EE360: Multiuser Wireless Systems and Networks

Lecture 1 Outline
 Course Details
 Course Syllabus
 Course Overview
 Future Wireless Networks
 Multiuser Channels (Broadcast/MAC Channels)
 Spectral Reuse and Cellular Systems
 Ad-Hoc, Sensor, and Cognitive Radio Networks
 Bandwidth Sharing in Multiuser Channels
 Overview of Multiuser Channel Capacity
 Capacity of Broadcast Channels
 Course Information *

People
 Instructor: Andrea Goldsmith, andrea@ee, Packard
371, 5-6932, OHs: MW after class and by appt.
 TA: Mainak Chowdhury, Email:
mainakch@stanford.edu OHs: around HWs. Possibly
around paper discussions organized via Piazza.

 Class Administrator: Pat Oshiro, poshiro@stanford,

Packard 365, 3-2681.

*See web or handout for more details

 Course Information
Nuts and Bolts
 Prerequisites: EE359
 Course Time and Location: MW 9:30-10:45. Y2E2 101.

 Class Homepage: www.stanford.edu/class/ee360

 Contains all required reading, handouts, announcements, HWs, etc.
 Class Mailing List: ee360win01314-students (automatic for
on-campus registered students).
 Guest list: send TA email to sign up

 Tentative Grading Policy:

 10% Class participation
 10% Class presentation
 15% Homeworks
 Grade Components
 Class participation
 Read the required reading before lecture/discuss in class

 Class presentation
 Present a paper related to one of the course topics
 HW 0: Choose 3 possible high-impact papers, each on a
different syllabus topic, by Jan. 13. Include a paragraph
for each describing main idea(s), why interesting/high
impact
 Presentations begin Jan. 22.

 HW assignments
 Two assignments from book or other problems
 Project
 Term project on anything related to multiuser wireless
 Analysis, simulation and/or experiment
 Must contain some original research
 2 can collaborate if project merits collaboration (scope, synergy)

 Must set up website for project

 Will post proposal, progress report, and final report to website

 Project proposal due Jan. 27 at midnight

 1-2 page proposal with detailed description of project plan
 Comments Feb 3, revised project proposal due Feb 10.

 Progress report: due Feb. 24 at midnight

See website for details
 Tentative Syllabus
 Weeks 1-2: Multiuser systems (Chapters 13.4 and
14, additional papers)
 Weeks 3-4: Cellular systems (Chapter 15, additional
papers)
 Weeks 5-6: Ad hoc wireless networks (Chapter 16,
additional papers)
 Week 7-8: Cognitive radio networks (papers)
 Week 8-9: Sensor networks (papers)
 Weeks 10: Additional Topics. Course Summary
 Future Wireless Networks
Ubiquitous Communication Among People and Devices

Next-generation Cellular
Wireless Internet Access
Wireless Multimedia
Sensor Networks
Smart Homes/Spaces
Automated Highways
In-Body Networks
All this and more …
 Multiuser Channels:
Uplink and Downlink
Uplink (Multiple Access x R3
Channel or MAC):
Many Transmitters h3(t)
to One Receiver. x h22(t)
Downlink (Broadcast x h21(t)
x h1(t)
Channel or BC):
One Transmitter R2
to Many Receivers. R1

Challenge: How to share the channel among multiuser users

Uplink and Downlink typically duplexed in time or frequency
 Spectral Reuse
Due to its scarcity, spectrum is reused
In licensed bands and unlicensed bands

BS

Cellular, Wimax Wifi, BT, UWB,…

Reuse introduces
 Interference: Friend or Foe?
 If treated as noise: Foe
P Increases BER
SNR 
NI Reduces capacity

 If decodable (MUD): Neither friend nor foe

 If exploited via cooperation and cognition:

Friend (especially in a network setting)
 Cellular Systems
Reuse channels to maximize capacity
 1G: Analog systems, large frequency reuse, large cells, uniform standard
 2G: Digital systems, less reuse (1 for CDMA), smaller cells, multiple
standards, evolved to support voice and data (IS-54, IS-95, GSM)
 3G: Digital systems, WCDMA competing with GSM evolution.
 4G: OFDM/MIMO
 5G: ???

BASE
STATION
MTSO
 Rethinking “Cells” in Cellular
How should cellular
Small
Coop
MIMO Cell systems be designed?
Relay

Will gains in practice be

DAS big or incremental; in
capacity or coverage?

 Traditional cellular design “interference-limited”

 MIMO/multiuser detection can remove interference
 Cooperating BSs form a MIMO array: what is a cell?
 Relays change cell shape and boundaries
 Distributed antennas move BS towards cell boundary
 Small cells create a cell within a cell
Ad-Hoc/Mesh Networks
Outdoor Mesh

Indoor Mesh
ce
 Ad-Hoc Networks

 Peer-to-peer communications
 No backbone infrastructure or centralized control
 Routing can be multihop.
 Topology is dynamic.
 Fully connected with different link SINRs
 Open questions
 Fundamental capacity
 Optimal routing
 Resource allocation (power, rate, spectrum, etc.)
 Design Issues
 Ad-hoc networks provide a flexible network
infrastructure for many emerging applications.
 The capacity of such networks is generally
unknown.
 Transmission, access, and routing strategies for
ad-hoc networks are generally ad-hoc.
 Crosslayer design critical and very challenging.
 Energy constraints impose interesting design
tradeoffs for communication and networking.
 Cognition Radios
 Cognitive radios can support new wireless users in
existing crowded spectrum
 Without degrading performance of existing users

 Utilize advanced communication and signal

processing techniques
 Coupled with novel spectrum allocation policies

 Technology could
 Revolutionize the way spectrum is allocated worldwide
 Provide sufficient bandwidth to support higher quality
and higher data rate products and services
 Cognitive Radio Paradigms
 Underlay
 Cognitive radios constrained to cause minimal
interference to noncognitive radios

 Interweave
 Cognitive radios find and exploit spectral
holes to avoid interfering with noncognitive
radios

Knowledge
and
Complexity
 Overlay
 Underlay Systems
 Cognitive radios determine the interference
their transmission causes to noncognitive nodes
 Transmit if interference below a given threshold

IP
NCR
NCR CR CR

 The interference constraint may be met

 Via wideband signalling to maintain interference
below the noise floor (spread spectrum or UWB)
 Via multiple antennas and beamforming
 Interweave Systems
 Measurements indicate that even crowded spectrum
is not used across all time, space, and frequencies
 Original motivation for “cognitive” radios (Mitola’00)

 These holes can be used for communication

 Interweave CRs periodically monitor spectrum for holes
 Hole location must be agreed upon between TX and RX
 Hole is then used for opportunistic communication with
minimal interference to noncognitive users
 Overlay Systems
 Cognitive user has knowledge of other
user’s message and/or encoding strategy
 Used to help noncognitive transmission
 Used to presubtract noncognitive interference

RX1
CR

RX2
NCR
 Wireless Sensor and “Green”
Networks

• Smart homes/buildings
• Smart structures
• Search and rescue
• Homeland security
• Event detection
• Battlefield surveillance

 Energy (transmit and processing) is driving constraint

 Data flows to centralized location (joint compression)
 Low per-node rates but tens to thousands of nodes
 Intelligence is in the network rather than in the devices
 Similar ideas can be used to re-architect systems and networks to be
 Energy-Constrained Nodes
 Each node can only send a finite number of bits.
 Transmit energy minimized by maximizing bit time
 Circuit energy consumption increases with bit time
 Introduces a delay versus energy tradeoff for each bit

 Short-range networks must consider transmit,

circuit, and processing energy.
 Sophisticated techniques not necessarily energy-efficient.
 Sleep modes save energy but complicate networking.

 Changes everything about the network design:

 Bit allocation must be optimized across all protocols.
 Green” Cellular Networks
Pico/Femto How should cellular
Coop systems be redesigned
MIMO
Relay
for minimum energy?

Research indicates that

DAS
signicant savings is possible

 Minimize energy at both the mobile and base station via

 New Infrastuctures: cell size, BS placement, DAS, Picos, relays
 New Protocols: Cell Zooming, Coop MIMO, RRM,
Scheduling, Sleeping, Relaying
 Low-Power (Green) Radios: Radio Architectures, Modulation,
coding, MIMO
 Crosslayer Design in
Wireless Networks
 Application
 Network

 Access
 Link
 Hardware
Tradeoffs at all layers of the protocol stack are
optimized with respect to end-to-end performance
This performance is dictated by the application
Multiuser Channels
 Uplink and Downlink
Uplink (Multiple Access x R3
Channel or MAC):
Many Transmitters h3(t)
to One Receiver. x h22(t)
Downlink (Broadcast x h21(t)
x h1(t)
Channel or BC):
One Transmitter R2
to Many Receivers. R1

Challenge: How to share the channel among multiuser users

Uplink and Downlink typically duplexed in time or frequency
 RANDOM ACCESS TECHNIQUES
Random Access
 Dedicated channels wasteful for data
 Use statistical multiplexing

 Techniques
 ALOHA and slotted ALOHA
 Carrier sensing
 Collision detection or avoidance
 Reservation protocols (similar to deterministic access)

 Retransmissions used for corrupted data

 Poor throughput and delay characteristics under

7C29822.038-Cimini-9/97
 ALOHA

Throughput per
Packet Time)
 Data is packetized .40 Slotted Aloha
.30
 Retransmit .20
.10
Pure Aloha
 When packets collide 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0

 Pure ALOHA G (Attempts per Packet TIme)

 send packet whenever data is available

 a collision occurs for any partial overlap of packets
 Slotted ALOHA
 send packets during predefined timeslots
 avoids partial overlap of packets
 Comments
 Inefficient for heavily loaded systems
 Capture effect (packets with high SINR decoded) improves efficiency
 Carrier Sense Techniques
 Channel sensed before transmission
 To determine if it is occupied

 More efficient than ALOHA  fewer retransmissions

 Carrier sensing is often combined with collision detection
in wired networks (e.g. Ethernet)
 not possible in a radio environment
CTS
RTS

Busy Tone

Wired Network Wireless Network

 Collision avoidance (busy tone, RTS/CTS) can be used

 Deterministic Bandwidth
Sharing
Code Space
 Frequency Division
Time

Frequency Code Space

 Time Division
Time

Frequency
Code Space
 Code Division
 Multiuser Detection Time

Frequency
 Space Division (MIMO)
 Hybrid Schemes
What is optimal? Look to Shannon.
 Multiple Access SS

 Interference between users mitigated by code

cross
T
b
correlation
xˆ (t )   1s1 (t ) sc21 (t ) cos 2 (2f c t )   2 s2 (t   ) sc 2 (t   ) sc1 (t ) cos( 2f ct ) cos( 2f c (t   )) dt
0
Tb

 .51d1  .5 2 d 2  sc1 (t ) sc 2 (t )dt  .5d1  .5d 2 cos( 2f c ) 12 ( )

a
0

 In downlink, signal and interference have

a
same received power
 In uplink, “close” users drown out “far” users
(near-far problem)
 Multiuser Detection
 In all CDMA systems and in TD/FD/CD cellular
systems, users interfere with each other.
 In most of these systems the interference is
treated as noise.
 Systems become interference-limited
 Often uses complex mechanisms to minimize impact
of interference (power control, smart antennas, etc.)

 Multiuser detection exploits the fact that the

structure of the interference is known
 Interference can be detected and subtracted out
 Better have a darn good estimate of the interference
 Ideal Multiuser Detection
Signal 1 - =
A/D
A/D Signal 1
A/D Demod
A/D

Iterative
Multiuser
Detection
Signal 2
Signal 2
Demod

- =
Why Not Ubiquitous Today? Power and A/D Precision
 Multiuser Shannon Capacity
Fundamental Limit on Data Rates
Capacity: The set of simultaneously achievable rates {R1,…,Rn}
with arbitrarily small probability of error R 3

R2
R2 R3
R1
R1

 Main drivers of channel capacity

 Bandwidth and received SINR
 Channel model (fading, ISI)
 Channel knowledge and how it is used
 Number of antennas at TX and RX

 Duality connects capacity regions of uplink and downlink

 Broadcast Channel Capacity
Region in AWGN
 Model
 One transmitter, two receivers with spectral noise
density n1, n2: n1<n2.
 Transmitter has average power Pand total bandwidth
B.

 Single User Capacity:  P 

Ci  Brate
 Maximum achievable 1  asymptotically
log with  small Pe
 ni B 

 Set of achievable rates includes (C1,0) and (0,C2), obtained

by allocating all resources to one user.
 Rate Region: Time Division
 Time Division (Constant Power)
 Fraction of time t allocated to each user is varied

U  R 1  C1 , R2  (1   )C 2  ;0    1

 Time Division (Variable Power)

 Fraction of time t and power si allocated to each user
is varied
   1   2  
U R1  B log 1  , R2  (1   ) B log 1   ;
   n1 B   n2 B   
 
  1  (1   ) 2  P, 0    1. 
 Rate Region: Frequency Division

 Frequency Division
 Bandwidth Bi and power Si allocated to each user is varied.

   P1   P2   
U R1  B1 log 1 
  , R2  B2 log 1  
 ;
   n1 B1   n2 B2   
 
 
 P1  P2  P, B1  B2  B 
 

Equivalent to TD for Bi=tiB and Pi=tisi.

Superposition Coding

Best user decodes fine points

Worse user decodes coarse points
 Code Division
 Superposition Coding
 Coding strategy allows better user to cancel out interference
from worse user.

   P1   P2  

 U 
 R1  B log 1   , R2  B log 1  ;
 1 P  P2  P 

   n1 B   n2 B  S1   




U 
  RDS spread spectrum with spreading gain G and cross
1 
B
G
log

1 
P1 

n1 B / G 
, R2 
B
G
log

1 
P2 
;
 1
n2 B / G  S1 / G  
P  P2  P




    
correlation r12= r21 =G:


      
U R 
B
log 1 
P1
 , R 
B
log 1 
P2
 ; P1  P2  P 

  1
G n1 B / G  P2 / G 
2
G n2 B / G  P1 / G   
     


 Broadcast and MAC
Fading Channels
Broadcast: Wireless Wired
One Transmitter Gateway Network
to Many Receivers.
x g3(t)
Multiple Access: x g2(t)
Many Transmitters
x g1(t)
to One Receiver. R3
R2
R1

Goal: Maximize the rate region {R1,…,Rn}, subject to some minimum rate
constraints, by dynamic allocation of power, rate, and coding/decoding.
Assume transmit power constraint and perfect TX and RX CSI
 Fading Capacity Definitions

 Ergodic (Shannon) capacity: maximum long-term rates

averaged over the fading process.
 Shannon capacity applied directly to fading channels.
 Delay depends on channel variations.
 Transmission rate varies with channel quality.

 Zero-outage (delay-limited*) capacity: maximum rate

that can be maintained in all fading states.
 Delay independent of channel variations.
 Constant transmission rate – much power needed for deep fading.

*Hanly/Tse, IT, 11/98

Two-User Fading Broadcast Channel
h1[i] n1[i]
x + Y1[i]
X[i]
x + Y2[i]
h2[i] n2[i]
At each time i:
n={n1[i],n2[i]}
n1[i]=n1[i]/h1[i]
+ Y1[i]
X[i]
+ Y2[i]
n2[i]=n2[i]/h2[i]
 Ergodic Capacity Region*
 Capacity region:C ergodic( P )  P F C (P ) ,where
  
  
P ( n )
C (P )   R j  E n  B log1  ,
j
1  j  M}
  M 
 

n j B   Pi ( n )1[ n j  n ]
i 

 i 1

M
 The power constraint implies E n  Pj (n)  P
j 1

 Superposition coding and successive decoding

achieve capacity
 Best user in each state decoded last

*Li/Goldsmith, IT, 3/01

 Power and rate adapted using multiuser water-filling:
 Zero-Outage Capacity Region*
 The set of rate vectors that can be maintained for all
channel states under power constraint P
C zero ( P )  P F nN C (P )
   
   
 P ( n ) 
C (P )   R j  B log 1  j , 1 j  M
 M 
  n j B   Pi (n)1[n j  ni ]  
  i 1  

 Capacity region defined implicitly relative to power:

 For a given rate vector R and fading state n we find
the minimum power Pmin(R,n) that supports R.
 RCzero(P) if En[Pmin(R,n)]  P
*Li and Goldsmith, IT, 3/01
 Outage Capacity Region
 Two different assumptions about outage:
 All users turned off simultaneously (common outage Pr)
 Users turned off independently (outage probability vector Pr)

 Outage capacity region implicitly defined from the

minimum outage probability associated with a given rate
 Common outage: given (R,n), use threshold policy
 If Pmin(R,n)>s* declare an outage, otherwise assign this
power to state n.

P  E n:P min ( R ,n ) s* P
min
( R, n ) 
 Pr  s* :
Power constraint dictates n:P min ( R ,n ) s*
p ( n)
 Independent Outage
 With independent outage cannot use the threshold
approach:
 Any subset of users can be active in each fading state.

 Power allocation must determine how much power to

allocate to each state and which users are on in that state.

 Optimal power allocation maximizes the reward for

transmitting to a given subset of users for each fading state
 Reward based on user priorities and outage probabilities.
 An iterative technique is used to maximize this reward.
Minimum-Rate Capacity Region

 Combines ergodic and zero-outage capacity:

 Minimum rate vector maintained in all fading states.
 Average rate in excess of the minimum is maximized.

 Delay-constrained data transmitted at the

minimum rate at all times.
 Channel variation exploited by transmitting
other data at the maximum excess average rate.
Minimum Rate Constraints
 Define minimum rates R* = (R*1,…,R*M):
 These rates must be maintained in all fading states.

 For a given channel state n:

 
 
P ( n )
R j (n)  B log1  j , R j (n)  R*j n
 M 
 n j B   Pi (n)1[ n j  ni ] 
 i 1 

 R* must be in zero-outage capacity region

 Allocate excess power to maximize excess ergodic rate
 The smaller R*, the bigger the min-rate capacity region
Comparison of Capacity Regions

 For R* far from Czero boundary, Cmin-rate Cergodic

 For R* close to Czero boundary, Cmin-rate CzeroR*
 Min-Rate Capacity Region:
Large Deviation in User Channels

P = 10 mW,
B = 100 KHz

Symmetric channel with 40 dB difference in noises in each fading state

(user 1 is 40 dB stronger in 1 state, and vice versa).
 Min-Rate Capacity Region:
Smaller Deviation

P = 10 mW,
B = 100 KHz

Symmetric channel with 20 dB difference in noises in each fading state

(user 1 is 20 dB stronger in 1 state, and vice versa).
Broadcast Channels with ISI
 ISI introduces memory into the channel

 The optimal coding strategy decomposes the

channel into parallel broadcast channels
 Superposition coding is applied to each subchannel.

 Power must be optimized across subchannels

and between users in each subchannel.
 Broadcast Channel Model
w1k m

H 1( w) y1k   h1i xk i w1k

i 1
xk w2k m

H2(w) y2 k   h2i xk i w2 k

i 1

 Both H1 and H2 are finite IR filters of length m.

 The w1k and w2k are correlated noise samples.
 For 1<k<n, we call this channel the n-block
discrete Gaussian broadcast channel (n-DGBC).
 The channel capacity region is C=(R1,R2).
 Circular Channel Model
 Define the zero padded filters as:
~ n
{hi }i 1  (h1 ,..., hm ,0,...,0)

 The n-Block Circular Gaussian Broadcast Channel

(n-CGBC) is defined based on circular convolution:
n 1
~
y1k   h1i x(( k i )) w1k  xi  h1i  w1k
~
i 0
n 1 0<k<n
~
y2 k   h2i x(( k i )) w2 k  xi  h2i  w2 k
~
i 0

where ((.)) denotes addition modulo n.

 Equivalent Channel Model
 Taking DFTs of both sides yields
~ ~
Y1 j  H1 j X j  W1 j
~ ~ 0<j<n
Y2 j  H2 j X j  W2 j

 Dividing by H~ and using additional properties

of the DFT yields
Y1j  X j  V1j
0<j<n
Y2j  X j  V2j

where {V1j} and {V2j} are independent zero-mean Gaussian

~ 2
random variables with lj 2
 n ( N l ( 2 j / n )/| H lj | , l  1,2.
 Parallel Channel Model
V11
+ Y11
X1
+ Y21
V21 Ni(f)/Hi(f)

V1n f
+ Y1n
Xn
+ Y2n
V2n
 Channel Decomposition
 The n-CGBC thus decomposes to a set of n parallel discrete
memoryless degraded broadcast channels with AWGN.
 Can show that as n goes to infinity, the circular and original channel
have the same capacity region

 The capacity region of parallel degraded broadcast

channels was obtained by El-Gamal (1980)
 Optimal power allocation obtained by Hughes-Hartogs(’75).

n 1

 E[ x 2
i ]  nP
 The power constraint i 0 onn 1the original channel is
 E[( X i) ]  n P
2 2

converted by Parseval’s theorem to i 0 on the

equivalent channel.
 Capacity Region of Parallel Set
 Achievable Rates (no common information)
  j Pj    j Pj 
 R1  .5  log1     .5  log 1   ,
j: 1 j  2 j   1 j  j: 1 j  2 j
 (1   ) P   
 j j 1j 

 (1   j ) Pj   (1   j ) Pj 
R2  .5  log1    .5  log1  ,
    2 j 
j: 1 j  2 j   j Pj   2 j  j: 1 j  2 j 
0   j  1,  Pj  n 2 P 

 Capacity Region

For 0<b find {aj}, {Pj} to maximize R1+bR2+l SPj.
 Let (R1*,R2*)n,b denote the corresponding rate pair.
b
R2
 Cn={(R1*,R2*)n,b : 0<b  }, C=liminfn n1Cn .
R1
Optimal Power Allocation:
Two Level Water Filling
Capacity vs. Frequency
Capacity Region
 Multiple Access Channel
 Multiple transmitters
 Transmitter i sends signal Xi with power Pi

 Common receiver with AWGN of power N0B

 ReceivedMsignal: X1
Y   Xi  N
i 1 X2 X3
 MAC Capacity Region

 Closed convex hull of all (R1,…,RM) s.t.

 

iS
Ri  B log 1   Pi / N 0 B ,
 iS 
S  {1,..., M }
 For all subsets of users, rate sum equals that of 1
superuser with sum of powers from all users

 Power Allocation and Decoding Order

 Each user has its own power (no power alloc.)
 Decoding order depends on desired rate point
 Two-User Region
Superposition coding
w/ interference canc.
Time division
C2 SC w/ IC and time
sharing or rate splitting

Ĉ2 Frequency division
SC w/out IC

 Pi  Ĉ1 C1
Ci  B log 1  , i  1,2
 N0 B 

ˆ  P1  ˆ  P2 
C1  B log 1  , C2  B log 1  ,
 N 0 B  P2   N 0 B  P1 
 Fading and ISI
 MAC capacity under fading and ISI determined
using similar techniques as for the BC

 In fading, can define ergodic, outage, and

minimum rate capacity similar as in BC case
 Ergodic capacity obtained based on AWGN MAC
given fixed fading, averaged over fading statistics
 Outage can be declared as common, or per user

 MAC capacity with ISI obtained by converting to

Comparison of MAC and BC
P
 Differences:
 Shared vs. individual power constraints
 Near-far effect in MAC P1

 Similarities: P2
 Optimal BC “superposition” coding is also optimal for
MAC (sum of Gaussian codewords)
 Both decoders exploit successive decoding and
interference cancellation
 MAC-BC Capacity Regions
 MAC capacity region known for many cases
 Convex optimization problem

 BC capacity region typically only known for

(parallel) degraded channels
 Formulas often not convex

 Can we find a connection between the BC and

MAC capacity regions?
Duality
 Dual Broadcast and MAC Channels
Gaussian BC and MAC with same channel gains
and same noise power at each receiver
h1 (n)
z1 (n)
h1 (n)

x + y1 (n) x1 (n) x z (n)

( P1 )
+ y (n)
x(n) z M (n)
h M (n) h M (n)
(P )
x + yM (n) xM (n) x
( PM )

Broadcast Channel (BC) Multiple-Access Channel (MAC)

 The BC from the MAC
C MAC ( P1 , P2 ; h1 , h2 )  C BC ( P1  P2 ; h1 , h2 )

h1  h2
P1=0.5, P2=1.5

Blue = BC P1=1, P2=1

Red = MAC

P1=1.5, P2=0.5

MAC with sum-power constraint

C BC ( P ; h1 , h2 )   C MAC ( P1 , P  P1 ; h1 , h2 )
0 P1  P
 Sum-Power
MAC
C BC ( P; h1 , h2 )  C (
 MAC 1P , P  P ;
1 1h , h2 )  C Sum
MAC ( P; h1 , h2 )
0 P1  P

 MAC with sum power constraint

 Power pooled between MAC transmitters
 No transmitter coordination
P
Same capacity region!
MAC BC

P
 BC to MAC: Channel
Scaling
 Scale channel gain by a, power by 1/a
 MAC capacity region unaffected by scaling
 Scaled MAC capacity region is a subset of the scaled BC
capacity region for any a
 MAC region inside scaled BC region for any scaling

P1 MAC
  h1  h1 +

P1
+  P2

h2 +
h2
P2
BC
 The BC from the
MAC
  

h2
Blue = Scaled BC 
h1
Red = MAC
  0

P1
C MAC ( P1 , P2 ; h1 , h2 )   C BC (  P2 ;  h1 , h2 )
 0 
 Duality: Constant AWGN
Channels
 BC in terms of MAC
C BC ( P ; h1 , h2 )   C MAC ( P1 , P  P1 ; h1 , h2 )
0 P1  P

 MAC in terms of BC
P1
C MAC ( P1 , P2 ; h1 , h2 )   C BC (  P2 ; h1 , h2 )
 0 

What is the relationship between

the optimal transmission strategies?
 Transmission Strategy
Transformations
 Equate rates, solve for powers
h12 P1M h12 P1B
R1M  log(1  M 2
)  log(1  2
)  R1
B
h2 P2   

h22 P2M h22 P2B

R2M  log(1  )  log(1  )  R2
B
2 h22 P1B   2
 Opposite decoding order
 Stronger user (User 1) decoded last in BC
 Weaker user (User 2) decoded last in MAC
 Duality Applies to Different
Fading Channel Capacities

 Ergodic (Shannon) capacity: maximum rate averaged

over all fading states.

 Zero-outage capacity: maximum rate that can be

maintained in all fading states.

 Outage capacity: maximum rate that can be maintained

in all nonoutage fading states.

 Explicit
Minimum transformations
rate capacity: between
Minimum transmission strategies
rate maintained in
all states, maximize average rate in excess of minimum
 Duality: Minimum Rate
Capacity

MAC in terms of BC
Blue = Scaled BC
Red = MAC

 BC region known
 MAC region can only be obtained by duality
What other capacity regions can be obtained by
Broadcast duality?
MIMO Channels