Advertisement

Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 424–434 | Cite as

A Stackelberg Game Based Inter-tier Spectrum Sharing Scheme for LTE-A SON

  • Songlin SunEmail author
  • Liang Gong
  • Bo Rong
  • Abdel Mouaki
  • Amir Basri
Article

Abstract

This paper proposes a spectrum sharing scheme based on Stackelberg game exploiting the SON features of 3GPP LTE-A HetNets. In the game, the MeNB controls and prices the available spectrum resource which the PeNBs can purchase and use to serve the Pico-cell as well as offload some macro-users. Both kinds of nodes try to maximize their own utility which is consisted of user data rates, earning and expenditures on spectrum trading. During the dynamic interaction of the game, the interference coordination features of the LTE-A SON, such as almost blank sub-frames (ABS) of enhanced inter-cell interference coordination (eICIC) and cell range expansion (CRE), are employed so that the change of spectrum allocation can be fully exploited. Simulation results show that the proposed approach can significantly improve the throughput of victim users with slight network total throughput degradation.

Keywords

SON LTE-A Cognitive radio Smart LPN 

References

  1. 1.
    Aliu OG, Imran A, Imran MA, Evans B (2013) A survey of self organisation in future cellular networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 15(1):336–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    3GPP TS 32.500 (2009) Self-organizing networks (SON); Concepts and requirements (Release 9), V9.0.0Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Wireless Broadband Alliance, Carrier Wi-Fi Guidelines, http://www.wballiance.com/resource-center/wba-white-papers/. February 2014
  5. 5.
    3GPP TR 36.902, E-UTRA; Self-configuring and self-optimizing network (SON) use cases and solutions (Release 9), V9.3.1, March 2011Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Juan R., Hamied K (2011) Self-organizing networks (SON): self-planning, self-optimization and self-healing for GSM, UMTS and LTE. WileyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu RQ, Qian Y (2013) Heterogeneous cellular networks. WileyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu RQ, Qian Y (2014) An energy efficient and spectrum efficient wireless heterogeneous network framework for 5G systems. IEEE Commun Mag 52(5):94–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li Q, Xu Y, Hu RQ, Qian Y (2013) Optimal Fractional Frequency Reuse and Power control in the heterogeneous wireless networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun 12 (6):2658–2668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li Q, Hu RQ, Qian Y, Wu G (2013) Intra-cell cooperation and resource allocation in a heterogeneous network with relays. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 62(4):1770–1784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    3GPP R1-104968 (2010) Summary of the description of candidate eICIC solutions, MadridGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rcz A, Reider N, Fodor G (2008) On the impact of inter-cell interference in LTE. In: IEEE GLOBECOM, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee SB, Pefkianakis I, Meyerson A, Xu S, Lu S (2009) Proportional fair frequency-domain packet scheduling for GPP LTE uplink. In: IEEE INFOCOM, pp 2611–2615Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hua Y, Zhang Q, Niu Z (2010) Resource allocation in multi-cell OFDMA-based relay networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM, pp 2133–2141Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lasaulce S, Debbah M, Altman E (2009) Methodologies for analyzing equilibria in wireless games. IEEE Signal Process Mag 26(5):41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harsanyi JC (1967) Games with incomplete information played by Bayesian players, I-III. Manage Sci 14 (3):160–182MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kang X, Liang YC, Garg HK (2011) Distributed power control for spectrum-sharing femtocell networks using Stackelberg game. In: IEEE ICC, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li P, Zhu Y (2012) Price-based power control of femtocell networks: a Stackelberg game approach. In: IEEE PIMRC, pp 1185–1191Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kang X, Zhang R, Motani M (2012) Price-based resource allocation for spectrum-sharing femtocell networks: a Stackelberg game approach. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 30(3):538–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hamouda S, Zitoun M, Tabbane S (2013) A new spectrum sharing trade in heterogeneous networks. In: IEEE vehicular technology conference (VTC Fall), pp 1–5Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Biglieri E, Caire G, Taricco G (2001) Limiting performance of blockfading channels with multiple antennas. IEEE Trans Inform Theory 47(4):1273–1289MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    ITU-R (2009) Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-advanced, TR M.2135-1, International Telecommunication Union (ITU)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Songlin Sun
    • 1
    Email author
  • Liang Gong
    • 3
  • Bo Rong
    • 2
  • Abdel Mouaki
    • 2
  • Amir Basri
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Information and Communication EngineeringBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijingChina
  2. 2.Communications Research Center CanadaOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Cable Institute of Academy of BroadcasingSARPPFTBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations