IMPROVED COOPERATIVE SPECTRUM

SENSING IN MULTIPLE STAGES FOR

LOW-POWER PRIMARY USERS
PRESENTED BY:
Muhammad Omer Naeem
Shahbaz Ali Khan 119691
Shahid Ali Murtza 119594
Chaudhary Ahmed

Contents
Introduction and Terminology
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
Simulation and Results
Conclusion

INTRODUCTION AND TERMINOLOGY

Why Cognitive Radios?

Limitations of the frequency spectrum
Expensive
Different applications (e.g. DTV, cellular etc.)

Need for higher data rates

Video calling, streaming etc.

One such solution is Cognitive Radios.

CRs and Spectrum Sensing

CR systems idea:
Spectrum sensing
Identify

spectrum

space

holes

across

multiple

dimensions

Parameter adaptation

One major caveat: Watch out for interference

CRs and Spectrum Sensing

Ways to perform spectrum sensing
Single user
Co-operative Scenario

Terminology
CR Cognitive radio
CT Cognitive terminal (equiv. Secondary
user)
LP Low power
PU Primary user
SS Sensing schemes
BS Base station
7

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

No-Talk Zone in Cellular CR System

The no-talk zone of PU

Objective is to maximize PU protection

9

Optimal Spectrum Sensing

PU
has two states
IDLE : Noise
BUSY: Noise + Signal

Binary Hypothesis
(PU is absent)
(PU is present)

10

Confidence in SS for CR System

False Alarm (PFA) : Efficiency

Missed-detection (PMD): Reliability

Lower PFA and Lower PMD are preferred!

11

Conventional Schemes
Conventional Cooperative Sensing Schemes
K-out-of-N rule
Compromise between PU protection and CR System
efficiency

AND-rule
Lower PU protection: Lower PFA

OR-rule
Higher PU protection : Lower PMD
12

Idea of Psense

13

Issue with Conventional Schemes

Conventional schemes assume:
all the CTs are within the no-talk zone
Psense=100%

When PU transmits at low power

the no-talk zone is reduced
some CTs are now outside the no-talk zone

Psense << 100%

This assumption is no longer valid!
14

PROPOSED SCHEME

15

Proposed Scheme
Proposed scheme
Based on OR-Rule
Reasons
Problems

Combating problems
Verification

16

Proposed Scheme
Max. number of sensing attempts: L
Consecutive attempts
Elimination
OR-Rule at the end

Intuition: Reliable sensing

?
17

Implications of Proposed Scheme

Probability
of false alarm (PFA)

Changes

Probability of missed-detection(PMD)
Changes

: PU not present

: PU present

18

Mathematical Expressions

Individual
FA
Not raising
FA
All CTs raising FAs

19

Mathematical Expressions

CTs outside notalk dont raise

FA
CTs inside notalk miss PU
20

Mathematical Expressions
and
decreasing and increasing functions of L

respectively
Fix the probability of false alarm and try to
optimize the probability of misdetection.

21

Mathematical Expressions

Versu
s

22

SIMULATION AND RESULTS

23

Assumptions for Spectrum sensing

Utilize one band simultaneously
Keep sensing till vacancy found

Sensing sequence synchronized

Simultaneous transmission and sensing

24

Simulation Parameters
Detection threshold of PU = -114 dBm
K out of N rule: 3 out of 10
Urban macro model of IMT-R channel
path loss constant = 14.8

path loss exponent = 3.6

25

Simulation Parameters
CTs are distributed uniformly
BS cell radius = 1 km
PU location: Centre of the cell
Fading considered by zero-mean circularly
symmetric complex Gaussian random
variable with variance = 1

26

Results:

27

Results:

28

Results: Throughput

29

Conclusion
New co-operative sensing scheme
Considers (sometimes) invalid assumptions

Advantages
Improved reliability
Throughput improvement for LP PUs

Disadvantages
(Small)

Throughput

degradation

under

normal

circumstances
30

THANKS!

31