2052
3, MARCH 2019
A Two-Hop MIMO Relay Architecture Using LTE
and Millimeter Wave Bands in High-Speed Trains
José David Oliva Sánchez , Member, IEEE, and José I. Alonso , Member, IEEE
Abstract—In this paper, a novel two-hop relay architecture us-
ing mobile relay nodes (MRN) technology for high-speed trains
is presented. In this architecture, a long-term evolution advanced
(LTE-A) link in sub-6 GHz bands is established between the Donor-
eNB (DeNB) and the MRNs mounted on the roof of the train and
another in millimeter Wave (mmWave) bands between the MRN
and the user equipment (UE) terminals inside the train. Moreover,
the multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) channel is exploited
between the DeNB and the UEs to enhance channel capacity. Dif-
ferent relay structures—several relays in a train carriage and a
single relay with multiple antennas—and different types of relays—
amplify-and-forward and decode-and-forward (DF)—are studied.
Ultimately, performance analysis is studied and discussed by means
of a downlink-level simulator with accurate channel models. Fur-
thermore, multiuser transmission and conventional user schedul-
ing algorithms are added to obtain a more realistic simulator. A new
algorithm for one of the structures and the DF relay is proposed.
This paper will examine how to provide broadband data access to
train passengers in high-speed environments by validating a new
architecture, which takes advantage of MIMO techniques, mobile
relays, and millimeter bands.
Index Terms—High-speed train, long-term evolution advanced,
millimeter wave, mobile relay node, multiple-input multiple-output
(MIMO).
I. INTRODUCTION
OWADAYS, the amount of people who demand fast and
N efficient data rates has increased greatly. In this field, there
is a constant evolution towards LTE-A and 5G, which has an
ambitious data rate target of 10 Gbps [1]. This tendency is also
evident in means of transportation, especially in high-speed
trains. The railway authorities wish to provide broadband data
access to HST passengers, allowing services that require higher
throughput and stability, such as video on demand or internet
browsing, to work.
Railway and vehicular environments give rise to several chal-
lenges due to very poor propagation conditions. Specifically,
Manuscript received March 15, 2018; revised June 21, 2018 and August 1,
2018; accepted September 25, 2018. Date of publication October 4, 2018; date
of current version March 14, 2019. This work was supported in part by the
Spanish Ministry of Economı́a, Industria and Competitividad under Grant
TEC2017-87061-C3-1-R and in part by the China Science and Technology
Exchange Center—MST of the People’s Republic of China—under Grant
2016YFE0200200. The review of this paper was coordinated by the Guest
Editors of the Special Issue on Smart Rail Mobility. (Corresponding author:
José David Oliva Sánchez.)
The authors are with the Information Processing and Telecommunications
Center, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain (e-mail:,
jd.oliva@alumnos.upm.es; ignacio@gmr.ssr.upm.es).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TVT.2018.2874097
0018-9545 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO.
High-Speed Railway (HSR) suffers from high Doppler spread,
shadowing, low coherence time or high Vehicular Penetration
Loss (VPL), among others. In order to counteract these ad-
verse effects, there are some technologies which are capable to
compensate them. One technology under research for these en-
vironments is the Mobile Relay Node (MRN), a relay mounted
on the roof of the train that improves signal quality and, then,
forwards it to the train users. In fact, 3GPP has proposed the
use of this new type of architecture in HST [2]. Relay nodes in
HSR can avoid VPL and tackle high Doppler spread. The de-
ployment of MRNs in HSR has been studied previously. In [3],
a two-hop architecture using inband MRNs in HST is proposed
and analyzed. In [4], the uplink channel capacity of a two-hop
architecture with full-duplex MRNs in an HST is assessed, in-
troducing also a self-interference cancellation algorithm. None
of these papers address the mmWave bands by using outband
MRNs or compare different types of MRNs in HSTs.
Another technology under research is MIMO. Virtual-MIMO
(VMIMO) [5] is an innovative technique capable of creating a
MIMO scenario. In VMIMO, multiple closely-spaced mobile
stations, each equipped with a single antenna, cooperate to form
a virtual antenna array and reap some benefits of the MIMO
system by taking advantage of spatial diversity.
Standardization organizations have struggled to offer a good
Quality of Experience (QoE) with gigabit data rates in mobile
communications. This is mostly due to mobile stations which
might not be able to support several antennas due to size and
design limitations. Research for new mobile bands has recently
been posited to be a possible solution. MmWave is able to de-
liver the high data rate which is expected from next-generation
communications. In a 3GPP technical report [6], mmWave is
proposed in HST. Some of the frequency bands being studied
are around 30 GHz (outdoor scenarios) or 70 GHz (indoor sce-
narios). The major drawback of mmWave is that attenuation
at these frequencies is very high, thus long-range applications
are not practical. Nevertheless, the unlicensed band at 60 GHz
(IEEE 802.11ad), which offers 2, 16 GHz of bandwidth per
channel [7], [8], is suitable for indoor use (intrawagon) where
the receiver is not far from the transmitter.
Previous studies have assessed the potential of mmWave
bands and two-hop architectures. In [9], a Distributed Antenna
System (DAS) using VMIMO is deployed in an outdoor-to-
indoor scenario. DAS uses AF outband relays that move the
signal from LTE frequencies to unlicensed bands at 60 GHz. In
[9], an optimization scheduling algorithm is proposed to allocate
resources dynamically. Furthermore, in [10], the same authors
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS 2053

extrapolate this architecture to a vehicular scenario. However,

they do not study the capabilities of a two-hop architecture in a
high-speed environment and with different types of relays.
In this paper, a two-hop architecture for mobile communi-
cations in high-speed scenarios using MRNs is proposed. The
proposed architecture uses outband MRNs in mmWave bands.
A first link in sub-6 GHz bands is established from the DeNB to
the relays mounted on the train carriages using MIMO—let us
call this link the backend. And a second link in mmWave bands
is established from the MRNs to the UEs—the frontend link.
Then, two different topologies—joint and non-joint—coupled
with two types of relays—AF and DF—are going to be described
and analyzed. The AF architecture and its associated scheduling
algorithms are from the literature, whereas the DF architecture
and its appropriate scheduling algorithm are proposed in this
article. We will analyze the performance of the link by means
of a downlink-level simulator developed for this purpose. In or-
der to obtain a realistic simulator, accurate channel models and Fig. 1. MIMO scenario scheme, joint topology, (N = 3, M = 1, M R = 3,
M T = 3, K = 2). fA are the DeNB A frequencies in sub-6 GHz bands. fB , i
multiuser transmission have been added. The improvement in are the MRN frequencies in millimeter frequencies where i indicates the index
performance and the gain in throughput using the architecture of each antenna and the sub-band in which is transmitting.
will be demonstrated with this simulator.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. A com-
prehensive description of the scenario and the channel models
used are explained in Section II. An in-depth explanation of
different schemes and algorithms used throughout this work are
discussed in Section III. In Section IV, the link-level simulator
and its tools are presented. The results obtained by the simulator
are shown and discussed in Section V. Finally, the conclusions
are drawn in Section VI.

II. NETWORK MODEL: TOPOLOGIES AND CHANNEL

COMMUNICATIONS
A. Description of the Scenario
The scenario is situated in a rural environment with few scat-
terers. Specifically, the train crosses a flat field in which the
vegetation density is not very high or very thick. Hence, there
is Line Of Sight (LOS) between the DeNB and the MRNs. The
layout considered for the simulation is split into backend and
frontend. Furthermore, two topologies have been designed for
the scenario as detailed in Fig. 1 (joint topology) and Fig. 2
(non-joint topology). In the first one, there is a single MRN
with a main hub and several antennas that cooperate to optimize
resource allocation taking into account the UEs and their loca-
tions. Unlike in the former, in the latter rather than one MRN
per carriage, there are M MRNs that work independently of each
other.
In both topologies, the backend link is a MIMO scenario. The
transmitter is a DeNB with a Uniform Linear Array (ULA) of N
antennas and several MRNs on top of the carriages that act as re-
ceivers with MR antennas. This link works in sub-6 GHz bands
in accordance with LTE-A standards. A closed-loop technique is
employed in the MIMO system using Sounding Reference Sig-
nals (SRS) to determine the Channel State Information (CSI).
These techniques use Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) to
obtain the precoding and post-processing matrices that are in-
troduced into the transmitter and the receiver respectively. Since
Fig. 2. VMIMO scenario scheme, non-joint topology, (N = 3, M = 3,
M R = M T = 3, K = 2). fA are the DeNB A frequencies in sub-6 GHz
bands. fB , i are the MRN frequencies in millimeter frequencies where i indi-
cates the index of each antenna and the sub-band in which it is transmitting.
our approach has two hops, two precoding matrices are needed.
Moreover, in this technique, feedback is necessary to obtain the
CSI at the transmitter. Every MRN establishes a communication
link with a single DeNB independently of the rest of the MRNs.
Furthermore, in both topologies, the frontend link is an in-
door environment with K UEs. This link is able to exploit the
mmWave bands at 60 GHz, taking advantage of the unlicensed
bands. Every train carriage is isolated, avoiding co-channel in-
terference and permitting the reuse of frequencies due to the
high losses in these bands. The MRNs have MT transmitting
antennas and the UEs have one antenna receiving in the 60 GHz
bands. Each MRN antenna transmits in a non-overlapping sub-
band to allocate all the information from the backend and avoid
2054
Fig. 3. Spectrum scheduling from the licensed bands (sub-6 GHz) at the
DeNB and reallocation in two non-overlapped sub-bands in the unlicensed
bands (mmWave) at the MRN.
interference between antennas. The multiplex access technique
used to separate the sub-bands is FDMA (Frequency Division
Multiple Access). In Fig. 3, an example with 3 UEs and 2 MRN
antennas is set out.
The relays used in the two-hop architecture are outband and
are intended to extend the mobile coverage to train passengers.
In the joint topology, the MRN can use either the AF or the DF
relay. Depending on the relaying type, a different MIMO tech-
nique will be used to improve performance. The signal model
of each of these configurations will be described in later sec-
tions. In the non-joint topology, a version of VMIMO has to be
used where several antennas create a virtual array and the UE
integrates all of the parts in the decoding process. It is impor-
tant to note that joint processing can also be accomplished with
VMIMO. However, it would imply more signaling channels for
the MRNs to cooperate between them and it would affect the
final performance of the network.
Finally, a direct link between the DeNB and the UEs inside the
train can be simulated at the same time as the relayed one. Estab-
lishing these two links—direct and relayed—together may en-
hance throughput. In the developed simulator, the performance
of both links will be compared to observe the improvement
achieved by our architecture.
B. Channel Communication Model
In this subsection, the channel models used in the link-level
simulator will be introduced. As in the previous subsection, we
have to differentiate between frontend and backend links, taking
the scenario and their parameters into account.
In the backend link there is a multipath propagation phe-
nomenon. Winner II [11] is a channel model which performs
a geometry-based stochastic channel model approach which
allows a MIMO radio channel to be created in different sce-
narios, also including different types of antennas, geometry of
the antennas and parameters of LTE-A (number of subcarriers,
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019
bandwidth, polarization, etc.). Therefore, different layouts can
be modeled depending on the parameters. We will be using the
Winner II D2a, which represents radio propagation in environ-
ments where both, the MRNs and the UEs, are moving at a
nominal train speed of 350 km/h in macro-rural cells. Besides,
LOS conditions between the DeNB and the MRN antennas are
assumed. The Winner II D2a code has been incorporated into the
QuaDRiGa open-source program [12]. QuaDRiGa is a channel
model program based on Winner and 3GPP SCM (Spatial Chan-
nel Model) to enable the modeling of MIMO radio channels for
heterogeneous networks.
The MRNs process the received signals and they are then
translated from sub-6 GHz bands to mmWave bands. Each
MRN up-converts the received information to a specific non-
overlapped sub-band at 60 GHz and, then, each antenna trans-
mits it. The channel model used in the frontend link is the
IEEE 802.11ad WLAN [13], [14]. This model considers the
quasi-optical nature of the waves at these frequencies, creates
a statistical model of both inter and intra clusters depending
on the scenario selected and, based on that, it generates the
channel impulsive response. There are currently three different
scenarios to choose from: conference room, living room and
cubicle. The scenario selected for our simulations is the confer-
ence room STA-AP (Station to Access Point) assuming LOS.
Furthermore, the antennas implemented in the transmission and
reception for this model are basic steerable directional antennas
with an aperture of 30° degrees at half-power beamwidth. The
algorithm used for beamforming is a maximum-power ray al-
gorithm. Nonetheless, further research has to be carried out in
this aspect to create a more accurate layout.
Finally, a direct link has been simulated between the DeNB
and the UEs. This link implements the Winner II D2a and D2b
models. The Winner II D2b simulates the frontend channel
model for the direct link. It takes into account that there are
tightly packed seats and tables as is usual in train carriages. In
order to simulate the VPLs of the train, an additional 24 dB loss
has been introduced into the path loss model as specified in [15],
which also concurs with the specifications given by Winner.
III. SYSTEM MODEL: MRN ARCHITECTURE AND
OPTIMIZATION PROCESS
In this section, we will look into both the MRN architec-
ture and the optimization process. First of all, the signal model
followed throughout this article will be explained. AF- and
DF-MRNs deal with different signal models. Additionally, the
main differences between both configurations will be explained.
Then, the optimization problem of the resource allocation will
be expounded and solved. In the case of the AF-MRN, the algo-
rithms described in the literature [9] will be used. In the case of
the DF-MRN, an algorithm will be developed based on the algo-
rithms presented on the AF case. Then, the model of the direct
link between the DeNB and the UEs will be presented. Finally,
two algorithms for the scheduling of users will be explained.
A. Notation
There are NS complex data symbols transmitted in an
LTE-A link with an OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS 2055

Multiplexing) subcarrier bandwidth of W = 15 KHz. A MIMO A threshold (subscript th) has to be established to know the
channel is established, where there are N DeNB transmitting minimum system requirements.
antennas, MT and MR MRN antennas (for both topologies)  
[i,k ] [i,k ]
and the k UE with 1 antenna. The link is divided into two parts, OT ,D F ,n SN Rth,D F ,n =
Backend (BE) and Frontend (FE), and the relay scheme used   
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
can be either AF or DF. Additionally, k represents the UE being = OF E /B E ,D F ,n min SN RB E ,D F ,n , SN RF E ,D F ,n
computed out of a total of K UEs, i is the subcarrier being com- 
puted out of nF and n is the spatial channel being computed out [i,k ]
< SN Rth,D F ,n (2)
of min(N, MT , MR ) for each UE. For simplicity, N is assumed
to be the total number of spatial channels. For example, a vari- A useful expression can be extrapolated from (2), where the
able in the FE link, using the AF relay and also dependent on the total SNR would be that of the weakest link [18], [19]:
UE, the spatial channel and the subcarrier will be represented
[i, k ]  
by (·)F E , A F ,n . [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
SN RT ,D F ,n = min SN RB E ,D F ,n , SN RF E ,D F ,n (3)
A bold font is used in vectors and matrices. Moreover, vectors
[i,k ] [i,k ]
use lower case (pF E ,A F ) and matrices upper case (P F E ,A F ). Finally, the average system throughput delivered per UE is
Some of the operators used in the article are: (P ) , (P )−1 and
H
given by:
|P | which denote the Hermitian operator, the inverse of a matrix
and the determinant of a matrix, respectively. Matrix I is the nF 
 N  
[k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
square identity matrix. The operator ε{·} denotes the statistical RA F /D F = sA F /D F · W · log2 1 + SN RT ,A F /D F ,n
expectation operator. [x]+ = max{0, x}, refers to the positive i=1 n =1

part of a number. Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) (4)

is represented by the Circularly-Symmetric Complex Normal
(CSCN) vector with zero mean and diagonal covariance matrix
Σ with each element being equal to No . This is denoted by the
distribution CN (0, Σ).
We will use this notation henceforth.
B. MRN Configuration
The MRN is a core part of the two-hop architecture. Con-
sequently, two types of MRN [16], [17] have been studied and
compared for the joint topology. Firstly, an AF scheme, and sec-
ondly, a DF scheme. Both schemes follow a full-duplex struc-
ture to be able to transmit and receive at the same time using a
Frequency Division Duplex (FDD).
The AF-MRN simply amplifies the signal and, then, forwards
it to the UE. Hence, it is easy to implement and cheaper to build.
The main drawback is that in the presence of a lot of noise and/or
interference, its performance deteriorates. Therefore, high Sig-
nal to Noise Ratio (SNR) is required. The T subscript indicates
the total SNR of a link (FE + BE). The total SNR in natu-
ral units of a two-hop structure with AF-MRNs is represented
in (1).
[i,k ] [i,k ]
[i,k ] SN RB E ,A F ,n · SN RF E ,A F ,n
SN RT ,A F ,n = [i,k ] [i,k ]
(1)
SN RB E ,A F ,n + SN RF E ,A F ,n
The DF-MRN consists of two parts: in the first part the relay
decodes all or part of the received information and, in the second
part, it re-encodes the signal and forwards it to its destination.
DF schemes do not suffer from noise or interference as much
as AF. However, it might have the risk of error propagation if it
fails to decode the message from the source correctly. A typical
quality metric used for DF relays is the Outage (O) as expressed
in (2). Equation (2) shows that the end-to-end link Outage is
equal to the Outage of the link with a minimum SNR, because
if one of them falls into Outage, the total link will stop working.
[i,k ]
where sA F /D F is the subcarrier allocation policy. The subcar-
[i,k ]
rier allocation policy shall be expressed as sA F /D F ∈ {0, 1} to
guarantee that each subcarrier is used only in one UE. When
using joint topology, the AF scheme has to include a processor,
so as to be able to manage the radio control functions of LTE.
The inclusion of this layer of intelligence in the MRN will in-
crease its cost. Hence, a DF scheme might be better for a joint
topology where the relay is able to manage the LTE physical
layer and upper layers which also allows a group handover to
be used. Additionally, it would allow a simpler MIMO scheme,
in which the MIMO post-processing is carried out at the MRN
instead of the UE, to be used. As a counterpart, a DF scheme has
to decode and re-encode the signals, thus LTE functions such as
Adaptive Coding and Modulation (ACM) or MIMO transmis-
sion modes have to be implemented. Furthermore, a DF-MRN
would introduce a higher processing delay.
The non-joint topology is unable to manage the radio re-
sources and upper layers, thus, only AF-MRNs are suitable for
this topology.
C. Amplify-and-Forward System Model
A single-user downlink transmission model for an AF con-
figuration is introduced in this subsection. The signal model for
the BE is given by:
[i,k ] [i] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i]
y B E ,A F = H B E ,A F F A F xA F + nB E ,A F (5)
[i,k ]
where xA F is the NS vector of complex data symbols transmit-
[i,k ] [i]
ted, F A F is the N × NS DeNB precoding matrix, H B E ,A F is
[i]
the MR × N BE channel matrix and nB E ,A F is an AWGN MR
vector with distribution CN (0, Σ); where Σ is the MR × MR
diagonal covariance matrix. Therefore, on the UE-side the signal
vector received from the MRN antennas in the MT frequency
2056 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019

sub-bands is given by: carried out in the FE. Finally, the original vector is retrieved by
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i] [i,k ] [i,k ] multiplying the received signal with the post-processing matrix:
y F E ,A F = H F E ,A F GA F H B E ,A F F A F xA F  H
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i] [i,k ] x̂F E ,D F = E F E ,D F y F E ,D F (11)
+ H F E ,A F GA F nB E ,A F + nF E ,A F (6)
[i,k ]
[i,k ]
where y F E ,A F is the MT vector received by the UE, GA F
[i,k ] where E F E ,D F is the MMSE post-processing MT × NS ma-
[i,k ]
is the MT × MR MRN precoding matrix and H F E ,A F is
[i,k ] trix at the UE. x̂F E ,D F is the extracted data vector at the end
the MT × MT FE channel diagonal matrix with each of the of the process. Likewise, the value of the precoding and post-
elements of the diagonal representing the channel gain between processing matrices in the DF-MRN are determined by follow-
the MRN and the UE k on subcarrier i in one of the unlicensed ing an optimization process.
sub-bands. It is relevant to note that the BE noise has been
[i,k ]
amplified. In addition, nF E ,A F is an MT vector of additive E. Resource Allocation for the AF-MRN
noise generated in the FE link which follows the distribution The problem in scheduling and allocating resources in the
CN (0, Σ); where Σ is the MT × MT diagonal matrix. The proposed scenario gives rise to several challenges. In [9], [20],
estimated data vector at the UE is given by: an algorithm is developed to optimize resource allocation in
 H an OFDM multicarrier transmission system. A DAS with AF
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
x̂A F = E A F y F E ,A F (7) relays is used in an outdoor-to-indoor scenario. The variables
[i,k ]
to be optimized are the subcarrier allocation policy of the LTE-
where E A F is the Minimum Mean Square Error (MMSE) post- A system and the precoding matrices used in the DeNB and
processing MT × NS matrix at the UE. The values of the pre- in the relays. The DAS architecture is similar to our approach.
coding and post-processing matrices are determined following It deploys relays to enhance the UEs’ signal quality, and the
[i,k ]
an optimization process. x̂A F is the estimated data vector re- relays work jointly to distribute system’s resources. Therefore,
trieved at the end of the process. instead of having them connected physically, it establishes a
communication link between the relays for signaling purposes.
D. Decode-and-Forward System Model Thus, their optimization problem can be extrapolated to our
scenario in the AF scenarios.
In a similar fashion as in the previous subsection, the down-
Three algorithms for the study of the AF-MRN from the state-
link transmission model for a DF configuration can be described.
of-the-art are going to be studied in this article. The first one [9],
Two channels are established: in the BE, there is a MIMO chan-
[20] is the aforementioned joint processing algorithm, whilst the
nel between the DeNB and the MRNs; and in the FE, there is an
second and third [21], [22] are non-joint algorithms.
FDMA channel for the k UE. Hence, the signal model for the
In [9], [20], the channel matrices are estimated using beacon
BE is given by:
signals to determine the CSI at the backend and the frontend. For
[i,k ] [i] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i]
y B E ,D F = H B E ,D F F D F xB E ,D F + nB E ,D F (8) simplicity, it is also considered that each relay retransmits in a
fixed frequency sub-band. Then, optimal precoding matrices are
[i,k ]
where xB E ,D F is the BE NS vector of complex data sym- determined and the MMSE estimator is implemented at the UE
[i,k ] following the theoretical analysis explained in subsection III.C.
bols transmitted, F D F is the N × NS DeNB precoding matrix,
[i] [i] The optimal linear precoding matrices used at the DeNB and the
H B E ,D F is the MR × N BE channel matrix and nB E ,D F is a
MRN jointly diagonalize the channels on each subcarrier. These
MR vector of AWGN with distribution CN (0, Σ); where Σ is
matrices are determined via SVD as in [9], [20]. This process
the MR × MR diagonal covariance matrix. The estimated data
will be further explained in the following subsection where the
vector at the MRN is given by:
DF-MRN optimization algorithm is analyzed.
 H The non-joint algorithms have the same structure as the joint
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
x̂B E ,D F = E B E ,D F y B E ,D F (9)
algorithm where several relays forward the signal to the UEs.
[i,k ] However, in this case the relays do not cooperate. Because of
where E B E ,D F is the post-processing MR × NS matrix at the these similarities between the algorithms, the same optimization
MRN. On the UE-side, the signal vector received from the MRN process is followed. The main difference lies in the calculation
antennas in MT frequency sub-bands can be expressed as: of the power allocation. The three algorithms are described
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] and programmed in [21]. And in [22], one of the algorithms
y F E ,D F = H F E ,D F GD F x̂B E ,D F + nF E ,D F (10)
of the non-joint topology—called the non-joint topology (al-
[i,k ] ternative approach)—is presented. This last algorithm is less
where y F E ,D F is the FE MT vector received by the UE,
[i,k ] [i,k ] computationally-complex, but also less accurate.
H F E ,D F is the MT × MT FE channel diagonal matrix, GD F
The overall optimization problem of the three algorithms
is the MT × NS matrix which represents the power allocated
[i,k ] is non-convex with multiple optimization variables. Thereby,
to each sub-band and x̂B E ,D F is the BE NS vector of complex a suboptimal solution will be determined based on alternat-
[i]
data symbols re-encoded and, then, re-transmitted. nF E ,D F is ing optimization [23]. The optimal power allocation at ei-
an MT vector of AWGN with distribution CN (0, Σ); where ther the transmitters or the relays can be calculated using the
Σ is the MT × MT diagonal covariance matrix. No MIMO is Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions and applying Lagrange
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS 2057

multipliers. In the joint algorithm, an equal distribution of the It is known that (15) is related to (4) via the subcarrier alloca-
power allocated to the MRNs is assumed. With this, the optimal tion policy and the precoding matrices. The subcarrier allocation
power allocation at the DeNB can be determined and, then at policy is a discrete variable which leads to a non-differentiable
the relays. In the non-joint algorithms, an equal distribution of problem. Therefore, time-sharing relaxation is adopted as in
[i,k ]∗
the power allocated to the DeNB is assumed. Then, the optimal [26], where sD F is now a real value between 0 and 1 instead
power allocation is calculated at the MRNs and, subsequently, of a Boolean.
[i,k ] [i,k ]
at the base station. Then, the power allocation solution will be The precoding matrices F D F and GD F are determined using
determined based on the binary search method. In order to solve SVD as in the AF optimization process. This is accomplished
the resource allocation problem, the optimization variables will through matrix factorization:
be updated by solving them iteratively to reach a local optimal  H
[i] [i] [i] [i]
solution for arbitrary SNR values. This process will keep on H B E ,D F = U B E ΛB E V B E ; (16)
repeating until a convergence point is found or the maximum  H
number of iterations is reached. The suboptimal iterative algo- [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
H F E ,D F = U F E ΛF E V F E (17)
rithm is guaranteed to converge to a local optimum for arbitrary
SNR values [24]. [i] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
where U B E , V B E , U F E and V F E are unitary matrices and
The three algorithms have been adapted to be used in the [i] [i,k ]
ΛB E and ΛF E are matrices whose main diagonal represent
simulator. In our scenario, the subcarrier allocation policy and [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
the precoding matrices of the MIMO system are optimized. The γF E /B E ,n ; where γB E ,n and γF E ,n are the Channel to Noise
[i] [i,k ]
first algorithm is used for the joint topology where a MIMO Ratio (CNR) of H B E ,D F and H F E ,D F , respectively. Hence,
channel is established and then, relayed to the UEs. On the the endeavor is to minimize the channel error, i.e., maximize the
other hand, the other two algorithms are used in the non-joint CNR. Accordingly, the precoding matrices will be calculated
topology where VMIMO is implemented to manage the MIMO like:
channel. [i,k ] [i] [i,k ]
F D F = Ṽ B E ΛF ; (18)
F. Resource Allocation for the DF-MRN  H
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
GD F = Ṽ F E ΛG Ũ B E (19)
The problem in scheduling and allocating resources in a joint
[i] [i,k ] [i,k ]
topology scenario with a DF-MRN in each of the carriages can where Ṽ B E , Ṽ F E and Ũ B E are the NS rightmost columns
be split into two halves, the BE and the FE. The BE being [i] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
of V B E , V F E and U B E respectively. ΛF and ΛG are
[i,k ]
a MIMO channel with full-knowledge of the CSI, a precoding diagonal matrices with NS elements that represent the optimal
matrix in the transmitter and an MMSE estimator in the receiver. [i,k ]
power allocation (PF E /B E ,n ) correspondingly. Refer to [9] to
Following (8) and (9), the Mean Square Error (MSE) matrix in
see the demonstration. Then, the power allocation functions as
the BE can be expressed as:
 a water-filling algorithm depending on the CNR.
 H 
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ] In (20), the optimization problem is presented:
M M S E = ε x̂B E ,D F − xB E ,D F x̂B E ,D F − xB E ,D F
 nF 
K  N
(12) [i,k ]∗
max sD F w[k ] log2
where is assumed for each antenna that the symbols power [i , k ]
PB E , n ,
[i , k ]
PF E , n
[i , k ]∗
,s D F ∗ k =1 i=1 n =1
[i,k ] [i,k ] H
in the baseband are normalized ε{(xB E ,D F )(xB E ,D F ) } =
[i,k ]

I N S . Hence, the MSE matrix can be expressed as: SN RT ,D F ,n
× 1+ ;
  [i,k ]∗
sD F
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i] [i,k ]
M M S E = I N S + E B E ,D F H B E ,D F F D F (13)
 nF 
K  N
[i,k ]
with
[i,k ]
E B E ,D F being the optimal post-processing matrix: subject to C1 : PB E ,n ≤ PT ;
k=1 i=1 n=1
 H
[i,k ] [i] [i,k ] nF 
K  N
E B E ,D F = H B E ,D F F D F  [i,k ]
C2 : PF E ,n ≤ MT · PM R N ;
  H  H −1
k =1 i=1 n =1
[i] [i,k ] [i,k ] [i]
· H B E ,D F F D F F D F H B E ,D F + Γ[i]
n K
 [i,k ]∗
(14) C3 : sD F ≤ 1 ∀ i;
k =1
[i]
where Γn denotes the noise correlation matrix. The FE opti- [i,k ]∗
mization problem is more a classic water-filling problem over a C4 : 0 ≤ sD F ≤ 1 ∀ i, k;
fading channel than a MIMO scenario. Nevertheless, the objec- [i,k ] [i,k ]
C5 : PB E ,n , PF E ,n ≥ 0, ∀ i, k, n
tive function in both links, FE and BE, is throughput maximiza-
(20)
tion. As already known, the minimization of the MSE matrix is
equivalent to throughput maximization as expressed in [25]: where PT is the DeNB maximum total transmission power,
  PM R N is the MRN maximum total transmission power per
[i,k ] [i,k ]
RD F = − log2 M M S E (15) antenna, w[k ] is a positive constant which permits different types
2058 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019

[i,k ]
of fairness to be obtained and SN RT ,D F ,n is the SNR of (3). σn are the eigenvalues of the total channel matrix (which is
The SNR of each link can be calculated as: the backend loss matrix multiplied by the frontend loss matrix
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]
plus the VPLs). Therefore, the link capacity of the direct channel
SN RF E /B E ,D F ,n = PF E /B E ,n · γF E /B E ,n (21) can be considered as an upper-bound of the MIMO (N × NU E )
Using Lagrange multipliers and the KKT conditions [27], the capacity.
Lagrangian can be written as:
  H. Scheduling of Users
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]∗
L λ, δ, β [i] , PB E ,n , PF E ,n , sD F = Apart from the resource scheduling to maximize channel ca-
nF 
K  N


[i,k ]
 pacity, another important aspect to study is the user scheduling
 [i,k ]∗ SN RT ,D F ,n
= sD F · w[k ] · log2 1+ [i,k ]∗
in order to share resources between users [28]. In this paper, two
k =1 i=1 n =1 sD F different approaches have been considered: Round-Robin (RR)
and Best SRS (RS).
 nF 
K  N nF 
K 
 N
[i,k ] [i,k ] The Round-Robin algorithm assigns the same resources
−λ PB E ,n −δ PF E ,n
equally to all users, handling all processes without priority.
k =1 i=1 n =1 k =1 i=1 n =1
Thus, it shares the bandwidth without considering the chan-
nF
K 
 [i,k ]∗ nel quality. Whereas the Best SRS algorithm schedules them
− β [i] sD F (22) depending on the user’s SNR channel. The Best SRS is a
k =1 i=1
channel-aware scheduler which favors users under better condi-
where the Lagrange multipliers are λ and δ respectively for tions in a determined band. Hence, in a multiple user scenario,
[i,k ] [i,k ]
PB E ,n and PF E ,n and β [i] with elements i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , nF } subcarriers are allotted to the UE with the marginal margin
is the Lagrange multiplier vector associated with the subcarrier calculated as:
⎛
usage constraints C3, C4. Now, we have to solve this problem. N  

Please refer to the Appendix to see the demonstration. Then, the ψ [i,k ] = w[k ] ⎝log2 1 + SN R[i,k ]
T ,A F /D F ,n
solutions to the power allocation are presented in (23) and (24). n =1

+ ⎞
[i,k ] [i,k ]∗ w[k ] 1 [i,k ]
SN RT ,A F /D F ,n
PB E ,n = sD F · − (23) ⎠
λln (2) γ [i,k ] − [i,k ]
(26)
B E ,n 1 + SN RT ,A F /D F ,n

+
[i,k ] [i,k ]∗ w[k ] 1 and
PF E ,n = sD F · − (24) 
δln (2) γ [i,k ]
F E ,n
[i,k ]
1, f k = arg max ψ [i,k ]
sA F /D F k {0,1,...,K } (27)
where the optimal power allocation depends on the Lagrange 0, otherwise
multipliers λ and δ. It is worth noting that the power allocated
to the FE does not depend on the power allocated to the BE and The Best SRS might leave some users without resources if
vice versa, thus, the DF-MRN is more versatile than the AF. The a lower limit is not established. Therefore, a minimum rate
optimal solution will be obtained by iterating until a convergence constraint has been established for each UE.
point is found or the maximum number of iterations is reached.
Finally, the total SNR can be calculated with (3). Then, (4) will IV. LINK-LEVEL SIMULATOR
be applied to obtain the average channel capacity. In order to verify the throughput gain achieved by the pro-
posed architecture, we have developed a link-level simulator for
G. Direct Link Approach the downlink. Link-level simulations are generally used to sim-
The resource allocation of the direct channel (DeNB-UE) is ulate point-to-point physical layer technologies, where there is
considered ideal, i.e., there is no optimization process to solve. one single cell, and taking into account accurate scenario mod-
The channel matrix in the direct link is an N × NU E matrix. els to simulate propagation losses. For the simulations, only one
N is the number of antennas in the DeNB and NU E is the DeNB and one train carriage are considered. The train crosses a
number of LTE-A antennas in the UE. SVD has been applied flat field with the DeNB at a distance of 500 metres as detailed
to the channel matrix to determine the maximum link capacity in Fig. 4. Our simulator is made up of two parts: calculation of
in (25): the frontend and backend links losses and an optimization pro-

 cess with different algorithms to allocate system resources in a
PT ,n  [i,k ] 2
nF N [i,k ]
[k ]
 dynamic fashion. This process is, then, repeated iteratively 10
Rdirect = W · log2 1 + 2 σ (25)
σn o N n times or more to obtain more accurate results. Fig. 5 illustrates
i=1 n =1
the block diagram of the software structure to better discern the
[i,k ]
where the capacity is measured in bits/s; PT ,n is the total power different parts of the implemented simulator.
transmitted by the DeNB per spatial channel, per subcarrier and In Table I, the main parameters of the simulator are detailed.
per user; σn2 o is the AWGN power which follows a CSCN and It is important to note that the DeNB maximum transmit power
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS
Fig. 4. Top-view layout of the railway scenario.
Fig. 5. Downlink-level simulator scheme, software structure hierarchy.
is the total power that the DeNB transmits to the MRNs, whilst
the transmission power in the MRN is per antenna. The latter
permits the same power to be had independently of the topology
used. In order to compare both topologies, the total number of
antennas in transmission and reception per carriage will be the
same (MR = MT = M ). In all simulations the bandwidth is
limited to 10 MHz. In fact, the effective bandwidth would be
9 MHz, hence, 600 subcarriers.
In some simulations, an upper-bound algorithm has been de-
signed using the joint topology. The only difference between the
upper-bound algorithm and the rest is that it considers that the
frontend channel is ideal and no losses are associated with it.
Therefore, either using AF- or DF-MRNs, the upper-bound al-
gorithm acknowledges the backend SNR as the total SNR when
calculating (4). Then, in the results section, it will be proven
that the backend links limit the channel throughput.
For the sake of the simulations, perfect synchronization and
estimation of the channel is assumed in the simulator.
2059
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results obtained from the link-level simulator are shown
in this section. The simulator is able to calculate the average
system throughput of the two-hop MIMO relay architecture that
has been discussed over this article. The average capacity can
be determined by taking the parameters shown in Table I into
consideration.
As previously mentioned, non-joint topology uses only AF
schemes, whilst joint topology uses DF and AF schemes. AF-
MRNs will be used in the simulations by default, unless the
contrary is specified.
A. Average Throughput Versus Transmit Power
In this simulation, the algorithms are compared by varying
the DeNB maximum transmission power (from 19 to 46 dBm).
The results are the system average capacity optimized for each
power. An 8 × 8 MIMO channel is established. The DeNB
2060
TABLE I
MAIN PARAMETERS OF THE SIMULATION
transmits using 8 antennas, the MRN uses 8 antennas at trans-
mission and reception and the UE has one antenna that listens in
one of the 802.11ad channels. In the direct link, also MIMO is
carried out with 8 antennas at each side. The results are shown
in Fig. 6. The throughput gain that the joint topology is able to
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019
Fig. 6. Average system throughput (Mbps) vs. DeNB maximum transmit
power (dBm) implementing AF-MRN, direct and relay links, (N = 8, M =
M R = M T = 8, N U E = 8, K = 1, N I t = 10).
achieve in comparison with the non-joint structure is shown. It
can be observed that the joint topology (green plot) achieves a
huge improvement in performance.
At the beginning, with low power, the joint and non-joint
topologies perform almost identically. Nevertheless, as soon as
the power is raised, the joint topology is able to exploit the archi-
tecture and perform far better. Additionally, the non-joint algo-
rithms (blue plots) behave similarly at high powers. As a matter
of fact, since the alternative approach algorithm (cyan plot) is
less complex computationally, it is a better choice in general.
The upper-bound algorithm (red plot) determinates the maxi-
mum throughput achievable under ideal conditions intrawagon.
Its capacity is almost identical to that of the joint, except at high
DeNB powers. It is clear from this that the backend channel
limits the throughput and only with a high power at the DeNB
will this limitation be overcome.
The direct channel (black plot) performs much worse in com-
parison with our approach. This is because the direct link has
to tackle the high propagation losses and the VPLs of the HST.
Hence, when the signal reaches the UE, it has poor SNR, so the
UE is not able to retrieve all of the information.
B. Average Throughput Versus Number of MRN Antennas
Fig. 7 details the average channel capacity versus the number
of MRN antennas. In the graph, the DeNB has N = 4 antennas
and the MRNs have MR = MT = {1, 2, . . . , 16} antennas. The
DeNB power has been set to a medium power of 33 dBm. The
array size of the MRNs has been kept constant, independently
of the number of antennas in both topologies. Hence, as the
number of antennas is increased, the distance between them is
also reduced. Bear in mind that the simulations are carried out
in a macro rural scenario with few scatterers. Therefore, MIMO
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS 2061

Fig. 7. Average System throughput (Mbps) vs. number of MRNs antennas Fig. 8. Average system throughput (Mbps) vs. distance traversed by the train
implementing AF-MRN, (N = 4, M = M R = M T = {1, 2, . . . , 16}, K = 1, (m) implementing AF-MRN. The x-axis indicates the path that the train follows
N I t = 20). from the starting point where the link DeNB-MRN is perpendicular to the rails,
(N = 2, M = M R = M T = 2, N U E = 2, K = 1, N I t = 20).

gain is much less than what it would be obtained in an urban

scenario.
As can be seen, the system throughput increases in accordance
with the number of antennas. Thus, both topologies achieve
high spatial diversity taking advantage of MIMO techniques.
As expected, if the number of antennas keeps increasing, less
throughput gain will be obtained since there are more spatial
channels correlated. This will lead to rank-deficient matrices,
where increasing the number of antennas will barely increment
the average throughput. The joint topology is also able to provide
a higher throughput than the non-joint. This difference is notable
with 4 antennas or more.

C. Average Throughput Versus Distance Traversed

by the Train
The average throughput versus the distance driven by the train
is shown. The initial distance between train and base station is
500 metres, and from that point the HST goes over a track
of 2.000 metres. The rails are normal to the imaginary line
traced between the DeNB and the HST. The scenario layout is
illustrated in Fig. 4. The DeNB power has been set to 40 dBm
and the DeNB, the LTE UE and the MRN have 2 antennas.
In Fig. 8, the impact of the propagation path in the direct
link and free space losses are noticeable. As expected, the three
algorithms perform in a similar way under these conditions. It
is relevant to note that, as the distance between the HST and
the DeNB is increased, joint topology (red plot) and non-joint
topology (green plot) algorithms gradually converge. This is due
to multipath propagation which is clearly predominant at small
distances, but not so at greater ones.
D. Performance of AF-MRN Versus DF-MRN
As previously mentioned, two different MRN configurations
have been studied and implemented. The AF- and DF-MRNs
Fig. 9. Average system throughput (Mbps) vs. DeNB maximum transmit
power (dBm), comparison of AF-MRN vs. DF-MRN, (N = 8, M = M R =
M T = 8, K = 1, N I t = 10).
are compared utilizing the joint topology in Fig. 9. The DF re-
constructs the signal and corrects errors, whereas the AF simply
amplifies the signals. Both schemes perform in a similar fash-
ion at low powers, but with high DeNB powers, the DF scheme
outperforms the AF slightly.
The differences between the AF and DF schemes have pre-
viously been researched in many studies [17], [19]. In the lay-
out simulated, the backend link is much more sensitive than
the frontend, due to the distance and the harshness of the en-
vironment in HSR environments. According to (1) and (3),
if both channels—backend and frontend—have very different
SNR from each other, the total SNR of AF- and DF-MRNs
will be equal to the channel with the minimum SNR and both
2062
Fig. 10. Average system SNR (dB) vs. DeNB maximum transmit power
(dBm), (N = 8, M = M R = M T = 8, K = 1, N I t = 10).
schemes will perform in a similar way. Hence, the DF scheme
will outperform the AF only at high DeNB powers, where the
SNR in the backend (BE-SNR) has a similar value to the SNR
at the frontend (FE-SNR) as depicted in Fig. 10.
Ultimately, costs have to be taken into account where, in
general, the DF is more expensive. Nonetheless, the AF-MRN
in our architecture needs a processor which will increase its
final cost. If AF-MRNs are to be implemented, a complete novel
design will be developed to take full advantage of the topology
and the MIMO channel. On the contrary, if the DF-MRN are
implemented, whilst the design will not be completely novel,
extra care has to be taken on the backend link to avoid the
propagation of errors. An in-depth research has to be carried
out to completely determine the structure of both relays and
its cost and design and analyze its performance under different
circumstances.
It is clear, in all cases, how the non-joint topology underper-
forms as it is unable to optimize resources between MRNs.
E. Scheduling of UEs in a Multiple User Scenario
Previously, all simulations have been carried out for only
one UE. In this subsection, K UEs are placed in the scenario.
Therefore, different scheduling algorithms have been tested.
Furthermore, the joint topology is used for this very purpose
because, as it has been shown, in general, that it achieves a
higher throughput. The average channel throughput versus the
DeNB Transmit power for 3 UEs is illustrated in Fig. 11. The
Round Robin and the Best SRS algorithms have been used for
this case.
The Round Robin scheduling algorithm shares the OFDM
subcarriers equally between the three users obtaining almost
the same throughput. The sum of the three UE rates has been
represented by the Total Throughput (black plot).
The Best SRS classifies UEs depending on the SNR channel,
where it determines which one has the better link conditions.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019
As in the other graphs, throughput is plotted depending on the
power which is transmitted for the 3 UEs, though using the
channel-aware scheduling algorithm. It is interesting to note
that the total throughput obtained with the Best SRS algorithm is
higher than the total throughput obtained with the Round Robin
because it allocates more resources to the UE with the best
channel conditions, thereby obtaining a higher SNR and greater
total throughput. In this very case, UE 2 has better channel
conditions, and hence, more resources are assigned to it, whilst
UEs 1 and 3 are left with a minimum channel rate.
The frontend SNR mainly depends on the positioning of the
MRNs and the UEs. Thereby, a good MRN positioning is critical
to obtain the maximum SNR inside the train.
F. Performance and Comparison of the Joint and Non-Joint
Topologies in a Two-User Scenario
In this subsection, the DF and AF joint topologies and non-
joint topology are compared with 2 UEs inside one carriage. In
a similar manner as in a previous subsection, there is an HST
placed near a base station, specifically at 500 metres. Then,
the train starts moving and traverses a distance of 2.000 metres
in a straight line that is perpendicular to the imaginary line
that creates the DeNB with the MRNs. The DeNB maximum
transmission power is set to 40 dBm. A Round Robin algorithm
is used to schedule both UEs by dividing the resources equally
between them. It is clear in Fig. 12 that UE 1 has higher SNR
and, hence, a greater throughput. The three algorithms start to
collide at long distances (over 800 m of the track). Only the UE
2 with the non-joint topology seems to underperform even at
very long distances. At short distances, the DF-MRN achieves
a higher throughput than the AF-MRNs.
In Fig. 12 is also depicted the average SNR of the differ-
ent algorithms for the same scenario. It is worth noting that
the throughput of UE 2 with joint topology is greater than
that of UE 1 with a non-joint topology, despite UE 1 having
a higher SNR than UE 2. This indicates the big difference in
performance between the joint topology and non-joint topology
architectures.
G. Performance and Comparison of the Joint and Non-Joint
Topologies in a Multiple User Scenario
Finally, a more realistic scenario can be simulated. These
simulations will lead to a more accurate depiction of the ca-
pabilities of the architecture in rural environments. As in the
previous section, the HST traverses the layout with one DeNB
offering coverage to the passengers. The only difference is that
the track is 2.000 m long and there are 10 UEs inside a car-
riage. A 2 × 2 MIMO link is established between the base
station and the MRN and each UE has only one antenna at
60 GHz. The DeNB maximum transmission power is set to
40 dBm and a Round Robin algorithm is used to share resources
between UEs.
The total average system throughput and the average user
throughput in a multiple user scenario is detailed in Fig. 13.
At short distances, there is a large difference between both
topologies with only a 2 × 2 MIMO, whereas at longer
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS 2063

Fig. 11. Average system throughput (Mbps) and average user throughput (Mbps) vs. DeNB maximum transmit power (dBm) implementing AF-MRN (left) and
DF-MRN (right). As for resource allocation, round robin (up) and best SRS (down) scheduling are implemented to split resources between UEs, (N = 8, M =
M R = M T = 8, K = 3, N I t = 10).

Fig. 12. Average throughput (Mbps) and SNR (dB) per UE vs. distance traversed by the train (m). The x-axis indicates the path that the train follows from the
starting point where the link DeNB-MRN is perpendicular to the rails, (N = 2, M = M R = M T = 2, K = 2, N I t = 10).

distances, this difference almost disappears. The main differ-
ence between the DF and AF schemes in this figure is that the
DF joint topology achieves a greater throughput gain than the
AF. Furthermore, the DF-MRN implementation accomplishes
to manage a larger number of UEs better as a result of its
versatility.
The spectral efficiency is another interesting factor to pay
attention to. In the case of the joint topology with the DF-
MRN, this leads to a peak of approximately 11,2 bits/s/Hz at the
beginning and 4 bits/s/Hz at the end. In the non-joint topology,
there is a peak of approximately 9,2 bits/s/Hz and a minimum
of 4 bits/s/Hz.
2064 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 68, NO. 3, MARCH 2019

APPENDIX
In the following, we offer the solution to the power alloca-
tion problem in the use of the DF-MRN joint topology. As a
reminder, we are maximizing the link capacity of a channel
split into BE and FE and we applied the KKT conditions us-
ing inequality constraints. As a result, the Lagrangian of the
optimization problem could be written as:
 
[i,k ] [i,k ]
L λ, δ, β [i] , PB E ,n , PF E ,n , s[i,k ]∗ =
nF 
K  N


[i,k ]

 [i,k ]∗ SN RT ,D F ,n
[k ]
= sD F ·w · log2 1+ [i,k ]∗
k =1 i=1 n =1 sD F
 nF 
K  N nF 
K 
 N
[i,k ] [i,k ]
− λ PB E ,n − δ PF E ,n
k =1 i=1 n =1 k =1 i=1 n =1
nF
K 
 [i,k ]∗
− β [i] sD F (28)
Fig. 13. Average system throughput (Mbps) and average user throughput
(Mbps) vs. distance traversed by the train (m). The x-axis indicates the k =1 i=1
path that the train follows from the starting point where the link DeNB- Then, (26) can be solved differentiating with respect to the
MRN is perpendicular to the rails, (N = 2, M = M R = M T = 2, K = 10,
N I t = 10). power. In the case of the BE link, we differentiate with respect
[i,k ]
to PB E ,n , whilst in the FE link we differentiate with respect to
[i,k ]
PF E ,n . Bearing in mind (3) and (21), the BE link would end as:
VI. CONCLUSION
[i,k ]∗ [i,k ]
In this paper, a new cutting-edge architecture has been studied ∂L sD F w[k ] γB E ,n
= − λ=0 (29)
in order to enhance the average system throughput in high-speed [i,k ]
∂PB E ,n ln (2) 1 + P [i,k ] γ [i,k ]
B E ,n B E ,n
railways. This system implements an LTE-A MIMO channel
that uses outband MRNs. These MRNs translate the incoming Now, we rearrange the terms:
signal into mmWave bands (60 GHz) for the link inside an HST. [i,k ] [i,k ]∗
[i,k ] [i,k ] γB E ,n sD F w[k ]
Two topologies that suit this structure have been designed. The PB E ,n γB E ,n = − 1 (30)
joint topology deploys one MRN per carriage with an array of λln (2)
antennas in transmission and reception that work jointly to op- Finally, we obtain the power allocation in the DeNB:
timize the final performance. The non-joint topology deploys 
+
multiple MRNs with one antenna at transmission and one an- [i,k ] [i,k ]∗ w[k ] 1
PB E ,n = sD F · − (31)
tenna at reception, although they do not cooperate. Furthermore, λln (2) γ [i,k ]
B E ,n
both the AF and DF schemes are studied in this scenario with
the joint topology. By means of a downlink-level simulator, the note that due to constraint C5, which indicates that power must
reachable channel capacity is demonstrated. These results show be equal to or greater than zero, only a positive number is
[i,k ]
how both topologies perform under different scenarios and con- eligible. The FE link can be differentiated by PF E ,n in a similar
figurations. manner:
In the simulations, joint topology clearly outperforms the non- [i,k ]∗ [i,k ]
∂L sD F w[k ] γF E ,n
joint structure. Furthermore, joint topology permits the AF- or = − δ = 0 (32)
DF-MRNs to be used. DF-MRNs can reach a higher data rate
[i,k ]
∂PF E ,n ln (2) 1 + P [i,k ] γ [i,k ]
F E ,n F E ,n
than AF, although its cost would probably be higher. Neverthe- [i,k ] [i,k ]∗
less, AF relays in the joint topology would also need a processor [i,k ] [i,k ] γF E ,n sD F w[k ]
PF E ,n γF E ,n = − 1 (33)
which would also increase its final cost. Therefore, an exhaus- δ ln (2)
tive study and design of these two schemes must be carried 
+
out. Moreover, two different scheduling algorithms have been [i,k ] [i,k ]∗ w[k ] 1
PF E ,n = sD F · − (34)
incorporated into the code to simulate the performance of this ar- δln (2) γ [i,k ]
F E ,n
chitecture with multiple UEs. The two-hop architecture exhibits
a high throughput gain in comparison to a MIMO direct channel The optimal solution to the power allocation problem for
that does not use either MRN or mmWave bands. Additionally, λ and δ is found with a standard gradient algorithm. Then, if
this architecture has a high SE. the Lagrangian is solved to find the optimal subcarrier alloca-
This novel approach might have a great impact on the devel- tion policy, we will obtain the marginal margin (26), which,
[i,k ]
opment of next-generation 5G technologies and for passenger with (27), will lead to sD F . Finally, the optimization vari-
[i,k ] [i,k ] [i,k ]∗
communications in several means of transportation. ables (PB E ,n , PF E ,n , sD F ) are updated iteratively until a
OLIVA SÁNCHEZ AND ALONSO: A TWO-HOP MIMO RELAY ARCHITECTURE IN HIGH-SPEED TRAINS
convergence point is found or the maximum number of iter-
ations is reached.
REFERENCES
[1] 5G: A Technology Vision, Huawei Technol., Shenzhen, China, 2013.
[2] 3GPP, “Technical report 3rd generation partnership project; technical
specification group radio access network; Evolved universal terrestrial ra-
dio access (E-UTRA); Study on mobile relay,” 3GPP, Valbonne, France,
Tech. Rep. TR 36.836 V12.0.0, Release 12, Jun. 2014.
[3] J. Calle-Sanchez, D. De-Antonio-Monte, M. Molina-Garcı́a, and J. I.
Alonso, “Theoretical analysis and performance simulation of in-band LTE
mobile relays in railway environments,” in Proc. 28th Int. Conf. Adv. Inf.
Netw. Appl. Workshops, 2014, pp. 725–730.
[4] N. Lin, X. Huang, and X. Ma, “Analysis of the uplink capacity in the
high-speed train wireless communication with full-duplex mobile relay,”
in Proc. 83rd Veh. Technol. Conf., May 2016, pp. 1–5.
[5] J. Jiang, M. Dianati, M. Ali Imran, and Y. Chen, “Energy efficiency and
optimal power allocation in virtual-MIMO systems,” in Proc. IEEE Veh.
Technol. Conf., Dec. 2012.
[6] 3GPP, “Technical report 3rd generation partnership project; 5G; Study
on scenarios and requirements for next generation access technologies,”
3GPP, Sophia Antipolis, France, Tech. Rep. TR 38.913 Version 14.2.0,
May 2017.
[7] Wireless LAN at 60 GHz - IEEE 802.11ad Explained, Application Note,
Agilent Technol., Santa Clara, CA, USA, 2013.
[8] T. Nitsche et al., “Boon and bane of 60 GHz networks: Practical insights
into beamforming, interference, and frame level operation,” in Proc. 11th
ACM Conf. Emerging Netw. Experiments Technol., Dec. 2015, Art. no. 17.
[9] D. W. Kwan Ng et al., “Energy-efficient 5G outdoor-to-indoor commu-
nication: SUDAS over licensed and unlicensed spectrum,” IEEE Trans.
Wireless Commun., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 3170–3896, May 2016.
[10] R. Shrivastava, M. Breiling, and A. Krishnamoorthy, “Vehicular SUDAS
for 5G high mobility V2X scenarios,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Standards
Commun. Netw., Oct. 2017, pp. 104–108.
[11] P. Kyösti et al., “D1.1.2 V1.1 WINNER II channel models,” Inf. Soc.
Technol., Nov. 2007.
[12] S. Jaeckel, L. Raschkowski, K. Börner, and L. Thiele, “Quasi determinis-
tic radio channel generator user manual and documentation,” Fraunhofer
Heinrich Hertz Inst., Berlin, Germany, Tech. Rep. v1.2.3-307, Mar. 2016.
[13] A. Maltsev et al., Channel Models for 60 GHz WLAN Systems, IEEE
P802.11, May 2010.
[14] R. Maslennikov and A. Lomayev, Implementation Channel Models for
60 GHz WLAN Systems, IEEE P802.1, May 2010.
[15] Y. Zhou et al., “Broadband wireless communications on high-speed
trains,” in Proc. Wireless Opt. Commun. Conf., Jun. 2011, pp. 1–6.
[16] I. Krikidis and G. Zheng, Advanced Relay Technologies in Next Generation
Wireless Communications, series 68. Croydon, U.K.: Inst. Eng. Technol.,
2016, pp. 39–93 and 129–170.
[17] Y. Sui, “On the benefits of mobile relay nodes in wireless networks,”
M.S. thesis, Dept. Signals Syst., Chalmers Univ. Technol., Gothenburg,
Sweden, 2012.
[18] T. Q. Duong et al., “On the performance of selection decode-and-forward
relay networks over Nakagami-m fading channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett.,
vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 172–174, Mar. 2009.
[19] G. Levin and S. Loyka, “Amplify-and-forward versus decode-and-forward
relaying: Which is better?,” in Proc. Int. Zurich Seminar Commun.,
Mar. 2012, pp. 1–4.
[20] M. Breiling, D. W. Kwan Ng, C. Rohde, F. Burkhardt, and R. Schober,
“Resource allocation for outdoor-to-indoor multicarrier transmission with
shared UE-side distributed antenna systems,” in Proc. Veh. Technol. Conf.,
Jan. 2015, pp. 1–7.
[21] M. Goodarzi and A. Krishnamoorthy, “Resource allocation in a distributed
antenna system,” Inst. Digital Commun., Friedrich-Alexander University
Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany, Jan. 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/iis/en/doc/ks/bb/Simulation-
Testbench_20171023.zip
[22] C. J. Wu et al., “Design of distributed amplify-and-forward relay network
for MIMO transmission,” in Proc. IEEE 21st Int. Symp. Personal Indoor
Mobile Radio Commun, 2010, pp. 893–898.
[23] I. Hammerström and A. Wittneben, “Power allocation schemes for
amplify-and-forward MIMO-OFDM relay links,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 2798–2802, Aug. 2007.
2065
[24] J. C. Bezdek and R. J. Hathaway, “Convergence of alternating optimiza-
tion,” Neural, Parallel Sci. Comput. vol. 11, pp. 351–368, Dec. 2003.
[25] D. P. Palomar, J. M. Cioffi, and M. A. Lagunas, “Joint Tx-Rx beamforming
design for multicarrier MIMO channels: A unified framework for convex
optimization,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 2381–2401,
Sep. 2003.
[26] C. Y. Wong, R. S. Cheng, K. B. Letaief, and R. D. Murch, “Multiuser
OFDM with adaptive subcarrier, bit, and power allocation,” IEEE J. Sel.
Areas Commun., vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1747–1758, Oct. 1999.
[27] D. W. Kwan Ng, E. Lo, and R. Schober, “Dynamic resource allocation
in MIMO-OFDMA systems with full-duplex and hybrid relaying,” IEEE
Trans. Commun., vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 1291–1304, May 2012.
[28] P. Kela et al., “Dynamic packet scheduling performance in UTRA long
term evolution downlink,” in Proc. 3rd Int. Symp. Wireless Pervasive
Comput., 2008, pp. 308–313.
José David Oliva Sánchez (M’18) was born in
Madrid, Spain, in 1994. He received a degree in
telecommunications engineering from Polytechnic
University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain, in 2016,
and specialized in communication systems. He re-
ceived the master’s degree in telecommunications
engineering from the UPM. He is currently work-
ing toward the Ph.D. degree.
He is currently working with the Department of In-
formation Processing and Telecommunications Cen-
ter, UPM. His research studies have included signal
processing, study and design of smart antennas and adaptive algorithms, and
analysis and simulation of high-speed/high-frequency scenarios. He has also
worked in the development of a system-level simulator for 4G communications
in high-speed railway, and measured and modeled the path loss propagation in
subway tunnels at 24 GHz. He is currently involved in the study of new tech-
nologies and their viability in high-speed trains for 5G communications. His
primary research interests are MIMO communications and signal processing.
He has received a scholarship from the Department of Information Processing
and Telecommunications Center.
José I. Alonso (M’91) received a degree in telecom-
munications engineering and the Ph.D. degree from
the Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid,
Spain. He was with Telettra España, S.A., as a Mi-
crowave Design Engineer. He, then, worked with
the Department of Signals, Systems, and Radio-
communications, UPM, where he is currently a Full
Professor. He has participated in more than 80 re-
search projects and contracts, financed by national
and international institutions and companies. He has
authored more than 150 publications in scientific
journals, symposium proceedings, seminars and reports. In addition, he holds
three patents. His research has included analysis and simulation of high-
speed/high-frequency integrated circuits and their interconnections, and the
computer-aided design and measurements of hybrid and GaAs monolithic mi-
crowave integrated circuits and their applications in the development and imple-
mentation of mobile, optical-fiber, and communications systems. He has also
worked in the development and radio planning of broadband point-multipoint
radio systems in millimetre frequencies and wireless and mobile communica-
tions systems (WiFi, WiMAX, TETRA, GSM-R, and LTE). He is currently
involved in the design of RF subsystems for automatic control and railway
signalling, such as ERTMS and CBTC, in the study of the viability of the use
of 5G communications for critical communications, operational and passenger
services in rail environments, in the analysis of interferences between GSM-R
and public communications networks, and the development of localization tech-
niques based on femtocell networks of LTE.