1 / 33

Algorithms for Wireless Network Design : A Cell Breathing Heuristic

Algorithms for Wireless Network Design : A Cell Breathing Heuristic. MohammadTaghi HajiAghayi U. of Maryland, College Park Joint work with Bahl , Jain, Mirrokni , Qui, Saberi. Application of Market Equilibrium in Distributed Load Balancing. Wireless devices

sybil
Download Presentation

Algorithms for Wireless Network Design : A Cell Breathing Heuristic

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. Algorithms for Wireless Network Design: A Cell Breathing Heuristic MohammadTaghiHajiAghayi U. of Maryland, College Park Joint work with Bahl, Jain, Mirrokni, Qui, Saberi

  2. Application of Market Equilibrium in Distributed Load Balancing • Wireless devices • Cell-phones, laptops with WiFi cards • Referred as clients or users interchangeably • Demand connections to access points • Uniform for cell-phones (voice connection) • Non-uniform for laptops (application dependent)

  3. Application of Market Equilibrium in Distributed Load Balancing • Access points • Cell-towers, Base stations, Wireless routers • Capacities • Total traffic they can serve • Integer for cell-towers • Variable transmission power • Capable of operating at various power levels • Assume levels are continuous real numbers

  4. Clients to APs assignment • Assign clients to APs in an efficient way • No over-loading of APs • Assigning the maximum number of clients and thus satisfying maximum demand

  5. One Heuristic Solution • A client connects to the AP with reasonable signal and then the lightest load • Requires support both from AP and Clients • APs have to communicate their current load • Clients have WiFi cards from various vendors running legacy software • Overall it has limited benefit in practice

  6. Ideal Case • We would like a client connects to the AP with the best received signal strength • If an AP j transmitting at power level Pj then a client i at distance dij receives signal with strength Pij = a.Pj.dij-c where a and c are constants capturing various models of power attenuation

  7. Cell Breathing Heuristic • An overloaded AP decreases its communication radius by decreasing power • A lightly loaded AP increases its communication radius by increasing power • Hopefully an equilibrium would be reached • Will show that an equilibrium exist • Can be computed in polynomial time • Can be reached by a tatonnement process • Let’s start with economics and game theory

  8. Market Equilibrium – A distributed load balancing mechanism. • Fisher setting with linear Utilities: • m buyers (each with budget Bi) and n goods for sale (each with quantity qj) • Each buyer has linear utility ui, i.e. utility of i is sumj uij xij where uij>= 0 is the utility of buyer i for good j and xij is the amount of good j bought by i. • A market equilibrium or market clearance is a price vector p that • maximizes utility sumj uij xij of buyer i subject to his budget sumj pj xij <= Bi • The demand and supply for each good j are equal sumj xij = qj (and thus the budgets are totally spent).

  9. Fisher Setting with Linear Utilities Goods Buyers

  10. Market Equilibrium – A distributed load balancing mechanism. • Static supply • corresponding to capacities of APs • Prices • corresponding to powers at APs • Utilities • Analogous to received signal strength function • Either all clients are served or all APs are saturated • Analogous to the market clearance(equiblirum) condition • Thus our situation is analogous to Fisher setting with linear utilities

  11. Clients assignment to APs APs Clients

  12. Analogousness Is Only Inspirational • Get inspiration from various algorithms for the Fisher setting and develop algorithms for our setting • Though we do not know any reduction – in fact there are some key differences

  13. Differences from the Market Equilibrium setting • Demand • Price dependent in Market equilibrium setting • Power independent in our setting • Is demand splittable? • Yes for the Market equilibrium setting • No for our setting • Market equilibrium clears both sides but our solution requires clearance on either client side or AP side • This also means two separate linear programs for these two separate cases

  14. Three Approaches for Market Equilibrium • Convex Programming Based • Eisenberg, Gale 1957 • Primal-Dual Based • Devanur, Papadimitriou, Saberi, Vazirani 2004 • Auction Based • Garg, Kapoor 2003

  15. Three Approaches for Load Balancing • Linear Programming • Minimum weight complete matching • Primal-Dual • Uses properties of bipartite graph matching • Auction • Useful in dynamically changing situation

  16. Linear Programming Based Solution • Create a complete bipartite graph • One side is the set of all clients • The other side is the set of all APs, conceptually each AP is repeated as many times as its capacity (unit demand) • The weight between client i and AP j is wij = c.ln(dij) – ln(a)= -ln(Pij/Pj) • Find the minimum weight complete matching

  17. Theorem • Minimum weight matching is supported by a power assignment to APs • Power assignment are the dual variables • Two cases for the primal program which is known at the beginning • Solution can satisfy all clients • Solution can saturate all APs

  18. Case 1 – Complete matching covers all clients

  19. Case 1 – Pick Dual Variables

  20. Write Dual Program xij

  21. Optimize the dual program • Choose Pj = e πj • Using the complementary slackness condition we will show that the minimum weight complete matching is supported by these power levels

  22. Proof • Dual feasibility gives: -λi ≥ πj – wij= ln(Pj) – c.ln(dij) + ln(a) = ln(a.Pj.dij-c) • Complementary slackness gives: xij=1 implies -λi = ln(a.Pj.dij-c) (Remember if an AP j transmitting at power level Pj then a client i at distance dij receives signal with strength Pij = a.Pj.dij-c) • Together they imply that i is connected to the AP with the strongest received signal strength

  23. Case 2 – Complete matching saturates all APs

  24. Case 2 – The rest of the proof is similar

  25. Unsplittable Demand

  26. Unsplittable Demand • The integer program is APX-hard in general (because of knapsack) • Assuming that the number of clients is much larger than the number of APs, a realistic assumption, we can obtain a nice approximation heuristic. • First we compute a basic feasible solution

  27. Analysis of Basic Feasible Solution

  28. Approximate Solution • All xij’s but a small number of xij’s are integral • Theorem: Number of xij which are integral is at least the number of clients – the number APs • Most clients are served unsplittably • Clients which are served splittably – do not serve them • The algorithm is almost optimal

  29. Discrete Power Levels • Over the shelf APs have only fixed number of discrete power levels • Equilibrium may not exist • In fact it is NP-hard to test whether it exists or not • If every client has a deterministic tie breaking rule then we can compute the equilibrium in which every client is served – if exists under the tie breaking rule

  30. Discrete Power Levels • Start with the maximum power levels for each AP • Take any overloaded AP and decrease its power level by one notch • If an equilibrium exist then it will be computed in time mk, where m is the number of APs and k is the number of power levels • This is a distributed tatonnement process!

  31. Proof • Suppose Pjis an equilibrium power level for the jth AP. • Inductively prove that when j reaches the power level Pjthen it will not be overloaded again. • Here we use the deterministic tie breaking rule.

  32. Conclusion • Theory of market equilibrium is a good way of synchronizing independent entity’s to do distributed load balancing. • We simulated these algorithm and observed meaningful results.

  33. Thanks for your attention… تشکر Obrigado

More Related