Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.

ORG

The Impact of Queue on Opportunistic based Cognitive Radio Networks


Samira Homayouni, Seyed Ali Ghorashi
AbstractIn cognitive radio systems which include primary and secondary networks, dynamic spectrum sharing methods are implemented in order to provide more spectrum access opportunities for secondary users without interference to the primary ones. In this paper, we investigate the impact of queuing secondary users on the cognitive radio system performance. Resource sharing process in the considered system is modeled by a two-dimensional Markov chain and performance metrics such as blocking and dropping probabilities, mean waiting time and channel utilization for different populations of secondary users are computed and compared. Both analytical and simulation results show that in the presence of queue, the dropping probability of secondary users decreases intensively with the cost of increasing secondary users' blocking probabilities and mean waiting time. Index Terms Blocking and dropping probabilities, Cognitive radio, Dynamic spectrum access, Markov chain.

1 INTRODUCTION
raditional wireless networks use fixed spectrum allocation methods for licensed users. Recent studies on the measurement of the spectrum show that by conventional spectrum allocation methods, the average utilization of the spectrum is low [1], [2]. Nowadays, exploiting the scarce spectrum resources has been significantly improved with emergence of dynamic spectrum access methods [3], [4] as well as cognitive radio technology [5]. Networks with opportunistic access to the spectrum allow the secondary users to use the primary users spectrum, if they are idle in a specific time or location. Each secondary user is supposed to have the capability of realization and usage of these idle channels [5]. Thus, secondary users can coexist with primary users in a given service area and share the spectrum with primary users without any harmful impact on them. A number of schemes related to opportunistic spectrum access have been investigated in the literature. For example, [6] analyzed the modeling of interference in spectrum access based on the listen before talk scheme. In [7], a measurement-based model for statistically describing the idle and busy periods of a WLAN is proposed. [8] proposed a network in which a primary user coexists with N secondary users with different types of traffic. They showed that the spectral efficiency can be increased by giving permission to reuse free bands of secondary users [9]. In [10], a channel reservation method for a spectrum sharing system has been introduced. Also several works has been done to use queues in cognitive radio networks; [11] analyzes the performance of the network with a delay and discard queue. Authors in [12] have

Samira Homayouni is with the Cognitive Telecommunications Research Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University G. C., Evin 198396113, Tehran, Iran, Seyed Ali Ghorashi is Assistant Professor of the Department of Electrical Enginireeing, Cognitive Telecommuications Research Group, Shahid Beheshti University G. C.,Evin 1983963113, Tehran, Iran.

used channel bonding/aggregation for multi-channel cognitive radio networks in order to take more advantage of bandwidth. Using this method, a secondary user can utilize separate parts of spectrum as a channel. In [13], two channel aggregation methods (fixed and variable) are compared. [14] proposes a performance model of an opportunistic spectrum sharing scheme. Since the detection mechanism in practical systems is associated with errors, then the authors have been extended their model to the unreliable sensing cases in [15] and [16]. In these models, secondary users can detect unused channels and make use of them by utilizing different spectrum sensing techniques. However, due to the priority of primary users over secondary ones, the channels cannot be used by secondary users, continuously. Thus, a secondary user upon detecting a primary user in its current channel, should vacant it and switch to another vacant channel, if there is any available one. This procedure is called spectrum hand-over. Otherwise, the secondary user connection moves to the queue and waits to achieve an opportunity to resume the service before the end of a maximum waiting time. In this paper, a method of opportunistic spectrum sharing in cognitive radio networks has been investigated in which primary and secondary users are in the same spectrum band. In contrast to [14], [15] and [16] in which the number of primary and secondary users in the system should be equal, our proposed model is a general one that can be easily matched to different scenarios. The spectral efficiency of channels with the presence of the secondary users can be increased by putting secondary users in the queue. This increases the probability of the channel being occupied and thus increases the channel efficiency. In this paper, we have investigated the effect of using queue in these cognitive radio systems. Different performance metrics such as blocking and dropping probabilities, mean waiting time and channel utilization with and without queue for different populations of secondary us-

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

10

ers are computed and compared. The reminder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 explains the system model and describes the performance analysis of channel allocation by the Markov process. Measurement metrics of network performance are derived in section 3. Simulation and analytical results of a cognitive radio system with primary and secondary users in two cases with and without queue are compared in section 4. Finally, the paper is concluded in section 5.

2 MODEL AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF CHANNEL ALLOCATION PROCESS


Consider a wireless cognitive network with access points that cover a certain service area and each base station puts a set of users under the service. Spectrum owners are defined as the primary users (PUs). They can allow a secondary network to use the same spectral bands, provided that the secondary users (SUs) only use those parts of the spectrum that are not used by the PUs. When a PU appears on a SUs channel, the ongoing SU must stop its data transmission to it, and if there is another idle channel, it has to switch. If there is no idle channel, in the absence of any queue, the SUs service forces to stop. To increase the spectral efficiency, a queue can be considered for SUs. When there is no idle channel in system, the SU can go to the queue and wait for a channel to become free in a FIFO order. We assume that both the primary and secondary networks are infra-structured and resource allocation is performed centrally by their access points, AP1 and AP2, respectively (Fig. 1). In dynamic spectrum sharing, where SUs share unused parts of the licensed spectrum opportunistically, PUs have the priority to access the channel. When a call request of PUs arrives, the PU occupies the channel if it is available. If the channels are occupied by SUs, they vacate the channel for PUs. Therefore, PUs' request is blocked only when all of the channels are occupied by other PUs. When a SU arrives, it occupies an idle channel if it is available. Otherwise, the SUs request is blocked. If some channels are occupied by PUs and some others are used by SUs, when a PU needs to use a certain channel, the SU should release that channel immediately, and switch to another channel, if there is any free. At this time, if all channels are occupied, the SUs call is placed in a queue (if there is queue) and temporarily avoids blocking. Now we explain our model assumptions; N channels are used to carry the traffic of both primary and secondary networks. We assume all cells are statistically identical, so we analyze our model in a cell. In each cell, the arrival time of both PU and SU calls follows an independent p s Poisson processes with rates and respectively. Also, the holding times of PU and SU calls are exponentially distributed with means and , respectively. We 1/ hp 1/ hs assume that the resident time of PU and SU calls in the service area is exponentially distributedwith mean and ,1/ rp respectively. 1/ r channel holding times are set to the Also s minimum holding time of calls and residence time in the area under the service. Therefore,
Fig. 1. Spectrum sharing model in a primary/secondary in the order network.

channel holding time for PU and SU calls is exponentially 1 distributed with mean P 1 1 / ( hp + rp ) and S = = 1 / ( hS + rS ), respectively [17]. For the sake of simplicity, we also assume that both PU and SU calls occupy only one channel for each call. Now we write ( X 1 (t ), X 2 (t )) as a 2-D Markov process with state spaces S = {( k1 , k2 ) | 0 k1 N , 0 k2 N ) in which X 1 (t ) and X 2 (t ) are the number of channels that are used by PU and SU at time t, respectively. The transition rate from state (k1 , k2 ) k ', k ' to (k1 ', k2 ') is denoted by Tk11 k2 2 . Also, the indicator func, tion 1{ x} , is defined as 1 if x is true and is 0 otherwise. Based on the above definitions, we can define three types for the state (k1 , k2 ) in Markov process; type-1: (k1 + k2 < N ) , type-2: (k1 + k2 = and type-3: (k1 + k2 > N ) . In the next N) section, we express the system model for three types of occupancy channel status.

2.1 Morkov Model (for the case of No Queue) The state diagram without queue for type-1and type-2 are shown in Fig. 2(a) and Fig. 2(b), respectively. Due to the lack of queue, type-3 does not happen in this case. For the same reason in this case we do not have the transitions from (i, j ) to (i + 1, j ) and (i, j + 1) . Moreover, for transition from (i, j ) to (i, j 1) and (i 1, j ) there should be at least one PU and one SU in the system. Transition from state (i, j ) to (i + 1, j 1) occurs when the PU arrives, while all channels are occupied and there is at least one SU in the system. In this case, the PU gets the SUs channel by dropping its call. This transition is eliminated for type-1, because at least one channel in the existing system is empty. ', k Therefore, the transition rate Tkk1 k2 2 ' for Markov model 1, with no queue is obtained as follows:
+ Tkk1, k21, k2 = p 1{0 k1 N 1,0 k2 N k1 1} 1 Tkk1, k21, k2 = k1 p 1{1 k1 N ,0 k2 N k1 } 1 , Tkk1, kk2 +1 = s 1{0 k1 N 1,0 k2 N k1 } 1 2 , Tkk1, kk2 1 = k2 s 1{0 k1 N 1,1 k2 N k1 } 1 2 + Tkk1, k21, k2 1 = ( k2 ) p 1{0 k1 N , k2 = N k1 } 1

(1)

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

11

(+ )s

, ,+

(+ ) p

+ ,

+ ,

( j ) p

Fig. 2. state transition diagram in the case of without queue

(a) (k1 + k2 < N )

N) (b) (k1 + k2 =

, , + + where ( k 2 ) = 0 for every k 2 = 0 and is equal to 1 in (Tkk1, k 1, k2 + Tkk1, k 1, k2 + Tkk1, k 1, k2 1 + Tkk1, kk2 +1 + Tkk1, kk2 1 ) I{k , k } 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 other cases. A forced SU disconnection depends on the k1 , k2 k1 , k2 {k1 , k2 } remaining number of channels and users in the system.= Tk1 +1, k2 I{k1 +1, k2 } {k1 + 1, k2 } + Tk1 1, k2 I{k1 1, k2 } + The transitions rate Tkk1 k 1, k2 1 , represent the state in , , 1, 2 {k1 1, k2 } + Tkk1,kk22+1 I{k1 ,k2 +1} {k1 , k2 + 1} + Tkk1,kk221 which a secondary user is interrupted from the system. 1 1

I{k1 ,k2 1} {k1 , k2 1}


2.2 Markov Model (for the case of With Queue) To avoid dropping SUs calls when all the channels are occupied by PUs and SUs, we consider a queue of length N. we choose the length of the queue equal to the number of channels, therefor, all of the on-going SU calls can transfer to the queue to avoid SU dropping. Transition state diagrams in the case of using queue for the type-2 and type-3 cases are shown in Fig. 3 (a) and (b), respectively. The state diagram for type-1 is the same as the case with no queue (Fig. 2. (a)). In this case, as the number of users in the system is less than the number of channels, queue is not used in practice. The transition rates for the case of queue can be written as follows:
+ Tkk1,k21,k2 = p 1{0 k1 N 1,0 k2 N } 1

(3)

and

= 0= 0 k2 k1

{k , k }I
1 2

{ k1 , k2 }

=1

(4)

where, {k1 , k2 } is the steady state probability for the state (k1 , k2 ) . Now, based on the steady state probabilities achieved above, different metrics such as blocking probabilities for the PUs and SUs, dropping probability for SUs and the channel utilization of system can be obtained.

3 PERFORMANCE METORICS
In this section we describe different measures of interest, such as blocking and dropping probabilities for two cases of with and without queue, as well as channel utilization.

k1 1, k2 k1 , k2

= k1 p 1{1 k1 N ,0 k2 N }
k2 s 1{0 k1 N 1,1 k2 N k1 } +
(2)

, Tkk1,kk2 +1 = s 1{0 k1 N 1,0 k2 N k1 } 1 2 , Tkk1,kk2 1 1 2

3.1 Call Blocking Probability for SUs


The SU call request is blocked, when a SU call request arrives, and all the channels are occupied by PUs and/or SUs. The blocking probability of the SUs is denoted by PBSU and can be written as follows:

[( N k1 ) s + (k2 N + k1 )rs ]1{1 k1 N , N k1 +1 k2 N }

We define I{k1 , k2 } as a function which has two cases; it is equal to 1 (with or without queue), if 0 k1 + k2 N (for= PBSU the case of with queue), and if k2 N (for the case of without queue), and I{k , k } = 0 otherwise. Then, ba- and 1 2 lanced state equation for two Markov models (with and without queue) can be expressed as:

k1 = 0

(k , N k )
1 1

(5)

PBSU =

= = k1 0 k2 N k1

(k1 , k2 )

(6)

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

12

+ s s

there is queue in the system. Note also that, in this case there should be at least one SU in the system. The dropping probability of the SUs is denoted by PDSU , and it is obtained as:
p

(+ ) p

+ ,

= PDSU

k2 =1

(N k , k )
2 2

(9)

3.4 Channel Utilization Probability


The ratio of the average number of busy channels to the number of all channels is called channel utilization and is denoted by and can be written as follows:

(a)

,+

(k1 + k2 = N)
, p

=
and

1 N N k1 k ((k1 + k2 ) (k1 , k2 ))I{k1 ,k2 } N = 0= 0 k1 2

(10)

s +(+ + )s

s +( + )s p p

1 N N k1 [ ((k1 + k2 ) (k1 , k2 ))I{k1 ,k2 } = N = 0= 0 k1 k2


+ ,

k1 =1 k2 = N k1 +1

( N (k1 , k2 ))I{k1 ,k2 } ]

(11)

( + )p

for the cases of without and with queue, respectively. In equation (11), the first term is defined as the channel utilization of both type-1 and type-2 and the second one is for type-3.

,+

4 NUMERICAL AND SIMULATION RESULTS


In this section, we present the numerical and simulation results to show the applicability and the performance of the proposed channel allocation method. To obtain numerical results, we consider a cellular system in which each cell has 10 channels available. We assume that both PUs and SUs arrivals follow Poisson process with parameters p = s = 1 call / hour. The mean call time of each user is 30 seconds which follows the exponential distribution. Channel allocation strategy is simulated for two cases. In the first case, there is no queue for the SUs. When PUs arrive, one of the ongoing SUs will be dropped from the channel, if there is no other available channel. If all channels are occupied by other PUs, the incoming PU will be blocked. In the second case, to reduce of the SUs blocking probability, a queue is used whose length is equal to the number of channels in the system. We also assume that the maximum waiting time of SUs in the queue is set to 5 sec, which means that after this time if there is no free channel to be allocated to these SUs, they will be dropped. It is assumed that the number of PUs in each cell is constant and it is set to 500. However, the number of SUs is variable. This is because of determining the impact of the SUs population on the PUs performance. First, we validate our analysis of the blocking probabilities by comparing the results of the simulation and numerical solution of (3) and (4) for both cases of with and without queue. Notice that the SUs have no effect on the PUs activities, therefore having queue has no effect on the blocking probability of PUs. Blocking probabilities of PUs and SUs are

(b)

(k1 + k2 > N )

Fig. 3. State transition diagram when queue is used.

for the cases of without and with queue, respectively.

3.2 Call Blocking Probability for PUs


The primary call request is blocked, when a PU call request arrives, and all the channels are occupied by the PUs. The blocking probability of the PUs is denoted by PBPU and can be written as follows:

PBPU = N= 0) = (k1 , k2
and

(7)

PBPU =

for the cases of without and with queue, respectively.

k2 = 0

(N , k )
2

(8)

3.3 Call Dropping Probability for SUs


The ongoing SUs call is dropped, when a PU call request arrives, all the channels are occupied by either PUs and/or SUs, and at that time there is no empty channel to switch to it. Note that, call dropping only happens when

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

13

0.45 0.4
SU and PU call blocking probabilities

0.9
Numerical SU with queue Simulation SU with queue Numerical SU wihtout queue Simulation SU without queue Numerical PU Simulation PU

0.85 0.8
channel utilization

with queue without queue

0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 100

0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5

200

800 700 600 500 400 300 Number of SUs per cell (numer of PUs=500)

900

1000

0.45 100

200

300 400 500 600 700 800 number of SUs (number of PUs = 500)

900

1000

Fig. 4. Comparision of PU and SU call blocking probabilities, for simulation and numerical results. Notice that the blocking probability of PUs is independent of queue presence, as the priority is with PUs and channel sensing is assumed to be ideal.

Fig. 5. Channel utilization in two cases of with and without queue.


0.45 0.4 SU with queue SU without queue PU with queue PU without queue

both calculated and simulated over a wide range of the users traffic with different populations. Fig. 4 shows a good compatibility between numerical and simulation results of the proposed schemes. The simulation was performed in MATLAB. Fig. 5 shows the channel utilization for two cases of with and without queue. It can be observed that the channel utilization is slightly increased when queue is used for SUs. This is due to SUs reconnection into the channel that increases the probability of busy channel consequently. Fig. 6 shows the blocking probability of the PUs and SUs in two cases of with and without queue. It can be seen that in both cases, increasing the SUs number has no effect on blocking probability of the PUs. The reason is that we have assumed an ideal channel sensing performed by SUs. The blocking probability of the SUs in the case of using queue is more than the case of without it. This can be explained as follows. When there is a queue in the system, the channel utilization increases and this will increase the probability of busy channels. Then at the SUs arrival times, there is more probability for them to see the channel busy and therefore the blocking probability will increase. Fig. 7 demonstrates the call dropping probability of the SUs as the SUs traffic increase in both cases. According to this figure, the dropping probability of the SUs in the case of using queue is dramatically lower than the case with no queue, because as the SUs are dropped by the PUs, they move to the queue and the queued secondary calls reconnect back to the system as soon as they find an idle channel. Fig. 8 shows the mean waiting time of the SUs in the queue. It can be seen that as the SUs population increases, the mean waiting time will increase as well. According to the results of figures 5 to 8, it can be said that an increase of the SUs population does not affect the performance of the primary users. If there is a queue, the dropping probability of the SUs will significantly reduce at

SU and PU call blocking probabilities

0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 100 200

300

800 700 600 500 400 number of SUs (number of PUs = 500)

900

1000

Fig. 6. SU and PU call blocking probabilities are compared for the cases of with and without queue.
0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 100 without queue with queue

SU call Dropping probability

200

800 600 700 400 500 300 number of SUs (number of PUs = 500)

900

1000

Fig. 7. SU call dropping probability for two cases of with and without queue.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 7, JULY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

14

0.5 0.45

[4]

[5]
0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 100

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 number of SUs (number of PUs = 500) 900 1000

Fig. 8. SU mean call waiting time in queue.

[10]

the expense of an increase in the blocking probability and the waiting time of SUs. In practice and, from the users point of view, call dropping is more unpleasant than call blocking. Therefore, putting the queue for SUs reduces the probability of dropping, which leads to more satisfied secondary network customers, while primary network costumers are not affected at all.

[11]

[12]

[13]

5 CONCLUSION
In this paper, we used Markov model to evaluate the impact of using queue in opportunistic radio management of secondary users in a cognitive radio network. Metrics such as the blocking and dropping probabilities for users in cases of with and without queue are derived and computed. Both numerical and simulation results show that opportunistic spectrum sharing increases the channel utilization and if there is a queue for SUs, this increase is even more. It also showed that the presence of queue reduces the dropping probability of SUs while slightly increases their blocking probability and leads to experiencing some delays for SUs, which is a well-known trade-off between blocking and dropping probabilities. In general, it is demonstrated in this paper that at least as far as we assume a perfect channel sensing mechanism, using queue for SUs is beneficial for secondary network users.

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

network: a survey, Elsevier Computer Networks, vol. 50, pp. 21272159, Sept.2006. A. Attar, M. S.A. Ghorashi, Sooriyabandara and A.H. Aghvami, Challenges of real-time secondary usage of spectrum, Computer Networks 52 (2008) 816830. J.Mitola III, Cognitive radio: an integrated agentarchitecture for software defined radio, PhD thesis, KTHRoyal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, 2000. A. E. Leu, M. McHenry, and B. L. Mark, Modeling and analysis of interference in listen-before-talk spectrum access schemes, Int. J. Network Mgmt, vol. 16, pp. 131147, 2006. S. Geirhofer, L. Tong, and B. Sadler, A measurement-based model for dynamic spectrum access in WLAN channels, in Proc. IEEE MILCOM06, pp. 17, Oct. 2006. A. S. Zahmati, X. Fernando, and A. Grami Steady-State markov chain analysis for heterogeneous cognitive radio networks, IEEE sarnoff symposium, Princeton, pp. 1-5, May, 2010. S. Tang and B. L. Mark, Performance analysis of a wireless network with opportunistic spectrum sharing, in Proc. IEEE Globecom07, Washington, D.C., USA, Nov. 2007. X. Zhu, L. Shen and T.-S. P. Yum, Analysis of cognitive radio spectrum access with optimal channel reservation, IEEE Commun. Letters, vol. 11, no.4, pp.304-306, Apr. 2007. M. Zhang, Sh. Jiang, G. Wei, and H. Wang, Performance analysis of the cognitive radio network with a call level queue for secondary users, Wireless communications, Networking and Mobile computing, Wicom09, IEEE. Beijing, pp. 1-4, Sept. 2009. L. J. Pla, V. Li, and F. Y, Analysis on channel bonding/aggregation for multi-channel cognitive radio networks, IEEE (EW), European. Lucca, pp. 468-474, Apr. 2010. L. Jongheon, S. Jaewoo, Analysis of cognitive radio networks with channel aggregation, IEEE (WCNC). Sydney, Australia. pp. 1-6, Apr. 2010. S. Tang and B. L. Mark, Performance analysis of a wireless network with opportunistic spectrum sharing, in Proc. IEEE Globecom'07, Washington, D.C., USA, Nov. 2007. S. Tang, M. B. L, Modeling and analysis of opportunistic spectrum sharing with unreliable spectrum sensing, IEEE Trans. On wireless communication, pp. 1934-1943, Apr. 2009. S. Tang, Performance modeling of an opportunistic spectrum sharing wireless network with unreliable sensing, IEEE (ICNSC), pp. 101-106, Apr. 2010. Y. Fang, Y.-B. Lin, and I. Chlamtac, Channel occupancy timesand handoff rate for mobile computing and PCS networks, IEEE Trans. on Computers, vol. 47, pp. 679692, June 1998.

SU mean waiting time in queue (seconds)

Samira Homayouni is a M.Sc. student in Cognitive Telecommunications Research Group, at the Department of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. Her research is focusedon Cognitive Radio Networks, opportunistic spectrum access, dynamic spectrum sharing and queuing theory. Seyed Ali Ghorashi Received his B.Sc. and M.Sc. Degrees in electrical engineering from the university of Tehran, Iran, in 1992 and1995, respectively. Then, he joined SANA Pro. Inc., where he worked on m odeling and s imulation of OFDM based wireless LAN systems and interference cancellation methods in WCDMA systems. Since2000, he worked as a research associate at Kings College London on Capacity enhancement methods in Multi-leyer WCDMA systemssponsored by Mobile VCE. In 2003 he received his PHD at Kings College and since then he worked at Kings College as a research fellow. In 2006 he joined Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd as a senior researcher and no w he is a f aculty member of Cognitive Telecommunications Research Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University G.C., at Tehran, Iran, working on wireless communication.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported by Iranian Education and Research Institute for Information and Communication Technology (ERICT), under the grant number 500/8974.

REFERENCES
[1] [2] [3] M. McHenry, Frequency agile spectrum access technologies, in Proc. FCC Workshop on Cognitive Radio, May 2003. G. Staple, and K. Werbach, The end of spectrum scarcity, IEEE Spectrum, vol. 41, pp. 4852, March 2004. I. F. Akyildiz, W.-Y. Lee, M. C. Vuran, and S. Mohantly, Next generation/ dynamic spectrum access/cognitive radio wireless