Downlink Power Control in Massive MIMO
Networks with Distributed Antenna Arrays
Noman Akbar∗ , Emil Björnson† , Erik G. Larsson†, and Nan Yang∗
∗

arXiv:1801.07862v2 [] 13 Mar 2018

Research School of Engineering, Australian National University, Acton, ACT, 2601, Australia
†
Department of Electrical Engineering (ISY), Linköping University, Sweden
Email: noman.akbar@anu.edu.au, emil.bjornson@liu.se, erik.g.larsson@liu.se, nan.yang@anu.edu.au

Abstract—In this paper, we investigate downlink power control
in massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) networks
with distributed antenna arrays. The base station (BS) in each
cell consists of multiple antenna arrays, which are deployed in
arbitrary locations within the cell. Due to the spatial separation
between antenna arrays, the large-scale propagation effect is
different from a user to different antenna arrays in a cell, which
makes power control a challenging problem as compared to
conventional massive MIMO. We assume that the BS in each
cell obtains the channel estimates via uplink pilots. Based on the
channel estimates, the BSs perform maximum ratio transmission
for the downlink. We then derive a closed-form spectral efficiency
(SE) expression, where the channels are subject to correlated
fading. Utilizing the derived expression, we propose a maxmin power control algorithm to ensure that each user in the
network receives a uniform quality of service. Numerical results
demonstrate that, for the network considered in this work,
optimizing for max-min SE through the max-min power control
improves the sum SE of the network as compared to the equal
power allocation.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) is widely
acknowledged as a key enabling technology for the next
generation mobile communication networks. Massive MIMO
offers an increased spectral and energy efficiency as compared
to regular MIMO [1], [2]. In massive MIMO, the base stations
(BSs) are equipped with a very large number of antennas and
serve many users simultaneously. The BSs’ antenna arrays can
be deployed in either a co-located or a distributed manner. In
co-located deployment, the BS consists of a single antenna
array, where all the antenna elements are in close proximity to
each other. Differently, in distributed deployment, the antenna
arrays belonging to a BS are not necessarily deployed in close
proximity to each other [3], [4]. As such, the antenna arrays
can be placed at arbitrary locations within a cell. We refer to
this as distributed antenna array (DAA) massive MIMO.
Most existing works in the massive MIMO literature assume
a co-located antenna array deployment [5]–[8]. However, DAA
massive MIMO can offer a number of advantages over the colocated antenna array massive MIMO. For example, it has the
potential to improve the capacity and the coverage, as the users
are closer to the antenna arrays [4], [9]–[11]. Additionally,
the DAA deployment offers more resilience to shadow fading
This research work was performed when the first author visited the Division
of Communication Systems, Department of Electrical Engineering (ISY) in
Linköping University, Sweden.

than the co-located deployment at the cost of an increased
back-haul communication requirements [4]. In this paper, we
assume that the antenna arrays are deployed in a distributed
manner at arbitrary locations. Each antenna array is connected
to a cell processing unit (CPU) through a back-haul link, which
enables coherent processing of the signal transmitted from
the arrays. Each cell in the network can be considered as a
“Cell-Free” massive MIMO [4], [12], where the access points
have multiple antenna elements. We highlight that the system
model considered in this paper is a generalized model, which
encompasses the “Cell-Free” massive MIMO as a special case.
Power control in massive MIMO is a pivotal technique to
achieve a uniform quality of service for every user throughout
the network. We highlight that the power control is performed
to utilize the available power in an efficient manner. Although
power control in massive MIMO is a well investigated topic
[13]–[15], the optimal power control in multi-cell DAA massive MIMO is a new problem. Specifically, this power control
problem is challenging because the large-scale propagation
effect varies from a user to different antenna arrays in a cell.
The optimal power allocation problem in “Cell-Free” massive
MIMO was investigated in [4], [12], where each access point
was equipped with a single antenna element. Differently, in
this work we consider that each array has multiple antenna
elements and the network has a conventional cellular structure.
The novel contributions of our paper are:
1) We derive a closed-form expression for the downlink
signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) in DAA
massive MIMO under the assumption of correlated
channel fading. The expression is valid for an arbitrary
number of DAAs.
2) We investigate optimal downlink power allocation and
equal power allocation in a DAA massive MIMO network. To this end, we formulate the downlink power
control problem as a max-min optimization problem.
3) We present numerical results for max-min power allocation and equal power allocation.
Notations: We denote vectors and matrices by lower-case boldface symbols and upper-case boldface symbols, respectively.
E[·] denotes the expectation, k · k, denotes the l2 norm, tr(·)
denotes the matrix trace, (·)H denotes the Hermitian transpose,
(·)T denotes the matrix transpose, and IM denotes an M × M
identity matrix.

‫ܯ‬

Antenna
͙

͙
‫ܯ‬

ܰ

͙

͙
͙
͙

͙
۰‫܁‬௟௡ାଵ
۰‫܁‬௟௡

CPU

‫܃‬௟௜

each cell across the network. Notably, the results can be easily
generalized to other cases for pilot assignment. Accordingly,
the uplink pilot transmission received at the n-th sub-array of
BSj , i.e., BSnj , is given as
Y

‫ܯ‬

jn

=

͙

L X
K
X
l=1

͙

͙

۰‫܁‬௝௡ାଵ

͙
۰‫܁‬௝௡

۰‫܁‬௟ଵ
۰‫܁‬௟ே

CPU

  th cell
Backhaul link

‫܃‬௝௞
͙
͙

Wireless
Transmission

۰‫܁‬௝ଵ
۰‫܁‬௝ே

ũth cell

Fig. 1. Illustration of multi-cell DAA massive MIMO with N arrays in each
cells. Each antenna array is equipped with M antenna elements. The shaded
box in top right corner depicts a conventional co-located massive MIMO BS.

1
H
hjn
Nn ,
li φli + √
ρtr j
i=1

where Nnj ∈ CM×τ represents the additive white Gaussian
noise (AWGN) at BSnj , and ρtr = ρp τp is the normalized pilot
power per user. The sub-array BSnj correlates (1) with the
known pilot sequence to obtain
!
L X
K
X
1
jn H
jn
(2)
hli φli + √ Nnj φjk .
yjk =
ρtr
i=1
l=1

Assuming that the k-th user in each cell is assigned the same
H
pilot sequence, we have φH
li φjk = 1 when i = k and φli φjk =
0 when i 6= k. Thus, we simplify (2) as
jn
yjk
= hjn
jk +

L
X

l=1,l6=j

II. D ISTRIBUTED A NTENNA A RRAY M ASSIVE MIMO
N ETWORK
We consider a multi-cell network consisting of L cells and
K single–antenna users in each cell. We assume that each
cell has DAA BSs. As such, each BS in a cell is equipped
with N DAAs deployed at arbitrary locations, where each
antenna array has M antenna elements as depicted in Fig. 1.
We denote the k-th user in the j-th cell by Ujk , where
j ∈ {1, · · · , L} and k ∈ {1, · · · , K}. Moreover, we denote
the BS in the j-th cell by BSj and the n-th antenna array
belonging to BSj by BSnj . Furthermore, we denote the uplink
channel between Uli and BSnj by hjn
li , where l ∈ {1, · · · , L},
i ∈ {1, · · · , K}, and n ∈ {1, · · · , N }. In this paper, we
assume that the channels follow a correlated Rayleigh fading
jn
jn
distribution hjn
li ∼ CN (0, Rli ), where Rli is the channel
covariance matrix that captures various channel properties
such as average path-loss and spatial correlation.
We assume that the network operates in time division duplex
(TDD) mode [1], [6]. As such, the uplink and downlink
channels are assumed to be the same during a coherence timefrequency interval and independent between different intervals.
The transmission consists of uplink pilots for channel estimation followed by downlink data transmission. We assume
that the entire transmission is carried out inside one coherence
time-frequency interval.
A. Uplink Channel Estimation
During the uplink channel estimation phase, all users in the
network send their pre-assigned pilot sequences to the samecell BSs. Specifically, φjk is the pilot sequence associated with
Ujk such that kφjk k2 = 1. We assume that all pilot sequences
have length τp . In this work we assume that τp = K. As such,
each user in a cell is assigned an orthogonal pilot sequence.
Furthermore, the same set of pilot sequences are repeated in

(1)

1
hjn
Nn φjk .
lk + √
ρtr j

(3)

From (3), we obtain the MMSE estimate of hjn
jk as [16]
b jn = Wjn yjn ,
h
jk
jk jk

(4)

i
h
jn
jn −1
jn
jn H
where Wjk
= Rjn
, Rjn
jk (Qjk )
jk = E hjk (hjk ) , and
L
i X
h
1
jn
jn H
IM .
=
Rjn
Qjn
=
E
y
(y
)
lk +
jk
jk
jk
ρtr

(5)

l=1

Throughout this paper, we assume that the covariance matrices
n
Rjn
jk and Qjk are known to the BSs.
B. Downlink Data Transmission
During the downlink data transmission phase, BSj transmits
data symbols to each user in the j-th cell. The channel
estimates obtained through the uplink channel estimation are
also utilized for downlink transmission under the consideration
of the TDD mode. Accordingly, the symbol transmitted by BSj
for the K same-cell users is represented as
xj =

K X
N
X

n n
aji qji ,
νji

(6)

i=1 n=1

n
where νji
≥ 0 is the real-valued downlink power control
coefficient for Uji at BSnj , anji is the precoding vector for
Uji at BSnj , qji is the data symbol intended for Uji , and
qji ∼ CN (0, 1). We assume that the downlink
power control

coefficients are chosen to satisfy E |xj |2 ≤ 1. This power
constraint can be re-written as
K X
N
X

i=1 n=1



n 2
(νji
) E kanji k2 ≤ 1, ∀ j.

(7)

The constraint in (7) represents the total transmit power constraint in cell j, which is normalized such that the maximum

γjk

γjk

h
i2
jn H n
n
ν
E
(h
)
a
jk
n=1 jk
jk


.
=
i2
h
2
PL PK
P
PN
N
jn H n
n
2
n
ln H n
−
ν
E
(h
)
a
E
+
σ
ν
(h
)
a
n
jk
jk
li
l=1
n=1 jk
jk
i=1
n=1 li
PN


2
jn
n
n
tr
ν
W
R
jk
jk jk
n=1
.
=P P
2
 P


PN
P
L
K
L
N
n
n
ln
n 2
n n
n H ln
2
+
tr
ν
W
R
tr
(ν
)
W
Q
(W
)
R
+
σ
n
lk
lk jk
li
li li
li
jk
l=1
i=1
l=1,l6=j
n=1
n=1
PN

power is 1. From (6), the downlink transmission received at
Ujk is
rjk =

L X
K X
N
X

H n
νlin (hln
jk ) ali qli + njk ,

where njk is the AWGN at Ujk . We assume that the users
do not have knowledge about the instantaneous channel and
only know the channel statistics [6]. Accordingly, the downlink
signal received at Ujk is represented as

+

h
i
PL,K,N n ln H n
n
H n
νli (hjk ) ali qli
νjk
E (hjn
jk ) ajk qjk +
l,i,n
| {z }
n=1
N
X

N
X

n=1

(l,i)6=(j,k)


h
i
jn H n
n
H n
(hjn
)
a
−
E
(h
)
a
qjk + njk ,
νjk
jk
jk
jk
jk

(9)

We note that the first term in (9) represents N superimposed
copies of the symbol qjk received from the different arrays in
cell j. We highlight that (9) is a generalized expression for
received signal at Ujk , which is valid for an arbitrary number
of DAAs in a cell.
C. Achievable Downlink Sum Spectral Efficiency
In this subsection, we derive a closed-form expression for
the downlink spectral efficiency (SE). We then compute the
sum SE and use it as a performance metric. We note that the
last three terms in (9) can be considered as the effective noise
and are uncorrelated with the first term in (9). Accordingly,
the downlink SE for Ujk is given as


K
SEjk = 1 −
log2 (1 + γjk )
b/s/Hz,
(10)
τc
where τc is the channel coherence interval in number of
samples and γjk is the downlink effective SINR for Ujk given
by (11) at the top of the page. The sum SE in a cell is the sum
of SE of all the same-cell users. We next provide a closed-form
expression for the SINR in the following theorem.
Theorem 1. Assuming that the BSs perform maximum ratio
b jn , the
transmission (MRT) in the downlink, i.e, anjk = h
jk
closed-form expression for the downlink effective SINR at Ujk
is obtained as in (12) at the top of the page.
Proof: Please see Appendix A.

(12)

The closed-form expression for the downlink SINR given
in (12) can be re-written as

γjk = PL,K,N
l,i,n

PN

n n
n=1 νjk χjk

(8)

l=1 i=1 n=1

rjk =

(11)

lin
(νlin )2 ζjk
+

PL

l6=j |

2

PN

n ln 2
n=1 νlk ξjk |

,

+ σn2

(13)

n
lin
n n
n H ln
where χnjk = tr(Wjk
Rjn
jk ), ζjk = tr(Wli Qli (Wli ) Rjk ),
ln
n
ln
and ξjk = tr(Wlk Rjk ).

III. D OWNLINK P OWER C ONTROL IN D ISTRIBUTED
A NTENNA A RRAY M ASSIVE MIMO
In this section, we formulate the downlink power control
problem as a max-min optimization problem. Max-min power
control maximizes the minimum SE for all the user in the
network. As such, every user in the network receives a uniform
quality of service. Max-min power control have previously
been studied for conventional BSs [15], [18]. However, the application of max-min power control for DAA massive MIMO
networks, where each array has multiple antenna elements, has
not been investigated.
The goal of the max-min optimization problem is to maximize the minimum SE for all the users in the network. As
such, we formulate the max-min optimization problem using
(13) as

max

n}
{νli

s. t.

min

n n
n=1 νjk χjk

2

PL PN n ln 2
n 2 lin
l,i,n (νli ) ζjk +
l6=j | n=1 νlk ξjk |
jn
n
n
tr(Wjk Rjk ) ≤ χjk , ∀ n,
n n
n H
lin
tr(Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rln
jk ) ≤ ζjk , ∀ l, i, n,
n
ln
tr(Wlk
Rln
jk ) ≤ ξjk , ∀ l, n,
PK PN
n 2
n n
n H
n=1 (νli ) tr(Wli Qli (Wli ) ) ≤ 1, ∀
i=1
νlin ≥ 0, ∀ l, i, n,

∀ j,k

PL,K,N

PN

+ σn2

l, n,
(14)

PK PN
n n
n H
where the constraint i=1 n=1 (νlin )2 tr(Wli
Qli (Wli
) )≤
1 is obtained from (7) under the assumption that MRT is used
at the BSs. Assuming that the target SINR is γ, we rewrite

.

the optimization problem given in (14) in the epigraph form
as
max
n

{νli },γ

PN

n n
n=1 νjk χjk

P

2

P

L
N
n 2 lin
n ln 2
l,i,n (νli ) ζjk +
l6=j |
n=1 νlk ξjk | +
n
n
tr(Wjk
Rjn
jk ) ≤ χjk , ∀ n,
n n
n H
lin
tr(Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rln
jk ) ≤ ζjk , ∀ l, i, n,
n
ln
tr(Wlk
Rln
jk ) ≤ ξjk , ∀ l, n,
PK PN
n 2
n n
n H
i=1
n=1 (νli ) tr(Wli Qli (Wli ) ) ≤ 1, ∀
νlin ≥ 0, ∀ l, i, n.

σn2

≥ γ, ∀ j, k,

l, n,

Proposition 1. The constraint set in the optimization problem
(15) is convex and the optimization problem is quasi-concave.
Assuming that γ is a constant, the optimization problem in
(15) is re-written as the convex feasibility problem

s. t.

0
1 PN n n
kxjk k ≤ √
n=1 νjk χjk , ∀ j, k,
γ
n
n
tr(Wjk
Rjn
jk ) ≤ χjk , ∀ n,
H

n n
n
lin
tr(Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rln
jk ) ≤ ζjk , ∀ l, i, n

(16)

n
ln
tr(Wlk
Rln
jk ) ≤ ξjk , ∀ l, n

n ln
νlk
ξjk ≤ ̺lin
jk , ∀ l, n,
PK PN
n 2
n n
n H
i=1
n=1 (νli ) tr(Wli Qli (Wli ) ) ≤ 1, ∀ l,
n
νli ≥ 0, ∀ l, i, n,
p T
σn2 ] . We define x̃jk and x̄jk as
where xjk = [x̃jk x̄jk
li
LK
li
LK
x̃jk = [x̃11
.
.
.
x̃
.
.
.
x̃
]
and x̄jk = [x̄11
jk
jk
jk
jk . . . x̄jk . . . x̄jk ],
respectively, where
1

1

N
liN 2
1
li1 2
x̃li
jk = [(νli )(ζjk ) . . . (νli )(ζjk ) ]

and
x̄li
jk

(
lkn
lkN
̺lk1
jk + ̺jk + . . . + ̺jk
=
0,

l 6= j,
l = j.

4

3

1

2

4

3

1

2

(15)

This can be solved as a quasi-convex problem. We next
formulate a convex feasibility problem based on (15), which
we use in a bisection algorithm [19] to search for the value
of γ ∈ [γmin , γmax ] that is the global optimum to (15), where
γmin and γmax define the search range [4], [19].

max

4

3

1

2

γ

s. t. PL,K,N

n}
{νli

BS
UE

(17)

(18)

Proof: Please see Appendix B.
In each iteration of the bisection algorithm, we set γ̄ =
(γmin + γmax )/2 and solve the feasibility problem (16) by
setting γ = γ̄. If the problem is infeasible, we set γmax = γ̄
otherwise we set γmin = γ̄. The algorithm iteratively refines
γmin and γmax and stops the search when γmax − γmax < ε,
where ε > 0 is the error tolerance. We highlight that the maxmin power control in “Cell Free” massive MIMO [12] is a
special case of the power control problem considered in this

4

3

1

2

4

3

1

2

4

3

1

2

4

3

1

2

Fig. 2. DAA massive MIMO network with N = 4 antenna arrays in each
cells. Each antenna array is equipped with M antennas.

paper, which can be obtained from (16) when the network has
one cell and each antenna array has one antenna element.
The max-min power control in (15) maximizes the minimum SE. In this work, we evaluate sum SE to demonstrate
the performance of the power control algorithms. We highlight
that the SE is dependent on the effective SINR as given in
(10). Therefore, by evaluating sum SE, we also demonstrate
the improvement in SE.
A. Equal Power Allocation
The baseline for comparison is equal power allocation. Here,
the total available downlink transmit power is shared equally
among all the users in a cell [18]. As such, the downlink
power control coefficients νlin are equal for all the users. From
(7) and assuming that the full available power is used by the
BSs during the downlink transmission, we obtain
(ν)2

L X
K X
N
X

l=1 i=1 n=1



E kanli k2 = L.

(19)

Assuming that the BSs performs MRT, the power control
coefficient is obtained as
v
u
L
u
.

ν = tP P
(20)
L
K PN
n Qn (Wn )H
tr
W
l=1
i=1
n=1
li li
li
With equal power allocation, the power control coefficients
ν remain the same regardless of the channel conditions.
Accordingly, it is expected that equal power allocation does
not give a higher sum SE as compared to the max-min
power control. However, equal power allocation serves as an
important benchmark for the network performance.
IV. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
In this section, we compare the performance of the downlink
power control schemes namely, max-min power control and

50
Number
Number
Number
Number

40

of
of
of
of

arrays
arrays
arrays
arrays

N
N
N
N

=4
=3
=2
=1

Sum Spectral Efficiency (b/s/Hz)

Sum Spectral Efficiency (b/s/Hz)

50

30

20

10

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Number of Antennas (M )
Fig. 3. The sum SE versus the number of antennas per array for different N .

equal power allocation. We consider a network with L = 7
cells and DAAs, as depicted in Fig. 2. We assume that the
DAAs are placed at 300 m from the cell center. Additionally,
we assume that each cell has K = 10 users and all users are
700 m away from the center of the cell as shown in Fig. 2. For
such a network configuration, the channel covariance matrices
are computed using the one-ring model [17]. We assume that
τc = 200 samples. These simulation parameters are kept the
same throughout this section unless stated otherwise.
We first examine the impact of increasing the number
of arrays in a cell on the sum SE of the network. The
advantages of increasing the number of antenna arrays are
clearly observed from Fig. 3. The result is obtained using (12)
for equal power allocation. In this simulation, for a given N ,
all DAAs marked N or lower in Fig. 2 are active. For example,
when N = 3, the antenna arrays marked 1, 2, and 3 are active.
We note that additional antenna arrays in the network provide
large performance gains. As such, the network performance
is improved by increasing the number of antenna arrays in a
cell. The result highlights the benefit of adding DAAs in a
cell. We note that it is not necessary to place a large number
of antenna elements in close vicinity for reaping the benefits
offered by massive MIMO. Instead, the antenna elements can
be placed on separate sub-arrays. The result in Fig. 3 indicates
that we observe improvement in sum SE even when the arrays
are deployed in arbitrary locations.
In Fig. 4, we compare the max-min power allocation
with the equal power allocation. We obtain the downlink
power allocation coefficients for max-min power allocation
by solving the optimization problem (16) using CVX. For
equal power allocation, we obtained the downlink power
allocation coefficients using (20). Afterwards, the sum SE for
the corresponding power allocation is obtained using (12). We
highlight that the max-min power allocation provides a higher
sum SE than the equal power allocation. For example, the

15.85%
9.09%

40
26.52%

11.62%

30
63.13%
20

10
Optimal Power Allocation
Equal Power Allocation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Number of Antennas (M )
Fig. 4. The sum SE versus the number of antennas per array for maxmin power allocation and equal power allocation. The percentages show the
improvement in sum SE provided by the max-min power allocation.

max-min power allocation provides a sum SE of 34.16 b/s/Hz
compared to 25.10 b/s/Hz provided by equal power allocation,
when each array in a cell has M = 60 antenna elements. In this
case, max-min power allocation provides 26.52% improvement
in the sum SE as compared to the equal power allocation. This
benefit comes in addition to the uniform user performance.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we investigated the downlink power allocation
in a DAA massive MIMO network. We first derived a generalized closed-form expression for the downlink SINR with
correlated Rayleigh fading channels. We then formulated a
max-min optimization problem based on the downlink SINR
expression. We solved the max-min optimization problem and
obtained the downlink power control coefficients. We then
compared the performance of the optimal power allocation
with equal power allocation. Our numerical results indicated
that adding DAAs in the network provides a large improvement in the sum SE. Additionally, the proposed system model
gives network designers great flexibility to deploy BS antenna
arrays in arbitrary locations and still provide benefit from
the advantages offered by massive MIMO. For future work,
we will investigate heuristic power allocation algorithms and
compare their performance with the max-min power allocation. Additionally, we will compare the performance of the
proposed scheme with existing power allocation schemes.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship, ARC Discovery
Project (DP180104062), the Swedish Research Council (VR),
and ELLIIT.

A PPENDIX A
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1
The proof follows the approach in [16]. For MRT, we have
b jn . Accordingly, the numerator of (11) is simplified
anjk = h
jk
as
i
h
jn H
n
n
H b jn
E (hjn
jk ) hjk = tr(Wjk E[yjk (hjk ) ]),
n
= tr(Wjk
Rjn
jk ).

(21)

We now simplify the first term in the denominator of (11). We
b ln
note that when (j, k) 6= (l, i), hln
jk and hli are independent.
For this case we have


E

N
X

n=1

2



H b ln 
νlin (hln
=
jk ) hli

N


X
n n
n H ln
tr (νlin )2 Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rjk .

n=1

(22)

We now consider the case where (j, k) = (l, i). In this case,
b ln
hln
jk and hli are not independent. By utilizing the fact that and
ln
b ln − Wn hln are independent, we have
hjk and h
li
li jk


E

N
X

n=1

2

H b ln
νlin (hln
jk ) hli



=
+

N


X
n n
n H ln
tr (νlin )2 Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rjk

n=1

N
X

2

n
n ln
tr(νlk
Wli
Rjk )

.

(23)

n=1

Combining (22) and the (23), the first term in the denominator
of (11) is written as


E

N
X

n=1

2
H b ln
νlin (hln
jk ) hli

(

0,
PN



=

N


X
n n
n H ln
tr (νlin )2 Wli
Qli (Wli
) Rjk +

n=1

(j, k) 6= (l, i)

n
n ln
n=1 tr(νlk Wli Rjk )

2

, (j, k) = (l, i)

(24)

Substituting (21) and (24) in (11) we obtain (12).
P ROOF

A PPENDIX B
OF P ROPOSITION 1

We write the first constraint in the optimization problem
(15) as
PN n n 2
n=1 νjk χjk
≥γ
bjk .
PL,K,N n 2 lin PL PN n ln 2
2
n=1 νlk ξjk | + σn
l6=j |
l,i,n (νli ) ζjk +
(25)
n ln
Now we introduce slack variable νlk
ξjk ≤ ̺lin
jk and simplify
(25). Accordingly, we obtain
P
1
PL PN
L,K,N
lin 2
2 2
n 2 lin
≤
̺
)
+
σ
(
(ν
)
ζ
+
n
li
jk
n=1 jk
l6=j
l,i,n

which is equivalent to

1 PN n n
p
n=1 νjk χjk , (26)
γ
bjk

1 PN n n
(27)
kxjk k ≤ p
n=1 νjk χjk ,
γ
bjk
p T
where xjk = [x̃jk x̄jk
σn2 ] . The terms x̃jk and x̄jk are
defined in the Proposition 1.

We highlight that the constraint given in (27) can be
represented in the standard second-order-cone form. As such,
the optimization problem in (15) is convex. Furthermore, the
constraints in (15) are convex. Accordingly, the optimization
problem in (15) is quasi-concave. Finally, we re-write the
optimization problem as (16) given in the Proposition 1.

R EFERENCES
[1] T. L. Marzetta, “Noncooperative cellular wireless with unlimited numbers of base station antennas,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 9,
no. 11, pp. 3590–3600, Nov. 2010.
[2] N. Yang, L. Wang, G. Geraci, M. Elkashlan, J. Yuan, and M. Di Renzo,
“Safeguarding 5G wireless communication networks using physical
layer security,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 20–27,
Apr. 2015.
[3] S. Zhou, M. Zhao, X. Xu, J. Wang, and Y. Yao, “Distributed wireless
communication system: A new architecture for future public wireless
access,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 108–113, Mar. 2003.
[4] H. Q. Ngo, A. Ashikhmin, H. Yang, E. G. Larsson, and T. L. Marzetta,
“Cell-free massive MIMO versus small cells,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1834–1850, Mar. 2017.
[5] W. Liu, S. Han, and C. Yang, “Energy efficiency comparison of massive
MIMO and small cell network,” in Proc. IEEE Global Conf. on Signal
and Information Processing (GlobalSIP), Atlanta, GA, Dec. 2014,
pp. 617–621.
[6] N. Akbar, N. Yang, P. Sadeghi, and R. A. Kennedy, “Multi-cell multiuser
massive MIMO networks: User capacity analysis and pilot design,” IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 5064–5077, Dec. 2016.
[7] E. Björnson, L. Sanguinetti, and M. Kountouris, “Deploying dense
networks for maximal energy efficiency: Small cells meet massive
MIMO,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 832–847,
Apr. 2016.
[8] N. Akbar, N. Yang, P. Sadeghi, and R. A. Kennedy, “User load analysis
and pilot sequence design for multi-cell massive MIMO networks,” in
Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. (Globecom), Washingon, DC, Dec.
2016, pp. 1–6.
[9] E. Björnson, M. Matthaiou, and M. Debbah, “Massive MIMO with nonideal arbitrary arrays: Hardware scaling laws and circuit-aware design,”
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 4353–4368, Aug.
2015.
[10] W. Choi and J. Andrews, “Downlink performance and capacity of
distributed antenna systems in a multicell environment,” IEEE Trans.
Wireless Commun., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 69–73, Jan. 2007.
[11] D. Castanheira and A. Gameiro, “Distributed antenna system capacity
scaling,” IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 68–75, Jun. 2010.
[12] E. Nayebi, A. Ashikhmin, T. L. Marzetta, and H. Yang, “Cell-free
massive MIMO systems,” in Proc. Asilomar Conf. on Signals, Systems
and Computers (ACSSC), Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2015, pp. 695–699.
[13] H. V. Cheng, E. Björnson, and E. G. Larsson, “Optimal pilot and
payload power control in single-cell massive MIMO systems,” IEEE
Trans. Signal Process, vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 2363–2378, May 2017.
[14] Y. Li, C. Tao, L. Liu, and L. Zhang, “Optimal resource allocation for
massive MIMO over spatially correlated fading channels,” in Proc. IEEE
Vehicular Technology Conf. (VTC–Spring), Nanjing, China, Jul. 2016,
pp. 1–5.
[15] T. L. Marzetta, E. G. Larsson, H. Yang, and H. Q. Ngo, Fundamentals
of Massive MIMO. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016.
[16] E. Björnson, L. Sanguinetti, and M. Debbah, “Massive MIMO with
Imperfect Channel Covariance Information,” in Proc. Asilomar Conf. on
Signals, Systems and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2016, pp.
974–978.
[17] A. Adhikary, J. Nam, J. Y. Ahn, and G. Caire, “Joint spatial division
and multiplexingthe large-scale array regime,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,
vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 6441–6463, Oct. 2013.
[18] H. Yang, and T. L. Marzetta, “A macro cellular wireless network with
uniformly high user throughputs,” in Proc. Vehicular Technology Conf.
(VTC–Fall), Vancouver, Canada, Sept. 2014, pp. 1–5.
[19] S. Boyd, and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.

