Transactions On Emerging Telecommunications Technologies - 2023 - Alam - An Overview of LTE LTE A Heterogeneous Networks

Received: 14 April 2022 Revised: 24 December 2022 Accepted: 5 April 2023
DOI: 10.1002/ett.4806
S U RV E Y A RT I C L E
An overview of LTE/LTE-A heterogeneous networks for 5G

and beyond
Mohammed Jaber Alam Md Rahat Hossain Salahuddin Azad Ritesh Chugh
School of Engineering and Technology,

CQUniversity, Queensland, Australia Abstract
The potential of fifth-generation (5G) and beyond wireless connectivity is to
Correspondence
deliver higher data rates, much lower latency, more frequent increase in channel
Mohammed Jaber Alam, CQUniversity,
Australia. capacity, and significant improvements in Quality of Service (QoS), compared
Email: [email protected] to the current Long Term Evolution (LTE) networks. The continued growth
Funding information
of smart devices, the introduction of trending multimedia applications, and
Central Queensland University; the dramatic increase in demand and use of wireless data communication are
Australian Government Research already causing a significant load on current mobile networks. 5G wireless
Training Program Scholarship
networks, with enhanced user data rates, delays, capacity and QoS, are antici-
pated to solve many of the existing problems of mobile networks. In this study,
we review the emergent wireless LTE-A and 5G networks to provide an overview
of the challenges and the solutions suggested in recent literature towards forth-
coming 6G networks. We first discuss the new structural changes associated
with the Radio Access Network (RAN) design, heterogeneous network and LTE
or LTE-Advanced (LTE-A) network. To understand the challenges and research
gaps in 5G and beyond networks, the paper reviews the outstanding features
of the new QoS and Self-Organization Networks (SON) related to the emerging
5G networks. Data rates, bandwidth and coverage have been given significance
throughout this review because these are some major challenges towards 6G
networks. Since understanding the present state of 5G usage is critical to its
adoption, the paper also discusses related field tests, trials, and simulation tests.
Finally, we identify existing major research problems and outline potential
research areas.
1 I N T RO DU CT ION
For at least two decades, mobile wireless communication remained in the first generation. Then onwards, the world has
seen a gradual yet continuous upgrading of wireless communication to the second generation (2G), third generation (3G),
fourth generation (4G) and fifth generation (5G) wireless cellular networks. Now, we are moving beyond to the sixth
generation (6G), which is targeted to be established by 2030. A comparative overview of all these generations in terms of
architecture, emerging technologies and others are presented below in Table 1.
Introduction to digital transformation, efficient reuse of frequency, and fast development of virtual layer technolo-
gies, such as Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ), Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiple Access (OFDMA),
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
© 2023 The Authors. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Trans Emerging Tel Tech. 2023;34:e4806. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ett 1 of 22

https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.4806
21613915, 2023, 8, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ett.4806 by Cochrane Philippines, Wiley Online Library on [02/11/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 of 22 ALAM et al.
T A B L E 1 Architectural differences of 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, and 6G.

Features 1G 2G 3G 4G 5G 6G
Deployment 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 2030s

Data Bandwidth 2 kbps 14.4–64 kbps 2 Mbps 200 Mbps to Higher than 1 Gbps 1 TbPS
(in bit per 1 Gbps for
second (bps)) low mobility
Standards AMPS TDMA, CDMA, WCDMA, LTE, WiMAX MIMO, mm Waves OFDM
GSM, GPRS, CDMA-2000
EDGE
Technology Analog Digital cellular Broad Unified IP and Unified IP and Extended
cellular technology bandwidth seamless seamless bandwidth,
technology CDMA, IP combination combination of including
technology of broadband, broadband, licensed and
LAN/WAN LAN/WAN unlicensed
spectrum
Applications Voice Voice and data Voice, data, and All of that from All of that from 4G All of that from 5G
video call 3G but in high but in Ultra-High plus 3D
definition Definition (UHD) integrated com-
(HD) plus Internet of munications,
Things (IoT), full-sensing and
smart city, virtual reality,
tele-medicine and Internet of
mobility upto bio-nano-things,
500 km/h and so forth
Wideband Code-Division Multiple Access (WCDMA), and Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) have contributed sig-
nificantly to this gradual transformation. The growing use of smart devices and multimedia applications, such as video
conferencing, video streaming, e-health care and online games, are not only meeting the needs of users but also opening
new business opportunities for organizations and mobile network operators.
Due to the ever-increasing demand for multimedia applications, existing mobile networks will no longer be able to
meet the bandwidth and quality of service requirements. Therefore, to enhance the quality of service, Long Term Evolu-
tion (LTE) has been proposed by 3GPP mobile systems. Later, in Release 10, LTE-Advanced (LTE-A) is recommended as
4G programs and beyond what is intended to be achieved in International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT)—improved
performance standards.
For key radio access networks, LTE has been completely redesigned as a fully packet-switched optimized system with
the dedicated architecture of Internet Protocol (IP), as set out in the definition of 3GPP (2013b). Orthogonal Frequency
Division Multi-Access (OFDMA) is the key enabler for LTE systems, where the channel spectrum is divided into smaller
radio systems called Physical Resource Blocks (PRB) (3GPP, 2012a). OFDMA is able to resist selective frequency blurring
and internal disruption of cells. Plus, the more affordable the research blocks, the better is the access to Code Division
Multiple Access (CDMA) in mobile systems. However, inter-cell disruption can affect OFDMA systems, so an efficient
cell group integration scheme is necessary.
Mobile integration is where the user equipment (UE) device is connected to a specific base station (BS) of a cell
following certain conditions set up by the operator, which we refer to as “cell association” or “cell selection”. Appropriate
cell association of the system not only contributes to the improvement of system performance but also to load balancing,
which is another major problem in current mobile systems. Load balancing is the misbalance of users among Macro
e-node Base Station (MeNB) and small base stations because of the disparity in their backhaul capacity. Macro-base station
being more powerful, associates more users than Small Base Stations (SBS). Hence, the MeNB gets overloaded, and its
users suffer a lack of channels required to maintain the 5G or beyond standards. Whereas, the SBS sits idle, having fewer
users and not being properly utilized for what it has been deployed for. In addition, the LTE system is presumed to bear a
few real-time applications, for example, VoIP and voice services, imposing Quality of Service (QoS) barriers.1 Dealing with
load balances and interference has many challenges, such as sorting the appropriate cell association scheme, interference
mitigation schemes and radio resource management. Individual studies have been conducted, but a combination of these
challenges in one scheme has rarely been evaluated.
ALAM et al. 3 of 22
To address these challenges, a new cell distribution concept called Heterogeneous Network (HetNet) has been pro-
posed by 3GPP. This includes Low Power Nodes (LPNs), for example, femto-cells, pico-cells and relays mounted on the
cover of MeNB to handle portable traffic, especially in tropical areas. Figure 1 shows the differences between a regular
homogeneous network and a heterogeneous network.2 Small cells in recent times have attracted a lot of interest from
researchers and industry for the following reasons3 :
• Enhanced indoor coverage: In the near future, the forecast is that about 70% of data calls and 50% of calls will come
from home locations. Unfortunately, indoor areas often suffer the loss of high-rise buildings. Thus, the Macro Base
Station (MBS) signal is weakened or lost in these cases, called coverage holes of the macro-cell. Transmission of small
cells to internal areas will bring better service due to the proximity between small cells and internal users.
• Offload traffic: The macro cell user load congestion is reduced by deploying more small base stations and handing over
some users to those SBSs. Therefore, the MBS load has been shared between smaller cells, which is why users get better
service.
• Cost reduction: Since large-scale shipping requires high installation expenses and cautious planning, deploying smaller
primary channels is considered cost-effective compared to macro-cell. The expense of deploying small cells can be
minimized by setting up an internal broadband connection. The insertion of small femto-cell-like cells depends on the
simple idea of connecting and playing fast.
• Reduced consumption of power: Powerful signal is obtained by users via small cell deployment, rather than from a
very small sub-station like a “relay node”. Therefore, a very high transfer capacity is not required.
• QoS satisfaction improvement: As a small number of mobile users are usually provided with a small cell, each user can
receive additional resources, thus leading to the development of QoS.
However, as MeNBs are costly to replace SBSs and there are differences in their transmission capacities, the major
challenges of heterogeneous networks will be load balance or fairness, interference mitigation and resource allocation.
To overcome these problems, both researchers and the industry are conducting extensive research, which needs due
consideration and further analysis.
The paper is organized as follows: Methodology is discussed in Section 2. Next, LTE and LTE-A architecture, het-
erogeneous networks have been discussed in Section 3. Section 4 presents radio resource management. The issues and
FIGURE 1 (A) Conventional homogeneous network versus (B) heterogeneous network.

4 of 22 ALAM et al.
challenges for heterogeneous networks to achieve 5G and beyond networks are described in Section 5. Most of the rel-
evant user association techniques used to acquire load balancing, resource management and interference mitigation
have been discussed in Section 6. Section 7 presents the technical approaches for load balancing. Finally, a conclusion
is provided.
2 M ET H O D O LO GY
In this literature review, articles are included through an online database search for load balancing, interference mitiga-
tion and cell association. The most current (last 10 years) and related research objective papers were selected, and along
with them, the journal impact factor and most cited papers were also prioritized. The PRISMA diagram in Figure 2 depicts
the way the literature was shortlisted for inclusion in this paper. There were 110 articles found with the objectives: load
balancing, interference mitigation and cell association. Out of these 110 articles, 100 full-text articles were found to be
suitable. Next, we filtered out the same types of methodology papers, and finally, 51 articles were included as references
in this review paper. These 51 articles were thoroughly studied and critically analyzed in this paper. The motivation of
this paper is to study and analyze the LTE-A and 5G heterogeneous networks for the forthcoming 6G networks and con-
centrate mainly on user association, load balancing and interference mitigation. This work can be used as a reference for
relevant works and to inform guidelines about future endeavors in this field.
3 OUTLINE OF HETEROGENEOUS LTE AND LTE-A NETWO RKS
The following section depicts an outline of the LTE and LTE-A framework and the key features of the heterogeneous
network.
FIGURE 2 PRISMA flow chart.

ALAM et al. 5 of 22
3.1 LTE and LTE-A architecture
The LTE and LTE-A network uses System Architecture Evolution (SAE), which is an improved system structure consisting
of a Radio Access Network (RAN) and a core network, as shown in Figure 2. Radio access network is known to evolve from
Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (UTRAN), which includes UE and macro-cell BS which is known to have
evolved Node Base stations (eNBs) in LTE or LTE-A context. Communication between E-UTRAN and Evolved Packet
Core (EPC) is established by S1 communication via sub-gateway S-GW and eNB. The X2 link was brought up to make
direct communication between eNBs signing. The core network is called the Evolved Packet Core (EPC), consisting of
S-GW, Packet Gateway (P-GW) and Mobility Management Entity (MME).
In the case of EPC, the sub-gateway acts as a local travel anchor point of inter macro cell delivery and transit between
3GPP, too, regarding the management of IP packet transfers between EPC and related UE. User navigation and commu-
nication management between other 3GPP technologies and LTE or LTE-A are hosted by MME. P-GW acts between EPC
and other similar internet protocol networks. In the LTE mobile system, the portable network bandwidth of 1.4 MHz to
20 MHz is used, and up to 100 MHz of spectrum is accessible to LTE-A.4,5 Channel bandwidth is divided into smaller
orthogonal Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs),3 which is the smallest unit of radio equipment. Considering the short start
of the cycle, each PRB contains 12 consecutive lower carriers and seven orthogonal frequencies to distinguish the mul-
tiplication symbols, where each PRB takes a 180 kHz spectrum and holds a time interval of 0.5 ms. For LTE or LTE-A
programs, the radio framework contains 10 sub-frames, each of which has two intermediate spaces of 0.5 ms. So, the small
LTE/LTE-A frame has a period of 1 ms, one Transmission Time Interval (TTI) and LTE/LTE-A radio frame save 10 ms.
3.2 Heterogeneous networks
LTE / LTE-A networks with different small cells, such as femto-cells, pico-cells, micro-cells and relay nodes, are depicted
in Figure 3. The black shades in Figure 3 show the user density. Small cells are generally deployed to fill the macro-cell dark
spot coverings and to expand capacity in highly dense traffic areas. This results in saving the cost of sending additional
eNBs,6,7 a process which requires careful network planning and efficiency.8
A. Femto-cells: Femto-cell, also referred to as Home evolved NodeB (HeNB), acts as a short-range transmission power
base station, especially to be used in indoor areas.9 Transmission capacity in femto-cells generally ranges from 10 to
FIGURE 3 LTE and LTE-A framework.

6 of 22 ALAM et al.
100 mW, while the coverage usually varies from 10 to 30 m.10 Ad hoc installation alone is a very attractive femto-cell
feature. This feature allows mobile operators to secure recovery costs as femto-cell user load can be handled by sub-
scribers’ broadband communication links (for example, digital subscriptions line,9 fiber optic and satellite links11 ) to
the main network. These backhaul links also aid a small amount of user load from compatible BS, thereby decreas-
ing traffic congestion eNB. Femto-cells can be given to a mobile operator with licensed macro-cell bands or different
spectrum bands. However, the study in Reference 9 does not consider user association with multiple BSs. Also, the
handover of the user from one base station to another, along with the mobility of the User Equipment (UE) has not
been taken into account. The authors in References 12 and 13 showed base stations could work in a variety of ways of
reaching, that is, open access, closed access and mixed access methods. The closed access mode is a femto-cell access
control method, where members are only registered to a closed subscriber group of femto-cells. Such access mode is
appropriate in residential areas. Femto-cells within open-access that allow all users to do so access them. In mixed
access mode, all users have permission to access femto-cells but the subscriber group is prioritized.
B. Relay Nodes: Relay node has been introduced in 3GPP Release 11 as other technologies supported by LTE-A systems.
For Relay Nodes (RN), active eNB is called Donor eNB (DeNB).2 RN can work internally as well on out-of-band relay-
ing modes. In the case of in-band relaying, the relay access link and relay backhaul link share similar network company
frequencies, while using different network company frequencies for backhaul and links to access out-of-band relaying.
Relay node is divided into Type-1 and Type-2.14 A Type-1 relay node is an in-band transmission channel with its own
body cell identity (ID), which appears as a separate cell from UE. This type of RN is called Layer 3 relay, which includes
Most DeNB RRM functions that support rewind. Two types of Type-1 RN are also described, which are Type-1a and
Type-1b, where the first one operates in out-of-band mode and the latest works in in-band mode. On the other hand,
the Type-2 transmission is a Layer 2 in-band channel that transmits that it has no visible cell ID and only supports
a few RRMs jobs. The Multi-cast Transmission Single-Frequency Network (MTSFN) subframe, which is utilized for
streaming and streaming apps, was created to eliminate disruptions from the RN transmitter on its own receiver. It is
optimized for approval of backhaul transmission only between RN and compliance DeNB. For LTE frames, up to six
sub-frames can be configured as subframes under MTSFN.14
4 RADIO RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Handover management, packet scheduling, link adaptation, radio admission control, and other RRM functions in a het-
erogeneous cellular system include the distribution of resource blocks among macro-cells and small cells. Figure 4 depicts
the RRM methods for LTE and LTE-A networks.
A. Resource Block Distribution Between Macro-cells And Small Cells: Depending on whatever RRM method is accept-
able, resource allocation between macro-cells and small cells may be required in heterogeneous networks. Other issues
in classifying resources in a network-based transfer include resource allocation between backhaul link, access link,
and direct link (eNB-UE), depending on whether in-band mode or out-of-band mode is active. Disruption, resource
requirement, batch size, user number, and so forth are all things to consider when practising cellular distribution. The
eNB is usually where services are distributed.
B. Handover Management: The RRC layer is responsible for managing user mobility and delivery. The assisted network
controls and the delivery process for LTE/LTE-A applications, that is, the choice are taken at the eNB, while the signal
power ratings are collected from the EU. Furthermore, LTE/LTE-A systems only support the hard drive, where radio
services are provided by the eNB provider prior to new radio services being assigned to the targeted eNB.2 In addition,
for UE to achieve a specified BS, the random access process is granted throughout the grant process. Random access
protocols that are based on contention and do not vary from contention are supported for LTE or LTE-A applications.2
HeNB and Type-1 RN can be used for access control and supply management.
C. Packet Scheduling: One of the key roles of RRM in Media Access Control (MAC) is powerful packet editing, which
is done regularly in LTE/LTE-A applications. One Transmission Time Interval (TTI) aims to increase the efficiency
of spectral cells and cell results by distributing PRB among UE. The planning choice could be based on the QoS
need for each UE’s radio, the UE’s Channel Status Information (CSI) or Channel Quality Indicator (CQI), the level of
interruption, and so forth. HeNB and Type-1 RN can be set up to pack the package to distribute PRBs to their respective
UEs in various LTE/LTE-A networks. Proportional fair and round-robin planning are two of the most often utilized
planning strategies.
ALAM et al. 7 of 22
FIGURE 4 Heterogeneous network.
D. Link Adaptation: Another key issue is getting acclimated to the connectivity. The MAC layer’s RRM function is used
to obtain the top user effect operation with a particular target block error rate.15 Link operations such as flexibility,
coding and transmission power control should be aligned. The UE assigned here has a greater channel quality because
of the improved modulation and coding technology (as indicated by CQI). Transmission control is frequently used
in conjunction with AMC to boost cell output. Furthermore, the level of distractions can be managed by using such
capabilities.
E. Radio Admission Control: In the radio service management business, you may find the company regulating radio
access. The decision on a new application for the adoption of a radio manager must be accepted in Layout 3 of the
LTE / LTE-A protocol stack. The decision is taken in accordance with QoS standards for asking radio managers and
radio service available for the usage of radio services.2 To welcome the user, the radio’s available resources must be
sufficient to meet all user-related radio managers’ QoS requirements. It could also depend on whether the user is a
new native user from the cell or an offloaded user from a neighboring cell. But the authors in Reference 2 do not
attempt to give sufficient consideration to load variation among macro-cell and small cells.
5 ISSUES A ND CHALLENGES FO R H ETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS TO

ACHIEVE 5G A ND BEYOND STA NDARDS
Although the transfer of users to small cells benefits heterogeneous networks in several ways, a few problems and techni-
cal issues arise about such features to achieve 5G and beyond network standards: radio resource utilization, interference
mitigation, QoS management, fairness, and complexity. The challenges and solutions to achieving 6G technology are
summarized in Table 2.
A. Radio Resource Utilization: One of the main issues for LTE-A networks is obtaining focused down-links and fast
up-link data speeds. Effective radio resource utilization is crucial in light of contemporary issues such as restricted
spectrum availability and the widespread use of low-bandwidth radios. The data rate and spectrum enhancement are
8 of 22 ALAM et al.
T A B L E 2 Challenges to reach 6G from present 4G and 5G technology.

Challenges Description Solutions
Enhanced network The challenge includes a full automated and intelligent Application of artificial intelligence (AI)
latency, reliability and transformation of the whole network system technique. And it should be deployed not
user experience consisting of massive amounts of data and unlimited only on a particular location or on a device,
computing resources but on the entire network
100% coverage Still more than 3 billion people in the world are unable It has become a consensus of the industry to
to access the internet. The reasons are difficulty of build an air-space-earth integrated 3D
installation of BSs in remote areas, higher expense to network. And the coverage can also be
deploy numerous BS and there are also limitations of ensured by efficient utilization of the
geographical conditions deployed BSs
Spectrum resource The challenge is to enhance the bandwidth to the Use of licensed and unlicensed spectrum
allocation and extreme that the 6G requires to satisfy the user. The while solving the network coverage issue by
bandwidth industry is talking about the terahertz frequency band application of optimization mechanisms
enhancement to be used, which still faces problems such as weak
coverage, immature terminal ecology and high
construction costs
Perception and positioning Wireless spectrum in the 6G era can be used not only for Location tracking services will enable a large
communication but also for sensing and positioning number of emerging applications to get the
functions. It is to provide communication and precise location of the user’s equipment
environmental awareness through base stations
Network security As the network is getting extended and more users are Post-Quantum cryptography (PQC) and
coming into coverage, and so are the emerging Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) is being
applications, network security is an important issue planned to be applied to the network to
ensure network super security
Green and low carbon This is an inevitable trend in the development of the ICT Enhancing the energy efficiency of the network
industry, along with all other industries following the by various optimization techniques as well
same goal across the globe as an efficient base station deployment
one of the major development in 5G and beyond networks. The best way to fulfil the above performance goals is to
reuse the entire frequency, that is, to reuse the frequency of one element. However, this compromises the efficiency
of radio services and interruption management, resulting in heavy interference on a high-reuse item. Therefore, the
RRM system should be developed to avoid distractions as much as possible over time, boosting spectral efficiency.
The tight placement of small cells causes severe disruption and further complicates distributing of radio resources, so
designing an RRM system for heterogeneous networks is extremely tough. Furthermore, due to an increase in small
cells, the RRM system will need to expand and adapt for 5G and beyond networks.
B. Interference Mitigation: For 5G and beyond networks, the size of the network is an ever-increasing one to meet the
high number of user demands. So, there are more number of small cells to cover this. It is possible for a small cell
to interrupt a neighboring eNB or other small cells in LTE and LTE-A networks. Different terminologies are used in
literature to distinguish between different sorts of interference.
In a two-stage femto-cell network, there are two sorts of disruptions: cross-tier and co-tier. Cross-tier interference
occurs when femto-cells and macro-cells use a common channel. When the PRBs of femto-cells and macro-cells are
the same, there is interference. For both the up-link and down-link, cross-tier disturbances are depicted in Figure 5.
There has been a lack of attention paid to the potential for interference between the electrical network and the
femto-electrical cell’s system. Co-tier interference, on the other hand, is interference between femto-cells. Femto-cells
spread uniformly within the macro-cell, and as a result, there is space between each of these cells, resulting in an
evenly spaced cover. Using the same set of PRBs throughout a network of dispersed femto-cells can cause problems
in both the up-link and the down-link. The interference scenario in scattered cells is depicted in Figure 6.
Intra-cellular disturbances, RN disruption, and cell disruption can be distinguished on supported networks (also
known as multihop networks).6,7 Direct links, backhaul links, and access links sharing the same set of PRBs can
cause intracell interference. There is an inter-RN interruption when two nearby cells use the same PRBs. To describe
ALAM et al. 9 of 22
FIGURE 5 Classification of RRM schemes for LTE/LTE-A networks.
the resulting interference as “intercellular disruption,” the relay node (RN) in a macro-cell that shares PRBs with a
neighboring macro-cell will use the term “nearby macro-cell MUE.” DeNBs RN interference and RN interference are
connected with interference between the two RNs.
C. QoS Management: Quality of Service (QoS) is about managing users in the network to specify a guaranteed throughput
level in a cost-effective way to improve user experience. QoS technologies aid in measuring and detecting any changes
in the network conditions, such as congestion or availability of bandwidth. Thus to prioritize the user for 5G and
beyond networks, the QoS is multiple times the present scenario. So, it is important to manage the QoS.16 To manage
it, there are plans to distribute femto-cells in public venues, such as airports, where the UE population is predicted
to be large and the available radio services may not be able to match the QoS needs of each EU member. It is also
considerably difficult to manage QoS in LTE or a variant of LTE. Each tiny cell in a network may only have a limited
amount of frequency resources after the eNBs distribute them.17 Consequently, to achieve the QoS standards of 5G
and beyond networks, we need a more complicated RRM solution that considers interference barriers and restricted
radio resources.
D. Fairness: For 5G and beyond networks, fairness is an essential RRM issue. With regard to UE package planning, the
conventional issue of fairness in RRM is that the proper amount of radio services for wireless access must be provided
to each UE. The problem of bias in heterogeneous networks extends beyond programming to include the distribution
of resources among the network’s many small cells. This challenge is particularly significant as the accuracy of the
resource separation between direct and backhaul access links should be considered in multi-hop 5G and beyond net-
works.18 Integrity can be split into global and local justice issues in heterogeneous networks. In Reference 18, we first
learn about the idea of LTE Fairness in resource distribution between direct access connections and backhaul-access,
as well as package design among UE, are inter-twined in multi-hop networks. “Global justice”, as used in this work,
refers to the equitable allocation of resources throughout the world’s many little cells. In other words, the distribution
of radio resources is termed “global” if it fully meets the demand for specific cellular services. However, if the minimal
level of access between UEs and radio executives is increased, radio resource allocation is considered very fair. There-
fore, UE or low-level radio operators will obtain more radio services, whilst those with superior channel quality will
10 of 22 ALAM et al.
FIGURE 6 Interference scenario.
receive fewer radio services, to put it another way. “High” local accuracy can be attributed to this fact. Performance
measurements known as Jain’s Fairness index19 have been widely accepted in assessing fairness.
E. Complexity: Complexity is another major concern as we are leading to 5G and beyond networks. The complex prob-
lems require complex solutions and algorithms which are affecting the latency and energy consumption in a practical
scenario. Computing complexity and implementation complexity are the two subcategories of complexity. The RRM
system’s high signature value and the required information-sharing between BSs are two examples of the system’s
complexity. On the other hand, the RRM system’s computer complexity relates to the amount of time it takes the RRM
system to run particular algorithms in the BS. Conventional RRM methods may not be practicable in LTE / LTE-A net-
works in the near future due to excessive communication between BSs, which could cause inhibitory startup issues.
Furthermore, in LTE/LTE-A systems, the maximum permissible computation time is hampered by the distribution
of resources between UE being done across TTI. As a result, during the TTI period, the RRM algorithm’s calculation
time should be maintained. Overall, the RRM design is complex due to the requirement for users to take into account
the implementation’s complexity as well as the computing complexity.
6 U S E R ASSOCIAT ION IN H ETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS
During wireless exposure to 5G, dense, heterogeneous networks may be the most common theme. However, the approach
has certain drawbacks because of variations in the transfer capability of macro cells and smaller cells, which will lead to
more user encounters with macro BS.20
As a solution to this problem, 3GPP developed the notion of biased user interaction in Release 1021 by illegally increas-
ing user capacity gained from small BSs cells to assure that more users would be affiliated with small cells. For bias
user organization, the advantages of off-loading release from macro to tiny cells were demonstrated in References 22 and
11 through enhanced accessibility. Users who are forced to associate with smaller cells because of added bias get sub-
stantial disruption from the surrounding macro-cell. In this case, a significant disruption could undo the gains made by
packing traffic into fewer cells. There is a high correlation with the number of biases adopted, which should be care-
fully constructed in order to maximize network use.23,24 In Reference 13, Q-learning was used to determine the bias of
each user, where each user learnt independently from the prior experience how much bias lowered the number of users
in the termination. Inter-cell Interference Co-ordination (ICIC) and enhanced inter-cell interference (eICIC) are two
resource-based disruption mitigation strategies developed by 3GPP to address the aforesaid problem of biased user inte-
gration. Both the bias rate and the segmentation of resources in eICIC-enabled heterogeneous networks were established
by the authors.4,25-27
ALAM et al. 11 of 22
6.1 User association for coverage or outage probability optimization
For 5G and beyond, networks are to be tested for coverage or outage scenarios to see how well a user performs. Using
stochastic geometry, outage or coverage capabilities are employed as critical performance metrics in user organization
analysis. Researchers in References 28 and 29 used stochastic geometry to describe and examine the max-RSS user asso-
ciation’s performance in K-tier down-link heterogeneous networks. The K-tier heterogeneous network’s cell load was
shown to be heterogeneous, and the potential for low interference interfaces for diverse networks was established in Ref-
erence 12. Some network features may not be able to contribute to the amount of integrated disruption because of huge
loading disparities across current network pieces, according to the authors in Reference 12. Because of this, the SINR
model12 was established in Reference 25 to monitor the activity factor of different BSs. Femto-cells and pico-cells, which
are less densely populated, can improve network coverage. There may, however, be congested network features as a result
of the random transmission of small cells paired with considerable variances in transmission power relative to large base
stations. A similar strategy to References 30-32 was taken by Reference 13 authors, who started by identifying coverage
chances for each category under different spectrum distribution rules and femto-cell access regulations before discussing
the volume-expanding problem. These are some methods used recently in the literature review to overcome some of the
QoS hurdles found in terms of both available coverage and the lower levels of each category. The findings gave a clearer
picture of the full spectrum.
In the context of multi-tier down-link heterogeneous networks, stochastic geometry was used to examine the impact
of bias user interaction. Total bias leads to a greater signal-to-interference (SIR) ratio. The deepest level of integration was
uncovered through the use of statistical analysis. In References 5,24,33, smooth user interactions and spectrum separa-
tion between macro-cells and smaller cells were considered. According to Reference 20, the two-phase topology serves
a specific purpose and provides information on the best spectrum classification based on a statistical study. It is more
likely that33 inputs that assure specialized functionality will be available in a normal multi-stage network when the net-
work has low connectivity. User bias and spectrum partitioning ratios were calculated to maximize equitable network
utilization based on the potential for both heterogeneous network down-link and up-link, as opposed to the previously
specified functions of down-link heterogeneous networks. A trade-off between up-link and down-link functionality on
heterogeneous networks, where users are compelled to associate with both an up-link and down-link BS, was revealed
by the results to exist between the total user organization’s up-link and down-link biases.
6.2 User association for spectrum efficiency optimization
It is commonly agreed that spectrum efficiency is a useful statistic for network performance in 5G and beyond networks.
In order to enhance the total number of users, a variable user relationship was proposed in Reference 34. An upper limit
on total down-link rate was discovered using convex optimization, and then a heuristic user association law was proposed
that was simpler and closer to higher performance than the convex optimization approach. Compared to previous RSS
and biased user data, their simulation findings showed the proposed heuristic user interaction is superior. It is widely
accepted that increasing the overall quantity of data available to all users may lead to erroneous data allocation. However,
the authors in Reference 34 overlook the up-link factor, which might hamper the QoS considerably.
Smaller cells tend to clump together because they bear a greater burden than macro-cells. Since only lucky macro-cell
users are able to access high data rates, the rest of the users are left feeling hungry. Users’ data rate was defined as the sum
of their logs, hence a complicated low-level method for organizing users was devised to maximize this rate.35 Providing
greater resources to low-level users is preferable since the logarithm is a concave function with a low return, thereby pro-
moting both load balancing and user bias in the system. In Reference 36, significant unresolved difficulty in compound
growth was turned into a convex developmental state by reducing the primal deterministic user association to the frac-
tional association. Problem convexity helped to build the distributed user algorithm using dual decomposition, gradient
downtime, and a guarantee of not exceeding specific high deviations from correctness. The size of the step has a signif-
icant impact on the assembly speed of the gradient drop approach. Using the same problem as in References 37 and 38
offered an integrated descending strategy to provide a more reliable performance guarantee and faster integration. To
meet the proven performance duty, the integrated problem of minimizing service delays required by users was developed
in Reference 28 and solved with the use of measurement techniques. Nevertheless, the authors in Reference 28 state that
the major drawback is that the system is not aware of the load variation and again does not consider the up-link scenario.
Moreover, the system model is also static rather than a dynamic one.
It is also common to employ game theory in the context of spectrum utilization. User association in heterogeneous
networks can be thought of as an open-ended challenge in References 15 and 39, where each network functions as a com-
petitor by providing users. Negotiation was created to maximize data utilization, while ensuring specific levels of users, as
well as providing fairness for all users and balancing cell traffic load at different phases. In order to preserve the quality of
service, multi-resource traffic34 created an opportunistic user algorithm to categorize individual traffic as a primary ser-
vice and machine-to-machine mobility as a secondary service. Adequate distribution of services for the second service by
the planned exploitative organization will not compromise the core QoS service. This is a multi-to-one simulation game
in which users and base stations evaluate one another based on well-defined user resources in down-link user association
on heterogeneous networks.5,12,33 According to precisely linked essential aspects in Reference 40, users and BS rank based
on specialized application functions that calculate both data rate and accuracy for cell edge users. In contrast to Refer-
ence 10, a service-based user organization was built by focusing on differentiating users’ priorities, delivery time, supply
failures, and the diverse Quality of Service (QoS) need of users. The authors of Reference 17 employed a problem-solving
approach similar to the one in Reference 41 to illustrate the quality of user information in terms of mean concepts that
accurately reflect specific properties of the investigated 5G and beyond network applications. It is possible to persuade a
small cell to take traffic from a macro-cell in order to enhance its coverage. However, all of the authors mentioned in this
section above avoided the interference issue in general when considering their separate objectives.
In heterogeneous networks, the requirement to manage interference is exacerbated by overcrowded tiny cells.
Research initiatives have made considerable gains in the integration of user interfaces and other areas of the efficient dis-
tribution of radio resources. To maximize the amount of data, the evolution of user interaction and channel allocation
decisions between macro-cells and tiny cells was studied in Reference 22. As stated in Reference 33, user integration,9
connection coordination and channel allocation between macro-cells and smaller cell groups were recommended to max-
imize data utilization. The reduction of heterogeneous networks7,20,27 and the increase of heterogeneous networks42,43
have been studied in relation to user power control interaction. Users’ organization and power transfer are both under
constant scrutiny in the proposed algorithms37,44,45 until integration is achieved. As a non-participatory game, the authors
of Reference 46 have raised the issue of raising the amount for both users and BS to play. In order to increase thermal con-
ductivity, it was proposed in Reference 47 to construct a network of small interactive cells that combined user integration
with spectrum distribution and interference interactions with surrounding cells. Because of the NP-hardness of the pre-
viously described shared development for user integration and channel or power control, finding the proper solution is
no easy job. For example, the solution can be approached by sequentially examining the user’s affiliation and power level
until an agreement is established.37,44,45 Fixed channel allocation or transmission coordination can help increase user
engagement before optimizing channel transmission coordination either way.4,29,31,33 With this in mind and the impor-
tance of user association in mind, we can say that careful cell selection optimization is critical for the holistic optimization
of heterogeneous networks.
6.3 User association for energy efficiency optimization
5G and beyond networks will inevitably consume more power as the volume of data traffic increases and the network
infrastructure expands. To qualify as environmentally friendly, this will immediately increase glasshouse gas emissions.
As a result, businesses and experts are simultaneously working to increase network capacity and energy efficiency.
Network capacity can be increased by increasing the amount of data successfully transmitted while reducing total
power usage. The reduction in overall power consumption while meeting corresponding traffic requirements or the
increase in the ratio between the total data usage of all users and the total network power consumption can both be viewed
as boosting network efficiency in terms of problem-solving. When a user is connected to a macro-cell, the power con-
sumption of the access network is typically higher than when connected to a smaller cell. A user association’s decision
on how to allocate network capacity, therefore, has a significant impact on its efficiency. Energy savings on heteroge-
neous networks are made possible by numerous significant contributions published in user organizations.2,3,40 To increase
system efficiency in heterogeneous networks with high user power transfers and low-level restrictions, a user organi-
zation algorithm was proposed in Reference 16. User engagement in heterogeneous networks was improved by raising
the ratio of data for all users to total power usage in Reference 45. In contrast to Reference 45, where the focus was on
problem-solving,10 writers studied how to reduce total energy use while still meeting the needs of traffic users through
user engagement. In order to improve the peak signal-to-noise ratio, the authors of Reference 7 advocated that video con-
tent recognition of user interaction be used to decrease heterogeneous networks measuring and power consumption of
the system. Thus, both indirect classification and dual decay techniques are employed to tackle the problem. In order to
maximize down-link output, algorithm-based decomposition was devised in References 26 and 4. In order to accomplish
this, users were assigned to a specific BS, which reduced the overall amount of transmission power used.
An analysis of mobile communication systems shows that radio access nodes account for 57% of the total energy
consumed by wireless networks.1 In addition, signal processing and air conditioning circuits consume about 60% of the
energy spread in each BS.34 Thus, blocking base stations that do not support active users is an efficient method of reduc-
ing network power usage.14,35 An attempt was made in Reference 28 to boost energy efficiency or minimize total use
while maintaining a fixed rate and accuracy ratio by preparing BS sleep mode for long-term sleep, organizing users, and
allocating sub-carriers jointly. Using computer simulations, these two strategies (raising energy efficiency and reducing
total energy use) were tested. As described in Reference 24, an algorithm was developed to reduce energy consumption
by optimizing the functionality of both the user interface and BS sleep mode to take into account spatial and temporal
variations in traffic demands as well as internal hardware components such as BS. Using a stochastic geometry-based
model,17 the potential for coverage and power efficiency of K-tier heterogeneous wireless networks was discovered under
various sleep modes. The authors of this work have found a way to both minimize energy usage and expand the amount
of energy available to macro-cells.
6.4 User association accommodating other emerging issues in heterogeneous networks
Table 1 represents a brief summary of algorithms, parameters and their pros and cons. There are some emerging issues
with these heterogeneous networks. The inherent heterogeneity of heterogeneous networks presents itself in terms of
up-link-down-link asymmetry, the backhaul bottleneck, varied footprints, and so forth, aside from the transmit power
imbalance between small cells and macro-cells. The design of the user association faces significant difficulties because of
this. However, the majority of prior research has merely mentioned these difficulties in passing. Therefore, we will focus
on three key points in the following paragraphs:
6.4.1 Down-link-up-link asymmetry
Most research on user interaction on various networks has investigated the problem from the up-link or down-link view.
However, various networks often introduce asymmetry between down-link and up-link depending on channel quality,
traffic volume, coverage, and computer hardware limitations. Among them, down-link and up-link coverage asymmetry
is very difficult for various networks. In the down-link, macro-cells provide much greater coverage than smaller cells
because of the large variances in power between different types of primary channels in various networks. In contrast,
user resources can transfer the same amount of power to the up-link regardless of the type of BS they are connected to.
Although some promising results have been reported in References 16,41,48 regarding down-link cuts and up-link user
associations, these cuts obviously require excellent synchronization and high-speed data connection as well as minimal
latency between basic channels in order to be effective. Users have been required to associate with the same BS in both
up-link and down-link directions since the invention of the mobile phone,39 as this integration makes it easier to construct
and employ sensible transport, and physical channels. As a result, 5G networks are likely to utilize both down-link and
up-link technologies. User-friendly links may not perform correctly because of network coverage asymmetry in up-link
and down-link. There are many ways that a big RSS-based user association law could relate a remote macro-cell to a
user’s location. For tiny cellular users, this results in heavy up-link interference, which reduces spectrum efficiency and
power, and shortens battery charging time, because the user must transmit excessive power to ensure the intended signal
intensity gets up-linked. In order to segregate down-link and up-link submissions across multiple networks, it is noticed
that asymmetry remains, whether Time Division Duplexing (TDD) or Frequency Division Duplexing (FDD) is employed.
As a result, in heterogeneous networks, using a complex joint up-link and improving user engagement is essential. The
authors of Reference 49 presented a user association method that raised the number of allowed users while reducing the
limiting power consumption of up-links. In Reference 25, the algorithm’s performance is highly dependent on the weight,
which was determined heuristically. The objective function in Reference 25 was further enhanced to increase network
utilization, which was based on a trade-off between data rate and power consumption. However, the authors in Refer-
ence 25 consider base stations to have full queues and therefore, biasing deteriorates the outage rate of the overall network
by lowering the signal to interference ratio (SINR). Improved user experience was developed as a discussion problem
in Reference 50 to boost up-link and down-link efficiency resources. Under specified Quality of Service (QoS) restric-
tions, a user association and a beam-forming algorithm were developed in Reference 42. Table 3 presents the summary
of algorithms, parameters and their advantages and disadvantages in heterogeneous networks.
6.4.2 Backhaul bottleneck
We can expect a paradigm shift in research due to the emergence of heterogeneous networks. The importance of the
backhaul in the context of the 4G LTE network was not completely acknowledged among these difficulties. Moreover,
it becomes more obvious in 5G and beyond technologies.45 Even if a complete backhaul is used, most studies focus on
front-end performance without considering specific backhaul implementation specifics or any potential bottlenecks in
the system’s network controller. This is often true for well-structured macro-cells from the distant past. However, BS may
slow down traffic in diverse networks due to overcrowding. Due to their restricted data rate, current backhaul options
for small cells are not ideal. When considering dense heterogeneous networks, rigorous backhaul analysis is necessary to
realize their full potential. For heterogeneous networks, the backhaul volume limit is quite critical.
As a result, backhaul-aware interaction techniques that consider the backlash limit are necessary for heterogeneous
networks. In order to maximize the efficiency of a wide range of networks, the dispersed organization algorithm uses a
flexible integrated setting.4 Under reversal limitations, several user-based metrics were examined. A new algorithm was
introduced in Reference 5 to enhance the overall weight of all users in conjunction with carrier aggregation (CA) and to
force backhaul capture in smaller BS cells. A heuristic user association technique was developed by the authors of Refer-
ence 46 to boost network capacity when both backhaul volume and cell load were considered. Using the power of game
theory in backhaul-constrained heterogeneous networks, a cache-aware user association was constructed, which has been
categorized as one to many simulation games. Based on the volume and recognition of a device that estimates the BS data
storage capacity and user movement patterns, it has been found that BS users are linked to each other. For a far lower
price than assured QoS connections, the authors of Reference 48 proposed an intriguing approach in which third par-
ties provided backhaul connections for BSs and then leased their networks’ excess capacity to mobile service providers.
The authors in Reference 48 give a standard algorithm for optimizing user engagement, which allows mobile carriers to
strongly select which customers should be outsourced to third-party femto-cell based on common traffic requirements,
interruption rates and channel conditions as well as third-party access pricing. When optimizing the backhaul net-
work, the authors15 took into account the lowest number of users while allocating resources across all wireless channels
and controlling the flow. In terms of network power usage and backhaul energy, researchers21 read the interaction sto-
ries of heterogeneous networks’ energy efficient users by considering both network power consumption and backhaul’s
energy.
6.4.3 Mobility support
The increase in cell density found on heterogeneous networks for 5G and beyond networks poses ongoing challenges for
mobility support. Small cells have reduced transmission capacity, leading to a reduction in footprints. A static method
that does not take into consideration the user’s mobility may result in a common dilemma between cell association on
heterogeneous networks compared to a conventional equivalent network. On the other hand, it is well known to increase
the complexity of complex procedures, resulting in higher expenses and unnecessary delays in the delivery and withdrawal
of calls.47 The load balance and handover process of heterogeneous networks is often not as good as systems with pure
macro-cell (homogeneous) only systems, as noted in the 3GPP technical study.16 In order to optimize long-term system
performance and avoid over-sharing on heterogeneous networks, it is vital to account for user transactions when making
user interaction decisions on heterogeneous networks.
The authors of Reference 11 initially discovered the opportunity to cover down-link by considering user speed under
a biased user integration law by taking advantage of stochastic geometry. After that, there was a total bias in favor of
expanding coverage, with both a positive bias and the likelihood of a merger being linked to the user’s speed. The findings
in Reference 11 showed that the bias factor-based speed factor was able to increase both network coverage and overall
network performance. According to Reference 12, a modified Markov and Poisson process51 replicated the user’s move-
ment and was used to improve system performance in terms of traffic delay and blocking potential. While the authors in
Reference 13 presented that old algorithms were only transmitting one package at a time to either the BS or to a mobile
T A B L E 3 Summary of algorithms, parameters and their pros and cons in heterogeneous networks.
Paper Optimization Optimization Performance
details algorithm parameters metrics Achievements Drawbacks
1 Coverage optimal Coverage Outage Derived expressions for Did not combine cell selection
cell selection Probability of probability, coverage probability and load balance in one or
a two tier Jain’s fairness and rate achievable by a different formula
HetNet, Rate index typical user
achievable
3 Max Sat and EMF SINR, DL data User satisfaction Concerns both up-link Poor SINR when the average
aware rate, Exposure ratio and down-link traffic, EMF exposure increases
Index good data rate
14 Adaptive Link reliability, System capacity, Increased System capacity, Did not address inter-cell
Cooperative UE selection packet RB loading, net-profit, interference among the
Communication dropping reduced packet several neighbor cells,
for ultra-dense probability dropping and delay cell-selection, load balancing
networks
34 Maximum Sum Rate, User Improved throughput, In some comparisons,
Throughput Channel throughput, SINR, enhanced CCREMM is outperformed
Scheduling Quality cost function performance in terms of by the existing compared
(MTS) Indicator handover in comparison schemes. Also, lacks the
to general CRE schemes up-link concept
44 Poisson Point SINR Rate coverage Up-link association is The association comparison is
Process considered not done with previous
down-link achievements and
moreover it omits down-link
itself
50 RA-ICIC scheme, Real demand Inter-site Good load balance, Good Did not consider fading or path
FD scheduling and backhaul density and performance gain loss exponent in the model
algorithm demand system compared to RSRP or
bandwidth SINR, coordinated RA
algorithm allocates the
frequency resources to
nodes effectively
20 Load balancing Involved eNBs Connection Efficient load balancing Does not consider multi-hop
algorithm D2D and UEs, D2D ratio network, which is
relay links relay links impractical. Might not be
able to provide stable
bandwidth during UE
mobility and cause delay also
21 Lagrangian Dual Throughput, Network utility, Average throughput, Does not consider dynamic
Method TTI constraint System utility network utility and less users
complexity
22 Round Robin Traffic load, Jain’s fairness UEs connected to Low Susceptibility of HCGPA to
Scheduling. resource index, Power Networks (LPN) interference led to low SINR
Hybrid Channel allocation and Spectral is 1.72 times, better load performance of the cell-edge
Access cell efficiency balancing fairness UEs
Probabilities association compared with
conventional RSRP and
others
8 Stochastic geometry Dual decompo- UL spectral Considers association for Interference is taken to be
sition, efficiency, up-link by dual limited and user are
Lagrangens association connectivity considered to be mobile
theorem probability
(Continues)
T A B L E 3 (Continued)
28 Logarithmic Utility Optimized Rate CDF A large (3.5X) throughput The system is not aware of the
Function, Resource gain for cell-edge users load variation and is not
Primal-Dual Allocation, dynamic. It also does not
Distributed Fractional work on up-link scenario
Algorithm User
Association
and
Convergence
37 Soft Frequency User Spectrum Throughput Improved spectrum Did not consider about the load
Reuse (SFR) and Efficiency efficiency of both UE variation
Almost Blank (macro and pico),
Subframes (ABS) improved overall UE
performance
45 Distributive Cell edge rate Selection Increase in throughput User mobility is not considered.
heuristic probability, and cell edge rate And cross tier interference is
algorithm Interference also not considered
38 Ant Colony Probability of Throughput Achieves greater average Did not consider cross-tier
Optimization selecting satisfaction performance in terms of interference
(ACO) node, ratio resource utilization,
pheromone fairness, interference
trail, number management. And it is
of also comparatively less
pheromones complex
deposited
40 Dual Fairness (Jain’s Throughput Resource allocation and Mobility of the users is not
decomposition fairness interference considered and the algorithm
by Langrangean’s Index) management is is complex
theorem efficiently managed
9 Distributive Belief Rate, channel System utility, Improves the system Association of UE with multi
Propagation (BP) estimation SINR utility, reduces BS is not considered,
complexity handover or mobile UE is
also not discussed
6 Optimal Resource Spectral Delay, average Significant gain, designed Did not consider handover and
Partitioning and efficiency, rate simple fast distributed load variation dynamism in
association Utility sum mechanisms and each BS
algorithm for dynamic
interference
management in each
subframe
49 Weight-based Network Throughput Good load balance Mobility and interference are
Balance Index achieved not considered
(NBI) a new
parameter
instead of
Jain’s fairness
index
proposed
25 Biased association Down-link SINR Spectrum Developed an analytical Considers base stations have full
(maximum CDF, Outage Efficiency framework for queues, and thereby biasing
biased Received probability evaluating outage deteriorates the outage ad
power) probability and spectral rate of the overall network by
efficiency lowering the SINR
(Continues)
T A B L E 3 (Continued)
27 Poison Point Outage SINR and Low-outage and good Mobility and interference are
Process probability coverage bit-rate achieved not considered
and bit-rate
4 Adaptive cell range Capacity Normalized cell Enhanced coverage and Mobility and interference are
extension load capacity not considered
29 One-Way Active Quality of JFI Good load balance No proper or clear idea found
Measurement Service (QoS) about the process
Protocol
(OWAMP)
12 Mobility load Throughput Standard Improve the network Only single objective
balancing deviation throughput
46 Game theory Throughput Energy Enhanced throughput and Mobility is not considered.
efficiency also energy efficiency Interference mitigation and
load balancing is not
accumulated in the algorithm
18 Dual Cell blocking Jain’s Fairness Enhanced load balance Interference not considered
decomposition probability index
user with a negative delay on heterogeneous networks with two subcategories. As a result of the erratic nature of inter-
actions between BS and users, the need for a multi-point transfer strategy emerged, in which many BSs keep useless
copies of data and are grouped such that mobile users may receive data reliably. For the authors,15,46 a novel framework
was devised, using a new technique to find the best user association in the femto-cell network, which not only assessed
previous cellular behavior and anticipated future regions, but also reduced the frequency of delivery.
Due to network heterogeneity, 3GPP Release 12 has temporarily suspended dual communication. It is possible to
simultaneously connect to both macro and small cells via dual connections, which considerably improves mobility
endurance and increases user access to the network. As long as dual communication is enabled, the user will be able to
receive signed messages from the primary BS. This user does not need to begin rendering processes until they move to the
cover of another huge BS, thereby ensuring more efficient delivery. User interfaces determine in advance the benefits of
dual-connection functionality, which determines which BS the user should be linked with. Simulations have been used to
examine the impact of various user-related circumstances on the ability to achieve dual connectivity in Reference 18. In
Reference 19, the total number of users was varied to analyze the cell association, and a sub-optimal algorithm for creating
sub-optimal associations was presented to resolve the issue. However, a dual connection has the ability to improve user
mobility, but dual communication also offers a number of technical issues in terms of buffer status reports and reporting,
transmission power management and so on. Because of this, extra work must be done before dual communication can be
completely utilized to promote mobility across diverse networks. A summary of the qualitative comparison of the most
common user association algorithms for heterogeneous networks is presented in Table 4.
7 TECHNICAL APPROACHES FOR LOAD BALANCING OR FAIRNESS
When measuring the burden on various servers and equipment, load balancing has long been considered a means to
boost values such as resource utilization, accuracy and wait or process delays, or exits. Even if the distribution of users
is uniform, “natural” measures like SINR or RSSI can lead to severe load imbalances in emerging 5G and beyond net-
works because of the varying transmission power and BS capabilities and the ever-increasing number of users. Due to
increased network traffic and network outages, a broader system needs to be developed in which decisions such as user
configuration and mobile connectivity are integrated. To discover the most efficient user server structure is a complicated
challenge, and the complexity grows exponentially with the network rate, which is a dead-end approach. In the next few
short sections, we will go through some of the most useful technical approaches of load balancing.
T A B L E 4 Qualitative comparison of user association algorithms for heterogeneous network.

Spectrum Energy Coverage
Algorithms Control QoS Fairness efficiency efficiency probability
Maximum received Down-link (DL) Moderate Moderate Low Low Low

signal (max-RSS) and distributed
max-RSS + spectrum DL and distributed High Moderate High Moderate High
partitioning
Biased RSS DL and distributed High Moderate Moderate Moderate High
Biased-RSS + BS DL and distributed High Moderate Moderate High High
sleeping
RSS + spectrum DL and centralized Moderate Moderate High Moderate Moderate
partitioning
RSS + power DL and central- High Moderate Moderate High Moderate
control ized/distributed
RSS + BS sleeping DL and central- High Moderate Moderate High Moderate
ized/distributed
7.1 Relaxed optimization
This NP method is difficult to use, even for a tiny mobile network, due to the more constant relationship between user
organization and planning that emerges from a typical user rate less than a service and power limit. As traffic increases,
so does the difficulty of solving the integrated lines problem, which has been extensively studied in line theory with only a
limited amount of improvement over time. An alternative method for making the problem more convex is to allow users
to associate with many base stations in a full-fledged model that regularly transmits.3 Depending on the application and
power limit, the fundamental form is to increase the weight level of the load, where the binary organization indicator is
relaxed to a real value between 0 and 1. An algorithm that is both simple and near-optimal can be created using the most
common programming tools, such as double decay, which is followed.
7.2 Game theory
Using game theory as a field, researchers can analyze collaborative decision-making processes and study the most pressing
issues of spatial expansion,34 analyses, for example, a user-focused method that does not necessitate any top signature
or connection of several access networks. Users in different service areas compete for bandwidth from many wireless
networks in the study of network selection variables.25 A valuable tool for operating systems and flexible networks, game
theory is not guaranteed to result in a combination of algorithms. Even after combining the methods to get a better
result, this may lead to incorrect use due to the high cost. As a result, no closed assertion can be made about the link
between performance indicators and network parameters in game theory. Game theory can provide some insight into
how unmanned vehicles and base stations should be coupled in terms of network load fluctuation.
7.3 Markov decision process
Learning about the evolution of stochastic systems of indefinite time is possible using Markov decision-making processes
(MDPs). Mobile uploading to WiFi has been studied using MDPs in the setting of heterogeneous networks. Another inter-
esting use for heterogeneous networks is the challenge of organizational structure; for example, Reference 35 presents a
hybrid scheme in which users are aided in their decisions by streaming data. But as network size increases, direct reso-
lution of MDPs becomes increasingly challenging. Using MDPs in a continuous state space also has its drawbacks. There
is also a challenge in defining appropriate circumstances and a coherent change model in complicated, unstructured sit-
uations. It is difficult, in general, to establish a proper nation model and solve it precisely on a big diversified network
that includes various types of BSs and WiFi, but MDP provides a feasible technique to think for itself, combining the
advantages of a medium and a distributed-design network into a single network.
7.4 Cell range expansion
One of the most prevalent sub-optimal techniques for offloading users to reduce power BSs in 3GPP standardiza-
tion efforts is the use of biased received power-based user association control.44 This strategy uses an association
bias to unload users to smaller cells. If a person can choose from among k possible tiers, the index of the tier they
choose is
k∗ = arg max Bi Prx,i , (1)

i=1, … k
where Bi is the bias for tier i and Prx,i is the received power from tier i. Scaled-down cells are placed in Tier 1 of the
cell hierarchy (0 dB). In other words, a small cell bias of 10 dB means that until the UE device’s received power drops
below 10 dB below the macro-cell BS, it will remain connected to the small cell. Biasing has been dubbed “Cell Range
Expansion” (CRE) because of its ability to increase the range and area covered by small cells.
It’s common to reflect about the appropriate distance between CRE and the theoretical solutions that were previ-
ously described. The simple bias in each phase virtually reaches optimum load performance when fair values are chosen.
However, in general, it is difficult to identify which strategies to use effectively are biased.42
7.5 Stochastic geometry
For the current network setup, the utility function U is maximized by the use of the prior tools and schemes.
E[max U], (2)

Ω
where Ω is the set of solution space. However, if the network configuration is based on an underlying distribution, a
different problem can be formulated as in Equation (3), where the optimization is over the average utility:
max E[U]. (3)

Ω
This is a stochastic optimization problem, and hence falls under this category. Using Equation (3)’s solution
for Equation (2) would be a mistake. As a result, the gap between a well-designed but stable CRE and the
world’s best solution has been proven to be substantially smaller than if the organizations of each network were
reorganized.
As a branch of possible opportunities, stochastic geometry provides BS and user locations in the network via a point
process. The Poisson Point Process (PPP) can yield expressions from important metrics like SINR and scale50 when mod-
elling user locations with BS. It is also valuable for providing information on the influence of important system level
factors like transmission power, density and bandwidth of different categories when constructing load balancing algo-
rithms. Stochastic geometry20 was used to study cell expansion and found to have a significant effect on the network
parameter in a concise manner by measuring overall potential network configurations.
As a result, the organization’s precise location and distribution are unaffected by modelling BS as random sites in
several networks. According to Reference 20, an organizational spatial measuring method was provided, which was then
utilized to distribute the load (based on the same distribution of users); as a result, the bias parameter distribution for
each category may be determined.20,21 It is possible to utilize the rate distribution to calculate the correct bias by adjusting
the distribution ratio to increase as a function of the bias value.
7.6 Load balancing accommodating other emerging issues
Load Balancing for 5G and beyond networks is far from fully understood. New flexibility and benefits for system designers
are obvious, but it also requires a lot of generally used metrics and ideas that have been created through time to locate
similar mobile networks. As a result, new approaches to study and evaluation are being considered.
7.6.1 Backhaul bottleneck
Wired backhaul connections often limit the power of small cells, such as femto-cells or WiFi APs. Small cells loaded across
the border, which may be retrieval-dependent, might limit the quantity of unnecessary data extracted from macro-cells
in light of this backhaul strain.21 The simplest approach would be to add the bias value to the backhaul limit.
7.6.2 Mobility
Supporting seamless supply between different cell types in different networks is important. When a user with moderate
or high mobility encounters a small area of cell structure, the user must be removed from their original cell and return
when the small cell is no longer nearby. On the other hand, handovers are well-known for their lengthy and expensive
procedures. Short connections to small cells may necessitate tolerance of BS integration that is less than optimal from a
system-level perspective rather than commencing supply and departure from the cell. Open versus small closed access
cells are a similar issue.
7.6.3 UE capability
In addition to its obvious advantages, bias in small cells lowers SINR. LTE-A systems can achieve zero link throughput
under Adaptive Modulation and Coding (AMC) if the SINR is less than −6.5 dB. Since the UE device may theoretically
have a better rate than the cell with the same SINR (−15 dB), this is not possible since the cell’s low bandwidth and coding
prevent it from doing so and edit BS can be sent. This can help with management and disruption cancellation, but it also
adds a new hurdle to precisely estimate the cost of load balancing.
7.6.4 Asymmetric down-link and up-link
In the down-link, macro-cells cover a bigger area than small cells due to the substantial variances in strength between
BS types in different networks. On the other hand, UE devices can transmit the same amount of power regardless of the
kind of BS. down-link traffic, on the other hand, tends to be significantly more intense than up-link traffic. With these
inconsistencies, a full down-link link does not need to be important for up-link transmission. As a result, the current
down-link load balancing algorithm must also be extended to include the relevant up-link cases. Ideally, researchers
should conduct a collaborative study to quantify both down-link and up-link traffic.
8 CO N C LU S I O N
The LTE or LTE-A architectural framework has gradually changed into heterogeneous networks over time. High-speed
wireless communications will become a reality as a result of this development. In order to increase capacity, 3GPP uses
LTE-heterogeneous network deployment as a means of increasing capacity. However, the most challenging difficulties in
heterogeneous networks where small cells are layered on top of macro-cells are cell selection, load distribution, and inter-
ference mitigation. Resources, complexity, and the Quality of Service (QoS) are just a few of the RRM issues preventing
these networks from progressing further. These problems are being addressed through a variety of methods. Furthermore,
the dynamic nature of user distribution and service demand means that the ultimate goal of improved cell-edge and over-
all spectral efficiency and QoS cannot be accomplished. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of the relevant
literature. This literature review includes several adaptive approaches that can boost each of these characteristics inde-
pendently to an improved degree. Despite this, heterogeneous networks remain unreliable and insufficient for 5G, 6G,
and future ultra-dense networks. The lack of a unified optimization of QoS, capacity, and spectral efficiency is to blame for
the lack of progress. The use of multi-objective frameworks and hence the optimization of the level of satisfaction for all
areas is one possible method. Research on heterogeneous networks is increasingly using this method. Examples include
game theory, genetic algorithms, artificial intelligence-based adaptive methods, and others. Designing in this manner is
intriguing because it has the potential to be quite effective in meeting numerous objectives at once.
To summarize, the research topic of heterogeneous networks still faces many challenges, some of which have been
discussed in this paper. By overcoming these challenges, LTE or LTE-A networks will be able to evolve into heterogeneous
networks and enable 5G, 6G, and beyond. A multi-objective-based study in heterogeneous networks is recommended for
its advancement.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research work has been supported by the Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) scholarship
along with CQUniversity, Australia. Open access publishing facilitated by Central Queensland University, as part of the
Wiley - Central Queensland University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data supporting this study’s findings are publicly available via the Google Scholar engine at https://scholar.google.
com/.
ORCID
Mohammed Jaber Alam https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8267-1312
Md Rahat Hossain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6835-8274
Salahuddin Azad https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6377-7912
Ritesh Chugh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0061-7206
REFERENCES
1. Gupta AK, Dhillon HS, Vishwanath S, Andrews JG. Downlink multi-antenna heterogeneous cellular network with load balancing. IEEE
Trans Commun. 2014;62(11):4052-4067.
2. Elsherif AR, Chen WP, Ito A, Ding Z. Resource allocation and inter-cell interference management for dual-access small cells. IEEE
J Selected Areas Commun. 2015;33(6):1082-1096.
3. De Domenico A, Díez LF, Agüero R, Kténas D, Savin V. EMF-aware cell selection in heterogeneous cellular networks. IEEE Commun
Lett. 2015;19(2):271-274.
4. Gu X, Deng X, Li Q, Zhang L, Li W. Capacity analysis and optimization in heterogeneous network with adaptive cell range control. Int
J Antennas Propagat. 2014;2014:1-11.
5. Kikuchi K, Otsuka H. Parameter Optimization for Adaptive Control CRE in HetNet. IEEE; 2013:3334-3338.
6. Madan R, Borran J, Sampath A, Bhushan N, Khandekar A, Ji T. Cell association and interference coordination in heterogeneous LTE-A
cellular networks. IEEE J Selected Areas Commun. 2010;28(9):1479-1489.
7. Roessler J. LTE-Advanced (3GPP Rel. 12) Technology Introduction White Paper. München: Application Note-1MA252-Rohde & Schwarz
International. Rohde and Schwarz; 2015.
8. Lema MA, Pardo E, Galinina O, Andreev S, Dohler M. Flexible dual-connectivity spectrum aggregation for decoupled uplink and downlink
access in 5G heterogeneous systems. IEEE J Selected Areas Commun. 2016;34(11):2851-2865.
9. Chen Y, Li J, Lin Z, Mao G, Vucetic B. User association with unequal user priorities in heterogeneous cellular networks. IEEE Trans Veh
Technol. 2016;65(9):7374-7388.
10. Lee YL, Chuah TC, Loo J, Vinel A. Recent advances in radio resource management for heterogeneous LTE/LTE-A networks. IEEE
Commun Surv Tutorials. 2014;16(4):2142-2180.
11. Storck CR, Efrem EO, Guilherme GO, Mini RA, Duarte-Figueiredo F. FiVH: a solution of inter-V-cell handover decision for connected
vehicles in ultra-dense 5G networks. Veh Commun. 2021;28:100307.
12. Hasan MM, Kwon S. Cluster-based load balancing algorithm for ultra-dense heterogeneous networks. IEEE Access. 2019;8:2153-2162.
13. Kudo T, Ohtsuki T. Cell range expansion using distributed Q-learning in heterogeneous networks. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw.
2013;2013(1):61.
14. Chang BJ, Liou SH. Adaptive cooperative communication for maximizing reliability and reward in ultra-dense small cells LTE-A toward
5G cellular networking. Comput Netw. 2017;115:16-28.
15. Rasheed I, Hu F. Intelligent super-fast vehicle-to-everything 5G communications with predictive switching between mmWave and THz
links. Veh Commun. 2021;27:100303.
16. Ali NA, Taha AEM, Hassanein HS. Quality of service in 3GPP R12 LTE-advanced. IEEE Commun Mag. 2013;51(8):103-109.
17. Ertürk MC, Güvenç I, Mukherjee S, Arslan H. Fair and QoS-oriented resource management in heterogeneous networks. EURASIP J Wirel
Commun Netw. 2013;2013(1):121.
18. Lee YL, Chuah TC, El-Saleh AA, Loo J. User Association for Backhaul Load Balancing with Quality of service provisioning for
heterogeneous networks. IEEE Commun Lett. 2018;22(11):2338-2341.
19. Sedgewick R. Permutation generation methods. ACM Comput Surveys. 1977;9(2):137-164.
20. Alam MJ, Gafur A, Rahid SZ, Sadeque MG, Kundu D, Sayed R. Permutation based load balancing technique for long term evolution
advanced heterogeneous networks. Int J Electrical Comput Eng. 2022;12(6):6311-6319. doi:10.11591/ijece.v12i6.pp6311-6319
21. Liu J, Xie R, Yu FR. Resource allocation and user association for HTTP adaptive streaming in heterogeneous cellular networks with small
cells. China Commun. 2016;13(9):1-11.
22. Gadam MA, Ng CK, Nordin NK, Sali A, Hashim F. Hybrid channel gain prioritized access-aware cell association with interference
mitigation in LTE-advanced HetNets. Int J Commun Syst. 2016;29(18):2650-2668.
23. Kamel M, Hamouda W, Youssef A. Ultra-dense networks: a survey. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials. 2016;18(4):2522-2545.
24. Simsek M, Bennis M, Güvenç I. Learning based frequency-and time-domain inter-cell interference coordination in HetNets. IEEE Trans
Veh Technol. 2015;64(10):4589-4602.
25. Jo HS, Sang YJ, Xia P, Andrews JG. Heterogeneous cellular networks with flexible cell association: a comprehensive downlink SINR
analysis. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2012;11(10):3484-3495.
26. Yang B, Mao G, Ge X, Han T. A New Cell Association Scheme in Heterogeneous Networks. IEEE; 2015:5627-5632.
27. Giambene G. Analysis of LTE-A heterogeneous networks with SIR-based cell association and stochastic geometry. J Commun Netw.
2018;20(2):129-143.
28. Ye Q, Rong B, Chen Y, Al-Shalash M, Caramanis C, Andrews JG. User association for load balancing in heterogeneous cellular networks.
IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2013;12(6):2706-2716.
29. Marwat SNK, Meyer S, Weerawardane T, Goerg C. Congestion-aware handover in LTE Systems for Load Balancing in transport network.
ETRI J. 2014;36(5):761-771.
30. Alam MJ, El-Saleh AA, Tan CK, Ku I, Lee YL, Chuah TC. Improved Joint Cell Association and Interference Mitigation for LTE-A Hetero-
geneous Networks. IEEE 4th International Symposium on Telecommunication Technologies (ISTT), Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Selangor, Malaysia; 2018:1-4.
31. Liang C, Yu FR. Wireless virtualization for next generation mobile cellular networks. IEEE Wirel Commun. 2015;22(1):61-69.
32. Sheikhidris K, Alias MY, Roslee M, Alam MJ. Throughput Maximization Based on User Association in Heterogeneous Networks. 6th
International Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT), Bandung, Indonesia; 2018:34-37.
33. Skondras E, Michalas A, Vergados DD. Mobility management on 5G vehicular cloud computing systems. Veh Commun. 2019;16:15-44.
34. Rakotomanana E, Gagnon F. Optimum biasing for cell load balancing under QoS and interference management in HetNets. IEEE Access.
2016;4:5196-5208.
35. Liu D, Wang L, Chen Y, et al. User association in 5G networks: a survey and an outlook. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials.
2016;18(2):1018-1044.
36. Kokku R, Mahindra R, Zhang H, Rangarajan S. NVS: a substrate for virtualizing wireless resources in cellular networks. IEEE/ACM Trans
Networking. 2012;20(5):1333-1346.
37. Moon S, Kim B, Malik S, et al. Cell selection and resource allocation for interference management in a macro-Picocell heterogeneous
network. Wirel Pers Commun. 2015;83(3):1887-1901.
38. Lee YL, Loo J, Chuah TC, El-Saleh AA. Multi-objective resource allocation for LTE/LTE-A femtocell/HeNB networks using ant colony
optimization. Wirel Pers Commun. 2017;92(2):565-586.
39. Chandrasekhar V, Andrews JG. Spectrum allocation in tiered cellular networks. IEEE Trans Commun. 2009;57(10):3059-3068.
40. Lee YL, Loo J, Chuah TC, El-Saleh AA. Fair resource allocation with interference mitigation and resource reuse for LTE/LTE-A femtocell
networks. IEEE Trans Veh Technol. 2016;65(10):8203-8217.
41. Barth U. 3GPP Long-Term Evolution/System Architecture Evolution Overview. Alcatel White Paper; 2006.
42. Andrews JG, Singh S, Ye Q, Lin X, Dhillon H An overview of load balancing in HetNets: Old myths and open problems. arXiv preprint,
arXiv:1307.7779 2013.
43. Gadam MA, Ahmed MA, Ng CK, Nordin NK, Sali A, Hashim F. Review of adaptive cell selection techniques in LTE-advanced
heterogeneous networks. J Comput Networks Commun. 2016;2016:3.
44. Elshaer H, Kulkarni MN, Boccardi F, Andrews JG, Dohler M. Downlink and uplink cell association with traditional macrocells and
millimeter wave small cells. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2016;15(9):6244-6258.
45. Qi Y, Wang H. Interference-aware user association under cell sleeping for heterogeneous cloud cellular networks. IEEE Wireless Commun
Lett. 2017;6(2):242-245.
46. Trabelsi N, Chen CS, El Azouzi R, Roullet L, Altman E. User association and resource allocation optimization in LTE cellular networks.
IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag. 2017;14(2):429-440.
47. Ghosh A, Ratasuk R, Mondal B, Mangalvedhe N, Thomas T. LTE-advanced: next-generation wireless broadband technology. IEEE Wirel
Commun. 2010;17(3):10-22.
48. Bai Y, Chen L. Hybrid spectrum arrangement and interference mitigation for coexistence between LTE macrocellular and femtocell
networks. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw. 2013;2013(1):56.
49. Huang Y, Durrani S, Dmochowski P, Zhou X. A proposed network balance index for heterogeneous networks. IEEE Wireless Commun
Lett. 2017;6(1):98-101.
50. Eguizábal M, Hernández Á. Joint dynamic resource allocation and load balancing-cell selection in LTE-A HetNet scenarios based on type
1 inband relay deployments. Comput Netw. 2016;100:90-109.
51. Huang J, Subramanian VG, Agrawal R, Berry RA. Downlink scheduling and resource allocation for OFDM systems. IEEE Trans Wirel
Commun. 2009;8(1):288-296.
How to cite this article: Alam MJ, Hossain MR, Azad S, Chugh R. An overview of LTE/LTE-A heterogeneous
networks for 5G and beyond. Trans Emerging Tel Tech. 2023;34(8):e4806. doi: 10.1002/ett.4806

Transactions On Emerging Telecommunications Technologies - 2023 - Alam - An Overview of LTE LTE A Heterogeneous Networks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transactions On Emerging Telecommunications Technologies - 2023 - Alam - An Overview of LTE LTE A Heterogeneous Networks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transactions On Emerging Telecommunications Technologies - 2023 - Alam - An Overview of LTE LTE A Heterogeneous Networks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Received: 14 April 2022 Revised: 24 December 2022 Accepted: 5 April 2023

An overview of LTE/LTE-A heterogeneous networks for 5G

Mohammed Jaber Alam Md Rahat Hossain Salahuddin Azad Ritesh Chugh

School of Engineering and Technology,

Trans Emerging Tel Tech. 2023;34:e4806. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ett 1 of 22

T A B L E 1 Architectural differences of 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, and 6G.

Deployment 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 2030s

FIGURE 1 (A) Conventional homogeneous network versus (B) heterogeneous network.

3 OUTLINE OF HETEROGENEOUS LTE AND LTE-A NETWO RKS

FIGURE 2 PRISMA flow chart.

3.1 LTE and LTE-A architecture

3.2 Heterogeneous networks

FIGURE 3 LTE and LTE-A framework.

4 RADIO RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

FIGURE 4 Heterogeneous network.

5 ISSUES A ND CHALLENGES FO R H ETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS TO

T A B L E 2 Challenges to reach 6G from present 4G and 5G technology.

FIGURE 5 Classification of RRM schemes for LTE/LTE-A networks.

FIGURE 6 Interference scenario.

6 U S E R ASSOCIAT ION IN H ETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS

6.1 User association for coverage or outage probability optimization

6.2 User association for spectrum efficiency optimization

6.3 User association for energy efficiency optimization

6.4 User association accommodating other emerging issues in heterogeneous networks

6.4.1 Down-link-up-link asymmetry

6.4.2 Backhaul bottleneck

6.4.3 Mobility support

7 TECHNICAL APPROACHES FOR LOAD BALANCING OR FAIRNESS

T A B L E 4 Qualitative comparison of user association algorithms for heterogeneous network.

Maximum received Down-link (DL) Moderate Moderate Low Low Low

7.1 Relaxed optimization

7.2 Game theory

7.3 Markov decision process

7.4 Cell range expansion

k∗ = arg max Bi Prx,i , (1)

7.5 Stochastic geometry

E[max U], (2)

max E[U]. (3)

7.6 Load balancing accommodating other emerging issues

7.6.1 Backhaul bottleneck

7.6.4 Asymmetric down-link and up-link

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

You might also like