A Framework for Packet Delay Analysis of Point-to-Multipoint Underlay Cognitive Radio Networks

Sibomana, Louis; Zepernick, Hans‐Jürgen; Tran, Hung; Kabiri, Charles

doi:10.1109/tmc.2016.2621760

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CRNs can be roughly categorized into overlay, interweave and underlay paradigms. Overlay CRNs are relatively difficult to be implemented due to the prerequisite of the prior information of PUs [3]. The implementation of the interweave scheme is also challenging because it requires the perfect detection of the existence of PUs, which however is difficult to be implemented in practice [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The implementation of the interweave scheme is also challenging because it requires the perfect detection of the existence of PUs, which however is difficult to be implemented in practice [4]. In an underlay CRN, both SUs and PUs can concurrently use the same spectrum under the provision that the interference caused by SUs at the primary receiver is below a predefined threshold [3]. As a result, a more efficient spectrum utilization can be achieved in underlay Q.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Connectivity of Underlay Cognitive Radio Networks With Directional Antennas

Wang

Dai

Georgiou

et al. 2018

IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In cognitive radio networks (CRNs), the connectivity of secondary users (SUs) is difficult to be guaranteed due to the existence of primary users (PUs). Most prior studies only consider cognitive radio networks equipped with omni-directional antennas causing high interference at SUs. We name such CRNs with omni-directional antennas as Omn-CRNs. Compared with an omni-directional antenna, a directional antenna can concentrate the transmitting/receiving capability at a certain direction, consequently resulting in less interference. In this paper, we investigate the connectivity of SUs in CRNs with directional antennas (named as Dir-CRNs). In particular, we derive closed-form expressions of the connectivity of SUs of both Dir-CRNs and Omn-CRNs, thus enabling tractability. We show that the connectivity of SUs is mainly affected by two constraints: the spectrum availability of SUs and the topological connectivity of SUs. Extensive simulations validate the accuracy of our proposed models. Meanwhile, we also show that Dir-CRNs can have higher connectivity than Omn-CRNs mainly due to the lower interference, the higher spectrum availability and the higher topological connectivity brought by directional antennas.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Connectivity of Underlay Cognitive Radio Networks With Directional Antennas

Wang

Dai

Georgiou

et al. 2018

IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both PIP and AIP constraints are analyzed. Nodes with fixed transmit power (FTP) were investigated in Refs . ‐ Analyze the performance when power of secondary nodes is adaptive or fixed and there is interference from primary transmitter. The effects of interference were not taken into account in Ref.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both PIP and AIP constraints are analyzed. Nodes with fixed transmit power (FTP) were investigated in Refs [25][26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Delay analysis for cognitive radio networks

Halima

Boujemâa

2018

IEEJ Transactions Elec Engng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we derive the waiting time and total delay of packets for cooperative cognitive radio networks. In the primary network, there are primary transmitter (PT) and receiver (PR). In the secondary network, there are a source, M relays and a destination. Our results are valid for any number of relays and different relaying protocols: opportunistic amplify and forward (AF), partial AF, reactive AF and reactive DF. The analysis is carried out for nodes with fixed and adaptive transmit power. For fixed transmit power (FTP), we cannot guarantee that interference to PR is less than threshold T. Therefore, some relays are inactive because they generate harmful interference to PR. For adaptive transmit power (ATP), the power of a relay node is fixed so that peak interference power (PIP) or average interference power (AIP) constraints are verified. We also take into account interference from the primary transmitter (PT) by analyzing the delays based on signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR). © 2018 Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract