Flexible Cache-Aided Networks with Backhauling
Italo Atzeni,1 Marco Maso,1 Imène Ghamnia,2 Ejder Baştuğ,2,3 and Mérouane Debbah1,2
1

arXiv:1705.08576v1 [cs.IT] 24 May 2017

Mathematical and Algorithmic Sciences Lab, France Research Center, Huawei Technologies France SASU
2
Large Networks and Systems Group (LANEAS), CentraleSupélec
3
Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
Email: {italo.atzeni, marco.maso, merouane.debbah}@huawei.com, imene.ghamnia@centralesupelec.fr, ejder@mit.edu
Abstract—Caching at the edge is a promising technique to
cope with the increasing data demand in wireless networks. This
paper analyzes the performance of cellular networks consisting
of a tier macro-cell wireless backhaul nodes overlaid with a tier
of cache-aided small cells. We consider both static and dynamic
association policies for content delivery to the user terminals
and analyze their performance. In particular, we derive closedform expressions for the area spectral efficiency and the energy
efficiency, which are used to optimize relevant design parameters
such as the density of cache-aided small cells and the storage size.
By means of this approach, we are able to draw useful design
insights for the deployment of highly performing cache-aided
tiered networks.

I. I NTRODUCTION
A tremendous increase in smartphone usage during the last
decade resulted in a 4000-fold mobile data traffic explosion
in cellular networks [1]. In this setting, mobile operators
constantly look for innovative solutions to satisfy performance
indicators such as higher spectral and energy efficiency, improved coverage, and lower end-to-end delays: this calls for
the development of innovative techniques at both device and
network level in the coming years [2]. Caching at the edge
is regarded as one of the most promising approaches to cope
with the increasing data demand [3]. This is particularly true
for heterogeneous and tiered network layouts, for which the
extent of the performance gains brought by caching has been
extensively assessed in terms of several performance metrics of
practical relevance. For instance, [4] and [5] focus on optimal
probabilistic caching policies for enhanced content delivery,
[6] studies the impact of caching on the coverage and on the
delay experienced by the user terminals (UTs), and [7] jointly
considers caching, routing, and channel assignment strategies
for collaborative small cells (SCs).
Along similar lines, this work analyzes the system performance of cache-aided tiered networks comprised of a tier
of macro-cell backhaul (BH) nodes overlaid with a tier of
non-cooperative SCs [8]. Each SC in the considered network
has (limited) storage capabilities and pre-fetches popular files
before the downlink transmission to its associated UTs. In
this context, and differently from what has been previously
proposed in the literature, our goal is to optimize relevant
performance metrics for network planners and operators, and
draw design guidelines for the deployment of highly performing cache-aided tiered networks. Using consolidated random
This research has been supported in part by the ERC Starting Grant 305123
MORE (Advanced Mathematical Tools for Complex Network Engineering),
the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant CCF-1409228.

spatial models to characterize the location of SCs, BHs and
UTs [9], we investigate the area spectral efficiency (ASE)
gains brought by caching popular files in the considered
network using tools from stochastic geometry. To increase
the generality and relevance of our study, we examine both
static and dynamic association policies for content delivery
to the UTs. In particular, in the static case, UTs can only be
associated with SCs, regardless of the occurrence of cache
hit/miss events at the latter; conversely, in the dynamic case,
UTs are associated with SCs in case of cache hit and with
wireless BHs otherwise.
The first contribution of this paper is the derivation of
closed-form expressions and bounds for the ASE and the
energy efficiency (EE) with the aforementioned UT association
policies. Such expressions are subsequently used to optimize
crucial design parameters such as SC density and storage size.
Our findings highlight that the impact of caching on the ASE is
minor as compared to that of the SC density, i.e., densifying
the network is always more convenient than expanding the
storage size at the SCs. Conversely, we show that increasing
the storage size rather than the SC density is more effective in
terms of EE of the network. In practice, the choice of investing
on additional SCs or on more storage strongly depends on the
goal of the network operator. Finally, it is worth observing
that the performance of the considered network heavily hinges
on the adopted UT association policy: a dynamic policy is
always preferable whenever the network can support the larger
complexity necessary for its effective implementation.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
A. Network Model
Let us consider a set of mobile UTs in a two-tier ultradense network, where the lower tier comprises a set of noncooperative SCs ensuring network coverage and the upper tier
consists in a set of BHs connected to the internet. In our
model, each SC is associated with only one UT and one BH.
We assume that the spatial distribution of the network nodes
follows the stationary, independently marked Poisson point
processes (PPP) Φ ,
x, u(x), b(x)
⊂ R2 × R2 × R2 .
We use ΦSC , {x} to denote the PPP of the SCs with spatial
density λ (measured in SCs/m2 ), with isotropic marks ΦUT ,
u(ΦSC ) = {u(x)}x∈ΦSC and ΦBH , b(ΦSC ) = {b(x)}x∈ΦSC
representing the UTs and the BHs, respectively; evidently,
ΦUT and ΦBH are dependent on ΦSC and have the same spatial
density λ. In this setting, the employment of PPPs allows
to capture the randomness of practical ultra-dense network

deployments and, at the same time, obtain precise and tractable
expressions for the system-level performance metrics [9]–[11].
Let ryz , ky−zk denote the distance between nodes y, z ∈ Φ:
the distances of the UTs and the BHs from their associated
SCs are assumed fixed and are denoted by RUT , rxu(x) and
RBH , rb(x)x , ∀x ∈ ΦSC , respectively, with RBH > RUT .
B. Caching Model and UT Association
Let F , {fi }F
i=1 be a F -sized subset of all the files
available in the internet, entirely accessible by each BH.
Without loss of generality, and for simplicity in the notation,
we assume that all F files have identical lengths. In the
following, we refer to F as file catalog. Each UT requests files
from P
F with probability denoted by P , {p1 , p2 , . . . , pF },
F
with i=1 pi = 1, which hinges on the files popularity over
the whole network.
To offload the overlaying BH infrastructure, each noncooperative SC x is equipped with a storage unit ∆x of size
S ≤ F (measured in files/SC). Suppose that, at a given time
instant, UT u(x) is interested in downloading file fi ∈ F: if
fi is cached at its associated SC x, i.e., fi ∈ ∆x , we have a
cache hit event; conversely, if fi ∈
/ ∆x , we have a cache miss
/ x to denote a cache miss event
event. In this regard, we use ∆
at x. Accordingly, we introduce the indicator function
(
/x
1, if ∆
1∆/ x ,
(1)
0, otherwise
where its logical complement is denoted by 1∆x .
The effectiveness of the adopted cache-aided approach
depends on the probability that any file requested by a given
UT is cached at its serving SC, which is referred to as cache
hit probability and is denoted by Phit . This quantity typically
depends on the adopted caching policy, content placement, and
distribution of the UT requests. Further details on these aspects
are unnecessary for the scope of our work and we refer to [3]
and references therein for further details.
Now, let R = T B ∈ R be the time-frequency resource used
by the network for delivering one file from the BH tier to
the UTs, with T ∈ R (resp. B ∈ R) defined as the amount
of necessary time (resp. frequency) resources to perform this
operation. Two UT association policies are considered in this
work, i.e., static and dynamic. When the static UT association
is adopted, operations in the two tiers occur on orthogonal
resources. In this case, the UTs can only be served by their
associated SCs, and the BH-to-SC/SC-to-UT links occupy two
R
2 -sized resources: for instance, each link may use the entirety
of B for half of the time (i.e., T2 ) or the entirety of T for
half of the bandwidth (i.e., B2 ). Conversely, under dynamic
UT association, operations in the two tiers occur on the same
resource. In this case, the UTs are served by either the SCs
or the BHs depending on the availability of the requested
file at the SCs, and the SC-to-UT/BH-to-UT links occupy
a R-sized resource. In practice, the second approach leads
to a more efficient use of the time-frequency resource at the
cost of more sophisticated inter-tier coordination and possibly

Static
Cache hit

Dynamic

Cache miss

Cache hit

Cache miss

}
R
2

R
2

R
2

BH

R

R

}
}

SC

UT

Figure 1. System model for static and dynamic UT association.

signaling. For notational simplicity, in the rest of the paper
we differentiate between static and dynamic UT association
by means of the super-indices S and D, respectively.
The adopted UT association policy has a strong impact on
the network response to a cache hit/miss event when UT u(x)
requests file fi . In particular:
1) Static: If a cache hit occurs, then SC x transmits fi to
u(x). Conversely, if a cache miss occurs, first x retrieves
fi from its associated BH b(x), then transmits it to UT
u(x). In both cases, an R2 -sized resource is used by the
SC-to-UT link due to the static UT association;
2) Dynamic: If a cache hit occurs, then x transmits fi to
u(x). Conversely, if a cache miss occurs, u(x) can bypass
x and connect directly to b(x) to download fi . In both
cases, the whole resource R is used by either the SC-toUT or the BH-to-UT link.
A graphical representation of these operations, and their impact on the network resource usage, is provided in Figure 1.
C. Channel Model
In this work, all nodes have a single transmit/receive antenna. In addition, we assume that the SCs and the BHs
transmit with powers ρSC and ρBH (measured in W), respectively. The propagation through the wireless channel combines
pathloss attenuation and small-scale fading. For the former, we
adopt the standard power-law pathloss model and define the
−α
pathloss function `(y, z) , ryz
between nodes y, z ∈ Φ, with
pathloss exponent α > 2. For the latter, we use hyz to denote
the channel power fading gain between nodes y, z ∈ Φ: all
channels are assumed to be subject to Rayleigh fading and,
hence, hyz ∼ exp(1).1 The signal-to-interference-plus-noise
ratio (SINR) at SC x reads as
SINRx ,

−α
ρBH RBH
hb(x)x
Ix + σ 2

(2)

where Ix is the overall interference power at SC x and σ 2
is the additive noise power. Likewise, the SINR at UT u(x)
reads as
−α
ρSC RUT
hxu(x)
(3)
SINRu(x) ,
Iu(x) + σ 2
1 For more involved types of small-scale fading, e.g., Nakagami−m fading,
we refer to [11].

where Iu(x) is the overall interference power at u(x). For static
(S)
(S)
UT association, we have Ix = Ix and Iu(x) = Iu(x) , with
X
−α
Ix(S) ,
ρBH rb(y)x
hb(y)x 1∆
(4)
/y
y∈ΦSC \{x}
(S)

Iu(x) ,

X

−α
ρSC ryu(x)
hyu(x)

(5)

y∈ΦSC \{x}

respectively. On the other hand, in case of dynamic UT
association, we are only interested in the interference at the
(D)
UT and we thus have Iu(x) = Iu(x) , with
X
(D)
−α
Iu(x) ,
ρSC ryu(x)
hyu(x) 1∆y
y∈ΦSC \{x}


−α
+ ρBH rb(y)u(x)
hb(y)u(x) 1∆
/y .

(6)

III. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
The system performance is closely related to the probability
of the UTs successfully receiving the requested content, which
is termed as success probability. This depends on two factors,
i.e., the cache hit probability (cf. Section II-B) and the SINRs
of the file transmissions (cf. Section II-C). Thus, in the
following, we derive the success probability using both the
considered UT association policies.
Our analysis focuses on a randomly chosen SC x, and its
marks u(x) and b(x), referred to as typical SC, typical UT and
typical BH, respectively: due to Slivnyak’s theorem and to the
stationarity of Φ, these nodes are representative of the whole
network [9]. For a given SINR threshold θ, we assume that
a file is successfully received by the typical UT if SINRx >
θ∧SINRu(x) > θ and SINRu(x) > θ for static and dynamic UT
association, respectively. The success probability is formalized
in the following theorem, where we use the notation

2
πz α csc 2π
α
.
(7)
Υ(z) ,
α
Theorem 1. For static UT association, the success probability
is given by
 (S)

−1 α
σ2 α
P(S)
suc (θ) , exp − θ ρSC RUT LIu(x) θρSC RUT
 (S)

2
α
α
LIx θρ−1
(8)
× Phit + (1 − Phit ) exp − θ ρσBH RBH
BH RBH
where

(S)
LIx (s) , exp − 2πλ(1 − Phit )Υ(ρBH s)

(S)
LIu(x) (s) , exp − 2πλΥ(ρSC s)

(9)
(10)
(S)

are the Laplace transforms of the interference terms Ix and
(S)
Iu(x) in (4)–(5), respectively. For dynamic UT association, the
success probability is given by
 (D)

−1 α
σ2 α
P(D)
suc (θ) , Phit exp − θ ρSC RUT LIu(x) θρSC RUT + (1 − Phit )
Z
 2π (D)
 dφ
α
σ2
× exp − θ ρBH RBH
LIu(x) θρ−1
(11)
BH Ω(RUT , RBH , φ)
2π
0
α
2
2
with Ω(RUT , RBH , φ) , RUT
+RBH
+2RUT RBH cos φ 2 and where

(D)

LIu(x) (s) , exp − 2πλPhit Υ(ρSC s)



× exp − 2πλ(1 − Phit )Υ(ρBH s)



(12)

(D)

is the Laplace transform of the interference term Iu(x) in (6).
Proof: See Appendix I.
Since a closed-form expression for the success probability
(D)
Psuc (θ) in (11) is not available, we provide a useful lower
bound in the following corollary.
Corollary 1. For dynamic UT association, the success probability can be lower-bounded as
 (D)

−1 α
σ2 α
P(D)
suc (θ) ≥ Phit exp − θ ρSC RUT LIu(x) θρSC RUT
 (D)
α 
2
α
+ (1 − Phit ) exp − θ ρσBH RBH
LIx θρ−1
RBH + RUT
.
BH
(13)
Proof: The lower bound is obtained by considering the
worst-case distance between BH and UT, i.e., RBH + RUT (cf.
[9]).
The expressions above can be used to obtain other useful
performance metrics. In this paper, we focus on the achievable
ASE (measured in bps/Hz/m2 ), which is readily obtained as
1 (S)
λP (θ) log2 (1 + θ)
2 suc
ASE(D) (θ, λ) , λP(D)
suc (θ) log2 (1 + θ)
ASE(S) (θ, λ) ,

(14)
(15)

for static and dynamic UT association, respectively. At this
stage, it is worth observing that, in practice, the distances RUT
and RBH depend on the SC density λ. Thus, in the following
we set RUT = 2β√UTλ and RBH = 2β√BHλ , with βBH > βUT ; observe
that 2√1 λ represents the average distance between nodes in a
PPP with spatial density λ. Figure 2 illustrates the achievable
ASEs as defined in (14)–(15) against the cache hit probability
Phit , with λ = 10−2 SCs/m2 , α = 4, θ = 1, σ 2 = 0
(i.e., interference limited case), ρSC = 0.5 W, ρBH = 1 W,
βSC = 0.5, and βBH = 1 (the same parameters will be used in
Section IV-A). The beneficial impact of caching is evident:
as compared with the cache-free setup (which corresponds
to Phit = 0), the achievable ASE with Phit = 0.25 (resp.
Phit = 0.5) is increased by 188% (resp. 264%) for dynamic
UT association and by 158% (resp. 218%) for static UT
association. Furthermore, we observe that the dynamic UT
association always outperforms the static UT association.
Lastly, the lower bound on (15), derived using Corollary 1,
is increasingly tight as Phit grows large.
IV. C ACHE -A IDED SC N ETWORK D EPLOYMENT
In this section, we look at possible design problems of
interest to network operators and we aim at providing simple design guidelines for the deployment of cache-aided SC
networks. As design parameters, we focus on the SC density
λ ∈ [λ(min) , λ(max) ] and the storage size S ∈ [0, S (max) ],
with S (max) ≤ F : therefore, we make the dependence on
these parameters explicit in our performance metrics. For

×10-3

5

4.5

4.5

4

4

3.5

3.5

3

S [files/SC]

ASE [bps/Hz/m2 ]

5

2.5
2
1.5

×106
c = 1 $/m2
c = 5 $/m2
c = 10 $/m2

3
2.5
2
1.5

Static UT association
Dynamic UT association
Dynamic UT association (LB)

1
0.5

1
0.5

0
0

0.1

0.2
0.3
Cache hit probability

0.4

0
10-4

0.5

Figure 2. Achievable ASE as a function of the cache hit probability.

instance, the minimum SC density λ(min) can be chosen to
ensure an interference-limited system performance (i.e., the
background noise becomes negligible), whereas the maximum
SC density λ(max) can be due to spatial limitations; similarly,
the maximum storage size S (max) may arise from practical
constraints regarding space or power consumption at the SCs.
In our analysis, we consider the simplest case of uniform
files popularity, i.e., pi = F1 , i = 1, . . . , F , with Phit (S) = FS ,
where we have made the dependence of the cache hit probability on S explicit. Note that, for the more realistic case
of decreasing files popularity, i.e., p1 > p2 > . . . > pF ,
expanding the storage will have an increasingly less significant
impact on the system performance.
A. Deployment Cost
Suppose that a network operator has a fixed monetary
budget per m2 c (measured in $/m2 ) to deploy a cache-aided
SC network. Let pλ denote the SC price (measured in $/SC)
and let pS denote the storage price (measured in $/file). The
following simple question naturally arises in this context: is
it better to invest in deploying SCs or storage? The answer
hinges on the choice of the performance metric and can be
found by means of an appropriate optimization. For instance,
to maximize the achievable ASE in (14)–(15), the answer is
given by the solution of the following optimization problem:
max

ASE(λ, S)

s.t.

pλ λ + pS λS ≤ c
λ ∈ [λ(min) , λ(max) ]
S ∈ [0, S (max) ].

λ,S

(P1)

Alternatively, the system performance can be measured in
terms of its EE. Before formalizing the corresponding problem, some definitions are in order. Let

Etot (S) , Phit (S)Ehit + 1 − Phit (S) Emiss
(16)
be the total energy consumed to provide a content to a UT
(measured in J), where Ehit is the energy needed by the SC
to retrieve a cached file from its storage unit and transmit it to
the UT in case of cache hit, and Emiss is the energy needed

10-3
SC density λ [SCs/m2 ]

10-2

Figure 3. Feasible solution set of problems (P1)–(P2) for different values
of the monetary budget c.

by the BH to retrieve a non-cached file from the internet and
transmit it to the UT in case of cache miss (via the SC for
static UT association and directly for dynamic UT association).
Moreover, we define the area energy consumption (measured
in J/m2 ) as AEC(λ, S) , λEtot (S) and the EE (measured in
bit/J) as
EE(λ, S) ,

ASE(λ, S)
.
AEC(λ, S)

(17)

Hence, the corresponding optimization problem is given by:
max

EE(λ, S)

s.t.

pλ λ + pS λS ≤ c
λ ∈ [λ(min) , λ(max) ]
S ∈ [0, S (max) ].

λ,S

(P2)

Using the same parameters as in Section III, we additionally
set F = 107 files, λ(min) = 10−4 SCs/m2 , λ(max) =
10−2 SCs/m2 , S (max) = 5 × 106 files/SC, pλ = 250 $/SC,
pλ = 0.005 $/file, Ehit = 1 J, and Emiss = 10 J.
Assuming pλ λ? + pS λ? S ? = c, which excludes the trivial
solution {λ? , S ? } = {λ(max) , S (max) }, Figure 3 illustrates
the feasible solution set of the considered problems with
c = {1, 2.5, 5} $/m2 .
Figures 4 and 5 plot the achievable ASE and the EE,
respectively, against the SC density λ, where each value
of λ yields a value of S (and thus of Phit ) according to
the constraint on the monetary budget (cf. Figure 3). The
achievable ASE in Figure 4 is monotonically increasing in
λ: this means that, to maximize the network ASE, one should
invest in deploying more SCs (even if that means S = 0),
whereas S should be increased only if there is remaining
budget. Therefore, the solution of problem (P1) is given by




c
c (max)
1
?
?
λ = min
,λ
, S =
− pλ . (18)
pλ
pS λ?
On the contrary, the EE in Figure 5 is monotonically decreasing in λ: this means that, to maximize the network
EE, one should invest in expanding the storage as much as

1

×10-3

0.9
0.8

0.09
c = 1 $/m2
c = 5 $/m2
c = 10 $/m2

c = 1 $/m2
c = 5 $/m2
c = 10 $/m2

0.08
0.07
0.06

0.6
0.5

EE [bit/J]

ASE [bps/Hz/m2 ]

0.7

Dynamic

0.4
0.3

0.05
Dynamic

0.04
Static

Static

0.03
0.2
0.02

0.1
0
10-4

10-3
SC density λ [SCs/m2 ]

10-2

0.01
10-4

V. C ONCLUSIONS
In this work, we study the performance of a tiered network
where a tier of macro-cell wireless backhaul nodes is overlaid
with a tier of cache-aided SCs. To frame a more realistic
scenario, we consider both static and dynamic UT association
policies. Building on random spatial models and using tools
from stochastic geometry, we derive closed-form expressions
and bounds for the achievable ASE for both UT association
policies. Then, we study suitable optimization problems to
identify deployment strategies for maximizing the ASE and EE
of the network. Our findings show that the ASE is maximized
by first increasing the SC density and then the storage size at
the SCs, whereas an opposite approach should be adopted for
maximizing the EE.
A PPENDIX I
P ROOF OF T HEOREM 1
Due to space limitations, we provide only a sketch of the
(S)
proof. Considering static UT association, we have Psuc (θ) =
Phit P[SINRu(x) > θ] + (1 − Phit )P[SINRu(x) > θ]P[SINRx >
θ] and, building on [8], [10], we obtain

10-2

Figure 5. EE as a function of the SC density.

Figure 4. Achievable ASE as a function of the SC density.

possible (even if that means λ = λ(min) ), whereas λ should
be increased only if there is remaining budget. Hence, the
solution of problem (P2) reads as
 


1
c
c
(max)
−p
S ? = min
,
S
, λ? =
.
λ
pS λ(min)
pλ + pS S ?
(19)
In practice, increasing the SCs caching capabilities seems to
be very useful for increasing the EE. Conversely, the impact
of additional storage on the ASE is minor if the operator
disposes of additional resources to increase the SC density.
These results suggest that the answer to the question initially
posed in this section, i.e., the choice of investing on additional
SCs or on more storage, is not unique but strongly hinges on
the ultimate goal of the network operator. Finally, we observe
that a dynamic UT association policy is always preferable in
terms of network performance 1whenever the larger complexity
necessary to implement it can be afforded.

10-3
SC density λ [SCs/m2 ]

 (S)

2
α
α
P[SINRu(x) > θ] = exp − θ ρσSC RUT
LIx θρ−1
(20)
SC RUT


2
(S)
α
α
LIx θρ−1
(21)
P[SINRx > θ] = exp − θ ρσBH RBH
BH RBH
(S)

(S)

with LIu(x) (s) and LIx (s) defined in (9)–(10). Likewise, for
(D)

dynamic UT association, we have Psuc (θ) = P[SINRu(x) > θ]
where (cf. [8], [10])
 (S)

2
α
α
P[SINRu(x) > θ] = exp − θ ρσSC RUT
LIu(x) θρ−1
SC RUT 1∆x
 (S)

2
α
α
(22)
LIu(x) θρ−1
+ exp − θ ρσBH RBH
/x
BH RBH 1∆
(D)

with LIu(x) (s) defined in (12).
R EFERENCES
[1] Cisco, “Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic
Forecast, 2016–2021,” White Paper, 2017.
[2] J. Andrews, S. Buzzi, W. Choi, S. Hanly, A. Lozano, A. Soong, and
J. Zhang, “What will 5G be?” 2IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 32,
no. 6, pp. 1065–1082, Jun. 2014.
[3] E. Baştuğ, M. Bennis, M. Kountouris, and M. Debbah, “Cache-enabled
small cell networks: modeling and tradeoffs,” EURASIP Journal on
Wireless Communic. and Netw., no. 1, pp. 41–51, 2015.
[4] K. Li, C. Yang, Z. Chen, and M. Tao, “Optimization and analysis
of probabilistic caching in n-tier heterogeneous networks,” Dec. 2016.
[Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.04030.pdf
[5] D. Liu and C. Yang, “Caching policy toward maximal success
probability and area spectral efficiency of cache-enabled HetNets,”
2016. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.03749v1.pdf
[6] M. A. Abd-Elmagid, O. Ercetin, and T. ElBatt, “Cache-aided
heterogeneous networks: Coverage and delay analysis,” Jan. 2017.
[Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1701.06735.pdf
[7] A. Khreishah, J. Chakareski, and A. Gharaibeh, “Joint caching, routing,
and channel assignment for collaborative small-cell cellular networks,”
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 2275–2284, Aug. 2016.
[8] M. Maso, I. Atzeni, I. Ghamnia, E. Baştuğ, and M. Debbah, “Cacheaided full-duplex small cells,” in Proc. Int. Symp. Modeling and Optimiz.
in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Netw. (WiOpt), Paris, France, May
2017, pp. 1–6. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.05064.pdf
[9] I. Atzeni and M. Kountouris, “Full-duplex MIMO small-cell networks
with interference cancellation,” Dec. 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.07289v1.pdf
[10] J. G. Andrews, F. Baccelli, and R. K. Ganti, “A tractable approach to
coverage and rate in cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 59,
no. 11, pp. 3122–3134, Nov. 2011.
[11] I. Atzeni, J. Arnau, and M. Kountouris, “Downlink cellular network
analysis with LOS/NLOS propagation and elevated base stations,” Mar.
2017. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.01279.pdf

