An analytic network process and trapezoidal interval‐valued fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution network access selection method

Abstract

Next generation wireless networks consist of many heterogeneous access technologies that should support various service types with different quality of service (QoS) constraints, as well as user, requirements and provider policies. Therefore, the need for network selection mechanisms that consider multiple factors must be addressed. In this paper, a network selection method is proposed by applying the analytic network process to estimate the weights of the selection criteria, as well as a fuzzy version of technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution to perform the ranking of network alternatives. The method is applied to a heterogeneous network environment providing different QoS classes and policy characteristics. Each user applies the method to select the most appropriate network, which satisfies his or her requirements in respect of his or her service-level agreement (SLA). Performance evaluation shows that when the user requests only one service, the proposed method performs better compared to the original technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution, as well as the Fuzzy AHP-ELECTRE method. Moreover, the proposed method can be applied in cases where a user requires multiple services simultaneously on a device. The sensitivity analysis of the proposed method shows that it can be properly adjusted to conform to network environment changes.of heterogeneous networks, seamless interworking among the different technologies is also needed [7]. Thus, special attention to the VHO process should be given [8].The VHO procedure consists of three main steps including the handover initiation, the network selection, and the handover execution. The initiation step contains the required procedures to identify the available access networks and select the time of handover in respect of network conditions and user mobility. The network selection step is related to the selection of the most appropriate network alternative based on the available network characteristics, user preferences, and applications requirements. Finally, the execution step completes the handover process by seamlessly connecting the terminal to the selected network. This paper deals with the network selection step of the VHO process.Existing handover network selection schemes employ multi attribute decision-making methods (MADM), fuzzy logic, neural networks, and utility functions [9]. However, because the selection of an access network depends on several parameters with different relative importance, the access network selection problem is usually looked at from the aspect of multi-criteria analysis and more specifically by applying different MADM algorithms. In this paper, a network selection method is proposed by employing two MADM algorithms: the analytic network process (ANP), which is an extension of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for criteria weights calculation, and a fuzzy version of the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) for accomplishing the ranking of the candidate net...

New Manhattan distance‐based fuzzy MADM method for the network selection

“…based on the received signal strength, the available bandwidth etc.) [5], game theory algorithms [6], genetic algorithms [7], artificial intelligence and fuzzy logic [8][9][10], neural networks, multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) methods [11][12][13][14][15], and hybrid methods combining more than one methodology [16][17][18][19]. However, the majority of these algorithms are either basic and thus inefficient or too complex that it could cause additional computational overhead, which could, in turn, break the current session.…”

Mobile device‐centric access point monitoring scheme for handover decision triggering in heterogeneous networks

“…(3) In this situation, since one packet loss occurs in one round, the packet loss probability, p, is represented as follows: (3) In this situation, since one packet loss occurs in one round, the packet loss probability, p, is represented as follows:…”

“…(W∕2) + (W∕2 + 1) + · · · + (W∕2 + W∕2) ≃ 3W 2 ∕8. (3) In this situation, since one packet loss occurs in one round, the packet loss probability, p, is represented as follows:…”

MCGDM with AHP based on Adaptive Interval Value Fuzzy

“…Multiple Criteria Group Decision Making (MCGDM) is a decision-making method to determine the best alternative from a set of alternatives with using alternative preferences as election criteria [1]. Some MCGDM methods include Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), Weighted Product (WP), Elimination and Choice Express Reality (ELECTRE), Technique for Order Preferences of Similarity Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) [2]. AHP is one of the most widely used MCGDM approaches.…”

“…315FANP and IV FTOPSIS for network access selection[2], combine DEMATEL and TOPSIS based on interval Fuzzy[13,14]. The study states that the Fuzzy Interval value is the expansion of Fuzzy, with the value of the Fuzzy membership function in the interval form.…”