# Probabilistic Coexistence and Throughput of Cognitive Dual-Polarized Networks

- J-M Dricot
^{1}Email author, - G Ferrari
^{2}, - A Panahandeh
^{1}, - Fr Horlin
^{1}and - Ph De Doncker
^{1}

**2010**:387625

https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/387625

© J.-M. Dricot et al. 2010

**Received: **30 October 2009

**Accepted: **25 April 2010

**Published: **8 June 2010

## Abstract

Diversity techniques for cognitive radio networks are important since they enable the primary and secondary terminals to efficiently share the spectral resources in the same location simultaneously. In this paper, we investigate a simple, yet powerful, diversity scheme by exploiting the polarimetric dimension. More precisely, we evaluate a scenario where the cognitive terminals use cross-polarized communications with respect to the primary users. Our approach is network-centric, that is, the performance of the proposed dual-polarized system is investigated in terms of link throughput in the primary and the secondary networks. In order to carry out this analysis, we impose a probabilistic coexistence constraint derived from an information-theoretic approach, that is, we enforce a guaranteed capacity for a primary terminal for a high fraction of time. Improvements brought about by the use of our scheme are demonstrated analytically and through simulations. In particular, the main simulation parameters are extracted from a measurement campaign dedicated to the characterization of indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor polarization behaviors. Our results suggest that the polarimetric dimension represents a remarkable opportunity, yet easily implementable, in the context of cognitive radio networks.

## 1. Introduction

Cognitive radio networks and, more generally, dynamic spectrum access networks are becoming a reality. These systems consist of primary nodes, which have guaranteed priority access to spectrum resources, and secondary (or cognitive) nodes, which can reuse the medium in an opportunistic manner [1–4]. Cognitive nodes are allowed to dynamically operate the secondary spectrum, provided that they do not degrade the primary users' transmissions [5]. From a practical viewpoint, this means that the secondary terminals must acquire a sufficient level of knowledge about the status of the primary network. This information can be gathered through the use of techniques such as energy detection [6], cyclostationary feature detection [7], and/or cooperative distributed detection [8]. Due to the complexity and drawbacks of the detection phase, the FCC recently issued the statement that all devices "must include a geolocation capability and provisions to access over the Internet a database of protected radio services and the locations and channels that may be used by the unlicensed devices at each location" [9]. Furthermore, the positions of the primary nodes and other meta-information can be shared in the same way. Though the locations of the nodes and their configurations can be obtained easily, the exploitation of such information remains an open problem. Considering that any diversity technique can be used by cognitive nodes, several approaches have been proposed to allow for the coexistence of primary and secondary networks [10]. These include, for example, the use of orthogonal codes (code division multiple access, CDMA) [11], frequency multiplexing (frequency division multiple access, FDMA), directional antennas (spatial division medium access, SDMA) [12], orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) [13], and time division multiple access (TDMA) [14], among others.

In this paper, we investigate a simple, yet powerful, diversity scheme by exploiting the polarimetric dimension [15–17]. More specifically, a dual-polarized wireless channel enables the use of two distinct polarization modes, referred to as *copolar* (symbol:
) and *cross-polar* (symbol:
), respectively. Ideally, cross-polar transmissions (i.e., from a transmitting antenna on one channel to the receiving antenna on the corresponding orthogonal channel) should be impossible. In reality, this is not the case due to an imperfect antenna cross-polar isolation (XPI) and a depolarization mechanism that occurs as electromagnetic waves propagate (i.e., a signal sent on a given polarization "leaks" into the other). Both effects combine to yield a global phenomenon referred to as cross-polar discrimination (XPD) [18–20].

*receiver-centric*analysis. The secondary (cognitive) terminals are deployed along with the primary ones. However, limitations on interference prevent them from entering a protected region around the receiver. This region, referred to as the "primary exclusive region" [21], is assumed to be circular and therefore, is completely characterized by its radius, denoted as .

Since polarimetric diversity does not allow a perfect orthogonality between primary and secondary nodes' transmissions, its use is possible under the application of a so-called *underlay paradigm* [10, 22, 23]. This means that both cognitive and primary terminals carry out communications, provided that the capacity loss caused by cognitive users does not degrade communication quality for primary users. For this purpose, we can further characterize the underlaid paradigm by requiring that the primary system must be guaranteed a minimum (transmission) capacity during a large fraction of time. As will be shown, this can, in turn, be formulated as a probabilistic coexistence problem under the constraint of a limited outage probability in the primary network.

We argue that using the polarimetric dimension allows dynamic spectrum sharing to be efficiently implemented in cognitive systems. To this end, we propose a theoretical model of interference in dual-polarized networks and derive a closed-form expression for the link probability of outage. We theoretically prove that polarimetric diversity can increase transmission rates for the secondary terminals while, at the same time, can significantly reduce the primary exclusive region.

First, we validated the expected (theoretical) performance gains analytically. To the best of our knowledge, none of the past studies in literature has investigated the behavior of the XPD under a complete range of propagation conditions, such as indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor. In particular, we conducted a vast experimental campaign to provide relevant insights on the proper models and statistical distributions which would accurately represent the XPD. Based on these measures, the achievable performance of these dual-polarized cognitive networks, considering both half-duplex and full-duplex communications, will be determined.

The medium access control (MAC) protocol considered is a variant of the slotted ALOHA protocol [24] such that in each time slot, the nodes transmit independently with a certain fixed probability [25]. This approach is supported by the observations in [26, page 278] and [25, 27], where it is shown that the traffic generated by nodes using a slotted random access MAC protocol can be modeled by means of a Bernoulli distribution. In fact, in more sophisticated MAC schemes, the probability of transmission of a terminal's transmission can be modeled as a function of general parameters, such as, queuing statistics, the queue-dropping rate, and the channel outage probability incurred by fading [28]. Since the impact of these parameters is not the focus of the this study, for more details we refer the interested reader to the existing studies in the literature [29–31].

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we demonstrate how the polarimetric dimension increases spectrum-utilization efficiency and supports the coexistence of primary and secondary users in a probabilistic sense, which requires guaranteed capacity for the primary network. After these theoretical developments, several insights are presented to move from the concept to practical implementation. First, Section 3 presents an experimental determination of the main parameters used to characterize cognitive dual-polarized networks in indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor situations. These results are then used in Section 4 for analytical performance evaluation. Section 5 concludes the paper.

## 2. The Dual-Polarized Cognitive Network Architecture

### 2.1. Probabilistic Coexistence and Interference

where is the instantaneous received power (dimension: [W]) at distance , is the noise power spectral density of the noise (dimension: [W/Hz]), is the channel bandwidth, and is the cumulated interference power (dimension: [W]) at the receiver, that is, the sum of the received powers from all the undesired transmitters. We now provide the reader with a series of theoretical results, which stem from the following theorem.

Theorem 1.

where is the transmit power, is the average power of the background noise, is the SINR threshold, is the path loss exponent, is the reference cross-polar discrimination of the antenna at a reference distance , and is a function that characterizes the polarization loss over distance.

Proof.

where is the XPD value at a reference distance and the function characterizes the de-polarization experienced over the distance.

By plugging (14) and (15) into (13), one finally obtains expression (6) for the probability of successful transmission.

Theorem 1 gives interesting insights on the expected performance in a dual-polarized transmission subject to background and internode interference. First, the leftmost term of the expression at the right-hand side of (6) is relevant in a situation where the throughput is limited by the background (typically thermal) noise. In large and/or dense networks, the transmission is only limited by the interference and one can focus on the interference and polarization terms (i.e., the two other term of the expression, assuming is negligible). The first exponential term can be easily evaluated if .

The second and the third terms of expression (6) relate to the interference generated by the surrounding nodes transmitting in co- and cross-polarized channels. These terms depend on (i) the polarization characteristics of the interfering nodes, (ii) the traffic statistics, and (iii) the topology of the network. Note that the impact of the topology has been largely investigated in [35] and we will limit our study to the effect of polarization.

Finally, channel correlation is neglected here, as often in the literature, for the purpose of analytical tractability and because these correlations do not change the scaling behavior of link-level performance. For the sake of completeness, we note that in [36] an analysis of the impact of channel correlation is carried out. The authors conclude that, when the traffic is limited ( ), the assumption of uncorrelation holds. On the other hand, when the traffic is intense ( ), the link probability of success is higher in the correlated channel scenario than in the uncorrelated channel scenario.

### 2.2. Probabilistic Link Throughput

*transmission is said to be successful*if and only if the primary terminal is not in an outage for a fraction of time longer than , that is, if the (instantaneous) SINR of the cognitive terminal is above the threshold . Therefore, we denote the probability of successful transmission in a primary link as , that is,

The *probabilistic link throughput* [37] (adimensional) of a primary terminal is defined as follows:

(i)in the full-duplex communication case, it corresponds to the product of (a) and (b) the probability that the transmitter actually transmits (i.e., );

(ii)in the half-duplex communication case, it corresponds to the product of (a) , (b) the probability that the transmitter actually transmits (i.e., ), and (c) the probability that the receiver actually receives (i.e., ).

The probabilistic link throughput can be interpreted as the unconditioned reception probability which can be achieved with a simple automatic-repeat-request (ARQ) scheme with error-free feedback [38]. For the slotted ALOHA transmission scheme under consideration, the probabilistic throughput in the half-duplex mode is then and in full-duplex case .

### 2.3. Properties and Opportunities of Polarization Diversity

Theorem 1 expresses a network-wide condition to support the codeployment of primary and cognitive terminals. In order to implement polarization diversity and make it work, proper considerations have to be carried out. In this section, we propose several lemmas, all derived from Theorem 1, that allow to design and operate dual-polarized systems.

Lemma 2.

In a dual-polarized system subject to probabilistic coexistence of primary and secondary networks, relocating a cognitive terminal from the copolar channel to the cross-polar channel increases its probability of transmission while keeping intact the transmission capacity of the primary network.

Proof.

Let us consider a scenario with a single interferer located at distance and transmitting with power . For the ease of understanding, let us assume that if the terminal uses a polarized antenna, its probability of transmission will be denoted as , whereas if a classical (not dual-polarized) scenario is considered, then .

*at most equal*to the power transmitted on the cross-polar channel. Finally, all other quantities in (19) are strictly positive and, therefore, one obtains that

where the right-hand side expression for derives directly from (18). Therefore, the thesis of the lemma holds.

Lemma 2 indicates that polarization can be exploited as a diversity technique. Indeed, the achievable transmission rate will always be increased if the secondary network uses a polarization state that is orthogonal to that of the primary network and, furthermore, this remains true regardless of the values taken by the other system parameters (e.g., transmission power, acceptable outage rate , SINR value, etc.).

Lemma 3.

There exists a region of space, referred to as the primary exclusive region, where the cognitive terminals are not allowed to transmit and can be reduced by means of polarimetric diversity.

Proof.

Therefore, since , using polarization diversity, that is, causing , reduces .

*outside*the transmission zone defined by the primary emitter-receiver distance. On the opposite, it is possible to operate a cognitive terminal inside this region (i.e., with ) when the polarimetric dimension is used. Furthermore, in both cases the exclusive distance increases as a function of the terminal probability of transmission but its gradient is smaller in the dual-polarized case.

Therefore, the quantity at the right-hand side of (25) represents the minimum amount of XPD that the antenna of the cognitive terminal must possess. This value depends on the network configuration but also on the propagation environment (through the depolarization function ).

Lemma 4.

If , polarization diversity is not required to achieve a probabilistic coexistence.

Proof.

In (25), all quantities are greater than zero. Therefore, if , the quantity is always negative and the solution of (26) is .

Lemma 4 indicates that, if the desired throughput remains limited, then the outage is guaranteed on the primary system without summoning up the diversity of polarization on the secondary terminal. Therefore, the cross-polar channel can be kept available for other terminals that may require higher data rates. This can be observed in Figure 2.

Theorem 5.

Besides being limited by probabilistic coexistence considerations, there exists an optimum probability of transmission by a terminal in the primary network, denoted as , that maximizes the throughput.

Proof.

which is the probability of transmission that maximizes the throughput. The same derivation can be applied in the case of a full duplex system and leads to the solution . If the approximation is not used, then the optimal probability of transmission cannot be given in a closed-form expression but has to be numerically evaluated.

Obviously, the maximum value of will be the minimum between (i) the optimum probability of transmission in a slotted transmission system (in a general sense), given by (32), and (ii) the maximum rate that can be achieved under the constraint of a probabilistic coexistence in (20). Therefore, before selecting its transmission rate, a cognitive terminal must evaluate these two quantities, on the basis of the available information stored in the databases (positions of the nodes, acceptable outage, etc.), and use the smallest one.

From these figures, it can be observed that the probability of transmission of dual-polarized cognitive systems is mainly limited by the interference bound imposed to protect the primary system. In fact, the transmission rate of the terminals will nearly always be lower than the optimal transmission rate, except when the cognitive terminal is distant. In that specific case, the optimum probability of transmission (20) in the accessible region (in a probabilistic sense) saturates, that is, it reaches in the half-duplex case and in the full-duplex case. Note that these values correspond to the maximum achievable throughput observed in any half-duplex or full-duplex system. Indeed, the definitions of the probabilistic link throughput are and and the corresponding optimum terminal probabilities of transmission cannot exceed and , respectively.

In the scenarios where polarimetric diversity is exploited, this crossover distance is smaller ( ) than in the classical case ( ). Comparing the results in Figure 3(a) with those in Figure 3(b), another observation can be carried out. In the half-duplex case, for each distance , the optimal transmission probability lies inside the accessible region. In other words, has to be properly selected to maximize the throughput. In the full-duplex case, everywhere in the exclusive region. These observations will be confirmed by the results presented in Section 4.

Finally, it is confirmed that, in the accessible regions, one either has (i) with (i.e., ) or (ii) . Therefore, the approximation used in proof of Theorem 5 (i.e., ) holds and the value of derived in Theorem 5 can be considered as an accurate approximation of the true value.

### 2.4. Considerations for Practical System Implementation

In the previous subsections, we have shown that the capacity of a primary user can be guaranteed, while, at the same time, allowing efficient spectrum access, if the polarimetric dimension is exploited. Moreover, dual-polarized terminals will benefit from an increase of capacity by means of a higher transmission rate and reduced terminal-to-terminal interference. The efficiency of polarization diversity depends on the cross-polar discrimination of the antennas in use. More precisely, the value of the initial cross-polar discrimination (i.e., ) has to be as high as possible; yet, the XPD of well-designed antennas is typically on the order of dB [15, 39], which allows a significant discrimination between copolar and cross-polar channels. Depending on the achievable value of , the outage rate of a primary terminal, and the location of the terminals, the transmission rate of a cognitive terminal can be adapted taking into account the relations (20) and (32). Finally, the primary exclusive region can be determined by means of (22) and notified to the cognitive terminals which, in turn, can use it as a constraint.

## 3. Experimental Determination of the Indoor-to-Indoor and Outdoor-to-Indoor XPD

Several previous works have been undertaken in order to model the XPD for different kinds of environment. In [20], a theoretical analysis is conducted for the small-scale variation of XPD in an indoor-to-indoor scenario and it is concluded that it has a doubly, noncentral Fisher-Snedecor distribution. A mean-fitting (i.e., the pathloss) model of XPD as a function of the distance in an outdoor-to-outdoor scenario was studied in [16, 19]. The corresponding performance is analyzed in [11].

In this paper, we provide the reader with original measurements campaigns in both indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor scenarios. Indeed, these correspond to real-life situations where various technologies, such as WiFi, sensor networks, personal area networks (indoor-to-indoor scenarios) or WiMax, public WiFi, and 3G systems (outdoor-to-indoor scenarios) are in use.

In the remainder of this section, we characterize the applicability of the three XPD models just introduced. In other words, we consider an experimental setup and, on the basis of an extensive measurement campaign, we determine which XPD model is to be preferred in each scenario of interest (indoor-to-indoor and outdoor-to-indoor).

### 3.1. Setup

The measurements were performed using a Vector Signal Generator (Rohde & Schwarz SMATE200A VSG) at the transmitter (Tx) side and a Signal Analyzer (Rohde & Schwarz FSG SA) at the receiver (Rx) side. The Tx chain was composed of the VSG and a directional antenna. The Rx antenna was a tri-polarized antenna, made of three colocated perpendicular antennas. Two of these antennas were selected to create a Vertical-Horizontal dual-polarized antenna. The three receiver antennas were selected one after another by means of a switch and were connected to the Signal Analyzer through a dB, low-noise amplifier. The Rx antennas were fixed on an automatic positioner to create a virtual planar array of antennas. A continuous wave (CW) signal at the frequency of GHz was transmitted and the corresponding frequency response was recorded at the receiver side. The antenna input power was 19 dBm.

### 3.2. Experimental Results and Their Interpretation

The analysis of the collected experimental results has shown that the values of the XPD, for a given distance, present a location-dependent variability. Therefore, in the following figures, where the XPD is shown as a function of the distance , the average value is shown along with the and being confidence intervals. Since the spatial variations were found to be Gaussian, these intervals account for and of the observed sets, respectively.

## 4. Numerical Performance Evaluation

For instance, if a confidence level of is required (i.e., ), one has to select . This approach will be used to set the initial parameters in the following performance analysis.

### 4.1. Full Duplex Systems in an Outdoor-to-Indoor Scenario

Two different polarization strategies are investigated: (i) the primary and the cognitive networks do not use polarimetric diversity (this scenario is referred to as *no polarization*) and (ii) the systems reduce their interference by using two orthogonal polarization states (this scenario is referred to as *full polarization*).

In Figure 11, the performance of full duplex systems is presented. More specifically, in Figure 11(a), the throughput of the system is shown as a function of the terminal probability of transmission. It can be seen that the throughput of the dual-polarized system is significantly higher, particularly when the probability of transmission is high. In Figure 11(b), the corresponding link probability of success in the primary network is investigated. It can be seen that it confirms the conclusions of Lemma 2: for a given minimum value of the link probability of success, the achievable transmission rate is significantly higher in the dual-polarized mode with respect to the value observed with the classical approach. For instance, with , one has while, by using the dual-polarized approach, the maximum probability of transmission can be increased up to . In other words, virtually any transmission rate is achievable with a limited impact on the primary system.

### 4.2. Half-Duplex System in an Indoor-to-Indoor Scenario

## 5. Conclusions

In this paper, we have presented a novel theoretical framework to demonstrate the network-level performance increase that can be achieved in a polarimetric diversity-oriented system subject to Rayleigh fading and probabilistic coexistence of primary and secondary (cognitive) networks. The theoretical approach was supported by an extensive measurement campaign. It has been shown that different mathematical expressions must be used in order to suitably model the dependence of the XPD on the distance between transmitter and receiver. These models depend not only on the scenario of interest, but also on the initial antenna polarization. For instance, in an indoor-to-indoor scenario, we have observed that the horizontal polarization provides a significant diversity ( around 10 dB) while the vertical polarization leads to a more limited gain ( around 4 dB).

Our results suggest that dual-polarized networks are of interest, even if orthogonality (indicated by the XPD value) is limited. Indeed, with respect to the classical implementation of probabilistic coexistence of primary and secondary networks on the same (single polarization) channel, the use of polarization diversity allows to remarkably increase the per-link throughput and reduce the primary exclusive region. In some cases (i.e., at low transmission rates), it could even be possible to deploy a cognitive terminal *closer* to a primary receiver than the primary transmitter itself, that is, inside the primary exclusive region.

## Declarations

### Acknowledgment

The support of the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research (FRS-FNRS) is gratefully acknowledged.

## Authors’ Affiliations

## References

- Cordeiro C, Challapali K, Birru D, Shankar S: IEEE 802.22: an introduction to the first wireless standard based on cognitive radios.
*Journal of Communications*2006, 1(1):38-47.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Mahmoud QH (Ed):
*Cognitive Networks*. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2007.Google Scholar - Akyildiz IF, Lee W-Y, Vuran MC, Mohanty S: NeXt generation/dynamic spectrum access/cognitive radio wireless networks: a survey.
*Computer Networks*2006, 50(13):2127-2159. 10.1016/j.comnet.2006.05.001View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar - Jondral FK: Software-defined radio—basics and evolution to cognitive radio.
*EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking*2005, 2005(3):275-283.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar - Budiarjo I, Lakshmanan MK, Nikookar H: Cognitive radio dynamic access techniques.
*Wireless Personal Communications*2008, 45(3):293-324. 10.1007/s11277-008-9473-6View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Qingchun R, Qilian L: Performance analysis of energy detection for cognitive radio wireless networks.
*Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Wireless Algorithms, Systems and Applications (WASA '07), August 2007, Chicago, Ill, USA*139-146.Google Scholar - Xu S, Zhao Z, Shang J: Spectrum sensing based on cyclostationarity.
*Proceedings of Workshop on Power Electronics and Intelligent Transportation System (PEITS '08), August 2008, Guangzhou, China*171-174.Google Scholar - Barve SS, Deosarkar SB, Bhople SA: A cognitive approach to spectrum sensing in virtual unlicensed wireless network. In
*Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication and Control (ICAC '09), August 2009, Mumbai, India*. ACM; 668-673.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - FCC 08-260 : Second report and order and memorandum opinion and order. 2008, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-260A1.pdf
- Berlemann L, Mangold S:
*Cognitive Radio and Dynamic Spectrum Access*. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2009.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Dricot J-M, Horlin F, De Doncker P: On the co-existence of dual-polarized CDMA networks.
*Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications (CROWNCOM '09), June 2009, Hannover, Germany*Google Scholar - Baccarelli E, Biagi M, Pelizzoni C, Cordeschi N: Multi-antenna cognitive radio for broadband access in 4G-WLANs. In
*Proceedings of the 5th ACM international Workshop on Mobility Management and Wireless Access, October 2007, Chania, Greece*. ACM; 66-73.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Bazerque J-A, Giannakis GB: Distributed scheduling and resource allocation for cognitive OFDMA radios.
*Mobile Networks and Applications*2008, 13(5):452-462. 10.1007/s11036-008-0083-zView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Wang X, Xiang W: An OFDM-TDMA/SA MAC protocol with QoS constraints for broadband wireless LANs.
*Wireless Networks*2006, 12(2):159-170. 10.1007/s11276-005-5263-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Oestges C: A comprehensive model of dual-polarized channels: from experimental observations to an analytical formulation.
*Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Communications and Networking in China (ChinaCom '08), August 2008, Hangzhou, China*1172-1176.Google Scholar - Shafi M, Zhang M, Moustakas AL, Smith PJ, Molisch AF, Tufvesson F, Simon SH: Polarized MIMO channels in 3-D: models, measurements and mutual information.
*IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications*2006, 24(3):514-526.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Argenti F, Bianchi T, Mucchi L, Ronga LS: Polarization diversity for multiband UWB systems.
*Signal Processing*2006, 86(9):2208-2220. 10.1016/j.sigpro.2005.10.024View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar - Oestges C, Erceg V, Paulraj AJ: Propagation modeling of MIMO multipolarized fixed wireless channels.
*IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology*2004, 53(3):644-654. 10.1109/TVT.2004.827149View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Erceg V, Soma P, Baum DS, Catreux S: Multiple-input multiple-output fixed wireless radio channel measurements and modeling using dual-polarized antennas at 2.5 GHz.
*IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications*2004, 3(6):2288-2298. 10.1109/TWC.2004.837298View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Quitin F, Oestges C, Horlin F, De Doncker P: Small-scale variations of cross-polar discrimination in polarized MIMO systems.
*Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP '09), March 2009, Berlin, Germany*1011-1015.Google Scholar - Vu M, Devroye N, Tarokh V: On the primary exclusive region of cognitive networks.
*IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications*2009, 8(7):3380-3385.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Giupponi L, Ibars C: Distributed cooperation among cognitive radios with complete and incomplete information.
*EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing*2009, 2009:-13.Google Scholar - Le L, Hossain E: Resource allocation for spectrum underlay in cognitive radio networks.
*IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications*2008, 7(12):5306-5315.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Abramson N: The ALOHA system—another alternative for computer communications.
*Proceedings of Joint Computer Conference, November 1970, Houston, Tex, USA, AFIPS Conference*37: 281-285.Google Scholar - Tobagi FA: Analysis of a two-hop centralized packet radio network—part I: slotted ALOHA.
*IEEE Transactions on Communications Systems*1980, 28(2):196-207. 10.1109/TCOM.1980.1094637View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Bertsekas D, Gallager R:
*Data Networks*. 2nd edition. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA; 1992.MATHGoogle Scholar - Nelson R, Kleinrock L: The spatial capacity of a slotted ALOHA multihop packet radio network with capture.
*IEEE Transactions on Communications*1984, 32(6):684-694.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Wu H, Pan Y:
*Medium Access Control in Wireless Networks*. Nova Science, Hauppauge, NY, USA; 2008.Google Scholar - Kwon Y, Fang Y, Latchman H: Performance analysis for a new medium access control protocol in wireless LANs.
*Wireless Networks*2004, 10(5):519-529.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Weinmiller J, Schläger M, Festag A, Wolisz A: Performance study of access control in wireless LANs—IEEE 802.11 DFWMAC and ETSI RES 10 Hiperlan.
*Mobile Networks and Applications*1997, 2(1):55-67. 10.1023/A:1013255927445View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Hsieh H-Y, Sivakumar R: IEEE 802.11 over multi-hop wireless networks: problems and new perspectives.
*Proceedings of the 56th IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC '02), September 2002, Vancouver, Canada*2(2):748-752.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Rappaport TS:
*Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice*. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA; 1996.MATHGoogle Scholar - Goldsmith A:
*Wireless Communications*. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA; 2005.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Silvester JA, Kleinrock L: On the capacity of multihop slotted ALOHA networks with regular structure.
*IEEE Transactions on Communications*1983, 31(8):974-982. 10.1109/TCOM.1983.1095921View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Dousse O, Baccelli F, Thiran P: Impact of interferences on connectivity in ad hoc networks.
*IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking*2005, 13(2):425-436.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Ganti RK, Haenggi M: Spatial and temporal correlation of the interference in ALOHA ad hoc networks.
*IEEE Communications Letters*2009, 13(9):631-633.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar - Haenggi M: Outage, local throughput, and capacity of random wireless networks.
*IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications*2009, 8(8):4350-4359.View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Ahmed S, Alam MS: Performance evaluation of important ad hoc network protocols.
*EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking*2006, 2006:-11.Google Scholar - Balanis CA:
*Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design*. JWiley-Interscience, New York, NY, USA; 2005.Google Scholar - Chuang JC-I: The effects of time delay spread on portable radio communications channels with digital modulation.
*IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications*1987, 5(5):879-889. 10.1109/JSAC.1987.1146591View ArticleGoogle Scholar - Gurunathan S, Feher K: Multipath simulation models for mobile radio channels.
*Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC '92), May 1992*131-134.Google Scholar - Fung V, Rappaport TS, Thomas B: Bit error simulation for pi/4DQPSK mobile radio communications using two-ray and measurement-based impulse response models.
*IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications*1993, 11(3):393-405. 10.1109/49.219546View ArticleGoogle Scholar

## Copyright

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.