This figure indicates that the capacity value will be higher due to a better multiuser diversity when more users are located in the system.
But, more users are located closer to their BS, with the result that each one will require less power, and consequently, the total power spent within the HetNet will be lower as well.
The ICIC approach tries to improve the cell-edge performance by accepting some level of interference and thus provides more homogeneous service to users located at different regions of the network.
Moreover, the SINR is higher for the small cell scenario than for the macro-cell case in regions 1 and 2. This is due to the larger inter-site distance in the macro-only case, making it more probable to have users located far from the serving cell and in lower SINR conditions.
Fring says it is currently adding more than 1 million activations a month (with more than 40% of new users located in the USA), powering upwards of 10 million video call minutes per month and more than 100 million voice minutes per month.
The idea behind FFR has come from the observation that user terminals (UTs) within a cell are not equivalent from an intercell interference point of view: due to the path-loss effect, cell-edge users are far more sensitive to it than users located near the center of the cell.
The outage probability can also be adopted to evaluate the user mobility performance because the users located in the cross-coverage area are more frangible for getting guaranteed service, which may cause heavier outage probability in the cell edge.
This mainly affects users located on the cell edge as they are more prone to ICI originating from neighbouring cells.
For 40%% of them (those users located near the cell border, which are allocated more transmit power), this difference may even be less than 1%%.
What's more, when the Portal box is connected to the internet, multiple users located all over the world can affect objects and hang out together in the same virtual scene displayed on the screen.
