Inter-Cell Interference Coordination in

Millimeter-Wave Cellular Networks

Haichao Wei∗ , Na Deng†‡ , Martin Haenggi§
∗ School of Information Science & Technology, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, Liaoning, China
† School of Information & Communication Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning, China
‡ National Mobile Communications Research Laboratory, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China
§ Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA

Email:∗ weihaichao@dlmu.edu.cn, †‡ dengna@dlut.edu.cn, § mhaenggi@nd.edu

Abstract—In millimeter-wave (mm-wave) cellular networks,
high-gain beamforming, realized with directional antenna arrays,
is typically adopted to mitigate the severe propagation loss.
However, the interference caused by such highly directional
beams may, in turn, result in a significant number of transmission
failures, especially for dense networks. To tackle this problem, we
propose two inter-cell interference coordination (ICIC) schemes
in mm-wave bands: one is merely based on the path loss
incorporating the blockage effect (PL-ICIC); the other considers
both path loss and directivity gain (PG-ICIC). To fully investigate
the performance of both schemes, we first derive the exact
expression for the success probability (reliability) of the typical
user that is served. Secondly, to reflect the cost of interference
coordination, we further derive the overall success probability
taking into account that some users cannot be served due to lim-
ited resources. Numerical results show that both the proposed two
schemes provide significant reliability improvements in the low
signal-to-interference ratio (SIR) regime, in particular, the higher
the number of antennas, the wider the range of SIR threshold
for which there is an improvement. In addition, compared with
PL-ICIC, PG-ICIC balances the available resources among all
users well.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Recently, millimeter wave (mm-wave) networks, operating
at frequencies between 30 and 300 GHz, have attracted con-
siderable attention from both academia and industry due to the
wide available bandwidth and their potential to offer high data
rates [1, 2]. Compared with conventional microwave commu-
nications, mm-wave communications have new characteristics,
making the deployment and operation of mm-wave cellular
networks more challenging. Firstly, because of the higher fre-
quencies, mm-wave signals are susceptible to surrounding en-
vironments such as oxygen molecules and water vapor, which
leads to significant path loss [3]. Secondly, due to the poor
diffraction, mm-wave signals are more vulnerable to blockage
by most solid materials, which limits the coverage region of
mm-wave cellular networks. To overcome this limitation, mm-
wave networks are envisioned to be densely deployed and use
large antenna arrays (benefiting from the small wavelengths of
the mm-wave band) to achieve acceptable coverage and rate
[4]. However, as shown in [5], increasing the density of base
stations (BSs) beyond a certain point leads to performance
degradation, and the network tends to be interference-limited,
i.e., the most important obstacle for successful transmission
is the high level of interference. To mitigate this problem,
coordination among BSs has recently been recognized as a key
requirement to effectively suppress the interference in dense
mm-wave cellular networks [6–8].
An efficient approach to combat inter-cell interference is to
exploit the cooperation between the multiple BSs. Generally,
inter-cell interference coordination (ICIC) in conventional mi-
crowave networks is implemented through assigning different
time/frequency/spatial dimensions to users that are severely
impacted by the interference from adjacent cells and thus
improves the per-user signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio
(SINR) performance [9–11]. However, since the mm-wave
spectrum has several unique features such as high propagation
loss, directivity, and sensitivity to blockage, the situation is
different when ICIC is implemented in the mm-wave band.
Regarding the interference characteristic, a key difference is
that whether an interferer is dominant or not is not merely
based on the distances or small-scale fading but on the actual
power gains of the interfering beams and their LOS/NLOS
states. As a result, the K-th strongest BS may not be the
K-th closest BS. In this case, an effective ICIC scheme
should be carefully designed to only coordinate those BSs
that actually cause significant interference. Such a scheme, to
our best knowledge, has not been studied in mm-wave cellular
networks.
In this paper, we investigate the ICIC technique in mm-
wave cellular networks considering the unique characteristics
(i.e., the blockage effect and the highly directional trans-
mission) of mm-wave communications. Specifically, in this
paper, two ICIC schemes are proposed to improve the quality
of experience for users: one is to mute the neighbor BSs
merely based on the path loss incorporating the blockage
effect (PL-ICIC); the other is to mute the neighbor BSs jointly
considering the path loss and the directional array gain (PG-
ICIC). Using stochastic geometry, we analyze the success
probability and the overall success probability to reflect the
reliability performance of the users served by their BSs and
the overall users, respectively, where the latter one captures
the ICIC cost. Numerical results demonstrate that while both
ICIC schemes yield significant performance gain in terms of
the success probability over no ICIC, especially in the low
SIR regime, where PL-ICIC is better than PG-ICIC. From

978-1-7281-0962-6/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the perspective of the overall success probability, PL-ICIC
is worse than PG-ICIC and no ICIC because the muting
operation based on the path loss leads fewer users to be served,
while PG-ICIC achieves better overall performance than no
ICIC with suitable coordination parameter setting, and thus
balances the available resources among all users well.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
A. Network Model
We consider a mm-wave cellular network where a homoge-
neous Poisson point process (PPP) Φ̂ with density λ is used
to model the location of the base stations (BS). We consider
the pertinent properties of mm-wave communications such
as directional beamforming of antenna arrays and blockage
effects of the propagation environment. Each BS is assumed
to be equipped with a uniform linear array (ULA) with N
antenna elements, and a generalized LOS ball model [12] is
adopted to capture the blockage effect. Specifically, all BSs
apply analog beamforming with the assumption of perfect
beam alignment. Letting wm be the half-power beamwidth
(HPBW), we consider a normalized flat-top antenna pattern,
given by  Gm hx0 |x0 |−αx0
Gm if |ϕ| ≤ wm
G(ϕ) =
Gs otherwise,
(1)
where ϕ = dt cos φ is the cosine direction corresponding to
the angle of departure (AoD) φ of the transmit signal, which is
termed the spatial AoD, with dt and  representing the antenna
spacing and wavelength, respectively. dt = 2 is assumed to
enhance the directionality of the beam and avoid grating lobes;
ϕ is assumed to be uniformly distributed in [−0.5, 0.5]. It is
known from [13] that the actual antenna pattern of the ULA
is
sin2 (πN ϕ)
Gact (ϕ) = , (2)
N sin2 (πϕ)
f and we have Gm = N , Gact (wm ) = N2 and Gs = 1−2w m Gm
1−2wm .
In the generalized LOS ball model, the LOS probability of
the channel between two nodes with separation d is
PLOS (d) = pL 1d<R ,
where R is the maximum length of a LOS channel, and pL ∈
[0, 1] is the LOS probability. Denote by αL and αN the path
loss exponents for LOS and NLOS channels, respectively. The
stationarity of the PPP lends itself to the analysis for the typical
user located at the origin. We denote by (x) = |x|−αx the
random path loss function from x to the origin, where
 of the mm-wave communications, we assume the interfering
αL w.p. PLOS (|x|)
αx =
αN w.p. 1 − PLOS (|x|),
and all (x)x∈Φ̂ are independent.
Due to the blockage effect, the signal strength from the
interferers outside the LOS ball is negligible because of the
severe path loss over the large distance (at least R) [14].
Hence, the coverage analysis for the typical user can be
restricted to a finite network region, and the relevant BSs,
denoted by Φ, correspond to the PPP in a disk of radius
Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
R centered at the origin. The BSs in Φ can be partitioned
into two classes, where the BSs with LOS propagation to
the typical user form a PPP ΦL with density λL = pL λ,
while ΦN with density λN = pN λ is the BS set with NLOS
propagation, where pL + pN = 1 such that Φ = ΦL ∪ ΦN . In
addition, Nakagami fading is adopted to model the small-scale
fading, and LOS and NLOS paths have different parameters
ML , MN ∈ N. The power fading coefficient between node
x ∈ Φ and the origin is denoted by hx , which follows a gamma
1
distribution Gamma(M, M ) with M ∈ {ML , MN }, and all
hx are mutually independent and also independent of Φ.
B. Proposed ICIC Schemes
The typical user has a single antenna and is served by the
BS with the smallest path loss, i.e., the serving BS x0 satisfies
 
x0 = arg min x ∈ Φ : |x|−αx . (5)
Consider an interference-limited scenario with dense deploy-
ments, where the noise has little impact compared to the
aggregated interference [14], and thus the transmit power of
the BSs can be set to be unit power. The SIR at the typical
user is
SIR   , (6)
x∈Φ! G(ϕx )hx (x)
where Φ! = Φ \ {x0 } and G(ϕx ) follows from (1). As in
[14], the spatial AoD ϕx from an interferer to the typical user
is uniformly distributed in [−0.5, 0.5]. To improve the user
experience, we consider two ICIC schemes as follows.
1) Path loss-based ICIC (PL-ICIC): We assume the inter-
fering BSs in the coordinating set ΩPL are muting the resource
blocks (RBs) assigned to the typical user, where
ΩPL = {x ∈ Φ! : |x0 |−αx0 < ρ|x|−αx }, (7)
and ρ ≥ 1 is a parameter that characterizes the coordination
level. In this case, whether an interfering BS participates in the
interference coordination depends on its path loss to the typical
user, which is related to the blockage effect from interfering
BSs to the typical user. Denote by χx ∈ {0, 1} whether BS
x is transmitting at the RBs assigned to the typical user. In
(3) PL-ICIC, we have χx = 1 − 1x∈ΩPL . The SIR at the typical
user is
Gm hx0 |x0 |−αx0
SIRPL =  . (8)
x∈Φ! G(ϕx )hx χx (x)
When ρ = 1, no ICIC occurs, and SIRPL becomes (6).
2) Path loss and array gain-based ICIC (PG-ICIC): Jointly
considering the blockage effect and the directional array gain
BSs in the coordinating set ΩPG are muting the RBs assigned
(4)
to the typical user, where
ΩPG = {x ∈ Φ! : Gm |x0 |−αx0 < ρG(ϕx )|x|−αx }. (9)
In PG-ICIC, we have χx = 1−1x∈ΩPG . The SIR at the typical
user is
Gm hx0 |x0 |−αx0
SIRPG =  . (10)
x∈Φ! G(ϕx )hx χx (x)
When ρ = 1, no ICIC occurs, and SIRPG also reverts to (6).
 (l)
III. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS Lk (r, u) is given recursively by
In this section, we first give the association probabilities and l−1 


(l) l−1 (l−n) (n)
the distributions of the serving distances to the LOS/NLOS Lk (r, u) = ηk (r, u)Lk (r, u), (18)
BSs to assist performance analysis of the two ICIC schemes. n=0
n
Then we give the exact results on the success probability for where the n-th derivative of ηk (r, u) w.r.t u follows as
the typical user and overall success probability for all users.   
(n) Gj
Lemma 1. The probabilities that x0 ∈ Φk , k ∈ {L, N}, are ηk (r, u) = −2π λi ψj φ(n) r̄k,i , , α i , Mi ,
Mi
 R2   i∈{L,N}j∈{m,s}
(19)
Ak = πλk exp − π λi rαk /αi dr. (11)
0
and the n-th derivative of φ(·) w.r.t u is
i∈{L,N}
R
Lemma 2. Given that the typical user is associated with a (n) Γ(m + n) (−y)n t1−αn
LOS/NLOS BS, the probability density function (PDF) of the φ (x, y, α, m) =
m+n dt. (20)
Γ(m) 1+uyt−α
distance r0 = |x0 | between the typical user and its serving BS x
is fk (r)/Ak , k ∈ {L, N}, where Proof: See Appendix A.
 
fk (r) = 2πλk r exp − π λi r2αk /αi . (12) Next, we give an exact expression of the success probability
i∈{L,N} for the typical user with the PG-ICIC scheme.
The proofs of Lemma 1 and 2 are analogous to those of Theorem 2. The success probability P(θ) of the typical user
[15, Lemma 1 and 3] and are omitted from this paper. with the PG-ICIC scheme is given by
A. Success Probability of the Typical Served User
k −1
R
 M (−u)l (l)
The success probability is defined as the complementary P(θ) = fk (r) Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr, (21)
cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of the SIR, given by l!
k∈{L,N} l=0 0

P (θ) = P(SIR > θ), (13) where Lk (r, u) = exp( ηk (r, u)), the superscript ‘(l)’ stands
where θ is target SIR threshold. The success probability can for the l-th derivative of Lk (r, u) w.r.t u, and
be thought of equivalently as the probability that the typical    Gj
user achieves a target SIR θ, or the fraction of users who ηk (r, u) = −2π λi ψj φ r̃k,i,j , , αi , Mi , (22)
Mi
achieve an SIR of θ in any time slot in any realization of the i∈{L,N}j∈{m,s}
PPP, which reflects the reliability performance of users served

 
where r̃k,i,j = min R, max 1, (ρGj /Gm )1/αi rαk /αi , and
by their BSs. Since the desired signal link is either LOS or
Lk (r, u) is given recursively similar to Theorem 1.
(l)
NLOS, the success probability is obtained by using the total
probability law, expressed as Proof: The proof is analogous to that of Theorem 1, with
P (θ) = AL PL (θ) + AN PN (θ), (14) a modified spatial distribution of the interfering BSs according
to the coordinating set ΩPG .
where PL and PN are the success probabilities conditioned on Remark: Comparing ΩPL and ΩPG , we find that ΩPG ⊆
the event that the desired link is LOS and NLOS, respectively. ΩPL , and thus the interference under the PG-ICIC scheme
Our first result in this section is an exact expression of the stochastically dominates that under the PL-ICIC scheme. As
success probability with the PL-ICIC scheme. a result, we have P (θ) ≥ P(θ).
Mk
Theorem 1. Letting k = G m
, the success probability P (θ) B. Overall Success Probability
of the typical user with the PL-ICIC scheme is given by
Although both ICIC schemes improve the success probabil-
k −1
R
 M l
(−u) (l) ity of the typical user served by its BS, the muted BSs cannot
P (θ) = fk (r) Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr, (15) transmit data at the RBs assigned to the typical user, and thus
l!
k∈{L,N} l=0 0 some users cannot be served by these muted BSs due to limited
where Lk (r, u) = exp(ηk (r, u)), the superscript ‘(l)’ stands resources. Since the success probability of the typical user
for the l-th derivative of Lk (r, u) w.r.t u, and cannot capture this effect, we define a novel metric, termed
   Gj overall success probability, that accounts for the fact that some
ηk (r, u) = −2π λi ψj φ r̄k,i , , αi , Mi , (16) users are no longer served. It is defined as
Mi  
i∈{L,N}j∈{m,s} 1

 ξ(θ)  E P (θ | r0 ) , (23)
where ψm = 2wm , ψs = 1 − ψm , r̄k,i = min R, ρ1/αi rαk /αi 1 + ζ(r0 )
and where r0 is the link distance between the typical user and its
R  serving BS, ζ(r0 ) and P (θ | r0 ) are the number of muted
1
φ(x, y, α, m) = 1−
m tdt. (17) BSs and the success probability given r0 , respectively. This
1+uyt−α definition captures the dependence between the number of
x

Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1
muted BSs and the received SIR for users served by their PL-ICIC w. ρ = 5
BSs. Since ΩPG ⊆ ΩPL , we have ζPL ≥ ζPG . Hence the 0.9 PL-ICIC w. ρ = 25
PG-ICIC w. ρ = 5
higher success probability of the typical user served by its 0.8 PG-ICIC w. ρ = 25
BS under the PL-ICIC scheme is achieved at the cost of no ICIC
fewer available RBs for neighboring BSs, which will lower 0.7

Success Probability
the overall performance of the network. In the following, we 0.6 N=8
analyze the overall success probability of both schemes.
0.5
Theorem 3. The overall success probability of the PL-ICIC
0.4
scheme is given by N=32
0.3
k −1
R
 M fk (r)ωk (r)(−u)l (l)
ξ(θ) = Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr, 0.2
l!
k∈{L,N} l=0 0
0.1
(24)
where 0

 -5 0 5 10 15
θ (dB)
20 25 30 35
2
−π λi r̄k,i −min(R2 ,r 2αk /αi )
1−e i∈{L,N} Fig. 1. The success probabilities for different ICIC schemes.
ωk (r) = 
2
. (25)
π λi r̄k,i − min(R2 , r2αk /αi )
i∈{L,N} 1

Proof: See Appendix B. 0.9

Theorem 4. The overall success probability of the PG-ICIC Overall Success Probability 0.8
N=32
scheme is given by 0.7 ρ = 10, ξ = 0.91

k −1
R
 M ωk (r)(−u)l (l)
fk (r) 0.6
˜
ξ(θ)= Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr,
l! 0.5
k∈{L,N} l=0 0
(26) 0.4 ρ = 16, ξ = 0.60
where N=8
 
 0.3
2
−π ψj λi r̄k,i,j −min(R2 ,r 2αk /αi )
1−e i∈{L,N} j∈{m,s} 0.2
k (r) =
ω   2

. PG-ICIC
π ψj λi r̄k,i,j − min(R2 , r2αk /αi ) 0.1 PL-ICIC
i∈{L,N} j∈{m,s} no ICIC
(27) 0
5 10 15 20 25
ρ
Proof: The proof is analogous to that of Theorem 3, with
Fig. 2. The overall success probabilities for different ICIC schemes.
a modified spatial distribution of the interfering BSs according
to the coordinating set ΩPG .
Remark: The success probability of the typical user reflects
the user-perceived performance if the user is served by its dB and 0.8 dB, respectively, and when ρ = 25, the horizontal
BS, while the overall success probability captures the overall gaps between the two schemes with N = 8 and N = 32 are
performance, which takes into account that fewer users can be 0.6 dB and 0.8 dB, respectively. This is because larger ρ and
served if some BSs are muted in certain RBs. N magnify the area gap between the coordinating regions ΩPL
and ΩPG and thus lead to a corresponding performance gap. It
IV. N UMERICAL R ESULTS can be seen that the performance gain of both ICIC schemes
In this section, we will present numerical results of the over no ICIC becomes larger as θ decreases, which shows the
success probability and the overall success probability for mm- advantage of the ICIC scheme in the low SIR regime. The
wave cellular networks with the two BS muting schemes. The higher the number of antennas, the wider the range of θ for
default system parameters are λ = 5 × 10−3 , pL = 0.5, which there is an improvement. For instance, when N = 8,
R = 300, ML = 4, MN = 2, αL = 2.5, and αN = 4. there is performance improvement for θ < 20 dB, and when
Fig. 1 compares the two ICIC schemes in terms of the N = 32, for θ < 30 dB.
success probability with different ρ and antenna size N . It is Fig. 2 shows the impact of the antenna size N and coor-
observed that the PL-ICIC scheme outperforms the PG-ICIC dination parameter ρ on the overall success probability with
scheme in all cases. We also observe that the performance gap θ = 5 dB. We observe that the overall success probability of
between the two ICIC scheme becomes larger when ρ or N the PG-ICIC scheme outperforms that of the PL-ICIC scheme
become larger. For instance, when N = 32, the horizontal in both cases. As ρ increases, the overall success probability
gaps between the two schemes with ρ = 5 and ρ = 25 are 0.3 of the PL-ICIC scheme is always lower than that of no ICIC

Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 k −1
R
and becomes smaller, while that of the PG-ICIC scheme first  M (−u)l (l)
increases to a peak value and then declines. Hence, for a = fk (r) Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr,
l!
certain range of ρ, the PG-ICIC scheme is better than no ICIC k∈{L,N} l=0 0

in terms of overall success probability. These observations  y) = Γ(x, y)/Γ(x) is the normalized incomplete
where Γ(x,
show the advantage of the PG-ICIC scheme on the overall gamma function, Lk (r, u) = E[e−uI ] is the Laplace transform
network performance. It is also seen that a larger N leads to a of I under the condition that the serving BS x0 is at a distance
larger overall success probability for both schemes, where N r and x0 is LOS (k = L) or NLOS (k = N), and the
has a strong effect on the PG-ICIC scheme but only a slight superscript (m) stands for the m-th derivative of Lk (r, u) w.r.t
effect on the PL-ICIC scheme. u. The spatial distributions of interferers are different in two
V. C ONCLUSIONS cases that the serving BS is either LOS or NLOS, which affects
Lk (r, u). When x0 ∈ ΦL and x0 = r, the interference powers
In this paper, we proposed two ICIC schemes for mm-
from LOS and NLOS BSs are expressed as
wave cellular networks, where the coordinating BSs are muted 
with the consideration of the unique characteristics (blockage IL (r) = G(ϕx )hx χx |x|−αL ,
effect and directional transmission) of mm-wave communi- x∈Φ!L
cations. To fully characterize the ICIC technique in mm- 
IN (r) = G(ϕx )hx χx |x|−αN . (28)
wave cellular networks, we provided analytical expressions of
x∈ΦN
the performance metrics in terms of success probability and
overall success probability with the aid of stochastic geometry. From Slivnyak’s theorem [16], Φ!L remains the same as the
Numerical results demonstrate that the proposed two ICIC original PPP ΦL . Then we have
 
schemes significantly improve the success probability of the LL (r, u) = Ee−uIi (r) = LIi (r, u), (29)
users served by their BSs for mm-wave networks. Meanwhile, i∈{L, N} i∈{L, N}
the PL-ICIC scheme yields a better success probability than
PG-ICIC scheme with more coordinated BSs muted and thus where LIi (r, u) follows as
 
leads to worse overall success probability. Hence, the PL-   1
ICIC scheme is suitable in scenarios with ultra-high reliability Li (r, u) = E
−αi Mi

requirements and light load while the PG-ICIC scheme is x∈Φi 1 + uG(ϕx )χ x |x|

 Mi

effective in the scenarios with medium/high-reliability and   ψj
heavy load. = E Φi  Mi
uGj χx |x|−αi )
x∈Φi j∈{m,s} 1 +
Mi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT  
R
The work of H. Wei has been supported by the Fundamental (a)  1
= exp −2πλi ψj 1−
uGj y −αi Mi
ydy
Research Funds for the Central Universities (3132019220). 1+ M
j∈{m,s} r̄L,i i
The work of N. Deng has been supported by the National  
Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61701071, = exp −2πλi ψj φ(r̄L,i , Gj /Mi , αi , Mi ) , (30)
by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2017M621129 j∈{m,s}
and 2019T120204), the open research fund of National Mobile
Communications Research Laboratory, Southeast University where step (a) follows from the probability generating func-
(No. 2019D03), and the Fundamental Research Funds for tional (PGFL) of the PPP [16] and the lower integration limit
the Central Universities (DUT19RC(4)014). The work of M. is obtained since

the closest interferer is at least at a distance
Haenggi has been supported by the US NSF grant CCF r̄L,i = min R, ρ1/αi rαL /αi obtained from the coordinating
1525904. set ΩPL . Letting
   Gj
A PPENDIX A ηk (r, u) = −2π λi ψj φ r̄k,i , , αi , Mi , (31)
Mi
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1 i∈{L,N}j∈{m,s}

 (1)
Proof: Letting I = x∈Φ! G(ϕx )hx χx (x), the success we have LL (r, u) = exp ηL (r, u) . Since LL (r, u) =
probability of PL-ICIC is given by η (1) (r, u)LL (r, u), L(l) (r, u) can be calculated recursively
  according to the formula of Leibniz, given by
 Gm hx0 r0−αk
PPL (θ) = Ak P >θ l−1 
I (l) l−1 (l−n) (n)
k∈{L,N}
   LL (r, u) = η (r, u)LL (r, u), (32)
n
 n=0
= Ak E Γ Mk , θk r k I
α
0 where the n-th derivative of ηL (r, u) w.r.t u is
k∈{L,N}
     Gj
(n)
 Mk −1
α (θk r0αk I)l ηL (r, u) = −2π λi ψj φ(n) r̄k,i , , α i , Mi ,
−θk r0 k I Mi
= Ak E e i∈{L,N}j∈{m,s}
l! (33)
k∈{L,N} l=0

Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and the n-th derivative of φ(·) w.r.t u is The other is conditioning on x0 ∈ ΦN and |x0 | = r. In this
case, ζ follows a Poisson distribution with mean
R 
Γ(m + n) (−y)n t1−αn 2
φ (n)
(x, y, α, m) =
m+n dt. (34) Eζ = π λi (r̄N,i − min(R2 , r2αN /αi )), (39)
Γ(m) 1+uyt−α i∈{L,N}
x
and ωN (r) is derived analogously, given by

x0 ∈ ΦN and x0 = r, we derive LN (r, u) =
When


exp ηN (r, u) and its derivatives analogously.  2
−π λi r̄N,i −min(R2 ,r 2αN /αi )
1−e i∈{L,N}

A PPENDIX B ωN (r) = 
2 . (40)
π λi r̄N,i − min(R2 , r2αN /αi )
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 3 i∈{L,N}

Proof: The overall success probability with the PL-ICIC The final result is obtained by substituting (36), (38), (40)
scheme is into (35).
 P (θ | r ) 
PL 0 R EFERENCES
ξ(θ) = E . (35)
1 + ζ(r0 ) [1] Z. Pi and F. Khan, “An introduction to millimeter-wave mobile broad-
band systems,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 49, no. 6, pp.
Similar to the proof in Theorem 1, we have 101–107, Jun. 2011.
  [2] F. Boccardi, R. W. Heath, A. Lozano, T. L. Marzetta, and P. Popovski,
k −1
αk
 M e−θk r0 I (θk r0αk I)l “Five disruptive technology directions for 5G,” IEEE Communications
ξ(θ) = Ak E Magazine, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 74–80, Feb. 2014.
1+ζ l! [3] T. S. Rappaport, S. Sun, R. Mayzus, H. Zhao, Y. Azar, K. Wang, G. N.
k∈{L,N} l=0
Wong, J. K. Schulz, M. Samimi, and F. Gutierrez, “Millimeter wave
k −1
R
 M  1  mobile communications for 5G cellular: It will work!” IEEE Access,
vol. 1, pp. 335–349, 2013.
= fk (r) E | r0 = r [4] T. Bai and R. W. Heath, “Coverage and rate analysis for millimeter-wave
1+ζ
k∈{L,N} l=0 0    cellular networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications,
ωk (r) vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 1100–1114, Feb. 2015.
[5] N. Deng and M. Haenggi, “A fine-grained analysis of millimeter-wave
(−u)l (l)
× Lk (r, u)|u=θk rαk dr, (36) device-to-device networks,” IEEE Transactions on Communications,
l! vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 4940–4954, Nov. 2017.
[6] C. Shi and G. Li, “Coordinated blanking for 5G millimeter-wave
where ωk (r) characterizes the cost for coordinating the infor- networks spectrum sharing,” in 2016 IEEE 83rd Vehicular Technology
mation transmission under the condition that |x0 | = r0 and x0 Conference (VTC Spring), Nanjing, May 2016, pp. 1–5.
[7] R. Kim, Y. Kim, and H. Lim, “Inter-BS interference-aware transmission
belongs to Φk , k ∈ {L, N}. Letting ζL and ζN be the number coordination for millimeter wave networks,” IEEE Wireless Communi-
of the muted LOS and NLOS BSs, we have ζ = ζL + ζN , and cations Letters, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 350–353, Jun. 2017.
according to the desired BS belonging to LOS or NLOS, the [8] J. Park, J. G. Andrews, and R. W. Heath, “Inter-operator base station
coordination in spectrum-shared millimeter wave cellular networks,”
following two disjoint events are considered. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking,
One is conditioning on x0 ∈ ΦL and |x0 | = r. In this vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 513–528, Sep. 2018.
case, the LOS BSs x ∈ ΦL are muted for the typical user [9] X. Zhang and M. Haenggi, “A stochastic geometry analysis of inter-cell
interference coordination and intra-cell diversity,” IEEE Transactions on
under the PL-ICIC scheme if r < |x| < ρ1/αL r is satisfied, Wireless Communications, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 6655–6669, Dec. 2014.
and thus ζL follows a Poisson distribution with mean EζL = [10] J. Yoon and G. Hwang, “Distance-based inter-cell interference coordina-
2
πλL (r̄L,L − r2 ). A NLOS BS x ∈ ΦN is muted if rαL /αN < tion in small cell networks: Stochastic geometry modeling and analysis,”
1/αN αL /αN IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 17, no. 6, pp.
|x| < ρ r is satisfied, and ζN also follows a Poisson 4089–4103, Jun. 2018.
2
distribution with mean EζN = πλN (r̄L,N − r2αL /αN ). Given [11] 3GPP, “Evolved universal terrestrial radio access (E-UTRA):X2 appli-
that x0 ∈ ΦL and |x0 | = r, ζL and ζN are independent, and cation protocol (X2AP),” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP),
Technical Specification (TS) 36.423, Sep. 2018, version 15.3.0.
thus ζ follows a Poisson distribution with mean [12] S. Singh, M. N. Kulkarni, A. Ghosh, and J. G. Andrews, “Tractable
 model for rate in self-backhauled millimeter wave cellular networks,”
2
Eζ = π λi (r̄L,i − r2αL /αi ), (37) IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 33, no. 10,
i∈{L,N}
pp. 2196–2211, Oct. 2015.
[13] C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design. Hoboken, NJ,
and we further obtain USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[14] X. Yu, J. Zhang, M. Haenggi, and K. B. Letaief, “Coverage analysis for
∞
 millimeter wave networks: The impact of directional antenna arrays,”
1 −Eζ (Eζ)n IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 35, no. 7, pp.
ωL (r) = e
n=0
1+n n! 1498–1512, Jul. 2017.
∞
[15] H. S. Jo, Y. J. Sang, P. Xia, and J. G. Andrews, “Heterogeneous cellular
e−Eζ  (Eζ)n+1 networks with flexible cell association: A comprehensive downlink SINR
= analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 11,
Eζ n=0 (n + 1)! no. 10, pp. 3484–3495, Oct. 2012.
  [16] M. Haenggi, Stochastic geometry for wireless networks. Cambridge
2
1 − exp − π λi (r̄L,i − r2αL /αi ) University Press, 2012.
i∈{L,N}
=  2
. (38)
π λi (r̄L,i − r2αL /αi )
i∈{L,N}

Authorized licensed use limited to: DA IICT. Downloaded on January 17,2022 at 06:48:58 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.