2013
DOI: 10.1186/1687-1499-2013-67
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A capacity and minimum guarantee-based service class-oriented scheduler for LTE networks

Abstract: Quality-of-service (QoS) requirements have always posed a challenge from scheduling perspective and it becomes more complicated with the emergence of new standards and applications. Classical techniques like maximum throughput, proportional fair, and exponential rule have been used in common network scenarios but these techniques fail to address diverse service requirements for QoS provisioning in long-term evolution (LTE). These QoS requirements in LTE are implemented in the form of delay budgets, scheduling … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
44
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
44
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on some indirect measures, the EXP rule scheduler is found to have improvements in delay, fairness measures, and throughput [37,38]. In [11], it was stated that this scheme prioritizes real-time traffic with regard to non-real-time traffic.…”
Section: Proposed Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on some indirect measures, the EXP rule scheduler is found to have improvements in delay, fairness measures, and throughput [37,38]. In [11], it was stated that this scheme prioritizes real-time traffic with regard to non-real-time traffic.…”
Section: Proposed Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second stage is to allocate the resource blocks for frequency domain scheduling. Some packet scheduling mechanisms have been proposed and analyzed [4][5][6][7]. For instance, the PF, a representative packet scheduling mechanism, focused on fairness instead of QoS [4].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, the PF, a representative packet scheduling mechanism, focused on fairness instead of QoS [4]. In [5], the scheduling mechanism analyzed and arranged the resource blocks to improve the transmission quantity of non-instant packets. The DPS scheduling mechanism [6] considered the remaining transmission time to determine the sequence of packet transmissions, and the resource was allocated in accordance with the transmission efficiency.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scheduling rules designed for delaysensitive traffic, such as in [24,25] (see the time utility functions of different traffic classes), give low scheduling priority to the best-effort flows. High priority differentiation between the delay-sensitive and best-effort flows causes resource starvation for the best-effort flows [26,27]. In FCS scheduling framework, inter-class traffic priority differentiation is provided by output fuzzy set.…”
Section: Dynamic Resource Controllermentioning
confidence: 99%