On LTE-WiFi coexistence and inter-operator spectrum sharing in unlicensed bands

Hasan, Cengis; Marina, Mahesh K.; Challita, Ursula

doi:10.1145/2942358.2942382

Cited by 18 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the authors suggested varying the transmit power and modulation scheme for coping with this interference. In [118] channel TABLE VIII-C INTER-TECHNOLOGY COEXISTENCE GOALS AND PERFORMANCE FOR LITERATURE REVIEW OF SPECTRUM SHARING AMONG BROADBAND TECHNOLOGIES IN A SPECTRUM COMMONS IN TABLE VIII-A: WI-FI/LBT-LTE Technologies Coexistence Goals Performance Evaluation method metric network size Wi-Fi/ LBT-LTE [123], [124], [126], [129], [132], [133], [135], [136], [142]- [162] Impact on Wi-Fi −no baseline [148]; −vs. coexistence with itself [123], [132], [133], [136], [142], [145], [147], [149]- [160] −vs.…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…duty cycle variants [124], [132], [133], [145], [146], [153], [155]- [157] −vs. other LBT variants [124], [136], [147], [149]- [152], [154], [158]- [162] Impact on LTE −no baseline [148] −vs. plain coexistence [123], [124], [126], [129], [132], [133], [135], [136], [142], [145], [155] −vs.…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…duty cycle variants [124], [132], [133], [145], [146], [153], [155], [157] −vs. other LBT variants [124], [136], [147], [150]- [152], [154], [158]- [162] Other −fairness (implicitly) for Wi-Fi vs. coexistence with itself [136], [147], [149], [150], [153], [155]- [157], [159] −proportional fair rate allocation for Wi-Fi and LTE [143] −fairness as same Wi-Fi/LTE airtime [152] −proportional fair channel switch [158] −fairness as minimization of collision probability to Wi-Fi [160] −fairness as constant aggregate Wi-Fi throughput [161] −airtime fairness for Wi-Fi based on altruistic gains [162] −maximize aggregate LTE capacity in presence of Wi-Fi [144] −enable different levels of protection for Wi-Fi [148] −maximize total throughput given requirements of each technology [147] −simulations [123], [124], [129], [132], [133], [135], [136], [143]- [146], [148]- ...…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…−analytical [126], [132], [136], [142], [144], [147]- [149], [151], [153], [160]- [162] −throughput [123], [124], [129], [133], [135], [136], [142]- [161];…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…−successful transmissions [126], [132]; −protection level [148]; −transmission duration [148] −channel access probability [126], [149] −collision probability [149], [160] −SINR [150] −airtime [152], [162] −Jain's fairness [152], [156], [157], [162] −channel occupation [160] −utility [161] −Q-value [161] −entropy [162] −risk-informed interference assessment [156], [157] − 1 LTE link/AP & several Wi-Fi devices [143], [148], [149], [152], [160] − ≤10 APs, or 15 APs/km 2 of each technology [124], [126], [135], [142], [146], [147], [151], [153], [154], [158], [161], [162];…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Voicu

Simić

Petrova

2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing capacity demands in emerging wireless technologies are expected to be met by network densification and spectrum bands open to multiple technologies. These will, in turn, increase the level of interference and also result in more complex inter-technology interactions, which will need to be managed through spectrum sharing mechanisms. Consequently, novel spectrum sharing mechanisms should be designed to allow spectrum access for multiple technologies, while efficiently utilizing the spectrum resources overall. Importantly, it is not trivial to design such efficient mechanisms, not only due to technical aspects, but also due to regulatory and business model constraints. In this survey we address spectrum sharing mechanisms for wireless inter-technology coexistence by means of a technology circle that incorporates in a unified, system-level view the technical and nontechnical aspects. We thus systematically explore the spectrum sharing design space consisting of parameters at different layers. Using this framework, we present a literature review on intertechnology coexistence with a focus on wireless technologies with equal spectrum access rights, i.e. (i) primary/primary, (ii) secondary/secondary, and (iii) technologies operating in a spectrum commons. Moreover, we reflect on our literature review to identify possible spectrum sharing design solutions and performance evaluation approaches useful for future coexistence cases. Finally, we discuss spectrum sharing design challenges and suggest future research directions.

show abstract

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…−analytical [126], [132], [136], [142], [144], [147]- [149], [151], [153], [160]- [162] −throughput [123], [124], [129], [133], [135], [136], [142]- [161];…”

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -30 Stations Of Each Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Voicu

Simić

Petrova

2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Spectrum sharing mechanisms in the unlicensed band: Performance limit and comparison

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deploying networks in unlicensed spectrum has been drawing significant attention, which serves to alleviate the increasing demands in licensed spectrum. However, the network coexistence in unlicensed channel may lead to throughput degradation and unfairness. An appropriate spectrum‐sharing mechanism is therefore of great significance. In this paper, we study the performance limit of two representative mechanisms used in the coexistence with WiFi, including Duty Cycle (DC) and Listen‐Before‐Talk (LBT). In particular, both the throughputs of the coexisting network and WiFi under two mechanisms are derived as explicit expressions of system parameters, based on which the maximum total throughput of the coexisting network and WiFi is characterized under throughput fairness and 3GPP fairness, respectively. A systematic comparison between the optimal throughput performance of DC and LBT is conducted. It is found that if the coexisting network with LBT occupies the channel for a large period each time it successfully accesses the channel, then the maximum total throughput in LBT would be close to that in DC under both throughput fairness and 3GPP fairness. The optimal settings for DC and LBT mechanisms to achieve maximum total throughput are obtained, respectively, which sheds important light on the design of fair and efficient spectrum‐sharing protocols.

show abstract

Evolution and Competition, a Game Theoretical Analysis of Heterogeneous Wireless Networks in Unlicensed Spectrum

Yang

Lou

2018

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On LTE-WiFi coexistence and inter-operator spectrum sharing in unlicensed bands

Cited by 18 publications

References 15 publications

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Spectrum sharing mechanisms in the unlicensed band: Performance limit and comparison

Evolution and Competition, a Game Theoretical Analysis of Heterogeneous Wireless Networks in Unlicensed Spectrum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About