1

Joint In-Band Backhauling and Interference
Mitigation in 5G Heterogeneous Networks

arXiv:1604.02750v4 [cs.NI] 23 May 2017

Trung Kien Vu, Student Member, IEEE, Mehdi Bennis, Senior Member, IEEE,
Sumudu Samarakoon, Student Member, IEEE, Mérouane Debbah, Fellow, IEEE, and Matti Latva-aho, Senior
Member, IEEE,

Abstract—In this paper, we study the problem of joint in-band
backhauling and interference mitigation in 5G heterogeneous
networks (HetNets) in which a massive multiple-input multipleoutput (MIMO) macro cell base station equipped with a large
number of antennas, overlaid with self-backhauled small cells
is assumed. This problem is cast as a network utility maximization subject to wireless backhaul constraints. Due to the
non-tractability of the problem, we first resort to random matrix
theory to get a closed-form expression of the achievable rate and
transmit power in the asymptotic regime, i.e., as the number of
antennas and users grows large. Subsequently, leveraging the
framework of stochastic optimization, the problem is decoupled
into dynamic scheduling of macro cell users and backhaul provisioning of small cells as a function of interference and backhaul
links. Via simulations, we evaluate the performance gains of
our proposed framework under different network architectures
and low/high frequency bands. Our proposed HetNet method
achieves the achievable average UE throughput of 1.7 Gbps as
well as ensures 1 Gbps cell-edge UE throughput when serving
200 UEs per km2 at 28 GHz with 1 GHz bandwidth. In ultradense network, the UE throughput at 28 GHz achieves 62× gain
as compared to 2.4 GHz. Moreover, we show that there exists an
[O(1/ν), O(ν)] utility-queue backlog tradeoff with any arbitrary
non-negative ν.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The demand for massive data traffic has grown due to
the exponential increase in the number of mobile broadband
subscribers such as smartphones and tablets. To handle these
relentless demands, in the next generation wireless networks,
a number of candidate solutions include: 1) higher frequency
spectrum (centimeter and millimeter-wave (mmWave)); 2)
advanced spectral-efficiency techniques (massive MIMO); and
3) ultra-dense small cell deployments [1]. Massive MIMO
plays an important role in wireless networks due to an
improvement in energy and spectral efficiency [2]. The basic
concept of massive MIMO assumes a macro base station
(MBS) equipped with a few hundreds antennas simultaneously
serving tens of macro user equipments (MUEs). On the
other hand, ultra dense SC deployment provides an effective
solution to increase network capacity. In parallel to that,
recent advances in full-duplex (FD) enables doubling spectral
efficiency and lowering latency, which is another promising
technique [3].
Manuscript received March 15, 2016; revised and accepted April 19, 2016.
Date of publication May 20, 2016; This work was supported in part by
the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes), Nokia,
Huawei, Anite, in part by the Academy of Finland funding through the grant
284704, and in part by the ERC Starting Grant 305123 MORE (Advanced
Mathematical Tools for Complex Network Engineering).
T. K. Vu, M. Bennis, S. Samarakoon, and M. Latva-aho are
with the Centre for Wireless Communications, University of Oulu,
Oulu 90014, Finland (e-mail: trungkien.vu@oulu.fi; mehdi.bennis@oulu.fi;
sumudu.samarakoon@oulu.fi; matti.latva-aho@oulu.fi).
M. Debbah is with the Large Networks and System Group (LANEAS),
CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France and is with
the Mathematical and Algorithmic Sciences Laboratory, Huawei France
R&D, Paris, France (e-mail: merouane.debbah@huawei.com).
Citation information: In proceeding of 2016 IEEE European Wireless

The combination of massive MIMO and ultra-dense SCs
holds the promise of ensuring high capacity improvement
and constitutes the main motivation of this work. Recently,
SC wireless backhaul in massive MIMO was studied in [3],
[4] showing the efficiency of combining massive MIMO and
wireless backhaul-based small cell networks focusing on minimizing power consumption. However, the key challenge of
how to dynamically optimize the overall network performance
taking into account the backhaul dynamics, and scheduling
has not been addressed. The main contribution of this work is
to study the problem of joint scheduling, interference mitigation, and in-band wireless backhauling. We design precoders
to alleviate both co-tier and cross tier interference and dynamically provide wireless backhauling to SCs. An operation mode
is proposed to dynamically control the interference among
adjacent SCs. By invoking results from random matrix theory
(RMT), we derive a closed-form expression of the signalto-interference-plus-noise-ratio (SINR) when the numbers of
MBS antennas and users grow very large. A network utility
optimization problem is formulated to maximize the total
network throughput subject to dynamically varying wireless
backhaul. Leveraging the framework of stochastic optimization, the problem is decoupled into several subproblems. The
mixed-integer non-convex subproblem is solved by applying
the framework of successive convex approximation (SCA). A
performance evaluation is carried out for different network
deployments at low/high frequency bands.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II
describes the system model and Section III formulates the
problem of scheduling and interference mitigation. Section IV
adopts the Lyapunov optimization framework and the SCA
method used to solve the problem. In Section V, the simulation results are presented and Section VI concludes the paper.
II.

S YSTEM M ODEL

A. System Model
We consider the downlink (DL) transmission of a HetNet
scenario as shown in Fig. 1 in which a MBS b0 is underlaid
with a set of uniformly deployed S SCs, S = {bs |s ∈
{1, . . . , S}}. Let B = {b0 } ∪ S denote the set of all base
stations (BSs), where |B| = 1 + S. The MBS is equipped with
N number of antennas and serves a set of single-antenna M
MUEs M = {1, . . . , M}. Let K = M ∪ S denote the set
of b0 ’s associated users, where |K| = K = M + S. SCs are
assumed to be FD capable with perfect self-interference cancelation (SIC) capabilities1 . Each SC is equipped with two antennas: the receiving antenna is used for the wireless backhaul
and the transmitting antenna to serve its single-antenna small
cell user equipment (SUE)2 . Let C = {c1 , c2 , . . . , cS } denote
the set of SUEs, where |C| = S. We assume closed-access
1 The

case of imperfect SIC is left for future work.
general, one SC base station can serve more than one SUE.Without
loss of generality, one SUE with higher traffic demand can be considered
as multiple SUEs with lower traffic demand. More SUEs per SC is left for
future work.
2 In

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9 (c) VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

2

policy where SCs serve their own users. Co-channel timedivision duplexing (TDD) protocol is considered in which the
MBS and SCs share the entire bandwidth, and do the DL
transmission at the same time. In this work, we consider a
large number of antennas at the MBS and a dense deployment
of MUEs and SCs, such that M, N, S ≫ 1.
MUE served by MBS
and interfered by SCs

da

Q: Network Queue

ta

MUE

ac

ce

Data
ss

Massive MIMO Antennas

D: Queue buffer
wi

ss
r el e

t
Da

kha
b ac

a fl

ul

be

ow

MBS
FD-SC

am

fo r

mi

ng

SUE

FD-SC
ISD: 250, 125, 100, ..., 35 m

SUE served by SC only
and interfered by MBS

Fig. 1: Integrated Access and Backhaul Architecture for 5G
network.

B. Channel Model
 (b ,1) (b ,2)
(b ,N) T
(b )
∈ CN×1
We denote hm0 = hm0 , hm0 , · · · , hm0
the propagation channels between the mth MUE and the
(b ,n)
is the chanantennas of the MBS b0 in which hm0
nel between the mth MUE and nth MBS antenna. Let
(b )
(b )
(b )
∈ CN×M denote the
H(b0 ),M = h1 0 , h2 0 , · · · , hM 0
channel matrix between all MUEs and the MBS antennas.
Moreover, we assume imperfect channel state information
(CSI)
due to mobility and we denote Ĥ(b0 ),M =
 (b0 ) for(b0MUEs
(b )
)
ĥ1 , ĥ2 , · · · , ĥM 0 ∈ CN×M as the estimate of H(b0 ),M
in which the imperfect CSI can be modeled as [5]:
q
(b ) (b0 )
(b0 )
,
(1)
ĥm = NΘm0 ŵm
√
(b )
(b )
(b )
where ŵm0 = 1 − τm 2 wm0 + τm zm0 is the estimate of
(b )
the small-scale fading channel matrix and Θm0 is the spatial
channel correlation matrix that accounts for path loss and
(b )
(b )
shadow fading. Here, wm0 and zm0 are the real channel
and the channel noise, respectively, modeled as Gaussian
random matrix with zero mean and variance 1/N. The channel
estimate error of MUE m is denoted by τm ; in case of
perfect CSI, τm = 0. Similarly, let H(b0 ),S ∈ CN×S and
H(b0 ),C ∈ CN×S denote the channel matrices from the MBS
(b )
antennas to SCs and SUEs, respectively. Let hi s denote the
channel propagation from SC bs to any receiver i. Let cs
denote the SUE served by the SC bs .
III.

J OINT ACCESS /BACKHAUL S CHEDULING AND
I NTERFERENCE M ITIGATION P ROBLEM F ORMULATION
We address the problem of DL scheduling at the MBS
to simultaneously provide data transmission to MUEs and
wireless backhaul to SCs. We define the scheduling vector
l(t) = (l1 (t), l2 (t), . . . , lK (t)) to determine the subset of users
served at time slot t, where lk (t) = 1 means user k is served
at time slot t and lk (t) = 0 otherwise.
A. Downlink Transmission Signal
The MBS serves two types of users: MUEs and SCs, let
(b )
(b )
pm0 , ps 0 , and P (b0 ) denote the DL MBS transmit power
assigned to MUE m, SC bs , and the maximum transmit

(b )

power at the MBS, respectively. Let pcss denote the DL
transmit power of SC bs assigned to SUE cs . Although SC
exploits FD capability to double capacity, SC causes unwanted
FD interference including cross-tier interference to adjacent
MUEs (or other SCs) and co-tier interference to other SUEs.
Moreover, inspired by [6], we invoke RMT to get closedform expression for the user data rate as N, K ≫ 1. In order
to convert the interference channel to multiple-input singleoutput (MISO) channel, we design a precoder at MBS and
propose an operation mode policy to control FD interference
due to the SC DL transmissions such that the total FD
interference at receiver is treated as noise.
Definition 1. [Operation Mode Policy] We define β as the
operation mode to control the SC transmission to reduce FD
interference. The operation mode is expressed as β(t) =
{β (bs ) (t) | β (bs ) (t) ∈ {0, 1}, ∀s ∈ S}. If SC bs operates
in FD mode, then β (bs ) (t) = 1. When SC bs operates in halfduplex (HD) mode, i.e., β (bs ) (t) = 0.
We assume that the MBS uses a precoding scheme, V =
[v1 , v2 , . . . , vK ] ∈ CN×K . We apply the technique in [7] to
design the precoder V = UT, where U ∈ CN×Ni and T ∈
CNi ×K are used to control cross-tier and co-tier interference,
respectively. Here, Ni antennas are used to mitigate the crosstier interference with Ni < N, where the subscript i stands for
“interference”. The precoder U is chosen such that
PS
(b )
(2)
U† s=1 β (bs ) Θcs0 = 0,
(b )

where Θcs0 ∈ CN×N is the correlation matrix between MBS
antennas and SUE cs . Note that β (bs ) determines that SUE
cs is served or not, and U† denotes the Hermitian transpose
of matrix U. The precoder T is designed to adapt to the real
time CSI based on Ĥ† U ∈ CK×Ni , where Ĥ = [ĥ(b0 ) ]†k∈K . In
this paper, we consider the regularized zero-forcing
−1 (RZF)
U† Ĥ† ,
precoding3 given by T = U† Ĥ† ĤU + NαINi
where the regularization parameter α > 0 is scaled by
N to ensure that the matrix U† Ĥ† ĤU + NαINi is well
conditioned as N → ∞. The precoder
 T is chosen to
satisfy the power constraint Tr PT† T ≤ P (b0 ) , where
(b ) (b )
(b )
P = diag(p1 0 , p2 0 , . . . , pK 0 ). By utilizing a massive
number of antennas at MBS, a large spatial degree of freedom
is partly utilized to serve MUEs and FD-enabled SCs, while
the remaining degrees of freedom are used to mitigate crosstier interference. In massive MIMO system, the total number
of antennas is considered as the degree of freedom [2].
Hence, we have the antenna
for scheduling and
P constraint P
operation mode such that Kk=1 lk (t) + Ss=1 β (bs ) (t) ≤ N.
For notational simplicity, we remove the time dependency
from the symbols throughout the discussion. The received
(b )
signal ym0 at each MUE m ∈ M at time instant t is given
by
(b0 )
ym
= lm

q

(b )

(b0 )†
(b0 )
vm xm
+
pm0 hm

PS

(bs )
s=1 β

q
(b ) (b )† (b )
pcss hms xcss
{z
}

|
cross-tier interference
q
PK
(b0 ) (b0 )†
(b0 )
+ k=1,k6=m lk pk hm vk xk +ηm ,
|
{z
}
co-tier interference

(b )

(3)

where xm0 is the signal symbol from the MBS to the MUE
m, ηm ∼ CN (0, 1) is the thermal noise at MUE m, and vm is
(b )
the precoding vectors of MUE m. xcss is the transmit signal
symbol from SC bs to SUE cs .
3 Other

precoders are left for future work.

3
(b )

At time instant t, the received signal ys 0 at each SC bs ∈
S suffers from self-interference, cross-tier interference, and
co-tier interference which is given by
q
q
(b )
(b )
ps 0 hs(b0 )† vs xs(b0 ) + β (bs ) pcss hs(bs )† xc(bss )
|
{z
}
self-interference
q
PS
(b ) (b )† (b )
+ s′ =1,s′ 6=s β (bs′ ) pcss′ ′ hs s′ xcss′ ′
{z
}
|
cross-tier interference
q
PK
(b ) (b )†
(b )
+ k=1,k6=s lk pk 0 hs 0 vk xk 0 +ηs ,
|
{z
}

ys(b0 ) = ls

co-tier interference

(4)

where ηs ∼ CN (0, 1) is the thermal noise of the SC bs . In
this work, the FD capability is leveraged at SCs.
The received signal at SUE cs from its serving SC bs is
interfered by the DL signals from other SCs and the MBS.
At time instant t, it is given by
yc(bss )

q
q
PK
(b )
(b )
(b ) (b )†
(bs )
s)
= β
l
pcss hc(bss )† x(b
pk 0 hcs0 vk xk 0
k
cs +
k=1
|
{z
}
cross-tier interference
q
PS
(b ) (b )† (b )
+ s′ =1,s′ 6=s β (bs′ ) pcss′ ′ hcss′ xcss′ ′ +ηcs ,
{z
}
|
co-tier interference

(5)

(b )

where xcss is the transmit data symbol from the SC bs to its
own SUE cs and ηcs ∼ CN (0, 1) is the SUE thermal noise.
According to (2)-(5), the SINRs of MUE m ∈ M, SC
bs ∈ S, and SUE cs are given by:
(b )†

(b )

(b0 )
γm
= P

k6=m

lm pm0 |hm0 vm |2
P
(b0 ) (b0 )†
(b ) (b )†
lk pk |hm vk |2 + β (bs ) pcss |hms |2 + 1
s

(6)
(b )

γs(b0 ) = P

k6=s

(b )†

ls ps 0 |hs 0 vs |2
,
P (b ′ ) (bs′ ) (bs′ )† 2
(b ) (b )†
β s pcs′ |hs
| +1
lk pk 0 |hs 0 vk |2 +

and operation mode policy, the respective Ergodic data rates
of MUE, SC, and SUE are:


(b0 )
,
rm (Λ|Θ) = E log 1 + γm


(b0 )
, and
rs (Λ|Θ) = E log 1 + γs


(bs )
rcs (Λ|Θ) = E log 1 + γcs
.
Definition 2. For any vector x(t) = (x1 (t), ..., xK (t)),
let x̄ = (x̄1 , · · · , x̄K ) denote the time average expectation
t−1
P
of x(t), where x̄ , lim 1t
E[x(τ )]. Similarly, r̄ ,
t→∞

t−1
P

E[r(τ )]
lim 1
t→∞ t τ =0

τ =0

denotes the time average expectation of

the Ergodic data rate.

For a given composite control variable Λ that adapts to the
spatial channel correlation matrix Θ, the average data rate
region is defined as the convex hull of the average data rate
of users, which is expressed as:

R , r̄(Λ|Θ) ∈ RK+ | l ∈ {0, 1}K, β ∈ {0, 1}S,
PK
PS
(bs )
≤ N,
k=1 lk +
s=1 β
PK PS
(b
)
(bs )
ζk s ≤ ǫo ,
i=1
s=1 lk β

†
(b0 )
Tr PT T ≤ P
,
P
(b
)
S
U† s=1 β (bs ) Θcs0 = 0 ,
where r̄(Λ|Θ) = (r̄1 (Λ|Θ), . . . , r̄K (Λ|Θ))T . Following the
results from [8], the boundary points of the rate regime with
total power constraint and no self-interference are Paretooptimal4 . Moreover, according to [9, Proposition 1], if the
INR covariance matrices approach the identity matrix, the
Pareto rate regime of the MIMO interference system is
convex. Hence, the rate regime is Pareto-optimal, and thus,
convex under above constraints.
Let us assume that SCs act as relays to forward data to
the SUEs. If the MBS transmits data to SC bs , but the
transmission of SC bs is disabled, it cannot serve its SUE.
Hence, we define D(t) = (D1 (t), D2 (t), . . . , DS (t)) as a data
queue at SCs, where at each time slot t, the wireless backhaul
queue at SC bs is

s′ 6=s

(7)
(bs )

γc(bss ) = P

s′ 6=s

β (bs ) pc

(b )†

|hcss |2

(b )

(b )†

β (bcs′ ) pcss′ ′ |hcss′ |2 + 1

.

(8)

Ds (t + 1) = max[Ds (t) + rs (t) − rcs (t), 0].

(9)

We define the network utility function f0 to be nondecreasing, concave over the convex region R for a given
Θ. The objective is to maximize the network utility under
wireless backhaul queue constraints and imperfect CSI. Thus,
the network utility maximization (NUM) problem is given by,

B. Downlink Scheduling Problem
We consider a joint optimization of scheduling l, operation
mode β, interference mitigation U, and transmit power allo(b ) (b )
(b )
cation p = (p1 0 , p2 0 , . . . , pK 0 ) that satisfies the transmit
power budget of MBS, i.e., Tr PT† T ≤ P (b0 ) . We define
(b )

p(bs ) |h

(bs )† 2

|

ζi s = cs |ηii|2
and ǫo as the FD interference to noise
ratio (INR) from SC bs to any scheduled receiver i, and the allowed FD INR threshold, respectively. The FD INR threshold
PK PS
(b )
is defined such that i=1 s=1 ζi s ≤ ǫo in which the total
FD interference is considered as noise. Under the operation
mode policy, we schedule the receiver i and enable the transP
P
(b )
mission of SC bs as long as Ki=1 Ss=1 li β (bs ) ζi s ≤ ǫo .
o
Let Λ = {l, β} be a composite control variable of
scheduling and operation mode. We define Λ = {Λo , U, p}
as a composite control variable, which adapts to the spatial
channel correlation matrix Θ. For a given Λ that satisfies (2)

max

f0 (r̄)

(10a)

subject to

r̄ ∈ R,
D̄ < ∞.

(10b)
(10c)

r̄

PK
where f0 (r̄) =
k=1 ωk (t)f (r̄k ), and ωk (t) ≥ 0 is the
weight of user k, f (·) is assumed to be twice differentiable,
concave, and increasing L-Lipschitz function for all r̄ ≥ 0.
Solving (10) is non-trivial since the average rate region R
does not have a tractable form. To overcome this challenge,
we need to find closed-form expressions of the data rate and
the average transmit power.
4 The Pareto optimal is the set of user rates at which it is impossible to
improve any of the rates without simultaneously decreasing at least one of
the others.

4

C. Closed-Form Expression via Deterministic Equivalent
We invoke recent results from RMT in order to get the
deterministic equivalent. As K, N → ∞, by applying the
techniques in [6, Theorem 2], for small α the deterministic
equivalent of the asymptotic SINRs of UEs (6-7) is
a.s.

(b0 )
γm
(Λ|Θ) −−→

(b )

2
lm pm0 (1 − τm
)
,
PS
(bs ) (bs )
1 + s=1 β ζm
(b )

ls ps 0

a.s.

γs(b0 ) (Λ|Θ) −−→

1+

PS

s′ =1,s′ 6=s

(bs′ )

β (bs′ ) ζs

,

1
2

K
P

k=1

Qk (t)2 +

K
P

k=1

Yk (t)2 +

S
P

s=1


Ds (t)2 . For each time slot

t, ∆(Σ(t)) denotes the Lyapunov
 drift given by ∆(Σ(t)) ,
E L(Σ(t + 1)) − L(Σ(t))|Σ(t) .
Noting that max[a, 0]2 ≤ a2 and (a ± b)2 ≤ a2 ± 2ab + b2
for any real positive number a, b, and thus, by neglecting the
index t we have, (max[Qk − rk , 0] + ak )2 − Q2k ≤ 2Qk (ak −
rk ) + (ak − rk )2 , max[Yk + ϕk − rk , 0]2 − Yk2 ≤ 2Yk (ϕk −
rk ) + (ϕk − rk )2 , max[Ds + ϕs − rcs , 0]2 − Ds2 ≤ 2Ds (ϕs −
rcs ) + (ϕs − rcs )2 . Assume that ϕk ∈ R and a feasible l for
all t and all possible Σ(t), we have

a.s.

where −−→ denotes the almost sure convergence, please see
the proof in Appendix A. The precoder T is designed to
satisfy a total transmit power constraint and takes into account
0)
PK p(b
k
the scheduling l and U, and thus, we obtain N1 k=1 Ω
−
k
1
(b0 )
P
≤ 0. Here, Ωk = N Tr(Θ̃k G) forms the unique positive
solution of which is the Stieltjes transform of nonnegative
PK
Θ̃k
+
finite measure [6, Theorem 1], where G = N1 k=1 α+Ω
k
−1
† (b0 )
†
and Θ̃k = UU Θk UU .
INi
Although the closed-form expression of time average of
data rate and transmit power is obtained, our problem considers a time-average optimization with a large number of control
variables and dynamic traffic load over the convex region for
a given composite control variable Λ and Θ. Moreover, the
goal is to maximize the aggregate network utility subject to
queue stability in which the Lyapunov optimization framework can be utilized effectively, by means of drift-plus-penalty
technique [10] to solve the joint scheduling and interference
mitigation problem.
IV. LYAPUNOV O PTIMIZATION F RAMEWORK
The network operation is modeled as a queueing network
that operates in discrete time t ∈ {0, 1, 2, . . . }. Let ak (t)
denote the bursty data arrival destined for each user k, i.i.d
over time slot t. Let Q(t) denote the vector of transmission
queue blacklogs at MBS at slot t. The evolution of Q(t) is
Qk (t + 1) = max[Qk (t) − rk (t), 0] + ak (t), ∀k ∈ K. (11)
Here, we define the bound of the traffic arrival of user k such
that 0 ≤ ak (t) ≤ amax
, for some constant amax
< ∞. Here,
k
k
we define the upper bound of traffic data rkmax (t) < ∞ for
user k at time slot t. The set constraint (10b) is replaced by an
inequivalent set constraint by introducing
auxiliary variables

ϕ(t) ∈ R, ϕ(t) = ϕ1 (t), . . . , ϕK (t) that satisfies ϕ̄k ≤ r̄k ,
t−1

P 
where ϕ̄k , lim 1t
E ϕk (τ )) . The wireless backhaul
t→∞

τ =0

queue can be rewritten as

Ds (t + 1) = max[Ds (t) + ϕs (t) − rcs (t), 0].

(12)

For a given Λ and Θ, the optimization problem (10) with the
network stability can be posed as
min

− f0 (ϕ̄)

(13a)

subject to

ϕ̄k − r̄k ≤ 0, ∀k ∈ K,
D̄ < ∞, Q̄ < ∞.

(13b)
(13c)

ϕ̄

In order to ensure the inequality constraint (13b), we introduce
a virtual queue vector Y (t) where
Yk (t + 1) = max[Yk (t) + ϕk (t) − rk (t), 0].

(14)

We
define the  queue backlog vector as Σ(t) =

Q(t), Y(t), D(t) which involves all constraints of (13).
The Lyapunov function can be written as L(Σ(t)) ,



PK
∆(Σ(t)) ≤ Ψ + k=1 Qk (t)E ak (t) − rk (t)|Σ(t)


PK
(15)
+ k=1 Yk (t)E ϕk (t) − rk (t)|Σ(t)


PS
+ s=1 Ds (t)E ϕs (t) − rcs (t)|Σ(t) .
Here ∆(Σ(t)) ≤ Π, where Π represents the R.H.S
ofP(15), and
Ψ is a finite
that
Ψ ≥

2 constant


PK satisfies
K
1
1
E
a
(t)
−
r
(t)
E
ϕ
(t)
−
|Σ(t)
+
k=1
2
2
k=1
 k
2
k 1 PS k 
2
rk (t) |Σ(t) + 2 s=1 E ϕs (t) − rcs (t) |Σ(t) , for all
t and all possible Σ(t). We apply the Lyapunov drift-pluspenalty technique, where the solution of (13) is obtained by
minimizing the Lyapunov drift and the objective function,
i.e., min Π − νE[f0 (ϕ(t))], where the parameter ν is chosen
as a non-negative constant to control optimality and queue
backlogs. Since Ψ is finite, the problem becomes minimizing (16), which is decoupled over scheduling and operation
mode variables (1⋆), auxiliary variables (2⋆), and precoder
and power allocation variables (3⋆), respectively. Hence, the
respective variables can be found independently by minimizing the individual term at each time. Fig. 2 summarizes the
relationship among subproblems.

A. Step 1: Joint In-Band Scheduling and FD or HD Operation
Mode Control
The joint in-band scheduling and SC operation mode control problem is a mixed-integer program with a non-convex
objective function and non-convex interference constraints.
To solve this problem, we first relax the integer constraints
to linear constraints as continuous values. Secondly, to deal
with non-convex interference constraint, we apply the SCA
method [11, Lemma 3.5], where at each iteration i the nonconvex constraints are approximated by upper convex approximations. Hence, we solve iteratively the problem by updating
the variables until convergence to obtain a Karush-KuhnTucker (KKT) point. The interference constraint is replaced
(i)
(bs ) 2
PK PS
λks l2k (t)
) (t)  (bs )
by
ζk (t) − ǫo ≤ 0,
+ (β (i)
i=1
s=1
2
2λks
(i)

for every fixed positive value λks . Finally, instead of minimizing the non-convex objective function (2⋆), we minimize its upper bound by replacing the denominators, i.e.,
P
(b )
1 + Ss=1 β (bs ) ζms with the largest bound, i.e., 1 + ǫ0 .
This upper bound is obtained due to interference constraint
PK PS
(bs ) (bs )
≤ ǫo and we assume the feasibility
ζi
i=1
s=1 li β
of problem exists such that the total FD interference at each
receiver is less than the total FD interference threshold ǫ0 .
Hence, we obtain the upper bound as below and the optimal
value of Λo is given by

5

Impact of SC queue and β

Impact of network queue, virtual queue, and Λ

Impact of virtual queue, SC queue, and auxiliaries

}|
{i
}|
{  z P
h z P

− k Qk (t) + Yk (t) rk (Λ(t)) 3⋆ − s Ds (t)rcs (β (bs ) (t))

Auxiliary Variable
Selection

l(t)? ; β(t)?

DL Transmission

Algorithm 1: Scheduling
& Operation Mode

SUEs

V = UT

MUEs

Power Allocation
p(t)(b0 )?
Queue Update

DL Transmission

Q(t + 1); D(t + 1); Y(t + 1)

Fig. 2: Joint Scheduling and Interference Mitigation Algorithm.

min
l,β

subject to

−

PS

Ds (t) log 1 +

−

PK

1+

s=1

+

ϕ(t)

s )† |2 
β (bs ) (t)pc(bss ) |h(b
cs
1+ǫ0

lk (t)pk 0 (1−τk2 ) 
1+ǫ0

2λks

i=1 s=1

(17d)
rk (lk (t), β (bs ) (t)) ∈ R,

(17e)

where Ak (t) = Qk (t) + Yk (t). At each time slot t, the joint
in-band scheduling and SC operation mode control problem
is outlined as Algorithm 1. We numerically observe that the
SCA-based Algorithm 1 converges quickly after few iterations
and yields a solution of many scheduling and operation
variables close or equal to binary. Hence, we apply a binary
search algorithm in order to obtain a low-complexity search
algorithm to convert the continuous relaxation solution to the
integer solution [12]. To ensure that all users will be served,
each user is set to have the same transmit power to find
the best scheduled users. Moreover, the scheduling will be
performed in a long-term period, while the power allocation
problem is executed in a short-term period.
Algorithm 1 Joint in-band scheduling and SC operation mode
control problem
(i)

Initialization i = 0, λks = randomly positive.
repeat
(i)
Solve (17) with λks to get optimal value Λo⋆ .
(bs )(i)
(i+1)
Update Λo(i) := Λo⋆ and λks := β (i) ; i := i + 1.
lk
until Convergence

S
P

s=1

k=1

Ds (t)ϕs (t) − νf0 (ϕ(t)),
(18a)
(18b)

ϕk (t) ≤ rkmax (t).

The optimal auxiliary variable is min{ϕ∗k (t), rkmax (t)}.

C. Step 3: Interference Mitigation and Power Allocation
For given scheduled users in Step 1, the precoder U is
found by solving (2). Finally, problem (13) is decomposed to
(b )
find the transmit power pk 0 (t) as follows:
−

min

(17a)

lk (t), β (t) ∈ [0, 1], ∀k ∈ K, ∀s ∈ S, (17b)
PK
PS
(bs )
(t) ≤ N,
(17c)
k=1 lk (t) +
s=1 β
K
S
(i)
2
P P λks lk (t) (β (bs ) )2 (t)  (bs )
ζk (t) ≤ ǫo ,
+
(i)
2

Yk (t)ϕk (t) +

Since the above optimization problem is convex, let ϕ∗k (t)
be the optimal solution obtained by the first order derivative
of the objective function of (18). With a logarithmic utility
function, we have:

 νωk (t)
if k ≤ M,
Yk (t)
ϕ∗k (t) =
νωk (t)
 Y (t)+D (t)
otherwise.
k
k−M

(b )

k=1 Ak (t) log
(bs )

penalty

}| P
{ z
}|
{i
.
s Ds (t)ϕs (t) −νf0 (ϕ(t))
k Yk (t)ϕk (t) +
2⋆
(16)

K
P

min
subject to

SCs

Beamforming Design

'(t)?

Radio Resource Management Function

CSI report

Algorithm 1

Q(t); D(t); Y(t)

pk (t)(b0 ) = P (b0 ) =K

Power Allocation
Queue Update

MBS

Time Indices

1⋆

h zP

p(t)

PK

k=1

Ak (t)rk (p(t)),

0 ) (t)
1 PK p(b
(b0 )
k
≤ 0,
k=1 Ωk (t) − P
N
(b )
pk 0 (t) ≥ 0, ∀k ∈ K.

subject to

(19a)
(19b)
(19c)

The objective function (19) is rewritten
as n(p(t)) =

PK
(b0 )
− k=1 Ak (t) log 1 + pk (t)nk (t) , where nk (t) =
lk (t)(1−τk2 )
. The objective function is strictly
PS
(b )
(bs )
1+
(t)ζk s (t)
s=1 β
(b )
convex for pk 0 (t) ≥ 0, ∀k ∈ K, and the constraints are
compact. Hence, the optimal solution of p⋆ (t) exists, the
Lagrangian function is written as L(p(t), µ0 ) = n(p(t)) +
µ0 g(p(t)), where µ0 ≥ 0 is the KKT multiplier. The KKT
conditions are
P
∇n(p(t))T + µ0 N1 Kk=1 Ωk1(t) = 0.
(20)
µ0

 P
K
1
N

(b )

pk 0 (t)
k=1 Ωk (t)

1 PK
N k=1

(b )

pk 0 (t)
Ωk (t)


− P (b0 ) = 0.

− P (b0 ) ≤ 0.

−p(t) ≤ 0, µ0 ≥ 0.

(21)
(22)
(23)

(b )
(b )
Here, ∇n(p(t))T = (n′ (p1 0 (t)), . . . , n′ (pK 0 (t))) where
(b )
k (t)
n′ (pk 0 (t)) = −A(bk0(t)n
. Since µ0 6= 0, from (20), we
)
1+pk (t)nk (t)

have

(b )

pk 0 (t) = max[

1
Ak NΩk (t)
−
, 0],
µ0
nk (t)

(24)

then, from (21) and (24) we derive µ0 . Finally, the optimal
value of pk (t)(b0 )⋆ is obtained with (24).
B. Step 2: Selection of Auxiliary Variable
The optimal auxiliary variables are computed by

D. Queue Update
Update the virtual queues Yk (t) and Ds (t) according
to (14) and (12), and the actual queue Qk (t) in (11).

6

V.

Bandwidth (BW) in MHz
20
100
1000
Values
43 dBm
23 dBm
5 × 10−3
0.1
5 dBi
2 × 103 /1 MHz BW
10−2

N UMERICAL R ESULTS

28 GHz
4 ISD=250m

2

4

0.2

2

0
16 64
0.1

3

HetNet-Hybrid
HomNet
Arrival Mean Rate

10 GHz

0.4

30

0

144 2.4 GHz

ISD=125m
0
16
ISD=100m
ISD=80m

40

400
0.4
0.2

64

1

0
144

100

20

10

ISD=50m
ISD=33m

0
16 64

Average Queue Length [Gb][Red]

Achievable Average UE Throughput [Gbps][Blue]

We consider a HetNet scenario, where a MBS is located
at the center of the cell. The path loss is modeled as a
distance-based path loss with line-of-sight (LOS) model for
urban environments at 28 GHz, 10 GHz, and 2.4 GHz [13].
We denote our proposed algorithms for HetNet (resp. Homogeneous network) as HetNet-Hybrid (resp. HomNet). Here,
HomNet refers to when the MBS serves both MUEs and SUEs
without SCs. The data arrivals follow the Poisson distribution
with the mean rate of 1 Gbps, 100 Mbps, and 20 Mbps for
28 GHz, 10 GHz, and 2.4 GHz, respectively. We consider the
proportional fairness utility function, i.e., f (r̄k ) = log r̄k [14].
The parameter settings are summarized in Table I.
Fig. 3 and 4 report the achievable average UE throughput,
cell-edge UE throughput, and average network queue length
as a function of network density at different frequency bands.
The number of SCs S increases from 16 to 900, reflecting the
inter-site distance (ISD) between SCs decreasing from 250 m
to 33 m. On the other hand, the number of UEs K increases
from 32 UEs to 1800 UEs per km2 . Moreover, the number of
antennas N at the MBS is twice the number of UEs K.

144

400
2
Number of Small Cells per km

900

Achievable Cell-Edge UE Throughput [Gbps]

HetNet-Hybrid
HomNet
Arrival Mean Rate

ISD=250m

3

2.4 GHz

10 GHz
0.4

0.06

0.2

0.03

0
16 64
ISD=125m
ISD=100m

144

400

16

64

100

144

ISD=80m
ISD=50m
ISD=33m

0
16 64

16

14

14

12

12

10

10

8

8

6
10

5×10

5

6

10

ν

6

1.5×10

6

2×10

6

6

2.5×10

144

Fig. 5: Impact of ν on the Utility and Network Backlogs at
28 GHz when K = 16, N = 64.

VI.

28 GHz

1

16

18

HetNet-Hybrid
HomNet

0

Fig. 3: Achievable Average UE throughput and Network
Queue length versus number of Small Cells at 28 GHz, 10
GHz, and 2.4 GHz.

2

18

Average Queue Backlog [Gb][Red]

Path Loss Model [13]
Values in dB
LOS @ 2.4 GHz
17 + 37.6 log(d)
LOS @ 10 GHz
55.25 + 18.5 log(d)
LOS @ 28 GHz
61.4 + 20 log(d)
Parameter
Maximum transmit power of MBS P (b0 )
Maximum transmit power of SC
FD interference threshold ǫo
Channel estimate error τ
SC Antenna Gain
Lyapunov parameter ν
RZF parameter α

With the increase in the number of SCs S and MUEs M,
the per UE/SC transmit power is reduced by a factor of K
and the cross-tier interference becomes dominant. Hence, the
achievable average UE throughput gradually decreases, while
the network queue traffic becomes more congested. Moreover,
the UE throughput at 28 GHz achieves 56× and 62× gain as
compared to 2.4 GHz due to 50× larger bandwidth and smart
beamforming, when the ISD is 250 m and 80 m, respectively.
In ultra-dense deployment, the UE throughput at 2.4 GHz is
below 10 Mbps, whereas 473 Mbps per UE is achieved by
using 28 GHz for 33 m of ISD.
By taking advantage of mmWave frequency bands, we
observe that at 28 GHz when the number of UEs per km2
is increased to 200 UEs, the average UE throughput reaches
1.73 Gbps and 1.39 Gbps in case of HetNet-Hybrid and
HomNet, respectively. Whereas the cell-edge UE throughput
reaches 1 Gbps and 0.73 Gbps in case of HetNet-Hybrid
and HomNet, respectively. When the ISD is less than 50
m, the network queue size dramatically increases, and the
network becomes congested. To handle this problem, the
arrival traffic needs to be adjusted by reducing the admitting
data or the UE throughput should increase by increasing the
maximum BS transmit power and number of antennas.
The performance of NUM based on Lyapunov framework is
analyzed in [10]. There exists an [O(1/ν), O(ν)] utility-queue
backlog tradeoff, which leads to an utility-delay tradeoff.
We show the impact of the Lyapunov parameter ν on the
achievable average network utility and queue backlog as seen
in Fig. 5, when K = 16, N = 64, and P (b0 ) = 38 dBm. By
varying the value of ν, the network utility is increasing with
O(1/ν), while the network backlog linearly increases with
O(ν).
Average Network Utility [Gbps] [Blue]

TABLE I: Parameter Settings

400
2
Number of Small Cells per km

900

Fig. 4: Achievable 5th % UE throughput versus number of
Small Cells at 28 GHz, 10 GHz, and 2.4 GHz.

C ONCLUSION

In this paper, we have studied the problem of joint inband backhaul scheduling and interference mitigation in 5G
HetNets which takes into account the combination of inband FD-SC and massive MIMO technologies. The main
addressed problem is to simultaneously schedule macro cell
users and to provide the wireless backhaul to small cells.
The goal is to maximize a network utility function of the
total time-average data rates subject to the wireless backhaul
constraint and network stability in the presence of imperfect
CSI. At mmWave 28 GHz with 1 GHz of BW, we observe
that 1.7 Gbps of the achievable average UE throughput and
1 Gbps of the cell-edge UE throughput can be reached for
200 UE per km2 in HetNet. When the network gets dense,
harnessing mmWave yields 62× gain of UE throughput as
compared to conventional cellular frequency.

7

P ROOF

OF

A PPENDIX
C LOSED -F ORM E XPRESSION

By applying the technique in [6, Theorem 2, 3], the
deterministic equivalent of the asymtotic SINR of the MUE
m is
(b )

2
lm pm0 (1 − τm
)(Ωm )2
,
Φ
h
i
2
α2 − (α + Ωm )2 + (α + Ωm )2 (1 +
where Φ = Υm α2 − τm
PS
(bs ) (bs )
ζm ). Ωm = N1 Tr(Θ̃m G) forms the unique
s=1 β
positive solution of which is the Stieltjes
 P transform of nonneg−1
K
Θ̃k
ative finite measure, where G = N1
+
I
.
Ni
k=1 α+Ωk
(b0 )
2
P
α lk pk ekm
K
Here, Υm = N1
k=1,k6=m
(α+Ω )2 , and, where Θ̃k =
a.s.

(b0 )
γm
−−→

(b )

k

UU† Θk 0 UU† . e = [ek ], k ∈ K, and em = [emk ], k ∈ K
are given by e = (I − J)−1 u, ek = (I − J)−1 uk , where
J = [Jij ], i, j ∈ K. u = [uk ], k ∈ K, um = [umk ], k ∈ K are
1
trΘ̃i GΘ̃j G
given by Jij = N
, umk = α21N trΘ̃k GΘ̃m G,
N (α + Ωj )2
uk = α21N trΘ̃k G2 . Similarly, the SINR of the SC bs are
a.s.

γs(b0 ) −−→

(b )

ls ps 0 (Ωs )2
.
PS
(b )
α2 Υs + (α + Ωs )2 (1 + s′ =1,s′ 6=s β (bs′ ) ζs s′ )
R EFERENCES

[1]
[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

“2020: Beyond 4g radio evolution for the gigabit experience,” White
Paper, Noikia Siements Networks, 2011.
T. L. Marzetta, “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited
numbers of base station antennas,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 3590–3600, 2010.
B. Li, D. Zhu, and P. Liang, “Small cell in-band wireless backhaul in
massive multiple-input multiple-output systems,” in IEEE International
Conference on Communications, 2015.
L. Sanguinetti, A. Moustakas, and M. Debbah, “Interference management in 5G reverse TDD HetNets: A large system analysis,” IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 33, pp. 1187–1200,
2015.
F. Rusek, D. Persson, B. Lau, E. Larsson, T. Marzetta, O. Edfors, and
F. Tufvesson, “Scaling up MIMO: Opportunities and challenges with
very large arrays,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 30, no. 1,
pp. 40–60, 2013.
S. Wagner, R. Couillet, M. Debbah, and D. Slock, “Large system
analysis of linear precoding in correlated MISO broadcast channels
under limited feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,
vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 4509–4537, 2012.
A. Liu and V. Lau, “Hierarchical Interference Mitigation for Massive
MIMO Cellular Networks,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,
vol. 62, no. 18, pp. 4786–4797, Sept 2014.
H. Boche, S. Naik, and M. Schubert, “Pareto boundary of utility sets for
multiuser wireless systems,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking,
vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 589–601, 2011.
Z. Chen, S. Vorobyov, C. Wang, J. Thompson et al., “Pareto region
characterization for rate control in MIMO interference systems and
Nash bargaining,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 57,
no. 12, pp. 3203–3208, 2012.
M. J. Neely, “Stochastic network optimization with application to
communication and queueing systems,” Synthesis Lectures on Communication Networks, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–211, 2010.
A. Beck, A. Ben-Tal, and L. Tetruashvili, “A sequential parametric
convex approximation method with applications to nonconvex truss
topology design problems,” Journal of Global Optimization, vol. 47,
no. 1, pp. 29–51, 2010.
H. Li, L. Song, and M. Debbah, “Energy efficiency of large-scale
multiple antenna systems with transmit antenna selection,” IEEE
Transactions on Communications, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 638–647, 2014.
M. R. Akdeniz, Y. Liu, M. K. Samimi, S. Sun, S. Rangan, T. S.
Rappaport, and E. Erkip, “Millimeter wave channel modeling and
cellular capacity evaluation,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in
Communications, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1164–1179, 2014.

[14]

J. Mo and J. Walrand, “Fair end-to-end window-based congestion
control,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (ToN), vol. 8, no. 5,
pp. 556–567, 2000.

