ABS Choice and Inter-cell Interference

The CQ-CCR scheme regulates the high interference associated with the NCCR scheme with the aid of the quality factor, QF, making it possible for MSs to select higher SINR ABS choices than under the NCCR schemes. This approach is extended further by being more definite about the choices of ABS to permit. For example MSs may be permitted to be served by only the first choice and second choice ABSs in terms of SINR but not third, fourth or higher choices. Firstly, the relationship between the choice of ABSs and inter-cell interference among ABSs is illustrated; then, the Interference Aware Clustering Capability Rating (IA-CCR) scheme, based on this relationship, is proposed. Finally, the relationship between ABS choices and energy efficiency is evaluated by comparing the IA-CCR scheme with the NCCR, Highest SINR and Capacity Based Channel Assignment (CBCA) schemes.

CBCA is an energy efficient scheme proposed for the BuNGee Architecture in [81]. Under the control of CBCA scheme, an MS is served by resources from the ABS with the highest traffic load in its vicinity regardless of its ranking in terms of SINR amongst suitable ABS choices. However, all prospective ABS choices must satisfy the call admission SINR condition. It is important to note that when all ABSs have no load, the MS is served by resources from the ABS with the highest SINR value. The same is true when several ABSs have the highest traffic load.

In full scale dense small cell deployments with high frequency reuse, the proximity of BSs makes it possible for MSs to have several choices of ABSs to connect to. In

Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and inter

between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher inter

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and inter

between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher inter

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and inter

between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher inter

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and inter

between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher inter

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and inter-

between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher inter-

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and -cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

-cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is expected that the highest SINR scheme

since MSs always connect to the first choice ABS. On the contrary, only Figure 4.11, a snapshot of streets with MSs and ABSs operating at various frequencies is shown to explain the relationship between the base station choices and cell interference in a SCN with fixed frequency plan. As a result of proximity between A

SINR achievable at different ABSs will be different due to different path loss conditions. MS1 may have the option of connecting to ABS1, ABS2, ABS3 and ABS6. If it connects to ABS1 which is t

the highest SINR possible (i.e. first choice ABS) and the interference to the most interfered ABS (which is ABS3) should be smaller than the interference to ABS6 which is the most interfered one if it connects to

ABS2 is a lower SINR choice further away than ABS1. This trend can be extended to connection to ABS3 which is even further away and also at lower SINR than ABS2. In this case the interference to ABS1 will be higher than

previous cases. Thus, by allowing MSs to be served by ABSs of high order choices but low SINR value rather than lower order choices and higher SINR value, higher

cell interference among small cells is introduced.

The deviation from connection to the closest and highest SINR ABS may be tolerable at low traffic loads as most of the ABSs being interfered with may be switched to the sleep state b

active. The interference already created towards the ABSs can make them unusable in the future as a result of the low SINR choices made earlier on. Intuitively, it is