1 / 13

Power Control in WLANs for Optimization of Social Fairness

Power Control in WLANs for Optimization of Social Fairness. Vaggelis Douros Pantelis Frangoudis Konstantinos Katsaros George Polyzos. {douros06,pfrag,ntinos,polyzos}@aueb.gr PCI 2008, 28/08/2008, Samos, Greece. Motivation. Some friends stay in the same neighborhood

iwidner
Download Presentation

Power Control in WLANs for Optimization of Social Fairness

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. Power Control in WLANs for Optimization of Social Fairness Vaggelis Douros Pantelis Frangoudis Konstantinos Katsaros George Polyzos {douros06,pfrag,ntinos,polyzos}@aueb.gr PCI 2008, 28/08/2008, Samos, Greece

  2. Motivation • Some friends stay in the same neighborhood • Each one has an AP • Should they use Power Control for a fair and efficient distribution of their incomes?

  3. Outline • Prerequisites - Methodology • Proposed Algorithms • Performance Evaluation • Variations • Conclusions

  4. Prerequisites • 2 APs (3 APs) • Using the same channel interference • Transmit at Pmax (i.e. maximum coverage radius) • Each AP belongs to a different owner • Goal: APs fully cooperate* for a fair and efficient distribution of their incomes • Ν users (N=10,30,50,100) • Uniformly randomly distributed • Static – Noarrivals/ volunteersdepartures

  5. Methodology • Custom simulator: C/Matlab • 10000 simulationsfor each scenario • Income computation for each useriand eachAP k

  6. Algorithm FirstMax • APs apply power control • They simultaneously reduce their transmission power to the same level • If, in the new state, the income for each AP is larger (worst case … equal) than the income in the previous state, power decrease continues • Otherwise, they choose to transmit at the exact previous state • Algorithm stops First time there is a decrease to an AP’s income • Find the first local maximum

  7. Algorithm BestMax (1) • APs apply power control • They simultaneously reduce their transmission power to the same level • Each AP computes its income • Algorithm stops APs have no common coverage area

  8. AlgorithmBestMax (2) • Find the value of the transmission power (Pmax) that maximizes the income of an AP, independently of the income of all other APs. • Repeat the previous step for all APs of the topology. • Find the value of the transmission power that the sum of the percentage losses from the maximum feasible incomes of each AP is minimized.

  9. Income Comparison between FirstMax - BestMax

  10. Mean % Improvementof FirstMax and BestMax with 2 ΑPs - 3 APs

  11. Variations • All APs of the neighborhood belong to me!.. • Should I use power control? • Non strict (not fully compliant) versions of these power control algorithms … • “Bliss or curse?” • Add a type of bargaining mechanism

  12. Conclusions • Back to the start… • Some friends stay in the same neighborhood • Each one has an AP • Should they use Power Control for a fair and efficient distribution of their incomes? • Of course! BestMax is a brilliant choice! • Full and honest cooperation is rewarded!

  13. Thank You! Vaggelis Douros Mobile Multimedia Laboratory Department of Informatics Athens University of Economics and Business douros06@aueb.gr http://mm.aueb.gr/~douros

More Related