EDGE: From GSM/GPRS to UMTS

Jose Miguel Torres Fco. Javier Aliaga Caldern Abstract This article presents a technical description of EDGE, including the new coding and modulation schemes (MCS) and also the link quality control functions (LQC). In addition, the main differences with GPRS and the product deployment requirements and evolution to UMTS are discussed. Finally, some capacity comparisons with other mobile systems are shown.

1. Introduction.
EDGE is the next evolutionary step of GSM/GPRS. The purpose is to improve the data bit rates, enhance spectrum efficiency and boost the used of new application on the mobile devices. With the introduction of EDGE in GSM Phase 2+, existing technologies like GPRS and HSCSD (High Speed Circuit Switched Data) are enhanced due to the new physical layer. EDGE standardization is carried out within GSM/GPRS activities (same specifications). GPRS provides data rates up to 115 kbps (theoretically up to 160Kbps over L1). EGPRS will provide data rates up to 384 kbps (theoretically up to 473.6 kbps). These higher bit rates in EGPRS are possible due to the new modulation techniques, new error tolerant methods combined with enhanced link adaptive mechanisms. All this provides higher spectrum efficiency and allows better applications performance (Wireless Internet, E-mail, FTP). GPRS/EGPRS together with WCDMA are called to be the wireless technologies of the near future.

Figure 1: EGPRS changes over GPRS.

GPRS and EGPRS have different protocols and functions at the BTS. However, the Core Network part is the same for both. The reuse of the current GPRS CN infrastructure indicates clearly that EGPRS is just an aggregate to the BTS and even easier to deploy than GPRS. In addition to improve user performance, EDGE also increase the capacity. Using EDGE, the same time slot can support more users. That is, less radio resources are needed to support the same traffic, so that the remaining ones can be used for additional voice or data services. EDGE facilitates the coexistence of circuit switch traffic and packet switch traffic, and it makes a more efficient use of the radio resources. Therefore, for tight planning networks, EDGE represents a very good option to increase capacity for data traffic. 2.2. EDGE Technology. Using the acquired GPRS knowledge (from the already deployed networks), EDGE allows to obtain significant technical advances.

2. Technical differences between EDGE and GPRS.

2.1. Introduccin. GPRS represents the introduction in the GSM network of the packet data technology. New nodes and protocols have been introduced in order to do that. EDGE is a method to increase the data rates over the GSM radio link. Basically, EDGE simply introduces a new technical modulation and a new channel coding scheme that can be used for voice and data services over packet and circuit switch. EDGE, therefore, is an aggregate to GPRS and it cant be work separately. GPRS produces a bigger impact over GSM than it does EDGE. The aggregation of the new modulation and coding schemes to GPRS, and the adjustment of the air interface, EGPRS offers higher capacity and data rates.

Figure 2. Technical Comparison between GPRS and EGPRS

Figure 2 shows a basic technical comparison between GPRS and EDGE. Although GPRS and EDGE have the same symbol rate, they use different bit modulation rates. EDGE can transmit three times more bits than GPRS during the same time slot. This is the main reason behind the higher EDGE bit rates. The differences between the radio interface bit rates and the user bit rates are the results of considering or not the packets overhead. For EDGE, usually the bit rate of 384 kbps is mentioned. The ITU has defined the bit rate of 384 as the limit for services meeting the IMT-2000 (International Mobile Telecommunications- 2000) in an pedestrian environment. This bit rate of 384 kbps corresponds to 48 kbps per time slot (assuming a 8 time slot terminal). 2.3. EDGE modulation technique. The modulation type used in GSM is GMSK (Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying), that is a kind of phase modulation. That can be represented in a I/Q diagram that shows the real (I) and non-real (Q) components of the transmitted signal (Figure 3). The transmission of a 0 or 1 is performed by the phase change of + or - . Every transmitted symbol represents one bit, that is, each phase change means one bit. To reach higher bit rates per time slot than in GSM/GPRS, a change modulation is required. EDGE has been specified in a way that it can reuse the structure, bandwidth, channel coding and the rest of mechanism and features currently existing in GPRS and HSCSD. The 8PSK modulation chosen for EDGE meets all those requirements. The 8PSK modulation has the same characteristics than GMSK regarding the generated interference over adjacent channels. That makes possible the integration of EDGE channels over the existing GSM frequencies plan and to assign new EDGE channels as if the were standard GSM ones.

2.4. Coding Schemes. For GPRS, four coding schemes (CS1 to CS4) have been defined. Each one includes different number of extra bits for error correction depending on the intended radio conditions they are planned to be used for. In EGPRS, new coding schemes have been introduced: MCS1 to MCS9. The functionality for is the same as for GPRS coding schemes. MSC1 to MCS4 use GMSK and MSC5 to MSC9 use 8PSK. Figure 4 shows the GPRS and EGPRS coding schemes and the maximum bit rates. With GPRS CS4, the maximum user bit rate is 20kbps (per time slot) independently of radio conditions, while in EGPRS it can be increased up to 59,2 kbps if the radio conditions allow that.

Figure 4.GPRS and EDGE Coding Schemes.

Either the GPRS CS1 to CS4 coding schemes and the EGPRS MCS1 a MCS4, they use GMSK, but the efficiency is slightly different. That is due to the fact the resegmentation is possible in EGPRS but not in GRPS. Resegmentation consists of packet retransmission moving them from one coding scheme to another with more error protection because the radio conditions have got poor. Resegmentation requires to change the payload size which lead to different efficiency even though using the same modulation (GMSK).. 2.5. Addressing Window. Another enhancement in EGPRS over GPRS is the increase in the packet numbering window, from 64 to 1024. Before initiating the transmission of packets over the radio interface (Um), the transmitter has to identify each packet using some numbering . That information is carried in the packet header.

Figure 3. EDGE I/Q modulations diagram

The 8PSK modulation is a linear method in which three consecutive bits are related to a symbol in the I/Q plane. Using this kind of modulation the symbol distance is smaller than in GMSK. That means that the probability of decoding a symbol erroneously is higher. When the radio conditions are good, that is not important. However, when the radio conditions are not so good it represents a problem and the transmission of extra bits is required. GMSK is more efficient only in scenarios where the radio conditions are very poor.

Figure 5.EDGE addressing window.

In GPRS, packets are numbered from 1 to 128. After each packets block transmission (for example, a burst of 10 packets), the transmitter verifies with the receiver that packets arrived correctly using an ACK or NACK mechanism. That allows to the transmitter to know if some packets have to be restransmitted. Due to the use of a numbering window of 64, the transmission can be stopped when that value is reached. In EGPRS this window has been increased up to 1024 and then the probability of stopping transmission due to the window limitation has been considerably reduced. 2.6. Radio Interface Measurements. Measurements on the interface radio (like pilot power level, VER,) are very important to determine which should be the correct coding scheme to use (i.e. Link Adaptation). The GPRS channel estimate mechanism makes difficult to select the correct coding scheme. Interference measurements are performed only during the free bursts, that is, only twice a 240 ms period time. In EGPRS that slow mechanism is not used. Measurements are taken over each burst at the terminal obtaining an estimate of the bit error (BEP). This BEP per burst is a very good indication of the C/I, signal time dispersion and terminal speed. Variations of BEP between bursts will provide additional information about the speed and FH, and therefore a very good BEP estimate can be obtained. As a result, EGPRS allows a better and much more flexible link adaptation. 2.7. Interleaving To increase of the performance in the cases of highest coding schemes (MCS 7 to MCS9), even with low C/I, the interleaving procedure has been changed in EGPRS. When FH is used, the radio conditions can be different from one burst to another. Due to the interleaving performed over the radio block (4 bursts), if only one burst is not received correctly, the whole block will be considered erroneous and retransmission will be needed. For GPRS CS4 no error protection is used and then some problems can arise.

2.8. EGPRS link control function. Two functions are used in EGPRS in order to achieve the highest bit rate possible: link adaptation and incremental redundancy. This combined solution increases the efficiency when compare with another one using only LA. Link Adaptation (LA) The purpose of LA is to decide, base on radio conditions, which should be the coding scheme and modulation used for the next radio packets. This adaptation is possible every radio block (4 bursts), but it can also be initiated due to new quality estimates being the real adaptation rate dependent on the measurement rate. There are three different families: A, B and C. Within each family there is a relationship between the payload sizes, doing possible the resegmentation for retransmission.

Figure 7. Modulations, bit rates and families. Incremental Redundancy

The incremental redundancy stats with a coding scheme like MCS9, with low error protection and without considering anything about the quality of radio conditions.

Figure 8. Incremental Redundancy. The information is received erroneously, an additional coding is transmitted and soft-combined a the receiver together with the previous information received. This combination increase the probability of decoding the signal correctly. This procedure will be repeated until the information received can be decoded correctly. Additional information about the radio conditions is not needed for this procedure. The standards state that the support of this mechanism is mandatory.

Figure 6.Interleaving

To solve this in EGPRS, the management of highest coding schemes has been changed. For MCS7, MCS8 and MCS9 two radio blocks are transmitted over the four burst and the interleaving is performed only over two burst, instead of four (as is the case in GPRS). Doing so, the number of burst that need to be retransmitted in case of error is reduced. The probability of receiving two free errors bursts is higher and that means that EDGE is more robust and appropriate for FH.

2.9. EDGE efficiency increase overGPRS. EDGE takes advantage of a higher C/I but also allows the highest bit rates to be available in all the coverage area.

limited impact, a EDGE network can be deployed rapidly and at a low cost. EGPRS does not required any architecture change. The packet control unit can be located either at the BTS or at the BSC. The central control unit has to be installed at the BTS.

Figure 9. Throughput versus distance for EDG.,

Figure 11. Transmission Plane Protocols Architecture.

Two set of curves show the efficiency gain. The first one (Figure 9) depicts DL throughput ( kbit/s per time slot) against distance (up to 11 Km). The average gain of EGPRS over GPRS with coding schemes CS1 to CS4 along this distance with coding is 2,6. The gain average gain over GPRS with coding schemes CS1 to CS3 IS 3.6. The second set (Figure 10) shows the throughput per slot versus C/I: 15% coverage area (yellow area) experiments an efficiency gain of double respect to GPRS (CS1 to CS2). 70% (green and blue) experiments a benefit of four times. And 15% (orange) experiments an increase of 5 times.

Figure 11 shows the protocols architecture for the transmission plane for GPRS. Protocols in blue and orange are the one affected that EDGE. The most affected protocols are the ones closer to the physical layer (RLC, MAC). There are also some minor modification for BSSGP. No other protocols are impacted. Looking at the control plane, the impacts refer to mobility management and radio resources management. The session management is not impacted at all. Regarding the modification for the mobility management, they refer to the introduction of information about radio access capacities of the UE. These capabilities include EGPRS multiple slot class, modulation choices and 8PSK power class. The RRM modifications include the support to establish and maintain EGPRS temporary blocks flows. New signalling has to provide the radio link control, quality control and measurement procedures.

4. From EDGE to UMTS.

An important issue to EDGE is also to facilitate the transition to UMTS. The evolution is focussed on the support of traffic classes, specially conversational and streaming (real time classes). This issue is one more item on the general telecommunication trend of moving from circuit switch to packet switch. All kind of services are impacted, not just the traditional data services (e-mail, web, ftp,..), but also real time services (videotelephony, VoIP,...).
Figure 10. Increase Performance for EDGE on the coverage area.

In figure 10, horizontal arrowed lines show C/I variations depending on the network load.

3. EDGE impact in GSM/GPRS.

The main impact of EGPRS over current GSM/GPRS networks is located at the base station (BTS/BSC). The impact consists of the new TR unit (allowing new EDGE modulation) at the BTS and new software (for protocols update) at the BTS and BSC. The rest of the network does not require any modification. Due to this

Either the 2G/2G+ Core Network and the GSM/GPRS/EDGE RAN require some updates in order to be able to support real time services. In 3GPP, the evolution of GSM/GPRS/EDGE systems as well as its integration with UMTS (3G) is covered under the title of GERAN. 4.1. GERAN Architecture Both, the support of real time services and the adoption of the 3G QoS architecture require changes in the current GSM/GPRS 2G/2G+ core network. Another possibility to the introduction of those changes is the integration of GERAN with UMTS which already

provides support for the mentioned real time services as well as for the WCDMA QoS architecture.

Table 1.Capacity Technologies Comparison.

Table 1 shows the efficiency of different mobile technologies. It is worth noting the significant increase when moving from GPRS to EDGE and to UMTS and HSDPA. Figure 10 presents the spectrum efficiency in Kbits/s per MHz and sector, versus average throughput for the final user in Kbits/s. For the average throughput, simulations show that EDGE has the highest spectrum efficiency for bit rates below 100 Kbit/s.

Figure 12. GERAN version 5.

This solution allows to have only one CN connected to both RANs (UTRAN and GERAN). La connection of GERAN to the common CN is done through the Iu interface. The interfaces A and Gb remain the same to guarantee the support of version 99 terminals (GSM/GPRS, ECSD, EGPRS). One of the main differences between interfaces A/Gb and Iu is that for the latter there is a clear functional split between RAN and CN that is not the case for the former. The radio interface between the UE and GERAN is called Um. This interface is based on version 99. However several improvements are been specified in order to allow the support of real timer services. Among these enhancements it can be found: support for cell reselection for packet domain, split between user and control planes, and transparent modes for RLC. Besides, it would be possible to multiplex packet traffic to/from UEs operating in Iu or Gb mode, over the same time slot. ESTI version 99 has proven efficient support for services without strict delay requirements (e-mail, web,...). With 3GPP version 5, GERAN will provide a complete range of wireless services (RT and NRT) and will connect to UMTS network through the Iu interface.

Figure 13. Spectrum efficiency comparison.

For data bit rates highest than 100 Kbits/s, WCDMA has a higher spectrum efficiency than EDGE. When EDGE uses 1.25 MHz without control channel and with two TRs, the spectrum efficiency that can be achieved is even higher.

5. Capacity comparison technologies.

for

different

Tow consideration have to be taken into account when analyzing the capacity of mobile systems: user traffic efficiency and spectrum efficiency (or total throughput for the system) Technology GPRS CS1-CS2 EDGE UMTS HSDPA CDMA2000 1xRTT Maximum bit rate (Kbit/s) 115 473 2000 10000 153 Average user Throughput 35 to 40 Kbit/s 110 to 130 Kbit/s 200 to 300 Kbit/s More than double of UMTS 50 to 70 Kbit/s

Figure 14. 10 MHz users per sector vs.average throughput

Figure 14 depicts the supported number of users per sector in 10 MHz, versus the average throughput. EDGE provides a very good efficiency for low bit rates , supporting 160 users at 23Kbits/s per sector and 90 users at 64 Kbits/s. So, for the above explanations, it is clear that EDGE is the most efficient technology for low data bit rates and WCDMA is for high data bit rates. Using a 3G system integrating WCDMA and EDGE we will have the most efficient solution for all the bit rates. EDGE seems a very good complement to WCDMA for low data bit

rates (specially interesting for rural areas where no very high bit rates are demanded).

6. EDGE Standardization.
EDGE standardization can be split in three areas: Physical layer standardization (definition of modulations and coding schemes). Protocols changes for supporting ECSD. Protocols changes for supporting EGPRS. Two phases have been defined for EDGE: Phase 1: Packet switch and circuit switch services with time slot single or multiple.. Phase 2: RT services using the new modulation techniques that are not included in Phase 1. Phase 1 is completed with 3GPP version 99. Phase 2 (GERAN) is under standardization in 3GPP and will include alignment with WCDMA and support for IMS. GERAN will offer the same services as WCDMA, being connected to the same CN. Figure below depicts the different phases.

[6] Nokia, EGPRS throughput versus pathloss, 5 de octubre de 2002. [7] Ericsson, WCDMA, EDGE and cdma200 Capacity for Packet Data Services, Julio de 2002. [8] Ericsson, EDGE: Introduction of high-speed data in GSM/GPRS networks, 2002. [9] Ericsson, Further evolution of the GSM/EDGE radio access network, Ericsson Review 3/2001. [10] C. Lindheimer, et al., Tirad Generation TDMA, Ericsson Review 2/2000. [11] P. Stuckmann, The capacity and performance gain rechable with link quality control in GPRS networks, Communications Networks 2001. [12] d. Molkdar, W. Featherstone, System Level Performance Evaluation of GPRS in GSM Macrocellular Environments,VTC2000, Boston. [13] F. Cavalcanti, et al., On the Performance of EGPRS using some cell reuse [14] Yuval Dorfan, High-spped data in EGPRS A physical layer challenge, RF embedded technology, Mayo 2002. [15] H. Olofsson, Requirements for GPRS Evolution Towards Providing Third Generation Services, Winlab 990222 [16] Tdmaedge, Enhanced Data-rates for Global Evolution (EDGE): An Overview, Presentacin. [17] Steven Baker, The performance & Cost Balance for EDGE Terminals, TTPCom Ltd Presentation.

Figure 15.EDGE Standardization Phases.

7. Conclusiones.
This article has provided a description of EDGE system, presenting the main differences with GPRS and analyzing the capacity of both systems. EDGE allows to operator higher data bit rates and better spectrum efficiency. EDGE seems to be one of the most efficient spectrum technologies for data cellular systems. The required investment for the deploying of EDGE is low due to be an additional piece over the already deployed GPRS network. Referencias [1] T. Halonen, J. Romero, J. Melero, GSM, GPRS and EDGE performance, Wiley200. [2] J.M. Hernando, Tecnologa, Servicios y negocios GPRS, Telefnica Mviles 2002. [3] Peter Rysavy, Capacidades de datos para la evolucin GSM a UMTS,Rysavy Research, Noviembre 2002. [4] 3GPP TS 43.051, GSM/EDGE Radio Access Network: Overall Descriptions Stage 2. [5] Nokia, A comparison between EDGE and Alternative Technologies, 5 de Junio de 2001.