2016
DOI: 10.1007/s11276-016-1252-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A modeling framework for supporting and evaluating connectivity in cognitive radio ad hoc networks with beamforming

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, that method is based on static network topology with full topological information of SUs and PUs, which may not always available in CRAHNs. Local connectivity of large scale CRAHNs, taken into account the influences of aggregated interference and beamforming were studied in [19] and [20], respectively. More importantly, the connectivity of CRAHNs in all aforementioned works is investigated in the viewpoint of connectivity of whole network (or the probability of having connected graph), and without taking into account the neighbouring node selection criteria in routing algorithm.…”
Section: Related Work and Motivationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, that method is based on static network topology with full topological information of SUs and PUs, which may not always available in CRAHNs. Local connectivity of large scale CRAHNs, taken into account the influences of aggregated interference and beamforming were studied in [19] and [20], respectively. More importantly, the connectivity of CRAHNs in all aforementioned works is investigated in the viewpoint of connectivity of whole network (or the probability of having connected graph), and without taking into account the neighbouring node selection criteria in routing algorithm.…”
Section: Related Work and Motivationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, using directional antennas in CRNs can significantly reduce the interference as indicated in [8]- [10]. However, most recent studies only consider using directional antennas at either PUs [9] or SUs [8], [10], [11] but not both. The partial deployment of directional antennas in CRNs cannot fully realise the benefits of directional antennas.…”
Section: A Related Work and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different from omni-directional antennas, directional antennas can concentrate radio signals on desired directions and consequently reduce the interference. Thus, using directional antennas in CRNs can significantly reduce the interference as indicated in [8]- [10]. However, most recent studies only consider using directional antennas at either PUs [9] or SUs [8], [10], [11] but not both.…”
Section: A Related Work and Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was shown that the probability of node isolation is improved compared with conventional CRAHNs using omnidirectional antennas due to the reduced PU-to-SU interference and the extended transmission range. A modeling framework for evaluating connectivity in CRAHNs where PUs are equipped with omnidirectional antennas while SUs are equipped with directional antennas, i.e., ULA and UCA antennas, was shown in [18]. It was concluded that UCA is the most suitable antenna for CRAHNs and the optimal number of elements at which the highest connectivity can be achieved is different for each type of directional antenna.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%