Upload
lora-poole
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
© 2003 Conventional Antenna Arrays With a conventional array, then elements are closely spaced ( /2) and connected through high bandwidth cabling. Microdiversity. Receiver Transmitter
Citation preview
copyright 2003
Exploiting Macrodiversityin Dense Multihop Networks
and Relay Channels
Matthew C. ValentiAssistant ProfessorLane Dept. of Comp. Sci. & Elect. Eng.West Virginia UniversityMorgantown, [email protected]
Neiyer CorrealFlorida Commun. Research LabsMotorolaPlantation, FL 33322
This work was supported in part by the Office of Naval Researchunder grant N00014-00-0655
This presentation does not necessarily represent the views of ONR or Motorola.
© 2
003
Motivation & Goals Embedded networks of sensors and actuators:
Expected to be the enabling technology for several revolutionary new applications.
Low cost, disposable devices.• Single antenna.• Noncoherent detection and hard-decision decoding.• High spatial density, but low duty cycle.• Little or no movement = slow fading.
IEEE 802.15 TG 4 Spatial diversity:
Fading can be mitigated using antenna arrays. However, antenna arrays are too cumbersome for EmNets.
Goal is to achieve spatial diversity in a dense network of low-cost devices, each with a single antenna.
“virtual” antenna array. Emphasis on low cost solutions. A cross-layer approach.
© 2
003
Conventional Antenna Arrays
With a conventional array, then elements are closely spaced (/2) and connected through high bandwidth cabling. Microdiversity.
ReceiverTransmitter
© 2
003
Distributed Antenna Array
With a distributed array, the antennas are widely separated (e.g. different base stations) and connected through a moderate bandwidth backbone. Macrodiversity.
Receiver #2Transmitter
Receiver #1
BackboneNetwork
© 2
003
Virtual Antenna Array
With a virtual array, the antenna elements are widely spaced (attached to different receivers) but are not connected by a backbone. Virtual connection achieved by MAC-layer design. Decentralized macrodiversity.
Receiver #2Transmitter
Receiver #1
Virtual Connection
© 2
003
Assumptions We Do Not Make Most research on ad hoc networks makes the
following simplifying assumptions: Point-to-point communications.
• “Receiver-directed”• Facilitates the adaptation of wired protocols.• Ignores broadcast nature of radio.
Fixed transmission range and circular coverage area.• Ignores effects of fading and interference.
Irregular and time-varying shape to coverage area.• Concept of transmission range ignores the shape of the error
performance curve of practical modulation and coding techniques.
Assumes a “brick-wall” packet error rate, i.e. if inside range, transmission is reliable, but if outside
range it is unreliable.
Packet Error Rate of Bluetooth
5 10 15 20 25 30 3510-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
Average Es/No in dB
Pac
ket E
rror
Rat
e
M=1
M=2
M=3M=6
Quasi-static Rayleigh fading channelwith M element antenna array
© 2
003
Related Work Several options for exploiting the broadcast nature of
radio have been proposed. Require maximal-ratio-combining.
Source Destination
Relay
The relay channel (Cover/El Gamal 1979)
Cooperative diversity (Sendonaris/Erkip/Aazhang & Laneman/Wornell 1998)
Source #2
Source #1
Destination #2
Destination #1
Multihop diversity (Boyer/Falconer/Yanikomeroglu & Gupta/Kumar 2001)
Parallel relay channel (Gatspar/Kramer/Gupta 2002)
Source Destination
Source Destination
© 2
003
A Simple Approach toDecentralized Macrodiversity
Source broadcasts to a cluster of relays. Receive diversity effect. Any relay that received the broadcast could forward. Decode-and-forward.
• Error detection code used to determine if correct.• Message re-encoded and forwarded.
A negotiation is needed to determine the forwarding node.
Source Destination
Comments:•All M relays participate in receiving the source transmission.•Only one relay forwards to the destination.•The relay is selected after the source transmits.
© 2
003
Potential Gain with Perfect Negotiation
To illustrate the potential performance gains, we first assess the performance with an idealized MAC protocol. All relays within the source’s range know which
relays have received the message correctly.• This information could be explicitly shared over a
separate control channel.• A better approach is to embed this negotiation process
into the MAC protocol. Which relay forwards?
• Must have received the source transmission.• Should have best SNR from relay-destination.
Instantaneous SNR. Average-SNR: Relay closest to the destination.
© 2
003
Channel Model Quasi-static Rayleigh fading channel.
SNR constant for duration of a packet. Varies from packet to packet. Exponential random variable.
Path loss. Received power at distance dm is:
• Assuming path loss exponent n=3, free-space reference distance do = 1 m, and fc = 2.4 GHz.
Noise spectral density No = 10-18 W/Hz
P cd f
dd
P d Pro c
m
o
n
t m tFHG IKJ FHGIKJ
410
24 3
© 2
003
Simulation Parameters Modulation:
Noncoherent FSK modulation. Short packets (N=80 bits). 1 Mbaud symbol rate. Packet error rate:
Topology: source-destination are 10 m apart. M relays placed in circular cluster of diameter 7 m. Relays are moved after each packet.
pNk ke m
k
mk
N
bg FHGIKJ FHGIKJ FHG IKJ
1
21
2
1
1
SourceCluster of
Relays
Destination
Simulation Results:Source/Relay Power for FER = 10-2
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
Relay Power P2 (in dBm)
Sou
rce
Pow
er P
1 (in
dB
m)
M=1
Receiver-directedBest Avg. SNRBest Instantaneous SNR
M=2
M=3
M=5
M=10
M={2,3,5,10}
© 2
003
Performance Gains
If goal is to minimize the sum of the transmit power of source and relay.
M Receiver-directed
Best Avg.SNR
Best Instantaneous SNR
1 6.69 mW 6.69 mW 6.69 mW
2 5.97 mW 1.61 mW 0.63 mW
3 5.62 mW 0.99 mW 0.28 mW
5 5.05 mW 0.64 mW 0.13 mW
10 4.80 mW 0.38 mW 0.07 mW
© 2
003
Methods for Practical Negotiation Divide time into slots.
One slot for source and each relay. Source transmits during first slot. Relay closest to destination transmits in next slot, if it received
the source transmission properly. Reliable ACK messages needed to prevent
unnecessary transmissions.
SourceDestination 1 2 3 4 5 6
NextSource
Message
© 2
003
Conclusion Energy efficiency can be greatly improved by allowing
multiple relays to receive the transmission. Particularly effective in quasi-static Rayleigh fading channels
and simple modulation. No need to find route in advance. MAC layer needs to resolve which relay is used. Cross-layer approach.
Future work. Include direct connection from source-destination.
• Classic relay channel. Information theoretic capacity. Channel coding for the relay channel. Further development of MAC protocol.
• How to handle unreliable acknowledgements.• Determine which nodes are in the cluster.
D
Source-RelayChannel
(& Decoder)
“Source”Decoder
“Relay”Decoder
Interleaver
Deinnterleaver 2(Xi)2(X’i)
1(Xi)
w (Xi)
V1(Xi)
V2(X’i)
V2(Xi)
iX̂Interleaver Relay-Destination
Channel
D
Source-DestinationChannel
Source
Relay
Destination
iX
Distributed Turbo Codes
40 50 60 70 80 90 10075
80
85
90
95
Average transmitted SNR r of the relay in dB
BPSK relay RSC Relay distributed rate 1/3 PCCC
distributed rate 1/4 PCCCdistributed rate 1/4 SCCCtheoretical bound
Ave
rage
tran
smitt
ed S
NR
s o
f the
sou
rce
in d
B