A Novel Evolutionary-Based Cooperative Spectrum Sensing Mechanism for Cognitive Radio Networks

Mohsen Akbari; Mohammad Ghanbarisabagh

doi:10.1007/s11277-014-1915-8

Wireless Personal Communications

November 2014, Volume 79, Issue 2, pp 1017–1030 | Cite as

A Novel Evolutionary-Based Cooperative Spectrum Sensing Mechanism for Cognitive Radio Networks

Authors
Authors and affiliations

Mohsen Akbari
Mohammad GhanbarisabaghEmail author

Article

First Online: 18 July 2014

186 Downloads
3 Citations

Abstract

Cognitive radio (CR) is considered as a feasible intelligent technology for 4G wireless networks or self-organization networks and envisioned as a promising paradigm of exploiting intelligence for enhancing efficiency of underutilized spectrum bands. In CR, one of the main concerns is to reliably sense the presence of primary users, to attain protection against harmful interference caused by the potential spectrum access of secondary users (SUs). In this paper, evolutionary algorithms, namely, genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) are investigated. An imperialistic competitive algorithm (ICA) is proposed to minimize error detection at the common soft data fusion (SDF) center for structurally centralized cognitive radio network (CRN). By using these techniques, evolutionary operations are invoked to optimize the weighting coefficients applied on the sensing measurement components received from multiple cooperative SUs. The proposed method is compared with other evolutionary algorithms, as well as other conventional deterministic, such as maximal ratio combining- (MRC-), modified deflection coefficient- (MDC-), normal deflection coefficient- (NDC-) based SDF schemes and OR-rule HDF based. MATLAB simulations confirm the superiority of the ICA-based scheme over the PSO-, GA-based and other conventional schemes in terms of detection performance. In addition, the ICA-based scheme also shows promising convergence and time running performance as compared to other iterative-based schemes. This makes ICA an adequate solution to meet real-time requirements.

Keywords

Cognitive radio Cooperative spectrum sensing SDF ICA PSO GA NDC MDC

This is a preview of subscription content, to check access.

Appendix 1

$$\begin{aligned}&\displaystyle U_{i} \left[ {n|{\text {H}}_{0} } \right] = \sqrt{P_{{R,i}} } h_{i} W_{i} \left[ n \right] + N_{i} \left[ n \right] \end{aligned}$$

(9)

$$\begin{aligned}&\displaystyle U_{i} \left[ {n|{\text {H}}_{1} } \right] = \sqrt{P_{{R,i}} } h_{i} W_{i} \left[ n \right] + N_{i} \left[ n \right] \!+\! \sqrt{P_{{R,i}} } g_{i} h_{i} {\text {S}}\left[ {\text {n}} \right] \!=\! \sqrt{P_{{R,i}} } g_{i} h_{i} {\text {S}}\left[ {\text {n}} \right] \!+\! U_{i} \left[ {n|{\text {H}}_{0} } \right] \qquad \nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$

(10)

This statistically shows i.e.

$$\begin{aligned} U_{i} \left[ {n|{\text {H}}_{0} } \right] \sim {\mathcal {N}}\left( {0,\sigma _{{1_{i} }}^{2} } \right) \sim {\mathcal {N}}\left( {0, P_{{R,i}} \left| {h_{i} } \right| ^{2} \sigma _{{W_{i} }}^{2} + {{\updelta }}_{{\text {i}}}^{2} } \right) \end{aligned}$$

and

$$\begin{aligned} U_{i} \left[ {n|{\text {H}}_{1} } \right] \sim {\mathcal {N}}\left( {0,\sigma _{{1_{i} }}^{2} } \right) \sim {\mathcal {N}}\left( {0, P_{{R,i}} \left| {g_{i} } \right| ^{2} \left| {h_{i} } \right| ^{2} \sigma _{S}^{2} + \sigma _{0}^{2} } \right) . \end{aligned}$$

In a Matrix form, the received signals at the FC through the control channel under ${\text {H}}_{0}$ and ${\text {H}}_{1}$, respectively, can be written as:

$$\begin{aligned} U_{i} \left[ {n|H_{0} } \right]&= \left[ \begin{array}{cccc} {\sqrt{P_{{R,1}} } h_{1} } &{}0&{}\cdots \cdots &{}0\\ 0&{}\sqrt{P_{{R,2}} } h_{2}&{} \cdots \cdots &{}0 \\ \vdots &{} \vdots &{}\ddots &{}\vdots \\ 0 &{} 0 &{}\cdots \cdots &{} {\sqrt{P_{{R,M}} } h_{M} } \end{array} \right] \nonumber \\&\times \left[ \begin{array}{c} {W_{1} \left[ n \right] } \\ \vdots \\ {W_{M} \left[ n \right] } \\ \end{array} \right] + \left[ \begin{array}{c} N_{1} \left[ n \right] \\ \vdots \\ N_{M} \left[ n \right] \\ \end{array}\right] \end{aligned}$$

(11)

$$\begin{aligned} U_{i} \left[ {n|H_{1} } \right]&= \left[ \begin{array}{cccc} \sqrt{P_{{R,1}} } g_{1} h_{1} &{} 0&{}\cdots \cdots &{}0\\ 0&{}\sqrt{P_{{R,2}} } g_{2} h_{2}&{}\cdots \cdots &{}0\\ \vdots &{} \vdots &{}\ddots &{}\vdots \\ 0&{}0 &{}\cdots \cdots &{} \sqrt{P_{{R,M}} } g_{M} h_{M} \end{array} \right] \nonumber \\&\times \left[ \begin{array}{c} S_{1} \left[ n \right] \\ \vdots \\ S_{M} \left[ n \right] \\ \end{array} \right] + \left[ \begin{array}{c} U_{1} \left[ {n|H_{0} } \right] \\ \vdots \\ U_{M} \left[ {n|H_{0} } \right] \end{array}\right] \end{aligned}$$

(12)

Appendix 2

$$\begin{aligned} E\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{0} } \right)&= \sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} \omega _{i} K\sigma _{{0,i}}^{2} \,\, = \,\sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} \omega _{i} \mu _{{0,i}} \, = \,\vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{0} }}\end{aligned}$$

(13)

$$\begin{aligned} E\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{1} } \right)&= \sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} \omega _{i} K\sigma _{{1,i}}^{2} = \sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} \omega _{i} \mu _{{1,i}} \, = \,\vec {\omega }^{T}\end{aligned}$$

(14)

$$\begin{aligned} var\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{0} } \right)&= \sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} 2\omega _{i} ^{2} K(\sigma _{{0,i}}^{2} + \delta _{i}^{2} )^{2} = ~\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} \vec {\omega }\end{aligned}$$

(15)

$$\begin{aligned} var\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{1} } \right)&= \sum \limits _{{i = 1}}^{M} 2\omega _{i} ^{2} K(\sigma _{{1,i}}^{2} + \sigma _{{0,i}}^{2} )^{2} = ~\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \vec {\omega } \end{aligned}$$

(16)

where ${\vec {\upomega }} = \left[ {{{\upomega }}_{1} ,{{\upomega }}_{2} , \ldots ,{{\upomega }}_{{\text {M}}} } \right] ^{{\text {T}}}$ marks the weighting vectors and the superscript $T$ denotes the transpose of the weighting coefficients vector. The covariance matrices under ${\text {H}}_{1}$ and ${\text {H}}_{0}$ are

$$\begin{aligned} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} = diag\left( {2K\left( {P_{{R,i}} \left| {g_{i} } \right| ^{2} \left| {h_{i} } \right| ^{2} \sigma _{s}^{2} + \sigma _{{0,i}}^{2} } \right) ^{2} } \right) \end{aligned}$$

and $ \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} = diag\left( {2K\sigma _{{0,i}}^{4} } \right) $, where square diagonal matrix is $diag(.)$ and given vector elements are diagonal elements.$\beta $ is assumed to be energy global threshold at FC then, $ Z{ \gtrless }_{{~H_{0} }}^{{~H_{1} }} \beta $ presents the likelihood ratio.

$$\begin{aligned} P_{f} = P\left( {Z > \beta {\text {|}} H_{0} } \right)&= Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - E\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{0} } \right) }}{{\sqrt{var\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{0} } \right) } }}} \right) = Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - \vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{0} }} }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right) \end{aligned}$$

(17)

$$\begin{aligned} P_{d} = P\left( {Z > \beta {\text {|}} H_{1} } \right)&= Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - E\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{1} } \right) }}{{\sqrt{var\left( {Z{\text {|}}H_{1} } \right) } }}} \right) = Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - \vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{1} }} }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right) \end{aligned}$$

(18)

Since $P_{f} = P_{m} $ or $ P_{f} = (1 - P_{d} )$, by equating the expression in Eqs. (17) and (18), we would obtain:

$$\begin{aligned} Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - \vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{1} }} }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right)&= 1 - Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - \vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{0} }} }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right) \end{aligned}$$

(19)

$$\begin{aligned} Q\left( {\frac{{\beta - \vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{1} }} }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right)&= Q\left( {\frac{{\vec {\omega }^{T} \overrightarrow{{\mu _{0} }} - \beta }}{{\sqrt{\vec {\omega }^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} \vec {\omega }} }}} \right) \end{aligned}$$

(20)

After some simplifications, we can obtain the optimal threshold $\beta $ that will minimize the total probability of error

$$\begin{aligned} \beta = \left( {\frac{{\sqrt{\omega ^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \omega } \mu _{0}^{T} \vec {\omega } + \sqrt{\omega ^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \omega } \mu _{1}^{T} \omega }}{{\sqrt{\omega ^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{0} }} \omega } + \sqrt{\omega ^{T} \varPhi _{{H_{1} }} \omega } }}} \right) \end{aligned}$$

(21)

References

1.
Federal Communications Commission. (Nov. 2002.) Spectrum policy task force report, FCC 02–155. doi: 10.1109/DYSPAN.2007.88.
2.
Haykin, S. (2005). Cognitive radio: Brain-empowered wireless communications. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 23(2), 201–220. doi: 10.1109/JSAC.2004.839380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.
Ghasemi, A. & Sousa, E. S. (Nov. 2005). Collaborative spectrum sensing for opportunistic access in fading environments. In The first IEEE international symposium on dynamic spectrum access networks (DySPAN) (pp. 131–136). doi: 10.1109/DYSPAN.2005.1542627.
4.
Ganesan, G. & Li, Y. G. (2007). Cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio, Part I: Two user networks. IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communications, 6(6). doi: 10.1109/TWC.2007.05775.
5.
Qi, C., Wang, J., & Li, S. (Jan. 2009). Weighted-clustering cooperative spectrum sensing In cognitive radio context. International Conference on Communications and Mobile Computing (CMC), 1, 102–106. doi: 10.1109/CMC.2009.303.
6.
Digham, F. F., Alouini, M. S., & Simon Marvin, K. (2007). On the energy detection of unknown signals over fading channels. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 55(1), 21–24. doi: 10.1109/TAES.1986.310699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.
Akyildiz, L. F., Lo, B. F., & Balakrishnan, R. (2011). Cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks: A survey. Physical Communication Journal, 4, 40–62. doi: 10.1016/j.phycom.2010.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.
Liang, Y. C., Zeng, Y., Peh, E. C. Y., & Hoang, A. T. (2008). Sensing-throughput tradeoff for cognitive radio networks. IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communications, 7(4), 1326–1337. doi: 10.1109/TWC.2008.060869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.
Quan, Z., Cui, S., & Sayed, A. H. (2008). Optimal linear cooperation for spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 2(1), 28–40. doi: 10.1109/JSTSP.2007.914882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.
Ma, J., Zhao, G., & Li, Y. (2008). Soft combination and detection for cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 7(11), part: 2, 4502–4507. doi: 10.1109/GLOCOM.2007.594.
11.
El-Saleh, A. A., Ismail, M., Ali, M. A. M., & Arka, I. H. (2011). Hybrid SDF-HDF cluster-based fusion scheme for cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 3(2). doi: 10.1109/APCC.2011.6152834.
12.
Kay, S. M. (1998). Fundamentals of statistical signal processing, Volume II: Detection theory. Upper Saddle River (New Jersey), 7, doi: 10.1098/rsta.1933.0009.
13.
Akbari, M., Manesh, M. R., El-Saleh, A. A., & Ismail, M. (2012). Improved soft fusion-based cooperative spectrum sensing using particle swarmoptimization. IECE Electronics Express, 9(6), 436–442. doi: 10.1587/elex.9.436.
14.
Shen, B., & Kwak, K. S. (2009). Soft combination schemes for cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. ETRI Journal, 31(3). doi: 10.1109/NRSC.2011.5873630.
15.
A-Gargari, E., & Lucas, C. Designing an optimal PID controller using Colonial Competitive Algorithm. doi: 10.1109/CEC.2007.4425083.
16.
Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Eivazy, H., Ghodsi, R., Rezaie, K., & Atashpaz-Gargari, E. (2010). Solving the integrated product mix-outsourcing problem using the imperialist competitive algorithm. Expert System Applications, 37(12), 7615–7626. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.
Niknam, T., Taherian Fard, E., Pourjafarian, N., & Rousta, A. (2011). An efficient hybrid algorithm based on modified imperialist competitive algorithm and K-means for data clustering. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 24(2), 3–306. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2010.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.
Kalyanmoy, D. (2000). An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 186, 311–338. doi: 10.1934/elsevier.2001.10012.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
19.
Kaveh, A., & Talatahari, S. (2010). Optimum design of skeletal structures using imperialist competitive algorithmOptimum design of skeletal structures using imperialist. Competitive Algorithm, 88(21–22), 1220–1229. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2010.06.011.Google Scholar
20.
Hossain, E., & Bhargava, V. K. (2007). Cognitive wireless communication networks. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
21.
Shen, B., Ullah, S., & Kwak, K. (2010). Deflection coefficient maximization criterion based optimal cooperative spectrum sensing. AEU-International Journal of Electronics and Communications, 64(9), 819–827. doi: 10.1016/j.aeue.2009.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.
Zheng, S., Lou, C., & Yang, X. Cooperative spectrum sensing using particle swarm optimisation. Electronics Letters 46(22). doi: 10.1049/el.2010.2115.

Copyright information

Authors and Affiliations

Mohsen Akbari
- 1
Mohammad Ghanbarisabagh
- 2
Email author

1.Department of Electrical EngineeringFaculty of Engineering, University of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
2.School of Computer and Communication EngineeringUniversity Malaysia Perlis, Pauh PutraArau, PerlisMalaysia

A Novel Evolutionary-Based Cooperative Spectrum Sensing Mechanism for Cognitive Radio Networks

Abstract

Keywords

References

Copyright information

Authors and Affiliations

Personalised recommendations

Cite article