An Efficient Pilot Assignment Scheme for Addressing Pilot Contamination in Multicell Massive MIMO Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Author discussed about an Efficient Pilot Assignment Scheme for Addressing Pilot Contamination in Multicell Massive MIMO System by utilizing efficient pilot assignment (EPA) by maximizing the minimum uplink rate of the target cell’s users.
The paper needs improvement before it can be accepted. However, I have a few minor comments for the authors to address, which are described as follows:
Author must compare previous recent research articles and explain how it differs from original work.
Its difficult to catch Problem statement for the reviewers. Explain and elaborate in detail.
In addition, some notations and abbreviations are used in manuscript are not defined,
Did author considered about inter cell interference coordination (ICIC) and Inter user interference coordination (IUIC)?
The author must briefly explain proposed algorithm EPA algorithm 1 in manuscript.
A more detailed comparison on the computational complexity of the proposed scheme and those of conventional scheme should be presented.
Overall, there is much scope for improvement in order to raise the quality of the paper as appropriate for the journal.
Author Response
REVIEWER #1:
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank the reviewer for the insightful comments and constructive critique toward improving the quality of this work. Please find the answers to the comments below.
Reviewer Comments and Responses:
Regarding the general response of the reviewer, I have considered improving the description of the method. The results section was improved and a new result was added. The conclusion has been modified to match the results. All modification have been highlighted.
The following points elaborate the responses to the author comments:
1- Author must compare previous recent research articles and explain how it differs from original work.
Response: A new paragraph that compares our work with other recent research works is added in section 2, last paragraph, from line 125 to 131.
2- It’s difficult to catch Problem statement for the reviewers. Explain and elaborate in detail.
Response: The problem statement has been modified to be more obvious in problem formulation subsection 5.1, from line 178 to 184.
3- In addition, some notations and abbreviations are used in manuscript are not defined.
Response: All abbreviations through the paper are reviewed and a new paragraph has been added to define the notations in section 1, from line 54 to 57.
4- Did author considered about inter cell interference coordination (ICIC) and Inter user interference coordination (IUIC)?
Response: In our work, we assume half duplex (HD) system, with time division duplex (TDD). Therefore, the inter-user interference (IUI) does not occur because it is a problem in full duplex systems (FD), which occurs between uplink (UL) and downlink (DL) users when they are supported in the same resources.
Throughout this research, the inter-cell interference (ICI) reduction is considered during the pilot phase, which causes the pilot contamination. The Interference between users in the same cell (intra-cell interference) is neglected because the pilot sequences are assumed mutually orthogonal within a cell.
5- The author must briefly explain proposed algorithm EPA algorithm 1 in manuscript.
Response: The algorithm already has been explained after the algorithm table until line 225 (I did not highlight it).
6- A more detailed comparison on the computational complexity of the proposed scheme and those of conventional scheme should be presented.
Response: a new paragraph has been added to discuss the computational complexity of the algorithm and compare it to other works in section 5, last paragraph, from line 226 to 233.
If there is another comments, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Reviewer 2 Report
In this paper the authors present a new pilot assignment approach in order to address the pilot contamination in multicell massive MIMO systems. The paper is based on a good bibliography and is easy to follow. The theory presented in sections 3 and 4 can be found also in other papers which are cited. The authors must put more accent on the section 5, to explain the complexity of their approach in comparison with the ones from the studied bibliography. Half of the parameters used in simulations (Table 1) are identical with the ones used by authors from reference [11]. In order to validate the proposed algorithm the authors must compare their results with the ones from [11] and to analyses if they are changing the parameters from table 1 their approach is still giving good results.Author Response
REVIEWER #2:
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank the reviewer for the insightful comments and constructive critique toward improving the quality of this work. Please find the answers to the comments below.
Reviewer Comments and Responses:
1- The authors must put more accent on the section 5, to explain the complexity of their approach in comparison with the ones from the studied bibliography.
Response: a new paragraph has been added to discuss the computational complexity of the algorithm and compare it to other works in section 5, last paragraph, from line 226 to 233.
2- In order to validate the proposed algorithm the authors must compare their results with the ones from [11] and to analyses if they are changing the parameters from table 1 their approach is still giving good results.
Response: To validate the proposed algorithm, a new result has been investigated and added in figure 13 using different parameters which increase the severity of the interference environment. The results were discussed in section 6, figure 13, from line 303 to 307.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I don't have any further questions. Congratulations to the authors for the great manuscript.
