2012
DOI: 10.1109/mcom.2012.6353683
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interference avoidance for in-device coexistence in 3GPP LTE-advanced: challenges and solutions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2 shows the optimal network scanning period with respect to an increasing number of freely accessible APs/m, ranging from very low to increased AP density [22], and an increasing user speed that ranges from pedestrian to vehicular. The parameters used for this calculation are the following: The macrocell transmission power, i.e., P m , is 250 mW [23], whereas the WLAN transmission power, i.e., P w , is 31 mW [24]. The WLAN cell radius, i.e., R, is 50m, whereas the energy consumption per network scan, i.e., E scan , is 13.7 mJ, assuming that the power consumption of a WLAN mobile terminal for network scanning is 1.37 W [25], with a duration of each active scan to be 10 ms [26].…”
Section: A Analytical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 shows the optimal network scanning period with respect to an increasing number of freely accessible APs/m, ranging from very low to increased AP density [22], and an increasing user speed that ranges from pedestrian to vehicular. The parameters used for this calculation are the following: The macrocell transmission power, i.e., P m , is 250 mW [23], whereas the WLAN transmission power, i.e., P w , is 31 mW [24]. The WLAN cell radius, i.e., R, is 50m, whereas the energy consumption per network scan, i.e., E scan , is 13.7 mJ, assuming that the power consumption of a WLAN mobile terminal for network scanning is 1.37 W [25], with a duration of each active scan to be 10 ms [26].…”
Section: A Analytical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Let us take one of the near-capacity coding schemes, for example the IrCC-URC-MSDD-aided-DQPSK scheme designed in previous sections to illustrate the scenario. As above-mentioned, in the practical system [127]- [130], each channel-encoded frame tends to be transmitted in an N sub sub-frames, where the average SN R value at the receiver side may be formulated as:…”
Section: Benefit Of Sub-frame Transmissionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increased usage of the radio frequency spectrum has lead to introduction of many wireless standards with small frequency separation. For an interference with a small frequency separation to the desired signal, the suppression achieved by the SAW filter is proved to be insufficient [4,5]. Furthermore SAW filters offer no flexibility in selecting a frequency band and for standards with several frequency bands several SAW filters and switching circuits are required.…”
Section: Interference Suppression By Linear Filteringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to (5) any component at the NIS input at the mirror frequency f m is mapped to f d . This can pose a problem when the channel noise around the frequency f m is not filtered by the BPF.…”
Section: Effect Of Input Channel Noise On the Receiver With Nismentioning
confidence: 99%