Proceedings of the 2017 4th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering
28-30 September, 2017, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Effectiveness of Filter Bank Multicarrier Modulation
for 5G Wireless Communications
Md. Motahar Hossain Mishu1, M. Rubaiyat Hossain Mondal2
Institute of Information and Communication Technology
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Email: mishuece@gmail.com1, rubaiyat97@yahoo.com2
Abstract—Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing
(OFDM) scheme may not be the optimum solution for 5G
scenarios because of its spectrum leakage, high peak to average
power ratio (PAPR) and the requirement of strict temporal and
frequency synchronization. These limitations are likely to be
overcome by filter bank multicarrier (FBMC) modulation which
uses pulse shaping principle to reduce the problem of spectral
leakage. Moreover, the users in FBMC do not need to be
synchronized before they gain access to the uplink of the
communication system. However, FBMC and conventional
OFDM have not yet been compared in terms of bit error rate
(BER) performance in the combined presence of Nakagami
fading, shadowing, path loss and channel noise. This paper
presents simulation results on the BER performance of FBMC
and OFDM considering these combined channel impairments.
The comparison is also done in terms of PAPR factor and
complexity. Results indicate that FBMC shows significantly
better BER performance than OFDM for the combined presence
of these impairments. However, for the cases considered, FBMC
can be slightly inferior to OFDM in terms of PAPR factor. In
addition, FBMC is approximately ten times more complex than
OFDM for a given subcarrier number.
Keywords— OFDM, OQAM, FBMC, Nakagami fading, PAPR,
PHYDYAS.
I. INTRODUCTION
The demand for mobile data traffic has been increasing
day by day and the next generation of wireless
communications (5G) is expected to serve users with high data
rates at near zero latency. Some of the major applications of
5G will be ultra-high definition video streaming, voice
communications with video and medical application like
remote surgery. The current 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE)
systems use orthogonal frequency division multiplexing
(OFDM) [1-3] in the downlink. The advantage of OFDM is
that it is robust to inter symbol interference (ISI) caused by
multipath fading channels. OFDM combats ISI in two ways.
Firstly, OFDM carries data via a large number of subcarriers
where each subcarrier has a long symbol duration compared to
the channel delay spread. Secondly, a cyclic extension known
as cyclic prefix (CP) is added to OFDM symbols where the
length of the CP is greater than the channel delay spread. One
important challenge for OFDM is its high peak to average
power ratio (PAPR) which causes nonlinearity in the
transmitter power amplifiers [4].
978-1-5386-0869-2/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
319
For the case of asynchronous multi-user 5G operating
scenarios, the OFDM spectrum is likely to experience
spectrum leakage or out of band emissions (OOBE). This is
because in conventional OFDM, a rectangular time-domain
pulse shape is used, which is equivalent to a Sinc function in
the frequency domain with large side lobes, resulting in high
OOBE. In other words, the OOBE of OFDM is due to the
discontinuity between adjacent OFDM symbols. In order to
avoid the interference among large number of users, strict
synchronization is a must for OFDM as it is affected by timing
and frequency synchronization errors. The temporal and
frequency synchronization can be achieved in OFDM with the
use of signaling data which along with CP reduces the spectral
efficiency. Therefore, researchers are considering new
waveforms for 5G communications that will be more
spectrally contained, and robust to time and frequency
misalignments, and will exhibit a reduced overhead compared
to OFDM [5-7]. The most promising waveform candidates for
5G are basically derivatives of OFDM with filters. Filter bank
multicarrier (FBMC) modulation is one such example. In
FBMC, the spectral containment problem of OFDM is
addressed by filtering each sub-carrier using a prototype filter
having longer length than OFDM symbol length. This filter
reduces the side-lobes. However, FBMC requires different
transceiver structures compared to OFDM LTE systems.
Besides, the suitability of FBMC for 5G has not been
confirmed yet [8-11]. In particular, the bit error rate (BER)
performance of FBMC has not been compared with OFDM for
the case of multipath wireless channel scenarios.
This paper focuses on a FBMC communication system and
evaluates its BER performance in the joint presence of
Nakagami fading, path loss, shadowing and channel noise.
This paper also compares the BER performance results of
FBMC with those of OFDM. Comparisons are also made
between OFDM and FBMC in terms of PAPR and
implementation complexity [12-16]. The rest of the paper is
organized as follows. Section II describes an OFDM and an
FBMC system. The wireless channel model is presented in
Section III. In Section IV, the complexity, the BER
performance and the PAPR aspects of OFDM and FBMC are
compared via computer simulations. The concluding remarks
are presented in Section V.
 II. SYSTEM MODEL
The block diagrams of OFDM and FBMC systems are
described in the following.
A. OFDM
The OFDM block diagram is presented in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. OFDM system
Input data sequences are converted from serial to parallel
(denoted as S/P) and then modulated using different types of
baseband modulation schemes such as Quaternary Phase Shift
Keying (QPSK) or Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM).
After the baseband modulation, parallel data symbols are
inserted to different subcarriers with the use of an inverse fast
Fourier transform (IFFT) block. For the reduction of ISI, a CP
is inserted to each OFDM block obtained from the output of
the IFFT operation. Then the parallel data are serially
converted (denoted as P/S). Next, the digital serial signal is
converted to analog and then transformed to a higher
frequency band using the up-conversion block. In the receiver
side, the opposite operations to the transmitter are performed.
The high frequency analog signal is converted into low
frequency signal. Next, analog to digital and serial to parallel
operations are performed. The additional CP is then removed
before the FFT operation. A frequency domain equalizer is
used to compensate the channel effects [1-2]. Next, the
subcarriers are de-mapped and demodulated, and the resultant
signal is converted to serial form.
The following expression presents a basic OFDM
transmitted signal in complex notation:
N −1 N −1
x(t ) = ¦ xk (t ) = ¦ S k [n]e j 2ΠΔfT , nT < t < (n + 1)T
k =0 k =0
where N represents the number of OFDM subcarriers, Sk is
th
the signal carried by the k subcarrier. During each OFDM
period of time T , a total of N parallel symbols will be
transmitted. The applied modulation scheme will define the
number of bits transmitted per OFDM symbol.
B. FBMC
FBMC technique has two different classes. One technique
is referred to as real valued signal transmission called
FBMC/Offset QAM (OQAM) and the other is complex valued
signal transmission called FBMC/QAM. It can be noted that
OQAM is the special form of QAM where one of the real and
imaginary parts are remained zero in every symbol. For the
transmission of these two techniques, there are three different
methods for FBMC signal generation: cosine modulated
multitone (CMT), filtered multitone (FMT) and staggered
modulated multitone (SMT). First consider the CMT method.
In CMT based FBMC modulation, a set of vestigial side-band
(VSB) subcarrier channels are utilized to transmit a real
valued signal. A stream of pulse amplitude modulated (PAM)
symbols are carried by each subcarrier ensuring that CMT
provides the maximum bandwidth efficiency as SMT.
However, the total number of subcarriers in CMT has to be
doubled to transmit the real values signal to get the same rate
in SMT [15]. In case of FMT method, data symbols are
usually QAM modulated. The subcarriers are arranged without
overlapping but with some guard bands requiring more
bandwidth for data transmission. As subcarriers are totally
separated in this system, interference is minimum similar to
the case of conventional frequency division multiplexing. The
FMT is less effective than both CMT and SMT as it requires
more bandwidth for a given data transmission rate. On the
other hand, to get the same data rate, the subcarrier number
has to be doubled and the complexity arises more than the
SMT. This paper considers SMT based FBMC [17-20].
SMT uses OQAM to modulate data. In such a system, a
root-Nyquist filter is chosen with symmetric impulse response
for pulse-shaping at the transmitter and the receiver sides. In
this transmission technique, a half symbol delay between the
in-phase and quadrature-phase components of QAM symbols
is always maintained, this makes it possible to get baud-rate
spacing between adjacent subcarriers. The information
symbols, which are free from ISI and inter carrier interference
(ICI) can be recovered successfully in this method without
using the CP as needed in OFDM. For example, in SMT
method, N filters are faded by N parallel data streams and
there is always a half symbol duration, T / 2 , between the in
phase and quadrature phase components. The output of these
filters is then modulated by 1 / T space frequency separated by
N subcarriers. With this consideration, the basic FBMC
signal can be expressed as
Π 2 Πt Π
N −1 ∞ (t − nT ) jk ( + )
j
x (t ) = ¦ ¦ S k [n]h(t − nT ) e 2T e T 2 (2)
k = 0 n = −∞
(1) The expression in (2) can be rewritten as
N −1 ∞ 2 Πt Π
jk ( + )
x (t ) = ¦¦ ( S kI [ n]h(t ) + jS kQ [ n]h(t − T / 2))e T 2 (3)
k = 0 n = −∞
where S kl [n] is the in-phase component, S kQ [n] is the
quadrature component of the k th subcarrier and n th symbol
and is defined by the following equations
SkI [t ] = ¦
SkI [n]δ (t − nT )
n
S kQ [t ] = ¦S
n
Q
k [ n]δ (t − nT ) (4)
320
here δ (t ) is the delta function.
Fig. 2 represents the simple block diagram of FBMC
transmitter. Similar to the OFDM system, initial blocks are
used for the baseband modulation of digital data stream, and
then the baseband signal is converted to another form by the
OQAM preprocessing which is described in the later part of
this section. After that paralleled data are faded by the filters
and the filter coefficients are generated for different
overlapping factors, K shown in Table I. It can be noted that
the FBMC systems usually use a prototype filter called Fig. 3. FBMC Receiver
‘physical layer for dynamic spectrum access and cognitive
radio’ (PHYDYAS). In this filter, the Nyquist criteria is
satisfied by using the co-efficient of the frequency domain and
by imposing the symmetry condition [23]. The impulse
response of the PHYDYAS filter is given as
­ 1 ª K −1
2Πwt º
°
h (t ) = ® A ¬«1 + 2 ¦
w =1
(−1) w H w cos( ) t ∈ [ 0, KT ]
KT »¼ (5)
° 0 elsewhere
¯
K-1
where A = KT [1 + 2 ¦H
w =1
2
w] is the normalization constant.

Next, the frequency faded data are passed through the IFFT
block. The serial data are then overlapped and summed before
the up conversion is performed to transmit to the channel. Fig.
3 represents the receiver section of the FBMC system where
the opposite operation takes place for recovering the data. The
same frequency coefficients as used in the transmitter side are Fig. 4. OQAM preprocessing
used to decode the signal in the original form.
OQAM preprocessing and post processing are the
necessary blocks which are actually required for the
conversion from QAM to OQAM. In Fig. 4, complex symbols
C k ,n are passed through two blocks according to their real
and imaginary parts which generating two types of data: d k ,2 n
for the real part of complex symbol and d k ,2 n +1 for the
imaginary part of the symbol. The sampling rate is doubled
when complex to real conversion is performed. They are
actually separated according to the odd/even number of index
k . In OQAM post processing as shown in Fig. 5, the inverse
operation is performed to convert OQAM to QAM. In this
case, sampling rate is decreased by 2 when the real values are
converted to complex symbols [22].

Fig. 5. OQAM post processing

TABLE I: Impulse response as a function of overlapping factor

K H0 H1 H2 H3
2 1 0.707106 - -
3 1 0.911438 0.411438 -
4 1 0.971960 0.707106 0.235147

Fig: 2. FBMC Transmitter

321
 III. CHANNEL MODEL As the basic OFDM transmitter consists of one single IFFT
In this section, a number of impairments of a practical block and their windowing technique and a CP, the total
wireless channel are described. In addition to channel noise number of multiplications at the transmitter side is given by
Tx
which is modeled as additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN), C OFDM = C FFT ( N ) + 4( N + LCP ) (10)
there are different multipath fading effects. In this research Tx
work, Doppler frequency shift is ignored but multipath fading, The term COFDM in (10) can be rewritten as
shadowing and path loss are considered. The path loss is Tx
C OFDM = N log 2 ( N ) + N + 4 + 4 LCP (11)
defined by the following equation for the high frequency
where Lcp is the length of CP in the OFDM transmitter. In the
transmission,
receiver side, only the FFT operation and a single tap
PL (d ) = α + β × 10 log10 (d ) (6) equalizer are needed. So, the total multiplications in OFDM
can be described by the following expression
where, α is the floating intercept in dB and β is the linear
slope (average path loss component) in dB and d is the Rx
C OFDM = C FFT ( N ) + 4 N f (12)
distance between the transmitter and the receiver in meter.
Another term shadowing is used for the large-scale propagation Rx
The term C OFDM in (12) can be rewritten as
loss which is defined by X σ where ı is the standard
Rx
deviation in dB scale. It is usually defined with the path loss by COFDM = N log 2 ( N ) − 3N + 4 N f (13)
the following equation [24-25]
loss = PL (d ) + X σ (7) TABLE II. Simulation parameters
In addition, with the large-scale propagation loss, signal
Parameters OFDM System FBMC System
may be corrupted by the small scale multipath fading. In this Constellation size 4,16,64,256 QAM 4,16,64,256 QAM
paper Nakagami fading is considered as multipath fading. Subcarriers N 256, 512,1024 256, 512,1024
Nakagami distribution is a generalization of the Rayleigh and 0-25% N/A
CP length, Lcp
Rician fading, and its probability distribution function (PDF)
is given as [26-27], Filter type Rectangular PHYDYAS
Overlapping N/A 2,3,4
mr 2
2r m −1 m m factor, K
f R (r ) = ( )e Ω (8) floating intercept=75.85, floating intercept=75.85,
Γ ( m) Ω m Path loss, PL
average path loss average path loss
where Γ ( m) is the Gamma function, Ω is the average signal component=10dB, component=10dB,
Distance= 30m to 200m Distance= 30m to 200m
power and m is the fading factor having values greater than Shadowing, χσ Log normal(ı=1-10) Log normal (ı=1-10)
or equal to 0.5. The term r represents the signal to be faded
for different fading.
Fading, m Nakagami Nakagami
(fading factor 1)
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
Next, consider the FBMC system complexity. In the case of
In this section, simulation results are presented for the FBMC, K + 1 frequency domain samples are generated by
comparison of the classical OFDM system and the FBMC
each signal when the subcarrier signals are multiplied by one
system in terms of computational complexity, BER, and
PAPR metrics. The simulation parameters are described in of the frequency domain coefficient of KN length prototype
Table II. filters. To get the time domain signals overlapping is done
after the KN point IFFT operation. The following expression
A. Computational complexity calculation: represents the computational complexity with the use of the
The computational complexity is evaluated in this section Split Radix algorithm for IFFT operation
for both OFDM and FBMC systems. The real valued
multiplication with the multiplication for equalizer is
Tx
C FBMC = 2{KN log 2 ( KN ) − 3KN } + 8 + 8 N f ( K − 1) (14)
considered here for determining the computational complexity The reverse steps are performed in the receiver side, but the
of both the systems. number of multiplications is increased for the employment of
It is considered that the total number of subcarriers for multitap equalizer as the equalizer is involved for each
OFDM is N , whereas N f is the number of subcarriers to be subcarrier. So, the total number of multiplications can be
occupied by the data. The total number of real multiplications represented by using (9):
performed for an N point FFT/IFFT is calculated by the Split Rx
C FBMC = 2{KN log 2 ( KN ) − 3KN } + 8 + 16 N f ( K − 1) (15)
Radix algorithm [15]
C FFT ( N ) = N {log 2 ( N ) − 3} + 4 (9) The complexity of OFDM and FBMC is shown in Fig. 6.
In both the systems, computational complexity mostly
depends upon the number of subcarriers and their percentage

322
of utilization. Here N = 1024 subcarriers are considered. Bar difference when fading is the only impairment and when there
graphs 1 and 2 represent the number of multiplications when are the joint impairments including fading.
data are carried by 20% and 50% of the total subcarriers,
respectively. In other words, for bar graph 1, N f = 0.2 N and
for bar graph 2, N f = 0.5 N . Bar graph 3 represents the
number of multiplications when all the subcarriers are
employed for data transmission, i.e. N f = N . It can be seen
from bar 3 that when all the subcarriers carry data, the number
of multiplications for FBMC is approximately 10 (ten) times
greater than OFDM. It can also be seen from Fig. 6 that the
complexity of FBMC is reduced when some subcarriers are
remained unused.

Fig: 7. BER performance for different constellation sizes.

Fig: 6. Computational complexity comparison

B. BER comparison:
In the following, the BER performance of OFDM is
compared with that of FBMC by varying energy per bit to
noise power spectral density, E b N 0 . Fig. 7 shows the BER
versus E b N 0 plots for FBMC for different constellation
sizes and for different values of K . The plots show there is
almost no impact of the value of K on the BER performance. It Fig: 8. BER comparison with different channel impairments.
can also be seen that for a given value of K , there is
significant performance degradation with the increase in the
constellation size.
Fig. 8 shows the BER versus E b N 0 plots for OFDM and
FBMC for 4-QAM. The plots are for different channel
impairments including stand-alone AWGN, multipath fading,
joints effects of path loss, shadowing and Nakagami fading
(denoted in Fig. 8 as All Imp.). It is assumed that the effect of
path loss is compensated in the system. It can be seen that for a
given constellation size and for the case of AWGN, the FBMC
and the OFDM systems have approximately the same power
efficiency. This is in agreement with the results reported for
AWGN in [28]. Fig. 8 also indicates that FBMC performs
significantly better than OFDM in case of joint channel
impairments. This means that compared to OFDM, FBMC is Fig: 9. PAPR comparison for different subcarrier for OFDM and
more robust to the combined effects of Nakagami fading, FBMC system.
shadowing and path loss. Note that there is almost no

323
C. PAPR comparison:
The value of the PAPR of the transmitted signal for both
OFDM and FBMC systems can be defined as [29]
PAPR ( x(t )) dB =10 log10 ª max{ x(t ) } x(t ) º
2 2
(16)
¬« ¼»
where x(t ) is the mean magnitude of the transmitted signal.
Fig. 9 shows the Complimentary Cumulative Distributive
Functions (CCDF) as a function of PAPR distribution for
OFDM and FBMC. In both the systems, the PAPR is slightly
increased with the increase of subcarrier numbers. At a CCDF
of 10-2 and for a subcarrier number of N = 256 , the PAPR for
OFDM is 8.9 dB while it is about 9.6 dB for FBMC. For
N = 512 , the PAPR is increased by approximately 0.4 dB
with respect to N = 256 for both the systems.
V. CONCLUSION
This paper compares the BER performance, the PAPR
factor and the complexity of OFDM and FBMC modulation
techniques. Simulation results indicate that FBMC has almost
the same BER performance as OFDM in the presence of
stand-alone AWGN. However, compared to OFDM, FBMC is
more robust to the joint impairments of Nakagami fading,
shadowing, path loss and AWGN. For the cases considered, it
can be seen that the PAPR values for FBMC is marginally
greater than OFDM. Simulation results also show that the
complexity of FBMC is approximately 10 times greater than
OFDM, and this difference increases when larger number of
subcarriers are used to carry data. Therefore, FBMC has better
BER performance than OFDM at the cost of increased
complexity. The performance evaluation of FBMC with large
constellation sizes in the combined presence of Doppler
frequency shift and other impairments is left for future work.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work has been carried at IICT, Bangladesh University
of Engineering and Technology (BUET).
REFERENCES
[1] L. Hanzo, Y. Akhtman, L. Wang and M. Jiang, “MIMO-OFDM for
LTE, WiFi and WiMAX: Coherent versus non-Coherent and cooperative
Turbo transceivers,” John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Oct. 2010.
[2] M. R. H. Mondal and S. P. Majumder, “Analytical performance
evaluation of space time coded MIMO OFDM systems impaired by
fading and timing jitter,” in Journal of Communications. vol. 4, no. 6,
2009.
[3] A. Loulou and M. Renfors, “Enhanced OFDM for fragmented spectrum
use in 5G systems,” in Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications
Technologies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 31–45, 2015.
[4] B. Farhang-Boroujeny, “OFDM versus filter bank multicarrier,” in IEEE
Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 92-112, May 2011.
[5] G. Wunder et al., “5GNOW: non-orthogonal, asynchronous waveforms
for future mobile applications,” in IEEE Communications Magazine,
vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 97-105, Feb. 2014.
[6] J. G. Andrews et al., “What will 5G be?” in IEEE Journal on Selected
Areas in Communications, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1065-1082, June 2014.
[7] E. Ayanoglu, “5G today: Modulation technique alternatives,”
International Conference on Computing, Networking and
Communications (ICNC), Kauai, HI, pp. 1-5, 2016.
324
[8] X. Zhang, et al., “New waveforms and multiple access methods for 5G
networks: on the waveform for 5G,” IEEE Commun. Mag., Nov. 2016.
[9] W. Hong, K.H. Baek, Y. Lee, Y. Kim, and S.T. Ko, “Study and
prototyping of practically large-scale mmWave antenna systems for 5G
cellular devices,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 63-69, Sep.
2014.
[10] A. Gupta and R. K. Jha, “A survey of 5G network: Architecture and
emerging technologies,” in IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 1206-1232, 2015.
[11] P. Banelli, S. Buzzi, G. Colavolpe, A. Modenini, F. Rusek and A.
Ugolini, “Modulation formats and waveforms for 5G Networks: Who
will be the heir of OFDM? An overview of alternative modulation
schemes for improved spectral efficiency,” in IEEE Signal Processing
Magazine, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 80-93, Nov. 2014.
[12] R. Nissel and M. Rupp, “Bit error probability for pilot-symbol aided
channel estimation in FBMC-OQAM,” IEEE International Conference
on Communications (ICC), Kuala Lumpur, pp. 1-6, 2016.
[13] R. Shrestha, and J. Seo, “PAPR reduction in FBMC systems using phase
realignment based techniques,” 21st Asia-Pacific Conference on
Communications (APCC), Feb. 2015.
[14] H. Wang, X. Wang, L. Xu and W. Du, “Hybrid PAPR reduction scheme
for FBMC/OQAM systems based on multi data block PTS and TR
methods,” in IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 4761-4768, 2016
[15] R. Gerzaguet, et al., “The 5G candidate waveform race: a comparison of
complexity and performance,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless
Communications and Networking 2017.
[16] M. V. Eeckhaute, et al., “Performance of emerging multi-carrier
waveforms for 5G asynchronous communications,” EURASIP Journal
on Wireless Communications and Networking 2017.
[17] M. Aldababseh, and A. Jamoos, “Estimation of FBMC/OQAM fading
channels using dual Kalman filters,” The Scientific World Journal,
Article ID 586403, 9 pages, 2014.
[19] H. Nam, et al., "A new filter-bank multicarrier system with two
prototype filters for QAM symbols transmission and reception," IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, Vol. 15, No. 9, Sep. 2016.
[20] H. Han, H. Kim, N. Kim, and H. Park, “An enhanced QAM-FBMC
scheme with interference mitigation,” IEEE Communications Letter,
Vol. 20, No. 11, Nov. 2016.
[21] C. Kim, et al., “New waveforms and multiple access methods for 5G
networks, Introduction to QAM-FBMC: from waveform optimization to
system design,” IEEE Communications Magazine, Nov. 2016.
[22] A. Viholainen, T. Ihalainen, T. H. Stitz, M. Renfors and M. Bellanger,
“Prototype filter design for filter bank based multicarrier transmission,”
17th European Signal Processing Conf., Glasgow, pp. 1359-1363, 2009.
[23] M. G. Bellanger, “Specification and design of a prototype filter for filter
bank based multicarrier transmission,” IEEE International Conference
on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Salt Lake City, UT, 2001.
[24] A. I. Sulyman, A. T. Nassar, M. K. Samimi, G. R. M. Jr., T. S.
Rappaport, and A. Alsanie, “Radio propagation path loss models for 5G
cellular networks in the 28 GHz and 38 GHz millimeter-wave bands,”
IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 78–86, Sep. 2014.
[25] H. Zhao, et al., “28 GHz millimeter wave cellular communication
measurements for reflection and 17 penetration loss in and around
buildings in New York City,” in IEEE International Conference on
Communications (ICC) pp. 5163–5167, 2013.
[26] Kun-Wah Yip and Tung-Sang Ng, “A simulation model for Nakagami-m
fading channels, m<1,” in IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol.
48, no. 2, pp. 214-221, Feb. 2000.
[27] S. Sharma, and R. Mishra, “A simulation model for Nakagmi-m fading
channel with m>1,” (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced
Computer Science and Applications, vol. 6, no. 10, 2015.
[28] R. Datta et al., “Flexible multicarrier PHY design for cognitive radio in
White Space,” 6th International ICST Conference on Cognitive Radio
Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications, Osaka, 2011.
[29] Z. Kollár and P. Horváth, “PAPR reduction of FBMC by clipping and its
iterative compensation,” Journal of Computer Networks and
Communications, 2012.