A Low Complexity Approach of Combining Cooperative Diversity and Multiuser Diversity in Multiuser Cooperative Networks

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the scheduling scheme to combine cooperative diversity (CD) and multiuser diversity (MUD) in multiuser cooperative networks under the time resource allocation (TRA) framework in which the whole transmission is divided into two phases: the broadcast phase and the relay phase. The broadcast phase is for direct transmission whereas the relay phase is for relay transmission. Based on this TRA framework, a user selection based low complexity relay protocol (US-LCRP) is proposed to combine CD and MUD. In each time slot (TS) of the broadcast phase, a "best" user is selected for transmission in order to obtain MUD. In the relay phase, the relays forward the messages of some specific users in a fixed order and then invoke the limited feedback information to achieve CD. We demonstrate that the diversity-multiplexing tradeoff (DMT) of the US-LCRP is superior to that of the existing schemes, where more TSs are allocated for direct transmission in order to jointly exploit CD and MUD. Our analytical and numerical results show that the US-LCRP constitutes a more efficient resource utilization approach than the existing schemes.

Performance Investigation of Cooperative Green Underground Wireless Systems

“…Two well-known cooperative communication strategies are amplify and forward (AF) and decode and forward (DF) [25] . A new error analysis approach has been proposed for single-relay cooperative diversity using selection combining.…”

BRAINS: Joint Bandwidth-Relay Allocation in Multihoming Cooperative D2D Networks

“…In [20], a relay based MIMO transmission with interference mitigation scheme was proposed for D2D communications. Multi-relay diversity was proposed by Lv et al [21] and round-robin based relay sharing was investigated in [22].…”

Performance evaluation of multiuser Internet of Things wireless‐powered relaying networks with transceiver hardware imperfections over Nakagami‐m fading channels

“…As per the aforementioned discussion, it is evident that de Melo et al and da Costa, Yang et al, Zhang et al, Hemachandra and Beaulieu, Fan et al, Guimaraes et al, Liu et al, Lateef et al, and Lv et al 30–38 have studied the performance of multiuser relay networks without taking the SWIPT architectures and transceiver hardware impairments into account. The impact of transceiver hardware impairments on the multiuser relay networks has been investigated in Kharwar et al, 39,40 but without exploiting the SWIPT benefits.…”

“…14,15 In TS architecture, the receiver can switch over time between EH and information processing (IP), while in PS architecture, the received signal is divided by the receiver into two portions, one for EH and the other for IP. [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] have studied the performance of multiuser relay networks without taking the SWIPT architectures and transceiver hardware impairments into account. The impact of transceiver hardware impairments on the multiuser relay networks has been investigated in Kharwar et al, 39,40 but without exploiting the SWIPT benefits.…”

“…Recently, multiuser (or multi‐source) communications have attracted remarkable attention due to their ability of enhancing the diversity of the wireless communication systems. The performance of multiuser cooperative relay networks has been widely discussed in the related literature, 30–40 but without taking the SWIPT architecture into account. Recently, the performance of SWIPT‐aided multiuser relay networks has been analyzed in Nguyen et al, Lai et al, Xie et al, Gupta et al, and Shukla et al 41–45 and related literature.…”