1 / 20

Andreas Savvides andreas.savvides@yale.edu Office: AKW 212 Tel 432-1275 Course Website http://www.eng.yale.edu/enalab/co

Mobility Increases Capacity In Ad-Hoc Wireless Networks Lecture 17 October 28, 2004 EENG 460a / CPSC 436 / ENAS 960 Networked Embedded Systems & Sensor Networks. Andreas Savvides andreas.savvides@yale.edu Office: AKW 212 Tel 432-1275 Course Website

cade
Download Presentation

Andreas Savvides andreas.savvides@yale.edu Office: AKW 212 Tel 432-1275 Course Website http://www.eng.yale.edu/enalab/co

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Mobility Increases Capacity In Ad-Hoc Wireless NetworksLecture 17 October 28, 2004EENG 460a / CPSC 436 / ENAS 960 Networked Embedded Systems &Sensor Networks Andreas Savvides andreas.savvides@yale.edu Office: AKW 212 Tel 432-1275 Course Website http://www.eng.yale.edu/enalab/courses/eeng460a

  2. Today: Two Different Aspects of Mobility • Communication: Capacity of Mobile Networks • M. Grossglauser and D. Tse, “Mobility Increases the Capacity of Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks”, Proceedings of INFOCOM 2001 • Sensing & Coordination: Constrained Mobility – Anjan’s Presentation

  3. Introduction: Capacity in Mobile Networks • Channel variations in time in wireless networks • Multipath fading • Path-loss through distance attenuation • Shadowing by obstacles • Interference from other users • How to cope with channel variations • Use diversity • Over time - interleaving coded bits • Frequency diversification • Space – multiple antennas • Multiple independent signal paths between a sender and a receiver

  4. Motivation • Exploit time-scale channel fluctuations in time • Multiuser diversity – frequent topology changes due to user mobility • Focus on asynchronous applications • Users don’t care about end-to-end delays • e.g email, data sysnchronization between a mobile terminal and an application, some types of event notification • Show that the theoretical network capacity increases with mobility

  5. Consider Static Networks First • Gupta & Kumar Result • The Capacity of Wireless Networks, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, March 2000 • Proposed model for studying the capacity of wireless networks • Fixed ad-hoc network, randomly deployed nodes • Each node has a random destination it wants to communicate • Main Result: As number of nodes n per unit area increases, the throughput per source destination paper decreases approximately like 1/√n • Results indicates best performance achievable • Optimal scheduling, routing and relaying • Pessimistic result – traffic rated per sender-destination pair goes to 0!

  6. This paper Mobility as a source of multi-user diversity: Average throughput of sender-destination (S-D) pair can be kept constant as number of nodes per unit area n increases • Caveat, long term throughput averaged over the node mobility time-scale => delays of the same order can occur • Distribute packets to as many nodes as possible • Mobile relay nodes, temporarily buffer a packet and pass the packet to destination when they come close to it

  7. Fixed vs. Mobile • Fixed nodes • Long range communication between multiple S-D pairs limited by interference • Communication needs to take place between nearest neighbors • Distances of 1/√n • Multiple hops to destination - √n • Actual useful traffic per pair is fairly small • Mobile nodes • Transmit only when nodes are close together • Use at most 1 relay node

  8. Signal to Interference Ration (SIR) Model SIR for successful communication Transmit power of node i Background noise power Processing gain: 1-spread spectrum, >1 CDMA Channel gain Positions for nodes (i,j)

  9. Assumptions • Results are based on an idealized setup • Assume a central scheduler • At time t, scheduler chooses the senders and their power levels • Goal: under random motion patterns • Show that the long term throughput remains constant as the number of users increases

  10. Mobile Nodes w/o Relaying Positions of nodes t,j at time t S(t) – Set of source nodes that are scheduled for successful transmission • Can mobile nodes achieve a throughput of O(1) per S-D pair by not relaying at all? • Answer: number of simultaneous long range communications is limited by interference

  11. Mobile nodes without relaying • Without relaying the achievable throughput per S-D pair goes to 0 at least as fast as Distance attenuation factor

  12. Mobile nodes with relaying • What is the problem with direct transmission to S-D pairs? • Transmissions are long range => interference limits the number of concurrent transmissions • How can we increase throughput? • Constrain transmission to nearest neighbors • Use lower transmission power to avoid interference • Cannot wait for nearest neighbor to come close by, time 1/n – vanishes at time goes by

  13. Mobile nodes with relaying • Spread out packets along a large number of relay nodes • Nodes temporarily buffer packets while they move • Ensure that every node will have packets to send to its nearest neighbor at any time • Note you cannot do this with direct transmission alone!

  14. Scheduling Policy & Theorem 3.4 • Assume that time is divided into slots • Fix a sender density parameter • Select the sender receiver pairs where the interference is small enough to make transmission possible • Theorem 3.4 The number of feasible sender-receiver pairs is O(n) • Proof based on interference analysis not shown here

  15. 2-phase scheduling policy • Apply a 2-phase interleaved scheduling policy: • Souce sends to relay (odd slots) • Relay sends to destimation (even slots) Direct transmission to destination is also allowed if destination is close enough

  16. 1 hop vs. 2-hop routes Theorem 3.4: Number of feasible sender receiver pairs is O(n) • The long-term throughput between any two nodes is equal to the probability that 2 nodes are a feasible node pair O(1/n) according to the theorem • Throughput over direct route O(1/n) • Single hops routes alone O(1/n) • In 2-hop routes there are n-2 routes • Total average throughput per S-D pair is O(1)

  17. Main result of the paper Theorem 3.5: The two-phased algorithm achieves a throughput per S-D pair of O(1) i.e there exists a constant c>0 such that

  18. Numerical Results

  19. Numerical Results Note performance degradation at large thetas

  20. Conclusions/Summary • Mobility can increase capacity is delay can be tolerated • Email, synchronization and data collection applications would be good candidates • Not useful for cellular telephony • Delays cannot be tolerated • Remember: Gupta & Kumar result • Capacity scales with 1/√n • Result under mobility assumptions in this paper • Capacity O(1)

More Related