Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
I. I NTRODUCTION
The next generation wireless networks are expected to
provide ubiquitous and broadband access to the Internet. The
majority of traffic in wireless networks has been shifting
from mobile voice to mobile data due to the popularity of
the smartphones. The exponentially growing data traffic and
access requirement have triggered vast expansion of network
infrastructures, resulting in dramatically increased energy consumption. It is urgent to focus on the energy-efficient design in
wireless networks from both the environmental and economic
viewpoint.
To deal with the green evolution of wireless networks, many
international research projects have sprung up like EARTH [1]
and GreenTouch [2]. There are also some initial research
efforts that reveal the opportunities and fundamental issues
of green communication. The author in [3] shows there exist
traffic dynamics in cellular networks both in time and spatial
This work was supported in part by the National Basic Research Program of
China (973 Program: No. 2012CB316001) and the Nature Science Foundation
of China (No. 61021001, No.60925002).
User 1
2
User 2
1
0
BS
User n
Queue length
Flow
arrivals
W(x)
(1/e,1)
PS
Service rate
Flow
departures
3
4
1
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. (a) Flow-level model for downlink transmission with traffic dynamics.
One user corresponds to one flow. (b) Lambert W function.
3171
g
.
N0 w
(2)
Pt (xn )
z(x) = pn (x)[c(xn ) + dn ] = pn (x)[
+ n].
n=0
n=0
(3)
(4)
x
l 1
l
+
(2 w 1).
x l
x
(5)
dz
= 0. The optimal
To minimize the objective, we take dx
W(
x
1
ln 2
( s )2 ) =
x 1.
e xs l
e
w s
(6)
1 We first study the basic case: users experience homogeneous channels with
gain g. When heterogeneous channel conditions are considered, the multi-class
PS model can be used, which will be discussed in our future work.
3172
7.5
l
l 1 xs
+
(2 w 1).
xs l xs
x
s
(7)
lower bound
upper bound
queueaware
loadaware
7
6.5
x
s
l
x 10
rate x(n)
zs =
8.5
6
5.5
5
0
10
12
User number
(a)
1
v0 = (z)+v1 ,
(8)
{ 1
vn+1 xl vn1 }
vn = inf
+
, n 1. (9)
x [c(x)+nz]+
xA +
+ xl
+ xl
l
Then define the relative cost differences un = (vn vn1 ),
the optimality equation will be re-expressed as
u1 = z, un+1 = sup {z n c(x) +
xA
x
un }.
l
(10)
xA
x
uw
(u) = min{x : u c(x) = (u)} = w log2
. (12)
l
l ln 2
(u) = sup {
x 10
8.5
8
rate x(n)
7.5
lower bound
upper bound
queueaware
loadaware
7
6.5
6
5.5
5
0
10
15
User number
(b)
Fig. 2. Comparison between the optimal rate of the two strategies and
the bounds of the queue-aware optimal rate, = 1, l = 2M B, w =
10M Hz, N0 = 109 , g = 1. (a) = 0.5flows/sec, (b) = 1flows/sec.
w
min w log2
+ (1+(n))
,
2
1+(n)
( ( n+ 1 2 l
)}
w (2t 1) l )
w log2 ln
+tw 2
, where in the lower bound
2
t
n zs +
1
(1
l
w
W((n2
t ln 21.
Its proof is omitted due to space limitations. It can be
observed that both the upper and lower bound are related to
the system load parameters and the user number in the system.
We can see the performance of the bounds from Fig. 2. They
give a good approximation of the optimal rate and is much
tighter when the traffic load is lower. Actually, in the upper
bound the first part which has explicit form plays an important
role.
(13)
(14)
3173
14
10
queueaware,=0.5
queueaware,=1
queueaware,=2
queueaware,=3
queueaware,=4
loadaware,=0.5
loadaware,=1
loadaware,=2
loadaware,=3
loadaware,=4
Power
10
8
6
4
loadaware
queueaware
10
P(Delay t)
12
10
10
10
2
10
0
0
10
15
Power
20
0
1
loadaware,=1
queueaware,=1
loadaware,=5
queueaware,=5
loadaware,=0.1
queueaware,=0.1
queueaware
loadaware
16
Delay
loadaware,=1
queueaware,=1
loadaware,=5
queueaware,=5
loadaware,=0.1
queueaware,=0.1
60
40
30
18
10
0
1
25
(a)
(a)
20
Delay
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Estimated
(b)
(b)
Fig. 4. (a) The tail distribution of delay, = 3flows/sec. (b) The robustness
comparison: the real = 3flows/sec, and the control rate is solved using the
estimated arrival rate.
SLEEP
In this section, we will take practical concerns into consideration and use the energy model given in section II-B with
both BS sleep and switching cost taken into account. Since the
performance of the load-aware strategy is almost the same as
the queue-aware strategy from foregoing analysis, in order to
characterize our problem explicitly, we will restrict attention
to load-aware analysis in this part.
3174
l
,
(16)
x l
l
l 1 x
l
Pbtot= ( (2 w 1)P +Ps)+(1 )Psleep+2Esw(1 ). (17)
x
x
x
Db=
140
120
100
1
1
130
110
=2,l=2MB
=1,l=2MB
=1,l=8MB
Fig. 6.
1
1
The 2-D state transition graph for the N-based sleep strategy.
90
80 1
10
10
10
average delay[sec]
Exploring the relationship between the total power consumption and the average delay, we get the following proposition, and the proof is omitted due to space limitations.
Proposition 1: 1. The total power consumption Pbtot (Db )
is monotonously decreasing with the average delay Db , when
either one of the following
( (conditions is satisfied.
) )
PsPsleep
w
i) < 2Esw , l ln 2 W P e (PsPsleep2Esw ) 1e +1 .
P P
ii) s2Esleep
.
sw
2. There exists the energy-optimal rate xe when the following
condition is satisfied, ( (
) )
P P
w
1
i) < s2Esleep
,
l
<
W
(P
P
2E
)
s
sleep
sw
ln 2
P e
e +1 .
sw
And the the
energy-optimal
rate
is
( (
) )
xe = lnw2 W P e (Ps Psleep 2Esw ) 1e +1 .
3. In both of the upper two cases, as delay goes to infinity, the
l
total power consumption is bounded by 1 (2 w 1)P + Ps .
Remark: The property of the tradeoff line between the
total power consumption and the average delay depends on
the relationship of traffic parameters, system parameters and
power consumption parameters. For the case there exists the
energy-optimal transmit rate, only in the rate region [xe , ),
delay can be traded off with energy, otherwise, increasing
delay will only cause bad energy performance. Interestingly,
xe is an increasing function of , so transmitting faster
when channels are good indeed saves energy. In addition, fast
transmission are beneficial when the gap between static power
consumption Ps and sleep mode power consumption Psleep
is high; otherwise large busy probability will consume too
much static energy. As the delay goes to infinity, the bound is
the total power consumption when the system will always be
in active mode with system utilization l
x goes to 1. Fig. 5
shows one example of Proposition 1 where the green and
blue line corresponds to 1.(i) and 1.(ii) respectively and the
red line shows case 2 with energy-optimal rate. The energy
consumption parameters of a micro BS in [1] are adopted.
B. Threshold-Based BS Sleep Strategies
1) N-based sleep strategy: Assume the BS goes to sleep
when there is no user in the system and returns to active mode
until the user number increases to N from zero. Using an
extended-Markov-chain given in Fig. 6, the static probability
Nx
l
l j
P (i, j)= N x (1 ( x ) )
if i = 1, 1 j N ;
l l jN
l j
( x ) ) if i = 1, j > N .
N x (( x )
(18)
j=N1
The fraction of time in sleep mode is j=0 P (i=0, j)=1l
x,
which is the same with the idle probability in the basic case.
Ts starts at the moment the BS goes to sleep and last
until N users have assembled. The average assembling time
is E{Ts } = N/. At the beginning of Ta there are N users
in the system, thus E{Ta } = N/(x/l ). Then we get the
average delay DN and total power consumption PNtot .
1
l
N 1
N 1
DN = (
+
)>
,
(19)
x l
2
2
l 1 x
l
l
PNtot= ( (2 w1)P +Ps)+(1 )Psleep+2Esw(1 ) . (20)
x
x
x N
To minimize the objective zN = DN + PNtot /, we get
N
the optimal rate x and threshold N by taking z
x = 0 and
zN
N =
(1 )
.
(22)
x
It can be seen from equation (22) that the optimal threshold
N is related to the switching cost and the system idle
probability in a square root form, which is consistent with
the result derived by Heymen [12] because N only affects the
average delay and the switching power cost in the objective.
The optimal threshold should be an integer, and is the one
chosen from {N , N } which minimizes zN . Actually,
the basic strategy is a special case of N=1. For PNtot (DN ),
similar results of Proposition 1 can be obtained.
2) V-based sleep strategy: In practical operation, waiting a
deterministic period of time is preferred due to the convenience
of operation. Assume that once the BS goes to sleep, it will
be asleep for a period of time and then wake up no matter
whether there are users in the system or not. Using the vacation
model given in [19], assume that the vacation duration V is
a random variable. When deterministic vacation is applied,
E(V ) = v, E(V 2 ) = v 2 . The fraction of time the BS spends on
v
vacation is pv = (1 l
x ) v+ev . The average cycle time is
3175
system cost: zv
system cost: zN
120
100
80
60
40
10
120
100
80
60
40
15
10
5
threshold N
5
0 0
rate
10
10
7
threshold V
x 10
0 0
x 10
rate
Fig. 7. The system cost of the two threshold-based sleep strategies varying
with the rate and threshold. = 0.5flows/sec, = 1, Ps = 100W, Psleep =
30W, Esw = 25J, P = 7 [1].
v
1
E(Tc )=( 1l/x
)( e +v). Then the total power consumption
Pvtot and delay Dv are obtained as follows.
1 l
2 v 2
v 2
Dv= (
+
)>
,
(23)
v
xl 2(v+e
)
2(v+ev )
1 x
l 2Esw
Pvtot=(1pv)( (2 w 1)P +Ps)+pvPsleep+(1 ) v
. (24)
x e +v
To minimize the objective zv = Dv + Pvtot /, we get
v
the optimal rate x and threshold v by taking z
x = 0 and
zv
l
1 x
zv
|v=0= (1 )(Psleep (2 w 1)P Ps)< 0, zv|v,
v
(v )
(v )
(A1)v (AB) = ev (B
), (25)
2
2
x
2Esw
1
w
where A= 1 (1l
(1
x )( (2 1)P +PsPsleep ) and B=
l
).
x
Fig. 7 gives an example of the two threshold-based sleep
strategies where the system cost varying with the rate and
threshold. Practically, based on our analysis of different strategies above such as their total power consumption and delay
performance, with different objectives concerned, different
operation parameters can be designed accordingly.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this article, we have studied traffic-aware power adaptation and base station sleep control with flow-level traffic
dynamics in green cellular networks. We formulate a total
cost minimization problem that allows for a flexible tradeoff
between energy consumption and flow-level delay performance. Load-aware and queue-aware power adaptation strategies are proposed. Especially for the queue-aware strategy,
3176