2007 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory 2007
DOI: 10.1109/isit.2007.4557542
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bits through ARQs: Spectrum Sharing with a Primary Packet System

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…ARQ means automatic repeat request and the mechanism used in the process is whenever the source node transmits a message to the destination user, if the message received successfully by the destination then it sends ACK-acknowledgement signals back to the sender such that sender assumes that message reached successfully [8][9] [11].…”
Section: Fig 1: System Model[12]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ARQ means automatic repeat request and the mechanism used in the process is whenever the source node transmits a message to the destination user, if the message received successfully by the destination then it sends ACK-acknowledgement signals back to the sender such that sender assumes that message reached successfully [8][9] [11].…”
Section: Fig 1: System Model[12]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this is not straight forward as the secondary does not have direct access to the primary CSI. In [7], [8], a secondary system is allowed to transmit in the primary frequency band and the control feedback, such as ARQ, channel state, or power control information, from the primary serves as the side information to the secondary terminals. Similarly, in [9], [10] the secondary user co-exists with a maximal-T -transmission primary system, under a constraint on the maximum throughput loss of the primary; [11] and [12] investigate techniques for exploiting the redundancy of the primary transmission process, as introduced by the ARQ scheme, i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although [17] uses a similar constraint, our work differs substantially for the following reasons: (1) in [17], the authors propose a channel access control algorithm, whereas we propose a power control algorithm; (2) the authors of [17] do not connect the rateassurance constraint to PU queue stability; (3) our analysis hinges on Lyapunov Stability theory whereas [17] applies the theory of Markov decision processes. The authors of [25] studied primary transmission-rate guarantee through primary ACK/NAK eavesdropping by secondary users. The system is modeled as an erasure channel and the erasure probability is influenced by the SU activities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The system is modeled as an erasure channel and the erasure probability is influenced by the SU activities. Our work differs from that of [25] in that our system model is different and we apply the theory of Lyapunov stability to devise a decentralized algorithm that allows multiple SU coordinations under the rate constraint. In [26], the authors propose a scheme that allows the PTx to change probability of transmission according to the secondary activity and/or channel conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%