Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Satellite-Terrestrial Spectrum Sharing in FR3 through QoS-Aware Power Control and Spatial Nulling

Maria Tsampazi, Paolo Testolina, Michele Polese, Tommaso Melodia

Abstract

Frequency Range 3 (FR3), encompassing frequencies between 7.125 and 24.25 GHz, is an emerging frequency band for 6th generation (6G) applications. The upper mid-band, as it is frequently referred to, represents the sweet spot between coverage and capacity, providing better range than mmWaves and higher bandwidth than the sub-6 GHz band. Despite these advantages, the spectrum is already occupied by incumbent systems such as satellites (e.g., Starlink), and sharing it with terrestrial cellular applications results in spectrum conflicts, only exacerbating the existing spectrum scarcity. This article investigates the impact of two state-of-the-art methods, namely Quality of Service (QoS)-Aware Power Control and Interference Nulling, as well as their joint application, on interference mitigation toward non-terrestrial links while maintaining acceptable QoS on terrestrial networks. Our simulation results demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of each method, pinpointing how interference nulling can maintain high average performance and how power control is more appropriate for risk-averse scenarios to enhance fairness in terrestrial QoS. Finally, we showcase how the two can complement each other to enhance fairness in terrestrial QoS and increase the Next Generation Node Base (gNB)'s energy efficiency, while suppressing interference toward incumbents.

Satellite-Terrestrial Spectrum Sharing in FR3 through QoS-Aware Power Control and Spatial Nulling

Abstract

Frequency Range 3 (FR3), encompassing frequencies between 7.125 and 24.25 GHz, is an emerging frequency band for 6th generation (6G) applications. The upper mid-band, as it is frequently referred to, represents the sweet spot between coverage and capacity, providing better range than mmWaves and higher bandwidth than the sub-6 GHz band. Despite these advantages, the spectrum is already occupied by incumbent systems such as satellites (e.g., Starlink), and sharing it with terrestrial cellular applications results in spectrum conflicts, only exacerbating the existing spectrum scarcity. This article investigates the impact of two state-of-the-art methods, namely Quality of Service (QoS)-Aware Power Control and Interference Nulling, as well as their joint application, on interference mitigation toward non-terrestrial links while maintaining acceptable QoS on terrestrial networks. Our simulation results demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of each method, pinpointing how interference nulling can maintain high average performance and how power control is more appropriate for risk-averse scenarios to enhance fairness in terrestrial QoS. Finally, we showcase how the two can complement each other to enhance fairness in terrestrial QoS and increase the Next Generation Node Base (gNB)'s energy efficiency, while suppressing interference toward incumbents.
Paper Structure (19 sections, 9 equations, 16 figures, 1 table, 1 algorithm)

This paper contains 19 sections, 9 equations, 16 figures, 1 table, 1 algorithm.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Contributions and Outline
  3. System Model
  4. Terrestrial-Satellite Spectrum Sharing Strategies
  5. Interference Nulling
  6. -Aware Power Control
  7. Joint Interference Nulling and QoS-Aware Power Control
  8. simulation Setup
  9. Terrestrial Channel Model
  10. Channel Model
  11. Considered Constellation
  12. Key Performance Evaluation Metrics
  13. Performance Evaluation
  14. Impact of Interference Nulling on Beamforming Gain
  15. -Aware Power Control for Risk-Averse Scenarios
  16. ...and 4 more sections

Figures (16)

  • Figure 1: Interference from terrestrial cellular transmissions to satellite in terrestrial- satellite coexistence scenario.
  • Figure 2: End-to-end resource management framework overview.
  • Figure 3: Simulation topology for terrestrial-satellite spectrum sharing.
  • Figure 4: Satellite overview with QuaDRiGa's visualize_lotlan in various geographic regions. The trajectories shown correspond to different parameterizations of the orbital elements defined in Listing \ref{['lst:satellite']}.
  • Figure 5: of the satellite elevation angles for the constellation of $N_{\text{sat}} = 40$ satellites considered in this work.
  • ...and 11 more figures