The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Investigation of Prediction Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Parameter Stability of Large-Scale Propagation Path Loss Models for 5G Wireless Communications
Open accessAbstract
This paper compares three candidate large-scale propagation path loss models for use over the entire microwave and millimeter-wave (mmWave) radio spectrum: the alpha-beta-gamma (ABG) model, the close-in (CI) free space reference distance model, and the CI model with a frequency-weighted path loss exponent (CIF). Each of these models have been recently studied for use in standards bodies such as 3GPP, and for use in the design of fifth generation (5G) wireless systems in urban macrocell, urban microcell, and indoor office and shopping mall scenarios. Here we compare the accuracy and sensitivity of these models using measured data from 30 propagation measurement datasets from 2 GHz to 73 GHz over distances ranging from 4 m to 1238 m. A series of sensitivity analyses of the three models show that the physically-based two-parameter CI model and three-parameter CIF model offer computational simplicity, have very similar goodness of fit (i.e., the shadow fading standard deviation), exhibit more stable model parameter behavior across frequencies and distances, and yield smaller prediction error in sensitivity testing across distances and frequencies, when compared to the four-parameter ABG model. Results show the CI model with a 1 m close-in reference distance is suitable for outdoor environments, while the CIF model is more appropriate for indoor modeling. The CI and CIF models are easily implemented in existing 3GPP models by making a very subtle modification -- by replacing a floating non-physically based constant with a frequency-dependent constant that represents free space path loss in the first meter of propagation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Rappaport, T. S., Xing, Y., Kanhere, O., Ju, S., Madanayake, A., Mandal, S., Alkhateeb, A., & Trichopoulos, G. C. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2921522 · Cited by 2,617
“such as provided in [133] has not yet been performed for indoor sub-THz channels) [4], [132], [134], [135].”
BackgroundSelf-citationMillimeter Wave Communications for Future Mobile Networks
Xiao, M., Mumtaz, S., Huang, Y., Dai, L., Li, Y., Matthaiou, M., Karagiannidis, G. K., Bjornson, E., Yang, K., I, C.-L., et al. (2017) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/jsac.2017.2719924 · Cited by 1,122
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sun, S., Rappaport, T. S., Thomas, T. A., Ghosh, A., Nguyen, H. C., Kovacs, I. Z., Rodriguez, I., Koymen, O., & Partyka, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology
- Published
- 2016-05
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2843-2860
- ISSN
- 0018-9545 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9359
- OpenAlex
- W2299676078
- Cited by
- 485
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Investigation of Prediction Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Parameter Stability of Large-Scale Propagation Path Loss Models for 5G Wireless Communications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tvt.2016.2543139
- The paper
- Sun, S., Rappaport, T. S., Thomas, T. A., Ghosh, A., Nguyen, H. C., Kovacs, I. Z., Rodriguez, I., Koymen, O., & Partyka, A. (2016). Investigation of Prediction Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Parameter Stability of Large-Scale Propagation Path Loss Models for 5G Wireless Communications. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvt.2016.2543139
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.