International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page169

Abstract

In this paper, we present a scheduling
algorithm that is used to manage resources in
a heterogeneous wireless network that works
with reconfigurabl e devices. The system
model supports device that works on both
unified and heterogeneous networks. Based
on the prior multi -attribute scheduling
algorithm which was implemented by Global
Resource Controller (GRC) resources are
managed that support various autonomous
wireless systems. The various attributes
considered here are spectral efficiency,
minimum potential delay fairness,
instantaneous and long term fairness and
overall energy consumption by considering
the battery life of each user. These attributes
are balances using a weighted sum values and
using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
which collects details from various network
providers. Using Matlab si mulator, we
compare previous separately studied
algorithms like Max-Sum Rate, Max-min
Fair, Proportional fair and min power with
our proposed min potential delay fairness
algorithm.
Keywords AHP-Analytical Hierarchy Process,
IP-CANs- IP Connectivity Access Networks, IMS-
IP Multi-Media Service, GRC-Global Resource
Controller, RR-Reconfigurable Radios

1. Introduction

Cellular industries which are driven by the
economi c forces are beginning to reduce the
number of cellular providers by increasing
their wireless network to grow larger based
on various wireless technologies that are
being introduced recent days. Recently, one
of the most significant way of achieving high
efficient joint wireless is by allocating fair
spectrum policies that are regularly
maintained. Due to the more usage of
unlicensed spectrum over for commercial
purposes, the usage of licensed spectrum has
is likely to be reducing even though the
demand for spectrum is increasing as early as
2014[1, 2]. This has sparked the interest in
developing techniques which focus on
improving the spectral efficiency which
includes cognitive radios and networks


that adopt to the behaviour to make the
efficient use of open or unlicensed spectrum.
While this attempts to process the efficient
spectrum utilization, the attempt to focus on
the energy efficiency was neglected by
network and device manufactures. Later only
the wireless operators have learned that
mobile device battery life efficiency is an
important attribute that should be provided
by operators services [3]. Another important
parameter that needs to be concerned while
going for resource allocation is the fairness
allocation across all users that are present in
the network.
2. System model

We consider a system model based on 3GPP
IMS architecture [4] as shown in Fig. 1. In
our model, a cognitive user equipment (cUE)
as an end-user with cognitive and
reconfigurable capabilities which has the
ability to access multiple IP Connecti vity
Access Networks (IP-CANs) separately or
simultaneously. We use Gl obal Resource
Controller (GRC) whi ch manages the
resources that are allocated by the network
providers. Based on these objectives, the
cUE-IP-CAN link and the rate assignment is
determined per mapping.


Fig.1. System Model
The working operation is based on the
following pattern. First, the cUE senses the
nearby IP-CANs that are available and
thereby register the available network with
the GRC before transmitting and data to the
IP-CAN. By selecting one of the available IP-
Multi Attribute Scheduling using Min Potential Delay Fairness having
Reconfigurable Devices in Heterogeneous Wireless System
R.Sambathkumar, V.Bharathi, Ravi Gunaseelan

1,3
PG Scholars,
2
Assistant Professor, Sri Manakula Vinayagar Engineering College, Puducherry.


International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page170

CANs that is present the cUE obtains the IP
Network connection which is used to
communicate with the external hosts. We
obtain IP-CANs in the following order Wi-Fi,
4G(LTE/WiMAX), 3G(HSPA/EVDO). This
preference mode is taken into account if the
user is not able to establish a connection to
his/her preference due to any technical
reasons like very high network load or
interference, then he/she will try to connect to
the second preference and this continues on
till the cUE establishes a connection with any
available IP-CAN. Then the cUE discovers,
registers and communicates with the GRC
application server which are described in [4].
The above procedure is shown in Fig. 2. Once
the cUE establishes connection with the GRC,
the cUE updates the details regarding the IP-
CAN to the GRC. The GRC will then be able
to calculate the cUE-IP-CAN route mapping
and rate assignment per mapping. This
mapping information is then sent to the cUE
so as to reconfigure the Reconfigurable
Radios (RRs) to the corresponding IP-CANs.


Fig.2. cUE-GRC Connectivity

Only after RR is configured according to
cUE-GRC mapping, radio link is established
with corresponding IP-CANs for data
transmission. The IP-CAN base station uses
the resource request from each cUE as
guidance to overcome their scheduling
decisions. The GRC scheduling decision is
based on long term scales (seconds or
minutes) while the local abase station
scheduling is based on short term scales i.e,
milliseconds only. Also while scheduling for
LTE and WiMAX are customizable, the IP-
CAN can generate a schedule in every 10
milliseconds and HSPA in 2 milliseconds and
EVDO in every 26.67 milliseconds but Wi-Fi
assigns channel to user for every 0.5
milliseconds to send one data frame. So, in
order to minimize the actual overhead and to
be sure that cUEs and base stations of various
IP-CANs uses the decision given by GRC by
a scheduling interval period of 1 second is
proposed for GRC.
3. Attribute function

A multi-attribute resource allocation
algorithm is used by GRC to determine the
cUE-IP-CAN mapping and rate assignment
per mapping for every schedule time t per
mapping. The attributes considered here are
spectral efficiency, max-min fairness,
minimum potential delay fairness,
proportional fairness and battery life of each
user in the system. The notations used are
extensions from [5, 6 ].
a) SPECTRAL EFFEICENCY
The spectral efficiency for the time
interval [t, t+1] is denoted by t which is
represented by (1). It is the ratio of aggregate
rate allocated to each user at time t to the
total spectrum user by the system. The rate
allocation to user denoted by u U at time t, is
represented in (2). This depends on : i) cUE-
IP-CAN assignment parameters at time t, and
ii) the aggregation rate allocated to user u U
by base station or access point at time t. Different
IP-CANs uses different terminologies like Wi-Fi
which uses CSMA/CA mechanism for resource
allocation similarly OFDMA based WiMAX and
LTE group 12 consecutive subcarriers in frequency
domain and 6 or 11 symbols in time domain so as
to forma minimumresource allocation unit.
( 1 )

( 2 )
Since most of the spectrum allocated is constant to
each IP-CAN, the total spectrum k is constant.
Max-Sum Rate (MSR) problem occurs when the
need to maximize the sumof rates allocated to each
user in order to improve the spectral efficiency. If
t max and t min represents the maximum and
minimum achievable spectral efficiency for time
period[t, t+1] obtained by solving MSR
optimization problem respectively. The normalized
spectral efficiency utility is given by,
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page171

( 3)

b) MAX-MIN FAIRNESS

The fairness can be calculated for each scheduling
time step be checking the minimum and maximum
data rate that is required. This fairness is
determined by transmitting data when there is
maximum and minimum numbers of users are
working when the systemis in use. For each GRC
interval the user achieves a data rate of T bits/sec.
For the admission control mechanism, if no users
are blocked than the utility becomes 1 and if all
users are blocked the utility becomes 0. The utility
is represented by,

(4)

c) MIN POTENTIAL DELAY FAIRNESS

When an user r tries to send a file of size w then the
time taken to transfer the file is given by x[6].

(5) If we decrease
the total transfer time of all the sources in network,
then the maximumutility can be given by,

(6)

d) PROPORTIONAL FAIRNESS

The 2
nd
step in resource allocation takes into
account the long-termfairness. The direct mapping
of J ains Fairness Index [7] is applied to long-term
fairness utility function shown in (7). The
proportional fairness utility is computed using
aggressive rates allocated to each user while
considering all time steps. The utility function is
normalized in the interval [0, 1].


(7)

e) BATTERY LIFETIME
The last metric in our multi-attribute resource
allocation algorithmis battery lifetime. Our energy
consumption model is similar to linear energy
consumption [8, 9]. The energy consumption of an
user during time period [t, t+1] is given by,
(8)
Pt,a(x) represents to the total energy component
and depends on the maximum number of data bytes
tua which can be transferred by the radio a A
of user u U during time period [t, t+1]. Then the
2
nd
component Po,a has two energy components
which represents the extra energy spent by RRs in
reconfiguring the hardware components and the
extra energy that is spent for establishing a
connection with the new IP-CAN. If t max and
t min represents the maximum and minimum
achievable overall energy consumption for time
period [t, t+1]. Then the battery llife utility function
is denoted by,

(9)

4. Multi-Attribute resource allocation
Resource allocation procedure is
represented here that is used y GRC that is used to
determine that mapping for cUE-IP-CAN and rate
assignment per mapping. There are two steps in
resource allocation problem i.e. an iterative
admission control policy designed to satisfy
minimum data rate requirements for real time
traffic and a weightage sum of the various
attributes mentioned above for best effort traffic.
The method is derived from[10].
The relationship between rtua and rtua,norm is
shown below,

(10)
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page172

The optimization problemP* is resolved using,

(11)
The second step in resource allocation is cUE-IP-
CAN mapping and rate assignment per mapping
based on optimization function M* derived in (13).
A method to maximize the long-term fairness
utility function is described below,
(12)
M*:
(13)
Where , and represents the corresponding
weightage that is provided by table I through AHP
[11]. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
determines the weightage of different utility
attributes using stake holders by pairwise
comparison and ratings.
TABLE I
AHP Table Matrix

5. Simulation and Description

A MATLAB based simulation model is developed
to shoe the properties of our multi attribute
resource allocation algorithmfor a heterogeneous
wireless system. Two major cellular carriers are
considered that has multiple IP-CANs in 2*2 km
area. Carrier 1 has EVDO, WiMAX and Wi-Fi IP-
CANs and Carrier 2 has HSPA, LTE and Wi-Fi IP-
CANs.
We consider two cases where Use case 1 has users
that connect to their own carriers network and Wi-
Fi network. Use case 2 has users that connect to
both carriers network and Wi-Fi network. For both
cases we use 100 nomadic users having 50 using
carrier 1 and other 50 using carrier 2. All users are
assumed to be equipped with 2 reconfigurable
radios for case 1 and 4 for case 2. The mobility is
considered to be 2 mph and the user can connect to
any IP-CAN [12].
6. Result

We first present the result for best effort traffic
condition and then for various scheduling
algorthms. The over all utility function depends on
the values of spectral efficiency, fairness and
energy consumption which are = 0.649, =
0.072, and =0.279 derived fromthe table. The
overall utility result (13)for case 1 is provided in
Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 Utility for Use Case 1Ttu=0
Because of more connectivity in case 2, the avg
spectral efficiency of case 2 is more than case 1.
Fig.4 and Fig.5 shows the overall utility of
combination of best effect and real time traffic for
Use Case 1 and Use case 2.
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 7 number 3 Jan 2014

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page173


Fig.4. Utility for Use Case 1Ttu

Fig.5. Utility for Use Case 2Ttu
The over all utility function is given below,
(14)
The overall utility of an algorithm in both cases
varies significantly than the other algorithms.
7. References

[1] FCC, ET Docket No. 03-222, Notice of
Proposed Rule Making and Order, Dec. 2003.
[2] R. Research, HSPA to LTE advanced,
Sep. 2009.
[3] I. Mansfield, Smartphone battery life
has become a significant drain on customer
satisfaction and loyalty, April 2012. [Online].
Available: http://www.cellular-
news.com/story/53523.php
[4] 3rd Generation Partnership Project, 3GPP
TS 23.228 V11.3.0, IP Multimedia Subsystem
(IMS); Stage 2 (Release 11), Dec. 2011.
[5] T. Bu, L. Li, and R. Ramjee,
Generalized proportional fair scheduling in third
generation wireless data networks, in Proc.
IEEE INFOCOM,2006.
[6] Congestion Control 2: Utility, Fairness
and Optimization in Resource Allocation Lecturers:
Laila Daniel and Krishnan Narayanan Date:11th
March 2013
[7] R. Jain, D. Chiu, and W. Hawe, A
quantitative measure of fairness and discrimination
for resource allocation in shared computer
systems, DEC Research Report TR-301, Sep.
1984.
[8] L. M. Feeney and M. Nilsson,
Investigating the energy consumptionof wireless
network interface in an ad hoc networking
environment, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2001.
[9] N. Balasubramanian, A. Balasubramanian,
and A. Venkataramani, En- ergy consumption in
mobile phones: a measurement study and implica-
tions for network applications, in Proc. 9th ACM
SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference,
2009.
[10] Balancing Spectral Efficiency, Energy
Consumption, and Fairness in Future
Heterogeneous
Wireless Systems with Reconfigurable Devices..
IEEE journal VOL.31 NO.5, MAY 2013
[11] T. Saaty, How to make a decision:
the analytic hierarchy process,European Journal
of Operational Research, vol. 48, 1990.
[12] J. Martin, R. Amin, A. Eltawil, and A.
Hussien, Limitations of 4G wireless systems, in
Proc. Virginia Tech Wireless Symposium, June
2011.