Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
9, SEPTEMBER 2009
4421
AbstractCognitive radio has been regarded as a promising technology to improve spectrum utilization significantly. In
this letter, spectrum allocation model is presented firstly, and
then spectrum allocation methods based on genetic algorithm
(GA), quantum genetic algorithm (QGA), and particle swarm
optimization (PSO), are proposed. To decrease the search space
we propose a mapping process between the channel assignment
matrix and the chromosome of GA, QGA, and the position of
the particle of PSO, respectively, based on the characteristics of
the channel availability matrix and the interference constraints.
Results show that our proposed methods greatly outperform the
commonly used color sensitive graph coloring algorithm.
Index TermsCognitive radio, spectrum allocation, genetic
algorithms, quantum genetic algorithm, particle swarm optimization.
I. I NTRODUCTION
HE spectrum of the wireless networks is generally regulated by governments via a fixed spectrum assignment
policy. However, in recent years, the demand for wireless
spectrum use has been growing dramatically with the rapid
development of the telecommunication industry, which has
caused scarcity in the available spectrum bands. Furthermore,
the underutilization of the licensed spectrum bands makes
the situation even worse [1]. In order to fully utilize the
scarce spectrum resources, dynamic spectrum access becomes
a promising approach to improve the efficiency of spectrum
usage. This new networking paradigm is also referred to as
NeXt Generation networks as well as cognitive radio networks
[2].
Cognitive radios have the ability to sense, to learn, and
to adapt to the outside world [3]. Based on their interaction with the environment, cognitive radios enable the users
to communicate over the most appropriate spectrum bands
through four main functionalities: spectrum sensing, spectrum
management, spectrum mobility, and spectrum sharing [2].
This paper focuses on how to share the available spectrum
bands which are detected unoccupied by primary users among
the coexisting cognitive radios (secondary users).
There exist a lot of research efforts on the problem of
spectrum sharing in cognitive radios. Based on centralized
or distributed architecture, cooperative or non-cooperative
spectrum allocation behavior, overlay or underlay spectrum
access technique [2], lots of methods have been proposed
c 2009 IEEE
1536-1276/09$25.00
4422
1 0
0 0
L= 0 1
0 0
1 0
Fig. 1.
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
, , = 0, , = 1, 1 , , 1 .
(1)
Given a conflict free channel assignment, the reward user
, , . We use = { =
gets is defined as =
=1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
A= 0
0
=1
(2)
, (2)
as in [9]: (1) Max-Sum-Reward (MSR): () =
=1
Proportional-Fair (MPF): () = (
( + 106 )) .
=1
and 1
, . For all , search all (, ) that
=1 =1
,
(3)
=
. . .
1
2
and
must satisfy
+
= 1, =
where
1, 2, . . . , , = 1, 2, . . . , , where denotes the population
size. The population of QGA can be denoted as () =
0
are initialized to 1/ 2 on the
{1 , 2 , . . . , }. 0 and
initial population.
The observed binary string of a chromosome in QGA plays
the same role as the binary encoded chromosome in GA such
that the observed state of a chromosome specifies a possible
solution of the optimization problem. We use the same process
as in GA-SAA to ensure that the observed binary string
satisfies the interference constraints. As in GA, we directly
use () as the fitness function in QGA. The proposed QGAbased spectrum allocation algorithm (QGA-SAA) proceeds as
follows:
Step 1: given , , and , set 1 the same as that in step
1 of GA-SAA, set population size , set the number of qubits
, .
in the chromosome as =
=1 =1
4423
GA-SAA, set =
, .
=1 =1
= [1
, 2
, . . . ,
], where {0, 1} and
[ , + ], 1 .
Step 3: map ( ) to , , where (, ) is the
th element in 1 . For all , search all (, ) that satisfies
,, = 1, and check whether both of the two dimensions of
the position corresponding to the element in the th line and
th column of and the element in the th line and th
column of are equal to 1; if so, randomly set one of them
to 0.
Step 4: compute the fitness value of each particle and set
= [1 , 2 , . . . , ] and = [1 , 2 , . . . , ], where
is the index of the particle which has the highest fitness value.
and as in [17].
Step 5: set = + 1, and update
Step 6: repeat the processes in step 3, and compute the
fitness value of each particle. For particle , if its fitness
, then set =
value is greater than the fitness value of 1
4424
TABLE I
AVERAGE REWARD .
Generation
or iteration
10
50
300
Algorithm
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
CSGC
Average reward ( = 5, = 5)
MSR
150.6038
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
151.0952
138.3981
MMR
25.0771
27.8634
27.8634
25.6343
27.8634
27.8634
27.3061
27.8634
27.8634
21.1016
MPF
53.8800
65.1482
64.8348
64.0926
66.1267
67.8842
64.5525
66.1267
67.9928
56.0257
MMR
2.3642
9.5613
8.3244
7.2553
39.5744
28.0520
12.3750
56.2500
50.9594
2.7769
MPF
62.4950
37.0068
13.7659
96.2020
87.5857
82.4346
116.7429
118.0215
120.5298
60.1252
TABLE II
C OMPARISON TO OPTIMAL VALUES .
60
50
Generation
or iteration
N=20,M=22
Min Reward
40
N=5,M=5
30
10
20
50
GASAA
QGASAA
PSOSAA
10
0
50
100
150
200
Generation
250
(a) Max-min-reward
N=20,M=22
120
Fair Reward
100
N=5,M=5
60
40
GASAA
QGASAA
PSOSAA
20
0
50
100
150
200
Generation
250
300
(b) Max-proportional-fair
Fig. 2.
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
GA-SAA
QGA-SAA
PSO-SAA
CSGC
MMR
3.4818
0
0
2.8639
0
0
2.3400
0
0
6.5438
MPF
1.6599
0.1017
0
0.9161
0.1017
0
0.9161
0.1017
0
7.8348
300
140
80
300
Algorithm
4425