A Comprehensive Real-World Evaluation of 5G Improvements over 4G in Low- and Mid-Bands

Citation Author(s):
Muhammad Iqbal
Rochman
University of Chicago
Wei
Ye
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Zhi-Li
Zhang
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Monisha
Ghosh
University of Notre Dame
Submitted by:
Muhammad Iqbal ...
Last updated:
Fri, 03/15/2024 - 11:39
DOI:
10.21227/64wp-sy79
License:
Creative Commons Attribution
544 Views
Categories:
Wireless Networking
Keywords:
LTE, NR, 4G, 5G, RSRP, CQI, MCS
0
0 ratings - Please login to submit your rating.
ACCESS DATASET CITE SHARE/EMBED

Abstract 

As discussions around 6G begin, it is important to carefully quantify the spectral efficiency gains actually realized by deployed 5G networks as compared to 4G through various enhancements such as higher modulation, beamforming, and MIMO. This will inform the design of future cellular systems, especially in the mid-bands, which provide a good balance between bandwidth and propagation. Similar to 4G, 5G also utilizes low-band (<1 GHz) and mid-band spectrum (1 to 6 GHz), and hence comparing the performance of 4G and 5G in these bands will provide insights into how further performance improvements can be attained. In this work, we address a crucial question: is the performance boost in 5G compared to 4G primarily a result of increased bandwidth, or do the other enhancements play significant roles, and if so, under what circumstances? There is extremely limited academic research that addresses this important question. Hence, we conduct city-wide measurements of 4G and 5G cellular networks deployed in low- and mid-bands in Chicago and Minneapolis, and carefully analyze the performance to quantify the contributions of different aspects of 5G advancements to its improved throughput performance. Our analyses show that (i) compared to 4G, the throughput improvement in 5G today is mainly influenced by the wider channel bandwidth, both from single channels and channel aggregation, (ii) in addition to wider channels, improved 5G throughput requires better signal conditions, which can be delivered by denser deployment and/or use of beamforming in mid-bands, (iii) the channel rank in real-world environments rarely supports the full 4 layers of 4x4 MIMO and (iv) advanced features such as MU-MIMO and higher order modulation such as 1024-QAM have yet to be widely deployed. These observations and conclusions lead one to consider designing the next generation of cellular systems to have wider channels, perhaps with improved channel aggregation, a deployment architecture that is dense and uses more beams, thus ensuring uniformly better signal strength over the coverage area and no more than 4 MIMO layers per user.

Instructions: 

A Comprehensive Real-World Evaluation of 5G Improvements over 4G in Low- and Mid-Bands
Brief Description: A dataset containing cellular network performance measurements
collected in Chicago, IL, and Minneapolis, MN, in 2023.

Data Collection
* Methodology: Network performance data collected using cellular-enabled smartphones.
* Location and period:
* Chicago, IL, Dec 2022 (Downlink and Uplink)
* Minneapolis, MN, May 2023 (Downlink)
* Minneapolis, MN, Nov 2023 (Uplink)
* Minneapolis, MN, Mar 2024 (Ping)
* Sampling: Data collected while driving using XCAL, sampled over 1s by averaging
numeric data and finding the mode of discrete data.

Dataset Structure
* Important files and folders:
* plots.zip: Contains Jupyter notebook for example data visualization and the
generated figures.
* scripts.zip: Scripts to extract each P/SCells in the raw CSVs.
* processed.zip: Processed CSVs containing individual cells on each row.
* raw.csv: Raw CSVs taken from XCAP-M (XCAL dataset viewer). There are three sub-folders
corresponding to the type of measurements taken (DOWNLINK, UPLINK, PING).
* Data fields for processed CSVs:
* timestamp: Date and time of measurement (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS.ssssss).
* lat: GPS Latitude.
* lng: GPS Longitude.
* operator: Network operator (ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile).
* tech: Radio technology (LTE, NR).
* ca: List of aggregated bands.
* cell: CA designation (PCell, SCell).
* pci: Physical Cell Indicator
* ssb: SSB Index, only available for NR channels.
* rsrp: RSRP for LTE, or SS-RSRP for NR.
* rsrq: RSRQ for LTE, or SS-RSRQ for NR.
* band: Band number designation.
* freq: Channel center frequency in MHz.
* scs: Sub-carrier spacing in kHz, only available for NR channels.
* tput: PHY layer downlink throughput.
* bw: Bandwidth in MHz.
* rb: Average downlink RB over 1s.
* mcs: Average downlink MCS over 1s.
* modulation: Mode of downlink modulation over 1s.
* bler: Average downlink block error rate over 1s.
* pathloss: Pathloss in dB.
* mimo: Downlink MIMO mode.
* layer: Average number of downlink MIMO layers over 1s.
* cqi: Average channel quality indicator over 1s.
* ri: Rank index.
* pmi: Precoding Matrix Index i(1;1).
* pmi12: Precoding Matrix Index i(1;2).
* pmi13: Precoding Matrix Index i(1;3).
* pmi2: Precoding Matrix Index i(2).
* ultput: PHY layer uplink throughput.
* ulrb: Average uplink RB over 1s.
* ulmcs: Average uplink MCS over 1s.
* ulmodulation: Mode of uplink modulation over 1s.
* ulbler: Average uplink block error rate over 1s.
* ulmimo: Uplink MIMO mode.
* ullayer: Average number of uplink MIMO layers over 1s.
* ulpower: Average PUSCH transmit power in dBm.

Funding Agency: 
National Science Foundation
Grant Number: 
2128489, 2132700, 2220286, 2220292, 2226437, and 2229387

Comments

Access data

Submitted by Samad R. Shabestari on Fri, 03/22/2024 - 16:18

Dataset Files

LOGIN TO ACCESS DATASET FILES

 

QUESTIONS?