Bootstrapping Cognitive Radio Networks

Publication Year:
2012
Usage 24
Downloads 20
Abstract Views 4
Repository URL:
http://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2289
Author(s):
Horine, Brent
Tags:
Cognitive radio; link rendezvous; argumentation; negotiation
thesis / dissertation description
Cognitive radio networks promise more efficient spectrum utilization by leveraging degrees of freedom and distributing data collection. The actual realization of these promises is challenged by distributed control, and incomplete, uncertain and possibly conflicting knowledge bases. We consider two problems in bootstrapping, evolving, and managing cognitive radio networks. The first is Link Rendezvous, or how separate radio nodes initially find each other in a spectrum band with many degrees of freedom, and little shared knowledge. The second is how radio nodes can negotiate for spectrum access with incomplete information. To address the first problem, we present our Frequency Parallel Blind Link Rendezvous algorithm. This approach, designed for recent generations of digital front-ends, implicitly shares vague information about spectrum occupancy early in the process, speeding the progress towards a solution. Furthermore, it operates in the frequency domain, facilitating a parallel channel rendezvous. Finally, it operates without a control channel and can rendezvous anywhere in the operating band. We present simulations and analysis on the false alarm rate for both a feature detector and a cross-correlation detector. We compare our results to the conventional frequency hopping sequence rendezvous techniques. To address the second problem, we model the network as a multi-agent system and negotiate by exchanging proposals, augmented with arguments. These arguments include information about priority status and the existence of other nodes. We show in a variety of network topologies that this process leads to solutions not otherwise apparent to individual nodes, and achieves superior network throughput, request satisfaction, and total number of connections, compared to our baselines. The agents independently formulate proposals based upon communication desires, evaluate these proposals based upon capacity constraints, create ariii guments in response to proposal rejections, and re-evaluate proposals based upon received arguments. We present our negotiation rules, messages, and protocol and demonstrate how they interoperate in a simulation environment.