Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A quantitative analysis of the throughput gains and the energy efficiency of multi-radio transmission diversity in dense access networks

  • Published:
Telecommunication Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Densification of mobile network infrastructure and integration of multiple radio access technologies are important approaches to support the increasing demand for mobile data traffic and to reduce energy consumption in future 5G networks. In this paper, the benefits of multi-radio transmission diversity (MRTD) are investigated by modelling the radio access link throughputs as uniform- and Rayleigh-distributed random variables and evaluating different user schedulers and resource allocation strategies. We examine different strategies for the allocation of radio accesses to individual users ranging from independent utilisation of the radio accesses to MRTD-enabled schemes. The schemes are compared by considering the statistics of the system throughput and energy consumption of the mobile devices. It is shown that MRTD can increase the throughput significantly through two types of diversity gain: Firstly by having multiple radio accesses to choose from for each user and secondly by having more available users to choose from for each radio access. The increased throughput also helps to reduce the energy consumption per bit, but this comes at a cost of increased energy consumption for channel measurement and reporting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In fact the same acronym (MR) will be used for both the allocation and the scheduling mechanisms throughout this paper. The distinction will be made explicit wherever necessary.

  2. The utilisation of multi-radio ARQ [28] or other cooperative ARQ schemes [29] have shown further improvements in terms of QoS.

  3. Replacing \(M-m\) in (9) by \(m\), yields (7).

  4. Given that \(0\le C_k^{(g)} (t)\le 1\), maximum system throughput would occur when \(C_k^{(g)} (t)=1 \forall k,g,t\), in which case \(R=G\).

  5. Maximum rate allocation among RAs implies a form of maximum C/I scheduling among the users within each RA.

References

  1. Aleksić, S. (2013). Energy-efficient communication networks for improved global energy productivity. Telecommunication Systems, 54(2), 183–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Katsigiannis, M., & Hämmäinen, H. (2014). Energy consumption of radio access networks in Finland. Telecommunication Systems, 55(2), 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zander, J., & Mähönen, P. (2013). Riding the data tsunami in the cloud: myths and challenges in future wireless access. IEEE on Communications Magazine, 51(3), 145–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhushan, N., et al. (2014). Network densification: the dominant theme for wireless evolution into 5G. IEEE on Communications Magazine, 52(2), 82–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 3GPP TR 36.842 V12.0.0. (2013). Study on Small Cell enhancements for EUTRA and E-UTRAN; Higher layer aspects (Release 12), Dec 2013.

  6. Osseiran, A., et al. (2014). Scenarios for 5G mobile and wireless communications: the vision of the METIS project. IEEE on Communications Magazine, 52(5), 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sachs, J., et al. (2008). Generic abstraction of access performance and resources for multi-radio access management. In: Advances in Mobile and Wireless Communications, Views of the 16th IST Mobile and Wireless Communication Summit. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, (Vol. 16, Part IV , pp. 239–259).

  8. Jin, F., et al. (2007). Cost-based approach to access selection and vertical handover decision in multi-access networks. In: NETWORKING 2007. Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks. Wireless Networks, Next Generation Internet, (Vol. 4479).

  9. Koudouridis, G. P., et al. (2005). Generic link layer functionality for multi-radio access networks. In: Proceedings of IST Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit, (pp. 1–5).

  10. Yaver, A. & Koudouridis, G. P. (2009). Performance evaluation of multi-radio transmission diversity: QoS support for delay sensitive services. In: IEEE 69th on Vehicular Technology Conference, 2009. VTC Spring 2009, (pp. 1–5).

  11. Koudouridis, G. P., Yaver, A. & Khattak, M. U. (2009). Performance evaluation of multi-radio transmission diversity for TCP flows. In: IEEE 69th on Vehicular Technology Conference, 2009. VTC Spring 2009, (pp. 1–5).

  12. Ma, X., Sheng, M. & Zhang, Y. (2012). Flow splitting for multi-RAT heterogeneous networks. In: IEEE on Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), 2012, (pp. 1–5).

  13. Dimou, K. et al. (2005). Generic link layer: A solution for multi-radio transmission diversity in communication networks beyond 3G. In: Proceedings of IEEE Semi-annual Vehicular Technology Conference, VTC2005-Fall, (Vol. 3, pp. 1672–1676).

  14. Koudouridis, G. P. (2013). Study of multi-radio transmission diversity in heterogeneous access networks. In: Licentiate Thesis in Telecommunications, Royal Institute of Technology, KTH.

  15. Melia, T., Oliva, A., Soto, I., Serrano, P., & Aguiar, R. (2007). Network controlled handovers: challenges and possibilities. Wireless Personal Communications, 43(3), 959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Magnusson, P., et al. (2005). Multi-radio resource management for communication networks beyond 3G. In: IEEE 62nd on Vehicular Technology Conference, 2005. VTC-2005-Fall. 2005, (Vol. 3, pp. 1653–1657).

  17. Yang, X., et al. (2010). Intermittent WLAN and interactions across heterogeneous wireless networks. Telecommunication Systems 2010, 43(1–2), 13.

  18. Koudouridis, G. P., Karimi, H. R., & Dimou, K. (2005). Switched multi-radio transmission diversity in future access networks. In: IEEE 62nd Vehicular Technology Conference, 2005. VTC-2005-Fall. 2005, (Vol. 1, pp. 235–239).

  19. Berggren, F. & Litjens, R. (2006). Performance analysis of access selection and transmit diversity in multi-access networks. In: Proceedings on Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking 2006, Mobicom 2006.

  20. Choi, Yonghoon, Kim, Hoon, Han, Sang-wook, & Han, Youngnam. (2010). Joint resource allocation for parallel multi-radio access in heterogeneous wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 9(11), 3324–3329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Xie, W., et al. (2010). Feasibility of optimally assigning channels by exhaustive search in commercial multi-radio wireless mesh networks. Telecommunication Systems 2010, 44(1–2), 171.

  22. Calabuig, D., Monserrat, J. F., Martín-Sacristán, D., & Cardona, N. (2010). Joint dynamic resource allocation for QoS provisioning in multi-access and multi-Service Wireless Systems. Mobile Networks and Applications, 15(5), 627.

  23. He, L., Su, X., Zeng, J. & Kuang, Y. (2012). Joint resource allocation method in heterogeneous wireless networks based on genetic algorithm. In: International Conference on Wireless Communications & Signal Processing (WCSP), 2012, (pp. 1–5).

  24. Koudouridis, G. P., et al. (2005). Feasibility studies and architecture for multi-radio access in ambient networks. In: Proceedings Wireless World Research Forum Meeting, Paris, France.

  25. Holtzman, J. M. (2001). Asymptotic analysis of proportional fair algorithm. In: IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, 2001, (Vol. 2, pp. F-33- F-37).

  26. Elliott, R. C. & Krzymien, W. A. (2002). Scheduling algorithms for the cdma2000 packet data evolution. In: IEEE 56th Proceedings Vehicular Technology Conference, 2002. VTC 2002-Fall, 2002, (Vol. 1, pp. 304–310).

  27. Ameigeiras, P., Wigard, J., & Mogensen, P. (2004). Performance of packet scheduling methods with different degree of fairness in HSDPA. In: IEEE 60th on Vehicular Technology Conference, 2004. VTC2004-Fall, 2004, (Vol. 2, pp. 860–864).

  28. Koudouridis, G. P. & Karlsson, P. (2007). On the performance of multi-radio ARQ and packet scheduling in ambient networks. In: IEEE 66th on Vehicular Technology Conference, 2007. VTC-2007 Fall, 2007, (pp. 1456–1460).

  29. Antonopoulos, A. & Verikoukis, C. (2010). Network coding-based cooperative ARQ scheme. In: IEEE ICC 2011, June 2011, Kyoto, Japan. 3GPP TR 36.814 V9.0.0, Further advancements for E-UTRA physical layer aspects (Release 9).

  30. Bastos, J., Albano, M., Marques, H., Ribeiro, J., Rodriguez, J. & Verikoukis C. (2012). Smart Interface Switching for Energy Efficient Vertical Handovers in ns-2. In: The IET Communications 2012.

  31. Huang, J., Qian, F., Gerber, A., Morley, Z., Subhabrata M. & Spatscheck, S. O. (2012). A close examination of performance and power characteristics of 4G LTE Networks. In: MobiSys (pp. 225–238).

  32. Lampropoulos, G., Kaloxylos, A., Passas, N., & Merakos, L. (2007). A power consumption analysis of tight-coupled WLAN/UMTS networks. In: IEEE 18th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, 2007. PIMRC 2007, (pp. 1–5).

  33. Rodriguez Castillo, J. M., Lundqvist, H. & Qvarfordt, C. (2013). Energy consumption impact from Wi-Fi traffic Offload. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems (ISWCS 2013), (pp. 1–5).

  34. Seo, S., & Song, J. (2009). An energy-efficient interface selection for multi-mode terminals by utilizing out-of-band paging channels. Telecommunication Systems, 42(1–2), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author would like to thank Dr. Anders Dahlén, TeliaSonera, Sweden for valuable discussions. The work has been partially funded by The Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems, VINNOVA, as part of the Celtic Green-T project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georgios P. Koudouridis.

Appendix: Theorem proof

Appendix: Theorem proof

Proposition 4.1

Given definition 4.1, \(P(R_{g[m]} {\vert }K)\), the probability that the maximum allocation process transmits with link throughput equal to \(R_{g[m]}\) is

$$\begin{aligned} P\left( {R_{g[m]} \left| K \right. } \right) =P_{g[m]} ^{K}-P_{g\left[ {m-1} \right] } ^{K} \end{aligned}$$
(8)

Proof

We start by deriving an expression for \(P(R_{g[M]}{\vert } K)\). Following our notation, \(p_{g[M]}\) denotes the probability that a user can transmit over the \(g\)th RA with the maximum link throughput \(R_{g[M]}\), while \(P_{g[M]}\) denotes the cumulative probability that a user can transmit at any of the rates up to \(R_{g[M]}\). Consequently, the probability that a user will send at rates lower than the maximum link throughput equals \((1-p_{g[M]})= P_{g[M-1]}\). Since users’ link throughputs at any instant of time \(t\) are assumed to be independent events, the outcome that all \(K\) users may send at lower link thoughput values than maximum is then given by \((1-p_{g[M]})^{K}=P(r<R_{g[M]})^{K}= Pr\le R_{g[M-1]})^{K}\). The relevant probabilities are reproduced in Table 2.

Table 2 Probabilities for the system to transmit at some rates

The derivation of the probability that at least one user among \(K\) users can send with \(r=R_{g[M-1]}\) equals \(1-P(r\le R_{g[M-1]})^{K}\) is summarized in (48) below:

$$\begin{aligned}&P\left( {R_{g[M]} |K } \right) \nonumber \\&=P\left( {\hbox {at least one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r=R_{g[M]} } \right) \nonumber \\&=1-P\left( {\hbox {no one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r=R_{g[M]} } \right) \nonumber \\&=1-(1-p_{g[M]} )^{K} \nonumber \\&=1-P\left( {\hbox {all }K\hbox { users have maximum rate }r\le R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&=1-P(r\le R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] })^{K} =1-P_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] }^{K} \end{aligned}$$
(48)

Next we will derive the probability of having the system transmitting at the next highest rate \(P(R_{g[M-1]}{\vert } K)\). According to the maximum rate allocation scheme the system transmits at the next highest link throughput, \(R_{g[M-1]}\), if and only if there is no user that can transmit at \(R_{g[M]}\) and there is at least one user that can transmit at \(R_{g[M-1]}\). A user will transmit at rates lower than \(R_{g[M]}\) and \(R_{g[M-1]}\) with probability \((1-p_{g[M]} -p_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } )=P\left( {r\le R_{g\left[ {M-2} \right] } } \right) =P_{g\left[ {M-2} \right] } \). This is also shown in Table 2.

For \(K\) users with independent rates this becomes \((1-p_{g[M]} -p_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } )^{K}=P\left( {r\le R_{g\left[ {M-2} \right] } } \right) ^{K}\) and equals the probability that the system will neither transmit with \(R_{g[M]}\) nor \(R_{g[M-1]}\). Thus the probability of having the system transmitting at the next highest rate \(P(R_{g[M-1]} {\vert }K)\) is given by

$$\begin{aligned}&P\left( {R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } |K} \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =P\left( {\hbox {at least one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -P\left( {\hbox {at least one among }K\hbox { users can send at }r\ge R_{g[M]} } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =1-P\left( {\hbox {no one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -\left( {1-P\left( {\hbox {no one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g[M]} } \right) } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =1-(1-p_{g[M-1]} -p_{g[M]} )^{K}-(1-(1-p_{g[M]} )^{K}) \nonumber \\&\quad =P\left( {\hbox {all }K\hbox { users have maximum rates }r\le R_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -P\left( {\hbox {all }K\hbox { users have maximum rates }r\le R_{g\left[ {M-2} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =P_{g\left[ {M-1} \right] } ^{K}-P_{g\left[ {M-2} \right] } ^{K} \end{aligned}$$
(49)

Similarly we derive the probability that the system will transmit at rate \(R_{g[M-m]}\) as follows

$$\begin{aligned}&P\left( {R_{g\left[ {M-m} \right] } |K} \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =P\left( {\hbox {at least one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-m} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -P\left( {\hbox {at least one among }K\hbox { users can send at }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-m+1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =1-P\left( {\hbox {no one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-m} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -\left( {1-P\left( {\hbox {no one among }K\hbox { users can send with }r\ge R_{g\left[ {M-m+1} \right] } } \right) } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =P\left( {\hbox {all }K\hbox { users have maximum rates }r\le R_{g\left[ {M-m} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\qquad -P\left( {\hbox {all }K\hbox { users have maximum rates }r\le R_{g\left[ {M-m-1} \right] } } \right) \nonumber \\&\quad =P_{g\left[ {M-m} \right] } ^{K}-P_{g\left[ {M-m-1} \right] } ^{K} \end{aligned}$$
(50)

Generally, by replacing \(M-m\) in (13) by \(m\) the probability that a system will transmit at rate \(R_{g[m]}\) is given by

The above proposition provides an expression to calculate the probability of the definition 4.1 as expressed in (7). \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koudouridis, G.P., Lundqvist, H., Karimi, H.R. et al. A quantitative analysis of the throughput gains and the energy efficiency of multi-radio transmission diversity in dense access networks. Telecommun Syst 59, 145–168 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9889-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-014-9889-0

Keywords

Navigation