kumoh national institute of technology
Networked Systems Lab.

Energy-Efficient Millimeter Wave Base Station Deployment in Dense Geometry Scenario using Stochastic Approach , JCN (R)
By : Cosmas
Date : 2020-09-07
Views : 60

06-Sep-2020

Dear Dr. Kim:

I write you in regards to manuscript # JCN20-DIV3-034 entitled "Energy-Efficient Millimeter Wave Base Station Deployment in Dense Geometry Scenario using Stochastic Approach" which you submitted to the Journal of Communications and Networks.

In view of the criticisms of the reviewers found at the bottom of this letter, your manuscript has been denied for publication in the Journal of Communications and Networks.

Thank you for considering the Journal of Communications and Networks for the publication of your research. I hope the outcome of this specific submission will not discourage you from the submission of future manuscripts.

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jcommnet

Sincerely,

Prof. Hyoil Kim
Editor, Journal of Communications and Networks
hkim@unist.ac.kr

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer: 1

Comments to the Author
The authors proposed a low complexity algorithm to effectively establish the best tradeoff point for base station density and least energy required at transmitter. The results showed an effective trade off in user equipment concentrations (base station density) and transmit power under a guaranteed connectivity constraint.
I have major comments:
1: Scenario in Figure 2 is not clear. Reviewer do not understand the dotted line, is a small cell connect directly to Core network? How CP and UP are distributed, Is Marco BS send Control channel and small cell only mmWave. This is not clear from Figure
2: Reviewer cannot see anything new in the paper, as already a lot of work has been done on the layout of mmWave BS and it power modeling.
3: What about backhaul energy consumption in Figure 3?
4: How NLOS will be the model in Figure 4.


Reviewer: 2

Comments to the Author
The paper proposes a stochastic approach-based base station deployment scheme that aims to optimize the network energy efficiency. The ideas in this paper, however, are not presented in an organized fashion, and the concepts as well as the notations used in this paper should be defined more clearly. In addition, the simulation results lack comparison with state-of-the-art base station deployment schemes, as there is only one benchmark. The specific comments on this paper are as follows:

1. The entire part of Section IV should be written more clearly, as there are many notations that are not defined. For example, \zeta_{\mathrm{Con}}, C_{p}, and \bar{p}_{c} are not defined, which makes the reader hard to follow (there are more notations that are not defined other than these three notations).

2. Rephrase the paragraph below (4) more clearly. In particular, explain the random lattice process that approximates the MTG considered in this paper with more details. In addition, define what the inverse operation of f is.

3. The paper aims at optimizing the base station deployment in a realistic mmWave propagation environment. The mmWave propagation model adopted in this paper, however, seems too simple, as the propagation condition is either a single LOS path or blockage. A more realistic scenario is to consider various factors that affect the propagation condition, e.g., NLOS paths, O2I penetration loss, etc.

4. The simulation results lack comparison with state-of-the-art base station deployment schemes, as there is only one benchmark. A more thorough comparison with other schemes is required to prove the superior performance of the proposed scheme.

5. There are many notations throughout the paper that are either not defined or unclear, P_{\mathrm{Th}} for instance.

6. The figures should be at the top of the page as recommended by the IEEE style manual.

7. Why do the authors use both American and British English? For instance, the authors use optimize and optimise, characterize and characterise, and summarize and summarise.

8. There are many notations that are not written consistently. For example, P_{\mathrm{Tx}} is sometimes written as p_{Tx} or P_{Tx}, which confuses the reader. Also, the authors should carefully revise the paper, as there are many words that are not capitalized, e.g., section, table, etc.