Mobile Wireless Communications – A system View移动无线通信系统视图.pptVIP

Connection Scheduling Signaling RTS/CTS signaling: All signals are single tone signals Better range due to PAPR gain More connections can compete the resource in a few symbols; small system overhead (224 CIDs, 18% system overhead) A connection picks a connection ID which is locally unique when the connection is setup Symbol/tone choice for RTS/CTS at a given time slot is pseudo random based on the CID Priority is embedded in the position of the symbol/tone choice of a signal “Fair” sharing of the channel use Both channel information and priority information are embedded by the position and power of the signals Tx (RTS) Rx (CTS) * SINR Based Yielding Receiver yielding: compare the signal strength from the intended transmitter to the signal strength from the interferer Yield if the SINR (interference from higher priority connections) is below a certain threshold Transmitter yielding: Receiver nodes do inverse power control to help SINR estimation at the transmitters Yield if the SINR (interference from the initiator) of a higher priority connection is below a certain threshold Inverse power scaling enables accurate SINR estimation Pt=P1 Pr=h11P1 Pt=1/h11P1 Pr=h21/h11P1 Tx1 Rx1 Tx2 Tx1 Tx2 Rx1 Rx2 * How to choose SINR threshold? Simulation shows a value between [0,10]dB A simple analysis: assume SINR threshold = x. Translate into distance: Number of pairs scheduled: inversely proportional to x^(2/alpha). System capacity: dt di * System Throughput vs. SINR Threshold Optimal value between [0,10] dB Agree with the simulation results * FlashLinQ vs. 802.11 802.11 is asynchronous 802.11’s scheduling is mainly based on CSMA/CA and RTS/CTS 802.11 signals are transmitted with maximum power 802.11 does not have rate scheduling FlashLinQ is synchronous FlashLinQ relies on RTS/CTS type of mechanism only No exposed terminal No extended hidden terminal FlashLinQ has both transmitter and receiver power scaling to maximize system spectrum efficiency and ena