UPS: A United Cooperative Paradigm for Primary and Secondary Networks

Abstract

The dominant spectrum sharing paradigm of today is the interweave paradigm. This paper advocates a new and alternative paradigm called United network of Primary and Secondary networks (UPS). UPS allows a complete cooperation between primary and secondary networks at the node level to relay each other's traffic, in addition to existing dynamic spectrum access (DSA) in time, space, and frequency domains. Such cooperation allows the primary and secondary networks to access a much richer network resources from the combined network. As a case study, we consider a problem with the goal of supporting the rate requirement of the primary network traffic while maximizing the minimum throughput of the secondary sessions. For this problem, we develop an optimization model and formulate a combinatorial optimization problem. Although this problem is in the form of mixed integer linear program (MILP), we can use CPLEX to solve it efficiently. Simulation results show that the UPS paradigm offers much better throughput performance than the interweave DSA paradigm.

All Cognitive MIMO: New Multiuser Detection Approach With Different Priorities

“…Then, inserting (A.2) and (A.3) into (A.4), utilizing the binomial expansion, and after performing some straightforward manipulations, we arrive at the desired result of (15).…”

“…In fact, the latter limitation is mainly due to the current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requirements. Still, the recent works in [15], [16] studied the performance of a full cooperative communication between the two systems, on a network-level scenario, where both primary and secondary nodes serve as relays to forward data streams to one another. A fundamental question arises when adopting this case: What would be the benefit from adopting such an approach?…”

“…Interestingly, it was explicitly demonstrated that the throughput regions of both systems are greatly enhanced when applying full cooperation [16]. Yet, single-antennas were assumed in [15], [16]. The scenario of a fully cooperative communication between primary and secondary MIMO systems has not been studied in the open technical literature.…”

Coexistence policies in cognitive radio

“…Other approaches [191,161,109] consider cooperation between networks belonging to different operators. Although it is possible to design mechanisms that provide incentives to selfish SUs to collaborate with the PT (cooperation in terms of game theory [149]), they require the exchange of several messages between these individuals, and therefore a loss in transmission efficiency, as pointed out in [131].…”

“…The bargaining partner selection problem in our work is not comparable to the one formulated in [194] because we do not assume knowledge about the impatience of other players, and we consider the PU has full bargaining power and learning abilities, among other differences. Bargaining partner selection is also different from traditional best-relay selection problems in multi-hop networks or cooperative networks [191,158], which expect an internetwork collaborative behavior in the form of relays revealing their true link qualities, battery life, etc.…”