a subset of up to PA values (defining the EPRE), implemented transmission modes (from the set of TM 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10) and the resource allocation and precoding granularity. Even if TM10 is signalled to the UE, there is PDSCH cancellation as such expected for a TM10 UE. While in theory possible, the cancellation of TM10 has been found to be a rather complex operation for Release 12 due to the fact that it was difficult to find network assistance versus UE blind detection common ground in terms of complexity and network flexibility. It is worth mentioning that cancelling a TM10 PDSCH would imply the need to know the virtual cell ID and scrambling information charac- terizing the interferer's DMRS while in addition the quasi-collocation information would be needed as well. Synchronization of CP, slot, SFN, subframe and common system bandwidth for the serving cell and interfering cells is not signalled, but rather implicitly assumed by the UE when NAICS signalling is configured (hence synchronized operation, aligned CP, same bandwidth). The blind detection of interfering PDSCH is certainly a sensitive process as any parameter misdetection leads to the incorrect identification of the interfering PDSCH and might even bring a performance penalty in practice, as cancelling the wrong information might have the effect of noise amplification. Consequently, the power of the dominant interferer plays an important role in its (blind) estimation, bringing an interesting paradigm; the stronger the interferer is, the more reliable the NAICS UE is to detect its PDSCH characteristics. In a bursty FTP traffic, the interference structure is changing in both time and frequency. The spatial properties of the dominant interferer would be impact (and be available for cancellation) of the NAICS UE depending on the interferers' packet duration. However, from a NAICS UE perspective, the dominant interference can change in frequency as well. At one end, we LTE Macro Cell Evolution NAICS UE NAICS UE allocation allocation Smaller alloca