Optimal Throughput Allocation in General Random Access Networks P. Gupta, A. Stolyar Bell Labs,...
-
date post
20-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Optimal Throughput Allocation in General Random Access Networks P. Gupta, A. Stolyar Bell Labs,...
Optimal Throughput Allocation in General Random Access Networks
P. Gupta, A. Stolyar Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ
March 24, 2006
2
Slotted Aloha is a classical random access model. Applies to the situations when all transmitters interfere with each other (“shared transmission medium”)
Slotted Aloha is relatively well studied, allows efficient control
We want to study more general models, where
– not all transmitters interfere with each other (ad-hoc nets, etc.)
– or cause different levels of interference (not in this talk)
Focus of this work is on
– characterization of efficient - Pareto optimal - throughput allocations
– dynamic distributed controls producing optimal throughputs, given a specific objective
Motivation
3
Slotted Aloha
Throughputs:
1 N32
p1 p2 p3 pN
Access probabilities in a slot
Throughput region:
Theorem (Massey-Mathys’85):Pareto (“north-east”) boundary M* of region M is
given by
- Example: the result provides guiding principle for
WLAN RC-MAC in Gupta-Sankarasubramaniam-S’05
4
General (“node-centric”) random access model
Transmission and interference graph:
Throughput region:
What is the Pareto boundary M* ?
p1
p12
p21
p23
p32
p43
p34
p3
p2
p4
Throughputs:
- this model is a generalization of that in Kar-Sarkar-Tassiulas’04
- a different - “link-centric” - model with “random interference” is in Gupta-S’05
5
Auxiliary problem: max weighted proportional fairness objective
Relatively easily solvable, because
Problem: for some fixed positive weights
Unique optimizer
total weight of all “incoming links” to node mnode n interferes with these nodes
- generalization of Kar-Sarkar-Tassiulas’04 where wnm=1
6
Pareto boundary characterization
Question: If we vary weights w, do vectors (p(w)) “fill” the entire set M* ?
For any set of weights w and the corresponding optimizer p(w), throughput vector (p(w)) is on the Pareto boundary M*
7
Simple interpretation of Slotted Aloha throughput region
Throughputs:
1 N32
p1 p2 p3 pN
From Th1: for any n wn = 1, p=w solves
max wn log n (p)
Theorem (Massey-Mathys’85):Pareto (“north-east”) boundary M* of region M is
given by
8
Dynamic throughput allocation: basic procedure
The characterization of Pareto boundary suggests the following basic procedure:
– Each node n
» maintains a dynamic weight wnm for its outgoing links (nm)
» maintains and periodically broadcasts its “incoming weight” Wnin
» calculates (or estimates) the sum of incoming weights of the nodes it interferes with
» sets its access probabilities according to the above formula
– Node n dynamically adjusts weights of its links, based on their “satisfaction” with the current throughput
– As different nodes vary their link weights, the throughputs vary, but stay on the Pareto boundary
total weight of all incoming links to node mnode n interferes with these nodes
9
Weighted proportional fairness s.t. minimum throughputs
Problem: for some fixed positive weights
Algorithm:
10
Fluid limit dynamics
– To prove Th2, convexity of log M is good enough
– For a proof of convergence, non-convexity of M is a problem
– If weights are updated on slower time scale, convergence is provable for the algorithm using log nm(t) and log rnm in place of snm(t) and rnm resp. (the alg. becomes a GPD alg., S’05)
– For the stability of the queues (Th3), non-convexity of M is not a problem
11
Example 1
All nm=1, so that we maximize log nm
Two cases:
– All rnm=0: no min rate constraints
– r5,9=0.1 and the rest are 0
Parameter =0.001
12
Example 1: steady-state throughputs
13
Example 1: link weight and access probability dynamics
14
Example 2
All nm=1, so that we maximize log nm
Two cases:
– All rnm=0: no min rate constraints
– R2,1=1/7 and the rest are 0
Parameter =0.001
15
Example 2: steady-state throughputs
16
For generalized (“node-centric”) Slotted Aloha model, we characterized Pareto boundary of the throughput region as a set of solutions to weighted prop. fairness problem
This characterization can be exploited for efficient “greedy” dynamic throughput controls
Need more work on convergence properties of dynamic controls
Conclusions