On the Performance of Ultra-Reliable Decode
and Forward Relaying Under the Finite
Blocklength
Parisa Nouri, Hirley Alves, and Matti Latva-aho

arXiv:1706.06883v1 [] 21 Jun 2017

Centre for Wireless Communications (CWC), University of Oulu, Finland
firstname.lastname@oulu.fi
Abstract—In this paper, we examine the performance of
the decode-and-forward (DF) relaying protocols with finite
blocklength (FB). We provide the overall outage probability
of three distinct DF relaying protocols, where the channels are
assumed to be quasi static Rayleigh fading. More importantly,
we derive the closed form expressions of the outage probability in the three relaying scenarios. We illustrate protocols
where the cooperative communications outperform the direct
transmission (DT). In addition, we compare the operating
efficiency of the cooperative schemes in the ultra-reliable (UR)
region.
Index Terms—Finite blocklength, Cooperative communication, Relaying, Outage probability.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The fifth generation (5G) of the cellular systems is
expected to deal with the demanding requirements such
as latency and reliability in addition to attaining higher
data rates in comparison to the previous generations. 5G
envisages to handle both the ultra-reliable communication
(URC) and the massive machine-to-machine communications. Wireless communication systems need to be designed in such a way to meet the stringent ultra-high
reliability and low latency requirements [1]. In massive
machine-to-machine communications, a huge number of
devices/sensors communicate with short data packets in
order to support the low latency necessity in the exigent
situations, in a certain domain, e.g. in the smart grid or
sensor networks [12]. In the case of URC, short data
packets are transfered under the stringent reliability and
latency requirements in order to support the connectivity
for the total duration of the communication. URC can
be applied to different wireless applications, e.g. cloud
connectivity, industrial control and safe interconnection
between vehicles [1].
Since in the short packet transmissions, the blocklength
of the metadata is analogous to the size of the information bits, a considerable loss occurs as a result of an
inefficient encoding of the control information bits [1].
Therefore, in order to cope with the reliability and latency
requirements with short messages, we resort to studying
the finite-blocklength regime. There are several works
which have studied different aspects of FB coding. For
instance, authors in [14], provided a tight approximation
of achievable coding rate for a specified outage probability
under the short packet transmissions since majority of
the theoretical results assumed infinite blocklength codes.
978–1–5386–3873–6/17/$31.00 c 2017 IEEE

Moreover, Makki [13], studied the performance of the spectrum sharing networks under the FB. They showed that the
system efficiency highly depends on the packet length and
optimal power allocation strategy boosts the performance
of the communication network under the finite-blocklength
regime.
Relaying is a well known technique in order to enhance
the reliability [2]. Authors in [15], propose a method that
meet the high reliability and latency requirements via cooperative relaying. Relaying protocol is characterized as fixed,
adaptive and feedback protocols. In the fixed protocol, the
relay always collaborates with the source and forwards the
data packets while in the adaptive protocol, the defined
threshold rule enables it to be able to make the decisions
if it should retransmit the packet or not independently.
In the feedback protocol, the relay cooperates only if the
destination asks for the retransmission [16]. Therefore, it
would be interesting to exploit it in the context of FB.
In early works, authors in [2] and [5], studied the
relaying performance of the quasi-static Rayleigh channels under the FB regime. Authors in [2], considered a
relaying protocol where the channel gains of the direct
link and relaying link are accumulated at the receiver
under the perfect CSI assumption. They illustrated that
the performance depends on the outage probability of
the relaying phase. They realized that the performance
loss increases when the error probability of the sourceto-relay link is higher than the overall error probability.
Authors in [5], focused on the effective capacity and the
throughput of the relaying protocol with the moderate CSI
at the source which means that the average channel gain
is higher than the instantaneous channel gain during a certain transmission interval. They showed that the effective
capacity is inversely proportional to the blocklength while
the throughput smoothly increases in the blocklength and
relaying becomes even more advantageous at high signalto-noise-ratio (SNR) regime.
However these recent works, concentrated on the relaying scenario without exploiting the ultra-high reliability in
the context of FB. Hence, following the concept of the
relaying, this paper guarantees the URC under the FB
and compare three cooperative relaying protocols, namely,
decode-and-forward (DF), selection combining (SC) and
maximum ratio combining (MRC). Throughout this paper,
we provide a tight approximated overall outage probability and also the closed form expression of the outage
probability for each of the relaying scenarios. Moreover,
we illustrate that MRC relaying scenario outperforms the

other relaying protocols in the blocklength and is more
suitable for the URC communications in terms of power
consumption, and different from [2] we propose close-form
expression for the outage probability.
Notation: Let fW p¨q and FW p¨q denote the probability
density function (PDF) and cumulative distribution function (CDF) of a random variableş (RV) W, respectively. Q2
8
function is defined as Qpwq “ w ?12π e´t {2 dt [18, Eq.
F.2], and its inverse is denoted as Q´1 p¨q. The packet error
probability is denoted by  and Er¨s is the expectation.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
Fig. 1 represents a DF relaying scenario that consists of
a source S, a destination D and a decode-forward relay
R. The links between S-D, S-R and R-D are specified
by Z, X and Y respectively. In this scenario, S sends
the message to D and R in the broadcasting phase by
employing nS channel uses. Afterwards, if R decodes the
data packet accurately, the message transfers to D in the
relaying phase through nR channel uses [2], [17]. In the
broadcasting phase, the received signals at D and R are
y1 “ h1 x ` w1 and y2 “ h2 x ` w2 respectively. If R
successfully collaborates with S, the received signal at D
is y3 “ h3 x ` w3 , where the transmitted signal is x and
the AWGN noise vector with power N0 “ 1 is denoted
by wi , where i P tX, Y, Zu [2], [17]. In a DF-based
relaying protocol, the instantaneous SNR depends on the
total power constraint P “ PS ` PR “ ηP ` p1 ´ ηqP ,
which is given by Z “ ηP |h1 |2 {N0 , X “ ηP |h2 |2 {N0 and
Y “ p1 ´ ηqP |h3 |2 {N0 for the direct link, broadcasting
link and relaying link respectively, where 0 ă η ď 1 is the
power allocation factor. Thus, the average SNRs are respectively, ΩZ “ ηP {N0 , ΩX “ ηP {N0 , ΩY “ p1 ´ ηqP {N0 .
Furthermore,we determine the S-R and R-D distances
according to the normalized S-D distance dSD “ 1, thus
dSR “ β and dRD “ 1 ´ β respectively.
A. Performance Analysis of Single-Hop Communication
under the Finite Blocklength Regime
In a single-hop communication, k information bits B “
tB1 , ..., Bk u pass over an encoder to create a codeword
T “ tT1 , ..., Tn u with length of n symbols to send over the
wireless channel. Subsequently, the channel outputs D “
tD1 , ..., Dk u traverse a decoder in order to generate the

Broadcasting phase

Relaying phase

h ,n
1

S

Z
S

h ,n
2

X

S

estimate of the information bits B̂ “ tB̂1 , ..., Bˆk u [1]. Thus,
for a single-hop communication with blocklength n, outage
probability
 and the average power constraint ρ, where
řn
1
2
|x
|
ď
ρ holds, the maximum coding rate R˚ pn, q
i
i
n
of the AWGN channel in bits is calculated as
c
V pρq ´1
˚
R pn, q “ Cpρq ´
Q pq log2 e,
(1)
n
where, Cpρq “ log2 p1
L ` ρq is the positive channel capacity
and V pρq “ ρp2 ` ρq p1 ` ρq2 is the channel dispersion [1].
According to (1), the outage probability is given by
¸
˜
? Cpρq ´ R˚ pn, q
,
(2)
n a
“Q
V pρq log2 e
which holds for the AWGN channels where the channel
coefficient hi is equal to one. While for fading channels,
we attain the error probability as follow1
¸ff
« ˜
? Cpρ|h|2 q ´ R˚ pn, q
a
.
(3)
«E Q
n
V pρ|h|2 q
Note that in the relaying schemes, we assume that S can
encode k information bits into nS channel uses, while R
uses nR channel uses. Hence, S and R could employ more
sophisticated encoding technique than [2], [5].
B. Closed-Form Expression of the Outage Probability
Unfortunately, (3) does not have a closed-form expression; therefore, we resort to an approximation of the Qfunction as in [6], [7]. To do so, let us define gpxq “
? Cpρq´R
, then we attain
n?
V pρq

$
1
tď%
’
& 1
µ
´ ? px ´ θq % ă t ă ϑ (4)
Kptq « Qpgpxqq “
’
2π
% 2
0
těϑ
a
a
R
where, θ “ 2 P´1 , ϑ “ θ ` π2 µ´2 , % “ θ ´ π2 µ´2 and
a n 2R
1
µ “
´1q´ 2 . Hence, the outage probability in
2π pe
(3) is defined for Rayleigh fading channels as
ż8
 “ EX rQ pgpxqqs “
KptqfX pxqdx
0„
ˆc
˙
ˆ c
˙
ζ
π
π
“ 1´ ? expp´θq exp
´exp ´
,
2ζ 2
2ζ 2
2π
(5)
where fX pxq is the PDF of
? the SNR of the link X, θ is
defined in (4) and ζ “ P 2πµ, where µ is specified in
(4). The proof can be found in [7].
III. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS OF THE C OOPERATIVE
R ELAYING

R

h ,n
3

Y

R

D

Fig.1. System model for the relaying scenario with a source
(S), destination (D) and a decode-forward relay (R). The links
between S to D, S to R and R to D are referred as the direct
link h1 , broadcasting link h2 and relaying link h3 each of which
with ni channel uses respectively, where i P tS, Ru.

In this section, we investigate the outage probability of
DF, SC and MRC protocols under the FB regime. The
direct transmission model is used here as the basis of the
comparison analysis done in this paper.
1 This approximation is accurate for n > 100, as proved for AWGN
channels [9, Figs. 12 and 13], as well as for fading channels as discussed
in [10].

˙
ˆ
$
%
ϑ
´Ω
´Ω
’
%
%
%
ϑ
ϑ
’
µθ e Z ´e Z
´
´
´
´
´
’
’
2µξ
µτ
e ΩZ `e ΩZ % e ΩZ % e ΩZ ´ϑ e ΩZ
’
’
?
?
& 1´
`? `
´
`
`
2
Ω
2Ω
2π
2π
Ω
Z
Z
Z 2π
SRD “
’
’

„
’
%
%
ϑ
ϑ
’
1
’
´
´
´
´
’
%
ΩZ ´ΩY `ΩZ e ΩZ λ1 `ΩZ e ΩZ λ2 `ΩY e ΩY λ3 `ΩY e ΩY λ4
ΩZ ´ΩY

A. Dual Hop Decode-and-Forward (DF)
In this scheme, since the S-D distance is too large, it
assumes that the direct link is in the outage; thus, R always
collaborates with the source. Hence, S sends the message to
both R and D in the broadcasting phase. Then, R transfers
the message to D [8]. The overall outage probability is
given by
DF “ SR ` p1 ´ SR qRD ,
(7)
where SR and RD are calculated according to (5). Notice
that we update ζ with PS “ ηP , PR “ p1´ηqP and µ with
n “ nS , n “ nR respectively. This scenario can be analyzed
as selection combining (SC) or maximum ratio combining
(MRC) depending on how the destination combines the
original transmitted signal and the retransmitted signal.
B. Selection Combining (SC)
In this protocol, R starts to collaborate with S when
the direct transmission is unsuccessful. Therefore, if the
R-D transmission also fails, S forwards the subsequent
frame [4], [3]. The overall outage is given by
SC “ SD SR ` p1 ´ SR qSD RD ,

(8)

where SD is equal to (5) where ζ is updated with PS “ ηP
and µ with n “ nS .
C. Maximum Ratio Combining (MRC)
In this scenario, we have the combined channel gains
of S-D and R-D links at the receiver. Hence, the instantaneous SNR is ΩW “ ΩZ ` ΩY [4], [3]. The outage
probability is [3]
˙
ˆ
SRD
,
(9)
M RC “ SD SR `p1´SR q
SD
where SRD is the outage probability of the source-torelay-to destination link, notice that the term SRD
refers
DF
to the probability that D was not able to decode S message
alone. In order to calculate the (9), first we need to
attain the PDF of W , which is provided in lemma 1 and
then we calculate the outage probability as proposed in
proposition 1.
Lemma 1. Let W denote the sum of two independently
distributed exponential RVs, Z and Y . Then, fW pwq is [3]
$
ˆ
˙
w
w
’
’
exp ´
ΩZ “ ΩY
’
’
& Ω2Z ˆ
ΩZ
˙
ˆ
˙
w
w
fW pwq “
exp ´
´exp ´
’
’
’
ΩZ
ΩY
’
%
ΩZ ‰ ΩY
ΩZ ´ΩY
(10)
Proof. Since the RVs are independent,
the proof is straightş8
forward solution of fW pwq “ 0 fZ pw ´yqfy pyqdy [11].

ΩZ “ ΩY
(6)
ΩZ ‰ ΩY

Proposition 1. The outage probability of the MRC of the
S-D and R-D links SRD , is equal to (6) on the top of
this page, where
τ “ ϑ2 e

ϑ
´Ω

Z

ϑ
´
ξ “ ϑ e ΩZ

´%2 e

%
´Ω

%
´
´% e ΩZ

Z

´θϑ e

`ΩZ

ϑ
´Ω

ϑ
´
e ΩZ

Z

%
´Ω

,

(11)

%
´
e ΩZ

,

(12)

`θ% e

´ΩZ

Z

? Z ´µθ ´
where, ϑ and % are specified in (4), and λ1 “ µϑ`µΩ
2π
µθ´µ%´µΩ
µϑ`µΩ
1
1
1
Z
?
? Y ´µθ and λ4 “
´
,
λ
“
,
λ
“
´
2
3
2
2
2
2π
2π
µ%`µΩ
1
? Y ´µθ .
`
2
2π

Proof. By plugging (10) into (5) and multiplying by the
linearized Q-function Kptq, we attain
¸
ż%
żϑ˜
1
µ
px ´ θq fX pxqdx,
 “ fX pxqdx `
´a
2
p2πq
0
%
(13)
which is solved with help of [19, Eq. 2.321] and after some
algebraic manipulations we attain (6).
D. Direct Transmission
The source sends the message directly to the destination,
where Z 1 “ Z{η “ P |hSD |2 {N0 , with average SNR Ω1Z “
P {N0 , where the outage probability is calculated as in (5)
but ζ with PS “ P and µ with n “ nS .
IV. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
In this paper, we study the performance of the cooperative transmissions under the FB regime for the quasistatic fading channels. First we show that the reliability
issue is considerably ameliorated via MRC scenario. Then
we examine the impact of the power allocation factor η
between S and R on the error probability. Thereafter,the
performance of the relaying scenarios is compared to the
direct transmission in the blocklength Further, we verify via
Monte Carlo simulations that the analytical and numerical
results properly match. Unless stated; otherwise, assume
average SNR of 10 dB, n “ 500, R “ 0.5, and R is in
between S and D, with β “ 1{2.
A. Reliability Improvement via Relaying
Fig.2 compares the impact of the coding rate on the
performance of the relaying scenarios under the UR region.
It shows the superiority of the MRC protocol over SC,
DF and DT scenarios particularly with short data packets
under the FB regime. For instance, with packet length
n “ 200, 99.99% reliable transmission is feasible with
k “ 31 and k “ 25 via MRC and SC protocols respectively,
while the probability of the reliable transmission decreases
respectively to 99% with k “ 67 and k “ 19 for DF and
DT scenarios. Therefore, the performance loss of the MRC
is lower with the coding rate growth in comparison to the

DT

DF
250

0.
9

100

100
0.99

50
200

400

600

800

200

0.999
600

400

n

n

SC

MRC

0.96

800
0.95
0.94

250
0.9

0.9

100

0.999

50
200

400

0.93

9

9

200
99

k

k

150

0.97

50

250
200

0.98

9
0.9

150

0.9

150

200
5
0.9

k

k

200

0.99

0.9 0.9
5

250

150

0.9

99
0.92

100

9

9
0.999

50

600

800

200

400

n

0.91

600

800

0.9

n

Fig.2. Probability of successful transmission in DT, DF, SC and MRC protocols as a function of k and n in the UR region with
average SNR as 10 dB.

100

Outage probability 0

Outage probability 0

10-1

10-2

DT
DF , 2 = 0.5 , 0 = 1.5%
SC , 2 = 0.6 , 0 = 0.2%
MRC , 2 = 0.7 , 0 = 0.1%
10-3
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

10

DT
DF
SC
MRC
UR region (99.9 %)

-1

10-2

10-3

10-4

0.9

2

Fig.3. Outage probability variations against the power allocation
factor η for the average SNR as 10 dB and n “ 500 channel
uses and R “ 0.5 bpcu or k “ 250 information bits. The points
marked in red are the minimum outage probabilities for the DF,
SC and MRC schemes.

SC and DF protocols. Moreover, it can be clearly seen that
the cooperative protocols have improved the reliability in
comparison to the DT.

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Blocklength n

Fig.4. Outage probabilities for DT, DF, SC and MRC scenarios
for SNR “ 10 dB and k “ 250.

with η “ 0.7 and η “ 0.6 for the MRC and SC schemes
respectively. Here, we assume average SNR of 10 dB and
n “ 500 and R“ 0.5. Similar conclusion holds for other
values of SNR, n and R.

B. Power Allocation Factor

C. On the Impact of Finite Blocklength

In the cooperative transmissions, we consider a power
allocation factor in order to provide a fair comparison
between the cooperative protocols and the direct transmission. In Fig.3, we examine the impact of η on the
outage probability which is minimized to 1.5% (thus 98.5%
reliability) when equal power allocation is employed only
for the DF scheme. In SC and MRC, we exploit the
additional diversity of the direct link; therefore, more power
should be allocated to S as shown in Fig.3; thus, it would
be hard to achieve URC without relaying. For instance,
the outage probability is minimized to 0.1% and 0.2%

Here, we define the URC region as reliability > 99.9%
and that border line is illustrated in red in the next figures.
Fig.4 indicates the performance advantage of the cooperative transmissions over the direct transmission under the
FB regime. Outage probability is highly decreased due to
the additional spatial diversity. More importantly, the URC
is feasible via MRC and SC protocols.
Fig.5, demonstrates a noticeable performance gap among
the relaying scenarios and DT, particularly at high SNR
regime. Moreover, MRC protocol performs better than the
SC and DF in terms of power consumption in the UR re-

Outage probability 0

100

DT
DF
SC
MRC
UR region (99.9 %)
Monte-Carlo

10-1

10-2

10-3

10-4
-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

SNR (dB)

Fig.5. Comparison between the analytical and numerical results
of the outage probabilities for n “ 500 and k “ 250.

gion. More importantly, the numerical and analytical results
are properly matched due to the Q-function linearization.
V. C ONCLUSIONS AND F INAL R EMARKS
Herein, we assess the relay communication under the
finite blocklength regime. The performance of the different
relaying schemes, namely, DF, SC and MRC are compared
to the direct transmission in terms of the overall outage
probability for the quasi-static Rayleigh fading channels.
Moreover, we provide the closed form expression of the
overall outage probability. In addition, through the numerical results, we indicate the accuracy of our analytical
model and the appropriateness of the outage probability
analysis. Notably, we show that the relaying is a desirable
technique in order to improve the system quality through
warranting the ultra-high reliability. The superiority of the
MRC over the SC, DF and DT is more evident when the
packet length is short under the FB regime. In addition,
relaying requires less transmit power to communicate in
the ultra-high reliable region. Finally, in our future work,
we will consider a general case in the context of FB
with the imperfect CSI assumption, we will account for
the overheads imposed by the relay protocol, in order to
provide a desirable trade-off between the reliability and
latency requirements in the ongoing and future wireless
systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been partially supported by Finnish
Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes),
Huawei Technologies, Nokia and Anite Telecoms, and
Academy of Finland (under Grant no. 307492).
R EFERENCES
[1] Durisi, G., Koch, T., and Popovski, P. (2016). Toward Massive,
Ultrareliable, and Low-Latency Wireless Communication With Short
Packets. Proceedings of the IEEE, 104(9), 1711-1726.
[2] Hu, Y., Gross, J., and Schmeink, A. (2015). On the performance
advantage of relaying under the finite blocklength regime. IEEE
Communications Letters, 19(5), 779-782.
[3] Alves, H., Souza, R. D., Fraidenraich, G., and Pellenz, M. E.
(2012). Throughput performance of parallel and repetition coding in
incremental decode-and-forward relaying. Wireless Networks, 18(8),
881-892.
[4] Alves, H., Souza, R. D., Brante, G., and Pellenz, M. E. (2011, May).
Performance of type-I and type-II hybrid arq in decode and forward
relaying. In Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), 2011
IEEE 73rd (pp. 1-5). IEEE. Chicago

[5] Hu, Y., Schmeink, A., and Gross, J. (2016). Blocklength-limited
performance of relaying under quasi-static rayleigh channels. IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, 15(7), 4548-4558.
[6] Makki, B., Svensson, T., and Zorzi, M. (2015). Finite block-length
analysis of spectrum sharing networks: Interference-constrained
scenario. IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, 4(4), 433-436.
[7] Makki, B., Svensson, T., and Zorzi, M. (2014). Finite block-length
analysis of the incremental redundancy HARQ. IEEE Wireless
Communications Letters, 3(5), 529-532.
[8] Laneman, J. N., Tse, D. N., and Wornell, G. W. (2004). Cooperative
diversity in wireless networks: Efficient protocols and outage behavior. IEEE Transactions on Information theory, 50(12), 3062-3080.
[9] Polyanskiy, Y., Poor, H. V., and Verdú, S. (2010). Channel coding
rate in the finite blocklength regime. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 56(5), 2307-2359.
[10] Yang, W., Durisi, G., Koch, T., and Polyanskiy, Y. (2014). Quasistatic multiple-antenna fading channels at finite blocklength. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 60(7), 4232-4265.
[11] Papoulis, A., and Pillai, S. U. (2002). Probability, random variables,
and stochastic processes. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
[12] Popovski, P. (2014, November). Ultra-reliable communication in 5G
wireless systems. In 5G for Ubiquitous Connectivity (5GU), 2014
1st International Conference on (pp. 146-151). IEEE.
[13] Makki, B., Svensson, T., and Zorzi, M. (2015, June). Finite blocklength analysis of spectrum sharing networks. In Communications
(ICC), 2015 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 7665-7670).
IEEE.
[14] Polyanskiy, Y., Poor, H. V., and Verdú, S. (2010). Channel coding
rate in the finite blocklength regime. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 56(5), 2307-2359.
[15] Swamy, V. N., Suri, S., Rigge, P., Weiner, M., Ranade, G., Sahai, A.,
and Nikolic̀, B. (2015, June). Cooperative communication for highreliability low-latency wireless control. In Communications (ICC),
2015 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 4380-4386). IEEE.
[16] Zimmermann, E., Herhold, P., and Fettweis, G. (2005). On the
performance of cooperative relaying protocols in wireless networks.
Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, 16(1),
5-16.
[17] Hu, Y., Schmeink, A., and Gross, J. (2016, July). Relaying with
finite blocklength: Challenge vs. opportunity. In Sensor Array and
Multichannel Signal Processing Workshop (SAM), 2016 IEEE (pp.
1-5). IEEE.
[18] Miller, S., and Childers, D. (2012). Probability and random processes: With applications to signal processing and communications.
Academic Press.
[19] Gradshteyn, I. S., and Ryzhik, I. M. (2014). Table of integrals, series,
and products. Academic press.

