Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
I. I NTRODUCTION
Detecting an unused spectrum and sharing it without interfering the primary users (PUs) is a key requirement of the
cognitive radio network. For detection of a spectrum hole, the
cognitive communication network relies upon the cognitive
radios (CRs) or secondary users [1]. Spectrum sensing is
a procedure in which a CR captures the information of a
band available for transmission and then shares the frequency
band without interfering the primary users. Cooperation among
the CRs provides improvement in detection of the primary
signals [2]. Due to the random nature of the wireless channel,
the signals sensed by the CRs are also random in nature.
Therefore, sometimes a CR can falsely decide the presence
or absence of the PU [3]. In [3], a cooperation based spectrum sensing scheme is proposed to detect the PU with an
optimal linear combination of the received energies from the
cooperating CRs in a fusion center (FC). The cooperative
spectrum sensing scheme provides better immunity to fading,
noise uncertainty, and shadowing as compared to a cognitive
network that does not utilize cooperation among the CRs [4].
Probability of miss and probability of false alarm play
important role in describing a reliable communication. We
can fix either of the probabilities at a particular value and
then optimize the other one for improving the probability of
detection of the primary signals [5]. In [6], optimization of
the total probability of error is performed by minimizing sum
of the probability of false alarm and the probability of missed
detection of an cooperative spectrum sensing scheme. It is
explored in [6] that how many CRs are needed for optimum
detection of the primary user in a cooperative spectrum sensing
based scheme, such that the total error probability does not
exceed a fixed value.
For the detection of unknown deterministic signals corrupted by the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN), an
energy detector is derived in [7], which is also called conventional energy detector. The conventional energy detector [7]
utilizes square of the magnitude of the received data sample,
which is equal to the energy of the received sample. It is
shown in [8] that the performance of a cognitive radio network
can be improved by utilizing an improved energy detector in
the CRs, where the conventional energy detector is modified
by replacing the squaring operation of the received signal
amplitude with an arbitrary positive power .
In this paper, we consider optimization of the cooperative
spectrum sensing scheme with an improved energy detector to
minimize the sum of the probability of false alarm and missed
detection. We derive a closed form analytical expression to find
an optimal number of the CRs required for cooperation while
utilizing the improved energy detector in each CR. Moreover,
we also perform optimization of the threshold and the energy
detector to minimize the total error rate.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
We consider a system consisting of number of CRs, one
primary user, and a fusion center. There are two hypothesis
0 and 1 in the -th CR for the detection of the spectrum
hole
0 : () = (),
if PU is absent,
1 : () = () + (),
if PU is present,
(0, 2 ),
(1)
(2)
where
is the
where = 1, 2.... , ()
average transmitted power of the PU, denotes a zero mean
Gaussian signal transmitted by the PU, and () (0, 2 )
is additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) with zero mean
and 2 variance. The variance of the signal received at each
secondary user under 1 will be 2 + 2 . It is assumed that
each CR contains an improved energy detector [8]. The -th
CR utilizes the following statistic for deciding of the presence
of the PU [8]
= , > 0.
(3)
(4)
=1
where D is the sum of the all 1-bit decisions from the CRs. Let
, corresponds to a number of cooperating CRs out of
CRs. The FC uses a majority rule for deciding the presence
or absence of the PU. As per the majority decision rule if
is greater than then hypothesis 1 holds and if is smaller
than then hypothesis 0 will be true. The hypothesis 0
and 1 can be written as
0 : < , if PU is absent,
(5)
1 : , if PU is present.
(6)
Pr( ) =Pr( )
1
(7)
(
exp
2
+ 2 )
2(2
1 (),
(15)
0
where 0 is the decision region corresponding to the hypothesis 0 . In Appendix I, it is shown that the probability of miss
in each CR will be
(
)
2
3
1
,
=
,
(16)
2 2(2 + 2 )
=Pr( )
1
0 (),
(13)
)
.
(10)
2 exp( 2
)
.
(11)
0 () =
From (8) and (10), the p.d.f. of under hypothesis 1 can
be obtained as
2
1
2 exp( 2(2 +2 ) )
.
(12)
1 () =
(2 + 2 )
function
(17)
From (5), (6), and (17), the probability of false alarm of the
FC can be written as
)
(
=
(18)
(1 ) .
(19)
= 1
(20)
(1 ) ( ) .
=1 +
(1 )
( )
(1 ) ( ) ,
(21)
10
4.5
4
1
10
3.5
10
n=1
n=2
n=3
n=4
n=5
n=6
10
5
p
2.5
=10
=20
=50
1.5
0.5
10
10
5
p
10
Fig. 1. Total probability of error versus for different number of CRs for
= 10 and SNR=10 dB.
Fig. 2.
Optimal number of CRs versus for = 10, 20, 50, and
SNR=10 dB.
It can be seen from (21) that denotes the total error rate in
the case when and are equiprobable.
,
(22)
= min ,
1+
ln
=
1 1
(
1
ln
2
3
2 , 2 2
2
3
2 , 2( 2 + 2 )
2
3
2 , 2( 2 + 2 )
1 1
2
3
2 , 2 2
( ) (1 ) 1
and
are given as
3
(23)
where
)
(
(1 )
+
=
(
)
( ) 1 (1 )
=
)
(
,
(25)
(1 )1
+
where
(
exp( 2
2 )
=
,
22 3
(26)
)
3
exp( 2(2 +2 ) )
=
.
3
22 (2 + 2 ) 2
(27)
(1 ) (1 ) = 0. (24)
After some algebra and with the help of results given in [6]
we get (22) from (24).
10
0.001
10
0.002
10
2
Probability of detection
10
0.003
10
0.004
10
10
p=1.75
p=2.00
p=2.25
p=2.50
0.005
p=1.75
p=2.00
p=2.25
p=2.50
10
0.006
10
10
5
SNR (dB)
10
Fig. 3. Total error rate versus SNR for = 1.75, 2.00, 2.25, 2.50, = 1,
and sensing threshold = 50.
=
(
=
(
=
(
)
)
)
)
and
( ) (1 ) 1
(1 )
( ) 1 (1 )
(1 )1
(28)
1 exp( 2
2 )
=
,
2
3
10
SNR (dB)
12
14
16
18
20
Fig. 4. Probability of detection versus SNR for = 1.75, 2.00, 2.25, 2.50,
= 1, and sensing threshold = 50.
V. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
where
(29)
1 exp( 2(2 +2 ) )
=
.
3
2(2 + 2 ) 2
(30)
3
1
,
=
1
2 2(2 + 2 )
=
)]
(
[
2
3
1
,
.
(31)
2 2(2 + 2 )
Fig. 5.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
We have discussed how to choose an optimal number of
cooperating CRs in order to minimize the total error rate of
a cooperative cognitive communication system by utilizing an
improved energy detector. It is shown that the performance of
the cooperative spectrum sensing scheme depends upon the
choice of the power of the absolute value of the received data
sample and the sensing threshold of the cooperating CRs as
well. We have obtained an analytical expression of the optimal
number of CRs required for taking the decision of the presence
of the primary user when the CRs utilize the improved energy
detector. It is shown by simulations that an optimal value of the
total error rate can be obtained by utilizing a joint optimization
of the number of cooperating CRs, threshold in each CR, and
the energy detector.
A PPENDIX I
P ROOF OF (14) AND (16)
From (11) and (13), the probability of false alarm in
each CR can be obtained as
/0 ()
=
exp( 2
)
.
=
1
exp().
=
2
(32)
(33)
2
1
2 exp( 2(2 +2 ) )
.
(2 + 2 )
(34)
Fig. 6. Total error rate versus and for different number cooperating users
= 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 at SNR=10 dB.
1
=
2 + 2 )
2(
exp().
(35)