Full vol 1 issue 4

23,503 views

Published on

IJAET Volume 1 Issue 4 has been published on Sept 1,2011.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
23,503
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
11
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Full vol 1 issue 4

  1. 1. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Table of ContentS.No. Article Title, Authors & Abstract (Vol. 1, Issue. 4, Sept-2011) Page No.s 1. ANALOG INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DESIGN AND TESTING USING THE FIELD 1-9 PROGRAMMABLE ANALOG ARRAY TECHNOLOGY, Mouna Karmani, Chiraz Khedhiri, Belgacem Hamdi 2. PROCESS MATURITY ASSESSMENT OF THE NIGERIAN SOFTWARE INDUSTRY, 10-25 Kehinde Aregbesola, Babatunde O. Akinkunmi, Olalekan S. Akinola 3. TAKING THE JOURNEY FROM LTE TO LTE-ADVANCED, 26-33 Arshed Oudah , Tharek Abd Rahman and Nor Hudah Seman 4. DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT OF AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM TO BUILD 3D MODEL FOR 34-39 UNDERWATER OBJECTS USING STEREO VISION TECHNIQUE, N. Satish Kumar, B L Mukundappa, Ramakanth Kumar P 5. ANALYSIS AND CONTROL OF DOUBLE-INPUT INTEGRATED BUCK-BUCK-BOOST 40-46 CONVERTER FOR HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, M.SubbaRao1, Ch.Sai Babu2, S. Satynarayana 6. MACHINE LEARNING APPROACH FOR ANOMALY DETECTION IN WIRELESS 47-61 SENSOR DATA, Ajay Singh Raghuvanshi, Rajeev Tripathi, and Sudarshan Tiwari 7. FEED FORWARD BACK PROPAGATION NEURAL NETWORK METHOD FOR ARABIC 62-72 VOWEL RECOGNITION BASED ON WAVELET LINEAR PREDICTION CODING, Khalooq Y. Al Azzawi, Khaled Daqrouq 8. SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS STUDIES FOR A MODIFIED ALGORITHM TO IMPROVE 73-85 TCP IN LONG DELAY BANDWIDTH PRODUCT NETWORKS, Ehab A. Khalil 9. MULTI-PROTOCOL GATEWAY FOR EMBEDDED SYSTEMS , 86-93 B Abdul Rahim and K Soundara Rajan 10. MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS (MCA) FOR EVALUATION OF INTELLIGENT ELECTRICAL 94-99 INSTALLATION, Miroslav Haluza and Jan Machacek 11. EFFICIENT IMPLEMENTATIONS OF DISCRETE WAVELET TRANSFORMS USING 100-111 FPGAS , D. U. Shah & C. H. Vithlani 12. REAL TIME CONTROL OF ELECTRICAL MACHINE AND DRIVES: A REVIEW, 112-126 P. M. Menghal & A. Jaya Laxmi 13. IMPLEMENTATION OF PATTERN RECOGNITION TECHNIQUES AND OVERVIEW OF 127-137 ITS APPLICATIONS IN VARIOUS AREAS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, S. P. Shinde, V.P.Deshmukh 14. ANALYTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF MULTIMODAL IMAGE REGISTRATION BASED ON 138-147 MEDICAL APPLICATION, Mohammad Reza Keyvanpour & Somayeh Alehojat 15. OVERVIEW OF SPACE-FILLING CURVES AND THEIR APPLICATIONS IN SCHEDULING, 148-154 Mir Ashfaque Ali & S. A. Ladhake 16. COMPACT OMNI-DIRECTIONAL PATCH ANTENNA FOR S-BAND FREQUENCY 155-159 SPECTRA, P. A. Ambresh1, P. M. Hadalgi2 and P. V. Hunagund 17. REDUCING TO FAULT ERRORS IN COMMUNICATION CHANNELS SYSTEMS, 160-167 Shiv Kumar Gupta and Rajiv Kumar 18. SPACE VECTOR BASED VARIABLE DELAY RANDOM PWM ALGORITHM FOR DIRECT 168-178 TORQUE CONTROL OF INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVE FOR HARMONIC REDUCTION, i Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. i-iii
  2. 2. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 P. Nagasekhar Reddy, J. Amarnath, P. Linga Reddy 19. SOFTWARE AGENT’S DECISION MAKING APPROACH BASED ON GAME THEORY, 179-188 Anju Rathi, Namita Khurana, Akshatha. P. S, Pooja Rani 20. CALCULATION OF POWER CONSUMPTION IN 7 TRANSISTOR SRAM CELL USING 189-194 CADENCE TOOL, Shyam Akashe, Ankit Srivastava, Sanjay Sharma 21. REFRACTOMETRIC FIBER OPTIC ADULTERATION LEVEL DETECTOR FOR DIESEL, 195-203 S. S. Patil & A. D. Shaligram 22. SYSTEM FOR DOCUMENT SUMMARIZATION USING GRAPHS IN TEXT MINING, 204-211 Prashant D. Joshi, M. S. Bewoor, S. H. Patil 23. ADAPTIVE NEURO-FUZZY SPEED CONTROLLER FOR HYSTERESIS CURRENT 212-223 CONTROLLED PMBLDC MOTOR DRIVE, V M Varatharaju and B L Mathur 24. A MODIFIED HOPFIELD NEURAL NETWORK METHOD FOR EQUALITY 224-235 CONSTRAINED STATE ESTIMATION, S.Sundeep, G. MadhusudhanaRao 25. DEPLOYMENT ISSUES OF SBGP, SOBGP AND pSBGP:A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, 236-243 Naasir Kamaal Khan, Gulabchand K. Gupta, Z.A. Usmani 26. A SOFTWARE REVERSE ENGINEERING METHODOLOGY FOR LEGACY 244-248 MODERNIZATION, Oladipo Onaolapo Francisca1 and Anigbogu Sylvanus Okwudili, 27. OPTIMUM POWER LOSS IN EIGHT POLE RADIAL MAGNETIC BEARING USING GA, 249-261 Santosh Shelke and Rapur Venkata Chalam 28. REAL TIME ANPR FOR VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION USING NEURAL NETWORK, 262-268 Subhash Tatale and Akhil Khare 29. AN EFFICIENT FRAMEWORK FOR CHANNEL CODING IN HIGH SPEED LINKS, 269-277 Paradesi Leela Sravanthi & K. Ashok Babu 30. TRANSITION METAL CATALYZED/NaBH4/MeOH REDUCTION OF NITRO, 278-282 CARBONYL, AROMATICS TO HYDROGENATED PRODUCTS AT ROOM TEMPERATURE, Ateeq Rahman and Salem S Al Deyab 31. PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF TWO ON-DEMANDS ROUTING PROTOCOLS FOR 283-289 MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORKS, Prem Chand and Deepak Kumar 32. CROSS-LAYER BASED QOS ROUTING PROTOCOL ANALYSIS BASED ON NODES FOR 290-298 802.16 WIMAX NETWORKS, A.Maheswara Rao, S.Varadarajan, M.N.Giri Prasad 33. UNIT COSTS ESTIMATION IN SUGAR PLANT USING MULTIPLE REGRESSION LEAST 299-306 SQUARES METHOD, Samsher Kadir Sheikh and Manik Hapse 34. ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK AND NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF THE HEAT 307-314 REGENERATIVE CYCLE IN POROUS MEDIUM ENGINE, Udayraj, A. Ramaraju 35. HYBRID TRANSACTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTED REAL-TIME DATABASE 315-321 SYSTEM, Gyanendra Kumar Gupta, A. K. Sharma and Vishnu Swaroop 36. A FAST PARTIAL IMAGE ENCRYPTION SCHEME WITH WAVELET TRANSFORM AND 322-331 RC4, Sapna Sasidharan and Deepu Sleeba Philip 37. IMPROVE SIX-SIGMA MANAGEMENT BY FORECASTING PRODUCTION QUANTITY 332-342 USING IMAGE VERIFICATION QUALITY TOOL, ii Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. i-iii
  3. 3. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 M.S. Ibrahim, M.A.R.Mansour and A.M. Abed 38. OPTIMAL PATH FOR MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORKS USING REACTIVE ROUTING 343-348 PROTOCOL, Akshatha. P. S, Namita Khurana, Anju Rathi 39. POWER QUALITY RELATED APPROACH IN SPACE VECTOR CONVERTER, 349-355 S. Debdas, M.F.Quereshi, D.Chandrakar and D.Pansari 40. SEARCH RESULT CLUSTERING FOR WEB PERSONALIZATION, 356-363 Kavita D. Satokar, A. R. Khare 41. HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING AND VIRTUAL NETWORKING IN THE AREA OF 364-373 BIOMETRICS, Jadala Vijaya, Chandra, Roop Singh Thakur, Mahesh Kumar Thota 42. STATUS AND ROLE OF ICT IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION TO BUILD DIGITAL 374-383 SOCIETY IN BANGLADESH: PERSPECTIVE OF A DIVISIONAL CITY, KHULNA , Anupam Kumar Bairagi1 , S. A. Ahsan Rajon2 and Tuhin Roy 43. PIECEWISE VECTOR QUANTIZATION APPROXIMATION FOR EFFICIENT SIMILARITY 384-387 ANALYSIS OF TIME SERIES IN DATA MINING, Pushpendra Singh Sisodia, Ruchi Davey, Naveen Hemrajani, Savita Shivani 44. DESIGN AND MODELING OF TRAVELLING WAVE ELECTRODE ON 388-394 ELECTROABSORPTION MODULATOR BASED ON ASYMMETRIC INTRA-STEP- BARRIER COUPLED DOUBLE STRAINED QUANTUM WELLS ACTIVE LAYER, Kambiz Abedi 45. POWER SYSTEM STABILITY IMPROVEMENT USING FACTS WITH EXPERT SYSTEMS, 395-404 G.Ramana, B. V. Sanker Ram 46. IMPROVEMENT OF DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE OF THREE-AREA THERMAL SYSTEM 405-412 UNDER DEREGULATED ENVIRONMENT USING HVDC LINK, T. Anil Kumar, N. Venkata Ramana 47. VOLTAGE SECURITY IMPROVEMENT USING FUZZY LOGIC SYSTEMS, 413-421 G.Ramana, B. V. Sanker Ram 48. EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE OF SYNTHESIS ON X-RAY, IR PROPERTIES OF MG-ZN 422-429 FERRITES PREPARED BY OXALATE CO-PRECIPITATION METHOD, S.S. Khot, N. S. Shinde, B.P. Ladgaonkar, B.B. Kale and S.C. Watawe 49. An Improved Energy Efficient Medium Access Control Protocol For Wireless 430-436 Sensor Networks, K. P. Sampoornam, K. Rameshwaran iii Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. i-iii
  4. 4. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 ANALOG INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DESIGN AND TESTING USING THE FIELD PROGRAMMABLE ANALOG ARRAY TECHNOLOGY Mouna Karmani, Chiraz Khedhiri, Belgacem Hamdi Electronics and Microelectronics Laboratory, Monastir, Tunisia.ABSTRACTDue to their reliability, performance and rapid prototyping, programmable logic devices overcome the use ofASICs in the digital system design. However, the similar solution for analog signals was not so easy to find. Butthe evolutionary trend in Very Large Scale Integrated (VLSI) circuits technologies fuelled by fierce industrialcompetition to reduce integrated circuits (ICs) cost and time to market has led to design the Field-Programmable Analog Array (FPAA) which is the analog equivalent of the Field Programmable Gate Array(FPGA). In fact, the use of FPAAs reduces the complexity of analog design, decreases the time to market andallows products to be easily updated and improved outside the manufacturing environment. Thus, thereconfigurable feature of FPAAs enables real time updating of analog functions within the system using theConfigurable Analog Blocks (CABs) system and appropriate software. In this paper, an interesting analogphase shift detection circuit based on FPAA architecture is presented. In fact, the phase shift detection circuitwill distinguish a faulty circuit from a faulty-free one by controlling the phase shift between their correspondingoutputs. The system is practically designed and simulated by using the AN221E04 board which is an Anadigmproduct. The Circuit validation was carried out using the AnadigmDesigner®2 software.KEYWORDSAnalog integrated circuits, design, FPAA, test, phase shift detection circuit I. INTRODUCTIONWith the continuous increase of integration densities and complexities, the tedious and hard process ofdesigning and implementing analog integrated circuits could often take weeks or even months [1].Consequently, analog and mixed semiconductor designers have begun to move design methodologiesto higher levels of abstraction in order to reduce the analog design complexity [2]. Also, the use ofprogrammable circuits further facilitates the task of designing complex analog ICs and offers otheradvantages. In fact the use of field programmable devices decreases the time to market and allows thepossibility of updating the considered circuit design outside of the manufacturing environment. Thus,field programmable devices can be programmed and reprogrammed not only to update a design but tooffer the possibility of error correction [1-2].“In the digital domain, programmable logic devices (PLDs) have a large impact on the developmentof custom digital chips by enabling the designer to try custom designs on easily-reconfigurablehardware. Since their conception in the late 1960s, PLDs have evolved into today’s high-densityFPGAs. In addition, most of the digital processing is currently done through FPGA circuits” [1].However, reconfigurable analog hardware has been progressing much more slowly. In fact, the fieldprogrammable analog array technology appeared in 1980’s [3-4]. The commercial FPAA did notreach the market until 1996 [1]. And the Anadigm FPAA technology was made commerciallyavailable just in 2000 [5].An FPAA is an integrated circuit built in Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor (CMOS)technology that can be programmed and reprogrammed to perform a large set of analog circuitfunctions. Using the AnadigmDesigner®2 software and its library of analog circuit functions, adesigner can easily and rapidly design a circuit that would previously have taken months to design 1 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  5. 5. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963and test. The circuit configuration files are downloaded into the FPAA from a PC or system controlleror from an attached EEPROM [6].Modern FPAAs like Anadigm products can contain analog to digital converters that facilitate theinterfacing of analog systems with other digital circuits like DSP, FPGAs and microcontrollers [1].FPAAs are used for research and custom analog signal processing. In fact, this technology enables thereal-time software control of analog system peripherals. It is also used in intelligent sensorsimplementation, adaptive filtering, self-calibrating systems and ultra-low frequency analog signalconditioning [6].The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 introduces the FPAA architecture based on switchedcapacitor technology. We then present The AN221E04 Anadigm board in section 3. The testingimportance in CMOS analog integrated circuits and the phase shifte defenition are discussed insection 4. The proposed test methodology using the FPAA technology is presented in section 6. Thesimulation results are given in section 6. Finally, we conclude in section 7. II. THE FPAA ARCHITECTURE USING THE SWITCHED CAPACITOR TECHNOLOGY“FPAA devices typically contain a small number of CABs (Configurable Analog Blocks). Theresources of each CAB vary widely between commercial and research devices” [4-7]. In this paper, wefocus on Anadigm’s FPAA family based on switched capacitor technology. This technology is thetechnique by which an equivalent resistance can be implemented by alternatively switching the inputsof a capacitor. In fact, an effective resistance can be implemented using switched capacitors. Its valuedepends on the capacity but changes according to the sampling frequency (f =1/T). Fig. 1 illustrateshow switched capacitors are configured as resistors [5-6]. Figure 1: Switched capacitor configured as a resistorThe most important element in FPAA is the Configurable Analogue Block (CAB), which includes anoperational amplifier and manipulates a network of switched capacitor technology. In the next sectionwe present the Anadigm® AN221E04 FPAA device which is based on switched capacitor technology[6].III. THE AN221E04 ARCHITECTUREThe AN221E04 device consists of a 2x2 matrix of fully Configurable Analog Blocks, surrounded byprogrammable interconnect resources and analog input/output cells with active elements.Configuration data is stored in an on-chip SRAM configuration memory. The AN221E04 devicefeatures six input/output cells. In fact, The AN221E04 devices have four configurable I/O cells andtwo dedicated output cells [6]. The architectural overview of the AN221E04 device is given by Fig. 2. 2 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  6. 6. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Figure 2: Architectural overview of the AN221E04 device [6]The circuit design is enabled using AnadigmDesigner®2 software, which includes a large library ofanalog circuit functions such as gain, summing, filtering, etc... These circuit functions are representedas CAMs (Configurable Analog Modules) which are configurable blocks mapped onto portions ofCABs. The circuit implementation is established through a serial interface on the AN221E04evaluation board using the AnadigmDesigner®2 software, which includes a circuit simulator and aprogramming device. A single AN221E04 can thus be programmed and reprogrammed to implementmultiple analog functions [6].IV. THE TESTING IMPORTANCE IN CMOS ANALOG INTEGRATED CIRCUITSOver the past decades, Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor (CMOS) technology scaling hasbeen a primary driver of the electronics industry and has provided a denser and faster integration [8-9]. The need for more performance and integration has accelerated the scaling trends in almost everydevice. In addition, analog and mixed integrated circuit design and testing have become a realchallenge to ensure the functionality and quality of the product especially for safety-criticalapplications [10-11].In fact, safety-critical systems have to function correctly even in presence of faults because they couldcause injury or loss of human life if they fail or encounter errors. The automobile, aerospace, medical,nuclear and military systems are examples of extremely safety-critical applications [12]. Safety-critical applications have strict time and cost constraints, which means that not only faults have to betolerated but also the constraints should be satisfied. Hence, efficient system design approaches withconsideration of fault tolerance are required [12]. In addition, in safety-critical applications, thehardware redundancy can be tolerated to provide the required level of fault tolerance.In fact, incorrectness in hardware systems may be described in different terms as defect, error, faultand failure. These terms are quite a bit confusing. They will be defined as follows [10-13-14-15]:Failure: A failure is a situation in which a system (or part of a system) is not performing its intendedfunction. So, we regard as failure rates when we consider that the system doesn’t provide its expectedsystem function.Defect: A defect in a hardware system is the unintended difference between the implementedhardware and its intended design.Fault: A representation of a defect at the abstract level is called a fault. Faults are physical or logicaldefects in the device design or implementation.Error: A wrong output signal produced by a defective system is called an error. Error is the result ofthe fault and can induce the system failure. 3 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  7. 7. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963Defining the set of test measurements is an important step in any testing strategy. This set includes allproperties and test parameters which can be monitored during the test phase. In the next case studysection, we consider the phase shift obtained between the fault free circuit output and the faulty one.The phase shift definitionTwo sinusoidal waveforms having the same amplitude and the same frequency (f=1/T) are said in “inphase” if they are superimposed. Otherwise, if the two waves are of the same amplitude andfrequency but they are out of step with each other they are said dephased. In technical terms, this iscalled a phase shift [16]. The phase shift of a sinusoidal waveform is the angle φ in degrees or radiansthat the waveform has shifted from a certain reference point along the horizontal zero axis. The phaseshift can also be expressed as a time shift of τ seconds representing a fraction of the time period T[17]. The next figure illustrates two sinusoidal waveforms phase shifted by 90°. Figure 2: Two sine waves phase shifted by 90°.The phase shift between the two sine waves can be expressed by: φ= 2πτ/T in radians (3)And φ= 360τ/T in degrees (4)Where T is the sine wave’s period which is equal to 50µs and τ is the time lag between the twosignals which is equal to 12.5µs. So, we can verify the phase shift value between the two signalsshown above using the equation (2): φ=360*12.5/50=90° V. THE PROPOSED TESTING METHODOLOGY USING THE FPAA TECHNOLOGYThe proposed testing methodology is base on hardware redundancy. In factwe will distinguish a faulty circuit from a fault-free one by controlling the phase shift between the twoconsidered outputs. The general test procedure is presented by Fig. 3. 4 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  8. 8. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Figure 3: The proposed test approach using the AN221E04 FPAA deviceThereby, the fault detection is obtained through comparing the analog output voltage of the circuitunder test (V1) to a fault free one (V2). If the testing circuit configured using the AN221E04 boarddetect a phase shift between the circuit under test output and the faulty free one we assume that thecircuit under test gives a wrong signal output. Consequently, the Pass/Fail signal switches from lowlevel (Pass) to high level (Fail) to indicate that the circuit probably contains faults.Once the fault is detected, we precede to the correctness acts. In fact, the correctness act in our casecan be done by replacing the output of the faulty circuit under test by the fault-free one. The hardwareredundancy used to detect faults causing phase shift errors in the CUT can be used to correct thesefaults. Therefore, we have a fault tolerance architecture which assures a correct system functioningeven in presence of faults. This fault tolerance mechanism is so important especially for safety-criticalsystems to avoid the system failure which can cause real damages.The phase shift detection circuit is illustrated by the circuit diagram given by Fig. 4. Figure 4: The bloc diagram illustrating the phase shift detection circuitThe two analog comparators C1 and C2 are used to compare to zero (ground) respectively the twosignals V1 and V2. So, the output of each comparator is a digital signal which switches to the highlevel (VDD) when the correspondent signal is greater than zero. Otherwise it should switch to the lowlevel (VSS). C3 is a dual comparator used to compare the two digital comparators outputs VC1 andVC2. In fact, the Pass/Fail signal which is the output of the comparator C3 switches from the low levelto the high level when VC1 < VC2. 5 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  9. 9. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963The Circuit design and implementation are enabled using AnadigmDesigner®2 software. The circuitdesign illustrating our test methodology is presented in Fig. 4. Figure 4: the phase shift detection circuit implemented using the AN221E04 FPAA deviceFrom fig. 2, we note that the phase shift detection circuit implementation only needs the use of threeCAM’s which are two comparators (C1 and C2) and a Gain Stage with Switchable Inputs (C3). Asshown in the resource panel given by the same figure the circuit implementation requires the use ofthree CABs (CAB 1, 2 and 3).VI. SIMULATION RESULTSThe fault-free (V2) and the faulty (V1) outputs simulation are given by Fig. 5. In this case the phaseshift absolute value between the two signals is equal to 30°. Figure 5: the fault-free and the faulty outputs simulationFig. 6 illustrates the fault-free and the first comparator (C1) outputs simulation results. In fact, the firstcomparator compares the fault-free output (V2) to the ground. If the considered output is higher than0mv the comparator output switches to the high level (5V) otherwise it switches to the low level (-5V). 6 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  10. 10. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Figure 6: The fault-free and the first comparator outputs simulation resultsFig. 7 illustrates the faulty output of the circuit under test and the second comparator (C2) outputsimulation results. Figure 7: The faulty and the second comparator outputs simulation resultsThe second comparator (C2) compares the output under test to the ground. If the considered output ishigher than 0mv the comparator output switches to the high level otherwise it switches to the lowlevel.Fig. 8 presents the superposed comparator’s outputs and the Pass/Fail signal which is the output of theGain Stage with Switchable Inputs CAM (C3) used as a dual comparator. Figure 8: the comparators and the Pass/Fail outputs simulation results 7 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  11. 11. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011. ©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Fig. 9 presents the fault-free, the faulty and the Pass/Fail outputs simulation results. Figure 9: the fault-free, the faulty and the Pass/Fail outputs simulation results Simulation results given by Fig. 9 ensure that the phase shift detection circuit behaves as intended. In fact, the phase shift existing between the fault-free and the faulty outputs is detected by the phase shift detection circuit. Thus, when the Pass/Fail signal passes to the high level, we assume that the output signal of the circuit under test presents a phase shift error. In addition, the information contained in the Pass/Fail signal enables us to know the exact value of the phase shift between the fault-free and the faulty outputs. Fig. 10 illustrates only the Pass/Fail signal. Figure 9: The Pass/Fail signal In fact, τ and T are respectively the time high and the period of the Pass/Fail signal. The phase shift value in degree is equal to 360* τ /T. In our case, the shift value obtained by simulation is equal to 360*(33.875-31.125)/(64.375-33.875)=32.45°.VII. CONCLUSION In this paper, we have presented the Field Programmable Analog Arrays technology which introduces new opportunities to improve analog circuit design and signal processing by providing a method for analog systems rapid prototyping. FPAAs elevate the design and implementation process of analog design to high levels of abstraction. This reduces integrated circuit test costs and time to market. In fact, an FPAA-based approach phase shift detection circuit is designed and simulated using AnadigmDesigner®2 software. Simulation results show that the technique is effective and prove that the analog integrated circuit design and testing become easier using the Field Programmable Analog Array technology. REFERENCES [1] P.Hasler, Tyson S. Hall, & CM. Twig, (2005) “Large-scale field-programmable analog array”, Institute of Neuromorphic Engineering publication. 8 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  12. 12. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963[2] S.Pateras, (2005) “The System-on-Chip Integration Challenge: The Need for Design-for-Debug Tools andTechnologies”.[3] P. Chow, S. O. Seo, J. Rose, K. Chung, G. Paez-Monzon, & I. Rahardja, (1999) “The design of an SRAM-based field-programmable gate array-part I: architecture”, IEEE Trans. on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI).[4] T. Hall, D. Anderson, & P. Hasler, (2002) “Field-Programmable Analog Arrays: A floating-gate Approach”12th Int’l Conf. on Field Programmable Logic and Applications, Montpellier, France.[5] P.DONG, (2006) “Design, analysis and reat-time realization of artificial neural network for control andclassification” PhD thesis.[6] ANADIGM data sheet (2003-2010).[7] Tyson S. Hall, (2004) “field programmable analog arrays:a floating gate approach”, PhD thesis.[8] C. Mead, (1972) “Fundamental limitations in microelectronics – I. MOS technology”, SolidStateElectronics, vol. 15, pp. 819–829.[9] R. Puri, T. Karnik & R. Joshi, (2006) “Technology Impacts on sub-90nm CMOS Circuit Design & Designmethodologies,” Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on VLSI Design.[10] M, Bushnell & Agrawal, Vishwani, (2002) “Essentials of Electronic Testing for Digital, Memory, andMixed-Signal VLSI Circuits”.[11] M. Karmani, C. Khedhiri & B. Hamdi, (2011) “Design and test challenges in Nano-scale analog and mixedCMOS technology”, International Journal of VLSI design & Communication Systems (VLSICS) Vol.2, No.2.[12] V. Izosimov, (2006)”Scheduling and Optimization of Fault-Tolerant Distributed Embedded Systems”, PhDthesis.[13] “Testing Embedded Systems”, courses, lesson38.[14] ISO Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing, ISO/IEC 10746-2:1996 (E), 1996.[15] A. Avizienis, J. Laprie, B. Randell & C. Landwehr, (2004) “Basic Concepts and Taxonomy for Dependableand Secure Computing” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol.1.[16] http://www.allaboutcircuits.com[17] http://www.electronics-tutorials.wsAuthorsMouna KARMANI is with the Electronics & Microelectronics Laboratory, Monastir, Tunisia. She isPursuing a PH.D in Electronics & microelectronics design and testing at Tunis University, Tunisia.Email: mouna.karmani@yahoo.frChiraz KHEDHIRI is with the Electronics & Microelectronics Laboratory, Monastir, Tunisia. She isPursuing a PH.D in Electronics & microelectronics design and testing at Tunis University, Tunisia.Email: chirazkhedhiri@yahoo.frBelgacem HAMDI is with the Electronics & Microelectronics Laboratory, Monastir, Tunisia. Ph.D inMicroelectronics from INP Grenoble (France) & Assistant Professor at ISSAT Sousse, Tunisia.Email: belgacem.hamdi@issatgb.rnu.tn 9 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 1-9
  13. 13. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 PROCESS MATURITY ASSESSMENT OF THE NIGERIAN SOFTWARE INDUSTRY Kehinde Aregbesola1, Babatunde O. Akinkunmi2, Olalekan S. Akinola3 1 Salem University, Lokoja, Kogi State, Nigeria. 2&3 Department of Computer Science, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.ABSTRACTCapability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a recognized tool for performing software process maturityand capability evaluation in software organizations. Experience with software companies in Nigeria shows thatmost project management activities do not follow the conventional practices. The study considered the extent towhich companies make use of organizational software process in performing their software developmentactivities. The extent to which software products are developed and documented as well as level of adherence toexisting organizational software process were studied among Twenty-six (26) selected software companies inNigeria. The selection criteria were based on: availability of personnel to provide adequate information; size ofthe development team; how established the companies are; and geographical distribution. Our study revealedthat the software companies do not have adequate documentation of their organizational software process, andthat most of the companies carry out their software development process by means of implicit in-house methods.KEYWORDS: Software Process, Software Industry, CMMI, Nigeria I. INTRODUCTIONSuccess in software development is expected to be repeatable if the team involved is to be describedas dependable. Dependability in software development can only be achieved through rigoroussoftware development processes and project management practices. Understanding organizationalgoals and aspirations, is always the first step in making progress of any kind.This study focuses on knowing the current state of software process maturity level of the Nigeriansoftware industry. Nigeria is a strategic market for application software in the African continent. TheNigerian software industry has a strategic influence in West Africa. The bulk of the Nigerian softwareindustry is located in the commercial capital of Lagos. According to the 2004 study by Soriyan andHeeks [13, 14], Lagos, which is widely regarded as Nigeria’s “economic capital”, accounts for 52software companies representing about 49 percent of the software companies in Nigeria.The study was conducted to determine the Capability and Maturity levels of the Nigerian softwareindustry using the CMMI Model. The specific objectives of the study are listed below: • Survey the software practices adopted by a good number of software companies; • Apply the SEI Maturity Questionnaire to further gather data; • Properly summarize and document the data collected; • Evaluate the practices in the industry based on key process areas. • Apply CMMI methods to determine the maturity and capability levels of the industry.The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews some literatures related to this work.Section 3 discusses the approach applied in performing the study. Section 4 discusses the findings ofthe study. Section five summarizes the conclusions drawn from the study. 10 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  14. 14. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 II. LITERATURE REVIEWHeyworth [5] described the characteristics of projects to include bringing about a change of state inentities of concern within well planned time frames. This indicates a strong relationship betweenprojects and processes.A prior study comparing CMMI appraisals for different countries have been reported by Urtans [6].The study revealed the observed trends in CMM to include the following: • Higher maturity levels seen mostly outside the USA • India is the leader in CMM • China and Korea are emerging as outsourcing centers Increasing number of high maturity companies • Canada, Ireland, Australia considered for outsourcing due to native English Starting to report lower levels of CMM • The number of companies each year using CMM to assess their software management practices more than doubles every five yearsAccording to Heeks [7, 8], production of software provides many potential benefits for developingcountries, including creation of jobs, skills and income. According to him also, selling softwareservices to the domestic market is the choice of most developing countries software enterprises, but ittypically represents a survival strategy more than a development strategy. He further iterated that mostinformation systems - including current ICT projects - in developing countries fail either totally orpartially due to the notion he described as design-reality gaps.Soriyan and Heeks [13] gave a very descriptive view of the Nigerian software industry. According tothem, 43.7% of the companies had 1-5 IT professionals, 27.2% had 6-15, 23.3% had 16-50, and only5.8% of firms had more than 50 IT professionals. Also, 51% of the companies were involved withservicing imported applications, 25% were involved with Developing and servicing local applications,while 24% were involved with servicing and developing local and imported applications. Thisbasically reveals that most of the software companies in the industry are small, and not as muchattention as expected is given to developing and servicing local applications. Virtually no attention isgiven to the development of software tool. Also, their work revealed that Nigerian software industryshowed significant use of formal methods but with a strong tendency to rely on in-house-developedmethods rather than industry standards.The work of Paulk et al [9, 10] produced the Maturity Questionnaire (MQ) which formed the majorinstrument of information elicitation during the course of the study discussed in this paper. Accordingto Ahern et al [1], Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) appraisalscan help organizations identify the strengths and weaknesses of their current processes, reveal crucialdevelopment and acquisition risks, set priorities for improvement plans, derive capability and maturitylevel ratings, and even perform realistic benchmarking.For this study we used the maturity questionnaire for eliciting information from surveyed companies,while2.1. The Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)CMMI is a model for evaluating the maturity of software development process. It was developed fromCMM. CMMI stands for Capability Maturity Model Integration. It is a method to evaluate andmeasure the maturity of the software development process of an organization. It measures thematurity of the software development process on a scale of 1 to 5. It was developed by the SoftwareEngineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, USA [3, 12].2.2. Maturity LevelA maturity level can be said to be a well-defined evolutionary plateau toward achieving a maturesoftware process. Each maturity level provides a layer in the foundation for continuous processimprovement. In CMMI models, there are five maturity levels designated by the numbers 1 through 5. 11 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  15. 15. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19635 Focuses on continuous process improvement Optimizing4 Process measured and controlled Quantitatively3 Process characterized for the organization and is Defined2 Characterized for projects and is often Managed1 Unpredictable, poorly controlled, and Initial Fig. 1: The Five Levels of CMMI [3, 12]Maturity levels consist of a predefined set of process areas. The maturity levels are measured by theachievement of the specific and generic goals that apply to each predefined set of process areas. Thefollowing sections describe the characteristics of organizations at each maturity level.Maturity Level 1 – Initial: Processes are usually ad hoc and chaotic. They do not provide stable workenvironment. Success depends on the competence and heroics of the people in the organization andnot on the use of proven processes.Maturity Level 2 – Managed: The projects of the organization have ensured that requirements aremanaged and that processes are planned performed, measured, and controlled. They ensure thatexisting practices are retained during times of stress.Maturity Level 3 – Defined: Processes are well characterized and understood, and are described instandards, procedures, tools, and methods.Maturity Level 4 - Quantitatively Managed: At maturity level 4 sub-processes are selected thatsignificantly contribute to overall process performance. These selected sub-processes are controlledusing statistical and other quantitative techniques.Maturity Level 5 – Optimizing: Processes are continually improved based on a quantitativeunderstanding of the common causes of variation inherent in processes. Maturity level 5 focuses oncontinually improving process performance.Maturity levels should not be skipped. Each maturity level provides a necessary foundation foreffective implementation of processes at the next level. • Higher level processes have less chance of success without the discipline provided by lower levels. • The effect of innovation can be obscured in a noisy process.Higher maturity level processes may be performed by organizations at lower maturity levels, with therisk of not being consistently applied in a crisis [3].2.3. Capability LevelA capability level is a well-defined evolutionary plateau describing the organizations capabilityrelative to a process area. Capability levels are cumulative, i.e., a higher capability level includes theattributes of the lower levels. In CMMI models with a continuous representation, there are sixcapability levels designated by the numbers 0 through 5.Capability Level 0 – Incomplete: An "incomplete process" is a process that is either not performed orpartially performed. One or more of the specific goals of the process area are not satisfied and nogeneric goals exist for this level.Capability Level 1 – Performed: This is a process that is expected to perform all of the CapabilityLevel 1 specific and generic practices. Performance may not be stable and may not meet specific 12 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  16. 16. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963objectives such as quality, and cost, but useful work can be done. It means that you are doingsomething but you cannot prove that it really works for you.Capability Level 2 – Managed: A managed process is planned, performed, monitored, and controlledfor individual projects, groups, or stand-alone processes to achieve a given purpose. Managing theprocess achieves both the model objectives for the process as well as other objectives, such as cost,schedule, and quality.Capability Level 3 – Defined: A defined process is a managed (capability level 2) process that istailored from the organizations set of standard processes according to the organizations tailoringguidelines, and contributes work products, measures, and other process-improvement information tothe organizational process assets.Capability Level 4 – Quantitatively Managed: A quantitatively managed process is a defined(capability level 3) process that is controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques.Quantitative objectives for quality and process performance are established and used as criteria inmanaging the process.Capability Level 5 – Optimizing: An optimizing process is a quantitatively managed process that isimproved, based on an understanding of the common causes of process variation inherent in theprocess. It focuses on continually improving process performance through both incremental andinnovative improvements [3].Fusaro et al [11] did some work on the reliability test of the SEI MQ. According to them, theSpearman-Brown formula was used to make all of the reliability estimates applicable to instrumentsof equal lengths. During their study, a point was noted where all of the internal consistency values forfull length instruments were above the 0.9 minimal threshold. For this reason, the full lengthinstrument was therefore considered to be internally consistent for practical purposes. III. RESEARCH DESIGN, METHODOLOGY AND APPROACHThis study was aimed at assessing software process maturity in the Nigerian software industry. In thissection, the methodology and approach we took in carrying out this study is outlined.The purpose of this section is to: • Discuss the research philosophy used in this work; • Expound the research strategy adopted in this work, including the research methodologies adopted; • Introduce the research instruments we adopted in the carrying out the research.Two major research methodologies were applied in performing this study. These methodologies aresurvey research and case study research methodologies.Survey Research: According to our research objectives, we surveyed the software practices adoptedby many of the Nigerian software companies. For this study 30 Nigerian software companies werestudied. 27 of those companies were based in Lagos southwestern Nigeria, while three were based inAsaba, south-southern Nigeria. The sampling method is stratified in the sense that the majority ofNigeria’s software companies were based in Lagos.An instrument – the SEI Maturity Questionnaire (MQ) – was used to gather information aboutsoftware process implementation within the companies covered. This instrument was administered tosolutions developers and software project managers in the industry. This instrument served as the keydata collection tool for the survey.Case Study Research: Some of the companies were taken as case studies for more detailedinvestigation. A direct observation of their activities and environment was carried out. Indirectobservation and measurement of process related phenomena was also performed. The companiesinvolved were visited and observed over a period of time to see how they actually implement theirsoftware development process. Both structured and unstructured interviews were also used to solicitinformation. Documentation, such as written, printed and electronic information about the companyand its operations were another method by which information was gathered. 13 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  17. 17. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963In order to analyze the current situation in the Nigerian software industry, it is essential to have avalidated and reliable instrument for the collection of the information required. For this reason, theSEI Maturity Questionnaire was adopted.3.1 The Software Process SEI Maturity Questionnaire (MQ)The software process maturity questionnaire (MQ) replaces the 1987 version of the maturityquestionnaire, CMU/SEI-87-TR-23, in the 1994 set of SEI appraisal products. This version of thequestionnaire is based on the capability maturity model (CMM) v1.1. It has been designed for use inthe new CMM-based software process appraisal methods: the CMM-based appraisal for internalprocess improvement (CBA IPI) which is the update of the original software process assessment(SPA) method, CMM-based software capability evaluations (SCEs), and the interim profile method.The questionnaire focuses solely on process issues, specifically those derived from the CMM. Thequestionnaire is organized by CMM key process areas (KPAs) and covers all 18 KPAs of the CMM.It addresses each KPA goal in the CMM but not all of the key practices. By keeping the questions toonly 6 to 8 per KPA, the questionnaire can usually be completed in one hour [4]. IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATIONIn as much as the Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) is anappraisal method that meets all of the Appraisal Requirements for CMMI (ARC), and currently theonly SEI approved Class A appraisal method, it was used in appraising the industry.4.1 Evaluation of Research FindingsOut of the 30 companies surveyed, only responses from 26 companies were found useful. Responsesfrom four companies were either inconsistent or could not be verified. As such, the evaluation of thecompanies was based on responses from 26 companies. 23 of these were based in Lagos, while threewere based in Asaba.In order to meet the objective of this study, the key practices were organized according to key processareas (labeled in Roman numerals). The key process areas were organized according to maturity level.Only the result for maturity level 2 is discussed this section. This is because an evaluation of the keypractices at maturity level 2 suffices to arrive at a conclusion as to which maturity level the Nigeriansoftware industry belongs.To appraise an organization using the Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement(SCAMPI), the organization (Industry) is considered to have reached a particular level of maturitywhen it has met with all of the objectives/practices within each of the key process areas from maturitylevel 2 to the maturity level in question. This work shall therefore progress in that order, starting withthe appraisal of the key process areas and practices found within maturity level2, until a point isreached where all the objectives/practices associated with a particular KPA are not met.In the instrument that was administered, “Yes” connotes that the organizations perform the specifiedpractice, while “No” means that the organization does not perform the specified practice. In thesummary tables found in this section of the work: The “Yes” column indicates the number of companies that perform the specified practice; The “No” column indicates the number of companies that do not perform the specified practice; Both the “Does Not Apply” and the “Don’t Know” column values are used in the appraisal to indicate the amount of organizational unawareness in the industry; Percentage values are recomputed for the number of explicit (“yes” or “no”) responses gathered, and would be used as a major appraisal factor. 14 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  18. 18. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19634.2 Evaluation of the Results Obtained for Maturity Level 2 (Managed)4.2.1. Requirement Management Table 1: Requirement Management I Requirement Management Does Don’t QUESTIONS (Key Practices) Yes No Not Know Apply Are system requirements allocated to software used to 16 4 3 3 1 establish a baseline for software engineering and management use? – (*) As the systems requirements allocated to software 20 4 0 2 2 change, are the necessary adjustments to software plans, work products, and activities made? – (**) Does the project follow a written organizational policy 7 13 4 2 3 for managing the system requirements allocated to software? – (***) Are the people in the project that are charged with managing the allocated requirements trained in the 7 11 4 4 4 procedures for managing allocated requirements? – (****) Are measurements used to determine the status of the activities performed for managing the allocated 18 2 1 5 5 requirements (e.g., total number of requirements changes that are proposed, open, approved, and incorporated into the baseline). – (*****) Are the activities for managing allocated requirements on 3 9 8 6 6 the project subjected to SQA review? – (******) 45.5% 27.6% 12.8% 14.1% Fig.2 Requirement Management 25 20 15 Yes No 10 Does Not Apply Don’t Know 5 0 (*) (**) (***) (****) (*****) (******)From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 62.3% bias for the performance of requirement management associated practices,while 37.7% bias holds for non performance of requirement management associated practices.Basically, since industry wide, the “Yes” column contains values greater than zero; it means that atleast one company performs one or more of the practices associated with the requirement managementkey process area. 15 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  19. 19. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19634.2.2. Software Project Planning Table 2: Software Project Planning II Software Project Planning Does Don’t QUESTIONS (Key Practices) Yes No Not Kno Apply w Are estimates (e.g., size, cost, and schedule) 1 documented for use in planning and tracking the 24 2 0 0 software project? – (*) Do the software plans document the activities to be 2 performed and the commitments made for the software 16 5 3 2 project? – (**) Do all affected groups and individuals agree to their 14 12 0 0 3 commitments related to the software project? – (***) Does the project follow a written organizational policy 2 17 2 5 4 for planning a software project? – (****) Are adequate resources provided for planning the 5 software project (e.g., funding and experienced 7 15 4 0 individuals)? – (*****) Are measurements used to determine the status of the activities for planning the software project (e.g., 6 completion of milestones for the project planning 18 6 1 1 activities as compared to the plan)? – (******) Does the project manager review the activities for 7 planning the software project on both a periodic and 21 4 0 1 event-driven basis? – (*******) 56.0% 33.5% 5.5% 4.9%From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 62.6% bias for the software project planning associated practices, while a 37.4%bias holds for non performance of software project planning associated practices. Basically, sinceindustry wide, the “Yes” column contains values greater than zero; it means that at least one companyperforms one or more of the practices associated with the software project planning key process area. 16 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  20. 20. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 4.2.3. Software Project Tracking and Oversight Table 3: Software Project Tracking and Oversight III Software Project Tracking and Oversight Does Don’t QUESTIONS (Key Practices) Yes No Not Kno Apply w Are the project’s actual results (e.g., schedule, size, and cost) compared 12 5 4 51 with estimates in the software plans? – (*) Is corrective action taken when actual results deviate significantly from 18 7 1 02 the project’s software plans? – (**) Are changes in the software commitments agreed to by all affected 14 5 6 13 groups and individuals? – (***) Does the project follow a written organizational policy for both tracking 7 15 0 44 and controlling its software development activities? – (****) Is someone on the project assigned specific responsibilities for tracking5 software work products and activities (e.g., effort, schedule, and 17 5 4 0 budget)? – (*****) Are measurements used to determine the status of the activities for6 software tracking and oversight (e.g., total effort expended in 20 4 2 0 performing tracking and oversight activities)? – (******) Are the activities for software project tracking and oversight reviewed7 with senior management on a periodic basis (e.g., project performance, 19 4 1 2 open issues, risks, and action items)? – (*******) 58.8% 24.7% 9.9% 6.6%From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 70.4% bias for the software project tracking and oversight associated practices,while a 29.6% bias holds for non performance of software project tracking and oversight associatedpractices. Basically, since industry wide, the “Yes” column contains values greater than zero; it meansthat at least one company performs one or more of the practices associated with the software projecttracking and oversight key process area. 17 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  21. 21. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19634.2.4. Software Subcontract Management Table 4: Software Subcontract Management IV Software Subcontract Management Does QUESTIONS Don’t Yes No Not (Key Practices) Know Apply Is a documented procedure used for selecting 1 subcontractors based on their ability to perform the 6 14 3 3 work? – (*) Are changes to subcontracts made with the agreement 2 of both the prime contractor and the subcontractor? – 12 5 7 2 (**) Are periodic technical interchanges held with 12 8 1 5 3 subcontractors? – (***) Are the results and performance of the software 4 subcontractor tracked against their commitments? – 12 6 8 0 (****) Does the project follow a written organizational 5 8 7 6 5 policy for managing software subcontracts? – (*****) Are the people responsible for managing software 6 subcontracts trained in managing software 12 5 5 4 subcontracts? – (******) Are measurements used to determine the status of the activities for managing software subcontracts (e.g., 7 schedule status with respect to planned delivery dates and effort expended for managing the subcontract)? – 2 19 5 0 (*******) Are the software subcontract activities reviewed with 8 the project manager on both a periodic and event- 15 3 6 2 driven basis? – (********) 36.5% 32.7% 20.2% 10.6%From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 52.8% bias for the software subcontract management associated practices, while a47.2% bias holds for non performance of software subcontract management associated practices.Basically, since industry wide, the “Yes” column contains values greater than zero; it means that atleast one company performs one or more of the practices associated with the software subcontractmanagement key process area. 18 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  22. 22. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19634.2.5. Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Table 5: Software Quality Assurance (SQA) V Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Does QUESTIONS Don’t Yes No Not (Key Practices) Know Apply 1 Are SQA activities planned? – (*) 2 17 3 4 Does SQA provide objective verification that software 2 products and activities adhere to applicable standards, 2 7 4 13 procedures, and requirements? – (**) Are the results of SQA reviews and audits provided to affected groups and individuals (e.g., those who 3 performed the work and those who are responsible for 1 21 2 2 the work)? – (***) Are issues of noncompliance that are not resolved within the software project addressed by senior 4 management (e.g., deviations from applicable 3 13 3 7 standards)? – (****) Does the project follow a written organizational 2 19 2 3 5 policy for implementing SQA? – (*****) Are adequate resources provided for performing SQA activities (e.g., funding and a designated manager who 6 will receive and act on software noncompliance 3 22 1 0 items)? – (******) Are measurements used to determine the cost and schedule status of the activities performed for SQA 7 (e.g., work completed, effort and funds expended 1 24 0 1 compared to the plan)? – (*******) Are activities for SQA reviewed with senior 0 19 5 2 8 management on a periodic basis? – (********) 6.7% 68.3% 9.6% 15.4%From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 9.0% bias for the software quality assurance associated practices, while a 91.0%bias holds for non performance of software quality assurance associated practices. Basically, sinceindustry wide, the “Yes” column contains a zero value at some point; it means that no companyperforms one or more of the practices associated with the software quality assurance key process area. 19 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  23. 23. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963Industry wide, this is an explicit violation of the requirement for an industry to be at this currentmaturity level (2) under consideration.4.2.6. Software Configuration Management (SCM) Table 6: Software Configuration Management (SCM) VI Software Configuration Management (SCM) Does QUESTIONS Don’t Yes No Not (Key Practices) Know Apply Are software configuration management activities 1 planned for the project? – (*) 13 6 3 4 Has the project identified, controlled, and made 2 available the software work products through the use of configuration management? – (**) 14 4 4 4 Does the project follow a documented procedure to 3 control changes to configuration items/units? – (***) 7 16 2 1 Are standard reports on software baselines (e.g., software configuration control board minutes and 4 change request summary and status reports) distributed to affected groups and individuals? – (****) 6 19 1 0 Does the project follow a written organizational policy 5 for implementing software configuration management activities? – (*****) 0 22 2 2 Are project personnel trained to perform the software 6 configuration management activities for which they are responsible? – (******) 15 7 3 1 Are measurements used to determine the status of activities for software configuration management (e.g., 7 effort and funds expended for software configuration management activities)? – (*******) 5 20 0 1 Are periodic audits performed to verify that software 8 baselines conform to the documentation that defines them (e.g., by the SCM group)? – (********) 12 11 2 1 34.6% 50.5% 8.2% 6.7%From the table above, out of the total number of people who responded explicitly as either “Yes” or“No”, there was a 40.7% bias for the software configuration management associated practices, whilea 59.3% bias holds for non performance of software configuration management associated practices.Basically, since industry wide, the “Yes” column contains a zero value at some point; it means that nocompany performs one or more of the practices associated with the software configurationmanagement key process area. Industry wide, this is an explicit violation of the requirement for anindustry to be at this current maturity level (2) under consideration. 20 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  24. 24. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011. ©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 V. RESULT AND DISCUSSION The result of the study is expressed in terms of Software Process Maturity Assessment and Capability Assessment of the industry. The capability assessment is done based on individual KPAs while the maturity assessment is based on a specific collection of KPAs for each maturity level. 5.1. Software Process Maturity Assessment From the foregoing data in section 4, it can be deduced that due to the explicit violation of the requirement that at maturity level 2, an organization/industry has achieved all the specific and generic goals of the maturity level 2 process areas, it suffices to conclude that the Nigerian software industry does not belong to the SEI CMMI Maturity level 2. Hence, it suffices to conclude that the Nigerian software industry is at the SEI CMMI Maturity Level 1. 5.2. Key Process Area Capability Assessment The project management practice in the Nigerian software industry was evaluated based on the key process areas identified by the adopted SEI Maturity Questionnaire. Table 7 below gives a high level summary of the data collected from the research. The percentage values for the number of explicit “yes” or explicit “no” responses gathered are shown in the columns “(Yes/Yes+No)*100” and “(No/Yes+ No)*100” respectively. Table 7: Summary of Collected Data Does Don’t (Yes/Yes+No (No/Yes+NoS/N Key Process Area (KPA) Yes No Not Know )*100 )*100 Apply1 Requirements Management – (i) 45.51% 27.56% 12.82% 14.10% 62.28% 37.72%2 Software Project Planning – (ii) 56.04% 33.52% 5.49% 4.95% 62.58% 37.42%3 Software Project Tracking and 58.79% 24.73% 9.89% 6.59% 70.39% 29.61% Oversight – (iii)4 Software Subcontract Management – 36.54% 32.69% 20.19% 10.58% 52.78% 47.22% (iv)5 Software Quality Assurance – (v) 6.73% 68.27% 9.62% 15.38% 8.97% 91.03%6 Software Configuration Management 34.62% 50.48% 8.17% 6.73% 40.68% 59.32% – (vi)7 Organization Process Focus – (vii) 20.88% 46.15% 24.73% 8.24% 31.15% 68.85%8 Organization Process Definition – 3.85% 71.15% 15.38% 9.62% 5.13% 94.87% (viii)9 Training Program – (ix) 32.97% 53.85% 5.49% 7.69% 37.97% 62.03%10 Integrated Software Management – 5.77% 56.41% 25.00% 12.82% 9.28% 90.72% (x)11 Software Product Engineering – (xi) 13.46% 65.38% 11.54% 9.62% 17.07% 82.93%12 Intergroup Coordination – (xii) 38.46% 44.51% 6.59% 10.44% 46.36% 53.64%13 Peer Reviews – (xiii) 54.49% 33.33% 5.13% 7.05% 62.04% 37.96%14 Quantitative Process Management – 8.24% 73.08% 9.34% 9.34% 10.14% 89.86% (xiv)15 Software Quality Management – (xv) 24.18% 50.55% 10.99% 14.29% 32.35% 67.65%16 Defect Prevention – (xvi) 5.49% 82.42% 4.95% 7.14% 6.25% 93.75%17 Technology Change Management – 21.98% 62.64% 6.59% 8.79% 25.97% 74.03% (xvii)18 Process Change Management – 8.79% 65.38% 11.54% 14.29% 11.85% 88.15% (xviii) 21 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  25. 25. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Fig.8 Summary of Collected Data 100.00% 90.00% Yes 80.00% 70.00% No 60.00% Does Not Apply 50.00% 40.00% Don’t Know 30.00% 20.00% (Yes/Yes+No)*100 10.00% 0.00% (No/Yes+No)*100 (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi) (xii) (xiii) (xiv) (xv) (xvi) (xvii) (xviii)The conclusions arrived at in the succeeding subsections are based on the data drawn from table 7above.5.2.1 Requirements Management (RM)The Nigerian software industry performs requirement management practices to a good degree. Therudiments for basic requirement management are well carried out, even though it is nowhere nearperfection at this point in time. The industry can still do with a whole lot of improvement, especiallywith requirement management quality assurance. The Requirement Management KPA can be said tobe at the SEI CMMI Capability Level 1.5.2.2 Software Project Planning (SPP)The software project planning KPA is performed in almost the same degree as the RequirementManagement KPA. There however seem to be very little organizational policy for planning softwareprojects. The Software Project Planning KPA can also be said to at the SEI CMMI Capability Level 1.5.2.3 Software Project Tracking and Oversight (SPTO)Projects are actively tracked in the Nigerian software industry. The reason for this has been identifiedto be mainly due to cost management. SPTO can be said to be at the SEI CMMI Capability Level 15.2.4 Software Subcontract Management (SSM)The Nigerian software industry does not involve so much in subcontracting activities. Mostsubcontracting activities performed are usually on a small scale. Not so much of writtenorganizational policy exists for managing software subcontract, and the measures for managingsoftware subcontracts are not well developed. The SSM KPA can be said to be at the SEI CMMICapability Level 1.5.2.5 Software Quality Assurance (SQA)The performance of SQA activities are at the very minimum in the Nigerian software industry.Findings revealed that for most of the time, SQA activities are not planned, verified, reviewed, norresolved. They do not follow written organizational policy, lack adequate funding, and lack adequatebasis for measurement. SQA KPA can be said to be at the SEI CMMI Capability Level0.5.2.6 Software Configuration Management (SCM)The performance of SCM practices in the Nigerian software industry seems to be rather low.Organizational policies supporting SCM practices were difficult to come by. SCM KPA can be said tobe at the SEI CMMI Capability Level 0.5.2.7 Organization Process Focus (OPF)Most software companies in Nigeria seem to focus too much on the product to be developed. Theydon’t have time to work on the process required to build the product. The SPF KPA can be said to beat the SEI CMMI Capability Level0 22 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  26. 26. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19635.2.8 Organization Process Definition (OPD)Most software organizations in Nigeria have very poorly defined software process structure. Somedon’t even have at all. As expected, this would be at Capability Level 0.5.2.9 Training Program (TP)Even though some software organizations are intensive about staff training, the trend does not cutacross board. Most pressing is the issue of most software organizations not having any writtenorganizational policy to meet the training needs of its members of staff. This KPA is also atCapability Level 0.5.2.10 Integrated Software Management (ISM)Most software organizations do not have well defined organizational software process and thereforedo not have a structure to pattern after. This KPA is also at the SEI CMMI Capability Level 0.5.2.11 Software Product Engineering (SPE)Most software companies in Nigeria do not involve in SPE practices. This KPA is at Capability Level0.5.2.12 Intergroup Coordination (IC)Even though intergroup coordination seems to be relatively high in the industry, it is not even nearlyas high and integrated into the system as it should be. IC KPA is at Capability Level 0.5.2.13 Peer Reviews (PR)Peer review practices seem to be actively carried out in software organizations in Nigeria. There ishowever still much gap to be filled. This KPA is at Capability Level 0.5.2.14 Quantitative Process Management (SPM)Quantitative process management seems to be unpopular with the software industry. This is mainlydue to the total absence or lack of adequate organizational software process. It is at Capability Level0.5.2.15 Software Quality Management (SQM)The practice of SQM practices in the Nigerian software industry does not seem to be so much on thehigh side. The seeming lack of written organizational policy calls for a lot of concern and craves forattention. This also falls under the SEI CMMI Capability Level 0.5.2.16 Defect Prevention (DP)As important as this KPA is, its practices are not more popular than a few others thus far mentioned.Adequate quality assurance and written organizational policies to support this KPA seem to bewanting. This KPA also falls under the SEI CMMI Capability Level 0.5.2.17 Technology Change Management (TCM)This KPA does not seem to be getting much attention. Most software organizations in Nigeria do nothave any plan for managing technology changes. This KPA falls under the SEI CMMI CapabilityLevel 0.5.2.18 Process Change Management (PCM)Just like most of the other process oriented KPA, the practices associated with PCM are not muchfavored by the lack of or inadequate organizational software process. Neither documented proceduresnor written organizational policies seem to exist for supporting the PCM practices. Its capability levelfalls in the SEI CMMI Capability Level 0. 23 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  27. 27. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-19635.3. DiscussionResults from this study are in consonance with results from studies by other scholars. The study ofSoriyan and Heeks [13, 14] shows that the Nigerian software industry is not so inclined to formal,well documented and standardized methodologies. The formalized methods used when there is anyare usually developed in-house. According to Urtans [6], India, China, Japan, Korea, Australia, andCanada reported the highest number of appraisals and seem to have the highest maturity rankings.Besides these countries, most other countries are either on or fall below maturity level 3. Virtually alldeveloping countries (to which Nigeria belongs) are in software maturity levels between 1 and 2.India happens to be one of the highest exporter of software and hence have software as one of itsmajor sources of revenue [2, 6]. The Indian software industry attributed their success to strictadherence to the CMMI. The Nigerian software industry can experience the same monumentaldevelopment following the same route other successful industries have been through. VI. CONCLUSIONTo achieve the objective of this work, the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Capability MaturityModel Integration (CMMI) for software process improvement was employed. The SEI MaturityQuestionnaire (MQ) was the primary instrument used for eliciting data from respondents. Survey(using the MQ), and Case Study combined research methodologies were applied across thirtysoftware organizations in Nigeria. The required data was successfully collected, verified, collated andevaluated. The Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) appraisalmethod was applied in the appraisal of the industry. The result of the appraisal was then summarized,indicating maturity level, capability levels, and project management practices based on the CMMIKey Process Areas (KPA).The result revealed that the Nigerian software industry is very deficient in so many areas. Thisincludes virtually all the Key Process Areas (KPA) in the SEI Maturity Questionnaire. The appraisalalso revealed that the software process of the Nigerian software industry is at the maturity level 1,which is the very base level. While clamoring for a drastic improvement, this result should howevernot be so alarming as many industries in the world (even in developed countries) have not yetexceeded maturity level 2. The capability level for the identified key process areas were alsoidentified to toggle between 0 and 1.The scalability of the SEI CMMI model makes it adaptable to any kind and size of softwaredevelopment organization or industry. All that is required is the identification of a need to develop,grow, or mature the organizational software process. Once this need has truly been identified, thediscipline required for climbing up the ladder of software process maturity will be imbibed.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTWe acknowledge all individuals and companies that have contributed in making this study possible.Due to issues of privacy as regarding the organizations and personnel involved, names will not bementioned. We say a very big thank you to you all.REFERENCES [1]. Ahern, Dennis M.; Armstrong, Jim; Clouse, Aaron; Ferguson, Jack; Hayes, Will; Nidiffer, Kenneth (2005). ‘CMMI SCAMPI Distilled: Appraisal for Process Improvement’. [2]. Ajay Batra (2000), What Makes Indian Software Companies Thick? (CMM Practices in India) [3]. CMMI Product Team (2006), ‘CMMI for Development, Version 1.2 - CMMI-DEV, V1.2’, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. [4]. David Zubrow, William Hayes, Jane Siegel, & Dennis Goldenson (1994) ‘Maturity Questionnaire’. [5]. Frank Heyworth (2002), ‘A Guide to Project Management’. European Centre for Modern Languages, Council of European Publishing. [6]. Guntis Urtans (2004) ‘SW-CMM Implementation: Mandatory or Best Practice?’, GM Eastern Europe, Exigen Group. [7]. Heeks, R.B. (1999) Software strategies in developing countries, Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 15- 20 24 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  28. 28. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 [8]. Heeks, R.B. (2002) i-Development not e-development, Journal of International Development, 14(1): 1- 12 [9]. Mark C. Paulk, Charles V. Weber, Bill Curtis, & Mary Beth Chrissis (1995) The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison – Wesley, Boston,1995 [10]. Mark C. Paulk, Charles V. Weber, Suzanne M. Garcia, Mary Beth Chrissis, Marilyn Bush, (1993), ‘Key Practices of the Capability Maturity Model’, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University CMU/SEI-93- TR-25, Pittsburgh, 1993. [11]. Pierfrancesco Fusaro, Khaled El Emam, & Bob Smith (1997) ‘The Internal Consistencies of the 1987 SEI Maturity Questionnaire and the SPICE Capability Dimension’. Empirical Software Engineering: An International Journal, 3(2): 179 -201. [12]. SCAMPI Upgrade Team (2006), ‘Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) A, Version 1.2: Method Definition Document’, CMU-SEI-2006-HB-002 Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 2006. [13]. Soriyan Abimbola & Richard Heeks (2004), A Profile of Nigerias Software Industry. Development Informatics Working Paper No 21, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester, 2004. [14]. Soriyan, H.A., Mursu, A. & Korpela, M. (2000) Information system development methodologies: gender issues in a developing economy, In: Women, Work and Computerization, E. Balka & R. Smith (eds.), Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA, 146-154BiographyKehinde Aregbesola had his secondary education at Lagelu Grammar School, Agugu,Ibadan, Nigeria, where he was the Senior Prefect. He obtained his first and second degreesin Computer Science from the prestigious University of Ibadan (a former college of theUniversity of London). He is an experienced solutions developer with several years in theindustry. He has been involved in the development of diverse kinds of applicationscurrently in use in different organizations, as well as a few tools currently in use by othersoftware developers. He has implemented projects with a few prominent ICT companiesincluding LITTC, Microsolutions Technology, Farsight Consultancy Services, Chrome Technologies,infoworks, etc. His focus is to be a pure blend of academic excellence and industrial resourcefulness. He is amember of the Computer Professionals of Nigeria (CPN), Nigeria Computer Society (NCS), and NigerianInstitute of Management (NIM), a certified manager of both human and material resources. He is currently aLecturer at Salem University, Lokoja, Kogi State, Nigeria.Babatunde Opeoluwa Akinkunmi is a member of the academic staff at the Dept ofComputer Science University of Ibadan. He has authored over twenty five research articlesin computer science. His research interests include Knowledge Representation, FormalOntologies and Software Engineering.Olalekan S. Akinola is currently a lecturer of Computer Science at the University ofIbadan, Nigeria. He had his PhD Degree in Software Engineering from the same Universityin Nigeria. He is currently working on Software Process Improvement models for theNigeria software industry. 25 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 10-25
  29. 29. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 TAKING THE JOURNEY FROM LTE TO LTE-ADVANCED Arshed Oudah , Tharek Abd Rahman and Nor Hudah Seman Faculty of Electrical Engineering, UTM University, Skudai, MalaysiaABSTRACTThis paper addresses the main features of the transition from the Long Term Evolution standard (LTE) to itssuccessor Long Term Evolution-Advanced (LTE-A). The specifications of the new release have taken severalyears and included thousands of temporary documents. The output, thus, would be tens of volumes of details.Turning this number of volumes into a single manuscript is a very useful resource for many researchers. Onepaper of this length must therefore choose its contents wisely if it has to do more than just scratching the surfaceof such a complex standard.KEYWORDSLong Term Evolution Advanced (LTE-A), Multiple-Input-Multiple-Output (MIMO), Bandwidth Aggregation,Coordinated Multi-Point (CoMP) and Relaying I. INTRODUCTIONFollowing the transition from Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) to Universal MobileTelecommunications System (UMTS) in wireless mobile systems [1], in 2009,the InternationalTelecommunication Union (ITU) decided to come up with challenging requirements for its next 4thGeneration (4G) standard, namely; International Mobile Telecommunications Advanced (IMT-Advanced) [2-5]. Not surprisingly, this upgrade aims at breaking new grounds in extremelydemanding spectral efficiency needs that would definitely outperform their predecessors of legacysystems. Average downlink data rates of 100 Mbit/s in the wide area network and 1 Gbit/s for localaccess are being the most challenging ones [6].Remarkably, the ITU is the key player in the whole wireless standardization process. It is the bodybehind the "G" in all new emerging standards, that is; the 2G, the 3G, and the forthcoming 4G [3], [5].Interestingly, these are not standards as such, they are simply frameworks, and within thoseframeworks, several bodies submit different candidate technologies. Up until Dec.2010, it appearedthere are only two candidate technologies for IMT-Advanced1, i.e. LTE-A and its rival IEEE 802.16mstandard [2], [7].It is worth mentioning that IMT family members, i.e. 3G and 4G, both share the same spectrum;hence there is no 4G spectrum, there is IMT spectrum, and it is available for 3G and 4G technologies[8], [9]. Furthermore, Mobile Wimax and Ultra mobile broadband (UMB) share, to a certain level, thesame radio-interface attributes for those of LTE given in Table 1. All of them, namely; mobileWimax, UMB, and LTE, support flexible bandwidths, FDD/TDD duplexing, OFDMA in thedownlink and MIMO schemes. However, there are a few differences among them. For instance, theuplink in LTE is based on SC-FDMA compared to OFDMA in Mobile Wimax and UMB. Theperformance of the three systems is therefore expected to be similar with minor differences [8], [10].1 ITU has recently redefined its 4G to include LTE, Wimax, and HSPA+. These standards were, foryears, considered as pre-4G technologies and by no means meet the 4G targets previously stipulatedby ITU [17]. 26 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 26-33
  30. 30. International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Sept 2011.©IJAET ISSN: 2231-1963 Table 1. Main LTE air interface elements.II. THE PATH TOWARDS LTEIn order to meet the growing traffic demands, extensive efforts have been made in the 3rd GenerationPartnership Project (3GPP) to develop a new standard for the evolution of 3GPPs Universal MobileTelephone System (UMTS) towards a packet-optimized system referred to as Long-Term Evolution(LTE) [11]. The project, which started in November 2004, features specifications for new radio-access technology revolutionized for higher data rates, low latency and greater spectral efficiency.The spectral efficiency target for the LTE system is 3 to 4 times higher than the current High SpeedPacket Access (HSPA) system [11]. These challenging spectral efficiency targets required pushing thetechnology envelope by employing advanced air-interface techniques such as low Peak-to-AveragePower Ratio (PAPR), orthogonal uplink multiple access based on Single-Carrier Frequency DivisionMultiple Access (SC-FDMA), multi-antenna technologies, inter-cell interference mitigationtechniques, low latency channel structure and Single-Frequency Network (SFN) broadcast todetermine LTE [12], see Table 1.Remarkably, in the standards development phase, the proposals go through extensive scrutiny withmultiple sources evaluating and simulating the proposed technologies from system performanceimprovement and implementation complexity perspective. Therefore, only the highest-qualityproposals and ideas finally will be counted in the standard. The system supports flexible bandwidths,offered by Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) and SC-FDMA accessschemes. In addition to Frequency Division Duplexing (FDD) and Time Division Duplexing (TDD),Half-Duplex FDD (HD-FDD) is allowed to support low cost User Equipment (UE) [12], [13]. UnlikeFDD, in HD-FDD operation a UE is not required to transmit and receive at the same time, thusavoiding the need for a costly duplexer in the UE [8].The system is primarily optimized for low speeds up to 15 km/h. However, the system specificationsallow mobility support in excess of 350 km/h at the cost of some performance degradation [12]. Theuplink access is based on SC-FDMA that promises increased uplink coverage due to low PAPRrelative to OFDMA. The system supports downlink peak data rates of 326 Mb/s with “4 × 4”multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) within 20 MHz bandwidth [11-14]. Since uplink MIMO is notemployed in the first release of the LTE standard, the uplink peak data rates are limited to 86 Mb/swithin 20 MHz bandwidth. Similar improvements are observed in cell-edge throughput whilemaintaining same-site locations as deployed for HSPA. In terms of latency, the LTE radio-interface 27 Vol. 1, Issue 4, pp. 26-33

×