic they will be serving. This
allows an estimate to be made of the number of channels each base station will require (see Section 2.1.5). The ‘best server’ of a
mobile station is the base station from which it receives the strongest radio signal, and it is assumed that a mobile station will always
make a call through its best server. This implies that the set of all the mobile stations for which a base station is ‘best server’ gives a
prediction of that base station’s traffic-carrying requirement. The best server model gives a conservative estimate of a network’s traffic
capacity because each base station can only accommodate a fixed amount of traffic, and any traffic above that limit must be considered
lost. In the best server model this ‘lost’ traffic is not allowed to be covered by other base stations - even if they offer interference-free
communication channels. A more accurate estimate of traffic cover can be achieved with a more sophisticated model, but its
disadvantages make best server the most sensible model to adopt. These disadvantages are summarised in the following subsection, but
they are not central to the thesis and may be skipped.
2.1.9.1 The Multiple Server Problem
For the mobile telephone network model used in the thesis, only one base station is a valid server for each test point[18], whereas in
the GSM standard up to six base stations may be considered as valid servers. In practice, if a server were to reach its traffic carrying
capacity, then a mobile subscriber could connect to the network through an alternate server. The conservative assumption in the thesis
model means that the predicted traffic service will always be less than or equal to the traffic service that could occur in practice.
A subtle problem was encountered when attempting to extend the thesis model to include the possibility of multiple servers, and no
evaluation algorithm could be found that did not have a worst case time-complexity (see [54] for background) that grew exponentially
with the number of potential servers.
Figure 2.1: An abstracted traffic cover problem using multiple servers.
Figure 2.1 presents an abstraction of the cell plan for 3 base stations A, B, and C, which form cells CellA, CellB, and CellC
respectively. CellA contains test points r1 to r6 and CellB contains test points r4 to r8 , in a multiple server model the points in the
intersection of CellA and CellB may be served by either base station A or base station B. Assume that each test point represents 10 Er
of traffic and that each base station may serve up to 30 Er of traffic, therefore each base station may serve a maximum of 3 test points.
By inspection it can be seen that if base station A serves r1 , r2 , and r3 , base station B serves r4 , r5 , and r7 , and base station C serves
r6 , r8 , and r9 then full coverage can be achieved (i.e. 3 test points per base station). The problem lies in identifying which points to
allocate to which base stations; consider the evaluation procedure below that allocates points to base stations in the (arbitrary) order
they have been defined:
1. Points r1 , r2 , and r3 are allocated to base station A.
2. Points r4 , r5 , and r6 are allocated to base station B.
3. Point r7 could only have gone to base station B, but B has already reached capacity and hence it must be discarded
4. Points r8 and r9 are allocated to base station C.
Due to the discarding of test point r7 , the total traffic coverage will be 10 Er less than the potential maximum (found previously by
inspection).
A variety of approaches were tried to overcome this problem but no suitable algorithm was discovered, all heuristic based approaches
tested (for example, ordering test points by number of potential servers) were found to be defeated by pathological cases. An algorithm
based on hypergraphs was devised that guaranteed delivery of the correct traffic coverage, however, analysis showed it to have a
worst case time complexity that increased exponentially with the number of potential servers, and testing proved this led to long and
unpredictable evaluation times. The performance of this algorithm was compared to the simple algorithm employed in the thesis, and in
no test case did the traffic prediction from the best server model fall more than 5% below the actual (multiple server model) value. This
was felt to be an acceptable inaccuracy, especially as the estimate was always conservative. Note that this problem can only occur in
situations where maximum base station capacity is reached by a base station, if all base stations are operating below capacity then the
best server prediction will be no less accurate.
2.1.10 Fuzzy Servers
Although the ‘best server’ assumption is essential in determining a base stations channel requirements, it is not safe to assume that
mobile stations will communicate exclusively through their best server. The best server of a mobile station may not be the one predicted
by the simulator, due, for example, to inaccuracies in the prediction of radio-signal strength. To decrease the chance of these ‘server
ambiguities’ creating unforeseen interference, a set of potential servers is identified. This comprises base stations that provide the mobile
station with a sufficiently strong signal to ‘capture’ it from its (predicted) best server. The set of potential servers is known as the fuzzy-
server set, and it includes all the base stations that provide the mobile station with a signal within a fixed tolerance of the best-server
signal. This tolerance corresponds, in part, to the cumulative error expected in the predicted radio-signal strengths.
2.1.11 Fixed Spectrum
A network operator will typically lease the use of a fixed portion of the radio spectrum, and once the spectrum is leased there is no
benefit in not using all of it. The wider the portion of spectrum available, the easier it is to minimise signal interference. In the network
model it is assumed that a fixed spectrum is available for communication. Section 1.2.2.1 contains a summary of the fixed and variable
approaches to spectrum management.
2.1.12 Handover
Handover (or handoff) is the transition of a mobile from one server to another. This is most usually between adjacent base stations in a
network, and occurs as the user passes out of one cell and into another – thus ensuring an uninterrupted service for mobile users. Base
stations have the ability to change communication channels mid-call, and these changes may also be refered to as handover.
The network model takes no account of ‘handover’ performance. Handover models have been proposed (examples include [2]) but
their accuracy is not well defined. Suggestions for the addition of handover performance models are included in Section 7.2.1.
2.2 Description of Model

The model used for the simulation of mobile-telephone networks is an extension of the one used in [2]. Network data sets that
complement this model have been obtained from two network operators: four data sets from Operator A and one data set from
Operator B (this corresponds to Task T1 of Objective O1 in Section 1.3). In the original model, interference was not explicitly
calculated, but in the new model it was decided to include the assignment of base station channels, thereby allowing the simulation of
signal interference. The following thesis subsections describe all the elements of the network model (this corresponds to Task T2 of
Objective O1 in Section 1.3).
2.2.1 Summary of Data Set
The data sets for the network model consist of the following elements:
· Network working area boundary.
· Subscriber service and demand requirement maps.
· Candidate sites for base station placement, including radio propagation information.
· Base station antenna types.
· Radio spectrum availabilty and characteristics.
The following subsections describe these elements in more detail.

2.2.2 Working Area
A network, N, contains a working area, and points in the working area may be described by their x and y co-ordinates. Two types of
point are located on the working area:
· Points at which a wireless service is required (known as test points)
· Candidate (or potential) sites where base stations may be positioned.
The test point data forms a two-dimensional raster, where the resolution of the raster grid along the x-axis (east-west) and y-axis
(north-south) is given by and respectively. The size of each test point is the same for both the x and y axes, and is
denoted by .
Figure 2.2: Rasterisation of the network working area.
2.2.3 Test Points
Network N contains a finite set of test points[19] R, where denotes the ith test point in R. Test points discretely approximate a
continuous subsection of the working area. A test point, , is uniquely defined by its position vector .
Figure 2.3: The test point layout in NetworkA3.
Figure 2.3 shows an example set of test points; the black border defines the extent of the working area, and test points are coloured
light blue.
2.2.3.1 Traffic Volume
Telephone calls may arise[20] in the area represented by test point , and the expected volume of call traffic is given by
(measured in Erlangs). Some test points are not expected to generate a significant volume of call traffic; hence the corresponding
will be zero.
Figure 2.4: The test point traffic volumes in NetworkA3.

Figure 2.4 shows an example of test point traffic volumes in a network. Test points with no traffic are coloured light blue, and test
points with traffic are coloured red in proportion to the traffic volume (light red indicates low traffic volume and dark red indicates high
traffic volume).
2.2.3.2 Service Threshold
A test point, , has a minimum field-strength requirement known as its service threshold. If a test point receives a radio signal
(from at least one base station) that is greater than or equal to this threshold, it is said to be serviced.
Figure 2.5: The test point service thresholds in NetworkB1.
Figure 2.5 shows an example of the distribution of service thresholds in a network; dark areas contain test points with high service
thresholds and light areas contain test points with low service thresholds. The pixel-intensity scale used in the diagram is logarithmically
proportional to the threshold value.
2.2.4 Candidate Sites
Candidate sites are the positions at which base stations may be placed. Network N contains a finite set of candidate sites S, where
denotes the lth site in S. Site is defined uniquely by its position vector .
Figure 2.6: The site positions in NetworkB1.
Figure 2.6 shows an example of site positions in a network. Sites are shown as dark blue squares with white centres.
2.2.5 Antenna Types
Network N contains definitions of two distinct classes of antenna: directional and omni-directional. Antennae of both types are
members of the set D, where denotes the mth antenna in D. An antenna is characterised by two diagrams: one tabulating the
horizontal loss and the other tabulating the vertical loss, and both diagrams are defined between 0º and 359º with a resolution of 1º.
2.2.5.1 Antenna Constraint
The following constraint exists between the two classes of antenna: if a site accommodates a base station with an omni-directional
antenna, it may accommodate no more base stations. This represents a hard-constraint on the network design, but it is enforced
as a soft-constraint, i.e. network designs that break this rule are valid but are always considered to be inferior to network designs that
do not. This approach makes the design of optimisation algorithms easier, as all possible network designs are valid. However, no final
design is accepted if it breaks the antenna constraint.
2.2.5.2 Horizontal Loss
The horizontal loss of antenna is characterised by the function , where is the angle, projected onto the
horizontal plane, between ‘a vector from the antenna to the receiver’ and ‘a vector along which the antenna is pointing’.
Figure 2.7: The geometry of the horizontal loss calculation for directional antennae.
Consider a directional antenna at site (as shown in Figure 2.7), the antenna is pointing at an angle from true north
(known as its azimuth). To calculate the horizontal component of the antenna loss experienced by test point it is necessary to
compute the angle :
where is the angle, relative to north, of a vector to :
where is a function that returns the vector-safe inverse tangent[21].
Note that function is defined as a look-up table with the angle given in degrees between 0º and 359º, therefore the angle
calculation is ultimately rounded to the nearest degree.
2.2.5.3 Vertical Loss
The vertical loss of antenna is characterised by the function , where is the angle between ‘a vector from the
antenna to the receiver’ (declination) and ‘a vector along which the antenna is pointing’, projected onto ‘a vertical plane along which the
antenna direction vector lies’. Note that if no clear path exists between the antenna and the receiver, the angle of declination is taken
from the antenna to the top of the highest incident peak on-route to the receiver.
Figure 2.8: The geometry of the vertical loss calculation for antennae.
Consider an antenna at site (as shown in Figure 2.8), which is tilted at an angle from the horizontal. To calculate the
vertical component of the loss experienced by test point it is necessary to compute the angle :
where is the angle-of-incidence (AI) from site to test point . All of the AI values are precomputed from the topographical
data that describes the network area. These precomputed values are stored in a look-up table, and de-referenced by the site and test
point indices.
Figure 2.9: The angles-of-incidence for a site in NetworkA4.
Figure 2.9 shows an example of the angle-of-incidence set for one site in a network; the site position is marked by a dark-blue square
with a white centre. Around the base of the site, the angles-of-incidence are positive (shown in green); further away from the site, the
angles-of-incidence turn negative (shown in red); white areas are those in which the angles-of-incidence are between -0·5º and +0·5º.
Note that function is defined as a look-up table with the angle given in degrees between -180º and +180º; hence the angle
calculation is ultimately rounded to the nearest degree.
2.2.6 Channels
Network N contains the definition of a finite and ordered set of channels C, where denotes the k th channel in C.
2.2.6.1 Channel Separation Gain
Receivers are tuned to receive signals on specific channels, and any received signal not employing this channel will be attenuated – the
greater the difference (between the channel to which the receiver is tuned and the channel on which the received signal was
transmitted), the greater the attenuation.
If a receiver, tuned to channel , receives a signal, transmitted on channel , the effective power of the
received signal is attenuated. The effective gain applied to the received signal is given by the function . The range of
the function is given by:
2.2.6.2 Channel Traffic Capacity

The traffic carrying capacity of a given number of channels n is denoted , and is described in Table 2.1. Note that these
figures are derived by the operators, and the method used for their generation is based on a heuristically adjusted version of Erlangs
formula (as described in [9]).
Number of channels n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Traffic Capacity in 2.9 8.2 15 22 28 35.5 43 56

Erlangs
Table 2.1: Traffic capacity vs. number allocated base station channels.
The number of channels required by a base station is encapsulated in the function , which returns the number of channels
whose capacity is greater than or equal to call volume t.
2.2.7 Base Stations
Network N contains the definition of a finite set of base stations B, where denotes the j th base station in B. Base stations occupy
the candidate sites defined by S. The maximum number of base stations that can occupy one site is constant and denoted by
. Therefore the maximum number of base stations in a network is given by:
2.2.7.1 Activation
Boolean parameter is true if base station is active; if a base station is not active it has no influence on the network. The set of
active base stations is given by:
and the number of active base stations is given by:
2.2.7.2 Site Occupied
Base station occupies site , note that base stations may share each site. The set of occupied sites
is given by:
and the number of occupied sites is given by:
2.2.7.3 Antenna Type
The type of antenna used by base station is given by .
The set of sites at which multiple base stations employ omni-directional antennae (thereby breaking the antenna constraint described in
Section 2.2.5.1) is given by:
where function returns true if antenna is omni-directional, otherwise it returns false.
The number of sites on which multiple base stations employ omni-directional antennae is given by:
2.2.7.4 Transmission Power
The transmission power employed by base station is given by . The lower limit of is given by and
transmission power is divided into discrete intervals, each one being 2dB (a factor of ~1·58) higher than its predecessor.
From this we can calculate the maximum transmission power:
2.2.7.5 Azimuth
The horizontal angle, or azimuth, of the antenna used by base station is given by , and it is stored in one-degree intervals in
the range .
2.2.7.6 Tilt
The vertical angle, or tilt, of the antenna used by base station is given by , and it is stored in one-degree intervals in the range
2.2.7.7 Channel Assignment
A set of channels is allocated to each base station, where the k th channel allocated to base station is denoted by . The
maximum number of channels any base station may use is given by .
The link is defined as being the part of the base station to which channels are assigned - each link requiring the allocation of exactly
one channel. This convention is adopted to simplify the description of the network design algorithms in Chapter 3.
2.2.7.8 Example
Figure 2.10 shows an example network with two active base stations:
· One base station has a directional antenna, which is indicated by a magenta coloured line originating from the base station’s site.
The angle at which it leaves the site is the antenna azimuth (60º) and its length is proportional to (the logarithm of) the base station
transmission power (0·4W)
· The other base station has an omni-directional antenna, which is indicated by a magenta coloured circle. The centre of the circle
indicates the base stations site and the circles radius is proportional to (the logarithm of) the base stations transmission power
(0·4W).
Figure 2.10: Two active base stations in NetworkA4.

Due to presentation limitations, tilt, channel assignment, and antenna type are not shown in the diagram.
2.2.8 Signal Path Loss
Signal propagation information is defined in a look-up table. The normalised loss experienced by a signal going from site to test
point is given by .
Figure 2.11: The propagation gain from a site in NetworkA2.
Figure 2.11 shows an example of the path loss from one site in a network (the site position is marked with a dark blue square with a
white centre). Around the site is the area with the lowest propagation loss (shown in dark grey); the test points further from the site
have higher losses (shown light grey). A river (or, at least, its effect on signal propagation) can be seen passing through the working
area from the north-west to the south-east. The pixel-intensity scale used in the diagram is logarithmically proportional to the path loss.
2.2.9 Radio Field-Strength Calculation
Test points receive signals from every active base station. The field strength due to each base station is a product of the base station’s
transmission power, the normalised path loss, and the horizontal and vertical antenna losses[22].
The field strength of the radio signal at test point due to base station is denoted by :
where and
and are the horizontal and vertical angles from the antenna to the test point, and they are given by:
and
2.2.9.1 Example
Figure 2.12 shows a single active base station in an example network. The base station has a directional antenna with an azimuth of 60º,
a transmission power of 0·4W, and a tilt of 0º. Each pixel represents a test point, and the pixel intensity is logarithmically proportional
to the signal strength (black being the highest).
Figure 2.12: The signal strength due to an active base station in NetworkA4.
2.2.10 Serviced Test Points
Test point is serviced if at least one received base station signal is greater than or equal to its signal threshold . The set of
serviced test points is therefore given by:
and the number of serviced test points is given by:

2.2.10.1 Example
Figure 2.13 shows an example network in which the serviced test points are coloured in light green; the base station configuration is the
same as was used for Figure 2.12.
Figure 2.13: An example of serviced test points in NetworkA4.
2.2.11 Best Server
The best server of a test point is the base station from which the signal with the highest field strength is received. If the received signal
from two or more base stations is equal, then the one with the lowest index is chosen. For a serviced test point , the
best server of is denoted by :
2.2.11.1 Base Station Cell
The set of test points for which base station is the best server is known as the cell of , and it is denoted by :
2.2.12 Base Station Demand
Demand is the number of channels required by a base station. The demand, , of base station is dependent on
the volume of traffic, denoted , in its cell:
Now, the number of channels available is limited to , hence the traffic successfully serviced by base station b is given by:
The number of channels, , required to accommodate traffic volume is given by:
Base stations that cover no traffic still require at least one channel if they are to contribute to general area coverage. The demand of
base station is therefore given by:
2.2.13 Traffic Service
The total volume of traffic serviced by all the active base stations in the network is given by:
This corresponds to the maximum potential traffic cover, or, in other words, the traffic cover that would be achieved in the absence of
interference.
2.2.14 Fuzzy-Server Set
For test point a set of servers is defined to contain all base stations that provide a signal within the fuzzy-server threshold (the
fuzzy server model is discussed in Section 2.1.10). This threshold is the product of (a gain constant) and the signal from the best
server of :
where
2.2.15 Carrier to Interference Ratio
The carrier-to-interference-ratio (CIR) for test point is the worst-case CIR from each of the servers in the fuzzy
server set:
where denotes the worst-case CIR found using each of the channels of base station :
where denotes the CIR at test point when it is tuned to the k th channel of base station . It is given by the ratio of the
server signal strength to the sum of all the other, interfering, signals[23]:
where is the strength of the serving signal:
and is the sum of all the interfering signals:

where is the interference due to all the channels of base station :
Note that, for simplicity of expression, is composed of two terms: and . Term includes the server signal as part of the
total noise, and then it is explicitly removed by term .
The adoption of the worst-case CIR is pessimistic, and may lead to an underestimate of test point cover. It might be argued that the
best-case CIR is more representative because only one interferference-free channel is required for communication. However, if this
channel was the only interference-free channel available across an entire cell it might not be able to accommodate all of the call traffic in
that cell.
2.2.15.1 Example
Figure 2.14 shows an example of the CIR calculation for two active base stations, where the base stations have the same configuration
as those described in Section 2.2.7.8. Each pixel represents a test point, and the pixel intensity is logarithmically proportional to the
CIR at that test point (black being the highest). For the purpose of illustration, all the networks test points are included in this figure, and
not just those that are serviced.
Figure 2.14: An example CIR calculation for two active base stations in NetworkA4.
2.2.16 Test point Cover
A test point is covered if it’s CIR, , is greater than or equal to the global CIR threshold . The set of covered test points
is given by:
therefore the number of covered test points, , is given by:
2.2.16.1 Example
Figure 2.15 shows an example network with two active base stations, where the base stations have the same configuration as those
described in Section 2.2.7.8. The non-covered test points are coloured blue, the serviced test points are coloured light green, and the
covered test points are coloured dark green. It can be seen that cover is achieved close to the base station sites, but cover becomes
more difficult as the distance from the base station increases.
Figure 2.15: An example of test point cover for two base stations in NetworkA4.
2.2.17 Traffic Cover
The traffic covered by base station is denoted , it is calculated in the same way as the traffic service (see
Section 2.2.13) except that only covered test points from the cell of may contribute:
The total volume of traffic successfully covered by the whole network of base stations is given by:
2.2.18 Network Designs
Most network parameters (such as path loss and test point positions) are fixed, except for the following base station configuration
parameters:
· Activation,
· Antenna Type,
· Transmission Power,
· Azimuth,
· Tilt,
· Channel Assignment,
A complete and valid allocation of base station parameters is known as a network design.
2.3 Performance Evaluation

To evaluate and compare design performances it is necessary to define what the design goals are (this corresponds to Task T3 of
2.3.1 Design Goals
Like any business, the network operators wish to maximise profits. They must maximise revenue and minimise overheads. For a
network operator to succeed, the network design goals must represent the economic goals as closely as possible.
2.3.1.1 Revenues and Overheads
Revenue is generated principally from telephone calls. The network model provides the operator with a prediction of the volume of call
traffic and, hence, the expected call revenue. Examples of the overheads that contribute to the total cost of running the network include:
· Base station equipment leasing.

· Base station site rental.
· Staff office rental.
· Personnel salaries.
· Radio spectrum rental.
The overheads can be divided into two categories:
· Dynamic costs, which grow with the size of the network (e.g. base station site rental, equipment leasing).
· Static costs, which must be met regardless of the network size (e.g. office rental, salaries, radio-spectrum rental).
No overhead component can be exclusively categorised in this way, but it is a distinction that lends itself neatly to analysis.
2.3.1.2 Profit and Loss
Consider a network of size n (arbitrary units), and let network revenue be a function of n and some constant T that represents the
normalised value of providing telephony:
Let network overheads be a function of n and some constant that represents the normalised cost of providing telephony. The
overheads also include the static cost component :
Profit is given by Revenue - Overhead, therefore
In order to turn a profit, the network operator must ensure that the revenue exceeds the overhead. The equation above identifies two
key-factors controlling a network’s profitability: the network size, n, and the call-profit-per-unit-network, . These
expressions must both be maximised in order to maximise profits.
2.3.1.3 Translating Business Analysis into Engineering Requirements
The simple analysis in the previous section showed that high profitability is achieved in a large network that provides efficient telephony.
This must be translated into a network design requirement. An ideal network design will:
· Be available for use by the maximum number of subscribers - every mobile station in a network should be able to instantiate or
receive telephone calls at any time.
· Minimise the cost of the network infrastructure.

2.3.1.4 Data Set Limitations
The available data for the network design problem does not include details of network infrastructure costs, furthermore the subscriber
information is only given in terms of call volume which is, at best, a relative indicator of call revenue. Because of the omission of
absolute monetary-values in the network data sets, the design requirements were simplified. The design requirements are listed below in
order of significance:
1. Maximisation of subscriber coverage.
2. Maximisation of area coverage.
3. Minimisation of the number of sites used.
4. Minimisation of the number of base stations deployed.
If more information were available then this design specification could be improved, for example it would be simple to include an
‘efficiency’ requirement such as the maximisation of the ratio of call revenue to site rental. Note that site rental is assumed to be
considerably more expensive than the telephony equipment, hence the relative significance of metrics 3 and 4; this assumption is based
on the experience of network operators.
2.3.2 Performance Comparison
Comparing the performance of different network designs is done by comparing network performance metrics. Each performance
metric has a relative significance, and the networks are compared metric-by-metric. These metrics are listed below in order of
significance:
1. Number of co-sited omni-directional antennae,
2. Volume of traffic covered,
3. Volume of traffic serviced,
4. Number of test points covered,
5. Number of test points serviced,
6. Number of occupied sites,
7. Number of active base stations,
Metrics 1,6 and 7 should be minimised and metrics 2,3,4 and 5 should be maximised.
The performance of a network design is expressed as a function . If network designs and contain no co-
sited omni-directional antennae and produce traffic cover values and respectively then outperforms if
. However, if then a comparison of the next significant metrics, and , must be performed;
if these two metrics are also equal then comparison continues to the next metric and so on. This relationship may be expressed as
follows:
This expression is not particularly clear, but it is expressed better algorithmically, i.e. as a function that compares the performance of
two network configurations and returns the result as a boolean (see Figure 2.16).
Figure 2.16: Comparison operator for network performance metrics.
2.4 Data Sets

Data sets have been obtained from two leading network operators; four networks from Operator A (NetworkA1, NetworkA2,
NetworkA3, and NetworkA4) and one network from Operator B (NetworkB1). There are some qualitative differences between the
data sets provided by the different operators, and the network model used in this thesis represents a synthesis of ideas from both
operators.
Network
Quantity
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
195 323 248 205 300
844 287 229 245 300

200 m 200 m 200 m 50 m 100 m
29954 74845 17393 48512 90000
0 Er 0 Er 0 Er 0 Er 0 Er
1·11 Er 0·64 Er 1·00 Er 1·43 Er 27·39 Er
3210·69 Er 2787·33 Er 2987·82 Er 2651·51 Er 34376·0 Er
-90 dB -90 dB -90 dB -90 dB -134 dB
-90 dB -90 dB -90 dB -90 dB -96 dB
250 320 568 244 91
3 3 3 3 3
-212 dB -200 dB -184 dB -180 dB -209 dB
-67 dB - 54 dB -49 dB -50 dB -77 dB
-68·46º -84·91º -86·34º -86·18º -43·48º
4·86º 11·34º 24·47º 84·54º 15·23º

3 3 3 3 3
1 1 1 1 1
54 54 54 54 50
26 dBm 26 dBm 26 dBm 26 dBm 26 dBm
55 dBm 55 dBm 55 dBm 55 dBm 55 dBm
7 7 7 7 8
14 dB 14 dB 14 dB 14 dB 12 dB
-2 dB -2 dB -2 dB -2 dB -4 dB
k=0
0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 0 dB 0dB
k=1 -18 dB -18 dB -18 dB -18 dB -9 dB
k=2 -50 dB -50 dB -50 dB -50 dB -41 dB
k=3 -58 dB -58 dB -58 dB -58 dB -48 dB
k>3 0 0 0 0 0
Table 2.2: Summary of statistics for network data sets.
2.4.1 NetworkA1
Roads dominate NetworkA1, and a service is required on and around the roads (indicated by the presence of test points). Significant
call-traffic volume is seen on the roads, probably in proportion to the volume of car traffic.
(a) (b) (c)
Candidate site density is high where there are test points, but it does not vary significantly with traffic density.
The minimum number of base stations required to accommodate the total traffic is given by:
hence, for NetworkA1:
base stations
The minimum number of sites is given by:
hence, for NetworkA1:
sites
which represents 10% of the candidate sites available.
2.4.2 NetworkA2
NetworkA2 represents a rural region. The majority of call-traffic is found on a strip (possibly a road) that runs from west to south-east
through the network, and traffic is also found in a central cluster (possibly the town centre). Examination of the propagation loss files
suggests that a river runs through the centre of the network alongside the road (see Figure 2.11).
(a)
(b)
(c)
Candidate sites are distributed evenly across the working area, but some sites lie in the suspected river. It is possible that the river is in
fact underground (and is still able to effect propagation) or that candidate sites have been placed randomly for the purpose of creating
test data. Candidate site density does not vary significantly with test point density or call traffic density.
The minimum number of base stations required to accommodate the total traffic in NetworkA2 is 65 and, hence, the minimum number
of sites required is 22 - this represents 6·9% of the candidate sites.
2.4.3 NetworkA3
NetworkA3 probably represents a small town. The centre of the network contains two large clusters of call-traffic; the highest density
of call-traffic is on a strip that circles the centre (possibly a ring-road). Significant call-traffic is found on several ‘spokes’ (probably
roads) radiating from the networks centre.
(a)
(b) (c)
Candidate-site density varies significantly with call-traffic density; in particular two dense clusters of sites correspond very closely with
dense regions of call traffic. The remaining sites are distributed evenly throughout the working area.
2.4.4 NetworkA4
NetworkA4 possibly represents an urban or suburban region; the call-traffic density is fairly uniform across the working area, as is the
candidate site density. The resolution of this network (50m) is the highest of any of the data sets, and this suggests that it is a ‘close-up’
of an area with high traffic density.
(a)
(b) (c)
2.4.5 NetworkB1
In NetworkB1 high call-traffic density occurs in clusters, especially in the north-west corner of the working area.
(a) (b)
(d)
(c)
Figure 2.21: NetworkB1 (a) test points, (b) traffic densities, (c) candidate site positions, and (d) service thresholds.
Candidate-site density does not vary significantly with call-traffic density; in fact there are very few sites in the region of highest call-
density (the north-west). This almost certainly makes covering the traffic in that region more difficult.
There are some significant differences between this network and the networks obtained from Operator A:
· The total traffic in this network is much higher – more than 10 times the total of NetworkA1.
· The maximum traffic represented by one test point is 27·39 Er, whereas the highest value for the other networks was 1·43 Er –
almost 20 times smaller. This means that some ‘well-dimensioned’ cells (i.e. cells which contain nearly the maximum traffic they can
hold without covering an un-necessarily large area) could be 2 or 3 test points in size. This makes good network designs harder to
find, and it also indicates that the resolution of the test point grid is too low to enable the simulation of reliable cell-plans.
· The number of candidate sites is much lower. This is possibly because the data is derived from an existing network (i.e. candidate
sites represent those currently occupied) and not augmented with extra sites. In the other networks the addition of extra sites
increases the cell-planning options.
· In the previous networks, the service threshold was a constant -90dBm, whereas in this network less than 2% of test points are
that easy to cover. In fact the average service threshold is approximately –70dBm (a factor of 100 larger than the average for the
other networks). This makes the test points harder to cover, or, at least, necessitates the use of higher transmission powers, which
reduces the scope of relative power trade-offs for interference management.
· The channel separation gain is nearly 10 times as strict for this network as it is for the other networks. This makes interference
management by channel separation more difficult.
The minimum number of base stations required to accommodate the total traffic in NetworkB1 is 593 and, hence, the minimum number
of sites required is 198. This is more than twice as many sites as are defined for this network; therefore the total network traffic is not
coverable. The largest amount of traffic that may be covered (assuming that each of the 91 sites accommodates 3 base stations, each of
which can handle 58 Er) is 91´3´58 = 15834 Er. This is 46·06% of the total network traffic.
Chapter 3
Network Design – Part 1

This chapter describes the application of simple combinatorial optimisation techniques to the Wireless Capacitated Network Design
Problem (WCNDP), the details of which are described in the previous chapter. The goal of the work described in this chapter was the
identification of optimisation algorithms that produce high quality network designs in a reasonable time (this corresponds to Task T1 of
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 3.2 describes algorithms for initialising network designs, which are improved by the
search algorithms described in Section 3.3, finally Section 3.4 discusses the factors that limit search efficiency.
3.1 Choice of Optimisation Algorithms

For all of the different problems described in this thesis, a wide variety of optimisation algorithms were trialed. An empirical approach
was taken to development, in which common heuristics such as hillclimbing, simulated annealing, and genetic algorithms were compared
using short run-times. Some poorly performing algorithms could be quickly rejected, allowing more time for the remaining algorithms to
evolve. The algorithms detailed in this chapter (and in the thesis as a whole) are those that produced the best network designs.
3.2 Initialisation Algorithms

Initialisation is characterised by the creation of a single network design; no valid intermediate designs are created during an initialisation
procedure. Initialisation algorithms create network designs, which may be modified by search algorithms.
3.2.1 Algorithm: InitBlank
A special case initialisation is the greenfield or empty network, this is a network design in which no base stations are active and hence
no cover can exist. These network designs, although useless in themselves, are used as the starting point for other design algorithms.
3.2.1.1 Description
Although no base stations are active, it is necessary to select valid parameters for in-active base stations. If a subsequently applied
search algorithm activates a base station, then it is not necessarily going to adjust the base station’s parameters. Choosing random initial
parameters reduces bias, e.g. if all base stations were allocated an azimuth of 0º this would give them a ‘northern’ bias.
Figure 3.1: Algorithm InitBlank.

No results are included for this algorithm, as the network designs it produces have no effect.
3.2.2 Algorithm InitRandomA
Network design parameters (such as azimuth or antenna type) uniquely define a candidate network design, and Algorithm
InitRandomA (outlined in Figure 3.2) does not favour the production of any particular network design. Algorithm InitRandomA aims
to sample with equal probability from the set of all possible network designs.
The number of active base stations in each candidate design is between 1 and (with a uniform probability distribution). Note that
this requirement forces the probability distribution of the number of occupied sites to be non-uniform[24].
3.2.2.1 Description
A set of n base stations is randomly activated. For each active base station, all parameters (azimuth, tilt, transmit power, and channel
assignment) are chosen randomly, and the antenna used by each active base station is chosen at random from the set of directional
antennae. If only one base station is active at a site then there is a probability, fixed at the beginning of the algorithm’s execution, that the
base station will be re-allocated an omni-directional antenna (selected at random from the set of directional antennae).
Figure 3.2: Algorithm InitRandomA.
3.2.2.2 Example
The following is an example of the output from algorithm InitRandomA. The target network was NetworkA4, the number of active
base stations chosen was 21, and the probability of mounting an omni-directional antenna on sites with one base station was 0·15. The
network performance for the example configuration was: 16·3% test point cover, and 10·6% traffic cover.
Figure 3.3: An example network design produced by InitRandomA.
It can be seen in Figure 3.3 that there is a mix of occupied and un-occupied sites. The occupied sites have one or two active base
stations, and some of those with just one base station have an omni-directional antenna.
3.2.2.3 Results
In order to obtain a statistical view of the algorithm’s performance it was run on each network for 20 hours. The results are summarised
in Table 3.1.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Min 0·00 1·54 1·44 0·51 0·00
Max 44·51 44·22 42·82 57·40 1·84

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
Average 25·95 28·02 25·81 32·73 0·61
s.d. 8·47 9·17 9·71 12·42 0·32
Min 0·00 9·96 5·08 0·42 0·00
Max 74·52 56·09 52·46 64·11 16·24

Test Point Cover
(% of total)
Average 34·20 38·43 32·38 39·14 6·44
s.d. 8·30 10·45 10·54 12·91 2·96
Min 0·40 0·31 0·18 0·41 1·10
Max 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Average 76·17 74·30 75·34 72·65 76·73
s.d. 28·50 28·92 27·82 28·75 27·54
Min 0·13 0·10 0·06 0·14 0·37
Active Base Max 99·20 99·90 99·88 100·00 100·00

Stations
(% of total) Average 51·57 50·18 50·10 46·81 52·07
s.d. 28·95 29·93 28·68 28·20 29·18
Number of Design Evaluations 660 248 703 480 1292
Table 3.1: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomA.
The following graphs show, in more detail, the result of applying InitRandomA to NetworkA4.
Figure 3.4: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.5: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.6: The distribution of site occupancy for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.7: The distribution of number of base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.7 shows that the distribution of the number of active base stations is approximately uniform (as intended), and consequently the
distribution of the number of occupied sites, as shown in Figure 3.6, is skewed, i.e. the instances of high site occupancy occur most
often.
The next set of graphs aims to show the correlation between the different network performance metrics, and NetworkA4 is again given
as an example.
Figure 3.8: Graph of traffic cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.9: Graph of traffic cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
It can be seen from Figure 3.8 that there is a strong positive correlation between the number of active base stations and the traffic
cover. A similar correlation between traffic cover and site occupancy is shown in Figure 3.9.
Figure 3.10: Graph of test point cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.11: Graph of test point cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.
It can be seen from Figure 3.10 that there is a strong positive correlation between the number of active base stations and the test point
cover. A similar correlation between test point cover and site occupancy is shown in Figure 3.11.
The positive correlation between base station activity and traffic coverage suggests that to maximise the average traffic coverage of
network configurations produced by initialisation method InitRandomA, all base stations should be active, and similarly all sites should
be occupied.
3.2.3 Algorithm: InitRandomB
Consider the example network configuration shown in Figure 3.3 - a detail from which is shown in Figure 3.12 indicating the active
base station of interest. None of the test points served by this base station (points where the field-strength due to the base station is in
excess of the service threshold) are covered, i.e. the carrier-to-interference-ratio (CIR) at all of these points is insufficient. To
understand why, it is necessary to examine the channel assignment. The base station has a demand of 7 channels, and , , ,
, , , and were allocated. Note that channel was allocated twice, resulting in the co-channel rejection ratio (0dB)
being the upper limit to the CIR for all points served by this base station[25]. As the target CIR is 14dB it is impossible for this base
station to cover any points. Note also that channels and are adjacent; this leads to a similar (but weaker) upper limit to the
CIR, i.e. the adjacent-channel rejection ratio, which for Operator A is 18dB. If the co-channel assignments were removed, this weaker
upper limit would not necessarily prevent test point coverage; however, it is within 4dB of the CIR and would be best avoided. For
Operator B the target CIR is 12dB and the adjacent-channel rejection ratio is 9dB, therefore adjacent-channel allocations would
prevent coverage as surely as co-channel allocations.
Figure 3.12: A subsection of the example network generated by InitRandomA.
Algorithm InitRandomB is a modified version of InitRandomA that employs an improved channel selection process. It was shown
above that a base station is guaranteed to fail if any two allocated channels are equal, and likely to fail if any two allocated channels are
adjacent[26]. Algorithm InitRandomB selects channels at random such that a two-channel separation is maintained between channels
allocated to the same base station - this is an example of an embedded heuristic (see [12]). Note that the channel-selection bias is
only designed to avoid channel ‘clashes’ in the same base station, not between base stations (i.e. co-sector interference not co-site or
far-site interference).
3.2.3.1 Description
InitRandomB is identical to InitRandomA except for the channel selection process. For each base station a list of all valid channels is
constructed, and selections are made at random from the channels in this list. Selected channels, and those adjacent to them, are
deleted from the list. This selection and deletion process is repeated until the base station has received its full complement of channels.
Figure 3.13: Algorithm InitRandomB.
3.2.3.2 Example
The following is an example of the output from algorithm InitRandomB. The target network was NetworkA4, the number of active
base stations was chosen as 21, and the probability of mounting an omni-directional antenna (on sites with one base station) was 0·15.
The performance for the example design was: 29·6% test point cover, and 15·5% traffic cover.
Figure 3.14: An example network design produced by InitRandomB.
3.2.3.3 Results
In order to obtain a statistical view of the algorithms performance it was run on each network for 20 hours. The results are summarised
in Table 3.2.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Min 1·34 4·74 2·38 4·61 0·00
Traffic Cover Max 53·95 50·58 48·87 60·55 4·69
(% of total)
Average 33·58 33·46 29·40 40·81 2·36
s.d. 9·05 9·20 9·98 11·78 1·01
Min 10·13 23·94 10·56 13·67 0·02
Max 57·26 58·33 82·05 67·85 23·42

Test Point Cover
(% of total)
Average 41·48 43·56 35·93 47·82 13·05
s.d. 6·88 8·70 9·95 10·52 5·23
Min 0·40 1·56 0·35 2·05 1·10
Max 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Average 76·45 72·83 73·44 78·54 75·22
s.d. 28·41 29·18 28·70 26·67 28·50
Min 0·13 0·52 0·12 0·68 0·37
Active Base Max 99·87 98·85 100·00 99·59 100·00

Stations
(% of total) Average 52·21 47·86 48·45 53·08 50·43
s.d. 29·30 29·23 29·12 27·60 29·19
Table 3.2: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomB.
The following graphs show, in more detail, the result of applying InitRandomB to NetworkA4. Note that the number of active base
stations and the number of sites occupied occurred with the same frequencies as those observed for algorithm InitRandomA, and
therefore they are not included.
Figure 3.15: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.16: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.17: Graph of traffic cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.18: Graph of traffic cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.19: Graph of test point cover vs. base stations active for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.20: Graph of test point cover vs. sites occupied for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.
It can be seen that the same correlations observed for InitRandomA network designs (see Section 3.2.2.3) exist for InitRandomB,
and therefore (for random networks at least) the test point and traffic cover increases with the number of active base stations and
occupied sites.
3.2.4 Algorithm: InitRandomC
Algorithm InitRandomC is a slightly modified version of InitRandomB. It was previously concluded that the maximum average traffic
cover was achieved when all the base stations were active, and therefore InitRandomC is identical to InitRandomB except that all
base stations are active (not just a randomly selected subset). Note that only directional antennae are used in order to maximise the
number of base stations that may be active.
3.2.4.1 Description
The algorithm for InitRandomC, given in Figure 3.21, is the same as InitRandomB except that all base stations are active.
Figure 3.21: Algorithm InitRandomC.
3.2.4.2 Example
The following is an example of the output from algorithm InitRandomC. The target network was NetworkA4, and the network
performance for the example design was: 57·4% test point cover, 51·9% traffic cover.
Figure 3.22: An example network design produced by InitRandomC.
3.2.4.3 Results
In order to obtain a statistical view of the algorithms performance, it was run on each network for 20 hours. The results are summarised
in Table 3.3.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Min 34·69 40·01 34·58 46·53 2·22
Max 50·88 51·44 49·53 62·15 4·83

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
Average 43·28 44·72 42·62 54·65 3·51
s.d. 2·95 2·17 2·45 2·60 0·44
Min 40·87 50·35 41·55 50·99 14·37
Test Point Cover Max 56·77 60·70 56·33 68·60 24·02
(% of total)
Average 48·88 55·30 49·11 60·78 19·06
s.d. 2·97 2·12 2·53 2·78 1·74
Table 3.3: The statistical performance of algorithm InitRandomC.
The following graphs show, in more detail, the result of applying InitRandomC to NetworkA4.
Figure 3.23: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomC on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.24: The distribution of test point cover for InitRandomC on NetworkA4.
3.2.5 Comparison of Initialisation Algorithms
Table 3.4 gives a summary of the results for the three initialisation methods (InitRandomA, B, and C).
Average No. Average No.

Average Average Test
Sites Base Stations
Initialisation Traffic Cover Point Cover
Network Occupied Active
Algorithm
(% of total) (% of total)
InitRandomA 25·95 34·20 76·17 51·57
A1 InitRandomB 33·58 41·48 76·45 52·21
InitRandomC 43·28 48·88 100·00 100·00
InitRandomA 29·02 38·43 74·30 50·18
A2 InitRandomB 33·46 43·56 72·83 47·86
InitRandomC 44·72 55·30 100·00 100·00

InitRandomA 25·81 32·38 75·34 50·10
A3 InitRandomB 29·40 35·93 73·44 48·45
InitRandomC 42·62 49·11 100·00 100·00
InitRandomA 32·73 39·14 72·65 46·81
A4 InitRandomB 40·81 47·82 78·54 53·08
InitRandomC 54·65 60·78 100·00 100·00
InitRandomA 0·61 6·44 76·73 52·07
B1 InitRandomB 2·36 13·05 75·22 50·43
InitRandomC 3·51 19·06 100·00 100·00
Table 3.4: A summary of results for initialisation algorithms.
Algorithm InitRandomC delivered network designs with the highest average traffic cover and test point cover for all networks. This
algorithm requires all base stations to be active and, hence, introduces an element of bias in to the configuration parameters selected. If
such biasing is undesirable, InitRandomA or InitRandomB should be used instead, however, InitRandomA produces network
configurations with poor base station channel assignments, so InitRandomB should always be used in preference to InitRandomA.
3.3 Search Algorithms

Searching is characterised by the creation of a set of valid network designs. In assessing the performance of a search algorithm two
factors are considered:
· The performance of the best design in the set (as defined by the evaluation function in Figure 2.16).
· The time taken to produce the whole set.
For the purposes of algorithm comparison each search algorithm is run for a fixed length of time, therefore the performance of the best
network designs produced by each algorithm may be compared on an equal basis. Some search algorithms may have alternative
termination criteria, e.g. local-search algorithms may terminate once a local-optima is reached, but for the tests described in this chapter
no alternative termination-criteria was invoked, i.e. in all cases termination was enforced, and indeed required, after a fixed time.
3.3.1 Algorithm: SearchRandomB
Algorithm SearchRandomB is a pure random search, where network designs are generated by calling InitRandomB. Successive
configurations are independent of those that have been created previously.
3.3.1.1 Description
The algorithm, detailed in Figure 3.25, begins with a call to InitRandomB to create an initial network design that is recorded as the
“best design so far”. Control then passes to a loop, where it remains until a fixed time (specified by the user) has expired. In this loop,
InitRandomB is called and the resulting network design is evaluated. The “best design so far” is replaced if its performance is exceeded
by the performance of this new network design.
Figure 3.25: Algorithm SearchRandomB.
3.3.1.2 Results
Algorithm SearchRandomB was run for 20 hours on each network. The performance of the best network design produced for each
network is summarised in Table 3.5.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Traffic Cover (% of total) 53·95 50·58 48·87 60·55 4·69
Test Point Cover (% of total) 55·50 58·19 53·91 67·85 19·89
Occupied Sites (% of total) 100·00 99·69 100·00 100·00 100·00
Active Base Stations (% of

99·60 86·15 94·72 95·49 94·87
total)
Table 3.5: The performance of the best network designs for SearchRandomB.
Figure 3.26 shows the performance of the best network design against the time taken to produce it for NetworkA4.
Figure 3.26: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchRandomB on NetworkA4.
The fastest rate-of-improvement of traffic cover was seen in the early phase of the algorithms execution. For all the networks, no
improvement in design performance was seen after approximately 2 hours.
3.3.2 Algorithm: SearchRandomC
Algorithm SearchRandomC is identical to SearchRandomB except that all calls to InitRandomB are replaced with calls to
InitRandomC.
3.3.2.1 Results
Algorithm SearchRandomC was run for 20 hours on each network. The performance of the best network design produced for each
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1


100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00
total)
Table 3.6: The performance of the best network designs for SearchRandomC.
Figure 3.27 shows the performance of the best network design plotted against the time taken to produce it for NetworkA4.
SearchRandomC out-performed SearchRandomB on all but NetworkA2. However, the difference in performance between the two
algorithms was small. It is interesting to note that SearchRandomC did not conclusively out-perform SearchRandomB even though the
initialisation technique that it is based on, InitRandomC, has a significantly higher average performance than InitRandomB, on which
SearchRandomB is based.
3.3.3 Algorithm: SearchHillClimbA
SearchHillClimbA is a local-search algorithm. An initial network design is modified by small adjustments to base station parameters,
which are repeated until no one-change to a single parameter improves network performance. This final design is said to be a local
optima.
Local-search algorithms require the definition of a search neighbourhood, which is the scope of changes made to input parameters
during searching. For algorithm SearchHillClimbA, the neighbourhood of a network design is defined as follows: a network design,
NDNEW, is in the neighbourhood of NDOLD if NDOLD can be transformed into NDNEW by the adjustment of one base station
parameter. For example, two network designs would be ‘neighbours’ if they were identical except for the type of antenna used by a
particular base station. The transformation of one network design into another, neighbouring, design is known as a move.
3.3.3.1 Description
Algorithm SearchHillClimbA has two separate control sequences. During the first, the set of all possible moves is generated. During
the second, these moves are applied and the resulting network designs evaluated. This cycle is repeated until a complete set of moves
has been applied with no improvement in network performance. The list of moves is executed in random order, which reduces bias in
the hill climbing procedure. Moves are of the form: <base station> <parameter> <value> except for channel assignment moves
which are of the form: <base station> channel <link index> <channel>. Table 3.7 lists some examples.
Encoding in Move Format

Action
Base Station Parameter Link Index Value
azimuth 43°
tilt 0°
txPower 10W
antDef
channel 2
active TRUE
Table 3.7: Example moves for SearchHillClimbA.
Algorithm SearchHillClimbA is described by the pseudo-code in Figure 3.28.

Figure 3.28: Algorithm SearchHillClimbA.
Note that all moves applied to inactive base stations (unless activating the base station) will have no effect and may be ignored.
Adjustments to base station channels that are not in use (i.e. not in the base station’s working set) will also have no effect and may be
ignored.
3.3.3.2 Results
Algorithm SearchHillClimbA was run three times for each network, each run used different initial network designs and lasted for 20
hours. The designs were generated by a modified version of InitRandomB, which allowed the fraction of base stations active in the
network to be specified at run-time. The values used were: 0% (Run 1, no base stations active), 50% (Run 2, half the base stations
active), and 100% (Run 3, all base stations active). The performance of the best network designs produced is summarised in Table 3.8,
and the performance of the initial designs is given for comparison.
Network
Run Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Initial 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
Final 52·13 47·97 51·77 52·54 5·36
Initial 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00

Test Point Cover
(% of total)
Final 69·96 61·53 76·42 69·48 18·32
1
Initial 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00
Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Final 20·80 15·63 12·15 22·13 53·85
Active Base Initial 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00 0·00

Stations
(% of total) Final 7·47 5·52 4·11 7·79 20·88
Initial 37·36 34·32 31·04 42·07 2·59

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
Final 54·12 38·66 43·18 54·16 5·33
Initial 42·93 43·55 38·55 48·31 11·50

Test Point Cover
(% of total) Final 58·32 47·42 47·39 61·56 20·75
2 Initial 84·80 87·81 88·56 88·11 84·62

Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Final 84·80 87·81 88·56 88·11 84·62

Stations
(% of total)
Final 50·00 50·00 50·06 50·27 50·55
Initial 38·66 46·12 45·58 53.66 3·67

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
Final 50·98 49·78 51·45 61·14 5·89
Initial 43·93 56·41 48·82 61·88 18·86

Test Point Cover
(% of total)
Final 53·56 60·31 54·53 68·66 24·33
3
Initial 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00
Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Final 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Stations
(% of total) Final 99·87 100·00 99·94 98·86 100·00
Table 3.8: The performance of network designs for SearchHillClimbA.
The following graphs show the change in network performance over time for algorithm SearchHillClimbA on NetworkA4.
Figure 3.29: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for
SearchHillClimbA on NetworkA4 (run 1).
Improvement in
Initial Traffic Cover Final Traffic Cover
Traffic Cover
Network Run
(Final – Initial)
1 0·00 52·13 52·13
A1 2 37·36 54·12 16·76
3 38·66 50·98 12·32
1 0·00 47·97 47·97
A2 2 34·32 38·66 4·34
3 46·12 49·78 3·66
1 0·00 51·77 51·77
A3 2 31·04 43·18 12·14

3 45·58 51·45 5·87
1 0.00 52·54 52·54
A4 2 42·07 54·16 12·09
3 53.66 61·14 7.48
1 0·00 5·36 5·36
B1 2 2·59 5·33 2·74
3 3·67 5·89 2·22
Table 3.9: The initial and final traffic covers for multiple executions of SearchHillClimbA.
The traffic cover results given in Table 3.8 are repeated in Table 3.9, where a calculation of the improvement in traffic cover is included.
Run 1 produced the best design for NetworkA3, Run 2 produced the best design for NetworkA1, and Run 3 produced the best
design for NetworkA2, NetworkA4, and NetworkB1. The average traffic cover (across all five networks) from Run 1 is 42%, for Run
2 it is 39%, and for Run 3 it is 44%. Run 3 produces the best average performance and the highest number of ‘best’ network
performances.
It can be seen from Table 3.9 that the traffic cover of the final network design is, to some extent, dependent on that of the initial design,
as the improvement in traffic cover is inversely related to the amount of traffic cover in the initial design. This relationship might be
expected when one considers the following extreme case: if the traffic cover of the initial design were maximal then no improvement
could be made to traffic cover, and, conversely, if it were minimal then a high proportion of moves would improve traffic cover.
For Run 3 of the algorithm test, the initial base station activity was 100%, and this did not decrease significantly throughout the
algorithm’s execution. It is interesting to compare the results of Run 3 with the results obtained for SearchRandomC (see Section
3.3.2.1) where base station activity is also 100% (by design). Now, as both algorithms ran for the same length of time and used
(nearly) the same number of base stations, one would expect the total number of design evaluations to be comparable, however,
SearchHillClimbA made a total of 2445 (504+212+585+408+736) evaluations whereas SearchRandomC made only 1892
(429+160+439+313+551). The difference is due to the ability of SearchHillClimbA (or any local-search algorithm) to exploit
coherence between consecutive (neighbouring) network designs, i.e. field strengths are re-calculated only when a base station’s
configuration changes. A greater number of network evaluations does not necessarily improve the effectiveness of a search-algorithm,
but it is likely to help.
3.3.4 Algorithm: SearchConstructA
SearchConstructA is a local-search algorithm and is detailed in Figure 3.32. A green-field network (see Section 3.2.1) is modified by
the sequential activation of base stations.
3.3.4.1 Description
During execution every base station is activated once per iteration, and the resulting network designs evaluated. Once all base stations
have been tried, the one that produced the best improvement in performance is selected. This new design is only accepted if it produces
an improvement over the performance of the network design from the previous iteration, i.e. network performance is better with it than
without it. Iterations continue until a (user specified) fixed time has elapsed.
Figure 3.32: Algorithm SearchConstructA.

3.3.4.2 Results
Algorithm SearchConstructA was run for 20 hours on each network. The performance of the best network design produced for each
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1

total) 2·40 1·04 0·88 1·91 10·62
Table 3.10: The performance of the best network designs for SearchConstructA.
Figure 3.33 shows the performance of the best network design plotted against the time taken to produce it for NetworkA1.
Figure 3.33: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchConstructA on NetworkA1.
Figure 3.33 shows that the rate of improvement in traffic cover slows during algorithm execution and that high test point cover is
achieved early and maintained throughout the run.
An interesting effect occurs early in the algorithms execution cycle. It may be described by examining the first iteration of the algorithm
on NetworkB1, in which 9 base stations (out of the 273 that were tried) delivered the maximum possible traffic cover (limited by the
traffic capacity of a single base station, i.e. 58 Erlangs). The number of test points covered by these base stations ranged between 74
and 1031, and, as the traffic cover for each base station was equal, the base station with the highest test point cover was accepted. If
this was the final network design produced then this would be the best choice, however, as the algorithm continues, the extra coverage
achieved early on becomes an obstacle to further coverage, i.e. it increases the likelihood of interference in the network. Essentially, the
‘dimensions’ (i.e. the ratio of traffic cover to test point cover) of the early cells are distorted by the requirements of the evaluation
function.
3.3.5 Algorithm: SearchConstructB
In Section 3.3.4.2 it was postulated that during the initial stages of execution of SearchConstructA, high test point cover was
detrimental to the performance of the final network design. Algorithm SearchConstructB attempts to avoid this problem by a
temporary adjustment of the evaluation function.
3.3.5.1 Description
The following list shows the default evaluation criteria in order of significance:
1. Higher traffic cover

2. Higher traffic service[27]
3. Higher test point cover
4. Higher test point service[28]
5. Lower site occupancy
6. Lower number of active base stations
At the beginning of SearchConstructB’s execution, changes are made (highlighted in italics in the following list) to the evaluation
criteria:
1. Higher traffic cover

2. Higher traffic service
3. Lower test point service
4. Higher test point cover
5. Lower site occupancy
6. Lower number of active base stations
The reversal in requirement from ‘highertest point service’ to ‘lower test point service’ is intended to encourage well-dimensioned cells
to be chosen. Notice that the ‘test point cover’ metric is not reversed as this could also be achieved by (and hence encourage) poor
channel assignments - it is, however, demoted to 4th in the ranking of metric significance.
The algorithm pseudo-code is identical to that of SearchConstructA (see Figure 3.32), as only the evaluation function has changed.
3.3.5.2 Results
Algorithm SearchConstructB was run for 20 hours on each network. The performance of the best network design produced for each
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1

4·93 2·60 1·76 3·69 17·22
total)
Table 3.11: The performance of the best network designs for SearchConstructB.
Figure 3.34: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchConstructB on NetworkA1.
SearchConstructB significantly outperforms SearchConstructA in terms of traffic cover. This is may be partly due to the avoidance of
‘poorly dimensioned’ cells (as intended), but an additional factor is the increase in the number of network designs evaluated. The
designs produced by SearchConstructB have less serviced test points (on average) than the designs of SearchConstructA, and this
means that less CIR calculations are required and less time is taken during design evaluations. This speeding up of the evaluation time
led to more iterations and better final designs. This consequence of the enhancements made to SearchConstructB highlights the
(relative) high computational cost of the CIR calculation.
3.3.6 Comparison of Search Algorithms
This section provides a comparison of the performance of the search algorithms. Table 3.12 gives a summary of the results for each
algorithm.
Network
Performance
Search Algorithm Average
Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
SearchRandomB 53·95 50·58 48·87 60·55 4·69 43·73
SearchRandomC 50·88 51·45 49·53 62·15 4·83 43·77
SearchHillClimbA (Run 1) 52·13 47·97 51·77 52·54 5·36 41·95

Traffic
Cover SearchHillClimbA (Run 2) 54·12 38·66 43·18 54·16 5·33 39·09
(% of total)
SearchConstructA 24·11 15·42 21·59 22·70 4·89 17·74
SearchConstructB 48·47 38·46 43·12 43·48 7·43 36·25
SearchRandomB 55·50 58·19 53·91 67·85 19·89 51·07
SearchRandomC 56·77 57·09 55·18 68·60 19·89 51·51

Test Point
Cover
(% of total)
SearchRandomB 100·00 99·69 100·00 100·00 100·00 99·94
SearchRandomC 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Occupied
Sites
(% of total)
SearchRandomB 99·60 86·15 94·72 95·49 94·87 94·17
SearchRandomC 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Active SearchHillClimbA (Run 1) 7·47 5·52 4·11 7·79 20·88 9·15
Base
Stations SearchHillClimbA (Run 2) 50·00 50·00 50·06 50·27 50·55 50·13
(% of total)
Table 3.12: A summary of results for all search algorithms on all networks.
The best average traffic cover and, hence, the best average network design (based on the structure of the evaluation function) was
produced by Run 3 of SearchHillClimbA, however, it did not significantly outperform SearchRandomB or SearchRandomC.
Although SearchConstructA did not produce designs with high traffic cover, it did quickly produce designs with high test point cover.
In addition, it produced the designs with the lowest number of occupied sites and active base stations. This algorithm may be better
suited to network design problems in which traffic capacity is not an issue, e.g. the placement of television broadcast masts (see Section
1.2.3 for a description of similar problems).
It is likely that a 20 hour run-time is not long enough to definitively separate the performances of SearchRandomB, SearchRandomC,
and SearchHillClimbA.
3.4 Factors Limiting Search Performance

In order to improve the performance of the search algorithms, it is useful to identify common factors that limit their effectiveness and
efficiency.
3.4.1 Computational Complexity
Computational complexity analysis (see [54] for a comprehensive background) provides information about the scalability of a
calculation. In Table 3.13 the evaluation of network performance is broken down into distinct computational steps; the complexity of
each step is given in terms of the number of base stations N (equivalent to ) and the number of test points M (equivalent to ).
Calculation Computational Complexity
Field strengths from active base stations to test points O(NM)
Serviced test point set O(NM)
Traffic volume in each base station cell O(M)
Fuzzy server list for each test point O(NM)

CIR for each test point O(N2M)
Covered test point set O(NM)
Covered traffic volume in each cell O(M)
Table 3.13: Computational complexity of network performance evaluation.
It can be seen that the computational complexity of most of the steps does not exceed O(NM), and in fact the only step to exceed this
complexity is the CIR calculation, which has complexity O(N2M) due to the inclusion of fuzzy servers. This implies that, for large
networks at least, the CIR calculation will dominate the evaluation time.
3.4.2 The Effect of Poor Channel Assignments
It was shown in Section 3.2.3 that poor channel assignments can cripple the operational performance of base stations. This effect can
obscure the potential improvements in adjusting other base station parameters.
3.4.3 Conclusion
To avoid the difficulties associated with the channel model (expensive CIR calculation and bad channel assignments) it is desirable to
split the problem into two stages:
1. Base station configuration without channel assignment (and its associated CIR calculations), known as the Base Station
Configuration Problem or BSCP (see Section 1.2.3.2 for description).
2. Channel assignment for the network design produced by stage 1. This is known as the Channel Assignment Problem or CAP (see
Section 1.2.2 for description).
The division of the WCNDP into these two sub-problems is not novel, and in fact most network design problems are explicitly
formulated with this two-part approach (see Section 1.2.4). The novelty lies in the opportunity to quantify the advantages this approach
may offer (Chapter 6 contains details of this comparison).
In the two-stage approach to the WCNDP, performance in the CAP phase depends heavily on the design produced to solve the
BSCP, because with high traffic and test point service is useless unless it is relatively easy to create good channel assignments. To do
this, an estimate must be made (during the cell planning process) of how difficult it will be to produce a good channel assignment. These
‘difficulty’ metrics shall be referred to as interference surrogates. The interference surrogate must be included in the definition of the
BSCP, and the network design evaluation criteria must be as follows (see Section 2.3.2 to compare this with the full WCNDP
evaluation function):
1. High traffic service.
2. High test point service.
3. Low estimated interference.
4. Low site occupancy.
5. Low number of active base stations.
The interference surrogate is shown in italics, and the structure of the evaluation is such that it would only become a deciding factor in
networks that had identical traffic and test point service. The interference surrogate function must have a computational complexity that
does not exceed O(NM), as this will ensure that it scales at least as well as the other calculations.
Chapter 4
Channel Assignment
This chapter describes a novel formulation of the Channel Assignment Problem (CAP). Channels represent a continuous portion of the
radio spectrum, and channel assignment is the allocation of channels to transmitters in a radio network such that the interference
between channels is minimised. The central frequency in a channel is sometimes used to uniquely identify it, and for this reason the CAP
is also know as the Frequency Assignment Problem (FAP). An introduction to the CAP is given in Section 1.2.2.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 4.1 gives a definition of the CAP as formulated in this thesis, Section 4.2 describes
how CAP solutions (i.e. assignments) are compared, Section 4.3 summarises the problem instances studied in this chapter, Section 4.4
introduces some algorithmic concepts that prove useful in the definition of the optimisation algorithms described in Sections 4.5 and 4.6,
and the performance of these algorithms is compared in Section 4.7.
4.1 Problem Definition

The definition of the CAP used in this thesis is not necessarily the same as the definitions traditionally used in the literature. It is tailored
to the cell planning problem as described previously in this thesis and may not generalise to all CAP requirements. The definition of the
problem is such that: the solution of the CAP will maximise the performance of the cell plan from which it was derived. It is
hoped that this definition has sufficient commonality with other CAPs to be applicable beyond the field of mobile telephone networks.
This thesis introduces some novel additions to the basic CAP, including:
· A detailed calculation of the Carrier-to-Interference-Ratio (CIR) for each radio link.
· Consideration of the relative importance of receivers, i.e. it may be more important to cover some receivers than others.
· An assessment of channel assignments based on two additional performance metrics: average CIR of non-covered receivers, and
average Interference-to-Carrier-Ratio (ICR) of all receivers.
In the CAP it is assumed that transmitter locations and parameters (such as transmission power) are fixed, and this accounts for all
factors that effect the strength of the received radio signal. Each transmitter requires the allocation of a fixed number of channels - know
as its demand. In cellular mobile telephone networks the demand of a transmitter is related to the size (in terms of peak call-volume) of
the transmitters cell (see Section 2.2.12).
The CAP is a subset of the Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem or WCNDP (see Section 1.1.2). Chapter 3 described a
solution to the WCNDP in which channel selection was regarded as one of many network configuration parameters, but in Section 3.4
it was postulated that there are advantages in separating the CAP from the rest of the network design problem. Historically network
design has been approached in this way - transmitter configurations have been established and then channels have been allocated.
Instances of the CAP are generated from network designs that require a channel assignment. All of the CAP data sets used in this
chapter are derived from the cell-planning data, as described in Section 2.4, obtained from Operators A and B.
The mathematical formulation of the CAP has much in common with the WCNDP (as derived in Error! Reference source not
found.), but the scope for ambiguity is sufficient to warrant the repetition of common definitions. This also allows the chapter to stand
on its own for readers who are exclusively interested in channel assignment.
4.1.1 Service Region
A service region comprises:
· A set of receivers.
· A set of transmitters.
· A finite set of channels to allocate to transmitters.
4.1.2 Receivers
A service region contains a finite set of receivers R, where denotes the ith receiver in R. Each receiver, r, has weight , and
this represents the importance of its received signal’s freedom from interference. In the case of the mobile telephone data, the receivers
correspond to test points and the weights correspond to the amount of traffic at those test points.
4.1.3 Channels
A service region includes the definition of a finite and ordered set of channels C, where denotes the k th channel in C. For
convenience, the first and last channels, and , are also denoted by and respectively.
4.1.3.1 Channel Separation Gain
Receivers are tuned to receive signals on specific channels, so that any received signal not employing this channel will be attenuated -
the greater the difference (between the channel to which the receiver is tuned and the channel on which the received signal was
transmitted), the greater the attenuation.
If a receiver tuned to channel receives a signal transmitted on channel , the effective power of the
received signal is attenuated. The effective gain applied to the received signal is given by the function . The range of
the function is given by:
4.1.4 Transmitters
The service region contains a finite set of transmitters B, where denotes the j th transmitter in B. A set of channels is allocated to
each transmitter. The k th channel allocated to transmitter is denoted by . The number of channels allocated to transmitter b
is the demand, and it is denoted by .
4.1.5 Field-Strength
The field-strength of the radio signal at receiver due to transmitter is denoted by . Note that this is a pre-calculated input
of the CAP, and the method used to derive these values is not important to the solution of the CAP.
4.1.6 Best Server
The best server of a receiver is the transmitter from which the signal with the highest field-strength is received. If the received signal
from two or more transmitters is equal, then the one with the lowest index is chosen. For test point , the best server is
denoted by :
4.1.7 Fuzzy-Server Set
For test point a set of servers, , is defined to contain all transmitters that provide a signal within the fuzzy-server threshold (the
fuzzy server model is discussed in Section 2.1.10). This threshold is the product of (a gain constant) and the signal from the best
server of :
where
4.1.8 Carrier-to-Interference Ratio
The CIR for receiver is the worst case CIR from each of the servers in the fuzzy server set :
where denotes the worst case CIR found using each of the channels allocated to transmitter :
where denotes the CIR at receiver when it is tuned to the k th channel of transmitter . It is given by the ratio of the server
signal strength to the sum of all the other, interfering, signals[29]:
where is the strength of the serving signal:
and is the sum of all the interfering signals:
where is the interference due to all the channels of base station :
Note that, for simplicity of expression, is composed of two terms: and . Term includes the server signal as part of the
total noise; it is then explicitly removed by .
4.1.9 Receiver Cover
Receiver is covered if its CIR is greater than or equal to the global CIR threshold . The set of covered receivers
is given by:
therefore the number of covered receivers, , is given by:
and the weighted receiver cover, , is given by:

4.1.10 Average Non-Covered Carrier-to-Interference Ratio
The set of receivers not covered, , is given by:
The average CIR of receivers that are not covered is denoted and given by:
4.1.11 Average Interference-to-Carrier Ratio (ICR)
The ICR of receiver is denoted and given by:
The global average ICR, , is given by:
4.1.12 Assignment
All the service region parameters (such as field strengths and receiver weights) are fixed, except for the allocation of transmitter
channels. A complete and valid allocation of channels is known as an assignment.
4.2 Performance Evaluation

Comparing the performance of different assignments is done by comparing their respective network performance metrics. Each
performance metric has a relative significance, and networks are compared metric-by-metric. They are listed below in order of
significance:
1. weighted receiver cover,
2. number of receivers covered,
3. average non-covered CIR,
4. average ICR,
Metrics 1, 2 and 3 should be maximised and metric 4 should be minimised.
The performance of an assignment, , is expressed as a function . If network configurations and produce
weighted-cover-metrics and respectively then outperforms if . However, if
then a comparison of the next significant metrics, and , must be performed, and if these two metrics
are also equal then comparison progresses to the next metric and so on. This relationship may be expressed as follows:
This expression is not particularly clear, and it is better expressed algorithmically, i.e. as a function that compares the performance of
two assignments and returns the result as a boolean (see Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1: The comparison operator for assignment performance metrics.
4.2.1 The Role of the Average Non-Covered CIR Metric
Consider two channel assignments that perform identically with respect to receiver cover and weighted receiver cover. Using the first
assignment, the CIR for the non-covered receivers is high, e.g. all receivers have a CIR that is 5% below the cover threshold, whereas
using the second assignment, the CIR for the non-covered receivers is low, e.g. all receivers have a CIR below 50% of the cover
threshold. Although the predicted performance (in terms of cover) of both assignments is identical, the first assignment would be
preferable for the following reasons:
· It must be remembered that this is only a simulation of the real network and, as such, it contains a degree of uncertainty. In the real
network, a signal within 5% of the target CIR may be sufficient for communication.
· If an existing transmitter were removed (say, for repair) then this may remove enough noise for previously uncovered receivers to
be covered, and this is more likely if they are already as close as possible to the CIR threshold.
· Optimisation algorithms prefer ‘smooth’ evaluation functions. The inclusion of this CIR metric informs the algorithm when it is
getting ‘warm’ (i.e. when the CIR of non-covered receivers is getting closer to the cover threshold) even if no direct improvement
in cover occurs.
To these ends, the average CIR of non-covered receivers is compared, and not the average ICR. This means that receivers with a CIR
near the threshold will dominate the calculation, and hence will be encouraged. This approach favours the majority of receivers having
borderline cover, with a minority of receivers having a very low CIR. If the ICR were used instead, then the minority of points with very
low CIR would dominate the calculation (and hence be discouraged), leaving fewer receivers with borderline cover. For the purpose of
this thesis the former choice is preferred, but the latter could be employed if a minority of test points with a very-low CIR were deemed
the greater evil.
4.2.2 The Role Of The Average-ICR Metric
Consider two assignments that both give 100% receiver cover. The receiver CIR values generated by the first assignment are all low,
e.g. 5% above the CIR threshold, whereas the receiver CIR values generated by the second assignment are all high, e.g. twice the CIR
threshold. The second assignment is preferable because it offers a more robust solution for the following reasons:
· Errors in simulation data (such as radio signal strengths) can be greater, on average, for the second assignment than for the first
whilst maintaining 100% cover.
· Additional, unforeseen, noise sources (such as solar activity) can be better tolerated, on average, by the networks that employ the
second assignment rather than the first.
Note that the average ICR of receivers is compared, and not the average CIR. This encourages receivers with a CIR just above the
target threshold to improve rather than to encourage a few receivers to have CIRs that massively exceed the target threshold.
It is worth emphasising that the addition of this metric to the CAP means that optimisation does not stop with full coverage. This is a
novel extension to the fixed-spectrum CAP.
4.3 Data Sets

All problem instances are derived from the network data sets described previously in this thesis (see Section 2.4). Two CAPs were
generated from each of the five networks.
4.3.1 Methodology of Creation
Two random network designs were created for each network using a modified version of algorithm InitRandomA. The first of each
pair of designs had 10% of the potential base stations active, and the second had 90% active. The problem instances are known as
CapXX-10 and CapXX-90 respectively, where XX is the identifier of the network (i.e. A1, A2, A3, A4, or B1).
The test point field strengths due to the active base stations were calculated for every network design. This allowed the creation of the
set of serviced test points that became the set of CAP receivers. The base station demands were also computed, which enabled the
translation of the set of active base stations into the set of CAP transmitters.
4.3.1.1 Example
The network design that produced problem CapA2-10 is shown in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2: CAP problem CapA2-10 generated from NetworkA2.
4.3.2 Service Region Statistics
The ten problem instances used to test algorithms in this chapter are summarised in Table 4.1.
Transmitter Statistics Receiver Statistics
Data Set
CapA1-10 75 259 29726 3196·23
CapA1-90 675 1019 29954 3210·91
CapA2-10 96 299 70777 2698·41
CapA2-90 864 1129 74845 2787·97
CapA3-10 170 372 17393 2988·11
CapA3-90 1533 1818 17393 2988·11
CapA4-10 73 225 48388 2649·22
CapA4-90 658 884 48512 2652·44
CapB1-10 27 74 4806 656·33
CapB1-90 245 523 32555 9346·62
Table 4.1: Summary statistics for CAP problem instances.
Problem instance data not listed in Table 4.1, such as the number of available channels, is inherited from the networks (as summarised
in Table 2.2) from which the CAP problems were generated.
4.4 Common Algorithmic Concepts

The section contains a few definitions that help simplify the algorithm description of the optimisation algorithms.
4.4.1 Cover Function
Some algorithm descriptions require the definition of a function, , which returns the number of receivers covered by
assignment :
4.4.2 Links
Links represent the connection from transmitter to receiver. Each link requires the assignment of a single channel, so a transmitter has
one link for every channel it employs. The number of links in the network is given by:
This convention means that instead of referring to the k th channel of the j th base station, one may simply refer to the lth link in the
network. The relationship between these indices is given by:
4.4.3 Magic Channels
A magic channel can cause no interference nor be interfered with. Magic channels represent an intermediate step in the assignment
process, and can be used to exclude the influence of some transmitters from the evaluation of network performance. The final
assignment produced by an algorithm may not contain any magic channels if it is to be realised in practice.
If a magic channel is denoted by m then:
4.5 Initialisation Algorithms

Initialisation is characterised by the creation of a single assignment, and no valid intermediate assignments are created during an
initialisation procedure.
4.5.1 Algorithm: InitRandomD
InitRandomD creates a valid channel assignment chosen from the set of all possible assignments with a uniform probability.
4.5.1.1 Description
This algorithm, detailed in Figure 4.3, simply assigns a channel to every link, where channels are selected at random from the set of all
available channels, C.
Figure 4.3: Algorithm InitRandomD.
InitRandomD is used by SearchRandomD (see Section 4.6.1), and it was not thought necessary to include a separate table of results
for InitRandomD alone.
4.5.2 Algorithm: InitConstructA
InitConstructA is a non-deterministic channel assignment algorithm that produces a single valid assignment at the end of execution.
During execution it produces assignments that contain magic channels.
4.5.2.1 Description
At the beginning of the algorithm’s execution, every transmitter is allocated magic channels. The algorithm progresses until all magic
channels have been replaced with real channels. Channel allocation occurs in two phases: the allocation of channels such that no loss of
cover occurs; and the allocation of channels such that the minimum loss of cover occurs. In the first phase, channels are allocated in
order from to . A channel is allocated to a link and the network performance is evaluated, if cover is lost then the
link is re-assigned a magic channel. This continues until the channel has been tried for all the links, at which point testing moves to the
next channel. The order in which links are allocated channels is decided by the demand of the transmitter from which they came, as this
gives high demand transmitters a good opportunity to spread across the available spectrum. In the second phase, all links that have not
been allocated a channel (i.e. still have magic channels) are given the channel that causes the least loss in cover (the order in which links
are allocated is the same as in the first phase). The algorithm is detailed in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4: Algorithm InitConstructA.
4.5.2.2 Results
InitConstructA was run once for each problem and the results are shown in Table 4.2.
Weighted
Cap RX Cover RX Cover Average Non- Average ICR Time
Covered CIR Elapsed
(% of total) (% of total) (seconds)
A1-10 94·46 93·50 13·54 (11·32dB) 0·03 (-15·91dB) 17617
A1-90 97·30 96·23 14·10 (11·49dB) 0·02 (-18·08dB) 148360
A2-10 76·55 78·09 11·47 (10·60dB) 0·05 (-12·70dB) 140115
A2-90 88·56 89·40 12·11 (10·83dB) 0·03 (-16·02dB) 795548
A3-10 63·24 67·14 10·53 (10·23dB) 0·09 (-10·61dB) 49890
A3-90 89·39 88·24 12·00 (10·79dB) 0·03 (-15·55dB) 976560
A4-10 82·72 82·57 11·60 (10·64dB) 0·05 (-13·20dB) 39250
A4-90 85·25 89·73 11·44 (10·59dB) 0·03 (-15·79dB) 267721
B1-10 99·68 96·94 4·97 (6·97dB) 0·01 (-18·33dB) 141
B1-90 72·53 73·59 5·31 (7·25dB) 0·15 (-8·27dB) 168991
Table 4.2: The performance of the best assignments produced by InitConstructA.
For problem CapB1-10, the speed with which a solution was found and the high quality of the assignment produced indicates that this
problem was not significantly challenging. It would be imprudent to use the results obtained for this problem instance for comparing the
performance of algorithms.
The weighted cover due to all the assignments produced by InitConstructA did not fall below 60%, the average being 83·33%
(excluding CapB1-10). The time taken to produce an assignment is large and varies significantly with the size of the network. It is
worth noting that the total time taken to generate all these results was more than 30 days.
4.6 Search Algorithms

Searching is characterised by the creation of a set of valid channel assignments. In assessing the performance of a search algorithm, two
factors are considered: the performance of the best assignment in the set; and the time taken to produce the whole set. For the
purposes of algorithm comparison, each search algorithm is run for a fixed length of time so that the performance of the best assignment
produced by each algorithm can then be compared on an equal basis.
4.6.1 Algorithm: SearchRandomD
SearchRandomD is a pure random search. Assignments are generated by calling InitRandomD, and successive assignments are
independent of those that have been created previously.
4.6.1.1 Description
The algorithm, detailed in Figure 4.5, begins with a call to InitRandomD that creates an initial assignment, this is recorded as the “best
assignment so far”. Control then passes to a loop, where it remains until a fixed time (specified by the user) has expired. In the loop,
InitRandomD is called and the “best assignment so far” is replaced if its performance is exceeded by this new assignment.
Figure 4.5: Algorithm SearchRandomD.
4.6.1.2 Results
SearchRandomD was applied to each problem for 10 hours, the results are summarised in Table 4.3.
Weighted
RX Cover Average Non-
Cap RX Cover Average ICR Iterations
(% of total) Covered CIR
(% of total)
A1-10 45·46 45·06 4·75 (6·77dB) 0·52 (-2·87dB) 3916
A1-90 44·52 48·88 6·41 (8·07dB) 0·25 (-6·07dB) 1144
A2-10 31·17 34·30 5·01 (7·00dB) 0·47 (-3·31dB) 1483
A2-90 47·74 57·07 6·42 (8·07dB) 0·23 (-6·37dB) 485
A3-10 23·71 24·53 4·77 (6·78dB) 0·55 (-2·62dB) 4160

A3-90 46·91 49·69 7·22 (8·59dB) 0·22 (-6·48dB) 1212
A4-10 29·99 32·65 5·40 (7·32dB) 0·38 (-4·21dB) 2747
A4-90 55·61 61·75 7·06 (8·49dB) 0·18 (-7·46dB) 846
B1-10 81·93 84·77 4·99 (6·98dB) 0·12 (-9·38dB) 94024
B1-90 15·25 28·00 3·14 (4·97dB) 0·71 (-1·50dB) 1359
Table 4.3: The performance of the best assignments produced by SearchRandomD.
Figure 4.6 shows the performance of the best assignment produced by SearchRandomD plotted against the time taken to produce it
for problem CapA2-90.
Figure 4.6: The performance of the best assignment produced vs. time for SearchRandomD on CapA2-90.
The average weighted cover due to SearchRandomD was 37·82% (excluding CapB1-10 as recommended in Section 4.5.2.2).
4.6.2 Algorithm: SearchHillClimbB
SearchHillClimbB is a local-search algorithm, i.e. an initial assignment is modified by single changes to assigned channels. These
adjustments may continue until no one-change to an assigned channel produces an improvement in assignment performance. This final
assignment is said to be a local optima.
Local-search algorithms require the definition of a search neighbourhood, this is the scope of changes made to input parameters during
searching. For algorithm SearchHillClimbB, the neighbourhood of an assignment is defined as follows: Assignment ANEW is in the
neighbourhood of AOLD if AOLD can be transformed into ANEW by the re-assignment of only one transmitter channel. The
transformation of one assignment into another, neighbouring, assignment is known as a move.
4.6.2.1 Description
Algorithm SearchHillClimbB, as detailed in Figure 4.7, has two separate control sequences:
1. The set of all possible moves is generated.
2. Each move is applied and the resulting assignment evaluated.
This cycle is repeated until a complete set of moves has been applied with no improvement in assignment performance. The list of
moves is executed in random order, which reduces bias in the hill climbing procedure.
Moves are of the form: <link> <channel>
Figure 4.7: Algorithm SearchHillClimbB.
4.6.2.2 Results
SearchHillClimbB was applied to each problem for 10 hours, and the results are summarised in Table 4.4. The initial assignments used
were generated by InitRandomD.
Weighted
RX Cover RX Cover Average Non-
Cap Covered CIR Average ICR Iterations
A1-10 93·95 94·50 11·68 (10·67dB) 0·02 (-16·52dB) 3935
A1-90 66·31 71·08 8·18 (9·13dB) 0·11 (-9·72dB) 1143
A2-10 57·50 64·61 7·63 (8·83dB) 0·17 (-7·78dB) 1483
A2-90 53·35 62·58 7·58 (8·79dB) 0·16 (-8·01dB) 484
A3-10 60·05 63·82 9·81 (9·92dB) 0·09 (-10·31dB) 4165
A3-90 55·67 58·05 7·77 (8·9dB) 0·17 (-7·72dB) 1210
A4-10 75·30 74·96 7·84 (8·94dB) 0·21 (-6·76dB) 2753
A4-90 65·20 68·33 7·37 (8·67dB) 0·14 (-8·65dB) 847
B1-10 99·98 97·59 4·86 (6·87dB) 0·01 (-20·57dB) 14801*
B1-90 30·68 41·23 3·79 (5·79dB) 0·69 (-1·62dB) 1360
* The algorithm terminated after 5647 seconds when the solution was found to be a local optima
Table 4.4: The performance of the best assignment produced by SearchHillClimbB.
Figure 4.8 shows the performance of the best assignment produced by SearchHillClimbB plotted against the time taken to produce it
for problem CapA3-90.
Figure 4.8: The performance of the best assignment produced vs. time for SearchHillClimbB on CapA3-90.
The average weighted cover due to SearchHillClimbB was 62·00% (excluding CapB1-10 – see Section 4.5.2.2).
4.7 Comparison of Results

InitConstructA produced the best assignments for all the CAP problems except for CapB1-10, but it is likely that this problem was
too easy to allow a fair comparison of algorithms, and it will be excluded from further results comparison.
Of the two search algorithms[30] described in this chapter SearchHillClimbB performed the best, as it produced the best assignment
for all CAP problems over the 10 hour run-time It gave an average weighted cover of 62·00% compared with 37·82%, which was
produced by SearchRandomD.
Of all the assignments produced by InitConstructA, only the one for CapA1-10 took less than ten hours. This limits the scope for
comparison between InitConstructA and the search algorithms. It took just under five hours for InitConstructA to produce a superior
assignment to the one produced in ten hours by SearchHillClimbB. In addition, it is likely that the assignment produced for CapA4-10
by InitConstructA would still outperform the one produced by SearchHillClimbB, even if the search algorithm were given the extra
time taken by InitConstructA. It is likely that InitConstructA is the most computationally efficient way of assigning channels for this
type of CAP (a conclusion supported by the results obtained for problem CapA1-10), but the disadvantage of InitConstructA is that
no valid assignment is produced until the algorithm finally terminates. Furthermore, the time it will take to terminate is not easily
predicted.
Given an unlimited time in which to produce assignments, the most efficient method (of those tested) is likely to be the application of
InitConstructA followed by SearchHillClimbB. If assignments were required in a fixed time, then the best approach would be to call
InitRandomD followed by SearchHillClimbB.
Chapter 5
Interference Surrogates
This chapter compares three different Interference Surrogates (ISs). In Section 3.4 it was concluded that optimisation performance was
limited by two factors:
· The Carrier-to-Interference Ratio (CIR) calculation was dominating the time taken to evaluate each network design.
· Poor channel assignments were masking potential network design improvements made by optimisation algorithms.
It was concluded that the loss of cover (due to interference) should be estimated using a stand-in, or surrogate, function. This function
should have a computational complexity that is less than or equal to the complexity of the other functions required for network
simulation. In addition, the value of the surrogate function should be independent of assigned channels. In this chapter, three ISs are
investigated that meet these criteria:
· Overlap – a measure of the density of cell overlap in a network.
· Non-dominance – a measure of the server ambiguity seen by mobile stations.
· Signal Freedom – an estimate of the communication channels’ isolation from interference.
The first two ISs are currently used in industry and they are employed by the operators from whom the data for this thesis was
acquired. The third surrogate is novel, and it was derived from detailed analysis of the relationship between cell planning and channel
assignment.
5.1 Role of the Interference Surrogate

When comparing two candidate network designs, performance metrics are compared one-at-a-time (see Section 2.3.2). When
employing an IS during cell planning the order of comparison is as follows:
1. Traffic service.
2. Test point service.
3. Interference surrogate performance.
4. Number of sites occupied.
5. Number of base stations active.
From this list it can be seen that the IS metric is only used when comparing network designs with the same traffic and test point service.
Suppose two such network designs A and B have interference surrogate performances IA and IB respectively. A channel assignment is
produced for A that results in a test point cover CVA and a channel assignment is produced for B that results in cover CVB. Now, if
CVA > CVB then this should be reflected by the IS, i.e. IA > IB. This relationship will be known as the IS Condition.[31]
Figure 5.1: The performance of an ideal (hypothetical) interference-surrogate.
Figure 5.1 is a graph that indicates the performance of an IS. The value of the IS metric is plotted against the test point cover (post
channel-assignment) for 10 different network designs. Designs with a high IS value have a correspondingly high test point cover. No
pair of network designs violate the IS Condition, which indicates that the IS is behaving ideally.
5.1.1 Optimum Cover vs. Fixed Time Cover
The test point cover produced for a network will depend on the channel assignment algorithm used and for how long it is run, this
implies that there are two possible test point covers to consider:
1. The cover due to the optimal channel assignment.
2. The best cover achievable in a fixed time.
There is no known method that can deliver the first of these figures in a reasonable time. To generate the second of these figures the
best-known fixed time algorithm (SearchHillClimbB) can be used. The longer the algorithm is run, the closer the result will be to the
optimum cover (although not guaranteed to ever equal it). The fixed time performance is more realistic than the optimum performance
because all real channel assignments are produced in a fixed time.
5.2 Interference Surrogate Descriptions

The following section contains definitions of the three ISs investigated in this chapter. The notation used for the mathematical
descriptions is based on the definitions in Error! Reference source not found..
5.2.1 Overlap
Consider a subscriber served by a single base station, if that subscriber receives radio signals from other base stations then the serving
signal may be interfered with, i.e. the CIR may fall below an acceptable threshold. The only way to attenuate the effective power of the
interfering signals is by channel separation, i.e. separation between those channels used by interfering base stations and the channel on
which the serving signal is transmitted. The greater the number of interfering-signals that overlap serving signals, the greater the number
of channel separations required. The implicit assumption of the overlap measure is that these increases in channel separation
requirements will increase the difficulty of channel assignment.
A non-serving signal is considered to overlap at a test point if it is above the test point’s service threshold. The number of overlaps at
each test point is summed to give the total network overlap. If the set of base stations that overlap at test point is
denoted and is given by:
then the total network overlap is given by:
Note that the serving base station does not contribute to the overlap, hence the subtraction of 1 from the overlap figure for each test
point.
The overlap metric is designed to be minimised.
5.2.2 Non-Dominance
The non-dominance metric takes account of the relative contribution of interfering signals. The total noise a subscriber receives can be
high as long as the server signal is significantly higher. A subscriber’s server is said to be non-dominant if the number of interferers
within a certain threshold ( dB) of the server signal is greater than . Non-dominance is sometimes known by its defining
parameters, in the form “ of ”.
The set of base stations, denoted by , that provide test point with a signal within the non-dominance threshold is
given by:
where
the set of test points with non-dominant servers, denoted by , is given by:
and the total non-dominance is given by:

For the purpose of this thesis, was chosen to be 7 and was chosen to be -9dB.
The non-dominance metric is designed to be minimised.
5.2.3 Signal Freedom
Signal freedom is a novel metric. In the signal freedom paradigm, networks are viewed as a collection of links to which channels must
be assigned[32]. The fact that links might share base stations and that base stations might share sites is regarded as un-important. Links
simply represent conduits into the network.
5.2.3.1 A Single Test point with a Single Link
Consider a single test point r, a signal will be received by r for every active link[33] in the network. Figure 5.2 shows the strengths of
four such signals received at r, they are the serving signal and the three interfering signals , , and .
Figure 5.2: An illustration of the attenuation of interference by channel separation.
If the target CIR is then the total interference cannot exceed (known as the target noise). The interfering signals must be
attenuated such that the sum of all three is less than the target noise. The greater the required attenuation, the greater the channel
separation will need to be. Therefore the ratio a of the target noise to the total interference gives an estimate of the effort required in
assigning channels. For the example in Figure 5.2, is given by:
Note that is the normalised CIR at r, therefore if then no channel separation would be required to cover r.
5.2.3.2 Normalised CIR Threshold
When calculating signal freedom, test point links for which are taken to have . This is to stop ‘easy’ links (i.e.
those requiring no channel separation) from ‘swamping’ the a values of more demanding links in the final total.
5.2.3.3 Number of Links vs. Channel Separation
Signal freedom takes account of networks with different numbers of links by including contributions from all possible links. Un-used
links are considered perfect as they can be assigned any channel. The two types of redundant links are:
· Links hosted by inactive base stations.
· Links that are not required to carry traffic but are hosted by an active base station.
A redundant link contributes a perfect value of 1 to the signal freedom metric.
Two factors control the difficulty of a channel assignment: the number of links that require channels; and the separation requirements
between the links. Consider two example network designs that are both equally difficult to assign channels for:
Design 1. A design requiring many links, in which the channel assigned to each link has a small impact on the channels assigned to
other links.
Design 2. A design requiring few links, in which the channel assigned to each link has a large impact on the channels assigned to
other links.
If the signal freedom metric was simply the average of the contributions from active links (and not the average of all possible links) the
first design would always be favoured, even though the assignment of channels is equally difficult for both (as postulated).
5.2.3.4 Mathematical Derivation
The total field-strength of radio signals received by test point is denoted and is given by:
therefore the normalised CIR, , due to a channel of base station serving test point is given by:
To calculate the signal freedom metric, a threshold must be applied to (see Section 5.2.3.2). In addition, an value of 1 should
be assumed for all in-active links (see Section 5.2.3.3). Both these requirements are encapsulated in the calculation of , which
represents the signal freedom of the k th channel of base station serving test point :
Hence, the signal freedom, , for test point is given by the average of the signal freedom due to every channel of every base
station:
where
The final signal freedom metric, , is the average of the signal freedom for each of the test points, i.e.
The signal freedom metric is designed to be maximised.
Note, the computational complexity of the signal freedom metric is O(NM) (as required). It manages to be less than that of the CIR
calculation because the total noise can be reused for every server in the fuzzy server set (as it is not effected by channel assignment).
5.3 Methodology of Comparison

To test the performance of an IS it is necessary to determine how well it meets the IS Condition, i.e. how reliably does the IS predict
the post channel-assignment test point cover?
For each network a set of ten designs with maximal test point and traffic service was produced, and then a channel assignment was
generated for each design (and the resulting test point cover recorded). Designs were compared pair-wise to determine the
performance of the IS.
Figure 5.3: The performance of an imperfect interference surrogate, in which one pair of designs violate the IS Condition.
The IS illustrated in Figure 5.1 behaves ideally (i.e. the IS Condition is never violated). Figure 5.3 shows a similar scenario except with
a different IS. The IS value for d1 is below that of design d2 despite d1’s superior test point cover (i.e. a violation of the IS Condition).
This difference in cover (denoted by e in the diagram) shall be referred to as an ‘inaccuracy’.
The difference in cover between all pairs of designs that violate the IS Condition shall be referred to as the inaccuracy of the IS. Note
that, for the purposes of calculating an average, pairs of designs that do not violate the IS Condition are considered to have an
inaccuracy of zero.
Figure 5.4: The performance of an imperfect interference surrogate, in which three pairs of designs violate the IS Condition.
Figure 5.4 shows the test point cover for ten network designs; three pairs of designs violate the IS Condition giving inaccuracies of e1,
e2, and e3. The total number of possible (unique) pairs is given by:
pairs
therefore the average inaccuracy of the IS is given by:
and the maximum inaccuracy is given by:
5.3.1 Generation of Network Designs
For each network, a set of ten random network designs was created, in which a fixed fraction of the potential base stations were active:
for the first design, for the next design and so-on until the last design, which used the fraction . A high
variation in base station activity was chosen to give the widest range of final test point covers, as this broadens the range of inaccuracies
with which to compare ISs.
Each design was hill-climbed until both the traffic and test point service was within 1% of the maximum possible; this ensured that the
network designs were close enough in terms of traffic and test point service performance to allow a fair comparison of the IS values.
Initially the requirement for service was set at 100%, however, it was found that a large portion of the hill-climbing algorithms runtime
was used to achieve the last 1% (i.e. from 99% to 100%). Note that NetworkB1 was not included in the testing process due to the
impossibility of achieving 99% test point or traffic service (see Section 2.4.5).
5.3.2 Channel Assignment
A channel assignment was generated for each of the network designs using algorithm InitRandomD. Control then passed to
SearchHillClimbB, which ran for 10 hours per network design. This combination was chosen because it was shown to deliver the best
fixed-time performance (see Section 4.7).
5.4 Results
Results are presented for each of the four networks tested, and a summary of the results is also included to assist comparison. For the
duration of each ten hour channel assignment, the best test point cover was recorded every second; this gave one second ‘snapshots’
of test point cover, each of which could be used to calculate the inaccuracy of the IS. Table 5.1 shows six such snapshots of the
performance of an IS.
Test point Test point Test point Average IS Max IS Worst Case
Time cover for cover for cover for IS
design 1 design 2 design 10 inaccuracy inaccuracy inaccuracy
(s)
(% of total) (% of total) (% of total) (% of total) (% of total) (% of total)
393 27·08 28·60 60·10 0·0410 2·05 13·42
394 27·08 28·60 60·13 0·0386 1·93 13·47
395 27·08 28·60 60·13 0·0386 1·93 13·47
396 27·08 28·60 60·13 0·0386 1·93 13·47
397 27·10 28·60 60·13 0·0383 1·93 12·20
398 27·10 28·68 60·13 0·0324 1·81 12·20
Table 5.1: An example of IS performance vs. time.
The worst case IS inaccuracy figure quoted in Table 5.1 is the IS value that would be obtained if the IS condition were violated for
every pair of designs, and it is used to normalise the IS values. These normalised values are plotted instead of the actual values in the
IS-versus-time graphs to allow comparison between different networks.
Although the plotting of IS performances over time is an interesting result, the important comparison of ISs comes from the final IS
inaccuracy values, i.e. those obtained after the 10 hour run-time.
5.4.1 NetworkA1
The IS inaccuracy values for the ten network designs of NetworkA1 are given in Table 5.2. Overlap, non-dominance, and signal
freedom are denoted OV, ND, and SF respectively.
Max Inaccuracy in Test Average Inaccuracy in Test Normalised Average

Point Cover Point Cover Inaccuracy
OV ND SF OV ND SF OV ND SF
16·59% 13·53% 5·16% 6·45% 1·85% 0·37% 0·95 0·27 0·05
The change in IS inaccuracy over time for the three ISs is shown in Figure 5.5. The initial and final conditions for each IS are shown in
Figure 5.6, Figure 5.7, and Figure 5.8.
5.4.2 NetworkA2
The IS inaccuracy values for the ten network designs of NetworkA2 are given in Table 5.3.

11·45% 11·27% 2·60% 3·76% 2·99% 0·25% 0·91 0·72 0·06
5.4.3 NetworkA3

19·54% 4·82% 4·33% 5·89% 0·49% 0·31% 0·83 0·07 0·04
The change in IS inaccuracy over time is shown in Figure 5.13 for the three ISs. The initial and final conditions for each IS are shown in
5.4.4 NetworkA4

26·32% 9·92% 2·48% 9·25% 0·90% 0·09% 0·90 0·09 0·01
5.4.5 Summary
The results are summarised in Table 5.6. For each result type, a maximum and average (taken across all four networks) is included.
Maximum Inaccuracy in Test Average Inaccuracy in Test Normalised Average

Scope
NetA1 16·59% 13·53% 5·16% 6·45% 1·85% 0·37% 0·95 0·27 0·05
NetA2 11·45% 11·27% 2·60% 3·76% 2·99% 0·25% 0·91 0·72 0·06
NetA3 19·54% 4·82% 4·33% 5·89% 0·49% 0·31% 0·83 0·07 0·04
NetA4 26·32% 9·92% 2·48% 9·25% 0·90% 0·09% 0·90 0·09 0·01
Max 26·32% 13·53% 5·16% 9·25% 2·99% 0·37% 0·95 0·72 0·06
Average 18·48% 9·89% 3·64% 6·34% 1·56% 0·26% 0·90 0·29 0·04
Table 5.6: A summary of IS inaccuracy results.
In comparing any two pairs of network designs, the signal freedom metric was never incorrect (i.e. in violation of the IS condition) by
more than 5·16% (in terms of actual test point cover), non-dominance was never incorrect by more than 13·53%, and overlap by
26·32%. The average of the maximum discrepancies for all four networks was 3·64% for signal freedom, 9·89% for non-dominance,
and 18·48% for overlap.
The average in-accuracy of all network-design-pair comparisons never exceeded 0·37% for signal freedom (in terms of actual test
point cover), 2·99% for non-dominance, and 9·25% for overlap.
5.5 Conclusion
For all four networks, signal freedom outperformed non-dominance, which outperformed overlap. Although non-dominance performed
well on some networks (NetworkA3 and NetworkA4) it performed badly on others, signal freedom performed consistently well on all
four networks. If high IS performance is required, then signal freedom is the best choice. Signal freedom is difficult to implement
(algorithmically), and it may also be difficult to convert for use with other network models. If the implementation costs were prohibitive,
then non-dominance would be a suitable replacement, but its erratic performance could lead to network designs with high interference.
Overlap performed badly on all networks, and it must be concluded that overlap is a poor IS (under the conditions applied in this test).
However, the IS requirement used in this thesis is based on the particular formulation of the evaluation function, whereas a different
evaluation function (even if only slightly different) may lead to a very different IS condition, to which overlap may be better suited. A
fundamental problem with overlap is it inability to take into account strong server signals, and the problem of interfering signals is only
relative to the strength of the serving signals.
It might be argued that overlap also functions as an indicator of a network's ability to handover subscribers between cells. However, in
practice it is better to have separate metrics for each network performance characteristic, as this allows the network designer to control
the relative significance of each characteristic independently.
Chapter 6
Network Design – Part 2

The application of combinatorial optimisation to the Wireless Capacitated Network Design Problem (WCNDP) is described in this
chapter. In Chapter 3 the Base Station Configuration Problem (BSCP) and the subsequent Channel Assignment Problem (CAP) were
solved as one problem (the WCNDP). In this chapter (following the conclusion of Chapter 3) these two sub-problems are solved
sequentially, and comparisons drawn (this corresponds to Task T1 of Objective O2 in Section 1.3). The evaluation function used
throughout this chapter is the same as the one described in Chapter 5.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 6.1 evaluates the advantages of the two-stage network design approach, Section 6.2
describes network designs that can be produced with a ‘high’ computational investment, and Section 6.3 assesses the impact that
minimising network infrastructure has on network performance.
6.1 Evaluation of Two-Stage Network Design Process

In Chapter 3, optimisation algorithms were described for the network design problem, and it was concluded (see Section 3.4) that the
problem should be split into two stages (BSCP and CAP). Signal freedom is the interference surrogate (see Chapter 5) used during the
BSCP phase of optimisation described in this chapter.
As in Chapter 3, the total runtime allocated for each network design was limited to 20 hours. This ensured a fair comparison of results.
It was not obvious how best to divide the time between the BSCP and the CAP; different divisions were tried on each problem, but no
discernible pattern emerged, therefore both stages were allocated ten hours.
6.1.1 Stage One: The Base Station Configuration Problem
The algorithms used for network design are taken from Chapter 3, and the (temporarily redundant) channel assignment operations are
ignored. Algorithms SearchRandomC and SearchHillClimbA (seeded by InitRandomC) were chosen for testing as they both
performed well and there was no significant difference between their average performances (see Section 3.3.6).
Both algorithms were tested on each network for ten hours, and the performance of the best network designs produced is summarised
in Table 3.5.
Network
Performance Metric Search Algorithm
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
SearchRandomC 97·30 97·53 97·15 98·52 9·08

Traffic Service
(% of total)
SearchHillClimbA 99·72 94·91 96·37 98·78 16·57
SearchRandomC 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 44·12

Test Point Service
(% of total)
SearchRandomC 0·999161 0·999461 0·999652 0·999320 0·995749
Signal Freedom
SearchRandomC 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00

Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Active SearchRandomC 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00
Base Stations
(% of total)
SearchRandomC 821 246 613 492 909

Number of Design
Evaluations
SearchHillClimbA 2294 663 1769 1325 3823
Table 6.1: The performance of the best BSCP solutions for SearchRandomC and SearchHillClimbA.
Figure 3.27 shows the performance of the best network design plotted against the time taken to produce it for SearchRandomC on
NetworkA4.
Figure 6.2 shows the performance of the best network design plotted against the time taken to produce it for SearchHillClimbA
NetworkA4.
Figure 6.2: The performance of the best design produced vs. time for SearchHillClimbA on NetworkA4.
6.1.2 Stage Two: The Channel Assignment Problem
Algorithm SearchHillClimbB was used, as it produced the best performance in a fixed time (see Section 4.7). The performance of the
final network designs produced is summarised in Table 6.2.
Network
Performance Search Algorithm
Average
Metric Used for BSCP
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
SearchRandomC 65·76 49·96 48·96 70·19 2·79 47·53

Traffic Cover
(% of total)
SearchHillClimbA 76·51 50·50 54·11 73·18 2·51 51·36
Test Point SearchRandomC 68·11 60·10 54·34 76·86 17·74 55·53

Cover
(% of total) SearchHillClimbA 77·88 61·58 61·31 77·72 13·63 58·42

Table 6.2: The performance of the best network design (after channel assignment) for SearchRandomB.
6.1.3 Comparison With One-Stage Approach
The average traffic cover due to the two-stage design process was higher than that due to the one-stage design process (see Section
3.3.6). The best average traffic cover produced by the two-stage process was 51·36%, and the best average traffic cover achieved
using the one-stage approach was 43·85%, but to quantify the difference it is best to compare relative traffic loss[34]:
Best traffic loss due to one-stage process = 100 - 43·85 = 56·15%
Best traffic loss due to two-stage process= 100 - 51·36 = 48·64%
Improvement in average traffic loss = 56·15 - 48·64 = 7·51%
Relative improvement in average traffic loss = 7·51 / 56·15 = 13·37%
This is a significant improvement in searching efficiency, and it was achieved with a relatively small programming effort (i.e. the
implementation of the interference surrogate, the modification of the search procedures, and the modification of the evaluation function).
Of the two algorithms tested in this chapter, SearchHillClimbA produced the highest average performance for all network
performance metrics, and this is due, in part, to the ability of SearchHillClimbA (or any local-search algorithm) to exploit coherence
between consecutively evaluated network designs. The efficiency of caching is demonstrated by the fact that approximately three times
as many network evaluations were made by SearchHillClimbA than were made by SearchRandomC. If the ‘caching’ of evaluation
calculations were disabled it is certain that the performance of SearchHillClimbA would decrease, and it is possible that it would fall
below that of SearchRandomC. Therefore, it should not be assumed that SearchHillClimbA would always outperform
SearchRandomC.
6.2 Network Designs with ‘High’ Computational Investment

All the network designs produced previously in this thesis have been limited to 20 hours of runtime, but in this section the runtime is
extended to seven days: five days for the BSCP and two days for the CAP. This relative division of time between network design and
channel assignment was found to yield good network design performance, however, no optimal division of time between the two stages
has been determined.
An unlimited time would ideally be devoted to finding the best possible network, but obviously this is not possible in practice. Therefore
it was decided that 35 days (7 days ´ 5 networks) was the maximum time available for the generation of results for this section. The
two-stage network design process was adopted because of its superior searching efficiency (see Section 6.1.3).
6.2.1 Algorithms for the BSCP
A combination of search algorithms was used to produce a solution to the BSCP for each of the five networks. Although
SearchHillClimbA was found to produce the best final network design performance, it was observed that SearchRandomC produced
the best improvement in network design in the early stages of optimisation (for example, compare Figure 6.1 with Figure 6.2), but then
stalled after about an hour. Therefore the first hour of searching was done by SearchRandomC, after which the control was passed to
SearchHillClimbA.
Experience from previous runs of SearchHillClimbA showed that approximately 50% of moves in which base stations were
deactivated produced an improvement in design performance, and that the adjustment of parameters for these redundant base stations
(and their inclusion in the evaluation procedure) wasted time. Once the initial optimisation algorithms (SearchRandomC and
SearchHillClimbA) had achieved 99% traffic and test point service, a new searching phase was started in which redundant base
stations were ‘pruned’ from the network design. This process is embodied in the algorithm SearchPruneA, which is a modified version
of SearchHillClimbA where only base station deactivation moves are permitted (see Figure 6.3 for details). SearchPruneA was run to
termination (local optimality), and then control was returned to SearchHillClimbA for the remaining time.
Figure 6.3: Algorithm SearchPruneA.
6.2.2 Algorithms for the CAP
SearchHillClimbB is the only channel assignment algorithm (of those tested in Chapter 4) guaranteed to terminate in a fixed time,
however, it was found that InitConstructA terminates in a shorter (albeit still unpredictable) time on better cell plans than the (random)
ones used for testing in Chapter 4. Therefore due to InitConstructA’s superiority over SearchHillClimbB in terms of searching
efficiency (see Section 4.7) it was chosen for the initial assignment, after which the control passed to SearchHillClimbB for the
remainder of the two-day channel assignment period.
6.2.3 Results
The results are presented separately for the two optimisation stages: solution of the BSCP and solution of the subsequent CAP.
6.2.3.1 BSCP
The performance of the best network designs produced during the five day period is summarised in Table 6.3.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Traffic Service
(% of total) 100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 68·80
Test Point Service

100·00 100·00 100·00 100·00 38·53
(% of total)
Signal Freedom 0·999628 0·999707 0·999863 0·999694 0·994096
Occupied Sites
80·40 89·69 57·57 97·13 100·00
(% of total)
Active Base
Stations 51·87 54·27 31·75 65·30 93·41
(% of total)
Number of Design
40246 11095 44947 20286 135220
Evaluations
Table 6.3: The performance of the best BSCP solution for composite search.
Figure 6.4 shows the performance of the best network design plotted against the time taken to produce it for NetworkA2, and the
three optimisation phases are labelled as follows: ‘A’ denotes SearchRandomC followed by SearchHillClimbA, ‘B’ denotes
SearchPruneA, and ‘C’ denotes SearchHillClimbA.
Figure 6.4: The performance of the best BSCP solution vs. time for composite search on NetworkA2.
6.2.3.2 CAP
The best channel assignment found for each BSCP solution was used to generate the network performance metrics in Table 6.4.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1
Test Point Cover (% of 100·00 96·76 99·13 99·82 25·78

total)
Table 6.4: The performance of the best network design for seven day optimisation.
6.2.4 Conclusion
Table 6.4 shows that, excluding NetworkB1, the performance of the network designs produced during the seven day optimisation was
high - no more than 5% of call traffic was lost from any network and no more than 4% of the test point area went uncovered. The
predicted performance of NetworkB1 suffered because of the characteristics of the data (see Section 2.4.5).
A large amount of network infrastructure was required to achieve the high network performance. In Table 6.5 the amount of
infrastructure used is compared with the theoretical minimum infrastructure dictated by capacity limitations (as calculated in Section
2.4).
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4
Actual 80·40 89·69 57·57 97·13

Occupied Sites
(% of total)
Minimum 10·00 6·88 4·23 8·61
Active Base Actual 51·87 54·27 31·75 65·30

Stations
(% of total) Minimum 10·00 6·77 4·11 8·47
Table 6.5: A comparison of actual network infrastructure with theoretic minimum.
For all four networks taken together, approximately seven (203·19 ¸ 29·35 = 6·92) times as many base stations were used than the
minimum required to serve all the network traffic.
6.3 Network Designs with Minimal Infrastructure

In the previous section it was demonstrated that network designs with high performance could be produced using automatic
optimisation, however, the designs required substantial network infrastructure. In this section, two approaches are presented that
explicitly address this infrastructure problem. The first approach attempts to minimise the infrastructure in an existing design, and the
second attempts to create a minimal design ‘from scratch’. The number of base stations is explicitly targeted as the element of
infrastructure to be reduced, but the number of sites will implicitly be reduced by this process.
NetworkB1 was excluded from this infrastructure minimisation study as it contains more traffic than would be coverable using even a
full complement of base stations (see Section 2.4.5).
6.3.1 Algorithm: SearchPruneB
The goal of algorithm SearchPruneB, detailed in Figure 6.5, is the production of network designs with minimal infrastructure. It is an
extended version of SearchPruneA.
SearchPruneB delivers a network design with a performance equal to (or greater than) that of the initial network design used, and
number of base stations in the new design will be less than or equal to that of the initial design.
6.3.1.1 Description
A list of active base stations is made from the initial network design. The base stations are then arranged in ascending order of the
amount of traffic cover they provide, as the removal of those covering the least traffic is likely to have the least impact on network
performance. The first base station in the list is deactivated and the resulting network design evaluated. If network performance does
not deteriorate (i.e. no loss of traffic or test point cover), then this base station remains inactive, otherwise it is reactivated and the next
base station in the list is tested instead. If no superfluous base stations can be found, the base station whose removal had the least
impact (i.e. led to the least loss in traffic cover) is deactivated, and the resulting network is then hill climbed until the target network
performance (that of the initial design) is restored. Whenever this target performance is achieved (after the removal of a base station or
after restoration by hill climbing) the whole sequence is repeated on the new network design.
Figure 6.5: Algorithm SearchPruneB.
The hill climb procedure used by SearchPruneB to restore coverage is embodied in algorithm SearchHillClimbC (detailed in Figure
6.6). This modified version of SearchHillClimbA has no activation/deactivation moves (as these are explicitly handled by
SearchPruneB) and terminates once the performance of its current design is greater than or equal to a given target performance.
Figure 6.6: Algorithm SearchHillClimbC.
Note that the full evaluation of CIR is necessary to compute the test point and traffic covers for each iteration of these algorithms.
Without this calculation the design performance could not be guaranteed.
6.3.1.2 Results
The network designs produced in Section 6.2 were used as the input to SearchPruneB, because these network designs had high
performance but required large amounts of infrastructure. SearchPruneB was run for seven days on each of the following networks:
NetworkA1, NetworkA2, NetworkA3, and NetworkA4. The results are summarised in Table 6.6.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4
Traffic Cover (% of total) 100·00 95·68 97·79 99·77
Test Point Cover (% of total) 100·00 95·43 95·77 99·70
Occupied Sites (% of total) 65·20 65·94 34·15 84·84

37·33 31·46 16·31 48·09
total)
Number of Network
17680 7744 33157 12834
Evaluations
Table 6.6: The performance of the final network designs produced by SearchPruneB.
Figure 6.7 shows the network infrastructure employed in the design for NetworkA1 plotted against the time taken to achieve it.
Figure 6.7: Graph of network infrastructure vs. time for algorithm SearchPruneB on NetworkA1.
Algorithm SearchPruneB decreased the amount of infrastructure required for each of the four network designs whilst maintaining the
original levels of performance. The new design for NetworkA1 required 28·03% less base stations than the original design, 42·03% in
NetworkA2, 48·63% in NetworkA3, and 26·36% in NetworkA4 (an average decrease of 36·26%). These results are presented in
Table 6.7.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4
Before 80·40 89·69 57·57 97·13
Occupied Sites
After 65·20 65·94 34·15 84·84
(% of total)
Before - After 15·20 23·75 23·42 12·29
Occupied Sites %Difference 18·91 26·48 40·68 12·65
Before 51·87 54·27 31·75 65·30

Active Base
Stations After 37·33 31·46 16·31 48·09
(% of total)
Before – After 14·54 22·81 15·44 17·21
Active Base Stations %Difference 28·03 42·03 48·63 26·36
Table 6.7: The effect on network infrastructure of algorithm SearchPruneB.
As well as requiring fewer base stations, fewer sites were required for each network. The algorithm specifically targets base stations for
removal, but a modified algorithm that targeted site reduction rather than base station reduction might improve upon the amount of site
reduction (albeit at the expense of base station reductions).
Although the amount of infrastructure in the new network designs has fallen, it is still significantly higher than the theoretical minimum
dictated by capacity limitations (see Section 2.4). For all four networks together, approximately four and a half (133·19 ¸ 29·35 =
4·54) times as many base stations were used than is required to satisfy base station capacity limitations.
6.3.2 Algorithm: SearchConstructC
In the previous section, the approach to infrastructure minimisation was the modification of an existing, high performance, network
design. An alternative approach is the production of networks that employ minimal (or near minimal) infrastructure at the (possible) cost
of network coverage performance. Comparison of the previous performance of the search algorithms (as summarised in Section 3.3.6)
showed that SearchConstructB produced network designs with a good ratio of coverage performance to deployed base station
infrastructure, therefore it was chosen as the ‘core’ algorithm for investigation.
For a fair comparison with the approach in the previous section, the optimisation of each network ran for 14 days (the total time
‘invested’ in creating each network design). Algorithm SearchConstructB was found to be unsuitable for long optimisation runs and
was replaced with SearchConstructC, as detailed in Figure 6.8.
6.3.2.1 Description
Algorithm SearchConstructC is a modified version SearchConstructB, which reversed the goal of maximising test point service in
order to limit interference. In SearchConstructC the construction of network designs occurs in two phases. In the first phase, new
base stations are selected based on high traffic service and low test point service, and this phase ends once 99% of the traffic in the
network is serviced. In the second phase the evaluation function is restored and new base stations are selected based on high test point
service - this ‘hole filling’ stage ends once 99% test point service is achieved.
Figure 6.8: Algorithm SearchConstructC.

Algorithm SearchConstructC was run to termination, and the resulting network design given to algorithm SearchPruneB. If
SearchPruneB terminated within the allotted time, control was passed to SearchHillClimbC. This optimisation phase was terminated
after 10 days regardless of which algorithm was currently active. A channel assignment was created for the resulting network design
using InitConstructA. If this did not require the allotted four days, then the assignment was optimised by SearchHillClimbB for the
remaining time.
6.3.2.2 Results
Table 6.8 summarises the performance of the best network designs produced during the full 14 day period. The results of the two
optimisation phases (the BSCP solution and the CAP solution) are combined in Table 6.8.
Network
Performance Metric
A1 A2 A3 A4
Traffic Cover (% of total) 87·74 60·21 65·08 62·35
Traffic Service (% of total) 99·02 99·07 99·46 99·47
Test Point Cover (% of total) 81·01 60·20 65·66 64·12
Test Point Service (% of total) 100·00 99·94 100·00 100·00
Signal Freedom 0·998364 0·998645 0·999264 0·998216
Occupied Sites (% of total) 27·20 20·31 11·44 22·95

10·00 6·77 4·11 8·47
total)
No. Network Designs (BSCP) 309575 127796 366198 212731
Table 6.8: The performance of the best network designs produced by the composite constructive search algorithm.
For all four networks, the minimum number of base stations (as dictated by capacity limitations) was achieved whilst still servicing
>99% of the network traffic. However, the interference in these designs was much higher than in those found in Section 6.3.1.2 using
the same amount of computational investment. This leads to a significant reduction in test point and traffic cover in all four networks.
Chapter 7
Conclusions and Future Work

The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 7.1 contains the thesis conclusions, Section 7.2 recommends enhancements to the
network model, and Section 7.3 presents possible improvements to the optimisation methodology.
7.1 Thesis Conclusions

In this section, the thesis results are examined and conclusions are drawn about the applicability of optimisation to the problem of
mobile telephone network design.
7.1.1 Spectral Efficiency and Network Infrastructure
Although this thesis was primarily a study of ACP techniques, an important principle to emerge from the results was a trade off between
spectral efficiency and the quantity of network infrastructure. It is useful to discuss this relationship first so that the remaining
conclusions, more directly relevant to ACP, may be better placed in context. The underlying principal will be referred to as the
efficiency conjecture, and it may be stated as follows: in general, spectral efficiency in a capacitated network may be improved
by the addition of more network infrastructure.
In a wireless network, spectral re-use is the amount of information transferred (measured in bits) divided by the amount of spectrum
used (measured in Hertz) to transfer it[35]. There is a fundamental limit to the amount of information a radio channel (or concatenation
of channels) can convey to the same place at the same time [5], but the same channels may be used multiple times in different places if
the information receivers are sufficiently electromagnetically isolated from one another. Hence, there is no theoretical upper-limit to
spectral re-use. However, in a real wireless network the receivers may not be sufficiently spread-out to ensure EM isolation, and the
spectral efficiency per unit area is a more accurate indicator of network performance[36]. This is the measure referred to by the
efficiency conjecture.
Now, the information bandwidth (or data rate) available to a receiver is dictated by the CIR of its serving signal [55], and a fixed data
rate is required for telephony (in a GSM system at least). Therefore, a corresponding (fixed) target CIR may be derived (as was the
case for the data sets used in this thesis) that ensures a successful telephone connection. For the thesis results, only receivers for which
a sufficient CIR was available were considered covered (see Section 2.2.16), and it was found that: the addition of more base
stations often improved the CIR in the network, which in turn improved the number of receivers covered. This is the basis for
the efficiency conjecture, and it is this relationship that the following subsection attempts to establish.
It is important to note that the improvement in spectral efficiency predicted by the efficiency conjecture is not due simply to the addition
of traffic carrying transceivers; instead it refers to the reduction of interference in a network that already has sufficient transceivers to
serve all the subscribers.
There are limits on the range of situations for which the efficiency conjecture is valid, and there exists a point at which the addition of
infrastructure will give no appreciable improvement in spectral efficiency. One limiting factor is the background noise – even if the
interference due to other network elements where to disappear completely, the CIR would be limited by unavoidable background
noise.
7.1.1.1 Evidence
Figure 3.10 and Figure 3.19 show a positive correlation between test point cover and base station activity for random network designs,
but in the regions of the graph where base station activity is low, a wide range of test point cover is seen. However, comparison of
designs in this region are (for the purposes of establishing a correlation) invalid, because the subscriber capacity each design offers will
vary widely. It is only fair to compare network designs that have the same, or very similar, capacity performance, i.e. the same traffic
service. This is because interference, transceiver allocations, and traffic are intimately linked.
To eliminate the effect (described in the previous example) that transceiver-based capacity limitations have on the correlation graphs, it
is necessary to compare network designs in which the base station transceiver capacities have been matched to subscriber demand (i.e.
designs with the same traffic service). By chance, the network designs produced for testing interference surrogates in Chapter 5 are
ideally suited. Ten network designs were produced (for each network data set), in which the number of active base stations was widely
varied (see Section 5.3) but the traffic service was the same. These initial network designs were optimised until their traffic and test
point service performances both exceeded 99%. The correlations between base station activity and test point cover are shown in
Figure 7.1, Figure 7.2, Figure 7.3, and Figure 7.4. Clearly a correlation does exist, but the stochastic nature of the process used to
derive the network designs means that some variance is present in the results, therefore the correlation is not conclusive.
More sensitive and intelligent experimentation is required in order to prove or disprove the efficiency conjecture, and is not considered
in this thesis. The evidence presented here, at best, implies the validity of the efficiency conjecture (or a closely related mechanism). It is
important to note that the thesis results are conveniently placed in context by the efficiency conjecture, but they are not contingent upon
it being true.
7.1.1.2 Explanation
It is useful to describe a scenario where the efficiency conjecture might be true. The demonstration of a pathological case for which the
conjecture is valid is by no means a proof, but it does help elucidate the potential underlying mechanism. Consider a one-dimensional
array of evenly distributed test points - indicated by the horizontal axes of the two graphs in Figure 7.5 and Figure 7.6. Each test point
requires an arbitrary CIR of 10 in order to be covered (shown as a bold horizontal line). The first graph shows the effect of two
transmitters TX A (shown in red) and TX B (shown in green). The following values are plotted for all the receivers: the field strength of
the signal from each transmitter, the total noise (which corresponds to a constant noise floor plus the co-channel interference from all
other transmitters) that a receiver would experience if served by the given transmitter, and (similarly) the CIR. It can be seen that 32%
of test points will be covered by one or other transmitter, i.e. 32% of test points have access to a signal with a CIR greater than or
equal to 10. The second graph shows the same scenario with the inclusion of a third transmitter, TX C (shown in blue). The extra
interference generated by TX C has caused the CIRs of receivers served by TX A or TX B to fall marginally, however this is more than
compensated for by the additional receiver cover in the immediate vicinity of TX C - the total cover rising to 38%.
A simple propagation loss model was used to compute the field strengths in both cases, the assumption being that signal strength was
attenuated in proportion to where d is the distance (in metres) and is 2·5. A background noise of 0·1mW was assumed
and the transmitters were assumed to all be transmitting on the same channel at a power of 1W. The line of receivers was assumed to
be 3 km from end to end. The figures were chosen to be consistent with the data sets used in this thesis. Different figures could lead to
the opposite conclusion (i.e. that the introduction of TX C actually reduced receiver cover), but the aim of this example was the
demonstration of a possible scenario where the efficiency conjecture might be true.
Figure 7.5: A pathological example of receiver cover for two transmitters.
Figure 7.6: A pathological example of receiver cover for three transmitters.
7.1.1.3 Implication
A base station has an upper traffic capacity limit (for a given grade of service), therefore a minimum number of base stations for a
network may be calculated from the total network traffic (as shown in Section 2.4). The efficiency conjecture implies that additional
base stations may be required to meet CIR coverage targets. If the number of base stations falls below this, CIR related, minimum then
the number of subscribers successfully covered must also fall. This trade off between infrastructure and subscriber cover is illustrated by
the pareto-optimal[37] curve shown in Figure 7.7. The shaded region beyond this pareto-optimal front represents unrealisable network
designs.
Figure 7.7: Graph of subscriber cover vs. network infrastructure.
The curve shown in Figure 7.7 is theoretical. In practice there may be no method by which these pareto-optimal designs could be
created, or such a method may require an unavailable quantity of computer power to achieve. Figure 7.8 shows the pareto-optimal
curves that may be obtained with finite computing resources, where one Computing Unit (CU) is used to represent the minimum amount
of effort required to create and evaluate a single network design. As the computational investment increases, the pareto-optimal curves
approach (but do not necessarily meet) the theoretical maxima.
Figure 7.8: Graph of the effect of computational investment on the pareto-optimal trade off between subscriber cover and
network infrastructure.
In light of the efficiency conjecture, a network designer must decide what is more important: a high level of cover or a minimal
deployment of infrastructure? Two designs that epitomise these aspirations are represented in Figure 7.9, where the target
performances are respectively labelled ‘A’ and ‘B’. However, it is not possible to derive these pareto-optimal curves for a given
network, or to be sure that the design performances shown are realisable. The graphs are only useful as an illustration of the efficiency
conjecture.
Figure 7.9: Target performance positions on the pareto-optimal graph.
7.1.2 Effectiveness of Automatic Cell Planning
In the following subsections, methods of generating network designs with the performances approaching those shown in Figure 7.9 are
evaluated (this corresponds to Task T3 of Objective O2 in Section 1.3).
7.1.2.1 Synthesising Network Designs with High Cover
In Section 6.2 designs with near maximal cover were produced for all networks[38]. Seven computer days were required, and the
network designs contained a substantial amount of infrastructure. None of the network designs produced matched the target theoretical
optima (labelled ‘A’ in Figure 7.9). However, the subscriber cover achieved using these designs was high, and the computational
investment required to obtain them was reasonable. It may be concluded that ACP is capable of producing network designs with near
maximal cover in a reasonable time, but the amount of network infrastructure required may be high.
7.1.2.2 Synthesising Networks with Minimal Infrastructure
The algorithms in Section 6.3 focused explicitly on the minimisation of network infrastructure, and two distinct approaches were
formulated. The first approach to infrastructure minimisation (described in Section 6.3.1) relied on the modification of an existing
network design by the removal of redundant infrastructure. The average reduction in the number of base stations was over 30% using
seven computer days per network. This approach is an extension of the previous design method (Section 7.1.2.1) in so far as the target
theoretical performance is that represented by ‘A’ in Figure 7.9. The second approach to infrastructure minimisation (described in
Section 6.3.2) produced network designs with a minimal number of base stations (as dictated by base station capacity and network
traffic) at the potential expense of subscriber cover. Minimal infrastructure was achieved for all networks, but the average loss in cover
was approximately 30%. This approach implicitly targets point ‘B’ in Figure 7.9.
It may be concluded that ACP is capable of significantly reducing network infrastructure requirements, at least for synthetic network
designs. Infrastructure minimisation is most effective if the target subscriber cover does not need to be guaranteed, however significant
minimisation can be achieved regardless.
7.1.3 Separating the BSCP and the CAP
An important and novel feature of this thesis was the inclusion of channel assignment as part of the whole wireless network design
process, and a comparison was made with the traditional two-stage approach. The network designs produced by the two-stage
approach had approximately 13% less traffic loss, and hence were superior. Note that the efficiency of the two-stage approach is only
available if a suitable interference surrogate is used, as derived in this thesis.
Despite the superiority of the two-stage approach, the one-stage approach does have certain advantages. Infrastructure minimisation
algorithms, such as SearchPruneB, only allow the removal of base stations if they do not effect subscriber cover, and this can only be
guaranteed if a full channel model is used to assess interference.
7.1.3.1 Signal Freedom
In Chapter 5 the interference surrogate Signal Freedom was developed. It was shown to accurately predict relative levels of
interference in candidate network designs. This allowed proper consideration of the difficulty in assigning channels to any base stations
selected during the network design phase. Signal freedom was shown to significantly outperform two current industrial interference
surrogates: overlap and non-dominance.
7.1.4 Comparison of Manual and Automatic Cell Planning
There are many facets of cell planning that cannot be easily quantified and, hence, automated. For instance, covering an area where a
technology trade show is regularly held (e.g. Earl’s Court in London), which is politically significant but not directly economical.
ACP is intended to empower cell planners, not to replace them. ACP still requires the cell planner to specify what they want (in terms
of service provision and economics), but not how to achieve it. This frees (valuable) cell planner time and allows them to either tackle
larger service areas or to concentrate in more detail on the issues arising in the same service area (such as data transmission quality or
network backbone bottlenecks).
7.1.5 Network Economics
Consider a network with a fixed target subscriber cover (selected by the network operator). If ACP techniques are used, the number
of base stations required to meet the target cover will decrease as the amount of computer power (number of computers ´ time)
increases. This relationship is shown in Figure 7.10.
Figure 7.10: Number of base stations vs. computational investment for a fixed subscriber cover.
Now, the amount of money spent on network infrastructure will be proportional to the number of base stations used – as shown in
Figure 7.11.
Figure 7.11: Infrastructure cost vs. number of base stations.
The operator would like to determine the optimal amount of computer power to devote to ACP. This is the point where any additional
investment in computers would cost more than it would save by reducing infrastructure. This optimal point is illustrated in Figure 7.12.
Figure 7.12: The determination of optimal computational investment by comparison of computational cost and network
infrastructure cost.
No method has been derived to allow an operator to determine this optimal computational investment, at best it can be said that
operators may currently be investing too little. The illustration of computational economics (given above) is simplistic, but it is included
to try and place the thesis results in a commercial context.
If subscriber cover (and hence, revenue) is allowed to vary, the economic model becomes more powerful. Further insights are gained in
allowing the amount of required radio spectrum to vary, as the efficiency conjecture suggests a trade-off between required spectrum
and required infrastructure. For example, an operator may save money by renting less spectrum (an incredibly expensive commodity)
and deploying more base stations (cheap in comparison to spectrum). However, the validity of these ideas is not considered in this
thesis.
7.2 Network Model Enhancements

This section presents extensions to the network model. All these proposals are intended to improve the quality of the predictions made
by the model.
7.2.1 Handover
The mechanism of subscriber handover from one cell to another has not been explicitly considered in this thesis. True mobility relies on
the support of handover between cells, and this becomes more important as cell sizes decrease, which is an essential feature of high
capacity networks. The model presented in this thesis is static - it does not consider the movement of subscribers. Some models, such
as the ‘connectivity’ model in [2], have relied on approximate measures of a network’s ‘handover performance’. However, the quality
of these approximations is unknown and, in pathological cases at least, a predicted optimal performance would not guarantee handover
support in a real network.
A study of handover successes and failures in operational networks is required in order to derive a complete model of handover
behaviour. If the computational complexity of this model prohibits its inclusion in an optimisation procedure, a surrogate function should
be derived (in a similar way to the interference surrogate derived in this thesis) that has a known (or at least estimated) degree of
accuracy.
7.2.2 Network Backbone Design
In this thesis no consideration is made of the network’s backbone infrastructure (such as the trunking elements, PSTN entry points, and
subscriber database services). These considerations were omitted because of a lack of readily available data, but their inclusion in the
network model would greatly enhance the quality of information that could be extracted from simulations (for example, the latency of
communication between two points in the network). The layout of the backbone infrastructure as a separate optimisation problem has
been well studied, and examples can be found in [56] and [57].
7.2.3 Three-Dimensional Modelling
The thesis network model assumes that all subscriber traffic will originate on the ground, and no consideration is made of the vertical
distribution of traffic that might occur (for instance, in a building). It has been informally estimated that in the City of London, only 40%
of mobile traffic occurs at ground level. This clearly implies that a two-dimensional model will be less accurate than a three-dimensional
one.
As subscriber densities and bandwidth requirements increase, cell sizes must decrease. The only way to achieve efficient spectrum re-
use in a built-up environment is to sectorise the building vertically; this may be achieved by pico-cellular architectures (each room of a
building is given its own base station) or by mounting directional antennae on adjacent buildings at different heights. To improve
prediction accuracy, consideration of the impact to users in vertically adjacent cells must be made.
The computational requirements of a full three-dimensional model are greater than that of the model presented in this thesis, in which a
trade off has been made between prediction quality and simulation run-time. However, as the price/performance ratio of computers
continues to improve, this trade off must be periodically re-assessed.
7.2.4 Temporal Variance
The inclusion of temporal variance to the model could give an improvement in simulation accuracy. The busy-hour traffic assumption
used in the thesis model is only able to give a worst-case prediction of network performance. Gross temporal variances could be
considered as individual static cases, for instance the traffic pattern during working hour differs significantly from the traffic pattern
outside of those hours. The current model makes a conservative estimate of network coverage performance based on the peak traffic
expected at each test point throughout a typical day, but this leads to an over-estimation of interference and an under-estimation of
network capacity; a more realistic prediction would allow the deployment of less infrastructure. Finer temporal variance characteristics,
such as mobility, could also be included to improve predictions of handover support (see Section 7.2.1)
7.2.5 Delay Spread
Path loss is not the only characteristic of a radio signal that affects reception quality; another important factor is delay spread. Delay
spread occurs when a transmitted signal travels by more than one path to its intended receiver. In the GSM system, adaptive channel
equalization is used to recover the intended signal, whereas in IS-95 [9] Rake receiver techniques are used to overcome the problem of
delay spread. The problem of optimising wireless networks to meet delay spread constraints is explicitly considered in [3].
7.2.6 Quality of Service
The central goal of the network design problem outlined in this thesis was the provision of a signal with a sufficient Carrier-to-
Interference-Ratio (CIR) for each user. Expressing the design requirement in terms of Quality of Service (QOS) measures (such as
data throughput, latency, and blocking probability) instead of technology specific measures, such as CIR, has two distinct advantages:
1. These measures are closer to a users experience of the network, and this makes the relative prioritisation of these quantities easier
for the network designer. In addition to simplifying the specification of network requirements, the specification becomes much more
portable between different technologies (such as GSM and UMTS).
2. Actual QOS statistics can be directly compared with other communication systems. A user (or a user’s application) will choose a
transport medium (such as wireless LAN, wireline ISDN, or GPRS) based on a comparison of the offered QOS, and the network
designer will be best placed to win that competition (and hence transport the user’s data) if QOS is given explicit consideration
during network design.
Mobile telephone network operators are increasingly interested in the provision of a variety of services, each of which may have
different QOS requirements. Although telephony is set to continue as the core service, its QOS requirements (for instance, low latency
and low bandwidth) are not the same as those for other services. The explicit calculation of QOS statistics allows a range of services to
be mapped onto a wireless network and not simply the one-size-fits-all mapping that results from designing solely for telephony.
7.2.7 Error Management Through Interval Arithmetic
The accuracy of predictions made by the model is dependent on the accuracy of input data such as terrain topography, subscriber
positions, and equipment operating characteristics. Additional inaccuracies are introduced by computational operations such as
propagation prediction. The calculation of the inaccuracy (or tolerance) of the results is non-trivial and the usual practice is to quote a
standard, conservative, estimate of the expected tolerance for each type of simulation result (for example, 4dB for propagation
predictions).
Interval arithmetic is a computational approach that may prove useful in improving the quality of the simulation results (see [58] for
background). Instead of input variables being quoted as single figures (as in single point arithmetic) they are quoted as two figures (an
interval), and the true value is said to be ‘contained within the interval’. These intervals are propagated through the calculation until they
emerge as outputs. The output is guaranteed to contain the correct answer, and the ‘spread’ of the interval indicates the certainty of the
result. More conventional tolerance techniques usually require an analytical analysis of the algorithms involved, but the numerical
approach of interval arithmetic delegates this ‘book-keeping’ to the computer instead of the programmer. Several disadvantages must
be addressed if interval analysis is to be included in network simulation:
1. Propagation prediction algorithms must be modified to include the interval concept, but this is cannot be achieved by a simple
extension of the existing algorithms.
2. No optimisation techniques have been developed that are designed to deal with interval based objective functions.
These disadvantages do not represent shortcomings in the interval approach to computation but are in fact implicit problems the ‘single
point’ approach ignores.
7.3 Improvements to Optimisation Methodology

A number of improvements to the optimisation methodology have been postulated, but time constraints have prevented their
implementation and testing. They are presented here as a resource for future research on this problem as they represent an opportunity
for improving optimisation effectiveness and efficiency (this corresponds to Task T4 of Objective O2 in Section 1.3).
7.3.1 Divide and Conquer
Divide and conquer is a classical approach to improving the efficiency of algorithms that operate on large data sets (as exemplified in
[51]). The underlying problem is usually spacio-temporal in nature, or at least shares with these problems the following property:
adjacent data elements are more dependent on one another than non-adjacent elements. It may be said, in general, that
adjacent cells in a cellular network have more influence on one another than non-adjacent cells (for instance, channel selection), or that
adjacent subscribers will affect each others quality of service more than non-adjacent ones (for instance, base station availability).
When operators design networks manually (i.e. without automatic optimisation) they invariably divide the network into manageable
geographical regions. The automatic division of the network area is non trivial, but it is easy to compare different approaches by
comparing the performance of the final network designs they produce.
7.3.2 Weighted Evaluation Function
Optimisation methods often rely on the use of a weighted evaluation function. This is the combination of all the solution performance
metrics into a single figure (by the magnitude of which, each solution may be judged). In this thesis a novel approach was taken based
on the fact that the solutions are only ever compared with one another, hence the evaluation function can be implemented as a binary
comparison operator (each network metric being compared in order of significance). This is the best one can hope to achieve in the
absence of a more complete network performance specification, for instance, knowledge of the relative significance of traffic cover and
test point cover. This information could be obtained from network operators and embodied in a more flexible evaluation function.
The ideal way to ‘weight’ the evaluation function is to relate all network statistics to a monetary (or ‘dollar’) value. A single figure could
then be produced that represents the networks profitability, which must be the principal concern if a network is to remain competitive.
The inclusion of economics necessitates the inclusion of economists, and this crossing of (typical) departmental boundaries (within a
network operating company) may impede the implementation of this approach. For instance, the economic analysis given in Section
2.3.1 may be deemed too simplistic, whereas a comprehensive economic model may be prohibitively complex to understand and
implement.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my supervisor, Steve Hurley, for his constant support and constructive criticism. I am also indebted to the many
practicing engineers who have freely discussed their work and ideas with me and helped to improve the industrial relevance of my
research. Thanks also to my colleagues in Cardiff for their ideas and friendship, in particular Simon Chapman and Steve Margetts with
whom I have thrashed out many of the central themes of my work. I would particularly like to thank my mother, Elinor Kapp, for her
practical support and encouragement, without which none of this would have been possible.
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my wife Erika with all my love.
Bibliography
[1] ITU, World Telecommunication Development Report (Executive Summary), International Telecommunication Union
October 1999.
[2] A. Caminada and P. Reininger, Model for GSM Radio Network Optimisation, presented at the 2nd International Workshop
on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications, 1998.
[3] G. Athanasiadou, A. Molina, and A. Nix, The Effects of Control Node Density in Cellular Network Planning Using the
Combination Algorithm for Total Optimisation (CAT), presented at the PIMRC2000, London, 2000.
[4] J. Button, K. Calderhead, I. Goetz, M. Hodges, R. Patient, R. Pilkington, R. Reeve, and P. Tattersall, Mobile network design
and optimisation, BT Technology Journal, vol. 14, 1996.
[5] C. Shannon, A mathematical theory of communication, Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, 1948.
[6] K. Holmberg and D. Yuan, A Langrangean Heuristic Based Branch-and-Bound Approach for the Capacitated Network
Design Problem, presented at the Symposium on Operations Research, 1996.
[7] W. Hershberger, Principles of Communication Systems, Prentice-Hall, 1960.
[8] R. Steele, Mobile Radio Communications, Pentech Press, 1992.
[9] R. Macario, Personal & Mobile Radio Systems, Peter Peregrinus Ltd., 1991.
[10] W. Lee, Mobile Cellular Telecommunications: Analogue and Digital Systems, McGraw-Hill, 1995.
[11] R. Steele, The Therapy of Percy Comms: A Dialogue on PCS Issues, International Journal of Wireless Information Networks,
vol. 2, pp. 123-132, 1995.
[12] D. Fogel, How to Solve It: Modern Heuristics, Springer, 2000.

[13] C. Papadimitriou and K. Steiglitz, Combinatorial Optimization: Algorithms and Complexity, Dover Publications, 1998.
[14] W. Macready and D. Wolpert, No Free Lunch Theorems for Search, The Santa Fe Institute 1995.
[15] M. Garey and D. Johnson, Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness, Bell Telephone
Laboratories, 1979.
[16] D. Corne, M. Sinclair, and G. Smith, Evolutionary Telecommunications: Past, Present and Future, presented at the
GECCO'99, USA, 1999.
[17] A. Koster, Frequency Assignment - Models and Algorithms, PhD Thesis, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 1999.
[18] J. Bater, Higher-order (non-binary) modelling and solution techniques for frequency assignment in mobile
communications networks, PhD Thesis, Royal Holloway, University of London, 2000.
[19] R. Murphey, P. Pardalos, and M. Resende, Frequency Assignment Problems, Handbook of Combinatorial Optimiziation, vol.
16, 1999.
[20] R. Beck, A. Gamst, R. Simon, and E. Zinn, An Integrated Approach to Cellular Radio Network Planning, presented at the
IEEE 35th Annual Vehicular Technology Conference, 1985.
[21] S. Hurley, J. Last, D. Smith, and B. Turhan, Algorithms for interference limited radiobeacon frequency assignment,
presented at the Second International Conference on Information Communications and Signal Processing, Singapore, 1999.
[22] S. Allen, S. Hurley, and D. Smith, Lower bounding techniques for frequency assignment, Discrete Mathematics, vol.
197/198, 1999.
[23] R. Gower and R. Leese, The Sensitivity of Channel Assignments to Constraint Specification, presented at the EMC97
Symposium, Zurich, 1997.
[24] S. Hurley, D. Smith, and W. Watkins, Evaluation of Models for Area Coverage, Department of Computer Science, Cardiff
University (Report No. 98003), 2 July 1998.
[25] P. Camarada, G. Schiraldi, F. Talucci, and R. Valla, Mobility and Performance Modeling in Cellular Communication
Networks, Mobile Computing and Communications Review, vol. 1, 1997.
[26] L. Farkas and L. Nagy, Indoor Base Station Location Optimization using Genetic Algorithms, presented at the
PIMRC2000, London, 2000.
[27] G. Athanasiadou, A. Molina, and A. Nix, The Automatic Location of Base-Stations for Optimised Cellular Coverage: A
New Combinatorial Approach, presented at the IEEE Conference on Vehicular Technology, 1999.
[28] F. Hillier and G. Liberman, Introduction to Operations Research, McGraw-Hill, 1995.
[29] H. Anderson and J. McGeehan, Optimizing Microcell Base Station Locations Using Simulated Annealing Techniques,
presented at the IEEE 44th Conference on Vehicular Technology, 1994.
[30] C. Pendyala, T. Rappaport, and H. Sherali, Optimal Location of Transmitters for Micro-Cellular Radio Communication
System Design, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 14, 1996.
[31] M. Wright, Optimization Methods for Base Station Placement in Wireless Applications, presented at the IEEE 48th Annual
Vehicular Technology Conference, Ottawa, 1998.
[32] S. Fortune, D. Gay, B. Kernighan, O. Landron, R. Valenzuela, and M. Wright, WISE Design of Indoor Wireless Systems:
Practical Computation and Optimization, IEEE Computational Science & Engineering, pp. 58-68, 1995.
[33] P. Brisset, T. Fruhwirth, and J. Molwitz, Planning Cordless Business Communication Systems, IEEE Expert/Intelligent
Systems & Their Applications, vol. 11, 1996.
[34] D. Agner, P. Calegari, B. Chamaret, F. Guidec, S. Josselin, P. Kuonen, M. Pizarosso, and S. Ubeda, Radio Network
Planning with Combinatorial Optimisation Algorithms, presented at the ACTS Mobile Summit, 1996.
[35] R. Menolascino and M. Pizarroso, STORMS Project Final Report, ACTS, Public A016/CSE/MRM/DR/P/091/a1, April
1999.
[36] C. Glaber, S. Reith, and H. Vollmer, The Complexity of Base Station Positioning in Cellular Networks, presented at the
Workshop on Approximation and Randomized Algorithms in Communication Networks, Geneva, 2000.
[37] B. Krishnamachari and S. Wicker, Experimental Analysis of Local Search Algorithms for Optimal Base Station Location,
presented at the International Conference on Evolutionary Computing for Computer, Communication, Control and Power (ECCAP
2000), Chennai, India, 2000.
[38] Y. Baggi, B. Chopard, P. Luthi, and J. Wagen, Wave Propagation and Optimal Antenna Layout using a Genetic
Algorithm, SPEEDUP Journal, vol. 11, pp. 42-46, 1998.
[39] R. Mathar, T. Niessen, and K. Tutschku, Interference Minimization in Wireless Communication Systems by Optimal Cell
Site Selection, presented at the 3rd European Personal Mobile Communications Conference, Paris, 1999.
[40] J. Kwon, Y. Myung, and D. Tcha, Base Station Location in a Cellular CDMA System, Telecommunication Systems, vol. 14,
pp. 163-173, 2000.
[41] L. Correia, Traffic Modelling and its Influence in Planning Optimisation in Dense Urban Networks, presented at the
COST 252/259 Joint Workshop, Bradford, 1998.
[42] A. Ephremides and D. Stamatelos, Spectral Efficiency and Optimal Base Placement for Indoor Wireless Networks, IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 14, 1996.
[43] C. Esposito, E. Olivetan, D. Wagner, and C. Willard, Forward cell planning networks, presented at the IEEE 44th
Conference on Vehicular Technology, Stockholm, 1994.
[44] L. Correia, L. Ferreira, V. Garcia, and L. Santos, Cellular Planning Optimization for Non-Uniform Traffic Distributions in
GSM, presented at the COST 259 TD(98), Bern,Switzerland, 1998.
[45] A. Caminada and P. Reininger, Genetic Algorithm for Multiperiod Optimisation of Cellular Network, presented at the 2000
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Las Vegas, 2000.
[46] A. Caminada and P. Reininger, Connectivity Management on Mobile Network Design, presented at the 10th Conference of
the European Consortium for Mathematics in Industry, 1998.
[47] S. Sato and K. Takeo, Evaluation of a CDMA Cell Design Algorithm Considering Non-uniformity of Traffic and Base
Station Locations, IEICE Transactions, vol. E81-A, pp. 1367-1377, 1998.
[48] H. Meunier, E. Talabi, and P. Reininer, A multiobjective genetic algorithm for radio network optimization, presented at the
Congress on Evolutionary Computation, San Diego, USA, 2000.
[49] L. Floriani and G. Mateus, Optimization Models for Effective Cell Planning Design, presented at the Discrete Algorithms
and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications, Budapest, Hungary, 1997.
[50] U. Behr, X. Huang, and W. Wiesbeck, A New Approach to Automatic Base Station Placement in Mobile Network,
presented at the International Zurich Seminar on Broadband Communications, Zurich, 2000.
[51] C. Valenzuela, Evolutionary Divide and Conquer: a novel genetic approach to the TSP, PhD Thesis, Imperial College of
Science, Technology and Medicine, London, 1995.
[52] R. Barr, B. Golden, J. Kelly, M. Resende, and W. Stewart, Designing and Reporting on Computational Experiments with
Heuristic Methods, Journal of Heuristics, vol. 1, pp. 33-42, 1995.
[53] E. Damosso (chairman), COST 231 Final Report 1997.
[54] N. Jones, Computability and Complexity : From a Programming Perspective, MIT Press, 1997.
[55] C. Shannon, Communication in the Presence of Noise, Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, vol. 37, pp. 10-21,
1949.
[56] R. Stanley, The Influence of MTSO Placement on Wireless Network Cost, presented at the PIMRC2000, London, 2000.
[57] I. Godor, J. Harmatos, and A. Szentesi, Planning of Tree-Topology UMTS Terrestrial Access Networks, presented at the
PIMRC2000, London, 2000.
[58] G. Walster, Philosophy and Practicalities of Interval Arithmetic, in Reliability in Computing:The Role of Interval
Methods in Scientific Computing, Moore (Editor), Academic Press Inc., 1988, pp. 309-323.
[59] S. Allen, S. Hurley, D. Smith, and W. Watkins, Frequency Assignment: Methods and Algorithms, presented at the NATA
RTA SET/ISET Symposium on Frequency Assignment, Sharing and Conservation in Systems (Aerospace), Aalborg, Denmark, 1998.
[60] M. Alouini and A. Goldsmith, Area Spectral Efficiency of Cellular Mobile Radio Systems, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology, vol. 48, pp. 1047, 1999.
[61] L. Ammeraal, STL for C++ Programmers, John Wiley & Sons, 1997.
[62] R. Battiti, A. Bertossi, and D. Cavallaro, A Randomized Saturation Degree Heuristic for Channel Assignment in Cellular
Radio Networks, presented at the WSDAAL'99, Fonte Cerreto, l'Aquila, Italy, 1999.
[63] D. Beasley, D. Bull, and R. Martin, Reducing Epistasis in Combinatorial Problems by Expansive Coding, presented at the
Fifth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, University of Illinois, 1993.
[64] D. Beasley, D. Bull, and R. Martin, A Sequential Niche Technique for Multimodal Function Optimization, Evolutionary
Computation, vol. 1, pp. 101-125, 1993.
[65] N. Blaustein, Radio Propagation in Cellular Networks, Artech House, 2000.
[66] D. Bull, N. Canagarajah, and A. Nix, Insights into Mobile Multimedia Communications, Academic Press, 1999.
[67] A. Caminada and D. Renaud, Evolutionary Methods and Operators for Frequency Assignment Problem, SPEEDUP
Journal (Proceedings of 22nd Workshop), vol. 11, 1998.
[68] A. Capone and M. Trubian, Channel Assignment Problem in Cellular Systems: a new Model and a Tabu Search
Algorithm, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 48, pp. 1252-1260, 1999.
[69] P. Cherriman, L. Hanzo, and F. Romiti, Channel Allocation for Third-generation Mobile Radio Systems, presented at the
ACTS'98, Rhodes, Greece, 1998.
[70] D. Cox and D. Reudink, A Comparison of Some Channel Assignment Strategies in Large-Scale Mobile Communications
Systems, IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. COM-20, 1972.
[71] J. Doble, Introduction to Radio Propagation for Fixed and Mobile Communications, Artech House, 1996.
[72] R. Dorne, P. Galinier, and J. Hao, Tabu Search for Frequency Assignment in Mobile Radio Networks, Journal of Heuristics,
vol. 4, pp. 47-62, 1998.
[73] A. Eisenblatter, A Frequency Assignment Problem in Cellular Phone Networks, DIMACS series in discrete mathematics for
theoretical computer science, vol. 40, pp. 109-115, 1997.
[74] ESPRIT, ESPRIT0016: Algorithms for Radio Network Optimisation (ARNO), 1999.
[75] J. Flood, Telecommunication Networks, IEE, 1997.

[76] L. Floriani and G. Mateus, A Critic of the Graph Coloring Approach in the Solution of Channel Assignment Problems,
presented at the Optimization Methods For Wireless Networks, Montreal, Canada, 1998.
[77] E. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, and J. Vlissides, Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software,
Addison-Wesley, 1995.
[78] S. Hurley, D. Smith, and S. Thiel, FASoft: A system for discrete channel frequency assignment, Radio Science, vol. 32,
1997.
[79] S. Hurley and D. Smith, Bounds for the Frequency Assignment Problem, Discrete Mathematics 167-168, pp. 571-582,
1997.
[80] S. Hurley, D. Smith, and C. Valenzuela, A Permutation Based Genetic Algorithm for Minimum Span Frequency
Assignment, presented at the 5th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature, Amsterdam, 1998.
[81] A. Kershenbaum, Telecommunications Network Design Algorithms, McGraw-Hill, 1993.
[82] T. Kurner, Analysis of Cell Assignment Probability Predictions, presented at the COST 259 TD (98) 05, Berne, 1998.
[83] M. Matsumoto and T. Nishimura, Mersenne Twister: A 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudorandom number
generator, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 8, pp. 3-30, 1998.
[84] S. Meyers, More Effective C++, Addison Wesley Longman, 1996.
[85] S. Meyers, Effective C++ (2nd edition), Addison Wesley Longman, 1998.
[86] M. Mouly and M. Pautet, The GSM System for Mobile Communications, published by the authors, 1992.
[87] Y. Myung, J. Kwon, and D. Tcha, Base Station Location in a Cellular CDMA System, Telecommunication Systems, vol. 14,
pp. 163-173, 2000.
[88] H. Niederreiter, Random Number Generation and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods, 1992.
[89] S. Ubeda and J. Zerovnik, A Randomized Algorithm for a Channel Assignment Problem, SPEEDUP Journal (Proceedings
of 22nd Workshop), vol. 11, 1998.
[90] R. Wessaly, Dimensioning Survivable Capacitated Networks, Technische Universität Berlin, 2000.
[91] J. Zoellner, A Breakthrough in Spectrum Conserving Frequency Assignment Technology, IEEE Transactions on
Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol. EMC-19, pp. 313-319, 1977.
[92] S. Zurbes, Frequency Assignment in Cellular Radio by Stochastic Optimization, presented at the 2nd European Personal
Mobile Communications Conference, Bonn, 1997.
[1] A telephone with a wireless connection to its network.
[2] A technology where services are provided in discrete geographical-regions, known as cells.
[3] Telephones that are connected to their network by wire.
[4] Global System for M obile communications (formerly Global System M obilé) - the European mobile standard.
[5] The conversion from analogue to digital may happen before the data enters the telephone exchange.
[6] The telephone number of the recipient will determine the destination of the data; the number will be used as an index to a dynamic database of subscriber locations
maintained by the network.
[7] Also known as the ‘point to point’ communication problem.
[8] Communication may involve more than two users, but these ‘party calls’ are not common.
[9] Also known as the ‘point to multi-point’ communication problem.
[10] It is worth noting that the cost of laying cable is usually significantly greater than the cost of the cable itself.
[11] A channel in a FDM A scheme or a code in a CDM A scheme.
[12] Also known as the Frequency Assignment Problem (FAP).
[13] Some low-frequency radio signals have a much further range. However, high frequency signals (which are most useful for high bandwidth communications) have a
short range.
[14] This may vary with location, for instance two taxi firms might use the same part of the spectrum but in different cities.
[15] It should be noted that this fundamental problem has not stopped commercial vendors utilising satellites for mobile communications; although it is inefficient for
densely populated areas it is well suited to sparse ones. In this thesis, only densely populated areas are considered.
[16] Also known as ‘the dimensioning problem’ or ‘cell dimensioning’.
[17] Usually manifest as embedded heuristics that can reject possible solutions as inferior without resorting to a (computationally intensive) full evaluation of the
solutions performance.
[18] Namely the base station that produces the highest field strength at that point.
[19] The term ‘test point’ is slightly misleading as each ‘point’ actually represents an area. The name is a legacy of previous work.
[20] Either instantiated or received by a subscriber.
[21] C-library equivalent is: double atan2(double x,double y).
[22] The terms ‘gain’ and ‘loss’ are used interchangeably to refer to ‘a multiplicative factor’. Whether the multiplied signal is amplified or attenuated will depend on
whether the gain/loss factor is greater or less than unity.
[23] Note that the contribution of interfering signals may be attenuated by channel separation.
[24] It is possible for this to be made uniform; however, the probability distribution of the number of active base stations would then be non-uniform.
[25] See Section 2.2.15 for details of CIR calculation.
[26] Adjacent channel selection guarantees failure for Operator B networks.
[27] The traffic that would be covered in the absence of interference.
[28] The test points that would be covered in the absence of interference.
[29] Note that the contribution of interfering signals may be attenuated by channel separation.
[30] Note that this comparison does not include the initialisation algorithms.
[31] Note that the ‘>’ symbol used to compare ISs should be read as ‘better than’. It may or may not be literally ‘greater than’ as this will depend on whether the IS is
designed to be maximised (as with signal freedom) or minimised (as with overlap).
[32] The concept of ‘links’ is the same as the one used to simplify the description of channel assignment algorithms in Section 4.4.2.
[33] An active link represents a utilised channel of an active base station.
[34] This is because traffic loss becomes increasingly difficult to minimise the closer it gets to 0%, i.e. optimisation effort gives a diminishing return.
[35] The units being bits/Hertz.
[36] The units being bits/Hertz/m2.
[37] Limits may be quoted in terms of a single parameter (such as the speed of light), or in terms of a ‘pareto optimal’ trade off between competing parameters (such as
speed and efficiency in a petrol engine). You may optimise one parameter, but only at the expense of the others.
[38] Except for NetworkB1, the reasons for which were explained in that section.

Automatic Cell Planning

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Automatic Cell Planning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Automatic Cell Planning

GLO SSARY O F TERMS

GLO SSARY O F SYMBO LS

1.1 OUTLINE O F PRO BLEM

1.3 THESIS AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1.4 TEST PLATFO RM

1.5 THESIS OUTLINE

2.1 SIMULATIO N ISSUES

2.2 DESCRIPTIO N O F M O DEL

2.3 PERFO RMANCE EVALUATIO N

2.4 DATA SETS

CHAPTER 3 NETWORK DESIGN – PART 1

3.1 CHO ICE O F OPTIMISATIO N ALGO RITHMS

3.2 INITIALISATIO N ALGO RITHMS

3.3 SEARCH ALGO RITHMS

3.4 FACTO RS LIMITING SEARCH PERFO RMANCE

CHAPTER 4 CHANNEL ASSIGNMENT

4.1 PRO BLEM DEFINITIO N

4.2 PERFO RMANCE EVALUATIO N

4.3 DATA SETS

4.4 CO MMO N ALGO RITHMIC CO NCEPTS

4.5 INITIALISATIO N ALGO RITHMS

4.6 SEARCH ALGO RITHMS

4.7 CO MPARISO N O F RESULTS

CHAPTER 5 INTERFERENCE SURROGATES

5.1 RO LE O F THE INTERFERENCE SURRO GATE

5.2 INTERFERENCE SURRO GATE DESCRIPTIO NS

5.3 M ETHO DO LO GY O F CO MPARISO N

CHAPTER 6 NETWORK DESIGN – PART 2

6.1 EVALUATIO N O F TWO -STAGE NETWO RK DESIGN PRO CESS

6.2 NETWO RK DESIGNS WITH ‘HIGH’ CO MPUTATIO NAL INVESTMENT

6.3 NETWO RK DESIGNS WITH M INIMAL INFRASTRUCTURE

7.1 THESIS CO NCLUSIO NS

7.2 NETWO RK M O DEL ENHANCEMENTS

7.3 IMPRO VEMENTS TO OPTIMISATIO N M ETHO DO LO GY

Figure 1.5: A channel re-use pattern for 7 different sets of channels.

Figure 2.1: An abstracted traffic cover problem using multiple servers.

Figure 2.2: Rasterisation of the network working area.

Figure 2.3: The test point layout in NetworkA3.

Figure 2.4: The test point traffic volumes in NetworkA3.

Figure 2.5: The test point service thresholds in NetworkB1.

Figure 2.6: The site positions in NetworkB1.

Figure 2.9: The angles-of-incidence for a site in NetworkA4.

Figure 2.10: Two active base stations in NetworkA4.

Figure 2.11: The propagation gain from a site in NetworkA2.

Figure 2.13: An example of serviced test points in NetworkA4.

Figure 2.16: Comparison operator for network performance metrics.

Figure 3.1: Algorithm InitBlank.

Figure 3.2: Algorithm InitRandomA.

Figure 3.3: An example network design produced by InitRandomA.

Figure 3.4: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.6: The distribution of site occupancy for InitRandomA on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.12: A subsection of the example network generated by InitRandomA.

Figure 3.13: Algorithm InitRandomB.

Figure 3.14: An example network design produced by InitRandomB.

Figure 3.15: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomB on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.21: Algorithm InitRandomC.

Figure 3.22: An example network design produced by InitRandomC.

Figure 3.23: The distribution of traffic cover for InitRandomC on NetworkA4.

Figure 3.25: Algorithm SearchRandomB.

Figure 3.28: Algorithm SearchHillClimbA.

Figure 3.32: Algorithm SearchConstructA.

Figure 4.1: The comparison operator for assignment performance metrics.