+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June...

Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June...

Date post: 19-Jul-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
9
1 24 June 2010 1 Fusion Strategies for Collabora3ve Spectrum Sensing Kamran Arshad and Klaus Moessner Centre for Communica3on Systems Research (CCSR), University of Surrey, United Kingdom Email: [email protected] 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany 2 24 June 2010 Outline Objective Motivation Spectrum Sensing Collaborative Spectrum Sensing Hard decision based fusion optimisation Genetic Algorithms based soft decision fusion optimisation Conclusions 3 24 June 2010 Outline Objective Motivation Spectrum Sensing Collaborative Spectrum Sensing Hard decision based fusion optimisation Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation framework Conclusions 24 June 2010 4 Objective 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany To optimise performance of collaborative spectrum sensing.
Transcript
Page 1: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

1

24 June 2010 1  

Fusion  Strategies  for  Collabora3ve  Spectrum  Sensing  

Kamran  Arshad  and  Klaus  Moessner  Centre  for  Communica3on  Systems  Research  (CCSR),  

University  of  Surrey,  United  Kingdom  Email:  [email protected]  

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany 2 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivation •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

•  Hard decision based fusion optimisation •  Genetic Algorithms based soft decision fusion optimisation

•  Conclusions

3 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivation •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

24 June 2010 4

Objective

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

“To optimise performance of

collaborative spectrum sensing.”

Page 2: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

2

5 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivation •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

6 24 June 2010

Motivation for this research...

•  People/users do not need spectrum, they need capacity and adequate quality communication means!

•  Technology converts the limited spectrum into capacity

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Demand for Spectrum

Limited Resource

Crowded

Bandwidth hungry

Services

7 24 June 2010

Motivation – ctd.

•  Possible solutions –  Use higher spectrum (higher frequency bands)

•  Do fundamental physical limits allows us to do so?

–  Increase modulation efficiency or spectrum efficiency •  Can we go beyond Shannon capacity?

–  MIMO techniques •  How much spectrum can be squeezed through more efficient antenna

techniques?

–  Cognitive Radio exploiting White Spaces?

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany 8 24 June 2010

Motivation – ctd.

•  What is a White Space (WS)? –  Unoccupied spectrum bands at a particular location and time –  Exists even in urban areas (depending on location and time)

•  Where does WS come from? –  Fixed and rigid spectrum allocations –  Terrain signal blockage –  Uneven demand for spectrum –  TVWS emerge due to the digital switchover in Britain (Europe,

USA and some other countries as well)

•  How to utilise them? –  Cognitive Radio by performing spectrum sensing

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Page 3: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

3

9 24 June 2010

Motivations - ctd

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Source: OFCOM /Dettmer R, ‘Up the revolution’, IEE Review, May 2005, p. 44

RURAL UK

SUBURBAN UK (near Heathrow

airport)

URBAN UK (Central London) Spectrum scarcity is mainly due to fixed

allocation policies

Unused

Heavily used

10 24 June 2010

Cognitive Radio as “enabler”

•  Many definitions exist •  In simple words:

–  An intelligent radio that makes decision for its operating frequency, modulation scheme, transmitting power etc based on factors like:

•  Current location •  Policies at that particular location •  Time of the day and available white

spaces •  Negotiations with other opportunistic

devices

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

11 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivations •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

12 24 June 2010

Spectrum Sensing

•  Goal is to reliably detect the presence of Primary (Licensed) User

•  Three main approaches: –  Match Filter detection –  Energy Detection –  Cyclostationary

Feature Detection

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Energy Detection •  “Optimal” detector •  Simple architecture •  Easy to implement •  Less complexity

Spectrum Sensing

Spectrum Decision

Channel Capacity

Primary User Detection

RF Stimuli

Spectrum Hole

Radio Environment

Spectrum Mobility

Decision Request

Transmitted Signal

Spectrum Sensing

Spectrum Sharing

Page 4: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

4

13 24 June 2010

Local Spectrum Sensing - Results

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 10010-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Probability of false alarm, Pf

Prob

abilit

y of

mis

s de

tect

ion,

Pm

Shadowing (σdB = 6) - analysis

Shadowing (σdB = 6) - simulation

Shadowing (σdB = 2) - simulation

Shadowing (σdB = 2) - analysis

Shadowing (σdB = 12) - analysis

Shadowing (σdB = 12) - simulation

AWGN - simulationAWGN - analysisRayleigh Fading - analysisRayleigh Fading - simulation

Simulation Parameters Nodes = 1 SNR = 5dB BT product = 5 Channel(s) = AWGN,

Rayleigh, Shadowing

14 24 June 2010

Local Spectrum Sensing – Results (Ctd)

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

-15 -10 -5 0 5 1010-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

SNR (in dB)

Prob

abilit

y of

mis

s de

tect

ion,

Pm

AWGNRayleigh FadingShadow Fading (σdB=6)

Simulation Parameters Nodes = 1 SNR = 5dB BT product = 5 Pfa = 10-1

Channel(s) = AWGN, Rayleigh, Shadowing

15 24 June 2010

Limitations of Local Spectrum Sensing

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Interference

Rayleigh Fading

Weak signals recvd. due to multi-path fading and may not detect PT

Interference

Cannot detect PT

Shadowing

CR can not detect PT due to large obstacles

PT

PU

CR

Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

16 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivations •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

Page 5: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

5

17 24 June 2010

Collaborative Spectrum Sensing (CSS)

•  A central unit (fusion centre) collects sensing information, identifies the available spectrum, and broadcasts this information to other cognitive radios

•  Use of control channels to share spectrum sensing result •  Nodes may send 1-bit decision (Hard decision - HDC) or

observation (Soft decision - SDC) to fusion centre •  Why collaboration?

–  Significantly decreases the probabilities of mis-detection and false alarm

–  Helps solving hidden primary user problem –  More effective when collaborating users observe independent

fading or shadowing

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany 18 24 June 2010

Performance of CSS - HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 10010-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

Probability of false alarm, Pf

Prob

abilit

y of

mis

s de

tect

ion,

Pm

2 users6 users10 users1 userAWGN

-15 -10 -5 0 5 1010-5

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

SNR (in dB)

Prob

abilit

y of

mis

s de

tect

ion,

Pm

1 user2 user4 user8 user20 userAWGN

Nodes = 5 SNR = 5 dB BT product = 5 Fusion rule = OR Channel(s) = AWGN, Shadowing

Nodes = 5 Pfa = 10-1

BT product = 5 Fusion rule = OR Channel(s) = AWGN, Shadowing

19 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivations •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

20 24 June 2010

Optimum Fusion for HDC

•  Is the “OR” fusion rule superior in all cases? •  Three different scenarios are considered:

–  Case 1 •  All users have similar mean SNR

–  Case 2 •  Half of the users have higher mean SNR than other half

–  Case 3 •  When only one user has high mean SNR

•  Decision Fusion Rule –  Voting, OR, AND, 1-user rule

•  Analytical formulation and Monte-carlo simulations were carried out to find optimal fusion in HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Page 6: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

6

24 June 2010 21

Analytical Formulation - HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

M = Total number of users Di = 1-bit decision of ith user

Global probability of detection and false alarm is given as,

Pd and Pf are local probabilities S0 = group of users decided signal is absent S1 = group of users decided signal is present

R(D) is decision fusion rule at fusion centre and defined as,

Where ith user is chosen as,

For 1-user rule

24 June 2010 22

Results - HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

AWG

N C

hann

el

Case 1 - All users have similar SNR Case 2 – Half of the users have high SNR Case 3 – Only one user have high SNR

Nodes = 5 BT product = 5 Channel(s) = AWGN

24 June 2010 23

Results - HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Ray

leig

h Fa

ding

Cha

nnel

Nodes = 5 BT product = 5 Channel(s) = Rayleigh

Case 1 - All users have similar SNR Case 2 – Half of the users have high SNR Case 3 – Only one user have high SNR

24 June 2010 24

Results - HDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Sha

dow

ing Nodes = 5

BT product = 5 Channel(s) = Shadowing

Case 1 - All users have similar SNR Case 2 – Half of the users have high SNR Case 3 – Only one user have high SNR

Page 7: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

7

25 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivations •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

26 24 June 2010

Soft Decision Combining (SDC) Framework

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

How to fuse local observations of cognitive radios at fusion centre to decide globally the existence of licensed user?

u1,γ1 Fusion Centre

Global Decision

g1

g2

gM

GA based Learning Module

Channel Estimator

u2,γ2

uM,γM

Fusion Module

Prob

lem

So

lutio

n A

ppro

ach For a given channel

conditions and targeted probability of false alarm, weights are assigned to the secondary user observations in such a way that it maximises global probability of detection. Optimum weights are calculated using genetic algorithms.

27 24 June 2010

Problem definition - SDC

•  Maximise global probability of detection at the fusion centre, considering –  Two scenarios (users with same mean SNR and with different

mean SNR values) –  Noisy reporting channels with channel gains

•  Global probability of detection can be defined as Qd = Q(f(w)), where f(w) is given by

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Problem

24 June 2010 28

Proposed weighted framework

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

CR 1

CR 2

CR M

X

X

X

+

+

+

X

X

X

.

.

.

Fusion Rule

u 1

u 2

u M

g 1

g 2

g M

n 1

n 2

n M

w 1

w 2

w M

Sensing Environment

x 1

x 2

x M

Reporting Channels Fusion Centre

y 1

y 2

y M

y c Genetic Algorithm (GA)

Page 8: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

8

29 24 June 2010

Why genetic algorithm?

•  Very useful for complex and loosely defined problems.

•  Quickly can scan a vast solution set.

•  Global optimisation technique.

•  Does not have to know any rules of the problem. –  It works by its own internal

rules. •  Supports parallel

processing. –  Multiple solution capability

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

Generation of initial

population

Start

Evaluate the current population

Is the reached quality

sufficient ?

Select the best

individual

StopMaximum number of iteration ?

Proportional Selection

Crossover

Mutation

Yes

No

Yes

No

Gen

erat

iona

l R

epla

cem

ent

Best solution

Search SpaceCoding/ Mapping

Decoding

24 June 2010 30

Simulation results - SDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

10-3 10-2 10-1 10010-3

10-2

10-1

100

Probability of False Alarm, Qf

Prob

abili

ty o

f Mis

s D

etec

tion,

Qm

M=1, EGC (same SNR)M=3, EGC (same SNR)M=6, EGC (same SNR)M=6, EGC (different SNR)M=6, PC (different SNR)

Performance loss due to different SNR

PC – Proportional Combining EGC - Equal Gain Combining

24 June 2010 31

Simulation results - SDC

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany

10-3 10-2 10-1 10010-3

10-2

10-1

100

Probability of False Alarm, Qf

Prob

abilit

y of

Mis

s De

tect

ion,

Qm

Pf vs Pm in AWGN channel with different SNR

EGC, no channel gainsSC, no channel gainsEGC, with channel gainsSC, with channel gainsOPT, with channel gainsOPT, no channel gains

OPT = GA based optimal combining PC = Proportional Combining EGC = Equal Gain Combining

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.80

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Probability of False Alarm, Qf

Pro

babi

lity

of M

iss

Det

ectio

n, Q

m

OPT (case 2)PC (case 2)EGC (case 3)PC (case 3)EGC (case 2)OPT (Case 3)EGC (case 1)PC (case 1)

AWGN Rayleigh

Case 1 - All users have good reporting channels Case 2 – All users have bad reporting channels Case 3 – Only two users have good reporting channels

32 24 June 2010

Outline

•  Objective •  Motivations •  Spectrum Sensing •  Collaborative Spectrum Sensing

–  Hard decision based fusion optimisation –  Genetic Algorithm based soft decision fusion optimisation

framework

•  Conclusions

Page 9: Presentation ERRT v2gala.gre.ac.uk/12903/1/Presentation_ERRT_v2.ppt.pdf · 2015-01-18 · 6 24 June 2010 21 Analytical Formulation - HDC 2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany M = Total

9

33 24 June 2010

Conclusions

•  Collaborative spectrum sensing improves sensing performance significantly

•  Different position (mean SNR) of users have significant effect on the performance of collaborative spectrum sensing

•  Optimum fusion rule must consider mean SNR values of users in both cases i.e. HDC and SDC

•  Proposed Genetic Algorithm based weighted collaborative spectrum sensing improves sensing performance

•  Proposed scheme requires knowledge about SNR of each user as well as channel conditions –  Larger reporting channel bandwidths are required –  Topic of our current research

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany 34 24 June 2010

Acknowledgments

This work was performed in project E3 and QoSMOS which have received research funding from the Community’s Seventh Framework programme. This paper reflects only the author’s views and Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. The contributions of colleagues from E3 and QoSMOS consortium are hereby acknowledged.

2010 ERRT Workshop Mainz Germany


Recommended