Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
YOUR MOBILE ?
J.JENIFER RIZANI , S. RASMA , A.REMIYA
SECOND YEAR CSE
DMI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
NAGERCOIL
(1)
information transmission of U1 and s2 denotes the transmit τ0 + τ1 + τ2(1) + τ2(2) ≤ 1,
(1) (2) (7)
signal in this duration. According to [42], the achievable end- τ0 , τ1 , τ2 , τ2 ≥ 0.
to-end information rate (Nats/s/Hz) from U1 to U0 over the
DF relaying channel can be given by Our goal is to maximize the system WSR by jointly
optimizing energy beamforming design, time assignment and
(12) (10)
R1 = min R1 , R1 , (3) power allocation. Thus, the problem can be mathematically
expressed as
(12)
where R1 is the information rate over the U1 → U2 link,
which is P1 : max α1 R1 + α2 R2
{ω,τ ,P}
(12) |g|2 P1 s.t. (1), (2), (6), (7), (8)
R1 = τ1 C
N0 where α1 and α2 respectively denote the given nonnegative
(10) rate weights for U1 and U2 to reflect the users’ fairness, and
and R1 is the sum information rate over the U1 → U2 and
U2 → U 1 links, which is P = [P1 , P2(1) , P2(2) ] represents the power allocation vector.
From (2), (3), (4) , (5) and (6), it can be seen that ω, τ and
(10) h1 2 P1 (1) h2 2 P2(1) P are multiplicatively coupled with each other, which makes
R 1 = τ1 C + τ2 C , (4)
N0 N0 Problem P1 neither convex nor concave. Thus, Problem P1
cannot be easily solved by using known methods. Therefore,
where C (x) ln(1 + x). we propose an efficient method to solve it as follows.
In the third duration of τ2(2) , U2 transmits its own informa- Following (3), we have that
tion to U0 . The received signal at U0 from U2 associated with 2
the data of U2 can be given by |g| P1
R 1 ≤ τ1 C (9)
N0
(2) (2) (2)
y0,2 = P2 h2 s2 + z0 , and
(1)
where P2(2)denotes power consumed at U2 to transmit its h1 2 P1 (1) h2 2 P2
(2) R 1 ≤ τ1 C + τ2 C . (10)
own information and s2 denotes its own information symbol. N0 N0
Accordingly, the achievable information rate from U2 to U0
is given by By treating R1 as an optimization variable, Problem P1 can
be equivalently transformed into
(2) h2 2 P2(2)
R 2 = τ2 C , (5) P1-A : max α1 R1 + α2 R2
N0 {R1 ,ω,τ ,P}
s.t. (1), (2), (6), (7), (9), (10) (11)
Moreover, since the total consumed energy at U2 must be
smaller than its harvested energy E 2 , we have that Problem P1-A is also non-convex, as ω, τ and P are
(1) (1) (2) (2) still multiplicatively couples with each other. To solve it,
τ2 P2 + τ2 P2 ≤ η|h2H ω|2 P0 τ0 . (6) (1) (2)
we introduce an auxiliary vector t = [t1 , t2 , t2 ], where
(1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (2)
For the transmission protocol with user cooperation t1 = τ1 P1 , t2 = τ2 P2 and t2 = τ2 P2 . Then, we have
described above, we shall explore its maximum WSR and that
minimum total transmission time in Section III and Section IV, ⎧ t1
⎪
⎪ P1 = ,
respectively. ⎪
⎪ τ
⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
⎨ (1) t (1)
III. W EIGHTED S UM -R ATE M AXIMIZATION D ESIGN P2 = 2(1) , (12)
⎪
⎪ τ2
Based on the system model described in section II, in this ⎪
⎪ (2)
⎪
⎪ (2) t2
section, we shall discuss how to jointly optimize the energy ⎪
⎩ P2 = (2) .
beamforming and time assignment to maximize the WSR of τ2
the system. We first formulate a WSR maximization problem. (1) (2) t1 t2
(1)
Then, we transform the problem into some equivalent ones by By substituting P1 , P2 and P2 with τ1 , (1) and
τ2
using proper variable substitutions. After that, we use the SDR (2)
t2
method to solve it efficiently. Finally, we theoretically prove (2) , respectively, in terms of (12), we can respectively
τ2
that by using our proposed method, the global optimum of the transform (5) into
obtained solution can be guaranteed. (2)
(2) h2 2 t2
In terms of the transmission process described in Section II, R2 = τ2 C (2)
, (13)
one can see that the total transmission period T is divided N0 τ2
(9) into Fortunately, we also found that the rank-one optimal solu-
tion V ∗ of Problem P1-C always exists, which means that by
|g|2 t
R 1 ≤ τ1 C N0 τ1
1
, (14) using our solution method mentioned above, the global optimal
solution of P1 can always be obtained. To prove this, we first
and (10) into
introduce the following lemma [41].
(1)
Lemma 1: ([42, Th. 3.2]) The following optimization
h1 2 t1 (1) h2 2 t2
R 1 ≤ τ1 C N0 τ1 + τ2 C (1) . (15)
N0 τ2 problem
L
Moreover, by defining V τ0 ωω H , constraint (1) can be min Tr(C l X l )
X 1 ,...,X L l=1
equivalently rewritten to be
⎧ s.t. X l 0, l = 1, . . . , L,
⎪ L
⎨Tr(V) ≤ τ0 , Tr( Aml X l ) ≥ bm , m = 1, . . . , M.
l=1
V 0, (16)
⎪
⎩ always has an optimal solution (X 1∗ , . . . , X ∗L ) such that
rank(V) = 1,
L
constraints (2) and (6) can be respectively transformed into rank2 (X l∗ ) ≤ M,
l=1
t1 ≤ η P0 Tr(h1 h1H V), (17) where Aml , X l , C l are K × K Hermitian matrices and bm is
a real number.
and The detail information associated with how to generate a
(1) (2) rank-constrained solution can be referenced to [41]. Based on
t2 + t2 ≤ η P0 Tr(h2 h2H V). (18)
Lemma 1, we present the Theorem 2 as follows.
By doing so, Problem P1-A is equivalently transformed into Theorem 2: The rank-one optimal solution V ∗ of Prob-
lem P1-C always exists.
P1-B : max α1 R1 + α2 R2 Proof: Consider the following optimization problem
{R1 ,V,t,τ }
s.t. (7), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18). (19) P2 : min Tr(V)
V
Due to the rank-one constraint in (16), Problem P1-B must s.t. t1∗ ≤ η P0 Tr(h1 h1H V),
be non-convex, so we adopt the semidefinite relaxation (SDR) (1)∗ (2)∗
t2 + t2 ≤ η P0 Tr(h2 h2H V), V 0.
technique to deal with it. By dropping the rank-one constraint,
we obtain the relaxed problem of Problem P1-B as Suppose the optimal solution of Problem P2 is V . We first
prove that V is feasible for Problem P1-C as follows.
P1-C : max α1 R1 + α2 R2 (20) Since the number of constraints of Problem P1-C is more
{R1 ,V,t,τ }
s.t. Tr(V) ≤ τ0 , V 0, than Problem P2, i.e., the constraints of Problem P1-C is
tighter than those of Problem P2, a feasible solution of Prob-
(7), (14), (15), (17), (18). (21) lem P1-C must be feasible for Problem P2. Thus, Tr(V ) ≤
Fortunately, we find that Problem P1-C is a convex problem, Tr(V∗ ) ≤ τ0∗ , which indicates that V is feasible for
which is emphasized and proved in the following theorem. Problem P1-C. Moreover, since the objective function of
Theorem 1: Problem P1-C is a convex problem. Problem P1-C is only related to t, τ and R1 , it can be
Proof: The constraints (7), (17), (18) and (21) are linear. inferred that (V , t∗ , τ ∗ , R1∗ ) is also the optimal solution of
The right part of the constraint (14)is the perspective function Problem P1-C. According to Lemma 1, there exists anoptimal
2
of concave functions ln 1 + |g|N0t1 and thus (14) is convex.
2
solution V for the Problem P2 such that rank(V ) ≤ 2.
Therefore, the optimal V satisfies V = 0 and thus
The constraint (15) has similar form as (14), and thus it can
rank(V ) = 1. Hence, Theorem 2 is proved.
also be proved to be convex. From (13), the objective function
Corollary 1: The global optimal solution to Problem P1 is
is the
non-negative weighted sum of R1 and concave function
(2)
h2 2 t2
guaranteed by using our proposed solution method.
τ22 ln 1 + N0 τ22 , so the objective function is concave. Proof: Problem P1, Problem P1-A and Problem P1-B
Thus, Theorem 1 is proved. are equivalent to each other. It is known that once the optimal
Following Theorem, it is known that the global optimal solution of Problem P1-C satisfies the rank-one constraint,
solution (V∗ , t∗ , τ ∗ , R1∗ ) of Problem P1-C can be obtained by it is equivalent to Problem P1-B. Theorem 2 proves that
using CVX tools [40]. With the obtained t∗ , τ ∗ , the optimal P∗ Problem P1-C always has a rank-one optimal solution and
can be derived according to (12). Theorem 1 indicates that the global optimal solution of
Note that our goal is to find the optimal beamforming Problem P1-C can be found. Therefore, the optimal solution
vector ω∗ rather than V∗ . Only when the optimal V∗ of for Problem P1 can always be found by using our proposed
Problem P1-C follows rank-one constraint, the ω∗ calculated solution method.
from V∗ is the optimal solution of Problem P1-B. Particularly,
in this case, the optimal beamforming vector ω∗ for the IV. T RANSMISSION T IME M INIMIZATION D ESIGN
primary problem P1 can be extracted by eigenvalue decom- In Section III, we explore the potential information
position of V∗ /τ ∗ . transmission capacity of the system by considering the
WSR-maximization problem. In practical applications, it is Similar to Problem P1-A, by dropping the rank-one con-
often of great to deliver all data for the users with as little time straint in (16), Problem P3-A is transformed into
as possible, especially for sensing applications. Actually, small
P3-B : min τ0 + τ1 + τ2(1) + τ2(2)
transmission time is also very important for user experience {V,t,τ }
and real-time applications. Therefore, in this section, we shall s.t. Tr(V) ≤ τ0 , V 0
discuss the transmission time minimization problem by jointly (17), (18), (24), (25), (26). (27)
optimizing the energy beamforming and time assignment.
Denote the amount of information required to be delivered Theorem 3: Problem P3-B is a convex problem.
from Ui to U0 to be Bi nats, where i = 1, 2. Without loss Proof: Constraints (17), (18), (24), (27) and the objec-
of generality, the system bandwidth is normalized to be 1Hz. tive function are linear. Moreover, the left side of the first
To guarantee the successful delivery of all information of U1 term of (25) is a perspective function of the concave func-
tion C |g|N2t1 , so the first term of constraint (25) must be
2
to U0 over the U1 − U2 − U0 three node DF cooperative relay
link, we need to ensure that R1 ≥ B1 . Combining it with (3), convex. Similarly, the second term of constraint (25) and
we have that
constraint (26) can also be proved to be convex. Therefore,
⎧ 2
⎪ |g| P1 Theorem 3 is proved.
⎪
⎨ τ1 C ≥ B1 , As a result, the global optimal solution (V∗ , t∗ , τ ∗ ) of P3-B
N0 2 (22)
⎪
⎪ h1 P1 (1)
(1)
h2 2 P2 can be obtained by interior point solver, e.g., CVX [40].
⎩ τ1 C + τ2 C N0 ≥ B 1 . In terms of the definition of t, τ , with the obtained t∗ , τ ∗ ,
N0
the optimal P∗ can be derived in terms of (12). Similar
Meanwhile, to guarantee the successful delivery of all infor- to Problem P1, to guarantee the global optimal solution of
mation from U2 to the U0 over the U2 → U0 direct link, it is Problem P3, the remaining question is to determine that
required that R2 ≥ B2 , i.e., whether the optimal V∗ of Problem P3-B is rank-one. If yes,
the global optimal solution of Problem P3 can be guaranteed.
(2) h2 2 P2(2) Fortunately, we found that the rank-one optimal solution V∗ of
τ2 C ≥ B2 . (23)
N0 Problem P3-B also always exists and thus the global optimum
is guaranteed by using our proposed solution method. For
Then the transmission time minimization problem by jointly
emphasizing, we prove it as follows.
optimizing the energy beamforming and time assignment can
Theorem 4: The rank-one optimal solution V∗ of Prob-
be mathematically expressed by
lem P3-B always exists.
P3 : min τ0 + τ1 + τ2(1) + τ2(2) Proof: Compared with Problem P2, since the number
{ω,τ ,P} of constraints of P3-B is more than P2, a feasible solu-
s.t. (1), (2), (6), (22), (23) tion of P3-B is also feasible for P2. Therefore, Tr(V ) ≤
τ0 , τ1 , τ2(1) , τ2(2) ≥ 0. (24) Tr(V∗ ) ≤ τ0∗ , which indicates that V is feasible for
P3-B. As the objective function of P3-B is only related to
Although the objective function of Problem P3 is linear, τ , the feasible solution (V , t ∗ , τ ∗ ) also arrives at the optimal
the constraints (22) and (23) are non-convex sets due to the value of P3-B. Moreover, according to Lemma 1, the optimal
multiplicative coupled variables. Thus, Problem P3 also cannot 2
solution V of P2 exists and it satisfies that rank(V ) ≤ 2.
be directly solved. Following similar approach in previous So, one can infer that V satisfies V = 0, i.e., rank(V ) = 1.
section, the problem can be solved as follows. As a result, Theorem 4 is proved.
(1) (2)
Firstly, by using the definition t = [t1 , t2 , t2 ], where Corollary 2: The global optimal solution to Problem P3 is
t1 = τ1 P1 , t2(1) = τ2(1) P2(1) and t2(2) = τ2(2) P2(2) , constraint (22) guaranteed by using our proposed solution method.
can be re-written to be Proof: The proof is similar to that of Corollary 1, which
⎧ 2 is omitted here.
⎪
⎪ |g| t1
⎨ τ1 C ≥ B1 ,
N0 τ12 (25) V. E XTENSION TO M ULTIPLE U SER PAIR S CENARIOS
⎪
⎪ h1 t1 (1)
h2 2 t2
⎩ τ1 C + τ2(1) C (1) ≥ B 1 , In this section, we apply our proposed solution method to a
N0 τ1 N0 τ2
more complex network scenario, where multiple users desire
and constraint (23) can be re-written to be to harvest energy from a common H-AP and then use the
harvested energy to transmit information to the H-AP. It is
(2) h2 2 t2(2)
τ2 C ≥ B2 . (26) assumed that every two users are pre-grouped into a user pair
N0 τ2(2) and the number of user pairs is denoted as K . How to pair
the users is beyond the scope of the paper.
Further, also by introducing V = τ0 ωω H , Problem P3 can In the considered K user pair system, Ui,1 and Ui,2 are
be equivalently transformed into the two users of the i -th user pair, i = 1, 2, . . . , K . Suppose
P3-A : min τ0 + τ1 + τ2(1) + τ2(2) Ui,1 is closer to H-AP, which is able to help the farther user
{V,t,τ } Ui,2 to transmit information. The transmission procedure can
s.t. (16), (17), (18), (24), (25), (26). also be divided into the DL ET phase and the UL IT phase.
In the ET phase with time length of τ0 , H-AP broadcasts The problem is non-convex, in order to solve it, by using our
energy to all users with the power P0 . Then, in the IT phase, solution method proposed in Section IV, we introduce some
(1) (1) (1)
all users transmit information to the H-AP, respectively. The auxiliary variables, i.e., ti,1 = τi,1 Pi,1 , ti,2 = τi,2 Pi,2 , and
IT phase is further divided into K sub-phases, and in the (2) (2) (2)
ti,2 = τi,2 Pi,2 . By defining V = τ0 ωω H , (33) is transformed
i -th sub-phase, the i -th user pair transmits its information to into
the H-AP. Note that, the i -th sub-phase is also divided into (2)
three durations in order to fulfill the cooperative transmission. (2) hi,2 2 ti,2
Ri,2 = τi,2 C (2)
, i = 1, 2, . . . , K (35)
That is, Ui,1 firstly broadcasts its own information with the N0 τi,2
power Pi,1 in the duration of τi,1 , and then Ui,2 decodes the
(31) is transformed into
information of Ui,1 and forwards the decoded information to 2
(1) (1) |g | t
H-AP with the power Pi,2 in the duration of τi,2 , and at last Ri,1 ≤ τi,1 C Ni0 τi,1i,1 , i = 1, 2, . . . , K , (36)
(2)
Ui,2 transmits own information to H-AP with the power Pi,2
(2) and (32) is transformed into
in the left duration τi,2 .
(1)
As the total consumed energy at Ui,1 and Ui,2 (i = hi,1 2 ti,1 (1) hi,2 2 ti,2
1, 2, . . . , K ) must be less than their harvested energy, it sat- Ri,1 ≤ τi,1 C + τi,2 C ,
N0 τi,1 N0 τ (1) i,2
isfies the following constraints, i.e.,
i = 1, 2, . . . , K . (37)
τi,1 Pi,1 ≤ η|hi,1
H
ω|2 P0 τ0 , i = 1, 2, . . . , K , (28)
Besides, the constraints (28) and (29) can be respectively
and transformed into
(1) (1) (2) (2)
τi,2 Pi,2 + τi,2 Pi,2 ≤ η|hi,2
H
ω|2 P0 τ0 , i = 1, 2, . . . , K . ti,1 ≤ η P0 Tr(hi,1 hi,1
H V), i = 1, 2, . . . , K , (38)
(29) and
Additionally, the transmission time should satisfy that (1) (2)
ti,2 + ti,2 ≤ η P0 Tr(hi,2 hi,2
H V), i = 1, 2, . . . , K . (39)
K (1) (2)
τ0 + i=1 (τi,1 + τi,2 + τi,2 ) ≤ 1,
(1) (2) (30)
τ0 , τi,1 , τi,2 , τi,2 ≥ 0, i = 1, 2, . . . , K . As a result, Problem P4 can be equivalently expressed by
K
P4-A : max (αi,1 Ri,1 + αi,2 Ri,2 )
TheK
system WSR of the K user pairs can be expressed by {R,V,t,τ } i=1
i=1 i,1 Ri,1 + αi,2 Ri,2 ), where Ri,1 and Ri,2 , respectively,
(α
s.t. (16), (30), (36), (37), (38), (39), (40)
represent the achievable rate of the user Ui,1 and Ui,2 in the
(1) (1)
i -th user pair, which satisfy that where t denotes the set {ti,1 , ti,2 , ti,2 |i
= 1, 2, . . . , K }.
Due to the rank-one constraint in (16), Problem P4-A is
|gi |2 Pi,1
Ri,1 ≤ τi,1 C , (31) still non-convex, so we adopt SDR technique to deal with it.
N0 By dropping the rank-one constraint, we obtain the relaxed
(1)
hi,1 2 Pi,1 (1) hi,2 2 Pi,2 problem of Problem P4-A as
Ri,1 ≤ τi,1 C + τi,2 C , (32)
N0 N0
K
P4-B : max (αi,1 Ri,1 + αi,2 Ri,2 ) (41)
and {V,t,τ }
(2) i=1
(2) hi,2 2 Pi,2 s.t. Tr(V) ≤ τ0 , V 0,
Ri,2 = τi,2 C . (33)
N0 (30), (36), (37), (38), (39). (42)
αi,1 and αi,2 (i = 1, 2, . . . , K ) denote the nonnegative rate
weights of Ui,1 and Ui,2 in the i -th user pair, respectively. Similar to Section IV, it can be easily proved that Prob-
hi, j (i = 1, 2, . . . , K , j = 1, 2) denotes the complex channel lem P4-B is a convex problem, and thus it can be solved
vectors of size N × 1 for the links from U0 to Ui, j , and by interior point solver, e.g., CVX [40]. Finally, it is worth
gi (i = 1, 2, . . . , K ) is the complex channel coefficient noting that the obtained optimal solution V∗ is not nec-
between Ui,1 and Ui,2 . essarily rank-one. If so, a suboptimal solution ω can be
The optimization problem to maximize the system WSR by obtained from V∗ by adopting the Gaussian randomization
jointly optimizing energy beamforming, the time assignment approach [43].
and the power allocation can be mathematically given by
K VI. S IMULATION R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
P4 : max (αi,1 Ri,1 + αi,2 Ri,2 )
{R,ω,τ ,P} i=1 In this section, some simulation results are provided to
s.t. (1), (31), (32), (28), (29), (30), (34) discuss the performance of the proposed system. The simulated
network topology is shown in Figure 3, where all nodes
where R is the set {Ri,1 |i = 1, 2, . . . , K }, τ is the are placed on a 2-D plane and the position of each node
(1) (1)
set {τ0 , τi,1 , τi,2 , τi,2 |i = 1, 2, . . . , K } and P is the set is determined by its coordinate (x, y). Specifically, H-AP is
(1) (1)
{Pi,1 , Pi,2 , Pi,2 |i = 1, 2, . . . , K }. positioned at the point with coordinate (0,0), U1 is positioned
Fig. 3. Illustration of the simulation network topology on a 2-D plane.
Fig. 5. WSR comparison of our proposed user cooperation scheme and the
direct transmission scheme versus the available transmit power at H-AP for
N = 5 and N = 10.