Handover Parameters Optimisation Techniques in 5G Networks
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- The impacts of various HCP settings on the system performance of the 5G network are studied based on three key performance metrics: HOP, PPHP and OP.
- Various HCP system settings, HOM and TTT are proposed and investigated for the 5G network with various scenarios for the speed of mobile.
- The suggested systems are validated to ensure their efficiency in the 5G network.
2. Related Works
3. The Key HO Performance Evaluation Metrics
4. The Simulation Scenario and System Model
5. Simulation and Performance Evaluation Analysis
- Performance of Fixed HOM ValuesTo analyse the performance of the proposed algorithm with fixed HOM values, simulations with various mobile speeds were performed. Figure 4 presents the average HOP performance of the suggested algorithm for different fixed HOM values under various UE velocities. The suggested algorithm dramatically reduces the average HOP for higher HOM values compared to lower values for all velocities. In this figure, the results indicate that the proposed algorithm with higher HOM (i.e., 10 dB) produces lower HOP, which further increases with time. Nevertheless, with mobile velocity scenarios that are equal to or greater than 60 km/h, the suggested algorithm produced HOPs that were capable of rapidly fluctuating with time for all different HOM values. The outcomes indicate that the suggested algorithm with 10 dB HOM offers remarkable reduction gains in the average HO rate for all mobile speed scenarios. When compared to lower values of HOM (i.e., 0 and 2 dB), the overall average HOP obtained when HOM was 10 dB is 88%. This is 80% less than what was obtained when HOM was 0 dB and 2 dB, respectively. Nevertheless, higher or lower HOP is not always considered as a good or bad indicator. The most important performance indicators are PPHP and OP, as discussed in the following sections.Figure 5 displays the impact of HOPP with different HOP values for a specific time. The suggested algorithm for 10 dB HOM obtained lower HOPP rates than other HOMs because of the proper preparation of HCPs and contact with the better eNB target. Nevertheless, the proposed algorithm and other HOM values also acquired low HOPP rates over a specified period, especially in high HOM scenarios where high HOPP rate caused a significant waste of resource mass from the round-trip switching of UE data. The HOPP impact with 10 and 8 dB HOMs at a time of 3.75 s is high for the proposed algorithm compared to other time scenarios. At low speed, the received signals increasingly fluctuate; therefore, the HOPP rate rises. In the middle and high HOMs, the UE connection to the target eNB is faster, resulting in low HOPP rate. The proposed algorithm achieved a significant decrease in the HOPP rate in low HOM scenarios compared to other HOMs. Thus, the proposed algorithm with 10 dB HOM significantly reduces the HOPP rate compared to other HOMs.Figure 6 presents the average OP rate of the proposed optimisation algorithm for different HOM levels at varied scenarios of mobile speed. The average OP rate for each HOM level is calculated over all scenarios of mobile phone speed and during the whole simulation time. The OP rate is acquired through the optimisation algorithm, which is significantly reduced for the 40 km/h mobile speed, compared to other mobile speed scenarios. Using an inappropriately modified UE speed for optimising HCPs (i.e., an algorithm based on a mobile phone speed of 140 km/h) may result in high OP rates for all HOM levels. Thus, HCPs must be periodically adapted according to each of the UE’s independent experiences. The impact of the Doppler Effect accompanied by weak connections will further increase the OP rate according to the UE speed. However, at the 6 dB HOM level, the proposed algorithm with 140 km/h mobile speed achieved approximately 8%, 12%, 20%, 22% and 30% average OP rates at 120, 100, 80, 60, and 40 km/h mobile speed scenarios, respectively.
- Performance of Fixed TTT IntervalsFigure 7 illustrates the average HOP at various UE speed scenarios for different fixed TTT intervals. The performance of the proposed algorithm was compared with different TTT intervals. The simulation results reveal that the proposed algorithm reduces the average HOP for all scenarios of mobile velocity when the TTT is equal to 5120 ms, as compared to other TTT intervals. The total average HOPs achieved through the proposed algorithm are approximately 50%, 60%, 87%, 95% and 99.5% lower than those achieved by 2560 ms, 1280 ms, 640 ms, 320 ms and 0 ms, respectively, for 100 km/h mobile speed scenario. A long HO delay will lead to increased HOP rate for various mobile speed scenarios, since many packet transmissions are disabled through vertical HO. The proposed algorithm achieves a low HOP due to effective HCP values according to UE velocity; therefore, the HO delay is greatly reduced.Figure 8 displays the evaluation of the average PPHP rate for the optimisation algorithm, based on different considered values of TTT intervals, as well as the time of the entire simulation. The PPHP rate obtained for the 0 ms TTT interval is relatively higher than other TTT intervals for all simulation time scenarios. This finding is justified since the improper optimisation of HCPs by the MRO algorithm increases PPHP or UHO. High HOP may further lead to an increase PPHP and HOF, while a large decline in HOP will reduce the PPHP rate. The results indicate that in the initial period of operation, PPHPs were low and gradually increased with time. This case is more apparent in the average PPHP over low TTT scenarios, especially for 0 ms TTT. The operation of the network begins based on the HCP settings initially selected; after that, the HCP settings are automatically optimised and updated through the studied algorithm, resulting in various effects on PPHP, which differ according to the reaction and optimisation strength of the algorithm.In Figure 9, the outcomes reveal that the average OP recorded throughout all measured utilizers and scenarios of mobile speed are based on the various TTT intervals that have been taken into account. In this figure, the OPs are served as the average rate for all measured utilizers with different TTT interval scenarios. In general, the results demonstrate that the suggested algorithm continuously interacts with time, and OPs are subject to change over time for all scenarios of mobile speed. However, in Figure 6, the suggested algorithm with a 40 km/h mobile speed presented a remarkable reduction in the OP rate in comparison with other selected speeds for all TTT intervals. The proposed optimisation algorithm with 140 km/h mobile speed scenario basically caused the highest OP rate as the average over all different TTT interval scenarios. The average reduction gains achieved through the proposed optimisation algorithm with 40 km/h mobile speed scenario and TTT were approximately 32%, 29%, 26%, 17% and 16% lower for 140, 120, 100, 80 and 60 km/h mobile speed scenarios, respectively. This represents a significant achievement for the application of the proposed optimisation algorithm.The simulation results reveal that the performance of the algorithm with fixed HOM values outperforms the performance of the algorithm with fixed TTT intervals throughout all performance metrics with the scenarios of various speed. In addition, the HOP and PPHP behaviours with different HOM and TTT values correspond to the impact of HOM on both parameters. At low TTT intervals, the HOP and HOPP rates increase and raise the level of signals, while at high TTT periods, both rates reduce and decrease the levels of signals. The high velocity of UE maybe cause OP to rise, since the serving BS or the target BS is not servicing the UE.In general, this study was performed based on a simulation study only. To the best of our knowledge, most handover management studies are conducted based on simulations. Moreover, it has become very difficult to acquire data from the operator regarding mobility management. Most of the data we received are not useful and cannot be used to study handover management. The acquired data do not consider the handover control parameter settings and it is also not clear which handover decision algorithm was used.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
Acronyms | |||
3GPP | 3rd Generation Partnership Project | MR | Measurement Report |
4G | Fourth Generation | MRO | Mobility Robustness Optimisation |
5G | Fifth Generation | NCL | Neighbouring Cell List |
ASO | Automatic Self-Optimisation | NSA | Non-Standalone |
AWGN | Additive White Gaussian Noise | OP | Outage Probability |
BS | Base Station | OFDMA | Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access |
CRAT | Context-aware Radio Access Technology | PPHP | Ping-Pong Handover Probability |
eNB | Evolved Node B | PROMETHEE | Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation |
HCP | Handover Control Parameter | QoS | Quality of Service |
HO | Handover | RFA | Reverse Frequency Allocation |
HOF | Handover Failure | RATs | Radio Access Technologies |
HOM | Handover Margin | RRC | Radio Resource Control |
HOP | Handover Probability | RT | Residence Time |
HPO | Handover Parameter Optimisation | SA | Standalone |
ICI | Inter-Cell Interference | sBS | small cell BS |
IoTs | Internet of Things | SIN | Self-Improvement Network |
KPIs | Key Performance Indicators | SINR | Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio |
LB | Load Balancing | SON | Self-Improvement Networks |
LBEF | LB Efficiency Factor | ST | Stay Time |
LBHSO | LB Handover Self-Optimisation | SAW | Simple Additive Weighting |
LBO | Load Balancing Optimisation | TOPSIS | Technique for Order Preferences by Similarity to the Ideal Solution |
mBS | macro-cell BS | TTT | Time To Trigger |
MCDM | Multi-Criteria Decision-Making | UE | User Equipment |
MLB | Mobility Load Balancing | UMLB | Utility-based MLB |
MPCs | Major Performance Criteria | URC | Ultra-Reliable Communication |
Notations | |||
The HOs average number per UE | |||
The total number of served UEs in the whole simulation through the network | |||
The HOP for UEi | |||
The time that UE leaves the serving eNB-A | |||
The time that UE returns back to the same serving eNB-A | |||
The critical period | |||
The average HPPP for UE through the simulation period 𝑡 | |||
The total number of PPH throughout the entire system | |||
The total number of requested HOs represents the sum of failed HOs | |||
The total number of non-PPH | |||
η | The immediately received SINR level | ||
ηth | The threshold level is the minimum SINR level | ||
The average OP | |||
The total number for all UEs | |||
and | The maximum and minimum HOM values | ||
The adjusted part of HOM. | |||
RSRSs | The service BSRS | ||
RSRSt | The target BSRS |
References
- Ericsson Mobility Report. Available online: https://www.iot.gen.tr/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/160307-Ericsson-mobile-report-MWC-Update-edition.pdf (accessed on 28 June 2021).
- Shayea, I.; Azmi, M.H.; Rahman, T.A.; Ergen, M.; Han, C.T.; Arsad, A. Spectrum Gap Analysis with Practical Solutions for Future Mobile Data Traffic Growth in Malaysia. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 24910–24933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ergen, M.; Inan, F.; Ergen, O.; Shayea, I.; Tuysuz, M.F.; Azizan, A.; Ure, N.K.; Nekovee, M. Edge on Wheels with OMNIBUS Networking in 6G Technology. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 215928–215942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, A.; Lopez-Aguilera, E.; Demirkol, I. Mobility Management as a Service for 5G Networks. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1705.09101. [Google Scholar]
- Jain, A.; Lopez-Aguilera, E.; Demirkol, I. Improved handover signaling for 5G networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 29th Annual International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), Bologna, Italy, 9–12 September 2018; pp. 164–170. [Google Scholar]
- Angjo, J.; Shayea, I.; Ergen, M.; Mohamad, H.; Alhammadi, A.; Daradkeh, Y.I. Handover Management of Drones in Future Mobile Networks: 6G Technologies. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 12803–12823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhammadi, A.; Roslee, M.; Alias, M.Y.; Shayea, I.; Alquhali, A. Velocity-aware handover self-optimization management for next generation networks. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shayea, I.; Ergen, M.; Azmi, M.H.; Çolak, S.A.; Nordin, R.; Daradkeh, Y.I. Key Challenges, Drivers and Solutions for Mobility Management in 5G Networks: A Survey. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 172534–172552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayea, I.; Ergen, M.; Azizan, A.; Ismail, M.; Daradkeh, Y.I. Individualistic Dynamic Handover Parameter Self-Optimization Algorithm for 5G Networks Based on Automatic Weight Function. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 214392–214412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhammadi, A.; Roslee, M.; Alias, M.Y.; Shayea, I.; Alraih, S.; Mohamed, K.S. Auto Tuning Self-Optimization Algorithm for Mobility Management in LTE-A and 5G HetNets. IEEE Access 2019, 8, 294–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alhammadi, A.; Roslee, M.; Alias, M.Y.; Shayea, I.; Alraih, S. Dynamic handover control parameters for LTE-A/5G mobile communications. In Proceedings of the 2018 Advances in Wireless and Optical Communications (RTUWO), Riga, Latvia, 15–16 November 2018; pp. 39–44. [Google Scholar]
- Shayea, I.; Ismail, M.; Nordin, R.; Mohamad, H. Handover Performance over a Coordinated Contiguous Carrier Aggregation Deployment Scenario in the LTE-Advanced System. Int. J. Veh. Technol. 2014, 2014, 971297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shayea, I.; Ismail, M.; Nordin, R.; Mohamad, H. Performance Analysis of Multi-Carrier Aggregation with Adaptive Modulation and Coding Scheme in LTE-Advanced System. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2014, 67, 384–396. [Google Scholar]
- Self-Organizing Networks (SON) Policy Network Resource Model (NRM) Integration Reference Point (IRP); Requirements (Release 15), Document TS 28.627 V15.0.0; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2018.
- Jabbar, W.A.; Saad, W.K.; Ismail, M. MEQSA-OLSRv2: A multicriteria-based hybrid multipath protocol for energy-efficient and QoS-aware data routing in MANET-WSN convergence scenarios of IoT. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 76546–76572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohsin, M.J.; Saad, W.K.; Hamza, B.J.; Jabbar, W.A. Performance analysis of image transmission with various channel conditions/modulation techniques. Telkomnika 2020, 18, 1158–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, H.; Zhang, J.; Zheng, X.; Yang, Y.; Wu, P. Self-configuration and self-optimization for LTE networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2010, 48, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saad, W.K.; Hashim, Y.; Jabbar, W.A. Design and implementation of portable smart wireless pedestrian crossing control system. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 106109–106120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahai, A.R.; Saltzberg, B.R.; Ergen, M. Multi-Carrier Digital Communications: Theory and Applications of OFDM; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Pi, Z.; Khan, F. An introduction to millimeter-wave mobile broadband systems. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2011, 49, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Telecommunication Management; Self-Organizing Networks (SON) Policy Network Resource Model (NRM) Integration Reference Point (IRP); Information Service (IS) (Release 11), Document TS 32.522 V11.7.0; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2013.
- Hamza, B.J.; Saad, W.K.; Shayea, I.; Ahmad, N.; Mohamed, N.; Nandi, D.; Gholampour, G. Performance Enhancement of SCM/WDM-RoF-XGPON System for Bidirectional Transmission with Square Root Module. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 49487–49503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabbar, W.A.; Saad, W.K.; Hashim, Y.; Zaharudin, N.B.; Abidin, M.F.B.Z. Arduino-based buck boost converter for pv solar system. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Student Conference on Research and Development (SCOReD), Selangor, Malaysia, 26–28 November 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Wotaif, A.H.; Hamza, B.J.; Saad, W.K. Improving Spectrum Sensing Under Impact of Noise Uncertainty Factor to Detect Primary User Traffic for Cognitive Radio System. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1804, 012002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tesema, F.B.; Awada, A.; Viering, I.; Simsek, M.; Fettweis, G. Evaluation of context-aware mobility robustness optimization and multi-connectivity in intra-frequency 5G ultra dense networks. IEEE Wirel. Commun. Lett. 2016, 5, 608–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-Utra); User Equipment (ue) Procedures in Idle Mode; Release 14 (Tech. Rep. No. TS36.304); 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2018.
- Saad, W.K.; Jabbar, W.A.; Hamza, B.J. Adaptive Modulation and Superposition Coding for MIMO Data Transmission Using Unequal Error Protection and Ordered Successive Interference Cancellation Techniques. J. Commun. 2019, 14, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ismeala, M.H.; Hamzaa, B.J.; Saada, W.K. Comparison the Performance Evaluation of Xgpon-Rof System with Wdm and Scm for Different Modulation Schemes. Al-Qadisiyah J. Eng. Sci. 2019, 12, 240–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saad, W.K.; Jabbar, W.A.; Abbas, A. Face Recognition Approach using an Enhanced Particle Swarm Optimization and Support Vector Machine. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2019, 14, 2982–2987. [Google Scholar]
- Alhammadi, A.; Roslee, M.; Alias, M.Y.; Shayea, I.; Alriah, S.; Abas, A.B. Advanced handover self-optimization approach for 4G/5G HetNets using weighted fuzzy logic control. In Proceedings of the 2019 15th International Conference on Telecommunications (ConTEL), Graz, Austria, 3–5 July 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Pedersen, K.I.; Wigard, J.; Mogensen, P. Method of Performing Handover by Using Different Handover Parameters for Different Traffic and User Classes in a Communication Network; Google Patents: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Shayea, I.; Ismail, M.; Nordin, R.; Ergen, M.; Ahmad, N.; Abdullah, N.F.; Alhammadi, A.; Mohamad, H. New weight function for adapting handover margin level over contiguous carrier aggregation deployment scenarios in LTE-advanced system. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2019, 108, 1179–1199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayea, I.; Ismail, M.; Nordin, R.; Mohamad, H.; Abd Rahman, T.; Abdullah, N.F. Novel handover optimization with a coordinated contiguous carrier aggregation deployment scenario in LTE-advanced systems. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2016, 2016, 4939872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Self-Conguring and Self-Optimizing Network (SON) Use Cases and Solutions (Release 9); Document TR 36.902; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2011.
- Leu, A.E.; Mark, B.L. Modeling and analysis of fast handoff algorithms for microcellular networks. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunications Systems, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 11–16 October 2002; pp. 321–328. [Google Scholar]
- Leu, A.E.; Mark, B.L. An efficient timer-based hard handoff algorithm for cellular networks. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking, WCNC 2003, New Orleans, LA, USA, 16–20 March 2003; pp. 1207–1212. [Google Scholar]
- Shih-Jung, W.; Lo Steven, K. Handover scheme in LTE-based networks with hybrid access mode. J. Converg. Inf. Technol. 2011, 6, 68–78. [Google Scholar]
- Bhattacharya, P.; Banerjee, P. A new velocity dependent variable hysteresis-margin-based call handover scheme. Indian J. Radio Space Phys. 2006, 35, 368–371. [Google Scholar]
- Muñoz, P.; Barco, R.; de la Bandera, I. On the potential of handover parameter optimization for self-organizing networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2013, 62, 1895–1905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, H.; Kwak, K.-s. Performance analysis of an adaptive handoff algorithm based on distance information. Comput. Commun. 2007, 30, 1278–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castro-Hernandez, D.; Paranjape, R. Optimization of handover parameters for LTE/LTE-A in-building systems. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 67, 5260–5273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sas, B.; Spaey, K.; Blondia, C. A SON function for steering users in multi-layer LTE networks based on their mobility behaviour. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), Glasgow, UK, 11–14 May 2015; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Ray, R.P.; Tang, L. Hysteresis Margin and Load Balancing for Handover in Heterogeneous Network. Int. J. Future Comput. Commun. 2015, 4, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nie, S.; Wu, D.; Zhao, M.; Gu, X.; Zhang, L.; Lu, L. An enhanced mobility state estimation based handover optimization algorithm in LTE-A self-organizing network. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 52, 270–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Legg, P.; Hui, G.; Johansson, J. A simulation study of LTE intra-frequency handover performance. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 72nd Vehicular Technology Conference-Fall, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 6–9 September 2010; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, Y.; Shin, B.; Lim, J.; Hong, D. Effects of time-to-trigger parameter on handover performance in SON-based LTE systems. In Proceedings of the 2010 16th Asia-Pacific Conference on Communications (APCC), Auckland, New Zealand, 31 October–3 November 2010; pp. 492–496. [Google Scholar]
- Awada, A.; Wegmann, B.; Rose, D.; Viering, I.; Klein, A. Towards self-organizing mobility robustness optimization in inter-RAT scenario. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 73rd vehicular technology conference (VTC Spring), Budapest, Hungary, 15–18 May 2011; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Song, Q.; Wen, Z.; Wang, X.; Guo, L.; Yu, R. Time-adaptive vertical handoff triggering methods for heterogeneous systems. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advanced Parallel Processing Technologies, Rapperswil, Switzerland, 24–25 August 2009; pp. 302–312. [Google Scholar]
- Tiwari, R.; Deshmukh, S. Analysis and design of an efficient handoff management strategy via velocity estimation in HetNets. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2019, e3642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, D.; Wen, X.; Zhang, H.; Zheng, W. A self-optimizing mobility management scheme based on cell ID information in high velocity environment. In Proceedings of the 2010 Second International Conference on Computer and Network Technology, Bangkok, Thailand, 23–25 April 2010; pp. 285–288. [Google Scholar]
- Saeed, M.; Kamal, H.; El-Ghoneimy, M. Novel type-2 fuzzy logic technique for handover problems in a heterogeneous network. Eng. Optim. 2018, 50, 1533–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdulraqeb, A. Self-optimization of handover control parameters for mobility management in 4g/5g heterogeneous networks. Autom. Control. Comput. Sci. 2019, 53, 441–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitagawa, K. A handover optimization algorithm with mobility robustness for LTE systems. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 22nd International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, Toronto, ON, Canada, 11–14 September 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Schröder, A.; Lundqvist, H.; Nunzi, G. Distributed self-optimization of handover for the long term evolution. In International Workshop on Self-Organizing Systems; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Gaur, G.; Velmurugan, T.; Prakasam, P.; Nandakumar, S. Application specific thresholding scheme for handover reduction in 5G Ultra Dense Networks. Telecommun. Syst. 2021, 76, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habbal, A.; Goudar, S.I.; Hassan, S. A context-aware radio access technology selection mechanism in 5G mobile network for smart city applications. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2019, 135, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hegazy, R.D.; Nasr, O.A.; Kamal, H.A. Optimization of user behavior based handover using fuzzy Q-learning for LTE networks. Wirel. Netw. 2018, 24, 481–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, M.T.; Kwon, S.; Kim, H. Mobility robustness optimization for handover failure reduction in LTE small-cell networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 67, 4672–4676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pollini, G.P. Trends in handover design. IEEE Commun. Mag. 1996, 34, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia, V.; Lebedev, N.; Gorce, J.-M. Capacity outage probability for multi-cell processing under Rayleigh fading. IEEE Commun. Lett. 2011, 15, 801–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Paris, J.F.; Morales-Jimenez, D. Outage probability analysis for Nakagami-q (Hoyt) fading channels under Rayleigh interference. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 2010, 9, 1272–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol Speci_cation (Release 15), document TS 36.331 V15.3.0; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2018.
- Wotaif, A.H.; Hamza, B.J.; Saad, W.K. Spectrum Sensing Detection for Non-Stationary Primary User Signals Over Dynamic Threshold Energy Detection in Cognitive Radio System. Al-Furat J. Innov. Electron. Comput. Eng. 2020, 1, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 3GPP. V0.1.4. Overview of 3GPP Release 12. 2014. Available online: http://www.3gpp.org/speci_cations/releases/68-release-12 (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- 3GPP. Release 16. 2018. Available online: http://www.3gpp.org/release-16. (accessed on 10 October 2020).
- Radio Frequency (RF) System Scenarios (Release 15); Document TR 25.942 V15.0.0; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2018.
- Gudmundson, M. Correlation model for shadow fading in mobile radio systems. Electron. Lett. 1991, 27, 2145–2146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guidelines for Evaluation of Radio Transmission Technologies for IMT-2000; International Telecommunications Union-Radiocommunications Sector: Geneva, Switzerland, 1997.
- Ahmed Mahmood, W.A.J.; Saad, W.K.; Hashim, Y.; Manap, H.B. Optimal Nano-Dimensional Channel of GaAs-FinFET Transistor. In Proceedings of the IEEE Student Conference on Research and Development (SCOReD), UPM Serdang, Seri Kembangan, Malaysia, 16–18 November 2009; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Physical Channels and Modulation (Release 12); Document TS 36.211 V16.1.0; 3GPP: Valbonne, France, 2020; Available online: http://www.3gpp.org (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- Abdulnabi, M.A.; Saad, W.K.; Hamza, B.J. Performance Analysis of Full-Duplex NG-PON2-RoF System with Non-linear Impairments. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1530, 012158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayea, I.; Azmi, M.H.; Ergen, M.; El-Saleh, A.A.; Han, C.T.; Arsad, A.; Rahman, T.A.; Alhammadi, A.; Daradkeh, Y.I.; Nandi, D. Performance Analysis of Mobile Broadband Networks With 5G Trends and Beyond: Urban Areas Scope in Malaysia. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 90767–90794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shayea, I.; Ergen, M.; Azmi, M.H.; Nandi, D.; El-Salah, A.A.; Zahedi, A. Performance analysis of mobile broadband networks with 5G trends and beyond: Rural areas scope in Malaysia. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 65211–65229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ref. | Description | Decision Making Method | Wireless Network Type | Given Parameters | Pros and Cons |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
[55] | An algorithm has been suggested to reduce the HOs by optimized MCDM algorithms with a context-aware and threshold-based scheme. | TOPSIS, PROMETHEE, and SAW | 5G-Ultra Dense Network (UDN) | Average number of Hos, Euclidean average distance. | Significantly reduces the number of UHOs and improves QoS. |
[7] | The algorithm of velocity-based self-optimization was suggested to modify the values of HCP according to the velocity of the UE and the RSRP. The suggested algorithm has proven to be effective under various mobile velocities, compared to other existing algorithms. | Velocity-based self-optimization | 4G and 5G | HOP, PPHP, and RLF | A noticeable decrease according to the total probability rate for RLF, HOP, and HOPP. |
[56] | A mathematical model of CRAT was derived by taking into account the context of the user and the network, by adopting an analytic hierarchical process (AHP) to weight the importance of selection criteria and TOPSIS for classifying the available RATs. | AHP and TOPSIS | 5G-UDN | Number of HOs, average network delay, packet delivery ratio and throughput. | The proposed CRAT outperforms the traditional A2A4 approach to the selection of RAT. |
[49] | The maximum likelihood (ML) estimator for speed estimation has been proposed in HetNets by separately utilizing sojourn time and HO count measurements. Velocity estimate based on sojourn time is more accurate than HO number because it uses both sojourn time and HO count information. | Sojourn time and HO count | HetNets | Root-mean-square error (RMSE), total number of HO, HOF and UHO, mobility state probabilities, probability of detection, and probability of false alarm. | Accuracy in estimating the speed, limit frequent HOs and the failure of the service, and mobility state detection (MSD) optimization. |
[57] | Fuzzy Q-Learning was used to improve the two contrasting HO problems, namely ping-pongs and RLFs through adjusting the HOM and TTT. | Fuzzy Q-Learning | LTE | PPHP and RLF | The suggested algorithm is robust against changes in the users number in the system, where it keeps the better solution when the users number is halved or doubled. |
[58] | A distributed MRO algorithm was proposed to improve the performance of HO by minimising RLFs, where the proposed algorithm classifies HOFs based on the causes of failure. | Adjust TTT and offset parameters | LTE | RLF rates and ping-pong rates | Adaptively optimizes the HO parameters, stimulates the least number of ping-pongs among the algorithms studied, and thus outperforms the previous algorithms. |
Parameters of Network | Presumption |
---|---|
Environment | 5G Rel. 16 System, micro cells and urban areas |
Hexagonal Cells No. | Changes dynamically according to the simulation time |
Number of sectors for each cell | 3 |
Height of eNBs antenna | 15 m |
R (m) | 200 m |
System bandwidth | 500 MHz |
Total power TX eNB | 46 dBm |
Shadowing | 8 dB |
Tested UE number | 15 UEs randomly distributed |
Noise Figure of UE | 9 dB |
eNB noise figure | 5 dB |
Height of UEs | 1.5 m |
No. and type of UE antenna | 1, Omni-directional |
No. of users inside each hexagonal cell | 200 |
Simulation cycle | 5 s |
Mobility Model | Directional |
The speeds of UEs | {40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140} km/h |
Min. desired level of RX in the cell [3GPP TS 36.304] | −101.5 dBm |
Initial value of HOM | 2 dB |
Initial value of TTT | 100 ms |
Min. and max. HOM values | (0 and 10) dB |
TTT intervals | Changes from (0 to 5.12) s |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Saad, W.K.; Shayea, I.; Hamza, B.J.; Mohamad, H.; Daradkeh, Y.I.; Jabbar, W.A. Handover Parameters Optimisation Techniques in 5G Networks. Sensors 2021, 21, 5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155202
Saad WK, Shayea I, Hamza BJ, Mohamad H, Daradkeh YI, Jabbar WA. Handover Parameters Optimisation Techniques in 5G Networks. Sensors. 2021; 21(15):5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155202
Chicago/Turabian StyleSaad, Wasan Kadhim, Ibraheem Shayea, Bashar J. Hamza, Hafizal Mohamad, Yousef Ibrahim Daradkeh, and Waheb A. Jabbar. 2021. "Handover Parameters Optimisation Techniques in 5G Networks" Sensors 21, no. 15: 5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155202
APA StyleSaad, W. K., Shayea, I., Hamza, B. J., Mohamad, H., Daradkeh, Y. I., & Jabbar, W. A. (2021). Handover Parameters Optimisation Techniques in 5G Networks. Sensors, 21(15), 5202. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155202