Comparison and Cost Analysis of Smart and
Opportunistic MIMO OFDM Schemes
Mats Bengtsson, Patrick Svedman, and Per Zetterberg
School of Electrical Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
SE-100 44 Stockholm, SWEDEN.
Phone: +46 8 790 8463 Fax: +46 8 790 7260
firstname.familyname@s3.kth.se
Abstract— This paper attempts to compare the system down-
link performance of a smart antenna scheme for OFDMA that
utilizes channel covariance information with an opportunistic
multi-antenna scheme for OFDMA that uses fast limited feed-
back of the instantaneous channel condition. The schemes are
evaluated by means of simulations in a low load scenario and
also compared to a simple HSDPA-like scheme. The smart
antenna method manages to utilize the multiple antennas better
than the opportunistic scheme. Furthermore, the performance
of the schemes is inserted into a cost model that assumes that
the receivers are relays that use short-range technologies to
communicate with user equipments. Also in terms of cost per
user equipment, the smart antenna scheme proves to be more
suitable for the studied scenario.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Multiuser multi-antenna communication has recently been
heavily investigated. Many different communication schemes
have evolved, often attractive from different points of view,
sometimes fundamentally different and therefore difficult to
compare. In this paper, we try to compare two multi-antenna
approaches in the context of a relay based cellular system.
Additionally, we have made an attempt to put the performance
results into an economical framework, in which we try to
compute the cost per user. The main idea of this relay-based
cellular system concept is that the path from the base station to
the user equipment is split into two. The intermediate station
is a unit we call a mobile relay. In the communication link
between the base stations and the relays, each mobile relay
acts as a mobile station in a classical cellular system - only
that it is physically large so that it can carry multiple antennas,
a large battery and high processing capabilities. In the link
between the mobile relays and the user equipment, the relay
acts as an access point using some form of short-range wireless
technology (see Figure I).
The scenario is an evolved 3G wide-area system. In order
to reduce the cost, the existing infrastructure in terms of base
station towers and backbone should be reused as much as
possible and multiple antenna solutions provide one possibility
to obtain the increased data rates [1].
It is well-known that the use of multiple antennas at both
transmitters and receivers can provide both increased data rate
and coverage, improved interference mitigation capabilities
The work reported here is partly funded by the Swedish Foundation for
Strategic Research, within the AWSI/LCI project.
The outdoor restaurant.
MRS
In car
Outdoors
MRS
MRS
Fig. 1. Illustration of usages of the mobile relay station (MRS).
and improved diversity to combat fading. This can lead to sig-
nificantly increased spectral efficiency, not only for each single
link but also for the system at large [2, 3]. Still, it is not clear
how to utilize the radio resources in such systems in the best
way, including aspects as spatial processing, power control,
and scheduling, taking both inter- and intra-cell interference
into account. Most practical approaches rely on Channel State
Information (CSI) at the transmitters to determine the spatial
processing and scheduling. In order to get a realistic amount of
channel feedback, we will here only consider using the second
order statistics of the channels at the transmitters. It is only
necessary to update this information at the rate of the large
scale fading.
An alternative approach is to exploit the multiuser diversity
and do the spatial processing at random. Such a scheme was
first proposed in [4], scheduling only a single user per cell
and later extended in [5] to allow several simultaneous beams
in each cell, which gives both multiuser diversity and spatial
multiplexing gains. In contrast to the “smart antenna” schemes
described above, information is fed back at the rate of the small
scale fading, but only a few bits of information (reflecting the
resulting SINR after the beamforming) are fed back at a time.
It is admittedly very difficult to make a fair comparison
between smart and opportunistic schemes and the results will
depend on the scenario and on the performance criterion (rate,
delay, etc.). The intention here is to highlight some of the main
aspects. A related study for the case of single antenna mobiles
was presented in [7].
II. C OMMUNICATION T ECHNIQUES
We consider a scenario with several base stations, serving
a number of mobile relays. Both the base stations and the
relays are equipped with multiple antennas and we study the
downlink traffic. OFDM modulation is used and the different
sub-carriers can be allocated to different users (OFDMA).
Beamforming is used both at the transmitters and receivers.
A. Smart Antenna OFDMA
In this scheme, the beamformers are designed to minimize
the total transmitted power in the system under the constraint
that the average signal to interference plus noise ratio at each
receiver should be above a certain threshold, see [8]. In this
design, both transmit and receive beamformers are determined
as a function of the second order statistics of the small scale
fading. However, we only use the resulting transmit beam-
formers, and the receive beamformers are determined using an
MMSE criterion based on the instantaneous channels. Such an
approach is clearly suboptimal but is chosen for mathematical
tractability. Note also that the solution is calculated jointly for
all users, taking both inter-cell and intra-cell interference into
account.
A round-robin schedule is determined using a first fit
approach similar to that proposed in [9], trying to schedule as
many users as possible in each slot. This schedule is applied
first along the subcarriers in each time slot and then along the
time slots.
Two possible versions of this scheme are considered in the
numerical examples.
• Adaptive modulation The channel covariance matrices
may be obtained from measurements of the uplink trans-
missions. This means that no long term channel infor-
mation is fed back from the mobiles. Therefore, we can
afford to let each scheduled mobile feed back an estimate
of the instantaneous SINR and use adaptive modulation.
• Fixed modulation In a system, where the channel covari-
ance matrices are fed back from the mobiles, we cannot
afford to feed back any short term channel information,
so a fixed modulation is used.
B. Opportunistic SD-OFDMA
We have used the opportunistic SD-OFDMA scheme in [6].
The principle of opportunistic SD-OFDMA is
1) For each sub-carrier, each base station independently
forms a number of random but orthogonal beams and
transmits orthogonal training sequences on the beams.
2) Each mobile terminal estimates the SINR on each sub-
carrier and each beam (the beam-SINR) and feeds back
the supportable rate for a number of them to the desig-
nated base station.
3) Each base station schedules its users on the sub-carriers
and beams according to the fed back rates.
4) The scheduling decisions are transmitted to the users,
for instance by transmitting the index of the scheduled
user on each beam.
5) During the rest of the time-slot, data is transmitted to the
users according to the scheduling in 3), with the rates
they estimated and fed back in 2).
6) The same procedure, 1)-5), is repeated for the next time-
slot for a new set of beams.
This scheme is a direct extension to OFDMA of the random
beamforming proposed in [5]. In [6], an OFDMA-specific
modification is proposed, which exploits the temporal channel
correlation. By keeping the beams on the frequency bands that
result in the highest sum-rate, the performance is improved.
This means that the beamforming in step 1) above is less
random, since the beams on only some of the sub-carriers
are randomly regenerated each time-slot. This can be seen as
a parallel search of beamformers, where the most successful
are kept from time-slot to time-slot.
C. HSDPA
For reference, we have also included HSDPA as a single
antenna scheme. High Speed Downlink Packet-data Access
(HSDPA) is an extension to the 3G-system that includes
features like fast multiuser diversity scheduling and fast hybrid
ARQ (Automatic Repeat Request). In this work, we have
simulated a simplified scheme intended to capture the main
features of HSDPA. Single carrier WCDMA with adaptive
modulation and spreading factor is used together with one
transmit and one receive antenna. Each user feeds back its
supportable rate and one user at a time is scheduled according
to proportional fair.
III. S IMULATION A SSUMPTIONS
A. Common Assumptions
The downlink of a system with 9 base station sites has been
simulated using the 3GPP spatial channel model for suburban
environments [10, 11]. Each site covers three 120◦ sectors, i.e.,
a total of 27 sectors are included in the simulation. The
simulated area is wrapped around on a torus, such that each
sector is surrounded by other sectors with similar traffic.
We have assumed block fading and the performance loss by
inter-carrier interference and feedback errors and delays are
not considered. Uniform linear arrays with half wavelength
spacing are used at both ends.
The mobile relays are placed at random in the area and
each relay is connected to the base station with the smallest
path-loss. All relays are considered active, i.e. there is always
data to transmit. The relays use MMSE receivers based on
instantaneous CSI, which is assumed perfectly known. We
focus on a low load region with in average 2 relays per sector.
Adaptive modulation is used (except for the fixed modulation
smart antenna scheme), selecting the highest modulation that
provides an uncoded bit error rate < 10−2 . Additional param-
eters are summarized in Table I.
B. Assumptions for Smart Antennas
In the covariance feedback schemes, the channel covariance
matrices are averaged during 0.1s and are used to calculate a
round-robin schedule for the following 0.1s. The beamformers
are designed for a target SINR of γtarget = 14dB, plus a
fading margin of γmargin = 3dB (which clearly is on the low
side for single antenna receivers, see [12], but realistic with
 18
multiple antenna mobiles using rapidly updated MMSE receive Nt=1 adapt. mod.
beamformers). Note that for the adaptive modulation scheme, Nt=2, adapt. mod.

Average throughput per sector [Mbit/s]

16 Nt=4, adapt. mod.
the total feedback will be lower than that of the opportunistic Nt=8, adapt. mod.
Nt=1 fix. mod.
scheme, since only the scheduled users use the feed back 14
Nt=2, fix. mod.
channel. Nt=4, fix. mod.
12 Nt=8, fix. mod.
For the fixed modulation scheme, 64-QAM was used and
an instantaneous SINR lower than γtarget was considered a 10
block error. Here it is harder to make a fair comparison
8
of the required feedback rate, since we have not evaluated
how many bits precision are required for each value of the 6
covariance matrices. Also, the number of channels to relays
in surrounding cells that actually need to be taken into account 4

in the optimization have not been evaluated (here, the channels

2
from each mobile to every base station sector was included). 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Average number of users per sector
Finally, the amount of feedback depends heavily on the system
parameters, such as burst structure, the user mobility and so Fig. 2. System throughput versus load for the smart antenna scheme, Nr = 4.
on, but unless the mobility is very low or channel reciprocity
is exploited, the covariance feedback schemes will typically
require higher feedback rate than the opportunistic schemes. N =1
t
12

Average throughput per sector [Mbit/s]

Nt=2
Nt=4
C. Assumptions for Opportunistic SD-OFDMA 10 Nt=8
N =1 HSDPA
For the opportunistic scheme, the mobile-stations feed back t

8
the supportable rate for a small number of their strongest
beams. Based on this information, the base station schedules
6
users according to a version of the proportional fair algorithm
that updates the user rates after the allocation of all clusters
4
and beams (the "third" scheme in [13]).
In order to reduce the feedback load, the beamforming
2
scheme does not work on a sub-carrier level, but on clusters of
adjacent sub-carriers. Furthermore, only the strongest beams 0
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
across the clusters are fed back [6]. The relays are set up to Average number of users per sector
feed back the supportable rates on many beams if there are few
relays in the sector and fewer beams if there are many relays Fig. 3. System throughput versus load for the opportunistic scheme, Nr = 4.
in the sector. The total feedback rate per sector is therefore
relatively constant and at most around 100 kbps. Note that
the feedback rate was designed for mobile speeds around 100 D. Assumptions for HSDPA
km/h. Since the simple HSDPA scheme uses single-carrier com-
munication, the OFDM parameters in Table I are not valid.
TABLE I The chip-rate is 3.84 MHz. Spreading factors (SF) between 1
S IMULATION PARAMETERS . and 64 are used together with adaptive modulation. For the
Total bandwidth 3.84 MHz HSDPA system, the time-slot duration is 2.3 ms. Assuming
Number of sub-carriers 128 that only three bits per time-slot have to be fed back by
Cluster-size 4 sub-carriers the users (’keep modulation/SF’,’higher modulation/SF’ and
Sub-carrier spacing 30 kHz ’lower modulation/SF’), the feedback rate is only 1.3 kbps
Cyclic prefix length 5µs
Total OFDM symbol period 33.33+5=38.33 µs
per user.
Carrier frequency 2 GHz IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS
Time-slot length 32 OFDM symbols
Transmit power per sub-carrier The results obtained in the case of 4 antennas at each
and sector (P) 312.5 mW relay are illustrated in Figure 2–5. Results for more cases are
Noise power per sub-carrier summarized in the cost analysis in Section V.
and antenna (σz2 ) 2.38 · 10−16 W Figures 2 and 3 show the system throughput (sum rate per
Site-to-site distance 3km sector) as a function of the load (average number of users per
Relay speed 3km/h
Modulation OFDM, BPSK, M-QAM
sector) for the different solutions. For the opportunistic SD-
M ∈ {4, 16, 64, 256} OFDMA in Figure 3, using only one transmit antenna gives
the highest throughput. The reason is that an opportunistic
 1
1
0.9
0.9
0.8
Cumulative Density Function

Cumulative Density Function

0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4 N =1
t
0.3 Nt=2
0.3
0.2 Nt=1 adapt. mod. N =4
t
0.2
Nt=2, adapt. mod. Nt=8
0.1 Nt=4, adapt. mod.
0.1 N =1 HSDPA
Nt=8, adapt. mod. t
0
0 5 10 15 0
0 5 10 15
Average throughput per user [Mbit/s] Average throughput per user [Mbit/s]

Fig. 4. CDF of the average user rate for the smart antenna scheme (adaptive
modulation), Nr = 4. Fig. 5. CDF of the average user rate for the opportunistic scheme, Nr = 4.

system needs many users to work well. Additional antennas
(and beams) increase the interference significantly. For the low
loads studied here, the spatial multiplexing gain is too low to
compensate for the loss in interference. On the other hand,
the smart antenna scheme will naturally provide improved
spatial multiplexing possibilities with an increased number of
antennas, which leads to an improved system throughput.
Another important aspect is the fairness between the users.
In Figures 4 and 5, the fairness is illustrated by plotting the
cumulative density (over users and scenarios) of the average
data rate a particular user perceives in a particular scenario.
Naturally, the round-robin based scheduling and the attempt
to provide the same average SINR for each user in the smart
antenna scheme provides higher rate for the users with worst
channel conditions. Still, it does not provide exactly the same
rate to all users, since adaptive modulation is used and the
scheduling and transmit beamforming is only based on the
long-term channel information. Note that all the different
schemes contain tuning parameters that influence the trade-off
between fairness and system throughput, so the results may
change with other choices of parameters.
V. C OST A NALYSIS
In this section, we try to incorporate the performance figures
from the previous section into a model for the cost per user
equipment. In order to get a numerical cost estimate, we use
a combination of cost figures from the literature and educated
guesses in Section V-B.
A. General
We assume a service area with a number user equipments to
be served by an infrastructure consisting of mobile relays and
base stations. The number of user equipments is given by NUE
and they are active with a probability pUE-active . The number
of users sharing a mobile-relay to access the network is given
by NUE-per-relay and thus the number of mobile relays, Nrelay ,
is given by Nrelay = NUE /NUE-per-relay . We assume that not
more than one user accesses a relay at any time and thus the
probability, pactive , of a relay being active is given by pactive =
pUE-active NUE-per-relay . The mean number of active relays is given
by Nactive-relays = pactive Nrelay . In order to keep the costs at a
minimum, the number of base stations Nbase is selected so
that the ratio Nactive-relay /Nbase attains exactly the maximum
capacity, K (in terms of relays per site). By the simulations
in the previous section for any selection of antennas in the
base- and mobile-station we do a minimum dimensioning, i.e.
K = Nactive-relay /Nbase . The total cost for base-stations, relays
and user equipments is then given by
Ctotal = Cbase (Nt )Nbase + Crelay (Nr )Nrelay + CUE NUE (1)
where Cunit is the cost per unit and the dependence of the costs
on the number of antennas (Nt and Nr ) has been emphasized.
As the criterion function for our further analysis we will be
the cost per user equipment i.e. CUE = Ctotal /NUE . Combining
the equations above yields
pUE-active Crelay (Nr )
Cuser = Cbase (Nt )( + ) + CUE (2)
K Cbase NUE-per-relay
pUE-active
= Cbase (Nt )( + f ) + CUE (3)
K
where “the fractional relay cost”, f , is given by
Crelay (Nr )
f= . (4)
Cbase NUE-per-relay
Equation (3) allows an easy interpretation for a fixed base
station cost. The first term is the cost for the base station part
- split equally over all user equipments, while the second term
is the fractional mobile relay station cost (relative to the base
station) divided by the number of user equipments who share
it. The equation becomes more favorable the more users that
can share the same relay. It is possible to see the trade-off
between the relay and base station costs. By increasing the
number of mobile-station antennas the K factor will increase
and thus the base station cost is reduced, on the other hand
the cost for the mobile relays is increased, and vice versa.
 Nr Nt Smart Opport.
B. Numerical Prediction 1 2 NA NA
2 2 1.65 3.6
To be able to provide a numerical comparison, the following 4 2 1.1 2.03
assumptions are used: 8 2 1.08 1.41
1 4 1.74 NA
• The relation of the cost of a multi-antenna relay and that
2 4 1.21 NA
of an IEEE802.11a modem is as in [14]. However it is 4 4 1.04 NA
modified with the matrix inversion rate assumed here i.e. 8 4 0.73 NA
once for each sub-carrier at every timeslot of 0.123ms. HSDPA 2.98
• The cost of a HSDPA modem is assumed to be two times TABLE II
the cost of an IEEE802.11a modem (in [14] it is assumed C OST PER USER EQUIPMENT [ K EUR] FOR THE S MART AND
to be five times as expensive). O PPORTUNISTIC SCHEMES .
• The cost of an IEEE802.11a modem is 25 Euro.
• The cost of the relay to user equipment links is assumed
equal to the cost of an IEEE802.11a modem.
• The BS cost is that given in [15] with the multi-antenna R EFERENCES
modeling of [16]. [1] K. Johansson, J. Markendahl, and P. Zetterberg, “Relaying access points
• The probability of a user equipment being active is and related business models for low cost mobile systems,” Austin
Mobility Roundtable, Mar. 2004.
pUE-active = 1%. [2] A. Paulraj, R. Nabar, and D. Gore, Introduction to Space-Time Wireless
• The capacity, K, is the mean number of relays per site Communications. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University
for which the user data-rate is above 2.0Mbit/s with 90% Press, 2003.
[3] D. Tse and P. Viswanath, Fundamentals of Wireless Communication.
probability and 11.0Mbit/s with 50% probability. This is Cambridge University Press, 2005.
a favorable selection for HSDPA. [4] P. Viswanath, D. N. C. Tse, and R. Laroia, “Opportunistic beamforming
• Number of UE per relay NUE-per-relay = 5. using dumb antennas,” IEEE Trans. IT, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1277–1294,
June 2002.
Based on these assumptions, the cost per user, Cuser , in kEUR [5] M. Sharif and B. Hassibi, “On the capacity of MIMO broadcast channels
with partial side information,” IEEE Trans. IT, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 506–
is obtained as given in Table II below. Note that for a given 522, Feb. 2005.
number of base- and mobile relay antennas the cost of the [6] P. Svedman, L. J. Cimini Jr., M. Bengtsson, S. K. Wilson, and
smart and opportunistic scheme are the same, thus the system B.Ottersten, “Exploiting temporal channel correlation in opportunistic
SD-OFDMA,” in Proc. ICC, 2006, accepted.
providing the largest capacity gain will have the lowest cost. [7] M. Bengtsson, P. Svedman, X. Zhang, and P. Zetterberg, “System
This is because the analysis is not so fine-grained that the comparison of smart and dumb antennas,” in Proc. VTC 2005 Spring,
computational load in the base-station matters. On the other June 2005.
[8] M. Bengtsson, “Pragmatic multi-user spatial multiplexing with robust-
hand the computational load of matrix inversions is a major ness to channel estimation errors,” in Proc. IEEE ICASSP, vol. IV, Apr.
cost driver but this is the same in both systems - here is a big 2003, pp. 820–823.
potential for cost savings. In the table NA means not applicable [9] F. Shad, T. D. Todd, V. Kezys, and J. Litva, “Dynamic slot allocation
(DSA) in indoor SDMA/TDMA using a smart antenna basestation,”
- which happens when the required user data-rate was not met IEEE/ACM Trans. on Networking, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 69–81, Feb. 2001.
at any load. As indicated, the lowest cost was obtained using [10] 3GPP TR 25.996 Spatial Channel Model for Multiple Input Multiple
the smart antenna scheme with four base-station and eight Output (MIMO) Simulations, 3GPP; Technical Specification Group
Radio Access Network, rel. 6.
mobile-station antennas. For this constellation the capacity [11] J. Salo, G. Del Galdo, J. Salmi, P. Kyösti, M. Milojevic, D. Laselva,
gain over HSDPA is 6.4 while the cost "loss" is 4.1. This and C. Schneider. (2005, Jan.) MATLAB implementation of the
means that part of the capacity gain is “eaten” by the cost 3GPP Spatial Channel Model (3GPP TR 25.996). [Online]. Available:
http://www.tkk.fi/Units/Radio/scm/
associated with the solution. The opportunistic scheme always [12] S. Kandukuri and S. Boyd, “Optimal power control in interference-
performs worse since it provides less capacity gain. This is limited fading wireless channels with outage-probability specifications,”
probably due to the low average number of relays per sector, IEEE Trans. Wireless Comm., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 46–55, Jan. 2002.
[13] W. Anchun, X. Liang, Z. Shidong, X. Xibin, and Y. Yan, “Dynamic
which results in a low multiuser diversity. resource management in the fourth generation wireless systems,” in
Proc. Int.. Conf. Communication Technology, vol. 2. IEEE, 2003, pp.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS 1095–1098.
[14] P. Zetterberg, “A smart antenna concept for 4g and transceiver cost,” in
Proceedings of Nordic Radio Symposium, Aug. 2004.
This paper presents an attempt to compare a smart antenna [15] K. Johansson, A. Furuskär, P. Karlsson, and J. Zander, “Relation between
solution based on round-robin scheduling with an opportunis- cost structure and base station characteristics in cellular systems,”
tic beamforming solution using proportional fair scheduling. IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio
Communications, Sept. 2004.
The comparison considers not only system throughput and [16] J. Markku, J. Heikkil, J. Ylitalo, E. Tiirola, and A. Pollard, “Architec-
user fairness but also system cost, assuming that the mobiles tural design and cost impact,” IST I-METRA, Tech. Rep. D5.1, 2003,
are used as mobile relays. Making a fair comparison between available at http://www.ist-imetra.org/deliverables/NMP-WP5-D5.1-V1.
1.pdf.
smart and opportunistic multi-antenna schemes is a difficult
task, but we have highlighted some important aspects. For
the low-load low-speed scenario we have considered, a smart
antenna scheme would be preferable in terms of system cost.