Advertisement

Wireless Networks

, Volume 23, Issue 8, pp 2319–2333 | Cite as

On the power of uniform power: capacity of wireless networks with bounded resources

  • Chen Avin
  • Zvi Lotker
  • Yvonne-Anne Pignolet
Article

Abstract

The throughput capacity of arbitrary wireless networks under the physical Signal to Interference Plus Noise Ratio (SINR) model has received much attention in recent years. In this paper, we investigate the question of how much the worst-case performance of uniform and non-uniform power assignments differ under constraints such as a bound on the area where nodes are distributed or restrictions on the maximum power available. We determine the maximum factor by which a non-uniform power assignment can outperform the uniform case in the SINR model. More precisely, we prove that in one-dimensional settings the capacity of a non-uniform assignment exceeds a uniform assignment by at most a factor of \(O(\log L_{\max })\) when the length of the network is \(L_{\max }\). In two-dimensional settings, the uniform assignment is at most a factor of \(O(\log P_{\max })\) worse than the non-uniform assignment if the maximum power is \(P_{\max }\). We provide algorithms that reach this capacity in both cases. These bounds are tight in the sense that previous work gave examples of networks where the lack of power control causes a performance loss in the order of these factors. To complement our theoretical results and to evaluate our algorithms with concrete input networks, we carry out simulations on random wireless networks. The results demonstrate that the link sets generated by the algorithms contain around 20–35 % of all links. As a consequence, engineers and researchers may prefer the uniform model due to its simplicity if this degree of performance deterioration is acceptable.

Keywords

Wireless networks SINR Network capacity Power control 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Zvi Lotker: This Research was supported in part by Fondation des Sciences Mathmatiques de Paris and by the Ministry of Science Technology and by Space, Israel, French-Israeli Project MAIMONIDE 31768XL, and by the French-Israeli Laboratory FILOFOCS. Yvonne-Anne Pignolet: Part of this research was done when the author was at ETH Zurich, Switzerland.

References

  1. 1.
    Gupta, P., & Kumar, P. R. (2000). The capacity of wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 46(2), 388–404.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moscibroda., T. & Wattenhofer, R. (2006). The complexity of connectivity in wireless networks. In Proceedings of 25th Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM) (pp 1–13).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moscibroda, T., Wattenhofer, R., & Weber, Y. (2006). Protocol design beyond graph-based models. In Proceedings of 5th ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HOTNETS).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Avin, C., Emek, Y., Kantor, E., Lotker, Z., Peleg, D., & Roditty, L. (2009). Sinr diagrams: towards algorithmically usable sinr models of wireless networks. In PODC (pp. 200–209).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goussevskaia, O., Oswald, Y. A., & Wattenhofer, R. (2007) Complexity in geometric sinr. In MobiHoc’07: Proceedings of the 8th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing (pp. 100–109). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moscibroda, T., Oswald, Y.A., & Wattenhofer, R. (2007). How optimal are wireless scheduling protocols? In Proceedings of 26th IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) (pp. 1433–1441).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lotker, Z., Parter, M., Peleg, D., & Pignolet, Y. A. (2011). Distributed power control in the SINR model. In INFOCOM 2011. 30th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (pp. 2525–2533).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rappaport, T. (2002). Wireless communications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsai, Y.-C., & Su, S.-L. (2015). An SINR-based routing and MAC design for QoS in wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 21(4), 1141–1154.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    El-Fadeel, G. A., El-Sawy, A., & Adib, M. J. (2012). C4. vertical handoff in heterogeneous wireless networks with predictive sinr using gm (1, 1). In: 2012 29th National Radio Science Conference (NRSC), (pp. 175–184).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moscibroda, T. ( 2007). The worst-case capacity of wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of 6th Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) (pp. 1–10).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grönkvist, J. (2005). Interference-Based Scheduling in Spatial Reuse TDMA. Ph.D. dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lebhar, E., & Lotker, Z. (2009). Unit disk graph and physical interference model: putting pieces together. In Proceedings of 23rd IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS) (pp. 1–8).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goussevskaia, O., Halldorsson, M., Wattenhofer, R., & Welzl, E. (2009). Capacity of arbitrary wireless networks. In 28th Annual IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Halldórsson, M. M., & Wattenhofer, R. (2009). Wireless communication is in APX. In S. Albers, A. Marchetti-Spaccamela, Y. Matias, S. E. Nikoletseas, & W. Thomas (Eds.) ICALP (1), ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 5555, pp. 525–536). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Avin, C., Lotker, Z., Pasquale, F., & Pignolet, Y.-A. (2009). A note on uniform power connectivity in the sinr model. In Algorithmic Aspects of Wireless Sensor Networks (pp. 116–127).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zander, J. (1992). Performance of optimum transmitter power control in cellular radio systems. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 41, 57–62.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fanghänel, A., Kesselheim, T., Räcke, H., & Vöcking, B. (2009). Oblivious interference scheduling. In Proceedings of 28th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC) (pp. 220–229).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fanghänel, A., Kesselheim, T., & Vöcking, B. (2009). Improved algorithms for latency minimization in wireless networks. In Proceedings of 36th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP) (pp. 447–458).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Halldórsson, M. M. (2009). Wireless scheduling with power control. In A. Fiat, & P. Sanders, (Eds.) ESA, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 5757, pp. 361–372). Berlin: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Collotta, M., & Pau, G. (2015). Bluetooth for internet of things: A fuzzy approach to improve power management in smart homes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 44, 137–152.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pillai, S., Suel, T., & Cha, S. (2005). The Perron–Frobenius theorem. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 22(2), 62–75.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ABB Corporate ResearchBadenSwitzerland
  2. 2.Ben Gurion University of the NegevBeer ShevaIsrael
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer Science, Institut de Recherche en Informatique FondamentaleUniv. Paris DiderotParisFrance

Personalised recommendations