Multi-armed bandit for LTE-U and WiFi coexistence in unlicensed bands

Sriyananda, M. G. S.; Parvez, Imtiaz; Guvene, Ismail; Bennis, Mehdi; Sarwat, Arif I.

doi:10.1109/wcnc.2016.7564899

Cited by 34 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the first case, when we change B to B e and W to W e , since W −W e > B e −B > 0, we always have W e ≤ max{ A T − Be 2 , 0}. This implies that (B e , W e ) still falls in the region of case 1), so that we can still use equation (16) to calculate the social welfare. Obviously, when B increases to B e , social welfare also increases.…”

Section: Appendix E Proof Of Theorem 43mentioning

confidence: 99%

Price Competition with LTE-U and WiFi

Wang

Berry

2019

IEEE INFOCOM 2019 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

LTE-U is an extension of the Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard for operation in unlicensed spectrum. LTE-U differs from WiFi, the predominant technology used in unlicensed spectrum in that it utilizes a duty cycle mode for accessing the spectrum and allows for a more seamless integration with LTE deployments in licensed spectrum. There have been a number of technical studies on the co-existence of LTE-U and WiFi in unlicensed spectrum In this paper, we instead investigate the impact of such a technology from an economic perspective. We consider a model in which an incumbent service provider (SP) deploys a duty cycle-based technology like LTE-U in an unlicensed band along with operating in a licensed band and competes with one or more entrants that only operate in the unlicensed band using a different technology like WiFi. We characterize the impact of a technology like LTE-U on the market outcome and show that the welfare impacts of this technology are subtle, depending in part on the amount of unlicensed spectrum and number of entrants. The difference in spectral efficiency between LTE and WiFi also plays a role in the competition among SPs. Finally, we investigate the impact of the duty cycle and the portion of unlicensed spectrum used by the technology.

show abstract

Section: Appendix E Proof Of Theorem 43mentioning

confidence: 99%

Price Competition with LTE-U and WiFi

Wang

Berry

2019

IEEE INFOCOM 2019 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, it is not clear whether these mathematical optimization approaches result in performance improvements over conventional CW adaptation approaches, especially in realistic deployments. 5) Wi-Fi/Duty-Cycle-LTE Coexistence: The following work in the literature considered Wi-Fi/duty-cycle-LTE coexistence [121], [122], [124], [127], [130], [132]- [134], [139], [143], [145], [153], [155], [156], [163]- [168]. a) Fixed duty cycle: The authors in [122], [127], [139], [153], [155], [163] considered LTE with fixed duty cycle.…”

Section: ) Wi-fi/lte Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…c) Adaptive duty cycle: The authors in [130], [133], [134], [143], [145], [155], [156], [163], [165]- [168] considered LTE with adaptive duty cycle. We note that, although duty cycling for LTE can be implemented based on the existing subframe blanking specifications, algorithms that adapt the duty cycle require more advanced features, e.g.…”

Section: ) Wi-fi/lte Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We note that, although duty cycling for LTE can be implemented based on the existing subframe blanking specifications, algorithms that adapt the duty cycle require more advanced features, e.g. monitoring the channel (potentially via an additional Wi-Fi interface) VIII-D INTER-TECHNOLOGY COEXISTENCE GOALS AND PERFORMANCE FOR LITERATURE REVIEW OF SPECTRUM SHARING AMONG BROADBAND TECHNOLOGIES IN A SPECTRUM COMMONS IN TABLE VIII-A: WI-FI/DUTY-CYCLE-LTE Technologies Coexistence Goals Performance Evaluation method metric network size Wi-Fi/ dutycycle-LTE [121], [122], [124], [127], [130], [132]- [134], [139], [143], [145], [153], [155]- [157], [163]- [168] Impact on Wi-Fi −no baseline [167]; −vs. coexistence with itself [132], [133], [145], [145], [153], [155]- [157], [165], [166]; −vs.…”

Section: ) Wi-fi/lte Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…−vs. standalone [121], [122], [124], [127], [139], [145], [156], [157], [164], [168]; −vs. channel selection [133], [155]- [157], [166]; −vs.…”

Section: ) Wi-fi/lte Coexistencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Voicu

Simić

Petrova

2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing capacity demands in emerging wireless technologies are expected to be met by network densification and spectrum bands open to multiple technologies. These will, in turn, increase the level of interference and also result in more complex inter-technology interactions, which will need to be managed through spectrum sharing mechanisms. Consequently, novel spectrum sharing mechanisms should be designed to allow spectrum access for multiple technologies, while efficiently utilizing the spectrum resources overall. Importantly, it is not trivial to design such efficient mechanisms, not only due to technical aspects, but also due to regulatory and business model constraints. In this survey we address spectrum sharing mechanisms for wireless inter-technology coexistence by means of a technology circle that incorporates in a unified, system-level view the technical and nontechnical aspects. We thus systematically explore the spectrum sharing design space consisting of parameters at different layers. Using this framework, we present a literature review on intertechnology coexistence with a focus on wireless technologies with equal spectrum access rights, i.e. (i) primary/primary, (ii) secondary/secondary, and (iii) technologies operating in a spectrum commons. Moreover, we reflect on our literature review to identify possible spectrum sharing design solutions and performance evaluation approaches useful for future coexistence cases. Finally, we discuss spectrum sharing design challenges and suggest future research directions.

show abstract