<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">CN</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Communications and Network</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1949-2421</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/cn.2013.53024</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">CN-35438</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Computer Science&amp;Communications</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Throughput Maximization Based on Optimal Access Probabilities in Cognitive Radio System
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ohamed</surname><given-names>Elalem</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lian</surname><given-names>Zhao</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>melalem@ryerson.ca(OE)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>07</month><year>2013</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>204</fpage><lpage>210</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>February</day>	<month>11,</month>	<year>2013</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>March</day>	<month>15,</month>	<year>2013</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>April</day>	<month>15,</month>	<year>2013</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
   Well-established fact shows that the fixed spectrum allocation policy conveys to the low spectrum utilization. The cognitive radio technique promises to improve the low efficiency. This paper proposes an optimized access strategy combining overlay scheme and underlay scheme for the cognitive radio. We model the service state of the system as a continuous-time Markov model. Based on the service state, the overlay manner or/and the underlay manner is/are used by the secondary users. When the primary user is not transmitting and only one secondary user has the requirement to transmit, the secondary system adopts the overlay scheme. When the primary user is transmitting and the secondary users want to transmit simultaneously, an underlay scheme with an access probability is adopted. We obtain the optimal access probability in a closed form which maximizes the overall system throughput. 
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Cognitive Radio; Access Probability; Underlay/Overlay Schemes; Marckov Model</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The wireless spectrum resource has become the major bottleneck for the development of the future wireless communications. Recent researches in spectrum-sharing techniques have enabled different wireless communication technologies to coexist and cooperate towards achieving a better gain from the limited spectrum resources. This started when spectrum utilization measurements showed that most of the allocated spectrum experiences low utilization [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref1">1</xref>]. Certain authorities, as Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for radio spectrum regulation, divide the radio spectrum into many frequency bands, and licenses for the often exclusive usage of these bands are provided to operators, typically for a long time. Depending on the type of radio service that is then provided by the licensees, frequency bands are often idle in many areas, and inefficiently used. The concept of spectrum sharing (the coexisting of different radio systems in the same spectrum) then occurred [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref2">2</xref>], as one device may transmit, while others in the area are idle. Moreover, radio systems can dynamically use and release spectrum wherever and whenever they are available. This dynamic spectrum access helps to minimize unused spectral bands.</p><p>In spectrum sharing systems, the secondary user can adopt two types of access schemes: overlay scheme and underlay scheme. In underlay scheme, the licensed spectrum band can be accessed without considering the primary user’s activities, but with strict power constraint. In overlay scheme, the secondary user senses the spectrum bands and accesses the unused spectrum spots. The secondary users must be ceased when the primary user appears in the band and resumed when the primary user finishes its service.</p><p>The different features of these two schemes enable them to make up with each other. In [3,4], the papers give a mixed access strategy: When the channel is being used by the primary user, the secondary users access the channel with a probability in underlay manner. When the channel is idle, they choose to access in overlay manner.</p><p>There have been several previous efforts addressing these two schemes from different points of view. In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref3">3</xref>], the authors study the capacity of the secondary users and the impact of the primary user’s activities for both schemes. The authors in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref5">5</xref>] conclude that the overlay spectrum sharing strategy offers higher network capacity and the interference threshold limits the capacity in the overlay strategy more than its underlay capacity.</p><p>In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref6">6</xref>], analytical formulation of DSA with imperfect spectrum sensing has been presented, only the case of same priority for all subscribers has been considered. In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref7">7</xref>], the authors assume that primary users and secondary users cannot operate simultaneously on the same spectrum band, then a Continuous Time Markov Chain (CTMC) is proposed to model the interactions between these different users. They derive a tradeoff between spectrum efficiency and fairness. However, the optimal access probability is not a precise value. An optimal access probability with different criteria is given in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref8">8</xref>] for pure underlay scheme.</p><p>Based on [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref8">8</xref>], this paper proposes a mixed overlay and underlay access scheme. The secondary users access the channel with an optimal probability in an underlay scheme when the spectrum is occupied by the primary user. Meanwhile, when the spectrum is idle, the secondary users access the channel in an overlay manner. This approach can maximize the total average throughput for the secondary users and limit the interference on the primary user.</p><p>The optimized access strategy proposed in this paper is similar in spirit to the work done in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref8">8</xref>]. We further introduce a new optimized parameter (r) to determine the best access probability to achieve the highest throughput. Closed forms for the achieved capacity are provided as well as the optimized access parameters.</p><p>The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the system model and assumptions. In Section 3, the maximal throughput expressions for the two schemes are given. The optimal access strategy for equiprobability case is introduced in Section 4. While Section 5 introduces the case of unlike access probability. Performance analysis and simulation results are given in Section 6. Finally, the paper is summarized in Section 7.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. System Model and Assumptions</title><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> illustrates the system model which consists of a primary user (P) and two cognitive users <img src="4-6101298\ce30e5f1-b3f4-4e5e-9860-deddae34f0da.jpg" /> sharing a W Hz wireless channel. It is assumed that both cognitive users can sense the primary user perfectly. A cognitive base station is assumed to make the cognitive users exchange their information among them. An example of these information is the real-time service state. The ser-</p><p>vice state indicates a user’s requirement for transmitting at specific time. The primary user can employ the channel without considering secondary users’ service state.</p><p>The traffic pattern of the primary and the two secondary users is modeled as independent Poisson processes with arrival rates<img src="4-6101298\1b36938c-e281-44ae-b94a-862cf1427c5c.jpg" />, <img src="4-6101298\f1a2d2d8-ae0f-4874-b357-ac334af25c03.jpg" />and<img src="4-6101298\1f6a61b9-242e-4b78-b5fa-c0d8c162be09.jpg" />, respectively.</p><p>The service times are assumed to be exponentially distributed with rates<img src="4-6101298\598c2fad-c368-4d35-8932-f45831c384c3.jpg" />, <img src="4-6101298\a0c9f0b9-cd7c-4317-8436-91d723ac569e.jpg" />and<img src="4-6101298\25e6dc40-4b10-41af-9d9b-ba9a1a056c39.jpg" />, respectively. We define service state of the system as the sum service state of all the users in the system at a moment. Based on the individual’s service state, we get the service state set for the system as<img src="4-6101298\f090f117-4b8f-40fa-9c24-900203809e8b.jpg" />. State</p><p>“0” represents there is no user tends to transmit on the channel; State “P” represents only the primary user is transmitting on the channel; State “A” represents only user A wants to transmit on the channel; State “B” represents only user B wants to transmit on the channel; State “AB” represents both cognitive users want to transmit on the channel at the same time; State “PA” represents user A wants to transmit on the channel while the primary is transmitting; State “PB” represents user B wants to transmit on the channel while the primary user is transmitting; State “PAB” represents both A and B want to transmit on the channel while the primary user is transmitting. These states in the cognitive radio system can be modeled as an eight-state continuous time Markov model, as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.35438-ref8">8</xref>].</p><p>The rate at which transitions take place out of state s<sub>i</sub> equals to the rate at which transitions take place into state s<sub>j</sub>. The normalization equations governing this flow balance can be written as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97579"><label>(1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\5c95bda6-c71f-40cb-8d6d-df74bc1ddabd.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="4-6101298\20c64d04-c4f2-4c82-8ffe-cbd3056c4834.jpg" /> represents the steady-state probability of being in state <img src="4-6101298\ed1954ec-4236-4875-9014-3b73e52f8cab.jpg" /> and<img src="4-6101298\7c7f48f6-7c5b-420b-912c-5c770bce2872.jpg" />. Also we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97580"><label>(2)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\db45a59c-051c-4271-8ec1-37450b17ab93.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The steady state probabilities for all the states can be found by solving the set of the linear Equations (1) and (2).</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Secondary User’s Maximal Throughput</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Maximal Throughput for Overlay Scheme</title><p>In the overlay scheme, the secondary users can only ac-</p><p>cess the spectrum hole which is currently not used by the primary user. They can not co-exist on the same spectrum band. If one secondary user is transmitting, the only interference is the background noise. The user A or B accesses the channel with power<img src="4-6101298\030b2790-2606-418d-82a3-60e616068496.jpg" />. Since in the overlay manner, only one user can transmit, the maximal data rate for each of them individually is</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97581"><label>(3)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\9f7196ad-df52-4e90-9507-30ba8aa75f4f.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97582"><label>(4)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\5ce6f9b9-8dbd-4ae1-8126-682689d140f8.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="4-6101298\0d05a402-74d8-45e7-9f00-44bb0fec738c.jpg" /> is noise power. These rates can be achievable with the following corresponding probabilities:</p><p><img src="4-6101298\9fb15fad-149d-4a48-9bf9-51bef1598080.jpg" /></p><p>respectively.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Maximal Throughput for Underlay Scheme</title><p>Unlike the overlay scheme, in the underlay system, secondary users are allowed to share the channel simultaneously with the primary user pledging not to violate the limit of interference which is assumed as<img src="4-6101298\617b308a-5ce9-4178-aba3-be76644e463a.jpg" />.</p><p>Since the secondary users A and B can get the service state of the system with the help of their base station, A and B make access decision based on the service state of the system. Here, there are two possible service state sets. When the service state is<img src="4-6101298\59bff453-ac74-4040-a953-e39db9e7ed64.jpg" />, which indicates the primary user P is not transmitting and only one secondary user has the requirement to transmit. The other case is when the service state</p><p><img src="4-6101298\1a26b46b-55ed-4b6d-9835-537a7aca22aa.jpg" />, which indicates that the primary user is transmitting or both secondary users want to transmit at the same time. User A and B have to adopt their powers <img src="4-6101298\462a147d-003f-40c3-827a-ab54bbc18f72.jpg" /> to access the channel with probabilities <img src="4-6101298\c9f86e94-1c6d-464e-993d-b5668e7a5940.jpg" /> and<img src="4-6101298\47b71990-2f1c-47f5-b9c5-ce58608efcbf.jpg" />, respectively in the underlay scheme. In order to protect the primary user and decrease the mutual interference between secondary users, we assume that</p><p><img src="4-6101298\be52a153-8f00-4254-9a03-95fc6e7b4245.jpg" /> satisfies the minimum SINR requirement.</p><p>These probabilities <img src="4-6101298\02a5d92e-de70-42ac-8458-8018d1b00688.jpg" /> and <img src="4-6101298\fe74fac9-979a-46b8-a6a6-048555ba0661.jpg" /> determine the sum throughput of the secondary users and the interference on the primary user. When <img src="4-6101298\6f95ae28-090f-460a-b4c0-496701fffda4.jpg" /> and/or <img src="4-6101298\f9b89012-588c-4792-8ade-8f8c206863e5.jpg" /> are large, the sum throughput may be large and the chance to coexist with primary user is large, too. Our goal is to obtain optimal access probabilities to maximize the total secondary throughput, while limit the interference on the primary user. The service state set of the system in the underlay manner is<img src="4-6101298\0bafd86c-2352-42f3-98be-e7e2dfd03980.jpg" />. Hence the actual access state set is<img src="4-6101298\2147eb7f-541b-447b-904c-faeaf19bdf79.jpg" />. The users’ maximal data rates under each state in the underlay manner is given in as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97583"><label>(5)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\d48a2709-8c94-4c05-873a-362feec66cf7.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="4-6101298\618ef7b3-515d-4796-b09c-10760a73882e.jpg" /> denotes the i’s maximal data rate for the underlay case. The term</p><p><img src="4-6101298\b4cee698-7074-4f4d-94f5-bca049af162a.jpg" />is the channel power gain between the transmitter of the user i and the receiver j as shown in</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>. <img src="4-6101298\e443be1c-dfc8-4602-8d4a-7e65040a85aa.jpg" />is the transmit power of the primary user.</p><p>The corresponding probabilities of these rates are:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97584"><label>(6.a)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\68a1b1a6-e3f5-41b7-b86f-bf0f0780cb24.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97585"><label>(6.b)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\672cdd05-281f-4d61-aa2b-1ced2435321d.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97586"><label>(6.c)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\d000280f-6763-4bc3-9edb-d00504dbf7fb.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97587"><label>(6.d)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\c18de4ae-6fa0-4aa3-b450-e289929d158c.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97588"><label>(6.e)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\c2e7a9ba-2987-476b-a0a7-ffa2e3242d7d.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97589"><label>(6.f)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\58aca36f-ecb3-43de-b767-19c2ff306b72.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Equiprobability Optimal Access Strategy</title><p>In this section we introduce an optimal access strategy which makes the cognitive network to operate in both schemes. During primary user’s idle periods, the network employs the overlay scheme; while in primary user’s busy periods, the network permits the secondary users to use the channel with probability <img src="4-6101298\fa891768-b353-4d27-958f-0b60ed80f194.jpg" /> subject to satisfying the interference threshold constraint. The parameter <img src="4-6101298\3e42cce2-adbc-4a4d-97b2-a05aca232419.jpg" /> is a secondary service parameter which has to be adjusted based on the spectrum status to achieve maximum throughput.</p><p>Based on Equations (3) to (5), we can get the average throughput for the secondary users as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97590"><label>(7)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\3baca257-633d-4f54-b957-366d3a2501e4.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97591"><label>(8)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\5d4fb202-df1f-47e1-8cd7-786373ec5e97.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The total throughput of the cognitive network is</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97592"><label>(9)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\f6eadd0f-ce1a-48b7-b467-bb643137a1ab.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Using Equaions (6)-(8), <img src="4-6101298\19f64ad7-de07-4327-8191-bf4f5ed9d01c.jpg" />can be written in the quadrature form as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97593"><label>(10)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\4dcdd4f9-f492-48ef-b619-c3bd7ff3a792.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="4-6101298\aaf8e175-ed90-4634-9b81-f013b2e180b3.jpg" /> and <img src="4-6101298\15534f77-f713-4f17-9a49-307b0781711b.jpg" /> are given as follows</p><p><img src="4-6101298\f8e7e582-7e00-4edd-8315-c4913bbc2a87.jpg" /></p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97594"><label>(11)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\813e6baf-54c9-4dc6-95c4-f01f56081728.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p><img src="4-6101298\9cfd2a3c-1ab6-4de5-9134-48b3d846a8c1.jpg" /></p><p>To maximize the secondary throughput, we take the first derivative of <img src="4-6101298\ae5ea969-9d53-49c1-bd0c-70c0578b1aa5.jpg" /> with respect to <img src="4-6101298\bea7c235-ce13-4304-8f54-27f81888c57b.jpg" /> and equate it to zero.</p><p>Solving for <img src="4-6101298\6caca614-25f2-4298-a68e-93bae4275bb8.jpg" /> leads to the optimal access probability.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97595"><label>(12)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\12e11b8a-ff3d-4b6d-b7eb-e85d160ae86c.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>We can note from Equation (12) that <img src="4-6101298\ebe51147-f2d9-4f01-bd7d-ede61b012817.jpg" /> is always positive. Since <img src="4-6101298\4b2008d9-c25a-41a4-bc2d-d15725cbe69f.jpg" /> is a probability value (i.e.,</p><p><img src="4-6101298\47d385e7-0604-4b7d-ae27-ff0208979dd8.jpg" />), the value of <img src="4-6101298\a42474d4-9806-4a61-b7c7-a8f2cafd5176.jpg" /> is always negative. The throughput function of the secondary network in Equation (9) is concave down. Thus it must have a unique maximum value, it can be expressed as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97596"><label>(13)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\101027d3-558e-4502-b2bc-22f3eb771635.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where <img src="4-6101298\45d4cce8-1a3f-4634-aa3e-73d319f30684.jpg" /> denotes the absolute value.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Diverse Access Probabilities Strategy</title><p>In this section, a similar approach will be followed as in the previous section expect that it is assumed that each user A and B has its own access probability (<img src="4-6101298\e63c4f46-41f4-4a8f-a7f4-10627e922556.jpg" />and<img src="4-6101298\efd70f01-d671-4483-b834-c2a9b2766ae5.jpg" />) respectively. The goal here is to optimize these parameters. So the best access probability for each secondary user is found to achieve the highest possible throughput.</p><p>User A and B have to adopt their powers <img src="4-6101298\3e594293-d697-47bb-8437-cb224f10b476.jpg" /> to access the channel with probabilities <img src="4-6101298\38870a43-1131-42ae-af45-1c5ab47becbb.jpg" /> and<img src="4-6101298\c16860a3-cbc7-4b9e-ac29-ab2007402cea.jpg" />, respectively in the underlay scheme. In order to protect the primary user and decrease the mutual interference between secondary users, we assume again that <img src="4-6101298\5b1bd7d9-8b5e-40f5-b004-73d25d047429.jpg" /> satisfies the minimum SINR requirement.</p><p>These probabilities <img src="4-6101298\4c7ee8a2-87b5-4312-8bfd-a9efc40ae93f.jpg" /> and <img src="4-6101298\3d353ec6-2747-44fe-82fc-d034b6d75253.jpg" /> determine the sum throughput of the secondary users and the interference on the primary user. When <img src="4-6101298\789173d0-45de-4a4f-86b8-dd3caa48b9bf.jpg" /> and/or <img src="4-6101298\1c5b7c5c-8595-436d-96da-d64d6a7664e4.jpg" /> are large, the sum throughput may be large and the chance to coexist with primary user is large, too. Our goal is to obtain optimal access probabilities to maximize the total secondary throughput, while limit the interference on the primary user.</p><p>Same service state set <img src="4-6101298\cd8a70b9-7e86-4ee7-96c7-cb40083f8fc3.jpg" /></p><p>exists. The users’ maximal date rate under each state in the underlay manner is given in Equation (5).</p><p>The corresponding probabilities of these rates given in Equation (6) can be written now as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97597"><label>(14.a)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\ac2ac39e-e09f-4a03-856b-81084e619979.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97598"><label>(14.b)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\2e9ef2d2-db1f-4e07-865e-44ae67e7ceb1.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97599"><label>(14.c)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\40afa49a-a5da-4a86-a326-70cdda3cd4a6.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97600"><label>(14.d)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\bdadb658-f3a6-4aa2-81e4-9330b6d791b2.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97601"><label>(14.e)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\fc7ff5d8-b7fd-4be9-8f4e-e6435067414b.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97602"><label>(14.f)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\ea0aa5e6-a9fe-46b8-bb80-f6d43e5a7704.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>Using Equations (7), (8) and (14), <img src="4-6101298\380d7d5b-449a-4f43-b31a-cece7405bd84.jpg" />can be written in a nonlinear equation form as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97603"><label>(15)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\1a008aaa-5b17-4153-bb04-397c5df7d0e6.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where<img src="4-6101298\8983170b-3d66-4f55-b11c-b967e59af9db.jpg" />, <img src="4-6101298\8f8d4f82-623f-4dc2-b39b-3c61ab0ce3b4.jpg" />is given as follows</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97604"><label>(16)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\62c22255-9117-4a89-9da6-b34f62782ee8.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>To find an optimization solution for Equation (15), we bring up the following theorem:</p><p>Theorem 1 Let f be a function with two variables with continuous second order partial derivatives<img src="4-6101298\8ded6109-4658-4607-86f7-d2c16274144f.jpg" />, <img src="4-6101298\420eba83-11dd-40e6-a8a9-00d5e33df930.jpg" />and <img src="4-6101298\d1845515-14df-41dc-9543-7b037daf1093.jpg" /> at a critical point<img src="4-6101298\74daefb2-be37-4d09-82aa-33ba69e894cf.jpg" />. Let D is the determinant of the Hessian matrix of the function f, i.e., <img src="4-6101298\05a0eb49-6d65-4afa-aac7-99fb70b74487.jpg" />, thus</p><p><img src="4-6101298\ef0a1a84-76cb-4cef-ab89-64d919745e3e.jpg" /></p><p>Using Theorem 1, it is forward to conclude that the possible maximum of the utility function <img src="4-6101298\c42a360b-f07f-469c-9c6a-1868411b7e54.jpg" /> (i.e., Equation (15) occurs at the saddle point of this function which appears at<img src="4-6101298\13510779-086f-4149-b15e-8d06af1ab0cb.jpg" />. Then the maximum secondary throughput can be found by substituting this point into Equation (15), this yields</p><disp-formula id="scirp.35438-formula97605"><label>(17)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="4-6101298\6336051e-86a3-4634-91e5-3feba97767e1.jpg"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Simulation Results</title><p>In this section, a simulation example will be carried to illustrate the proposed algorithm. The following powers are set: <img src="4-6101298\87779211-46e8-4905-9fae-f009150b4f49.jpg" />and<img src="4-6101298\dce1b8d5-7080-44f0-a023-4c07635a8c9a.jpg" />. The arrival rates are set as<img src="4-6101298\88416e7b-cb18-4c0b-9b9f-78fcf2de442e.jpg" />,</p><p><img src="4-6101298\1b18b03e-7961-406f-b935-88739e27f006.jpg" />and <img src="4-6101298\04529fa9-0e83-4083-b796-ac493fb5580e.jpg" /> with equal average times<img src="4-6101298\50f6a5e3-ab38-4bf5-93e7-0c1fd1c2730b.jpg" />,<img src="4-6101298\86b0be23-a5f5-46a8-a9dc-91f2b6b4a54a.jpg" />. The wireless channel bandwidth<img src="4-6101298\e26386d9-26c3-4187-b476-ce05dccfd865.jpg" />. It is assumed that the loss of power in propagation follows the exponential propagation law with exponent loss 3.5. The position of the primary user’s transmitter and receiver are <img src="4-6101298\fef814f5-553a-40dd-b463-327973d539e1.jpg" /> and <img src="4-6101298\88244c57-3057-4a88-b6e3-bd7a318fddde.jpg" /> respectively. The user A’s transmitter and receiver location are at <img src="4-6101298\140fd8cb-04ae-4b76-ac61-76c3bfb99947.jpg" /> and<img src="4-6101298\6f391d6f-a775-4c97-af8e-84b730db55d5.jpg" />, and for User B’s transmitter and receiver are located at <img src="4-6101298\263df9fd-4eec-4134-97e2-7af388c58f0f.jpg" /> and <img src="4-6101298\b8cedafc-efbc-47ea-8452-de3c367d337e.jpg" /> respectively. The interference constraint is assumed double the background noise;<img src="4-6101298\19fc3c3a-5e26-4e86-b195-76f6f7cad3ee.jpg" />.</p><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>, the normalized throughput (normalizes to W) for user A, B are shown. Clearly, user B’s throughput is larger than that of A.</p><p>This is because B’s transmitter and receiver are located closer than those of A. As the arrival rate of B increases, the throughput of B gets better, which can be understood intuitively. The throughput of A decreases because the user B transmitting creates more interference to it.</p><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>, the performance of the optimized access strategy, the pure overlay strategy, the pure underlay strategy and the overall throughput of the secondary network with and without optimization are compared. The underlay strategy can obtain more throughput than the overlay strategy because we have assigned more power for<img src="4-6101298\afaa8cd2-24ac-424b-9e74-19f9cdbb41bd.jpg" />. It should be remembered that the overlay strategy avoids the coexisting time with the primary user, which has the least influence on the primary user. The proposed optimized access strategy maximizes the total throughput and has limited interference on the primary</p><p>user, since the condition <img src="4-6101298\c79b214a-b1ee-4362-a52f-6fa1c6d9baf9.jpg" /> is always guaranteed.</p><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>, the normalized throughput for the pure underlay and the proposed underlay strategies versus the access probability is shown. The value of the arrival rate of the user B,&#160;<img src="4-6101298\67b29fde-e185-48c5-a5c6-35e5589e1ba6.jpg" /> is fixed at 115 ms. As mentioned in Section 4, there is an unique optimal access probability that maximize the throughput.</p><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>, the throughput is plotted versus the two access probabilities. When <img src="4-6101298\92f676a5-5b7a-4c26-aa2b-01906262f8eb.jpg" /> the throughput is at the worst case which equivalent to the overlay throughput. Accessibility of user A enhances the throughput more than that of user B. This is because user A creats less interference on the primary user. The small circle on the graph shows the optimized value of</p><p><img src="4-6101298\c4eec4ed-2302-4789-9d71-9cd7921a6544.jpg" />, note that<img src="4-6101298\e0b44761-b940-4a90-b32f-7ac3fc8f7d14.jpg" />.</p><p>To study the effect of changing the arrival rate of the far user A, <img src="4-6101298\738f0337-3589-41d5-810e-37e483832c5b.jpg" />is fixed at 110 ms, while <img src="4-6101298\69258c7d-8aa8-4ed4-a485-b9c70a73e901.jpg" /> is varied in</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>. Because of the nearness of user B where the probability to introduce interference on the primary is hight, <img src="4-6101298\bdc0cf25-d254-492a-8874-296e8ee335da.jpg" />is always less than<img src="4-6101298\450b77dd-50ef-4ea0-8646-9bef1b0a5632.jpg" />. As <img src="4-6101298\f8adafa6-15cc-4dac-b108-53b61361220c.jpg" /> increasesboth access probabilities decrease to mitigate the interference on the primary user. This degradation is more for the near user B.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>7. Conclusion</title><p>The two dominant access schemes in the cognitive radio architecture, underlay and overlay, are studied. It is found by some literatures that these two schemes can make up with each other to enhance the system’s performance. This paper proposes a mixed access strategy combining these two schemes. It is assumed that secondary users</p><p>access the spectrum with certain access probabilities. It is focused on the service state and model the service state of the system as a continuous-time Markov chain. Finally, optimal access probabilities and optimal throughput for this mixed strategy are introduced in closed forms to maximize the overall capacity of the cognitive network. The simulation results show that the proposed access strategy can achieve much better performance for the secondary uses, compared with the single scheme strategies.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>REFERENCES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.35438-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">C. Cordeiro, K. Challapali, D. Birru and N. Shankar, “IEEE 802.22: The First Worldwide Wireless Standard Based on Cognitive Radio,” The First IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, Baltimore, 8-11 November 2005, pp. 328-337. doi:10.1109/DYSPAN.2005.1542649</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Marcus, “Unlicensed Cognitive Sharing of TV Spectrum: The Controversy at the Federal Communications Commission,” IEEE Communication Magazine, Vol. 43, No. 5, 2005, pp. 24-25.  
doi:10.1109/MCOM.2005.1453413</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Khoshkholgh, K. Navaie and H. Yanikomeroglu, “Access Strategies for Spectrum Sharing in Fading Environment: Overlay, Underlay, and Mixed,” IEEE Journal on Mobile Computing, Vol. 9, No. 12, 2010, pp. 1780-1793. doi:10.1109/TMC.2010.57</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">X. Kang, Y. Liang, H. Garg and L. Zhang, “SensingBased Spectrum Sharing in Cognitive Radio Networks,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 58, No. 8, 2009, pp. 4649-4654. doi:10.1109/TVT.2009.2018258</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. Zhang, Z. Tian and G. Wei, “Spatial Capacity of Narrowband vs. Ultra-Wideband Cognitive Radio Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, Vol. 7, No. 11, 2008, pp. 4670-4680.  
doi:10.1109/T-WC.2008.070746</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. Wong, A. Hoang and F. Chin, “Dynamic Spectrum Access with Imperfect Sensing in Open Spectrum Wireless Networks,” Proceedings of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), Las Vegas, 31 March 2008-3 April 2008, pp. 2765-2770.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">B. Wang, Z. Ji, K. Liu and T. Clancy, “Primary-Prioritized Markov Approach for Dynamic Spectrum Allocation,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2009, pp. 1854-1865.  
doi:10.1109/T-WC.2008.080031</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.35438-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. Hu and Q. Zhu, “Dynamic Spectrum Access in Underlay Cognitive Radio System with SINR Constraints,” Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing (WiCOM), Beijing, 24-26 September 2009, pp. 1-4.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>