GLOBECOM '05. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2005. 2005
DOI: 10.1109/glocom.2005.1578402
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A technique to support dynamic pricing strategy for differentiated cellular mobile services

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It should be noted that some recent relevant studies (e.g., [20,21]) have proposed dynamic pricing strategies in mobile networks, as opposed to static pricing which we propose in this work and has also been proposed in other works in the literature (e.g., [24], which however does not consider video traffic). Dynamic pricing gives negative incentives to users, based on current network conditions (e.g., congestion), in an attempt to shape the aggregate traffic in the network.…”
Section: The Proposed Cac Mechanismmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…It should be noted that some recent relevant studies (e.g., [20,21]) have proposed dynamic pricing strategies in mobile networks, as opposed to static pricing which we propose in this work and has also been proposed in other works in the literature (e.g., [24], which however does not consider video traffic). Dynamic pricing gives negative incentives to users, based on current network conditions (e.g., congestion), in an attempt to shape the aggregate traffic in the network.…”
Section: The Proposed Cac Mechanismmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Some recent relevant studies (e.g., [21,22,26]) have proposed dynamic pricing strategies in mobile networks, as opposed to static pricing which we propose in this work and has also been proposed in other works in the literature (e.g., [23], which however does not consider video traffic). Dynamic pricing gives negative incentives to users, based on current network conditions (e.g., congestion), in an attempt to shape the aggregate traffic in the network.…”
Section: Revenue-based Call Admission Controlmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…In [15] we have shown that our mechanism works equally well for H.263 videoconference traffic and excels, again, in comparison to the equivalent bandwidth approach. The accuracy of our video traffic models, for both MPEG-4 and H.263 traffic, helps alleviate the disadvantage that can be found in a number of efficient CAC mechanisms in the literature (e.g., [20,22,25]), which is the frequent use of bandwidth adapta- tion; as pointed out in [24], frequent bandwidth switching among different levels can consume a significant amount of resources, due to increased network signaling overhead. Regarding [25], which introduced a revenue-based CAC, it should also be pointed out that the linear change which the authors proposed in the number of guard channels (depending on the change in revenue) is not an efficient choice for video traffic, due to its bursty nature.…”
Section: Revenue-based Call Admission Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The process to determine whether a new price is necessary, of setting this new price and advising it to all relevant network elements together with the subscribers requires a signaling process. Little consideration of signaling requirements for dynamic pricing in mobile telecommunications has been considered in the literature; see for example [1][2][3][4][5]. Only Fitkov-Norris and Khanifar [1] mention that the Broadcast Control Channel can be used for sending pricing information on the downlink for GSM.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, no explicit information about signaling for UMTS is found in this work. The focus of this work together with others [2][3][4][5] is mainly on proposing dynamic pricing schemes, analyzing its effects on revenue and network performance parameters, and modeling user behavior. Note that dynamic pricing proposals for the Internet are not applicable to mobile telecommunications systems because of fundamental differences in system architecture, even considered in the context of an all-IP core network.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%