skip to main content
10.1145/3394486.3403287acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Cellular Network Radio Propagation Modeling with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Radio propagation modeling and prediction is fundamental for modern cellular network planning and optimization. Conventional radio propagation models fall into two categories. Empirical models, based on coarse statistics, are simple and computationally efficient, but are inaccurate due to oversimplification. Deterministic models, such as ray tracing based on physical laws of wave propagation, are more accurate and site specific. But they have higher computational complexity and are inflexible to utilize site information other than traditional global information system (GIS) maps.

In this article we present a novel method to model radio propagation using deep convolutional neural networks and report significantly improved performance compared to conventional models. We also lay down the framework for data-driven modeling of radio propagation and enable future research to utilize rich and unconventional information of the site, e.g. satellite photos, to provide more accurate and flexible models.

References

  1. Alejandro Aragón-Zavala Simon R. Saunders, editor. 2000. Antennas and Propagation for Wireless Communication Systems. Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. T. K. Sarkar, Zhong Ji, Kyungjung Kim, A. Medouri, and M. Salazar-Palma. 2003. A survey of various propagation models for mobile communication. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, 45, 3, 51--82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. F. Ikegami, T. Takeuchi, and S. Yoshida. 1991. Theoretical prediction of mean field strength for urban mobile radio. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 39, 3, 299-- 302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. J. Walfisch and H.L. Bertoni. 1988. A theoretical model of uhf propagation in urban environments. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 36, 12, 1788--1796.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. C. O. Mgbe, J. M. Mom, and G. A. Igwue. 2015. Performance evaluation of generalized regression neural network path loss prediction model in macrocellular environment. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST), 2, 2, 204--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. S. P. Sotiroudis, S. K. Goudos, K. Siakavara K. A. Gotsis, and J. N. Sahalos. 2013. Application of a composite differential evolution algorithm in optimal neural network design for propagation path-loss prediction in mobile communication systems. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 2, 364--367.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. S. P. Sotiroudis and K. Siakavara. 2015. Mobile radio propagation path loss prediction using artificial neural networks with optimal input information for urban environments. International Journal of Electronics and Communications (AEU), 1453--1463.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Segun I. Popoola, Emmanuel Adetiba, Aderemi A. Atayero, Nasir Faruk, and Carlos T. Calafate. 2018. Optimal model for path loss predictions using feed-forward neural networks. Cogent Engineering, 5, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Joseph M. Môm, O Callistus, Mgbe, and Gabriel A. Igwue. 2014. Application of artificial neural network for path loss prediction in urban macrocellular environment. In volume 3, 270--275.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Ayadi, A. Ben Zineb, and S. Tabbane. 2017. A uhf path loss model using learning machine for heterogeneous networks. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, 65, 7, 3675-- 3683.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Y. Lecun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner. 1998. Gradientbased learning applied to document recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 86, 11, 2278--2324. issn: 0018-9219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E. Hinton. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 1 (NIPS'12). Curran Associates Inc., Lake Tahoe, Nevada, 1097--1105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman. 2014. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. CoRR, abs/1409.1556.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Christian Szegedy, Wei Liu, Yangqing Jia, Pierre Sermanet, Scott Reed, Dragomir Anguelov, Dumitru Erhan, Vincent Vanhoucke, and Andrew Rabinovich. 2015. Going deeper with convolutions. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.4842.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2016, Las Vegas, NV, USA, June 27-30, 2016, 770--778.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. J. Long, E. Shelhamer, and T. Darrell. 2015. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation. In 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 3431--3440.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Bharath Hariharan, Pablo Andrés Arbeláez, Ross B. Girshick, and Jitendra Malik. 2014. Hypercolumns for object segmentation and fine-grained localization. CoRR, abs/1411.5752. arXiv: 1411.5752. http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5752.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox. 2015. U-net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention -- MICCAI. Springer, Cham, 234--241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. M. Hata. 1980. Empirical formula for propagation loss in land mobile radio services. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 29, 3, 317--325.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. V Erceg, K.V.S. Hari, M S. Smith, D.s Baum, K P. Sheikh, C Tappenden, J M. Costa, C Bushue, A Sarajedini, R Schwartz, and D Branlund. 2001. Channel models for fixed wireless application. IEEE 802.16 Broadband Wireless Access Working Group, Tech Rep, (January 2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Forsk. 2019. Atoll 3.1.0 model calibration guide. https://www.forsk.com/atoll - overview. Accessed: 2019-1-21. (March 2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Siradel. 2019. Volcano propagation model. (March 2019). https://www.siradel.com/software/connectivity/volcanosoftware/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Cellular Network Radio Propagation Modeling with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          KDD '20: Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining
          August 2020
          3664 pages
          ISBN:9781450379984
          DOI:10.1145/3394486

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 20 August 2020

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

          Upcoming Conference

          KDD '24

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader