# A Modular Experimentation Methodology for 5G Deployments: The 5 GENESIS Approach
## 5 Experimental Setup
### ED Definition
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Indicator**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Scenario**} \\ \cline{3-4}  & & **LoS** & **NLoS** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{RTT [ms]} & Average & \(11.83\pm 0.05\) & \(26.15\pm 3.87\) \\  & Median & \(11.77\pm 0.07\) & \(19.33\pm 0.39\) \\  & Min & \(10.00\pm 0.00\) & \(13.19\pm 0.13\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & Max & \(16.65\pm 0.60\) & \(555.16\pm 620.11\) \\  & 5\% Percentile & \(10.13\pm 0.02\) & \(14.39\pm 0.14\) \\  & 95\% Percentile & \(13.70\pm 0.09\) & \(42.74\pm 8.27\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & Standard deviation & \(1.20\pm 0.04\) & \(48.33\pm 8.27\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & Average & \(21.58\pm 0.02\) & \(10.68\pm 0.14\) \\ \cline{1-1} MAC UL ReTx Rate [\%] & Average & \(0.01\pm 0.001\) & \(14.83\pm 1.12\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & Average & \(-53.53\pm 0.05\) & \(-110.38\pm 0.18\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & Average & \(-10.80\pm 0.00\) & \(-11.15\pm 0.01\) \\ \cline{1-1} MAC DL BLER [\%] & Average & \(0.01\pm 0.01\) & \(0.04\pm 0.02\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Experiment 1: Statistical results for TC_RTT test case in SC_LoS_PS and SC_NLoS_PS scenarios (Acronyms as per Table 2; ReTx in MAC UL ReTx Rate stands for Retransmission). On the other hand, Figure4 shows that the RTT increase in the NLoS scenario directly maps with degraded radio conditions, particularly in terms of SINR, which, indeed, require a higher retransmission rate when compared to nearly-zero retransmissions observed in LoS conditions. ### KPI Validation across Different Configurations

We now move on to Experiment 2, which aims at highlighting the sole impact of PS on the achievable RTT. Hence, as compared to Experiment 1, this experiment focuses on the TC_RTT test case and runs it in LoS scenarios with vs. without PS activation. Figure 5 shows the per-iteration statistics of RTT, for TC_RTT test case in SC_LoS_PS and SC_LoS scenarios when using UE_1. The comparison shows a significant impact of PS on the average RTT

Figure 4: Experiment 1: Per-iteration statistics in SC_LoS_PS and SC_NLoS_PS scenarios and UE_1. UDP Throughput (**top**), average SINR (**middle**) and average PDSCH MCS CW0 (**bottom**) are reported for TC_THR_UDP test case (**a**). RTT (**top**), average SINR (**middle**), and average MAC UL ReTx Rate (**bottom**) are reported for TC_RTT test case (**b**). as well as on its variance. When PS is not active, the observed RTT ranges between 20 and 40 ms, with most of the results being concentrated between 25 and 30 ms. When PS is active, there is a smaller variance, with most of the values concentrated around 11 and 13 ms, and the remaining values in the interval from 10 to 15 ms. The result ultimately validates the impact of PS and its potential suitability for time-critical low-dense use cases, possibly delivered via a dedicated 5G network. ### KPI Validation across Different Technologies

The goal of Experiment 3 is to benchmark different UEs by means of their nominal achievable throughput, while also deepening the inspection of the mechanisms across layers of the 5G NR protocol stack. To this aim, it embeds the TC_THR_UDP test case and LoS scenario, and it is alternatively executed on UE_1 and UE_2, two 5G NR devices that are provided by different vendors. Finally, its focus is on comparing UDP and PDCP throughput statistics. Figure 5(a) reports per-iteration statistics of UDP and PDCP throughput for both devices. As already analyzed in Experiment 1, we observe a UDP throughput of about 180 Mbps for UE_1 (Figure 5(a)). Interestingly, we see instead a PDCP throughput of around 271 Mbps, close to the theoretical maximum calculated in Section 5.3. Hence, under higher data rates possibly sustained by good coverage (i.e., LoS), UE_1 shows a quite constant and rather significant throughput drop, while moving at the application level. When considering UE_2 (Figure 5(a)), we see that the PDCP throughput stabilizes at a slightly lower value compared to UE_1 (around 267 Mbps).