2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.comnet.2010.06.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A survey on game theory applications in wireless networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
79
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 181 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
79
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…where w j is the weight value of position obtained by the weighting method of the normal distribution [11], d j is the jth largest data in a set {nψ 1 a 1 , nψ 2 a 2 , · · · , nψ n a n }, n is a balance factor, ψ j is the weight value of the nth property value obtained by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) algorithm, a n is the nth property value. The payoff function of all heterogeneous access networks is defined as follows.…”
Section: The Handover Decision Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where w j is the weight value of position obtained by the weighting method of the normal distribution [11], d j is the jth largest data in a set {nψ 1 a 1 , nψ 2 a 2 , · · · , nψ n a n }, n is a balance factor, ψ j is the weight value of the nth property value obtained by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) algorithm, a n is the nth property value. The payoff function of all heterogeneous access networks is defined as follows.…”
Section: The Handover Decision Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although there are some existing materials and resources presenting the applications of game theory in wireless networks such as [1], [2], there exists no survey specifically for the repeated game models developed for wireless networks. This motivates us to deliver the survey with the objective to provide the necessary and fundamental information about repeated game models in wireless networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Database driven (e.g., geo-location database) [37], [79] + Provides accurate information regarding spectrum availability across the network + Reliable interference protection for sharing players + Can be an unbiased entity for fair spectrum allocation among sharing players -T oo complex for real-time spectrum opportunity detection -Requires additional infrastructure for deployment such as backhaul -Requires a third party to manage the sharing procedure -Imposes excess signalling overhead to the network/participating systems -Vulnerable to jamming attacks Spectrum broker/ Super resource scheduler [83], [84] Distributed Spectrum sensing (e.g., energy detection) [61], [37] , [33], + Is capable for on-demand and real-time spectrum opportunity detection + No additional infrastructure is required + Only target UE is involved to perform sensing, thus, lower signalling is imposed to the network -Is vulnerable to some issues such hidden node, false alarm and detection -Is not reliable for QoS sensitive services when sensing is performed by UE Coordinated Beamforming [85], [86] + Simultaneous utilisation of spectrum by multiple service providers + Increased spectrum utilisation efficiency -Requires CSI sharing between sharing players -Requires interface (such as backhaul, X2, etc.) between sharing players Game-T heory based coordination [87], [88], [89] + Low to no, information sharing between sharing players during sharing procedure + Low to no overhead is imposed to the network -Implementation complexities -Low fairness guarantees between sharing players…”
Section: Centralisedmentioning
confidence: 99%