Proceedings of the 2005, American Control Conference, 2005.
DOI: 10.1109/acc.2005.1470595
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New economic perspectives for resource allocation in wireless networks

Abstract: The economic approaches of potential game theory and bargaining theory are applied to the area of power control in CDMA wireless networks. These perspectives help identify suitable equilibrium points, and algorithms that can be shown to converge to them. The bargaining approach also suggests an iterative method for the simultaneous routing and resource allocation problem.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Table 2, it is denoted that, when user 19 is at P1, its SIR reaches higher than the minimum target SIR (19.4236), because it is nearer to the base station and has a better channel capacity. However, while moving to P2, its SIR will be reduced to target SIR (10). Moreover, because of the increased distance from the base station, it has to increase transmit power and cause an interference in the primary user 6 to cross the threshold; therefore, user 6 will not be able to reach its preferable target SIR and this event is not acceptable, because PUs have higher priority than SUs.…”
Section: Interference Control In the Pu Using Phase Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In Table 2, it is denoted that, when user 19 is at P1, its SIR reaches higher than the minimum target SIR (19.4236), because it is nearer to the base station and has a better channel capacity. However, while moving to P2, its SIR will be reduced to target SIR (10). Moreover, because of the increased distance from the base station, it has to increase transmit power and cause an interference in the primary user 6 to cross the threshold; therefore, user 6 will not be able to reach its preferable target SIR and this event is not acceptable, because PUs have higher priority than SUs.…”
Section: Interference Control In the Pu Using Phase Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar to [8], [9], [10], and [11], we calculate the whole system throughput (sum of the throughput of all users) by:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The utility function for each player was defined as the sum of capacity values acquired over K subcarriers subtracting the interference caused on the primary user. The potential games were also studied in for the power control problem in code division multiple access system and in to model an interference avoidance scheme. In addition, a potential game framework encompassing both power control and channel allocation in CR networks was proposed in .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [5], an extensive study about the adoption of Game Theory based methods in wireless networks has been done. Potential Games applications in CDMA power control problems have been investigated in [6] and [7], while in [8] this mathematical framework has been used to model an interference avoidance scheme. However it is in Cognitive Radio networks analysis that Potential Games are being used widely, as firstly noticed in [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%