Quantification of Scenario Distance within Generic WINNER Channel Model

Starting from the premise that stochastic properties of a radio environment can be abstracted by defining scenarios, a generic MIMO channel model is built by the WINNER project. The parameter space of the WINNER model is, among others, described by normal probability distributions and correlation co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of antennas and propagation 2013-01, Vol.2013 (2013), p.1-17
Main Authors: Thomä, Reiner S., Kotterman, Wim, Schneider, Christian, Narandžić, Milan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Antennas
Approximation
Channels
Classification
Divergence
Indoor
Mathematical models
Normal distribution
Propagation
Rural
Stochastic models
Studies
Wireless communications
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Starting from the premise that stochastic properties of a radio environment can be abstracted by defining scenarios, a generic MIMO channel model is built by the WINNER project. The parameter space of the WINNER model is, among others, described by normal probability distributions and correlation coefficients that provide a suitable space for scenario comparison. The possibility to quantify the distance between reference scenarios and measurements enables objective comparison and classification of measurements into scenario classes. In this paper we approximate the WINNER scenarios with multivariate normal distributions and then use the mean Kullback-Leibler divergence to quantify their divergence. The results show that the WINNER scenario groups (A, B, C, and D) or propagation classes (LoS, OLoS, and NLoS) do not necessarily ensure minimum separation within the groups/classes. Instead, the following grouping minimizes intragroup distances: (i) indoor-to-outdoor and outdoor-to-indoor scenarios (A2, B4, and C4), (ii) macrocell configurations for suburban, urban, and rural scenarios (C1, C2, and D1), and (iii) indoor/hotspot/microcellular scenarios (A1, B3, and B1). The computation of the divergence between Ilmenau and Dresden measurements and WINNER scenarios confirms that the parameters of the C2 scenario are a proper reference for a large variety of urban macrocell environments.
ISSN:1687-5869
1687-5877
DOI:10.1155/2013/176704