- Research Article
- Open Access
Distributed Power Allocation for Parallel Broadcast Channels with Only Common Information in Cognitive Tactical Radio Networks
© V. Le Nir and B. Scheers. 2010
- Received: 31 May 2010
- Accepted: 20 December 2010
- Published: 12 January 2011
A tactical radio network is a radio network in which a transmitter broadcasts the same information to its receivers. In this paper, dynamic spectrum management is studied for multiple cognitive tactical radio networks coexisting in the same area. First, we consider the problem of common rate maximization subject to a total power constraint for a single tactical radio network having multiple receivers and using parallel subchannels (parallel multicast channels). Mathematical derivations show that the optimal power allocation can be found in closed form under multiple hypothesis testing. An outer loop can be used to minimize the power subject to a common rate constraint. Then, we extend the iterative water-filling algorithm to the coexistence of multiple cognitive tactical radio networks without requiring any cooperation between the different networks. The power allocation is performed autonomously at the transmit side assuming knowledge of the noise variances and channel variations of the network. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm is very robust in satisfying these constraints while minimizing the overall power in various scenarios.
- Cognitive Radio
- Power Allocation
- Broadcast Channel
- Optimal Power Allocation
- Multiple Hypothesis Testing
Tactical radio networks are networks in which information (voice and packet based data) is conveyed from one transmitter to multiple receivers. When several coalition nations coexist in the same area, current technologies do not permit reconfigurability, interoperability, nor coexistence of the radio terminals. Software defined radio has been developed for reconfigurability of the terminals with software upgrades and for portability of the waveforms. Cognitive radio has been introduced by Mitola in 1999 as an extension to software-defined radio . Cognitive radio has been developed for spectrum availability recognition, reconfigurability, interoperability, and coexistence between terminals by means of software defined radio technology, intelligence, awareness, and learning [1, 2]. The fundamental principles of cognitive radio are on one hand to identify other radios in the environment that might use the same spectral resources by means of spectrum sensing and on the other hand to design a transmission strategy that minimizes interference to and from these radios by means of dynamic spectrum management. The major goals of cognitive radio are to provide a high utilization of the radio spectrum and reliable communications whenever and wherever needed . Applications of cognitive radio include, but are not limited to, tactical radio networks, emergency networks, and wireless local area networks with high throughput and range.
The broadcast channel has been introduced by Cover in 1972 as a communication channel in which there are one transmitter and two or more receivers . The broadcast channel in which independent messages are sent to the receivers (unicast channel) belongs to the class of degraded channels in which one user's signal is a degraded version of the other signals. Its capacity region is fully characterized and can be achieved by superposition coding [3, 4]. Contrary to a single unicast channel, the sum of unicast channels as well as MIMO broadcast channels is nondegraded [5, 6].
Previous studies on parallel broadcast channels have focused on scenarios in which independent messages are sent to the receivers (parallel unicast channels) [7–10]. The optimal power allocation can be achieved by a multilevel water-filling over the parallel channels, which is an extension of Gallager's 1968 water-filling strategy for single-user parallel Gaussian channels . Some other studies have considered parallel broadcast channels in which simultaneous common and independent messages are sent to the receivers [5, 12, 13], or simultaneous common and confidential messages are sent to the receivers .
Contrary to a unicast channel, a tactical radio network can be thought as a multicast channel with only common information. The capacity of a single multicast channel is limited by the capacity of the worst receiver [4, 15]. However, less work has been done on parallel multicast channels .
In the first part of the paper (Section 2), we extend the water-filling strategy  to multiple receivers considering parallel multicast channels with perfect channel state information (CSI) at the transmit side. In this case, the extended water-filling strategy maximizes the common rate subject to a power constraint (inner loop) or minimizes the power subject to a common rate constraint (outer loop). Mathematical derivations show that the optimal power allocation can be found in closed form under multiple hypothesis testing [14, 17, 18].
Distributed multiuser power control has been studied for parallel interference channels, leading to a common strategy known as iterative water-filling [19–21]. Distributed algorithms, although suboptimal, are preferred to centralized algorithms in practical scenarios because of their scalability. In the iterative water-filling algorithm, each network considers the interference of all other networks as noise and iteratively performs a water-filling strategy. At each iteration, the power spectrum of each network modifies the interference caused to all other networks. This process is performed iteratively until the power spectra of all networks converge.
In the second part of the paper (Section 3), capitalizing on the previous results, we introduce an autonomous dynamic spectrum management algorithm based on iterative waterfilling  for multiple cognitive tactical radio networks coexisting in a given area and willing to broadcast a common information (voice, data, etc.) to their group. The problem can be modeled as networks, each network with a single transmitter willing to send a common message to its corresponding receivers over parallel scalar Gaussian subchannels. It is assumed that each transmitter has the knowledge of the channel variations and noise variances in its own network and iteratively updates its power spectrum until a common rate constraint for all receivers is satisfied. Although this paper focuses on multiple cognitive radio networks for tactical communications, the proposed algorithm can be applied to any application requiring spectrum management between multiple cognitive radio networks for parallel multicast channels with only common information. In Section 4, simulation results are given for multiple scenarios and compare the proposed algorithm with the worst subchannel strategy. Finally, Section 5 concludes this paper.
The expression in (2) is the maximization of the minimum of a set of sums of concave functions of . Since the sum and the minimum operations preserve concavity, the objective is concave, and maximizing a concave function yields a convex optimization problem. This max-min optimization problem can be efficiently solved by the approach based on minimax hypothesis testing given in [14, 17, 18]. For two receivers, the optimal power allocation algorithm is given by three steps
If , then the optimal power allocation is and finish.
If then the optimal power allocation is and finish.
Search over all to find that satisfies , then the optimal power allocation is and finish.
The optimal power allocation corresponds to Gallager's water-filling strategy for single-user parallel Gaussian channels .
In this formula, the optimal power allocation takes into account the difference between the water-fill functions and the weights of the different receivers.
Figure 2 shows the power control for a single tactical radio network. An inner loop determines the power allocation maximizing the common rate subject to a total power constraint. Then, an outer loop minimizes the power such that a common rate constraint is achieved. Algorithm 1 provides the proposed power allocation for power minimization subject to a common rate constraint. The inner loop and the outer loop correspond to lines 13–21 and 6–30, respectively. Note that if all the steps in the multiple hypothesis testing are needed, the complexity of the algorithm increases exponentially with the number of receivers .
Algorithm 1: Minimization of the power subject to a common rate constraint.
(6) for all steps
(7) init according to step
(13) Calculate according to the roots of(18)
(18) end if
(20) end while
(21) If condition satisfied on exit step loop
(22) end for
(27) end if
(29) end while
Considering jointly the maximization of the aggregate common rate subject to a total power constraint per network in a centralized algorithm is an extensive task, since it would require the knowledge of the channel variations of all the interference terms for all , , , . This knowledge can be acquired through a feedback channel from the receivers to the transmitter of each network assuming that the acquisition time is much lower than the coherence time of the channel fading. To this end, each terminal must be equipped with a spectrum sensing function to estimate the noise variances and a channel estimation function to estimate its channel variations. This information can be further transmitted to a centralized unit. Moreover, even if a centralized cognitive manager was able to collect all the channel state information (CSI) within and between the different networks, solving (22) would require an exhaustive search over all possible 's or a more efficient genetic algorithm.
Therefore, after collecting the noise variances and the channel variations of its network, each transmitter has to apply Algorithm 1 autonomously and to update its power allocation regularly to reach an equilibrium between the different networks. As shown on Figure 4, within each network, an inner loop determines the power allocation maximizing the common rate subject to a total power constraint. This process is updated regularly between all the different networks until they reach a Nash equilibrium. Finally, an outer loop minimizes the power such that a common rate constraint is achieved for each network. The algorithm for the coexistence of multiple tactical radio networks is presented in Algorithm 2.
Algorithm 2: Distributed power allocation for minimization of the power subject to a common rate constraint.
(6) for iteration = 1 to 20
(7) for to
(8) for all steps
(9) init according to step
(15) Calculate according to the roots of(18)
(20) end if
(22) end while
(23) If condition satisfied on exit step loop
(24) end for
(25) end for
(26) end for
(27) for to
(32) end if
(34) end for
(35) end while
which gives a noise variance per subchannel of approximately .
4.1. Single Tactical Radio Network
4.2. Multiple Cognitive Tactical Radio Networks
In this paper, dynamic spectrum management was studied for multiple cognitive tactical radio networks coexisting in the same area. First, we have considered the problem of power minimization subject to a common rate constraint for a single tactical radio network with multiple receivers over parallel channels (parallel multicast channels). Then, we have extended the iterative water-filling algorithm to multiple receivers for the coexistence of multiple cognitive tactical radio networks assuming knowledge of the noise variances and channel variations of the network. Simulation results have shown that the proposed algorithm is very robust in satisfying these constraints while minimizing the overall power in various scenarios.
This work was carried out in the frame of the Belgian Defense Scientific Research and Technology Study C4/19 funded by the Ministry of Defense (MoD). The scientific responsibility is assumed by its authors.
- Mitola J, Maguire GQ: Cognitive radio: making software radios more personal. IEEE Personal Communications 1999, 6(4):13-18. 10.1109/98.788210View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Haykin S: Cognitive radio: brain-empowered wireless communications. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 2005, 23(2):201-220.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cover TM: Broadcast channels. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1972, 18(1):2-14. 10.1109/TIT.1972.1054727MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Cover TM, Thomas JA: Elements of Information Theory. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1991.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Gamal AE: The capacity of the product and sum of two inconsistently degraded broadcast channels. Problemy Perdachi Informatsi 1980, 6(1):3-23.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Weingarten H, Steinberg Y, Shamai S: The capacity region of the Gaussian multiple-input multiple-output broadcast channel. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2006, 52(9):3936-3964.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Tse DN: Optimal power allocation over parallel Gaussian broadcast channels. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT '97), July 1997 27.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Goldsmith AJ, Effros M: The capacity region of broadcast channels with intersymbol interference and colored Gaussian noise. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2001, 47(1):219-240. 10.1109/18.904524MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Jindal N, Rhee W, Vishwanath S, Jafar SA, Goldsmith A: Sum power iterative water-filling for multi-antenna Gaussian broadcast channels. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2005, 51(4):1570-1580. 10.1109/TIT.2005.844082MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Le Nir V, Moonen M, Verlinden J, Guenach M: Optimal power allocation for downstream xDSL with per-modem total power constraints: broadcast channel optimal spectrum balancing (BC-OSB). IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2009, 57(2):690-697.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gallager RG: Information Theory and Reliable Communication. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1968.MATHGoogle Scholar
- Gohary RH, Davidson TN: On power allocation for parallel gaussian broadcast channels with common information. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking 2009., 2009:Google Scholar
- Gohary RH, Davidson TN: The capacity region of a product of two unmatched Gaussian broadcast channels with three particular messages and a common message. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT'10), June 2010, Austin, Texas, USA 560-564.Google Scholar
- Liang Y, Poor HV, Shamai S: Secure communication over fading channels. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2008, 54(6):2470-2492.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Jindal N, Luo ZQ: Capacity limits of multiple antenna multicast. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT '06), July 2006, Seatle, Wash, USA 1841-1845.Google Scholar
- Sidiropoulos ND, Davidson TN, Luo ZQ: Transmit beamforming for physical-layer multicasting. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2006, 54(6):2239-2251.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liang Y, Veeravalli VV, Poor HV: Resource allocation for wireless fading relay channels: max-min solution. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2007, 53(10):3432-3453.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Poor HV: An Introduction to Signal Detection and Estimation. 2nd edition. Springer, New York, NY, USA; 1994.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Yu W: Competition and cooperation in multi-user communication environments, Ph.D. dissertation. June 2002.Google Scholar
- Setoodeh P, Haykin S: Robust transmit power control for cognitive radio. Proceedings of the IEEE 2009, 97(5):915-939.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gohary RH, Willink TJ: Robust IWFA for open-spectrum communications. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 2009, 57(12):4964-4970.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cioffi JM: A Multicarrier Primer. ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/91-157, November 1991Google Scholar
- Jindal N, Goldsmith A: Optimal power allocation for parallel gaussian broadcast channels with independent and common information. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT '04), June 2004Google Scholar
- Caire G, Taricco G, Biglieri E: Optimum power control over fading channels. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1999, 45(5):1468-1489. 10.1109/18.771147MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Boyd S, Vandenberghe L: Convex Optimization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; 2004.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Ong L, Wang W, Motani M: Achievable rates and optimal schedules for half duplex multiple-relay networks. Proceedings of the 46th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, September 2008, Monticello, Utah, USA 1317-1324.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rappaport TS: Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA; 1996.MATHGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.