Massive MIMO Performance Comparison of Beamforming and Multiplexing in the Terahertz Band
Sayed Amir Hoseini, Ming Ding, Mahbub Hassan

TL;DR
This paper compares beamforming and multiplexing in massive MIMO systems for Terahertz band communications, revealing that multiplexing can outperform beamforming under certain conditions due to re-radiation effects.
Contribution
It provides a comparative analysis of beamforming and multiplexing in THz massive MIMO, highlighting the potential advantages of multiplexing in LoS scenarios with re-radiation effects.
Findings
Multiplexing can outperform beamforming in THz massive MIMO under certain conditions.
Re-radiation effects create rich scattering, enabling multiplexing gains even in LoS channels.
Simulation results support the potential of multiplexing to achieve higher performance than beamforming.
Abstract
In this paper, we compare the performance of two main MIMO techniques, beamforming and multiplexing, in the Terahertz (THz) band. The main problem with the THz band is its huge propagation loss, which is caused by the tremendous signal attenuation due to molecule absorption of the electro-magnetic wave. To overcome the path loss issue, massive MIMO has been suggested to be employed in the network and is expected to provide Tbps for a distance within a few meters. In this context, beamforming is studied recently as the main technique to take advantage of MIMO in THz and overcome the very high path loss with the assumption that the THz communication channel is Line-of-Sight (LoS) and there are not significant multipath rays. On the other hand, recent studies also showed that the well-known absorbed energy by molecules can be re-radiated immediately in the same frequency. Such re-radiated…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
