Fundamentals of Wireless Communications

Cooperative diversity
in a Linear Multihop Vehicular Network

Jiwoong Lee, Nikhil Shetty

University of California, Berkeley
May 10 2006

General Network Model

Linear Multihop Vehicular Network

S1,a
S1,b
S1,c

S0

S2,a
S2,b
S2,c

dv

Sn,a
Sn,b
Sn,c

dh

Model Assumptions
Each Station = Relay & Recipient
Relay forwards (optionally after detection)
Recipient detects and uses

Two Roles of a Relay

Extend the Range of the network
Provide Cooperative Diversity to neighbors

2/34

Channel Modeling: Linear Multihop Channel

S0

Simplified Diagram
x0
h1

S1

x1
h2

S2

Sn

3/34

Forwarding Protocols

Forwarding Protocol

Whether to forward :
When to forward :
What to forward :

PHY
MAC+PHY
PHY

Forwarding Protocol What to forward

Analog Forwarding
Forwarding with no Detecting
Amplify-and-Forward
Sufficient statistic Forward*

Digital Forwarding
Necessitate Detection and Decoding
MRC Decode-and-Forward
Blind Decode-and-Forward
Compress-and-Forward
4/34

Motivation Questions:

Setup
In a Linear Multihop Vehicular Network
With periodic broadcast traffic

Part I
Q1. What protocol is suitable
in terms of pairwise error performance
for linear multihop communications ?

Part II
Q2. Delay ?
Q3. Deployment planning criterion of Base
stations ?

5/34

Part I

5 Lessons in this part

6/34

Protocol 1: Amplify-and-Forward

Protocol Definition

Lesson 1
Coherent detection is impossible
Leads to possible severe under-utilization of DOF

7/34

AF::Statistics Analysis
Product Channel/Cumulative Noise

Define Product Channel

Expectation
Variance

Define Cumulative Noise

Expectation
Variance

Incomplete Gamma function

8/34

AF::Expected received SNR at Sn

Expected received SNR

received SNR
1

0.8

0.6

s 2=0.5
s 2=1
s 2=2

0.4

0.2

n
10

20

30

40

50

Lesson 2
Non-coherent detection in AF
Performance becomes worse

Lesson 3
Signal energy 0, Noise energy remains

9/34

Protocol 2: Sufficient Statistic Forwarding

Coherent Detection + Analog Forwarding ?

Carry the phase information

Devise a new analog protocol:

Sufficient Statistic Forwarding

Protocol Definition

10/34

SF::Statistics Analysis

Product Noise/Cumulative Noise

Define Product Channel

Expectation
2nd Moment
Variance

Define Cumulative Noise

Expectation
Variance

11/34

SF::Asymptotic Statistics

>>
?
=

Lesson 4
For
, typical error performance is bad
For
, cant determine typical error
performance Approach fails
Var[w] and E[h2] both increase at the same rate
12/34

SF::Deep Fade Event Analysis

Pairwise error probaiblity

Deep Fade event

Deep Fade event probability

SF::P(Deep Fade) at 1st Hop

S0

PDF

CDF

S1

S2

S3

13/34

SF::P(Deep Fade) at 2nd Hop

S0

S1

S2

S3

PDF

K: Modified Bessel Function of 2nd Kind

CDF
14/34

SF::P(Deep Fade) at 3rd Hop

PDF

CDF

S0

S1

S2

S3

G: Meijer G-function

15/34

SF::P(Deep Fade) at 4th Hop

S0

S1

S2

PDF
No appropriate Math expression

CDF
No appropriate Math expression

S3

Stop here and See the result

16/34

SF::Deep Fade Event ..... & Summary of Part I

Deep Fade Probability in SF

n=3

n=2

n=1 Also P(Deep fade) for DF

Lesson 5
SF provides the coherent-detection
SF suffers from Deep-Fade with high
probability

Summary
No hope in Analog Forwarding
Always use Digital Forwarding

17/34

Part II

18/34

Need for delay analysis

Traffic data, radio station, TV broadcast.

Require conditions on traffic pattern.

Require low jitter due to jitter buffer

constraints.

Requires delay analysis to bound performance.

19/34

Delay Analysis

System Model

Assumptions:
Reasonable penetration of technology.
Quasi-static analysis.
Perfect scheduling of nodes.
Within a pair, nodes can hear each other well.

20/34

Comparing two schemes

Blind decode-and-forward (BDF)

Do not consider previous transmissions.
If packet received correctly forward ahead
else drop and neglect.

Maximal Ratio Combining decode-and-forward

(MRC)
Collect energy over multiple transmissions of
the same packet.
Maximal Ratio Combining of data.

21/34

Use of outage probabilities

Information sent in short packets.

Cannot code over a long time.

Channel is constant over packet transmission

time.

Hence, outage probabilities are used.

Probability that the detection is corrupted at the

nth transmission = outage probability for the
detection scheme over n transmissions.

22/34

Outage Probabilities

For MRC-DF,

High SNR Approximation

For BDF,

23/34

Outage Probabilities

24/34

Delay Analysis

Every non-colliding transmission is an attempt.

If a_i is the number of attempts required at the

ith hop then total number of attempts

Total delay = Total attempts * Transmission

Delay (Assuming ideal MAC)

25/34

Analysis of number of attempts

Attempt is successful if at least one node in

adjacent group receives correctly.

Probability that both nodes fail to receive is

square of the outage probabilities.

Thus we end up with the cumulative

distribution.

26/34

Characteristic of a

27/34

Results for Blind decode

For Blind decode, since each transmission has an

independent and identical fade, pok = po1k

28/34

High SNR results for MRC

29/34

Plots for High SNR approximation analysis

High SNR Approximation BDF worse than the

upper bound of MRC-DF
30/34

Delay plot (exact)

Delays are higher for BDF at low SNR <-> high

outage probabilities.
31/34

Plots for Standard Deviation (exact)

Jitters are widely different at low SNR <-> high

outage probabilities.
32/34

Conclusions for Part 2

High SNR Blind decode is as good as MRC.

Low SNR huge difference in the jitters

experienced.

Use of MRC - A robust system.

A Design for the worst case.

Deployment of base stations determined by

the jitter that you can absorb.

Any MAC can be analyzed on top if we can

characterize the number of successful attempts
per unit time.

33/34

Summary of the Talk

Amplify and Forward not good.

Sufficient statistic forwarding better but still

not good enough.

Digital Forwarding better than Analog

Forwarding in multihop scenario.

Within Digital Forwarding, BDF as good as MRCDF at high SNR.

MRC-DF is suggested for a robust system.

In short, paper provides a guide to engineering

design for transport of real-time traffic on
highway networks.

34/34