Interference Management using Power Control for Device-to-Device Communication in Future Cellular Network

Abstract

There are many scenarios that have been proposed for fifth generation (5G) networks. Some of them, if implemented, will bring fundamental changes at the architectural and node level. One example of such proposed technologies is device-to-device (D2D) communications which will change the nature of conventional cellular network design. D2D permits direct communication between two or more user devices without intervention of the base station (i.e. eNB). D2D can ensure network performance improvement over the traditional cellular network, because it can offload the mobile data traffic from the other devices. However, applying D2D features in a cellular network will bring about more complex interference problems, since D2D communication uses the same band as its underlying cellular communication network. The aim of this research is to investigate interference-related problems caused by D2D communications, affecting the underlying cellular networks, during downlink and uplink transmissions. The paper examines the use of power control methods to mitigate interference. A comparison is offered between fixed power level (FC) with or without power control, and adaptive power controls using two methods (AC1 and AC2), on a base station or on each of the D2D devices, based on the measured signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR). The simulation results show that both power control methods contribute to improvement of network performance. AC1 and AC2 can improve SINR by about 1 dB and 0.5 dB compared to FC in a downlink transmission, and by 0.5 dB in an uplink transmission.

Performance Analysis of Resource Allocation Techniques for Power Control in Device-to-Device Cellular Systems

“…It was observed that as the numbers of D2D pairs are increasing for all investigated techniques, SINR is decreasing. As observed in Figure 6, Comparison among the average SINR obtained for all the techniques deployed shows that the RPTC,APTC and OPTC technique has higher values for different numbers of D2D pairs, unlike the FPTC which performed poorly as confirmed by [36], [39]. It may be noted that, these techniques are able to contain SINR performance ability, they may perform because of the ability of individual transmitter of devices been able to realign with power of transmitter relative to the calculated SINR and interference parameters as observed by [38].…”

“…With due recognition of the representation obtained when addressed with respect numbers of device pairs as regards the comparison of the value of the SINR obtained for the techniques used, it becomes indisputable and worthy of note that the respective values of the various techniques have higher values for different respective numbers of D2D pairs for the RPTC,APTC and OPTC. However, in the case of the FPTC which performed poorly and this of course is a reflection of its inability to conform to the signal to interference ratio of noise when varied with a referenced distance as confirmed in the previous work done by [36], [39] when compared to other techniques. In a related development, these techniques generally, as seen by their performance they are able to contain SINR performance ability, because of the ability of the individual transmitter of devices have been able to realign with the power of transmitter relative to the calculated SINR and interference parameters.…”

“…(5) where𝑃 𝐿 can be referred to as the propagation pathloss within the various macrocell and MUE, and the ℎ 𝑀 can be regarded as the fading factor in the small scale of the channel from the transmitting macrocell to MUE as observed by [38]. Hence, this generally emphasizes in detail the propagation pathloss occasioned by the relative distance of separation in between the transmitting and the receiving antenna parameters within the D2D cellular system, by implication this means that 𝑃 𝑇 and 𝐺 𝑇 are for the receiving power signal at the distance of reference as investigated by [36] and [39]. However, the pathloss link between several numbers of user equipment, can be utilized to estimate the propagation loss from one D2D user equipment when considered with the referenced transmitting station and the macrocell user equipment with respect to the transmitting macrocell and this is expressed as follows [38];…”

“…The method adopted for this work entails the performance evaluation of previous work done on resource allocation strategy for power controlling in devices in the cellular system by some selected researchers with due reference to a singular cell in a cellular system. However, according to [36], it was established that the implementation of some selected user devices to initiate D2D communication may be achieved using or by varying parameters of the resource allocation with the incorporation of power control techniques by considering either type of the transmission process or in some cases both transmission types may be used and this includes both links in transmissions deployed in the D2D communication network of macrocell coverage area. In a related development, as emphasized by [37], to understand the best strategy for power controlled in terms of connection within device systems, it could be assumed that the process of communication in D2D may be enhanced by adopting the same frequency spectrum as a resource just as its often deployed in the macrocell, but this will often result in interference between all the devices and the base station.…”

Transmission Power Control and Relay Strategy for Increasing Access Rate in Device to Device Communication

“…Several frameworks have been proposed for interference management by means of transmission power control in D2D communication systems. These frameworks can be broadly categorized as in-band [6][7][8][9][10][11] and out-band [12][13][14][15][16]. Inband refers to the sharing of the available licensed spectrum between D2D and regular traffic.…”