Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
The problem of resource allocation in cellular networks has been traditionally faced at two different levels: at the network level, in terms of frequency planning and reuse pattern design, and at the cell level, in terms of cell capacity optimizations based on channel-dependent scheduling, link adaptation, power control, and so on. While this second aspect has been deeply investigated in literature, the first aspect has been mainly faced with static or semi-dynamic reuse utilization solutions. In this paper we deal with the problem of multi-cellular resource allocation in heterogeneous OFDMA environments with reuse factor equal to 1, where base stations with different power constraints coexist. In particular, we analyze the effects of different allocation schemes, independently performed in each cell, on the aggregated network-level performance. By means of simulation results, we enlighten the network scenarios in which network planning and mobile station feedbacks are (or not are) advantageous. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2011 | 10.1109/ISCC.2011.5983865 | Computers and Communications |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
OFDM modulation,cellular radio,frequency division multiple access,resource allocation,aggregated network-level performance,cell capacity,channel-dependent scheduling,heterogeneous OFDMA environments,heterogeneous macro-microcellular network,mobile station feedbacks,multicellular resource allocation,network capacity maximization,network planning,power control,resource allocation,semidynamic reuse utilization solutions | Resource management,Base station,Network planning and design,Computer science,Reuse,Power control,Computer network,Resource allocation,Cellular network,Channel allocation schemes,Distributed computing | Conference |
ISSN | ISBN | Citations |
1530-1346 E-ISBN : 978-1-4577-0678-3 | 978-1-4577-0678-3 | 2 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.39 | 11 | 3 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Di Piazza, F.I. | 1 | 2 | 0.39 |
| Mangione, S. | 2 | 2 | 0.39 |
| Tinnirello, I. | 3 | 2 | 0.39 |