0.1.

RESOURCES ANDSUBCARRIER ALLOCATIONINATWO-TIER OFDMFEMTOCELL NETWORKWITHQUALITYOF SERVICE GUARANTEE1

0.1 Resources And Subcarrier Allocation in a

two-tier OFDM Femtocell Network With Qual-
ity Of Service Guarantee
0.1.1 1. Abstract
Abstract-In this project, we consider the problem of allocating power and sub-
carrier to the femtocell users in a two tier (uplink-downlink) OFDM based net-
work. It is a multi-objective optimization problem which aims to maximize the
throughput of all users, simultaneously increasing the power eciency of femto
base station. Interference to macro users is checked and is kept below a cer-
tain tolerable threshold and rate constraint is being imposed on Delay Sensitive
users. The problem is optimized using NSGA-II algorithm and the results are
compared with the existing scheme. Keywords-OFDM, femtocells, power allo-
cation, multi objective optimization, NSGA-II (non-dominanted sorting genetic
algorithm).
0.1.2 2. Introduction
INTRODUCTION
Femtocells are miniature versions of the standard base station. They are
low power base stations designed to facilitate cellular communication in the ar-
eas where macrocell base station power received is not adequate to support the
active users or demand for cellular communication is very high and one macro
base station is not adequate to meet the requirements ??. They have a typical
coverage of 10 meters and are used in small business oces or homes. Spectrum
sharing is performed in the region of high number of active users [2]. How-
ever, there is a great chance of cross-tier signal interference in such a spectrum
sharing system [3]. Hence we allocate resources to enhance the performance of
network and facilitate better cellular communication. In [4], a non-cooperative
power allocation with SINR adaptation is used to alleviate the uplink inter-
ference suered by macrocells; while in [5], a Stackelberg game based power
control is formulated to maximize femtocells capacity under cross-tier interfer-
ence constraints. However, subchannel allocation is not considered. In [6], a
joint subchannel and power allocation algorithm is proposed to maximize total
capacity in dense femtocell deployments. While in [7], lagrangian approach is
used to allocate power in OFDM based femtocell network. In [2], the distributed
subchannel and power allocation for co-channel deployed femtocells is modeled
as a non cooperative game, for which a Nash Equilibrium is obtained based on a
time-sharing subchannel allocation. However, in these works, joint subchannel
and power allocation with users QoS and cross-tier interference considerations
is not studied. In [8], a distributed modulation and coding scheme, subchannel
and power allocation that supports dierent throughput constraints per users
is proposed, but it does not consider two tier networks.
Femtocells should be able to support the minimum requirements for delay
sensitive users, such as video calling, online multimedia etc. while maximizing
2
the capacity of delay tolerant users [9]. Resource allocation not only includes
the power allocation maintaining minimum required SINR, but here we also
consider the maximum power utilization of femtocell base station (maximum
eciency). The delay sensitive users have a minimum QoS requirement [10],
while delay tolerant users do not. After including the constraints of power
budget and maximum interference temperature level, we optimize the multi-
objective problem formulation using NSGA-II algorithm. The remainder of the
paper is organized into following sections- section 2 provides the modeling of the
systems and the required mathematical model of optimization. In section 3 we
discuss briey the algorithm used in allocating power and subcarrier to the users
for two-tier system. In section 4 we have showed the results of simulations and
compared the results of proposed algorithm with existing results. We conclude
the paper in section 5.
0.1.3 3. System Model and Optimization
System Model and Optimization
We consider the two-tier femtocell system with total K number of femtocells
in a cellular network, deployed in sub-urban areas. We assume that each fem-
tocell comprises of F users and the number of users in macrocell is M. Let the
total bandwidth allocated to cellular communication in the macrocell be B and
the number of sub-carriers as N. We rst calculate the results for uplink case
and extend them to the downlink case. We model the SINR as:

F
k,u,n
=
p
F
k,u,n
g
F
k,u,n
p
F
w,n
g
F
k,w,n
M +
2
(1)
Where
F
k,u,n
is the SINR at the k{1, 2, . . . , K} femtocell base station to its
u{1, 2, . . . , F} user at the n{1, 2, . . . , N} subcarrier. Where p
F
k,u,n
is the trans-
mission power by the u user belonging to the k femtocell on n subcarrier to the
femtocell base station. g
F
k,u,n
is the channel gain from femto user u to its fem-
tocell base station k on n subcarrier. p
F
w,n
is the macro users w{1, 2, . . . , M}
transmit power on the n sub channel to the macrocell base station. g
F
k,w,n
is the
channel gain on sub channel n of the macro user w to the femtocell k and
2
is the AWGN (Additive White Gaussian Noise) power. We have assumed the
interference between femtocells to be negligible [11], [12], as they are transmit-
ting much lower power [11] than macro base station and separated by a larger
distance to cause any signicant interference. Hence we only consider the inter-
ference caused by femtocell users on macrocell users. Using Shannons capacity
formula, we can write:
C
F
k,u,n
= log
2
(1 +
F
k,u,n
) (2)
Where C
F
k,u,n
is the Capacity of the femto user u in the k femtocell on the sub
carrier n.
0.1. RESOURCES ANDSUBCARRIER ALLOCATIONINATWO-TIER OFDMFEMTOCELL NETWORKWITHQUALITYOF SERVICE GUARANTEE3
0.1.4 4. Optimization Problem Formulation
Optimization Problem Formulation
Our aim is to maximize the total capacity of all users, satisfying the con-
straints of Quality of service. The subcarrier and power allocation will be de-
cided by these quality factors. Our objective is to maximize the throughput [10]
requirement and to maximize the femtocell power eciency usage wise:
max
K

k=1
F

u=1
N

n=1
a
k,u,n
C
F
k,u,n
(3)
minP
max tot

K

k=1
N

n=1
a
k,u,n
p
F
k,u,n
(4)
Subject to:
C1 : p
F
k,u,n
0, k, u, n
C2 : p
F
k,u,n
P
max
, k, u, n
C3 :
N

n=1
a
k,u,n
C
F
k,u,n
R
u
, k, uDS
k
C4 :
K

k=1
F

u=1
a
k,u,n
p
F
k,u,n
g
MF
k,w,n
I
th
n
, n
C5 :
F

u=1
a
k,u,n
1, k, n
C6 : a
k,u,n
{0, 1}, k, u, n
The rst objective is to maximize the total throughput capacity of all the
femtocell users [10]. The second objective is the maximum resource/power uti-
lization of the femtocell base station. Here a
k,u,n
is the identier matrix. If
a
k,u,n
= 1, means that in k femtocell, the u user is assigned the n sub channel.
Otherwise it is zero. It ensures that no two users in a femtocell are allocated the
same sub channel. P
m
ax is the maximum power that each user can transmit.
P
max tot
is the maximum power that all femtocells transmit (in case of down-
link, receive) it is equal to P
max
F K. Here we assume that the maximum
power that a femto base station can transmit is the maximum power that a user
can transmit multiply by total number of femto users.
DS
k
and DT
k
are the set of delay sensitive and delay tolerant users in a
femtocell k. DS
k
+ DT
k
= F and DS
k
DT
k
= [10]. C1 makes sure that
power transmitted or received (in case of downlink) be greater than zero in
the allocated subcarrier. In C2, we fulll the QoS requirement of the delay
sensitive users. The capacity of delay sensitive users should be more than a
given threshold R
u
. In the constraint C3g
MF
k,w,n
is the channel gain on sub
channel n, from femtocell user u in femtocell k to the macro base station. I
th
n
is
4
the maximum interference temperature level that is tolerated. This constraint
implies that only those sub channels be assigned to the femtocell users whose
interference temperature level to the macro base station is below this level. C5
and C6 implies that no two users, in the same femtocell, is assigned the same
sub channel and only one subcarrier is allocated to a user.
0.1.5 5. Subcarrier and Power Allocation Scheme
The above Multi-objective problem is solved using Non Dominated Sorting Ge-
netic Algorithm - II (NSGA-II). The algorithm and its benet over conventional
NSGA is explained in detail in following sub-sections.
5.1 Genetic Algorithm
Genetic Algorithm are a class of evolutionary algorithms use to nd solution
for a multi-objective optimization problem. They provide novel approaches to
problem solving technique inspired by biological evolution. They use operators
like, Cross-over, Mutation and Selection, whos functionality is same as their
natural biological counter parts. This property makes an ecient algorithm in
searching solution to the optimization problem from a pool of feasible solution.
Fitness value of every solution is calculated by the tness function which
forms the base in deciding how t the solution is in its population, in other
words, how well it optimizes the problem.
Initially random population, a set of random solutions, is created. The
tness of each member of the population is tested. Based on their tness value,
they are mated to give ospring that have dierent or mixed characteristics,
in other words, fragments of dierent solutions are used to make new solution.
This new set of solution contains mixed traits from their parent population.
This process is called cross-over. Mutation is performed to search for new
variety of solutions, more than what is available in the initial population. Each
set of solution (also known as a Chromosome) goes through all the steps to
form more t generation.
Many times in a multi-objective optimization problem, there are conicting
objectives. Hence there is not a single non-dominating solution but a set of
non-dominating solution. Parito fronts are plotted and the best solution (non-
dominating) is selected (choice of selection may vary from person to person
other system specication).
5.2 NSGA-II
Genetic Algorithm, even though delivered exceptional results, suered from
various drawbacks. One of them being their computational complexity. They
have the computational complexity of the order of O(MN
3
). Where M is the
number of objectives and N is the Population size. They lacked elitism too.
Even better solutions had the tendency of being modied. It also required a
sharing parameter in order to obtain a wide variety of equivalent solutions.
The initial population in the NSGA-II algorithm is rst sorted into fronts.
Where the members of rst front are non dominated by any other member.
The members of second front are dominated by the members of rst front only
and so on. A solution is said to dominate the other solution if its tness value,
0.1. RESOURCES ANDSUBCARRIER ALLOCATIONINATWO-TIER OFDMFEMTOCELL NETWORKWITHQUALITYOF SERVICE GUARANTEE5
for all objective function, is better than the other. The individuals in the r
th
front are assigned a value of r. Crowding distance is a parameter that is use to
describe how close an individual is to its neighbor. It is a measure of diversity
in population.
Each individual chromosome is coded as a two dimensional matrix with F
rows and K columns. Each element of the chromosome matrix is composed of
two parts, the left hand side (dimensionless quantity) denotes the n
th
subcar-
rier that is assigned to the femto user in that particular Femtocell. We assume
that only one subcarrier is assigned to each femto user. The right hand side
denotes his uplink/downlink power on that subcarrier. Keeping in mind that
power allocated to each user is less than P
max
, satises constraint 1 and 2. and
only one subcarrier is assigned to each user satises constraint C5 and C6. The
gure below shows the structure of a chromosome (where we have assumed that
there are only two femto users). The last row depicts how chromosomes would
be considered for crossover and mutation.
Users/Femtocells FC1 FC2 FCK
F1 12 17dbm 36 14dbm 15 16dbm
F2 21 19dbm 42 18dbm 02 17dbm
Used as string 12172119 361442218 15160217
The standard NSGA-II algorithm is as follows:
i) Generation- Initially the population is randomly generated.
ii) Fitness Check-The tness of each individual is evaluated through all the ob-
jective functions.
iii) Ranking-Rank the population using Non Dominant Sorting Algorithm de-
scribed in section 5.2.3.
iv) Crowding Distance- Calculate the crowding distance by using the crowding
distance algorithm described in 5.2.3.
v) Generating new generation- This is done by following described operations:
Selection- Select two chromosomes based on crowding selection operator.
which is described in section 5.2.4.
Crossover-With a crossover probability cross over the parents to form new
ospring (children). If no crossover was performed, ospring is the exact
copy of parents. The single point crossover is explained in section 5.2.5.
Mutation-With the probability of mutation, mutate new ospring at each
locus (position in chromosome). Mutation is explained in section 5.2.5.
Acceptance- Place new ospring in the new population.
Replace- Use new generation for the further run of algorithm.
Test-If the end condition is satised (e.g. when reaches a constant number
of generation for which the algorithm is run), stop and return the best
solution in current population.
Loop- Go back to tness again.
The following sub sections provide detailed description of steps involved in
resource allocation using NSGA-II algorithm.
6
5.2.1 Population initialization
Number of population and number of generation are xed at the very begin-
ning of simulation/algorithm. Let the number of population be P and let
the number of generations be G. Hence the dimension of population will be
P (F K 4). Each individual is created by generating a single digit ran-
dom number.
5.2.2 Evaluate Objective Function
The tness of each individual chromosome is evaluated with respect to each
objective function.
5.2.3.1 Non Dominated Sorting Algorithm
For each individual p in the main population P do the following:
Initialize S
p
= . This set would contain all the individuals that are
dominated by p.
Initialize n
p
= 0. This is the number of individuals that dominate p.
For each individual q in p:
If p dominates q then add q to the set S
p
i.e. S
p
= S
p
{q}.
Else if q dominates p then increment the domination counter for
p i.e. n
p
= n
p
+ 1.
If n
p
= 0 i.e., no individuals dominate p then p belongs to the rst
front. Set rank of individual p to 1 i.e., p
rank
= 1. Update the rst
front set by adding p to front one i.e., F
1
= F
1
{p}.
This is carried out for all the individuals in main population P.
Initialize the front counter to one i.e., i = 1.
Following is carried out while the i
th
front is nonempty i.e., F
i
= :
Q = The set for storing the individuals for (i + 1)th front.
For each individual p in front F
i
.
for each individual q in S
p
(S
p
is the set of individuals dominated
by p).
n
q
= n
q
1, decrement the domination count for individual
q.
If n
q
= 0 then none of the individuals in the subsequent
fronts would dominate q. Hence set q
rank
= i + 1. Update
the set Q with individual q i.e., Q = Q {q}.
Increment the front counter by one i.e., i = i + 1.
Now the set Q is the next front and hence F
i
= Q.
Here we are also keeping record for each individual, the number of individ-
uals that dominate it and also those individual that are dominated by it. This
unique feature makes NSGA-II more attractive than NSGA.
5.2.3.2 Crowding Distance Calculation
Crowding Distance is a measure of diversity amongst the individuals. This is
0.1. RESOURCES ANDSUBCARRIER ALLOCATIONINATWO-TIER OFDMFEMTOCELL NETWORKWITHQUALITYOF SERVICE GUARANTEE7
calculated for all the individuals of a front. The crowding distance is compared
between the individuals belonging to the same front only. The algorithm of
calculating crowding distance is described below:
For each front F
i
we do the following:
Take any objective function (say m) to begin with, and for each
objective function do the following:
Calculate the Fitness (value) of each individual front with re-
spect to the above objective function only.
Store them in the ascending order in a set I, i.e. I = sort(F
i
, m).
Assign innite distance to the rst (one with minimum value
of crowding distance) and the last (one with maximum value
of crowding distance) solution points. These form the boundary
points for this generation, i.e. I(d
1
) = and I(d
l
) = . Where
l is the total number of individuals in front F
i
.
Re calculate the value of other points with respect to these
boundary point value. Let j be the j
th
individual in front F
i
.
For j = 2 to l 1:
I(d
j
) = I(d
j
) +
I(j + 1).mI(j 1).m
f
max
m
f
min
m
where I(j).m is the
value of m
th
objective function for j
th
individual in front
F
i
. f
max
m
and f
min
m
are the maximum and minimum value of
objective function m.
Crowding distance is the distance between individual solutions when plotted
in an m dimensional space. The boundary points always optimize an objective
function. Hence they are given innite value so that they are always selected.
5.2.4 Tournament selection
Till this stage we have grouped individuals of the population in Fronts and
assigned crowding distance to each of them. The next step is to select the indi-
viduals for mating to produce a new generation. Hence it is called Tournament
selection. The selection is done using a crowding-comparison- operator (
n
).
Every individual in a population has two major attributes, its rank (p
rank
) and
its crowding distance F
i
(d
j
) (It is the crowding distance of j
th
individual in
front i). We dene partial order as:
p q if p
rank
< q
rank
.
If they belong to the same front F
i
than F
i
(d
p
) > F
i
(d
q
).
In other words, for selection purpose, we choose the individual with the lower
rank, and if they belong to the same front, we choose the one with lower crowd-
ing distance. The mating pool is prepared based on this selection whose size is P.
5.2.5 Single Point Crossover
Mating between the selected individuals is done by the mechanism of cross-
over. Fragments of individuals that were selected are exchanged to produce o
springs with new or mixed characteristics. Our chromosomes is basically an
8
array of integers. Single point crossover is performed to swap some portion of
one parent chromosome with another to produce two new (child) chromosomes.
An example is shown below where all the integers after | are exchanged to form
new individuals:
parent 1: 17491311|1814 parent 2: 13251822|1234
ospring 1: 17491311|1234 ospring 2:13251822|1814
5.2.6 Mutation
Mutation is performed in order to maintain diversity in population. It is ana-
logues to biological mutation. Here we alter some digits of our chromosomes.
This is done by assigning a random variable to the digits of chromosomes which
gives the information regarding alteration of that digit. The probability of mu-
tation, P
m
is usually kept 100 times lower than the probability of crossover, P
c
.
The purpose of mutation is to avoid generation of local maxima/minima by pre-
venting the chromosomes to become too similar to each other. Thus preventing
or slowing evolution. An example of mutation is shown below, where the bold
digit is being mutated: parent: 18271-9441214
ospring: 18271-5441214
5.2.7 Generation of new population
We have with us a pool of individuals from the original population and o-
springs. The new population is formed, based on the non-dominant sorting
and crowding distance operator. Steps 5.2.4, 5.2.5 and 5.2.6 are repeated for G
number of times.
In [12] elitism was assured by using Largest Weighted Delay First, LWDF.
Here since all the best individuals from the current and previous populations
are added to the new population, elitism is guaranteed. The best individual
chromosome from the nal population gives the desired allocation of subcarriers
and bits per subcarrier.
0.1.6 6.Simulation Results and Discussion
Simulation results, given in this section are compared with the Existing So-
lutions [10]. The femtocells are randomly placed over the cell. The coverage
radius of macro cell is 500 m while femtocell is 10 m. Macro cell and femtocell
users can transmit a maximum of 23dbm power. The carrier frequency is 2
Ghz, bandwidthB = 10 Mhz, N = 50, M = 50,
2
=
B
N
N
0
where N
0
= 174
dBm/Hz is AWGN (Additive White Gaussian Noise) power spectral density.
The path loss models for indoor femto users and outdoor macro users are based
on [15] and block fading channel gains are modeled as i.i.d. unit exponentially
distributed random variables. Standard deviation of shadow fading between the
MBS and user is 8dB, while that between an FBS and user is 10dB. The Ex-
isting algorithm included in the simulation for comparison is the sub channel
allocation scheme proposed in [10] in conjunction with optimal power allocation
proposed in this paper.
Figure 1 to 5 shows the parito front for uplink network i.e. the total ca-
pacity of all users versus power dierence per femtocell (power dierence is the
dierence between the total power that is being transmitted and the maximum
power budget of femto base station). The parameters used in generating the
plots are: F = 2, R
u
= 9 bps/Hz, P
max
= 23dbm (uplink), P
max
= 20dBm
0.1. RESOURCES ANDSUBCARRIER ALLOCATIONINATWO-TIER OFDMFEMTOCELL NETWORKWITHQUALITYOF SERVICE GUARANTEE9
(downlink) and threshold interference level I
th
n
= 7.5x10
14
w (-101.2 dBm).
The total transmitted power cannot be greater than the total power budget,
hence we get negative values on the Y-axis. As NSGA-II algorithm works on
minimization of objective function, we multiply the objective function in (3) by
-1 and plot the result. Hence on both the axis we get negative values. The best
points (non dominated points) in all the parito fronts are chosen and plotted
in gure 8. From the gures 1 to 5 we observe that the power dierence per
femtocell remains almost constant, averaging to 0.0365 Watts.
Figure 6 shows the total capacity of all delay sensitive users versus number
of femtocells, the parameters set are same as above. From the gure we see
that the capacity obtained by proposed algorithm is much higher than that of
existing algorithm. We can clearly see from the gure that it also satises the
constraint of minimum capacity for DS users. Similar result is observed for
downlink network.
Figure 7 shows the total capacity of Delay tolerant users versus total number
of femtocells. From the gure we see that the capacity of delay tolerant users
over the femtocell range, is almost same as that of delay sensitive users. This is
because we are maximizing the capacity of both the type of users giving equal
weights to them. It is however less than the existing scheme. Similar result is
observed for downlink network.
Figure 8 shows the total capacity of all users over number of femtocells. We
observe that the total capacity (capacity of DS users + capacity of DT users) is
slightly greater than the existing algorithm. Averaging over all femtocells, the
total capacity is greater by 4.5 than existing scheme. Same is true for downlink
case.
Figure 9 shows the variation in capacity versus variation in Interference
Temperature Level for both the uplink and downlink case. The value of P
max
used is 23 dbm for uplink and 20 dbm for downlink for K=10. Curve is plotted
for F=2 and F=4 with R
u
= 9 bps/Hz. From the graph we observe that the
sum capacity increases as we decrease the interference tolerance temperature
level because we are increasing the allowable tolerance with macro users. As
we increase femto users from 2 to 4 we get a rise of almost 20% in the total
capacity in both the uplink and downlink network. Also increasing the P
max
from 20 dbm to 23dbm we get to see a rise of almost 20% in the total capacity.
0.1.7 9. Conclusion
In this paper we considered the problem of subcarrier allocation and power
allocation to the femtocell users considering the constraints of Quality of Service
for delay sensitive users. The proposed algorithm has properly allocated all the
resources and from the simulation we can see that it provides more ecient
results than the existing algorithm.
0.1.8 References
[1] D. Lopez-Perez, A. Valcarce, G. de la Roche, and J. Zhang, Ofdma fem-
tocells: A roadmap on interference avoidance, IEEE Commun. Mag., vol.
47, no. 9, pp. 4148, 2009. [2] J.-H. Yun and K. G. Shin, Adaptive inter-
ference management of ofdma femtocells for co-channel deployment, IEEE J.
Sel. Areas in Commun., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 12251241, 2011. [3] K. Son,
10
S. Lee, Y. Yi, and S. Chong, Rem: A practical interference management in
heterogeneous wireless access networks, IEEE J. Sel. Areas in Commun., vol.
29, no. 6, pp. 12601272, 2011. [4] V. Chandrasekhar, J. G. Andrews, T.
Muharemovic, Z. Shen, and A. Gatherer, Power control in two-tier femtocell
networks, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 43164328,
2009. [5] X. Kang, R. Zhang, and M. Motani, Price-based resource alloca-
tion for spectrum-sharing femtocell networks: a stackelberg game approach,
IEEE J. Sel. Areas in Commun., 2012. [6] J. Kim and D.-H. Cho, A joint
power and subchannel allocation scheme maximizing system capacity in indoor
dense mobile communication systems, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 59,
no. 9, pp. 43404353, 2010. [7] Wei-Chen Pao Yung-Fang Chen Chia-
Yen Chan, Power allocation schemes in OFDM-Based Femtocell Networks
in Wireless Personal Communication, DOI 10.1007/s11277-012-0626-2 [8] D.
Lopez-Perez, A. Ladanyi, A. Juttner, H. Rivano, and J. Zhang, Optimization
method for the joint allocation of modulation schemes, coding rates, resource
blocks and power in self-organizing lte networks, in INFOCOM, 2011 Proceed-
ings IEEE, april 2011, pp. 111115. [9] M. Tao, Y.-C. Liang, and F. Zhang,
Resource allocation for delay dierentiated trac in multiuser ofdm systems,
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 21902201, June 2008.
[10] Haijun Zhang, Wei Zheng, Xiaoli Chu, Xiangming Wen, Meixia Tao, A.
Nallanathan, David Lopez-Perez, Joint Subchannel and Power Allocation in
Interference-Limited OFDMA Femtocells with Heterogeneous QoS Guarantee,
in Globecom 2012-Wireless communication symposium. [11] V. Chandrasekhar
and J. G. Andrews, Femtocell networks: A survey, IEEE Commun. Mag.,
vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 5967, 2008. [12] H.-S. Jo, C. Mun, J. Moon, and J.-G.
Yook, Interference mitigation using uplink power control for two-tier femtocell
networks, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 49064910,
Oct. 2009. [13] Nitin Sharma , K. R. Anupama, On the use of NSGA-II for
multi-objective resource allocation in MIMO-OFDMA systems, Wireless Netw
(2011) 17:11911201, DOI 10.1007/s11276-011-0340-0 [14] Kalyanmoy Deb, As-
sociate Member, IEEE, Amrit Pratap, Sameer Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan, A
Fast and Elitist Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE TRANS-
ACTIONS ON EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION, VOL. 6, NO. 2, APRIL
2002 [15] Further Advancements for E-UTRA, Physical Layer Aspects, 3GPP
Std. TR 36.814 v9.0.0, 2010.