Performance analysis of interferencelimited dualhop multiple antenna AF relaying systems with feedback delay
 Jinlong Wang^{1},
 Yuzhen Huang^{1}Email author,
 Caijun Zhong^{2, 3},
 Fawaz AlQahtani^{4},
 Qihui Wu^{1} and
 Yunpeng Cheng^{1}
https://doi.org/10.1186/168714992013284
© Wang et al.; licensee Springer. 2013
Received: 29 July 2013
Accepted: 16 November 2013
Published: 12 December 2013
Abstract
In this paper, we present a comprehensive performance analysis of dualhop multiple antenna channel state information (CSI) assisted amplifyandforward (AF) relaying systems over Rayleigh fading channels employing arbitrary transmit antenna selection (TAS) and receiver maximum ratio combining (MRC) with feedback delay in the presence of cochannel interference (CCI) at both the relay and destination. Specifically, an upper bound on the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the endtoend signaltointerference ratio (SIR) is proposed, based on which closedform expressions for the outage probability and the average symbol error rate (SER) are derived. To gain further insights, simple and high informative expressions for the outage probability and the average SER are obtained at the high SIR regime, which readily enable us to characterize the achievable diversity order and coding gain of the system. Moreover, we present new analytical upper and lower bounds for the ergodic capacity of the system, which apply to the system with arbitrary number of antennas, CCI and feedback delay at any SIRs. Finally, to minimize the outage probability of the system, an optimum power allocation scheme is devised under the total transmission power constraint between the source and the relay. The findings suggest that the feedback delay limits the diversity order to one, while the CCI degrades the outage performance by affecting the coding gain of the system.
Keywords
1 Introduction
Relaying transmission has been proposed as a promising technique to improve the coverage and throughput of wireless communication systems [1]. Among the various relaying protocols, the most two common relaying schemes are amplifyandforward (AF) and decodeandforward (DF). In particular, the AF relaying scheme has received significant attention due to its low implementation complexity. Depending on the availability of channel state information (CSI) at the relay, the AF relaying scheme generally falls into two categories, i.e., variable gain relaying [2] and fixed gain relaying [3]. Over the last decades, a significant amount of effort has been devoted to investigate the key performance measures such as outage probability, average symbol error rate (SER), and ergodic capacity for AF relaying schemes over various fading channels [4–8].
Nevertheless, all the above works assume that the relaying systems operate in a noiselimited environment. However, future wireless communication networks tend to operate in an interferencelimited environment due to aggressive frequency reuse. Motivated by this observation, many works have investigated the effect of cochannel interference (CCI) on the performance of the relaying systems in a variety of different scenarios. In [9], the authors proposed a relay selection algorithm for dualhop CSIassisted AF relaying networks in the presence of interference at the relay. In [10], the outage probabilities for both AF and DF relaying systems with noisy relay and interferencelimited destination were derived. In [11], the authors investigated the outage performance of dualhop fixedgain relaying systems in the presence of interference at both the relay and destination and pointed out that the worst outage performance occurred when the power of interference at the relay and destination was equal. In [12, 13], the authors investigated the joint effects of imperfect channel estimation and CCI on the performance of dualhop relaying systems, respectively. Most recently, some works addressed the case with Nakagamim fading [14–18]. In [14], the authors studied the outage probability and the average BER of dualhop fixedgain AF relaying systems with a single interferer in Nakagamim fading channels. In [15], the authors considered the performance of interferencelimited dualhop CSIassisted AF systems in Nakagamim fading channels. In [16], the outage probability of multibranch dualhop DF cooperative relaying systems with CCI over Nakagamim fading channels was analyzed. In [17], the authors derived the exact closedform expression for the outage probability of multihop transmission systems with AF and DF relaying protocols in Nakagamim fading channels in the presence of CCI and made a comprehensive comparison between the two relaying protocols. In [18], the authors analyzed the ergodic capacity of dualhop CSIassisted AF relaying system with both CCI at the relay and destination.
While these prior works have improved our understanding on the impact of CCI on the performance of dualhop relaying systems, the key limitation of these works is that they all consider a single antenna relaying system. With the fact that the multiple antenna technique will be adopted as one of the key enabling technologies for the next generation wireless communication systems, the importance of understanding the fundamental performance of multiple antenna relaying systems becomes increasingly evident [19–22]. In [19], the outage probability and the average SER were analyzed in a twohop multipleinput multipleoutput (MIMO) relaying network using transmit antenna selection with receiver maximalratio combining (TAS/MRC). In [20], a unified framework for the average SER of distributed TAS/MRC in MIMO relaying networks was proposed. In [21], two attractive MIMO protocols, i.e., TAS/MRC and transmit antenna selection with receive selection combining (TAS/SC), were analyzed in a dualhop AF relaying network with respect to the average SER. In [22], a lowcomplexity protocol that guaranteed a twofold diversity, i.e., multiantenna diversity via TAS/MRC and multiuser diversity via opportunistic scheduling, was proposed in multiuser AF relaying networks. However, it is worth pointing out that these aforementioned works also assume the noiselimited scenario; hence, the impact of CCI on the performance of dualhop multiple antenna AF relaying systems has not been well understood. Recently, only a few analytical results concerning the performance of dualhop multiple antenna AF relaying systems in the presence of CCI are available in the literature [23–25]. In [23], the performance of dualhop fixedgain AF relaying systems with a single Rayleigh interferer at the relay was investigated under the special case, where only one of the nodes is equipped with multiple antennas. In [24], the outage performance of a dualhop fixedgain AF MIMO relaying network using maximum ratio transmission and maximum ratio combining (MRT/MRC) in the presence of interference was analyzed. In parallel, [25] investigated the effect of feedback delay on the outage probability and the average SER of multiple antenna AF relaying systems employing MRT/MRC.
In this paper, different from these prior works, we consider a dualhop multiple antenna CSIassisted AF relaying system applying arbitrary TAS/MRC in the presence of interference at both the relay and destination. Furthermore, the CSI feedback delay of the firsthop link is also taken into consideration. For such practical system model, we pursue a comprehensive analysis of the joint effects of feedback delay and multiple antennas on the performance of the system. The main contributions of the paper are summarized as follows:

We propose an upper bound of the equivalent endtoend signaltointerference ratio (SIR) of the system and derive its cumulative distribution function (CDF).

With the help of the CDF of the proposed upper bound, we investigate the joint effects of number of antennas, CCI, and feedback delay on the system performance in terms of the outage probability and the average SER. Specifically, we present closedform expressions for the outage probability and the average SER, which provide a fast and efficient means to evaluate the performance of the system. In addition, we look into the asymptotic high SIR regime and characterize the key performance measures such as diversity order and coding gain. Our findings suggest that the impact of feedback delay on the performance of the system is significant as it limits the diversity order to one regardless of the number of antennas at the source and destination. On the other hand, the impact of CCI on the performance of the system is less significant, since it does not reduce the diversity order, but affects the coding gain of the system.

We also present new analytical upper and lower ergodic capacity bounds for interferencelimited dualhop multiple antenna CSIassisted AF relaying systems with feedback delay. The proposed bounds apply to arbitrary number of antennas, CCI, and feedback delay at any SIR. Moreover, they involve only standard mathematical functions and therefore can be easily and efficiently evaluated.

We investigate the optimum power allocation scheme to minimize the asymptotic outage probability of the system under the constraint that the total transmit power of the source and relay is fixed, and present closedform power allocation expressions. Simulation results demonstrate that the optimum power allocation scheme achieves better coding gain compared to the equal power allocation scheme.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the system model. In Section 3, we derive the upper bound of the equivalent endtoend SIR and investigate the outage probability, average SER, and ergodic capacity of the system. In Section 4, the optimum power allocation scheme is proposed to minimize the outage performance of the system. Numerical results are presented in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper.
2 System model
where h_{(k)r} is the channel coefficient between the selected k th worst antenna and the relay node, x_{ s } is the source symbol with E[x_{ s }^{2}] = 1, x_{ ir } is the i th interference symbol satisfying E[x_{ ir }^{2}] = 1, and g_{ ir } is the corresponding interference channel link, whose amplitude follows Rayleigh distribution with parameter λ_{ ir }.
where $\mathbf{w}=\frac{{\mathbf{h}}_{\mathit{\text{rd}}}}{{\u2225{\mathbf{h}}_{\mathit{\text{rd}}}\u2225}_{F}}$ is the N_{r} × 1 weight vector with ∥·∥_{ F } being the Frobenius norm, ${N}_{{I}_{2}}$ is the number of interferers at the destination, P_{ jd } is the transmit power of the j th interference at the destination, x_{ jd } is the j th interference symbol at the destination with a unit energy, ${\mathbf{g}}_{\mathit{\text{jd}}}={\left[{g}_{j1d},\dots ,{g}_{j{N}_{\mathrm{r}}d}\right]}^{T}$ is the j th interference channel vector for $j\in \left\{1,\dots ,{N}_{{I}_{2}}\right\}$, and the amplitude of its entries follows i.i.d. Rayleigh fading with parameter E[g_{ jmd }^{2}] = λ_{ jd } for m ∈ {1, …, N_{r}}.
where ${\stackrel{~}{\gamma}}_{1\left(k\right)}={P}_{s}{\left{h}_{\left(k\right)r}\right}^{2}$, ${\gamma}_{2}={P}_{r}{\u2225{\mathbf{h}}_{\mathit{\text{rd}}}\u2225}_{F}^{2}$, ${\gamma}_{{I}_{1}}=\sum _{i=1}^{{N}_{{I}_{1}}}{P}_{\mathit{\text{ir}}}{\left{g}_{\mathit{\text{ir}}}\right}^{2}$, and ${\gamma}_{{I}_{2}}=\sum _{j=1}^{{N}_{{I}_{2}}}{P}_{\mathit{\text{jd}}}{\left{f}_{\mathit{\text{jd}}}\right}^{2}$.
3 Endtoend performance analysis
In this section, we perform a comprehensive performance analysis of the system under consideration by presenting closedform analytical expressions for key performance measures, i.e., the outage probability, the average SER, and the ergodic capacity. We start by characterizing the statistics of the upper bound of the endtoend SIR. Based on which, the closedform approximations for the outage probability and the average SER are obtained. Moreover, to gain more insights, we look into the asymptotic high SIR regime and present simple analytical expressions for the outage probability and the average SER. Finally, we investigate the ergodic capacity of the system and propose tight upper and lower bounds on the ergodic capacity of the system.
3.1 Upper bound of the endtoend SIR
It is worth pointing out that the same bounding technique has been widely adopted in the performance analysis of various relaying systems (see [12] and references therein). In addition, it has been demonstrated that this upper bound is in general very tight, especially in the high SIR regime.
To this end, to analyze the outage and SER performance of the system, the statistical behavior of the SIR upper bound γ_{up} is required, which is given in the following theorem:
where we have used [31] eq.(6.451.1) to solve the corresponding integral. Finally, substituting (19) and (20) into (14) yields the desired result.
3.2 Outage probability
where Δ = 2^{2R}  1. Hence, with Theorem 1 at hand, the lower bound of outage probability can be directly obtained from (13). Note that the expression (13) only involves the standard function which allows for fast evaluation in popular mathematical software such as Matlab or Mathematica, thereby providing an efficient means to assess the impact of various key system parameters such as number of antennas, CCI, and correlation coefficient on the outage performance of the system.
To gain further understanding on the impact of number of antennas, CCI and correlation coefficient on the outage performance, we now look into the asymptotic high SIR regime. We find it convenient to treat the following two cases separately. Case 1: interference only (no feedback delay), i.e., ρ = 1, and Case 2: interference and feedback delay, i.e., ρ < 1.
For notational convenience, we define $z=\mathrm{\Delta}/{\overline{\gamma}}_{1}$ and ${\overline{\gamma}}_{2}=\mu {\overline{\gamma}}_{1}$, where μ is a positive constant. We first consider the case where only CCI exists in the system, and we have the following important result:
Proof. See Appendix 1.
Corollary 1 suggests the intuitive result that the outage performance of the system depends on the selection order of the transmit antenna, i.e., k. Moreover, the impact of CCI on the outage performance varies as the selection order k changes. As we can readily observe, when k < N_{r}, the outage probability is solely affected by the CCI at the relay and is independent of the CCI at the destination. Similarly, when k > N_{r}, the outage probability is only affected by the CCI at the destination regardless of the CCI at the relay. Only for the case k = N_{r}, the impact of CCI at both the relay and destination on the outage probability becomes evident. This phenomena is somehow expected, since in a dualhop relaying system, the overall outage performance is limited by the worst link.
Now, we look at the case when the system is subjected to both the CCI and feedback delay, and we have the following key result:
To this end, the desired results can be obtained after some algebraic manipulations.
Corollary 2 shows that the achievable diversity order is one when the transmitter only has access to a delayed version of the CSI. Moreover, whether the interference at the destination affects the outage probability of the system depends on the number of antennas employed at the destination. It is worth noting that when the destination has a single antenna, the interference at the destination will affect the outage probability of the system. Otherwise, the interference at the destination has no impact on the outage probability.
3.3 Average symbol error rate
where $Q\left(x\right)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}{\int}_{x}^{\infty}{e}^{{y}^{2}/2}\mathit{\text{dy}}$ is the complementary error function, and a and b are the modulation specific constants. For instance, a = 1, b = 1 for BPSK, a = 1, b = 0.5 for BFSK with orthogonal signaling, a = 2(M  1) / M, b = 3 / (M^{2}  1) for MPAM, and a = 2, b = sin2(π / M) for MPSK.
To this end, with the help of the CDF of the SIR upper bound, we have the following key result:
with${H}_{1}={H}_{1,\left[1:1\right],0,\left[1:1\right]}^{1,1,1,1,1}[\xb7]$being the generalized Fox’s Hfunction ([35], eq.(2.2.1)).
Proof. See Appendix 2.
Theorem 2 presents an analytical expression for the average SER of the system, and it applies to the generic scenario with arbitrary number of antennas, CCI, and feedback delay at any SIR. The closedform expression involves the generalized Fox’s Hfunction, which can be efficiently evaluated via the algorithm developed in ([36] Table two), hence provides a fast and reliable way to evaluate the average SER of the system.
In order to get more insights into how the system parameters such as number of antennas N_{t} and N_{r}, interference, and correlation coefficient ρ affect the average SER of the system, we now present simple expressions of the average SER in the high SIR regime, from which the diversity order and coding gain of the system can be easily analyzed. Similar to the outage analysis part, we consider two asymptotic SER cases depending on the value of ρ.
Proof. Substituting the asymptotic CDF expression presented in (22) into (26) and utilizing [31] eq.(3.351.3), the desired result can be obtained after some algebraic manipulations.
Proof. Substituting the asymptotic CDF expression presented in (23) into (26) and utilizing [31] eq.(3.351.3), the desired result can be obtained after some algebraic manipulations.
It is noted from the above two corollaries that the diversity order achieved by the system with no feedback delay is min{k, N_{r}}. However, the diversity order reduces to one when there is feedback delay. Moreover, the results suggest that the CCI only degrades the performance of the system by affecting the coding gain of the system and does not reduce the achievable diversity order.
3.4 Ergodic capacity
where f_{ γ }(x) denotes the PDF of the endtoend SIR γ.
It is worth pointing out that unlike the outage probability and SER metrics which have been widely studied for various dualhop relaying systems in the presence of CCI, few works have investigated the ergodic capacity of dualhop relaying systems with CCI due to the fact that it is extremely difficult to obtain tractable expressions for the ergodic capacity. Indeed, two key challenges encountered in the analysis of ergodic capacity include obtaining the exact PDF of the endtoend SIR and taking expectation of the nonlinear log(·) function. To circumvent these challenges, we hereafter seek upper and lower bounds of the ergodic capacity of interferencelimited dualhop multiple antenna CSIassisted AF relaying systems with feedback delay. We start by presenting the following ergodic capacity upper bound.
Proof. See Appendix 3.
Theorem 3 provides a general expression of the capacity upper bound, which is valid for arbitrary number of antenna, CCI and feedback delay. Now, we turn our attention to the ergodic capacity lower bound, and we have the following key result:
Proof. See Appendix 4.
It is worth highlighting that the upper and lower bounds on the ergodic capacity presented in the previous theorems involve only standard functions, hence can be very fast and efficiently evaluated in popular softwares such as Matlab or Mathematica. More importantly, the derived bounds remain very tight across the entire range of SIRs as will be demonstrated in Section 5.
4 Optimum power allocation
In this section, we propose optimum power allocation schemes minimizing the asymptotic outage probability with/without feedback delay. Specifically, we consider the scenario that the total transmit power between the source S and the relay R is fixed, i.e., P_{ s } + P_{ r } = P_{ t }.
5 Numerical results
In this section, we perform extensive numerical simulations to validate analytical results developed in the previous sections and to investigate the impact of number of antennas, CCI, and feedback delay on the performance of interferencelimited dualhop multiple antenna CSIassisted AF relaying systems with feedback delay. In all simulations, unless otherwise specified, we use the following set of parameters: P_{ r } = P_{ s }, λ_{ sr } = 1, and λ_{ rd } = 1. The rate threshold R is set 5W, and the BPSK modulation, i.e., a = 1 and b = 1, is used.
6 Conclusions
In this paper, we have investigated the impact of number of antennas, CCI, and feedback delay on the performance of interferencelimited dualhop multiple antenna CSIassisted AF relaying networks with arbitrary TAS/MRC. Specifically, based on a tight upper bound for the effective endtoend SIR, the closedform approximate expressions for the outage probability and the average SER were derived, which provided a fast and efficient tool for evaluating the impact of the key parameters on the system performance. Simulation results illustrated that the derived approximations for the outage probability and the average SER achieved a good match with the exact results. Furthermore, simple and high informative expressions were also provided to obtain the diversity order and the coding gain of the system with perfect feedback and delayed feedback. The finding of the paper suggested that the full diversity order of min{k, N_{r}} was achieved under perfect feedback, whereas the diversity order was degraded to one underdelayed feedback. More importantly, some new analytical upper and lower bounds were first derived for the ergodic capacity of the considered system, which demonstrated that the proposed bounds worked quite well under different cases. In addition, the optimal power allocation between the source and the relay was proposed to minimize the asymptotic outage probability. A profound reduction in the outage probability was attained using the optimal power allocation compared to the equal power allocation due to additional coding gain.
Endnote
Appendices
Appendix 1
where β = N_{t}  k + n + 1.
To this end, the desired result can be obtained after some mathematical manipulations.
Appendix 2
where ${H}_{1,\left[1:1\right],0,\left[1:1\right]}^{1,1,1,1,1}[\xb7]$is the generalized Fox’s Hfunction ([35], eq.(2.2.1)). Finally, substituting the integrals I_{1}, I_{2}, and I_{3} into (51) yields the final result given in (27).
Appendix 3
where _{2}F_{1}(·,·;·;·) is the Gauss hypergeometric function ([31], eq.(9.100)), and C is the Euler constant ([31], eq.(8.367.1)).
To this end, pulling everything together, we obtain the desired result.
Appendix 4
where we have used [31] eq.(3.351.3) to solve the corresponding integral.
To this end, pulling everything together yields the desired result.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of China (grants numbers 61201229, 61172062, and 61072044), the Jiangsu Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number BK2011116), the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number LQ12F01006), the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities (2012QNA5011), the Open Research Fund of National Mobile Communications Research Laboratory, Southeast University (grant number 2013D06), and the Qatar National Research Fund (JSREP grant number 30392010).
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 Laneman JN, Tse DNC, Wornell GW: Cooperative diversity in wireless networks: efficient protocols and outage behavior. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2004, 50(12):30623080. 10.1109/TIT.2004.838089MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Hasna MO, Alouini MS: A performance study of dualhop transmissions with fixed gain relays. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2004, 3(6):19631964. 10.1109/TWC.2004.837470View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Hasna MO, Alouini MS: Endtoend performance of transmission systems with relays over Rayleighfading channels. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2003, 2(6):11261131. 10.1109/TWC.2003.819030View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 da Costa DB, Aïssa S: Cooperative dualhop relaying systems with beamforming over Nakagami m fading channels. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2009, 8(8):39503954.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Suraweera HA, Karagiannidis GK: Closedform error analysis of the nonidentical Nakagami m relay fading channel. IEEE Commun. Lett 2008, 12(4):259261.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Chau YA, Huang KY: Channel statistics and performance of cooperative selection diversity with dualhop amplifyandforward relay over Rayleigh fading channels. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2008, 7(5):17791785.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ikki SS, Ahmed MH: Performance of cooperative diversity using equal gain combining (EGC) over Nakagamim fading channels. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2009, 8(2):557562.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Alapattu S, Rajatheva N, Tellambura C: Performance analysis of TDMA relay protocols over Nakagami m fading. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technol 2010, 59(1):93104.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Krikidis I, Thompson JS, Mclaughlin S, Goertz N: Maxmin relay selection for legacy amplifyandforward systems with interference. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2009, 8(6):30163027.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Zhong C, Jin S, Wong KK: Dualhop systems with noisy relay and interferencelimited destination. IEEE Trans. Commun 2010, 58(3):764768.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Xu W, Zhang J, Zhang P: Outage probability of twohop fixedgain relay with interference at the relay and destination. IEEE Commun. Lett 2011, 15(6):608610.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ikki SS, Aïssa S: Impact of imperfect channel estimation and cochannel interference on dualhop relaying systems. IEEE Commun. Lett 2012, 16(3):324327.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
 Ikki SS, Aïssa S: Impact of imperfect channel estimation and cochannel interference on regenerative cooperative networks. IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett 2012, 1(5):436439.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Suraweera HA, Michalopoulos DS, Yuen C: Performance analysis of fixed gain relay systems with a single interference in Nakagami m fading channels. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technol 2012, 61(3):14571463.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 AlQahtani FS, Duong TQ, Zhong C, Qaraqe KA, Alnuweiri H: Performance analysis of dualhop AF systems with interference in Nakagami m fading channels. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 2011, 18(8):454457.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Yu H, Lee IH, stüber GL: Outage probability of decodeandforward cooperative relaying systems with cochannel interference. IEEE Trans. Commun 2012, 11(1):266274.Google Scholar
 Soithong T, Aalo VA, Efthymoglou GP, Chayawan C: Outage analysis of multihop relay systems in interferencelimited Nakagami m fading channels. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technol 2012, 61(3):14511457.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 AlQahtani FS, Yang J, Radaydeh RM, Alnuweiri H: On the capacity of twohop AF relaying in the presence of interference under Nakagami m fading. IEEE Commun. Lett 2013, 17(1):1922.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Yeoh PL, Elkashlan M, Collings IB: Exact and asymptotic SER of distributed TAS/MRC in MIMO relay networks. IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun 2011, 10(3):751756.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Yeoh PL, Elkashlan M, Collings IB: MIMO relaying: distributed TAS/MRC in Nakagami m fading. IEEE Trans. Commun 2011, 59(10):26782682.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Elkashlan M, Yeoh PL, Yang N, Duong TQ, Leung C: A comparison of two MIMO relaying protocols in Nakagami m fading. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Technol 2012, 61(3):14161422.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Yang N, Elkashlan M, Yeoh PL, Yuan J: Multiuser MIMO relay networks in Nakagami m fading channels. IEEE Trans. Commun 2012, 60(11):32983310.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Zhong C, Suraweera H, Yuen C, Huang A, Zhang Z: Outage probability of dualhop multiple antenna AF relaying systems with interference. IEEE Trans. Commun 2013, 61(1):108119.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ding H, He C, Jiang L: Performance analysis of fixed gain MIMO relay systems in the presence of cochannel interference. IEEE Commun. Lett 2012, 16(7):11331136.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Phan H, Duong TQ, Elkashlan M, Zepernick HJ: Beamforming amplifyandforward relay networks with feedback delay and interference. IEEE Signal Process. Lett 2012, 19(1):1619.View ArticleGoogle Scholar