Abstract

In the past few years, a large body of literature has been created on downlink Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA), employing superposition coding and Successive Interference Cancellation (SIC), in multi-antenna wireless networks. Furthermore, the benefits of NOMA over Orthogonal Multiple Access (OMA) have been highlighted. In this paper, we take a critical and fresh look at the downlink Next Generation Multiple Access (NGMA) literature. Instead of contrasting NOMA with OMA, we contrast NOMA with two other multiple access baselines. The first is conventional Multi-User Linear Precoding (MU-LP), as used in Space-Division Multiple Access (SDMA) and multi-user Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) in 4G and 5G. The second, called Rate-Splitting Multiple Access (RSMA), is based on multi-antenna Rate-Splitting (RS). It is also a non-orthogonal transmission strategy relying on SIC developed in the past few years in parallel and independently from NOMA. We show that there is some confusion about the benefits of NOMA, and we dispel the associated misconceptions. First, we highlight why NOMA is inefficient in multi-antenna settings based on basic multiplexing gain analysis. We stress that the issue lies in how the NOMA literature, originally developed for single-antenna setups, has been hastily applied to multi-antenna setups, resulting in a misuse of spatial dimensions and therefore loss in multiplexing gains and rate. Second, we show that NOMA incurs a severe multiplexing gain loss despite an increased receiver complexity due to an inefficient use of SIC receivers. Third, we emphasize that much of the merits of NOMA are due to the constant comparison to OMA instead of comparing it to MU-LP and RS baselines. We then expose the pivotal design constraint that multi-antenna NOMA requires one user to fully decode the messages of the other users. This design constraint is responsible for the multiplexing gain erosion, rate and spectral efficiency loss, ineffectiveness to serve a large number of users, and inefficient use of SIC receivers in multi-antenna settings. Our analysis and simulation results confirm that NOMA should not be applied blindly to multi-antenna settings, highlight the scenarios where MU-LP outperforms NOMA and vice versa, and demonstrate the inefficiency, performance loss, and complexity disadvantages of NOMA compared to RSMA. The first takeaway message is that, while NOMA is suited for single-antenna settings (as originally intended), it is not efficient in most multi-antenna deployments. The second takeaway message is that another non-orthogonal transmission framework, based on RSMA, exists which fully exploits the multiplexing gain and the benefits of SIC to boost the rate and the number of users to serve in multi-antenna settings and outperforms both NOMA and MU-LP. Indeed, RSMA achieves higher multiplexing gains and rates, serves a larger number of users, is more robust to user deployments, network loads and inaccurate channel state information and has a lower receiver complexity than NOMA. Consequently, RSMA is a promising technology for NGMA and future networks such as 6G and beyond.

Highlights

  • Comparison with Multi-User Linear Precoding (MU–LP) and RS show that higher multiplexing gains can be achieved and a larger number of users can be served at a lower receiver complexity and a reduced number of Successive Interference Cancellation (SIC) operations

  • Our results show that Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA) requires K − 1 SIC layers to support K users with M transmit antennas, while RS can support M − 1 + K users with only one SIC layer

  • We show and explain that the misconceptions, the multiplexing gain reduction, and the inefficient use of SIC receivers in both underloaded and overloaded multi-antenna settings relying on both perfect and imperfect Channel State Information at the Transmitter (CSIT) originate from a limitation of the multiantenna NOMA design philosophy, namely that one user is forced to fully decode the messages of the other users

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Contrary to the SISO BC that is degraded and where users can be ordered based on their channel strengths, the multi-antenna BC is nondegraded and users cannot be ordered based on their channel strengths [8], [12] This is why SC–SIC/NOMA is not capacity-achieving in this case, and Dirty Paper Coding (DPC) is the only known strategy that achieves the capacity region of the multiantenna (Gaussian) BC with perfect Channel State Information at the Transmitter (CSIT) [12]. We take a critical look at multi-antenna NOMA and Generation Multiple Access (NGMA) techniques for the downlink of communication systems and ask the important questions “Is multi-antenna NOMA an efficient strategy?” and “What are the important design principles for NGMA techniques?” To answer those questions, we go beyond the conventional NOMA vs OMA comparison, and contrast multi-antenna NOMA with MU–LP and RS strategies This allows us to highlight some misconceptions and shortcomings of multi-antenna NOMA. The multiplexing gain analysis provides a firm theoretical ground to infer that multi-antenna NOMA is not as efficient as RS in exploiting the spatial dimensions and the available CSIT, and in serving a large number of users

Conclusions and Future
TWO-USER MISO NOMA WITH PERFECT CSIT
System Model
Definition of Multiplexing Gain
Discussions
K-USER MISO NOMA WITH PERFECT CSIT
MISO NOMA System Model
Multiplexing Gains
K -USER MISO NOMA WITH IMPERFECT CSIT
CSIT Error Model
MIMO NOMA
BASELINE SCHEME I
MU–LP System Model
Multiplexing Gains with Perfect CSIT
Multiplexing Gains with Imperfect CSIT
BASELINE SCHEME II
Rate-Splitting System Model
VIII. SHORTCOMINGS AND MISCONCEPTIONS OF MULTI-ANTENNA NOMA
Misconceptions of Multi-Antenna NOMA
Illustration of the Misconceptions with an Example
SIC layers cannot serve
Shortcomings of Multi-Antenna NOMA
NUMERICAL RESULTS
Perfect CSIT
Imperfect CSIT
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call