ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The scheduling and energy complexity of strong connectivity in ultra-wideband networks
Full text PdfPdf (282 KB)
Source International Workshop on Modeling Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems archive
Proceedings of the 9th ACM international symposium on Modeling analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems table of contents
Terromolinos, Spain
SESSION: Sensor Networks table of contents
Pages: 282 - 290  
Year of Publication: 2006
ISBN:1-59593-477-4
Authors
Qiang-Sheng Hua  University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, P.R. China
Francis C. M. Lau  University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, P.R. China
Sponsors
SIGSIM: ACM Special Interest Group on Simulation and Modeling
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 35,   Citation Count: 2
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1164717.1164767
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Recently Moscibroda and Wattenhofer came up with the notion of scheduling complexity to capture the minimum amount of time to successfully schedule all the transmission requests under the physical SINR model. Their algorithm featuring a non-linear power assignment can schedule strongly connected transmissions in narrowband networks with O(log4 n) timeslots. In this paper, we first generalize this result to ultra-wideband networks. We show the strong connectivity scheduling complexity in UWB networks to be O(log (n/m)∙log3 n), where m is the processing gain. Secondly, we show that both of these polylogarithmic scheduling complexity results are gained at the expense of exponential energy complexity with lower bound ω(n∙2n). We also prove the upper bound of the energy complexity in narrowband networks to beO(n2∙2), and for UWB networks, this upper bound can be reduced by a processing gain factor.On the other hand, we show that improving the scheduling complexity through arbitrary power control has its limitations, and that different power assignment strategies have different impacts on the protocol interference models, which was often neglected in the design of wireless scheduling algorithms. Compared with narrowband networks, although the effect of aggregate interferences in UWB networks is greatly reduced, we demonstrate that the constant and linear power assignments in UWB networks are still inefficient in the worst case with respect to the scheduling complexity (Ω(n/m), which suggests there is a need for a better arbitrary power assignment.Our analyses shed new light on the design of the power assignment scheme and the performance analysis of the wireless scheduling algorithms. In energy-constrained wireless networks, a tradeoff between the scheduling complexity and energy complexity is a practical consideration. Our results in this paper can be directly applied to other spread-spectrum networks including DS-CDMA and FH-CDMA.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
H. Balakrishnan, C. Barrett, V. S. Anil Kumar, M. Marathe, and S. Thite. The distance 2-matching problem and its relationship to the MAC layer capacity of ad-hoc wireless networks. IEEE J. Selected Areas in Communications, 22(6):1069--1079, August 2004.
 
2
A. Behzad and I. Rubin. On the performance of graph-based scheduling algorithms for packet radio networks. In Proc. of IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM), 6:3432--3436, San Francisco, December 2003.
3
 
4
F. Cuomo, C. Martello, A. Baiocchi and F. Capriotti. Radio resource sharing for ad-hoc networking with UWB. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 20(9):1722--1732, December 2002.
 
5
 
6
Piyush Gupta and P. R. Kumar. The capacity of wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 46(2):388--404, 2000.
7
 
8
 
9
S. Koskie and Z. Gajic. Signal-to-interference-based power control for wireless networks: a survey, 1992-2005. Dynamics of Continuous, Discrete and Impulsive Systems B: Applications and Algorithms, 13(2):187--220, 2006.
 
10
T. Moscibroda and R. Wattenhofer. The complexity of connectivity in wireless networks. In Proc. 25th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM), Barcelona, Spain, April 2006.
11
 
12
R.C. Qiu, H. Liu, and X. Shen. Ultra-wideband for multiple-access communications. IEEE Communications Magazine, 43(2):80--87, Feb. 2005.
 
13
B. Radunovic and J.-Y. Le Boudec. Optimal power control, scheduling and routing in UWB Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 22(7):1252--1270, Sept. 2004.
 
14
S. Schmid and R. Wattenhofer. Algorithmic models for sensor networks. In Proc. 14th International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Real-Time Systems (WPDRTS), Island of Rhodes, Greece, April 2006.
 
15
 
16
R. Wattenhofer. MACbeth: The three witches of media access theory . In 1st IEEE International Workshop on Foundation and Algorithms for Wireless Networking (FAWN), Pisa, Italy, March 2006.
 
17
M. Z. Win and R. A. Scholtz. Ultra-wide bandwidth time-hopping spread-spectrum impulse radio for wireless multiple-access communications. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 48(4):679--691,2000
18


Collaborative Colleagues:
Qiang-Sheng Hua: colleagues
Francis C. M. Lau: colleagues