# Optimizing the Quality of Service of Mobile Broadband Networks for a Dense Urban Environment
## 4 Results and Discussions
### Discussion of Results  
The obtained results are discussed as follows:  
The comprehensive summary of the performance metrics from the DT in Lagos (UNILAG, Ikorodu, and Oniru VI) in Tables 2-4 show a compromise with existing literature [49; 50; 51]. Where the available data was not enough to compute the result required, the use of a dash (\(-\)) has been adopted in the tables. It is clear from Tables 2-4 that the RSRP for the three locations has a maximum value within the \(-\)50 dBm range. This appears to be the threshold that Etislad provides across the areas covered. Also noteworthy is the range of the RSRP, which goes from as low as 34.37 dBm in Oniru VI to 53.90 dBm in UNILAG and 62.74 dBm in Ikorodu. The close gap in the values obtained in the case of UNILAG in Table 3 may be dependent on the proximity of the structures and the topographical layout of the terrain. Such tight value difference may be beneficial, as users in the area of poor RSRP values (allocated less RB) would experience a QoS close to that of users receiving the highest RSRP in the area. The highest values of RSRP were obtained in Oniru VI (Table 5). It will, however, not be accurate to state emphatically that users in this area experience better 4G LTE QoS because they record the highest RSRP values. As seen in Table 4, Ikorodu records higher RSRQ values (\(-\)0.44 dB) than Oniru (\(-\)4.38 dB), suggesting that users may experience seamless cell reselection and handover rates in Ikorodu compared to Oniru VI. Also noteworthy is that the values obtained from the UNILAG area consistently lie within the highest and lowest values of RSRP and RSRQ. On the surface, this suggests fewer erratic signals compared to the other areas, but this is quickly disputed by the simulation of \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Metric**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Mean of Unoptimized Values**} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Optimized** \\ **Value** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-5}  & **UNILAG** & **Ikorodu** & **Oniru VI** & **Value** \\ \hline RSRP (dBm) & \(-\)91.74 & \(-\) & \(-\)74 & \(-\)72.54 \\ RSRQ (dB) & \(-\)9.35 & \(-\) & \(-\)9.7 & 9.04 \\ RSSI (dBm) & \(-\)68.06 & 1.9396 & \(-\)50.75 & 69.42 \\ SINR (dB) & \(-\) & \(-\) & \(-\) & 15.57 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Summary of optimized and unoptimized results. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **RSRP (dBm)** & **RSRQ (dB)** & **RSSI (dBm)** & **SINR (dB)** \\ \hline Optimized Value & \(-\)72.54 & \(-\)9.04 & \(-\)69.42 & 15.57 \\ RMSE of Original Data & 68.51 & 9.62 & 68.51 & \(-\) \\ RMSE of Optimized Solution & \(10.11\) & 4.38 & 9.21 & \(-\) \\ Difference in RMSE & \(-\)58.40 & \(-\)5.24 & \(-\)59.30 & 00.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Summary of comparison between optimized and unoptimized results. the RSRP and RSRQ values shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. NCC recommends RSSI values of \(-95\) dBm at the edge of the cell radius of the base transceiver station. As seen in the values obtained, while there is a record at Ikorodu of \(-85.05\) dBm, a value very close to the recommended signal strength, and \(-82.23\) dBm for UNILAG, Oniru VI happens to lag as a distant third with \(-63.93\) dBm. This is most likely caused by poor network mapping and routing coupled with a poorly executed urban housing design. Low RSSI can quickly have an unfavorable effect on user network reception. The erratic RSSI simulation in Figure 4 shows how unreliable the QoE a user in Oniru VI tends to get is when other signal-reducing factors, such as UE distance from the transceiver, physical obstruction to the wave propagation, and radio interference, are considered. However, one may associate the poor RSSI values in the area with these same factors, as Oniru VI is an urban settlement with all the aforementioned limiting factors in abundance.