## 3 System-Level Configuration
### System-Level Simulations
When \(66\times 2=132\) users are served by an RIS (i.e., \(132/330=0.40\)), the remaining \(60\%\) users are served by TRP \(60\%\)BS + \(40\%\)RIS,10 RB. Assigning 20 PRBs per user (black lines), when 66 users at cell borders are served by an RIS (i.e., \(66/165=040\)), \(165-66=99\) users are served by TRPs, \(99/165=0.60\), \(60\%\)BS + \(40\%\)RIS,20 RB. When \(66\times 2=132\) users are served by an RIS (i.e., \(132/165=0.80\)), the remaining \(165-132=33\) users (i.e., \(33/132=0.20\)) are served by TRP \(20\%\)BS + \(80\%\)RIS,20 RB. We observed only a very slight decrease in the throughput results when increasing the number of users served by every RIS panel from one to two. There is almost no difference in achieved throughput between HPBS and LPBS. There is a slightly higher throughput for LPBS that is more noticeable for 20 RBs. Throughput gains are between \(97\%\) for 10 RB and \(110\%\) for 20 RB. Figure 12 illustrates the average coverage versus transmitted power for both \(N_{c}\) = 120 (10 PRB) and \(N_{c}\) = 240 (20 PRB), corresponding to the throughput performance presented in Figure 11, considering only HPBS, with a maximum transmitted power of 3.16 W (35 dBm). The comparison between Figures 11 and 12 indicates that there is a direct correspondence between the throughput performance of Figure 11 and the associated coverage of Figure 12. However, in terms of coverage, the differences are more noticeable than with throughput. It is noticeable that for the maximum transmitted power, the highest coverage of \(99.4\%\) is  
Figure 11: Throughput vs. number of users for the stadium with pitch scenario for two different number of resource blocks: LPBS with BS Power 24 dBm, and HPBS with 35 dBm, \(N_{s}\) = 3, \(N_{lx}\) = 64, \(N_{rx}\) = 16, \(N_{ris}\) = 576 and \(N_{ris}\) = 288.  
achieved by the curve 80%BS + 20%RIS,10 RB followed by the curve 60%BS + 40%RIS,10 RB. Next follow the curves 60%BS + 40%RIS,20 RB and 20%BS + 80%RIS,20 RB. It is obvious that when the number of PRBs per user doubles, the coverage decreases. It is also noticeable that doubling the number of users served by RIS panels also decreases the coverage. The lowest coverage values correspond to no RIS panels being activated, i.e., 100%BS + 0%RIS, 10 RB and finally, 100%BS + 0%RIS, 20 RB, with a coverage of 45.4%. The coverage gain compared to the highest coverage value with 20 RB is 111% and is 98% for 10 RB. In Figure 13, we again consider the stadium scenario, presenting the aggregate throughput for each sector and considering the maximum transmit power of 24 dBm versus the number of PRBs per user. The maximum number of subcarriers is set as 3300 per sector, independently of the number of PRBs per user. We evaluate the sector throughput only for a specific number of PRBs, namely, 1 PRB, 5 PRBs, 10 PRBs, 15 PRBs and 20 PRBs. Assigning 1 PRB per user corresponds to \(N_{c}\) = 12, 5 PRBs per user corresponds to \(N_{c}\) = 60, 10 PRBs per user corresponds to \(N_{c}\) = 120, 15 PRBs per user corresponds to \(N_{c}\) = 180, and finally, 20 PRBs per user requires \(N_{c}\) = 240 subcarriers. The number of users per sector when each user has 1 PRB is 3300/12 = 275. In total, there are 12 sectors in the stadium; thus, there are a total of 3300 active users. For the case in which every active user has 20 PRBs, there are 3300/240 = 13.75 users per sector and the total of active users in the stadium is 165. We observe in Figure 13 that for the curve BS (100%BS + 0%RIS), there is a maximum throughput for 1 PRB, which is the same for the curve BS + RIS. For 5 PRBs and 10 PRBs per user, there is a clear linear decrease in throughput in the red curve (BS) compared to black curve (BS + RIS). The decrease in throughput continues with 15 PRBs and 20 PRBs, but in a slower way. The curve of BS + RIS has almost the same aggregate throughput per sector; however, we noticed a very slight decrease with the increasing number of PRBs.