TGn Simulation Methodology Validation Proposal

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Simulation and Evaluation of Various Block Assignments Evaluation of multiple carriers deployed in a channel block evaluation criteria section.
Advertisements

Submission doc.: IEEE /1452r0 November 2014 Leif Wilhelmsson, EricssonSlide 1 Frequency selective scheduling in OFDMA Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0053r0 Submission Jan Zhang Jiayin (Huawei Technologies)Slide 1 Further Considerations on Calibration of System Level Simulation.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0070r0 Jan 2014 Josiam et.al., SamsungSlide 1 Joint MAC/PHY Evaluation Methodology Date: Authors:
A Simple and Effective Cross Layer Networking System for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Wing Ho Yuen, Heung-no Lee and Timothy Andersen.
Doc.: IEEE /209r2 Submission March 2004 Lanzl, Aware; Ketchum, QualcommSlide 1 Carrier Frequency / Symbol Clock Offset Proposal for TGn FRCC Colin.
Doc.: n-proposal-statistical-channel-error-model.ppt Submission Jan 2004 UCLA - STMicroelectronics, Inc.Slide 1 Proposal for Statistical.
Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Update Farooq Khan IEEE Plenary Meeting Orlando, FL, USA March 15-19, 2004.
Doc.: IEEE /0553r1 Submission May 2009 Alexander Maltsev, Intel Corp.Slide 1 Path Loss Model Development for TGad Channel Models Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1229r1 Submission November 2009 Alexander Maltsev, IntelSlide 1 Application of 60 GHz Channel Models for Comparison of TGad Proposals.
Doc.: IEEE /0216r0 Submission March 2004 Atheros / Mitsubishi ITE / ST Micro / MarvellSlide 1 Modified “Black Box” PHY Abstraction Methodology.
Doc.: IEEE /0301r0 Submission March 2004 J.Gilbert, Atheros CommunicationsSlide TGn Simulation Methodology Special Committee March 2004.
Doc.: IEEE 11-04/0304r0 Submission March 2004 John S. Sadowsky, Intel PER Prediction for n MAC Simulation John S. Sadowsky (
Doc.: IEEE /0535r0 Submission May 2008 Thomas Kenney, Minyoung Park, Eldad Perahia, Intel Corp. Slide 1 PHY and MAC Throughput Analysis with 80.
Doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission February 2004 John Ketchum, et al, QualcommSlide 1 PHY Abstraction for System Simulation John Ketchum, Bjorn Bjerke,
Multiple Data Rates for WUR
Multiple Data Rates for WUR
Proposal for Statistical Channel Error Model
Performance Evaluation for 11ac
Requirements Discussion
Comparisons of Simultaneous Downlink Transmissions
Proposal for TGad Evaluation Methodology
Unified “Black Box” PHY Abstraction Methodology
Closed versus Open Loop
HT SG PAR Proposal Colin Lanzl Aware, Inc.
November 18 July 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: Task Group 4e definitions Date.
TGn Simulation Methodology Ad Hoc Overview
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
Remaining incoherence in Comparison Criteria
Record and Playback PHY Abstraction for n MAC Simulations
OFDMA Performance Analysis
SMSC March 2004 Session Speaker List
TGn Simulation Methodology Validation Proposal
EVM vs PER Plot Not Promising for PSNI
Simulation Methodology Proposal
Enhanced Beam Tracking Against Blockage: Resolution to CID 145
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
Hemanth Sampath Erik Lindskog Ravi Narasimhan
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
Investigation of PA Model Sample Rate for TGac
PHY Abstraction to be used in MAC simulation
Multiple Data Rates for WUR
doc.: n Jeff Gilbert Atheros Communications
doc.: n Jeff Gilbert Atheros Communications
Carrier Frequency / Symbol Clock Offset Proposal for TGn FRCC
Joint submission for Box 5 calibration
Simulation Effort Required to Satisfy the n Comparison Criteria
<month year> <doc.: IEEE doc> January 2013
<month year> <doc.: IEEE doc> January 2013
PHY Abstraction based on PER Prediction
Record and Playback PHY Abstraction for n MAC Simulations
Performance Gains from CCA Optimization
Erik Lindskog Hemanth Sampath Ravi Narasimhan
802.11ac preamble for VHT auto-detection
Strawmodel ac Specification Framework
TGn Simulation Methodology Ad Hoc Overview
PER Prediction for n MAC Simulation
Performance on Multi-Band Operation
Intel Validation of TGn Simulation Scenarios
Proposal for TGad Evaluation Methodology
AoD in Passive Ranging Date: Authors: Name Affiliations
System Level Simulator Evaluation with/without Capture Effect
Performance Investigation on Multi-AP Transmission
Performance on Multi-Band Operation
DSC Calibration Result
TGn Simulation Methodology Special Committee March 2004 Report
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
Reducing Overhead in Active Scanning
Consideration on System Level Simulation
Month Year doc.: IEEE y18/r0 March 2018
Presentation transcript:

TGn Simulation Methodology Validation Proposal Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 TGn Simulation Methodology Validation Proposal Jeff Gilbert Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 Overview The simulations methodology ad hoc is investigating methods to accurately, yet efficiently, model the behavior of proposals’ PHYs in MAC/system simulations. Various proposals trade off accuracy of modeling of the PHY itself with accuracy of modeling of the PHY/MAC interface. I.e. some proposals use link-level detailed PHY but use abstractions to capture its performance (e.g. 11-04/0172 by Atheros/Mitsubishi) Some proposals use approximation of PHY but are able to incorporate it more exactly in the MAC / System Simulations (e.g. 11-03/0863 by Intel) J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 Necessity to Validate If approximations of the PHY are made, it is critical that we have a methodology to validate the approximations. Since proposals could have arbitrary PHYs, the proposer must show how they have accurately incorporated their PHY into the methodology. Otherwise the validity of results will be immediately challenged during the proposal comparison process. J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 A Validation Option One method to validate the PHY / MAC abstraction is to have proposers plot unidirectional, point-to-point MAC SAP throughput vs. SNR or Range for both: Simulation using link-level PHY (w/MAC) simulation – incorporating true rate adaptation etc. Simulation using proposed methodology with any approximations By only running full link-level simulation for point-to-point scenario, computation is limited. Latency and jitter curves could be included too. J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Benefits of Validation Curves Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 Benefits of Validation Curves Validate PHY abstraction The closeness of the two curves validates both the methodology but also the application of the methodology. This will be one primary source of debate when discussing results Accurate comparison of PHY / MAC properties E.g. tradeoffs between ABL and fixed-rate systems, as well as other PHY and MAC properties can be accurately assessed in terms of PHY improvements, MAC overheads, and Doppler mitigation Point-to-point would simplify vs. full usage model J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 Relationship to CC67 Comparison Criteria 67 currently looks at PHY-only performance in “real” channels. However being PHY-only makes it more difficult to accurately include rate adaptation effects. These validation curves could replace CC67 and thus keep the total required work from proposers similar. J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications

Month 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-03/0185r0 Proposed text for CC67 Show curves for achieved point-to-point MAC SAP throughput as a function of total SNR. Plot the achieved throughput, versus SNR per receive antenna, for a 1500B packet source. SNR in this case is the ratio of the received power at a single receive antenna, to the input-referred receiver noise power. The received signal power is as measured in -10dB signal bandwidth at a single receive antenna, is summed over all transmit antennas and averaged over time and receive antennas. Note that when computing the SNR, the signal and noise bandwidth shall be identical. The throughput shall be computed using a minimum of 100 packet errors. This should be simulated for channel models B, D, and F. The simulations should all include the Doppler effect as specified in the text of the channel model document. All models should be run without the fluorescent effect but additionally model D should be run with and without the fluorescent effect. The shadowing variance should be 0. Simulations should use a link-level phy simulation with rate adaptation effects incorporating the channel dynamics present in the TGn channel model. J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications J.Gilbert, Atheros Communications