Integrated mmWave Access and Backhaul in 5G:
Bandwidth Partitioning and Downlink Analysis

arXiv:1710.06255v1 [] 17 Oct 2017

Chiranjib Saha, Mehrnaz Afshang, and Harpreet S. Dhillon

Abstract—With the increasing network densification, it has
become exceedingly difficult to provide traditional fiber backhaul
access to each cell site, which is especially true for small cell
base stations (SBSs). The increasing maturity of millimeter wave
(mmWave) communication has opened up the possibility of
providing high-speed wireless backhaul to such cell sites. Since
mmWave is also suitable for access links, the third generation
partnership project (3GPP) is envisioning an integrated access
and backhaul (IAB) architecture for the fifth generation (5G)
cellular networks in which the same infrastructure and spectral
resources will be used for both access and backhaul. In this paper,
we develop an analytical framework for IAB-enabled cellular
network using which we provide an accurate characterization
of its downlink rate coverage probability. Using this, we study
the performance of two backhaul bandwidth (BW) partition
strategies, (i) equal partition: when all SBSs obtain equal share of
the backhaul BW, and (ii) load-based partition: when the backhaul
BW share of an SBS is proportional to its load. Our analysis
shows that depending on the choice of the partition strategy,
there exists an optimal split of access and backhaul BW for
which the rate coverage is maximized. Further, there exists a
critical volume of cell-load (total number of users) beyond which
the gains provided by the IAB-enabled network disappear and
its performance converges to that of the traditional macro-only
network with no SBSs.
Index Terms—Integrated access and backhaul, heterogeneous
cellular network, mmWave, 3GPP, wireless backhaul.

I. I NTRODUCTION
With the exponential rise in data-demand far exceeding
the capacity of the traditional macro-only cellular network
operating in sub-6 GHz bands, network densification using
mmWave base stations (BSs) is becoming a major driving
technology for the 5G wireless evolution. While heterogeneous
cellular networks (HetNets) with low power SBSs overlaid
with traditional macro BSs improve the spectral efficiency of
the access link (the link between a user and its serving BS),
mmWave communication can further boost the data-rate by
offering high bandwidth. That said, the HetNet concept never
really turned into a massive real-time deployment since the
existing high-speed optical fiber backhaul network that connects the BSs to the network core is not scalabale to the extent
of ultra-densification envisioned for small cells [1]. However,
with recent advancement in mmWave communication with
highly directional beamforming, it is possible to replace the socalled last-mile fibers for SBSs by establishing fixed mmWave
backhaul links between the SBS and the MBS equipped with
fiber backhaul, also known as the anchored BS (ABS), thereby
The authors are with Wireless@VT, Department of ECE, Virginia Tech,
Blacksburg, VA, USA. Email: {csaha, mehrnaz, hdhillon}@vt.edu. The
support of the US National Science Foundation (Grant CNS-1617896) is
gratefully acknowledged.

achieving Gigabits per second (Gbps) range data-rate over
backhaul links. While mmWave fixed wireless backhaul is
targetted to be a part of the first phase of the commercial rollout of 5G [2], 3GPP is exploring a more ambitious solution
of IAB where the ABSs will use same spectral resources and
infrastructure of mmWave transmission to serve cellular users
in access as well as the SBSs in backhaul [3].
Over recent years, stochastic geometry has emerged as
a powerful tool for the analysis of cellular networks by
modeling the BS and user locations as independent Poisson
point processes (PPPs) over an infinite plane. This PPPbased model, initially developed for sub-6 GHz networks [4]
has been further tailored for mmWave systems [5]–[7]. All
these works mostly focus on modeling the access links by
including particulars of channel statistics (e.g. blocking) and
transmission techniques (e.g. beamforming) with the assumption of unconstrained backhaul of mmWave BSs. However,
there exists no significant prior art on the analytical framework
for IAB-enabled mmWave HetNet except an extension of the
PPP-based model [8], where the authors model wired and
wirelessly backhauled BSs as two independent PPPs. Due to
the PPP assumption, this model is unable to capture some real
world morphologies, such as the formation of user hotspots
(or user clusters), which is one of the key motivations for
the deployment of more short-range mmWave SBSs at the
locations of these user clusters [9]. Not surprisingly, such configurations are at the heart of the 3GPP simulation models [10].
To address this shortcoming of the analytical models, in this
paper, we propose the first 3GPP-inspired stochastic geometrybased finite network model for the performance analysis of
HetNets with IAB. The key contributions are summarized next.
Contributions. We develop a realistic analytical framework
to study the performance of IAB-enabled mmWave HetNets.
Similar to the models used in 3GPP-compliant simulators [3],
the users are assumed to be non-uniformly distributed over the
macrocell forming hotspots and the SBSs are located at the
geographical centers of the user hotspots. Using this model, we
evaluate the downlink rate coverage probability for two backhaul BW partition strategies, namely, (i) equal partition where
each SBS gets equal share of BW irrespective of its load1 and
(ii) load-based partition, where the backhaul BW received by
an SBS is proportional to its load. Three key take-aways of our
analysis are: (i) the load-based partition always provides higher
rate coverage than the equal partition, (ii) depending on the
backhaul BW partition strategy, there exists an optimal access1 Throughout the paper, BS-load refers to the number of users connected
to that BS.

Mmwave backhaul link

Mmwave access link
user hotspot

Macrocell

Small cell BS

𝑅"

𝑅
𝑅"
Mobile
Core

Anchored BS
a. User and BS locations

(1

⌘)W

Access BW (shared by users)

…

Backhaul BW (partitioned into
𝑛 shares)
b. Resource allocation

Fig. 1. Illustration of system model.

backhaul BW split for which the rate coverage probability
is maximized, and (iii) for given infrastructure and spectral
resources, the IAB-enabled network outperforms the macroonly network with no SBSs up to a critical volume of total
cell-load, beyond which the performance gains disappear and
its performance converges to that of the macro-only network.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
A. mmWave Cellular System Model
1) BS and user locations: Inspired by the spatial configurations used in 3GPP simulators [3], [10] for an outdoor
deployment scenario of a two-tier HetNet, we assume that
n SBSs are deployed inside a circular macrocell of radius R
(denoted by b(0, R)) with the macro BS at its center. This BS
is called an ABS since it is connected to the core network with
high speed optical fiber. Note that, in contrast to the infinite
network models (e.g. the PPP-based networks defined over
R2 ) which are suitable for interference-dominated networks
(such as conventional cellular networks in sub-6 GHz), finite
network model is a sufficient assumption for mmWave networks which are predominantly noise-limited [11]. The users
are assumed to form spatial clusters or hotspots. We model
a user hotspot at x as b(x, Rs ), i.e., a circle of radius Rs
centered at x. We assume that the macrocell contains n user
hotspots, located at {xi ≡ (xi , ϕi ), i = 1, . . . , n}, which are
distributed uniformly at random in b(0, R−Rs ).2 Thus, {xi } is
a sequence of independently and identically distributed (i.i.d.)
random vectors with the joint distribution of (xi , ϕi ) being:

xi

 π(R−Rs )2 , when 0 < xi ≤ R − Rs ,
fX (xi ) =
(1)
0 < ϕi ≤ 2π,


0,
otherwise.
The marginal probability density function (PDF) of xi is
obtained as: fX (xi ) = 2xi /(R − Rs )2 for 0 < xi ≤ R − Rs
and ϕi is a uniform random variable in (0, 2π]. Note that, this
construction ensures that all hotspots lie entirely inside the
macrocell, i.e., b(xi , Rs ) ∩ b(0, R)c = ∅, ∀ i. For the sake of
2 For

notational simplicity, we use x ≡ kxk, ∀ x ∈ R2 .

simplicity of analysis, we assume that each hotspot contains a
fixed number of users which is equal to m̄. These m̄ users are
assumed to be located uniformly at random in each hotspot.
Thus, the location of a user belonging to the hotspot at xi is
denoted by xi + u, where u ≡ (u, ξ) is a random vector in
R2 with PDF:
(
u
when 0 < u ≤ Rs , 0 < ξ ≤ 2π
2,
fU (u) = πRs
(2)
0,
otherwise.
The marginal PDF of u is: fU (u) = 2u/Rs2 for 0 < u ≤ Rs
and ξ is a uniform random variable in (0, 2π]. We assume that
the SBSs are deployed at the center of user hotspots, i.e., at
{xi }. The ABS provides wireless backhaul to these SBSs over
mmWave links. For analysis, we first choose a user uniformly
at random along with its hotspot center. We call this hotspot
and user (located at x and x + u, where, x = xn , without loss
of generality) the representative hotspot and the typical user,
respectively. See Fig. 1 for an illustration.
2) Propagation assumptions: All backhaul and access
transmissions are assumed to be performed in mmWave spectrum. We assume that a BS at y ∈ R2 transmits at a constant
power spectral density (PSD) P/W over a system BW W ,
where P = Pm and Ps are the transmission powers of the ABS
and SBS, respectively. The received power at z is given by
P ψhL(z, y)−1 , where ψ is the combined antenna gain of the
transmitter and receiver and L(dB) = β(dB)+10α log10 kz−
yk is the associated path loss. We assume that all links undergo
i.i.d. Nakagami-m fading. Thus, h ∼ Gamma(m, m−1 ).
3) Blockage model: Since mmWave signals are sensitive to
physical blockages such as buildings, trees and even human
bodies, the LOS and NLOS path-loss characteristics have to
be explicitly considered into analysis. On similar lines of
[12], we assume exponential blocking model. Each mmWave
link of distance r between the transmitter (ABS/SBS) and
receiver (SBS/user) is LOS or NLOS according to an independent Bernoulli random variable with LOS probability
p(r) = exp(−r/µ), where µ is the LOS range constant
depending on the geometry and density of blockages.
We assume that all BSs are equipped with steerable directional antennas and the user equipments have omni-directional
antenna. Let G is the directivity gain of the transmitting and
receiving antennas of the BSs (ABS and SBS). Assuming
perfect beam alignment, the effective gains on backhaul and
access links are G2 and G, respectively. We assume that the
system is noise-limited, i.e., at any receiver, the interference
is negligible compared to the thermal noise with PSD N0 .
Noticing that, the signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) on a link with
P
W0
BW W 0 is proportional to NW0 W 0 = P/N0 W , the SNR-s of a
backhaul link from ABS to SBS at x, access links from SBS
at x to user at x+u and ABS to user at x+u are respectively
expressed as:
Pm G2 hb L(0, x)−1
,
N0 W
Ps Ghs L(x, x + u)−1
SNRSBS
(x + u) =
,
a
N0 W
Pm Ghm L(0, x + u)−1
SNRABS
(x + u) =
,
a
N0 W

SNRb (x) =

(3a)
(3b)
(3c)

where {hb , hs , hm } are the corresponding small-scale fading
gains.
4) User association: We assume that the SBSs operate in
closed-access, i.e., users in hotspot can only connect to the
SBS at hotspot center, or the ABS. Given the complexity of
user association in mmWave using beam sweeping techniques,
we assume a much simpler way of the user association which
is performed by signaling in sub-6 GHz which is analogous to
the current LTE standard [13]. In particular, the BSs broadcast
paging signal using omnidirectional antennas in sub-6 GHz
and the user associates to the candidate serving BS based
on the maximum received power over the paging signals.
Since the broadcast signaling is in sub-6 GHz, we assume
same power-law pathloss function for both LOS and NLOS
components with path-loss exponent α due to rich scattering
environment. We define the association event for the typical
user E as:
(
1
if Ps kuk−α > Pm kx + uk−α ,
E=
(4)
0, otherwise,

where NzSBS denotes the load on a SBS at z. The BW partition
is illustrated in Fig. 1. To compare the performance of these
strategies, we first define the network performance metric in
the next Section.
1) Downlink data-rate: The maximum achievable downlink
data-rate, henceforth referred to as simply the data-rate, on the
backhaul link between the ABS and the SBS, the access link
between SBS and user, and the access link between ABS and
user are obtained by:

where {0, 1} denote association to ABS and SBS, respectively.
The typical user at x + u is under coverage in the downlink
if either of the following two events occurs:

where Ws (x) is defined according to backhaul BW partition
strategies in (6) and NzABS denotes the load on the ABS due to
the macro users of the hotspot at z. In (7b), the first term inside
the min-operation is the data-rate achieved under no backhaul
constraint when the access BW Wa is equally partitioned
within NxSBS users. However, due to finite backhaul, RSBS
a
is limited by the second term.

E = 1 and SNRb (x) > θ1 , SNRSBS
(u) > θ2 , or,
a
E = 0 and SNRABS
(x + u) > θ3 ,
a

(5)

where {θ1 , θ2 , θ3 } are the coverage thresholds for successful
demodulation and decoding.
B. Resource allocation
The ABS is assumed to be capable of transmitting on
both mmWave and sub-6 GHz bands. The sub-6 GHz band
is reserved for control channel and the mmWave band is
kept for data-channel. Since mmWave links are unreliable
for long distances, a fraction of the macro users may be
offloaded to sub-6 GHz depending on the link quality from
ABS to the user. However, due to space constraints, we
will delegate the discussion on sub-6 GHz offloading to the
extended version of this paper. The total mmWave BW W for
downlink transmission is partitioned into two parts, Wb = ηW
for backhaul and Wa = (1 − η)W for access, where η ∈ [0, 1)
determines the access-backhaul split. Each BS is assumed to
employ a simple round robin scheduling policy for serving
users, under which the total access BW is equally shared
among its associated users, referred to alternatively as load
on that particular BS. On the other hand, we assume that
the backhaul BW is shared amongst n SBSs by either of
the following two strategies: 1. Equal partition. This is the
simplest partition strategy where Wb is equally divided into
n splits. 2. Load-based partition. In this scheme, the ABS
allocates backhaul BW proportional to the load on each small
cell. If the SBS at x gets backhaul BW Ws (x), then

Wb

for equal partition,
 n ,
SBS
N
x
Ws (x) =
Wb , for load-based partition,
P

 NxSBS +n−1
NxSBS
i=1

i

(6)

RABS
= Ws (x) log2 (1 + SNRb (x)),
(7a)
b

Wa
log2 (1 + SNRSBS
(u)),
RSBS
= min
a
a
NxSBS

Ws (x)
log2 (1 + SNRb (x)) ,
(7b)
NxSBS
Wa
RABS
=
log2 (1 + SNRABS
(x + u)),
a
a
n−1
P
NxABS +
NxABS
i
i=1

(7c)

III. R ATE C OVERAGE P ROBABILITY A NALYSIS
In this Section, we derive the expression of rate coverage
probability conditioned on x and u and later decondition
over them. This deconditioning averages out all the spatial
randomness of the user and hotspot locations in the given
network configuration.
A. Association Probability
The following Lemma characterizes the association probability to the SBS.
Lemma 1. Conditioned on the fact that the user belongs to
the hotspot at x, the association probability to SBS is given
by: As (x) = As (x) =

2
√
2 . sin2 ξ)+k cos ξ
kp (1−kp
p
Z 2π min(Rs , x
)
2
1−kp
dξ, (8)
2
Rs
0
where kp = (Ps /Pm )1/α , and the association probability to
the ABS is given by Am (x) = 1 − As (x).
Proof: Conditioned on the location of the hotspot center
at x, As (x) =
P(E = 1|x) = E[1(Pm kx + uk−α < Ps kuk−α )|x]
= P(Pm (x2 + u2 + 2xu cos ξ)−α/2 < Ps u−α )|x)

= P(u2 (1 − kp2 ) − 2x cos ξkp2 u − kp2 x2 < 0|x)


√
2 sin2 ξ)+k cos ξ 
(a)
xk
(1−kp
p
= P u ∈ 0, p
,
ξ
∈
(0,
2π]
x
2
1−kp



√ 2 2
xk
1−kp sin ξ+kp cos ξ
 min Rs , p

2
1−kp
(b)
=E
x ,
Rs2

the probability mass functions (PMFs) of NxABS and NxSBS in
the following Lemma.

where ξ = arg(u − x) and is uniformly distributed in (0, 2π].
Here, (a) follows from solving the quadratic inequality inside
the indicator function, (b) follows from deconditioning over
u. The final form is obtained by deconditioning over ξ.
We now evaluate the coverage probability of a typical user
which is the probability of the occurrence of the events defined
in (5).
Theorem 1 (Coverage probability). The coverage probability
is given by:
R−R
Z s

Pc =


Pcs (θ1 , θ2 |x) + Pcm (θ3 |x) fX (x)dx,

(9)

0

where Pcs (θ1 , θ2 |x) =

 αL
Z2π umax
Z (x,ξ)
x βN0 W θ1
, mL + (1 − p(x))
p(x)Fh
Pm G2
0
0
 αN L


 αL
x
βN0 W θ1
u βN0 W θ2
Fh
, mN L
, mL
p(u)Fh
Pm G2
PG

 s
 αN L
βN0 W θ2
fU (u)
u
, mN L
du dξ ,
+ (1 − p(u))Fh
Ps G
2π


√
2 sin2 ξ)+k cos ξ)
(1−kp
p
where umax (x, ξ) = min Rs , xkp
1−k2
p

and Fh (·) is the complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of Gamma distribution, and Pcm (θ3 |x) =
Z2π

ZRs




αL
p(κ(x, u, ξ))Fh κ(x,u,ξ)Pm GβN0 W θ3 , mL

0 umax (x,ξ)



+(1−p(κ(x, u, ξ)))Fh

κ(x,u,ξ)αN L βN0 W θ3
, mN L
Pm G



fU (u)du dξ
,
2π

where κ(x, u, ξ) = (x2 + u2 + 2xu cos ξ)1/2 .
Proof: See Appendix A.
As expected, coverage probability is the summation of two
terms, each corresponding to the probability of occurrences of
the two mutually exclusive events appearing in (5).
B. Load distributions
While the load distributions for the PPP-based models are
well-understood [14], they are not directly applicable to the
3GPP-inspired finite model used in this paper. Consequently,
in this Section, we provide a novel approach to characterize the
ABS and SBS load for this model. As we saw in (7c), the load
on the ABS has two components, one is due to the contribution
of the number of users of the representative hotspot connecting
to the ABS (denoted by NxABS ) and another is due to the macro
users of other clusters,
which we lump into a single random
Pn−1
variable, NoABS =
N ABS . On the other hand, NxSBS
i=1
Pn−1 SBS xi
SBS
and No
= i=1 Nxi denote the load on the SBS at x
and sum load of all SBSs except the one at x. First, we obtain

Lemma 2. Given the fact that the typical user belongs to a
hotspot at x, load on the ABS due to the macro users in the
hotspot at x (NxABS ) and load on the SBS at x (NxSBS ) are
distributed as follows:


m̄ − 1
ABS
P(Nx
= k|x) =
Am (x)k−1 As (x)m̄−k , (10)
k−1


m̄ − 1
SBS
P(Nx = k|x) =
As (x)n−1 Am (x)m̄−k . (11)
k−1

Proof: Conditioned on the fact that the typical
user belonging to the hotspot at x connects to the
ABS,
NxABS = 1 + NxABS,o , where NxABS,o =
Pm̄−1
E[ j=1 1(Pm kx + uj k−α > Ps kuj k−α )|x], is the load due
to other users among m̄ − 1 users in the hotspot connecting to
the ABS. The conditional moment generating function (MGF)
ABS,o
of NxABS,o is: E[esNx
|x] =

 m̄−1
Y
s1(Pm kx+uj k−α >Ps kuj k−α )
e
|x
E
j=1

(a)
=

m̄−1
Y

E[es1(Pm kx+uj k

−α

j=1

=

m̄−1
Y
j=1

>Ps kuj k−α )

|x]

es P(Pm kx + uj k−α > Ps kuj k−α |x) + P(Ps ku−α
j k>

Pm kx + uj k−α |x) = (Am (x)es + (1 − Am (x)))m̄−1 ,
which is the MGF of a Binomial distribution with (m̄−1, Am ).
Here, (a) follows from the fact that uj -s are i.i.d. The PMF
of NxSBS can be obtained on similar lines by altering the
inequality in the first step of the above derivation.
Pn−1 ABS
We now obtain the PMFs of NoABS =
and
i=1 Nxi
SBS
No in the following Lemma. Note that, since xi -s are i.i.d.,
NoABS and NoSBS are independent of x. In what follows, the
exact PMF of NoABS (NoSBS ) is in the form of (n − 1)-fold
discrete convolution and hence is not computationally efficient
beyond very small values of n. We present an alternative
easy-to-use expression of this PMF by invoking central limit
theorem (CLT). In the numerical Section, we verify that this
approximation is tight even for moderate values of n.
Lemma 3. Given the fact that the typical user belongs to a
hotspot at x, load on the ABS due to all other n − 1 hotspots
is distributed as:
Zb
(t−υ )2
1
− σ2m
ABS
m
√ e
dt, for large n,
P(a < No
< b) →
σm 2π
a

and sum of the loads on the other SBSs at {xi , i = 1} is
distributed as:
Zb
(t−υ )2
1
− σ2s
SBS
s
√ e
P(a < No < b) →
dt, for large n,
σs 2π
a

where,
υm = (n − 1)m̄E[Am (X)], υs = (n − 1)m̄E[As (X)],

and
2
σm

2

σs2 .

= (n − 1)[m̄E[Am (X)As (X)] + m̄ Var[Am (X)]] =
R R−Rs
Am (x)fX (x)dx, and
Here, E[Am (X)]
=
0
R−R
2
R s
Var[Am (X)] =
Am (x) fX (x)dx − (E[Am (X)])2 .

The SBS-rate coverage depends on the backhaul BW partition
strategy. For equal partition, Prs =

 R−R
Z s 
m̄ 
X
ρnk
ρk
m̄ − 1
Wb
W
Pcs 2
− 1, 2 a − 1 x ×
k−1

k=1

0

0

Proof: Following the proof of Lemma 2, conditioned
on the location of a hotspot at xi , NxABS
becomes
i
a BinomialP random variable with (m̄, Am (xi )). Now,
n−1
ABS
ABS
NoABS =
i.i.d.
i=1 Exi [Nxi ], where E
 xi [Nxi k ]-s arem̄−k
m̄
ABS
].
with P(Exi [Nxi ] = k) = Exi [ k Am (xi ) As (xi )
The exact PMF of NoABS is obtained by the (n − 1)-fold
discrete convolution of this PMF. We avoid this complexity of
the exact analysis by first characterizing
the mean and variance
Pn−1
ABS
of NoABS as: υm = E[NoABS ] =
i=1 E[Exi [Nxi ]] =
(a)
2
(n − 1)Exi [m̄Am (xi )], and σP
= Var[NoABS ] =
m
P
n−1
n−1
ABS
=
E [E[(NxABS
)2 ]] −
i=1 Var[Exi [Nxi ]]
i
Pn−1 i=1 xi
ABS 2
(Exi [Nxi ])
=
+
i=1 Exi [m̄Am (xi )As (xi )
(m̄Am (xi ))2 ] − (m̄Exi [Am (xi )])2 , where (a) is due to
]-s are i.i.d. The final result follows
the fact that Exi [NxABS
i
from some algebraic manipulation. Having derived the mean
and variance of NoABS , we invoke CLT to approximate the
distribution of NoABS since it can be represented as a sum of
i.i.d. random varables with finite mean and variance. Similar
steps can be followed for the distribution of NoSBS .
C. Rate Coverage Probability
We first define the downlink rate coverage probability (or
simply, rate coverage) as follows.
Definition 1 (Rate coverage probability). The rate coverage
probability of a link with BW W̃ is defined as the probability
that the maximum achievable data rate (R) exceeds a certain
threshold ρ, i.e., P(R > ρ) =


P W̃ log2 (1 + SNR) > ρ = P(SNR > 2ρ/W̃ − 1). (12)
Hence, we see that the rate coverage probability is the
coverage probability evaluated at a modified SNR-threshold.
We now evaluate the rate coverage probability for different
backhaul BW partition strategies in the following Theorem.
Theorem 2. The rate coverage probability for a target datarate ρ is given by:
Pr = Prm + Prs ,

(13)

where Prm (Prs ) denotes the ABS-rate coverage (SBS-rate
coverage) which is the probability that the typical user is
receiving data-rate greater than or equal to ρ and is served
by the ABS (SBS). The ABS-rate coverage is given by:

Prm

 Z∞ R−R


Z s
m̄ 
X
ρ(t+k)
m̄ − 1
W
=
Pcm 2 a − 1|x ×
k−1
k=1

k−1

Am (x)

−∞

As (x)

m̄−k

0

fX (x)dx

1
√

σm 2π

e

−

(t−υm )2
2
σm

dt.

(14)

As (x)k−1 Am (x)m̄−k fX (x)dx,

(15)

and for load-based partition, Prs =

 Z∞ R−R
Z s  ρ(k+t)
m̄ 
X
ρk
m̄ − 1
Wb
W
a
Pcs 2
− 1, 2
−1 x
k−1

k=1

−∞

0

× As (x)k−1 Am (x)m̄−k fX (x)dx

1
√

σs 2π

e

−

(t−υs )2
2
σs

dt. (16)

Proof: See Appendix B.
IV. R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
To validate the results obtained in Theorem 2 with simulation, we set the parameters according to Table I and plot
the values of Pr in Figs 2 and 3. Recall that one part of
ABS and SBS load was approximated using CLT in Lemma 3
for efficient computation. Yet, we obtain a perfect match
between simulation and analysis even for n = 10. From
Fig. 4, we observe that, (i) Pr = 0 for η = 1 since this
corresponds to the extreme when no BW is given to access
links, (ii) the rate coverage is maximized for a particular
access-backhaul BW split (η ∗ = arg max{η} Pr ), and (iii) the
maximum rate coverage, Pr ∗ = Pr (η ∗ ) (marked as ‘*’ in
Figs 2-5) in load-based partition is always greater than Pr ∗
obtained in equal partition. However, note that, load-based
partition requires periodic feedback of the load information
from the SBSs to the ABS and thus has slightly higher
signaling overhead than the equal partition. This opens up an
interesting performance-complexity trade-off for the design of
cellular networks with integrated access and backhaul which
will be discussed in the extended version of this paper. Next,
we plot the effect of increasing system BW on rate coverage.
As expected, Pr increases as W increases. However, the
increment of Pr ∗ saturates for very high values of W since
high noise power reduces the link spectral efficiency. Another
interesting observation is that starting from η = 0 to η ∗ , Pr
does not increase monotonically. This is due to the fact that
sufficient BW needs to be steered from access to backhaul so
that the network with IAB performs better than the macroonly network (corresponding to η = 0). Finally, we plot
the variation of Pr with m̄ in Fig. 5. We observe that as
m̄ increases, more number of users share the BW and as a
result, Pr decreases. However, the optimality of Pr completely
disappears for very large value of m̄ (10 < m̄ < 15 in our
case). This implies that for given BW W there exists a critical
total cell-load (nm̄) beyond which the gain obtained by the
IAB architecture completely disappears.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we proposed the first 3GPP-inspired analytical framework for two-tier mmWave HetNets with IAB
and investigated two backhaul BW partition strategies. Our



Pm β −1 G2 hb(NL) x−αN L
+ (1 − p(x))P
> θ1 |x .
N0 W
Here (a) follows from step (a) in the proof of Lemma 1.
The final form is obtained by evaluating the expectation with
respect to u and ξ. We can similarly obtain Pcm (θ3 |x) =
P(SNRABS
(u) > θ3 , E = 0|x).
a

TABLE I
Notation
Pm , P s
αL , α N L
β
G
µ
N0 W

1

Rate coverage probability (Pr )

Rate coverage probability (Pr )

mL , m N L
R, Rs
n
ρ

K EY SYSTEM PARAMETERS
Parameter
Value
mmWave BS transmit powers
30, 0 dBm
Path-loss exponent
2.0, 3.3
Path loss at 1 m
70 dB
Main lobe gain
18 dB
LOS range constant
30 m
-174 dBm/Hz+ 10 log10 W
Noise power
+10 dB (noise-figure)
Parameter of Nakagami distribution
2, 3
Macrocell and hotspot radius
40 m, 5m
Number of hotspots in macrocell
10
Rate threshold
50 Mbps

0.8

0.6

0.4

W = 300 MHz
W = 600 MHz
W = 1000 MHz
Simulation

0.2

0

B. Proof of Theorem 2
First we evaluate Prm as: Prm = P(RABS
> ρ) =
a


Wa
ABS
log
(1
+
SNR
(x
+
u))
>
ρ
P
2
a
NxABS + NoABS

1



= P SNRABS
(x + u) > 2
a

0.8



= Pcm 2

0.6

0.4

W = 300 MHz
W = 600 MHz
W = 1000 MHz
Simulation

0.2

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

Access-Backhaul Partition (η)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Access-Backhaul Partition (η)

1

Rate coverage probability (Pr )

Rate coverage probability (Pr )

Fig. 2. Rate coverage probability Fig. 3. Rate coverage probability
for equal-based partition for different for load-based partition for different
bandwidths (ρ = 50 Mbps).
bandwidths (ρ = 50 Mbps).

0.8

W = 600 MHz

0.6

0.4

W = 300 MHz

0.2

Load-based Partition
Equal Partition
0.2

0.4

0.8
0.6

m̄ = 5
0.4

m̄ = 10
0.2
Load-based Partition
Equal Partition

0

0
0

1

0.6

0.8

1

0

Access-Backhaul Partition (η)

0.2

0.4

m̄ = 15
0.6

0.8

1

Access-Backhaul Partition (η)

Fig. 4. Comparision of equal and Fig. 5. Rate coverage for different
load-based parition strategies (W = numbers of users per hotspot (W =
600 MHz, ρ = 50 Mbps).
300 MHz, ρ = 50 Mbps).

analysis lead to two important findings: (i) the existence of
the optimal access-backhaul bandwidth partition split, and (ii)
maximum total network load that can be supported using the
IAB architecture. This work has numerous extensions such
as studying multihop backhauling, impact of beam-alignment
errors and cellular interference on system performance, and
more comprehensive performance analysis by considering
uplink and downlink transmissions jointly.
A PPENDIX
A. Proof of Theorem 1
Conditioned on the location of the typical user at u = (u, ξ)
and its hotspot center at x, Pcs (θ1 , θ2 |x) =
P(SNRSBS
(u) > θ2 , SNRb (x) > θ1 , E = 1|x)
a

= P(SNRSBS
(u) > θ2 , E = 1|x)P(SNRb (x) > θ1 |x)
 a 

(a)
P Gβ −1 hs(L) u−αL
>
θ
= E p(u)P s
2 + (1 − p(u))×
N0 W


√ 2 2
P β −1 Ghs(NL) u−αN L
xkp 1−kp
sin ξ+kp cos ξ 
P s
>
θ
1
u
∈
0,
,
2
2
1−kp
N0 W




Pm β −1 G2 hb(L) x−αL
ξ ∈ (0, 2π] x p(x)P
> θ1 |x
N0 W

ABS +N ABS )
ρ(Nx
o
Wa

ABS +N ABS )
ρ(Nx
o
Wa


−1


−1 ,

where, the first step follows from (7c). The final form is
obtained by deconditioning with respect to NxABS , NoABS and
x. On similar lines, we can evaluate Prs for equal and loadbased partitions. The detailed proof is omitted due to space
constraints.
R EFERENCES
[1] H. S. Dhillon and G. Caire, “Wireless backhaul networks: Capacity
bound, scalability analysis and design guidelines,” IEEE Trans. on
Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 6043–6056, Nov. 2015.
[2] E. Dahlman, G. Mildh, S. Parkvall, J. Peisa, J. Sachs, Y. Selén, and
J. Sköld, “5G wireless access: requirements and realization,” IEEE
Commun. Magazine, vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 42–47, Dec. 2014.
[3] 3GPP TR 38.874, “NR; Study on integrated access and backhaul,” Tech.
Rep., 2017.
[4] H. S. Dhillon, R. K. Ganti, F. Baccelli, and J. G. Andrews, “Modeling
and analysis of K-tier downlink heterogeneous cellular networks,” IEEE
Journal on Sel. Areas in Commun., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 550–560, Apr.
2012.
[5] T. Bai and R. W. Heath, “Coverage and rate analysis for millimeter-wave
cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. on Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 2,
pp. 1100–1114, Feb. 2015.
[6] E. Turgut and M. C. Gursoy, “Coverage in heterogeneous downlink
millimeter wave cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. on Commun., vol. PP,
no. 99, pp. 1–1, 2017, to appear.
[7] J. G. Andrews, T. Bai, M. N. Kulkarni, A. Alkhateeb, A. K. Gupta,
and R. W. Heath, “Modeling and analyzing millimeter wave cellular
systems,” IEEE Trans. on Commun., vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 403–430, Jan.
2017.
[8] S. Singh, M. N. Kulkarni, A. Ghosh, and J. G. Andrews, “Tractable
model for rate in self-backhauled millimeter wave cellular networks,”
IEEE Journal on Sel. Areas in Commun., vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 2196–
2211, Oct. 2015.
[9] C. Saha, M. Afshang, and H. S. Dhillon, “Enriched K-Tier HetNet
model to enable the analysis of user-centric small cell deployments,”
IEEE Trans. on Wireless Commun., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1593–1608, Mar.
2017.
[10] ——, “3GPP-inspired HetNet model using Poisson cluster process:
Sum-product functionals and downlink coverage,” 2017, arXiv preprint
arXiv:1705.01699.
[11] S. Singh, M. N. Kulkarni, and J. G. Andrews, “A tractable model for
rate in noise limited mmwave cellular networks,” in Proc. 48th Asilomar
Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, Nov. 2014, pp. 1911–
1915.
[12] T. Bai, R. Vaze, and R. W. Heath, “Analysis of blockage effects on urban
cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. on Wireless Commun., vol. 13, no. 9,
pp. 5070–5083, Sep. 2014.
[13] A. Alkhateeb, Y. H. Nam, M. S. Rahman, J. Zhang, and R. W. Heath,
“Initial beam association in millimeter wave cellular systems: Analysis
and design insights,” IEEE Trans. on Wireless Commun., vol. 16, no. 5,
pp. 2807–2821, May 2017.
[14] M. N. Kulkarni, A. Ghosh, and J. G. Andrews, “A comparison of MIMO
techniques in downlink millimeter wave cellular networks with hybrid
beamforming,” IEEE Trans. on Commun., vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 1952–1967,
May 2016.

