User Preference Heterogeneous Network Selection in Less Subjective Ways
Article
First Online:
- 212 Downloads
- 5 Citations
Abstract
Heterogeneous network selection is a popular topic with the rapid development of telecommunication technologies. Literatures employed different ways for solving the issue with drawbacks more or less especially neglecting the user preference and using much subjective configurations. This paper proposes a user preference scheme including realtime or non-realtime pursuit, money and battery consumption concern and non-specific requirement. For front four modes, a technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution based method with vote which reduces the subjectiveness is introduced. Then, a function-less and totally unsubjective method called directional distance function based data envelopment analysis method faces the non-specific requirement. Several examples test these two methods and the results support them.
Keywords
Heterogenous network selection User preference TOPSIS DEA Directional distance functionReferences
- 1.Ai, X., Zhou, W., Xie, B., & Song, J. (2010). Network selection issue in heterogeneous wireless environment. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), 18–21 April 2010, Sydney, NSW (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
- 2.Bari, F., & Leung, V. (2007). Automated network selection in a heterogeneous wireless network environment. IEEE Network, 21(1), 34–40.Google Scholar
- 3.Chan, H., Fan, P., & Cao, Z. (2005). A utility-based network selection scheme for multiple services in heterogeneous networks. 2005 International Conference on Wireless Networks, Communications and Mobile Computing, Sheraton Maui Resort Maui, HI,2 (pp. 1175–1180).Google Scholar
- 4.Chan, P., Sheriff, R., Hu, Y., Conforto, P., & Tocci, C. (2001). Mobility management incorporating fuzzy logic for heterogeneous a IP environment. IEEE Communications Magazine, 39(12), 42–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Chen, Q.-B., Zhou, W.-G., Chai, R., & Tang, L. (2011). Game-theoretic approach for pricing strategy and network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks. IET Communications, 5(5), 676–682.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 6.Chung, Y. H., Fare, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: A directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51(3), 229–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Cordeiro, C., & Agrawal, D. P. (2006). Ad hoc sensor networks: Theory and applications. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Fan, J., Zhang, S., & Zhou, W. (2012). Energy-friendly network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks. Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), Yokohama, 6–9 May 2012 (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
- 9.Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Mehtods and applications. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Lai, Y. J., & Hwang, C. L. (1994). Fuzzy multiple objective decision making: Methods and applications. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 11.Niyato, D., & Hossain, E. (2009). Dynamics of network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks: An evolutionary game approach. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 58(4), 2008–2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Ormond, O., Murphy, J., & Muntean, G. (2006). Utility-based intelligent network selection in beyond 3G systems. IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Istanbul, Turkey,4, (pp. 1831–1836).Google Scholar
- 13.Paris, S., Martignon, F., Filippini, I., & Capone, A. (2012). A truthful auction for access point selection in heterogeneous mobile networks communications. ICC, 10–15 June, 2012, Ottawa, ON. (pp. 200–3205).Google Scholar
- 14.Pervaiz, H., Ni, Q. (2012). User preferences-adaptive dynamic network selection approach in cooperating wireless networks: A game theoretic perspective. The 11th IEEE TrustCom., 25–27 June, 2012, Liverpool, UK (pp. 1609–1616).Google Scholar
- 15.Ray, S. C. (2004). Data envelopment analysis: Theory and techniques for economics and operations research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Saker, L., Jemaa, S. B., & Elayoubi, S. E. (April, 2009). Q-learning for joint access decision in heterogeneous networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Communication and Networking Conference (WCNC), (pp.1–5), Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
- 17.Song, Q. Y., & Jamalipour, A. (June 2005). Network selection in an integrated wireless LAN and UMTS environment using mathematical modeling and computing techniques. IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communication, 12(3), 42–48.Google Scholar
- 18.Stevens-Navarro, E., Lin, Y., & Wong, V. W. S. (February 2008). An MDP-based vertical handoff decision algorithm for heterogeneous wireless networks. IEEE Transaction on Vehicular Technology, 57(2), 1243–1254.Google Scholar
- 19.Trestian, R., Ormond, O., & Muntean, G.-M. (2012). Game theory-based network selection: Solutions and challenges. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 14(4), 1212–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Wang, Y., Zheng, L., Yuan, J., & Sun, W. (April, 2009). Median based network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Communication and Networking Conference (WCNC) (pp.1–5), Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
- 21.Wang, Y., Zhang, P., Zhou, Y., Yuan, J., Liu, F., & Li, G. (2010). Handover management in enhanced MIH framework for heterogeneous wireless networks environment. Wireless Personal Communications, 52(3), 615–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Wang, L., & Kuo, G. (2013). Mathematical modeling for network selection in heterogeneous wireless networks: A tutorial. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 15(1), 271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Zavadskas, E. K., Zakarevicius, A., & Antucheviciene, J. (2006). Evaluation of ranking accuracy in multi-criteria decisions. Informatica, 17(4), 601–618.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014