5G – the 5th
Generation mobile technology might arrive at our door steps sooner than we
think, supporting 3 typical usage scenarios: enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB),
massive Machine Type Communication (mMTC) and Ultra-reliable Low Latency
Communication (URLLC) [1]. Though architecture wise 5G is different from its
predecessors, like in any other wireless communication technology, among many
other things, the Multiple Access Scheme
(MAS) becomes the key for 5G and selecting the suitable scheme will
ultimately decide the future and success of 5G.
MAS (aka Multiple
Access Method or Channel Access Method) is required when we have to share a
physical media. This is not only applicable to wireless, but also to many wired
networks including bus networks and ring networks. In wireless, MAS allows
several User Equipment (UE) connected to the same multi-point transmission
medium to transmit over it and to share the available radio capacity. MAS is
based on a multiplexing method,
allowing several data streams or signals to share the same communication
channel or physical medium.
Multiplexing or muxing
works by combining multiple analog or digital signals into one signal over a
shared medium. Space Division Multiplexing (SDM), Frequency Division
Multiplexing (FDM), Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) and Code Division
Multiplexing (CDM) are some examples. Therefore the MAS using FDM becomes
Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA), TDM becomes Time Division Multiple
Access (TDMA) and CDM becomes Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA). In FDMA, each user has a small part of the
resource (spectrum) allocated all the time. In TDMA, each user has nearly all
the spectrum allocated at a small duration of time. In CDMA, each user has all the
spectrum all the time. While multiplexing is provided by the physical layer,
multiple accesses also involves Media Access Control (MAC) layer.
So,
in summary, Multiplexing is combining many signals on one media, while MAS is
allowing many to access the media/resource at one time. Therefore, it can be
stated that Multiplexing is a technique and multiple accesses is the way to use
that technique.
Over
the years, different generations of mobile technologies used different MASs to
achieve different capabilities, more importantly the system capacity and spectral
efficiency.
Generation
|
MAS
|
Application
|
1G
|
FDMA
|
AMPS
|
2G
|
TDMA
|
GSM
|
3G
|
CDMA
|
UMTS
|
4G
|
OFDMA
|
LTE
|
Note:
AMPS-Advanced Mobile Phone System, GSM-Global System for Mobile communications,
UMTS-Universal Mobile Telecommunications
System, LTE-Long Term Evolution
All
the above MASs (except CDMA), which can be called as conventional MASs, are
Orthogonal Multiple Access (OMA) technologies.
In OMA, different users are allocated to orthogonal resources in either
time, frequency or code domain in order to mitigate Multiple Access
Interference (MAI). As the expectations or the objectives of 5G (higher data
rates – 100/1000 times 4G, low latency – 1ms Round Trip Time (RTT), massive
connectivity, high density – 1M devices/km^2, enhanced indoor coverage etc.)
are quite different from that of 4G and others, the Radio Access Technology
(RAT), which is characterized by MAS, need to be flexible, reliable, energy efficient,
spectral efficient and support diverse Quality of Service (QoS). OMA schemes
are not sufficient to support these requirements, especially massive connectivity
and diverse QoS. [2], [3], [4]
It’s
worthwhile to look little deeper on the scenario of mMTC and why the current
LTE or LTE- Advanced (LTE-A) will find it difficult to support mMTC. In
LTE/LTE-A there are lot of interactive processes between the Node B (NB)/enhanced
NB (eNB) and the UE before data is transmitted. This is ok for long time
continuous sessions, as the signaling overhead averaged over time is less.
However, in mMTC used in Internet of Things (IoT), the “thing” (including UE)
transmits a small amount of data over s short period of time and there are
millions of such “things”. Now if we use LTE/LTE-A for such a scenario, the
signaling overhead suddenly becomes high and access efficiency becomes low.
Therefore,
several Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access Schemes are proposed for 5G, especially
to address the Machine-to-Machine (M2M) requirements. These include; Superposition
Coding based Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (SPC-NOMA), Multi –User Shared Access
(MUSA), Sparse Code Multiple Access (SCMA), Pattern Division Multiple Access
(PDMA), Resource Spread Multiple Access (RSMA), Non-orthogonal Coded Multiple
Access (NCMA) and Interleaver-Grid Multiple Access (IGMA). The different
Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access Schemes can be compared as below; [1], [5]
Category
|
Power
Domain Based
|
Code
Domain Based
|
Interleaver
Based
|
SPC-NOMA
|
MUSA
|
SCMA
|
PDMA
|
RSMA
|
NCMA
|
IGMA
|
Scenario
|
DL: eMBB
|
UL: mMTC, URLLC
DL: eMBB
|
UL: mMTC, URLLC
DL: eMBB
|
UL: mMTC, URLLC
DL: eMBB
|
UL: mMTC, URLLC
|
UL: eMBB mMTC, URLLC
|
UL: eMBB , mMTC, URLLC
|
Multiplexing
Domain
|
Power
|
Code/ Power
|
Code/ Power
|
Code/ Power/ Spectral
|
Code/ Power
|
Code
|
Interleaver
|
Transmitting Overhead
|
Low/ Medium
|
High
|
Medium/ High
|
Medium/ High
|
Low
|
High
|
High
|
Note:
UL-Uplink, DL-Downlink
When
we design Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access Schemes, we need to consider
following;
- Coverage
- Peak to Average Power Ratio (PAPR)
- Implementation Complexity
- Combination with Multiple –Input Multiple-Output
(MIMO)
- Flexibility
Pictorially, TDMA,
FDMA, CDMA, OFDMA and NOMA can be visualized as follows [6]. This shows how
different users (denoted by different colors) gets the allocation of spectrum.
While there are
multiple candidates for the 5G MAS in non-orthogonal domain, none of them seems
to be a perfect choice at this point of time. As different schemes have both
their merits and demerits, it’s likely that a combination of different MASs,
including the conventional orthogonal schemes, will be used in 5G to achieve
different objectives. However, as we get closer to 2020, where the finalized
standards are expected to be released, more improvements on different schemes
are possible with the expectation of all new schemes or approaches to combine different
schemes. At the meantime, Research & Development Engineers and scientists
will be quite busy discovering, improving and innovating the finest ingredients
for the success of 5G.
References
[1] SUN Qi, WANG Sen,
HAN Shuangfeng et al., “Unified Framework Towards Flexible Multiple Access
Scheme for 5G” ZTE Communications,
vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 26-33, October. 2016. doi:
10.3969/j.issn.1673-5188.2016.04.004
[2] WEI Zhiqiang, YUAN
Jinhong, Derrick Wing Kwan Ng, et al., “A Survey of Downlink Non-Orthogonal Multiple
Access for 5G Wireless Communication Networks”
ZTE Communications, vol. 14,
no. 4, pp. 17- 23, October. 2016. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5188.2016.04.003
[3] Volker Jungnickel, Konstantinos Manolakis,
Wolfgang Zirwas et al., “The
Role of Small Cells, Coordinated Multipoint, and Massive MIMO in 5G”
IEEE Communications Magazine, pp.
44-51, May. 2014.
[4] Peng Wang, Jun Xiao, Li Ping, “Comparison of Orthogonal and Non-Orthogonal
Approaches to Future Wireless Cellular Systems”.
[5] YAN Chunlin, YUAN
Zhifeng, LI Weimin et al., “Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access Schemes for 5G” ZTE
Communications, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 11-16, October. 2016. doi:
10.3969/j.issn.1673-5188.2016.04.002
[6] Mahyar Shirvanimoghaddam,
Sarah J. Johnson, “Multiple Access Technologies for Cellular M2M
Communications” ZTE Communications, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 11-16, October. 2016. doi:
10.3969/j.issn.1673-5188.2016.04.006