IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO.
5, MAY 2015
Performance Analysis of Cognitive Relay Networks
Over Nakagami-m Fading Channels
Xing Zhang, Senior Member, IEEE, Yan Zhang, Senior Member, IEEE,
Zhi Yan, Jia Xing, and Wenbo Wang, Member, IEEE
Abstract—In this paper, we present performance analysis for
underlay cognitive decode-and-forward relay networks with the
N th best relay selection scheme over Nakagami-m fading chan-
nels. Both the maximum tolerated interference power constraint
and the maximum transmit power limit are considered. Specif-
ically, exact and asymptotic closed-form expressions are derived
for the outage probability of the secondary system with the N th
best relay selection scheme. The selection probability of the N th
best relay under limited feedback is discussed. In addition, we
also obtain the closed-form expression for the ergodic capacity
of the secondary system with a single relay. These expressions
facilitate in effectively evaluating the network performance in key
operation parameters and in optimizing system parameters. The
theoretical derivations are extensively validated through Monte
Carlo simulations. Both theoretical and simulation results show
that the fading severity of the secondary transmission links has
more impact on the outage performance and the capacity than
that of the interference links does. Through asymptotic analysis,
we show that the diversity order for the N th best relay selection
scheme is min(m1 , m3 ) × (M − N ) + m3 , where M denotes
the number of cognitive relays, and m1 and m3 represent the
fading severity parameters of the first-hop transmission link and
the second-hop transmission link, respectively.
Index Terms—Cognitive relay networks, N th best relay selec-
tion, Nakagami-m fading, outage probability, ergodic capacity.
I. I NTRODUCTION
R ADIO spectrum is an important and scarce resource
which is increasingly demanded by many kinds of users.
Cognitive radio is an efficient technology to improve the spec-
trum resources utilization and has gained much attention in re-
cent years [1]. There are three main cognitive radio paradigms:
underlay, overlay and interweave [2]. The underlay paradigm
allows cognitive (secondary) users to utilize the licensed spec-
Manuscript received January 4, 2014; revised May 8, 2014 and July 15, 2014;
accepted August 23, 2014. Date of publication September 30, 2014; date of
current version April 21, 2015. This work was supported in part by the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant 61372114, by the
National 973 Program of China under Grant 2012CB316005, by the Joint Funds
of NSFC-Guangdong under Grant U1035001, and by Beijing Higher Education
Young Elite Teacher Project under Grant YETP0434.
X. Zhang, J. Xing, and W. Wang are with the Wireless Signal Processing
and Network Laboratory, Key Laboratory of Universal Wireless Communica-
tion, Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunica-
tions, Beijing 100876, China (e-mail: zhangx@ieee.org; xjbupt@gmail.com;
wbwang@bupt.edu.cn).
Y. Zhang is with Simula Research Laboratory, Fornebu 1364, Norway
(e-mail: yanzhang@ieee.org).
Z. Yan is with the School of Electrical and Information Engineering, Hunan
University, Changsha 410082, China (e-mail: yanzhi@hnu.edu.cn).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSAC.2014.2361081
0733-8716 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
865
trum if the interference caused to primary users is below a
given interference threshold. In overlay systems, both primary
and secondary users can utilize the licensed spectrum simul-
taneously through sophisticated signal processing and coding.
In interweave systems, secondary users opportunistically uti-
lize spectrum holes to communicate without interfering the
transmission of primary users. In this paper, we focus on the
underlay systems.
On the other hand, relay communication has emerged as
a powerful spatial diversity technology for effectively com-
bating channel fading and greatly improving the transmission
performance of wireless communication systems [3]. There
are two kinds of classical relay communication protocols, i.e.,
amplify-and-forward (AF) and decode-and-forward (DF) [4]. In
multiple-relay systems, the relay-selection-based transmission
protocol can get higher spectrum efficiency compared with the
traditional relay communication protocol. Best relay selection
[5], [6] is an ideal protocol to achieve the best performance. In
practice, however, the best relay might not be available due to
some scheduling, load balancing or channel side information
(CSI) imperfect feedback conditions. In this case, the second
best relay or more generally the N th best relay might be
selected. Therefore, the study of the N th best relay selection
is of great need.
Inspired by cognitive radio and relay communication, the
cognitive relay network which combines these two techniques
is proposed. In cognitive relay networks, both the spectrum
efficiency and the transmission performance can be improved.
Recently, the research of cognitive relay networks has attracted
much attention, especially on the underlay paradigm [7]–[19].
In [7], the outage probability of a cognitive dual-hop network
with a single AF relay under the interference power constraint
was derived. The outage probability of a cognitive DF relay
network without a direct transmission link and with best relay
selection was evaluated in [8]. In [9], a rough upper bound
on outage probability for cognitive DF relay networks with
a direct transmission link and with best relay selection over
independent and identically distributed (i.i.d) Rayleigh fading
channels was obtained. However, these works can be improved
by considering the dependence among the received signal-to-
noise ratios (SNRs) in the first hop. Considering this kind of
dependence, the accurate upper and lower bound on outage
probability for such systems were respectively obtained in [10]
and [11].
In [12], the exact outage probability expression for cognitive
DF relay network was derived. The authors in [13] investigated
the diversity performance of cognitive relay networks with
866 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015

three different relaying protocols, i.e., selective AF, selective

DF, and AF with partial relay selection. In [14], the authors
studied the outage performance of a cognitive network adopting
incremental DF protocol. In [15], the outage probability, sym-
bol error probability and ergodic capacity were derived for cog-
nitive AF relay networks with best relay selection. References
[7]–[15] focused on Rayleigh fading channels while references
[16]–[19] studied the more general fading environment, i.e.,
Nakagami-m fading channels. In [16]–[18], the authors studied
the outage performance of cognitive relay networks with a
single relay over Nakagami-m fading channels. In [19], the
outage performance of cognitive DF relay network with best
relay selection over independent and non-identically distributed
Nakagami-m fading channels was studied.
The above mentioned references all focused on the best Fig. 1. System model.
relay selection scheme. Only a few studies involved the N th
best relay selection scheme. As we have mentioned, the N th tailed analysis of exact and asymptotic outage performance of
relay selection is more of practical significance. In [20], the the secondary system with the N th best relay selection scheme,
performance for conventional AF and DF relay networks with respectively. The selection probability of the N th best relay
the N th best relay selection over Rayleigh fading channels was under limited feedback is discussed in Section V. In Section VI,
studied. The asymptotic symbol error rate for a conventional the exact ergodic capacity is derived and analyzed. Numerical
AF relay network with the N th best relay selection over results are shown in Section VII. Finally, conclusions are given
Nakagami-m fading channels was derived in [21]. In [22], in Section VIII.
the authors investigated the outage behavior of a conventional Notation: Cnk represents the binomial
 ∞ α−1 coefficient and n!
dual-hop N th-best DF relay system in the presence of co- represents
 ∞ α−1 −t the factorial of n. Γ(α) =
 x α−1 0−tt e−t dt, Γ(α, x) =
channel interference over Rayleigh fading channels. The x t e dt and γ(α, x) = 0 t e dt denote the gamma
outage performance for cognitive relay networks with the N th function [24, eq. (8.310.1)], the upper incomplete gamma func-
best relay selection over Rayleigh fading channels were studied tion [24, eq. (8.350.2)] and the lower incomplete  ∞gamma
−t
in [23]. In summary, it is observed that there have been no prior function [24, eq. (8.350.1)], respectively. Ei(x) = − −x e t dt
works on the performance of cognitive relay network with represents the exponential integral function [24, eq. (8.211.1)].
the N th best relay selection scheme over Nakagami-m fading The cumulative distributed function (CDF) and the probability
channels. While in practical networks, the channels will not density function (PDF) of random variable X are expressed as
always be simply Rayleigh-distributed. Thus, a comprehensive FX (·) and fX (·), respectively.
study of cognitive relay network with N th best relay selection
over the general Nakagami-m fading channel will be beneficial
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
for the design in practical cognitive relay systems.
In this paper, we investigate the performance of an underlay We consider an underlay cognitive DF relay network, as
cognitive DF relay network over Nakagami-m fading channels. illustrated in Fig. 1. It involves one primary user receiver (P U )
Our main contributions are as follows: and a secondary system. The secondary system is a dual-hop
relay communication system which consists of one secondary
• The exact outage probability of the secondary system with
source (SS), one secondary destination (SD) and M sec-
the N th best relay selection is derived over Nakagami-m
ondary relays (SRi , i = 1, . . . , M ). All nodes are equipped
fading channels, which build the relationship between the
with a single antenna and operate in half-duplex mode. The
outage performance and the related system parameters. In
interference from the primary transmitter is assumed to be
addition, the selection of the N th best relay in the limited
neglected as in [7]–[19]. This can be possible if the primary
feedback scenario is discussed.
transmitter is located far away from the secondary users, or the
• An asymptotic analysis is carried out to get the asymptotic
interference is modeled as the noise term [8]. Like [13], [15],
outage probability of the secondary system with the N th
[16], [18], etc., we assume that there is no direct link between
best relay selection. The diversity order is also obtained.
SS and SD due to the severe shadowing and path loss. We
• The closed-form expression for the ergodic capacity of
employ the CSI-assisted DF relaying protocol and the N th best
the secondary system with single relay is derived over
relay selection scheme. A whole transmission process of the
Nakagami-m fading channels.
secondary system consists of two phases. In the first phase,
• The results show that the fading severity of the secondary
the SS broadcasts messages to M relays under a transmit
transmission links has more impact on the outage perfor-
power constraint which guarantees that the interference on the
mance and the ergodic capacity than the fading severity of
primary user receiver does not exceed a threshold. In the second
the interference links.
phase, the N th best relay that is selected from the successful
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II decoding relay set based on the channel quality of the second-
describes the system model. Sections III and IV present the de- hop links forwards source messages to the SD. Finally, the SD
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS 867

TABLE I
PARAMETERS N OTATIONS

decodes source messages. The transmitters of the secondary written as

system are with the maximum transmit power constraint Pmax , P
max gsi
and the maximum interference power constraint of the primary min(Pmax , Q/gsp )gsi σ2 , for Pmax < gQsp
γsi = =
user receiver is Q. All links are assumed to be independent σ2 Qgsi
σ 2 gsp , for Pmax ≥ gQsp .
Nakagami-m flat fading channels with integer values of the (1)
fading severity parameters and unit average power. The channel
gain of SS-SRi , SS-P U , SRi -SD, and SRi -P U are denoted From the above equation, it is worth noting that γsi for each
as gsi , gsp , gid , and gip , whose fading severity parameters are i is related with gsp while Pmax > Q/gsp . Hence, the received
m1 , m2 , m3 , and m4 , respectively. The thermal noise at each SNRs at relays are correlated in the first-hop transmission while
receiver is modeled as additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) Pmax > Q/gsp , but they are independent while Pmax ≤ Q/gsp .
with variance σ 2 . More details of the parameters used in this We denote the target transmission rate of secondary system as
paper are given in Table I. R. Then the received SNR at the ith relay should meet the
following inequality if the ith relay can successfully decode
source messages.
III. E XACT O UTAGE P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
1
In this part, we derive the exact outage probability expression R≤ log2 (1 + γsi ). (2)
for the previously described underlay cognitive relay network 2
with the N th best relay selection, which can be used to evaluate We define γth = 22R − 1, so the successful decoding constraint
the impact of the related parameters on the outage performance, of the ith relay can be simplified to γsi ≥ γth . We denote
which include the maximum interference power constraint Q, the successful decoding relay set as R(s) in the first-hop
the maximum transmit power constraint Pmax , the fading sever- transmission.
ity parameters mi (i = 1, 2, 3, 4), the number of relays M and Lemma 1: The probability of the successful decoding relay
the order of the selected relay N . set R(s) is given by the expression (3), shown at the bottom of
Considering the maximum transmit power constraint Pmax of the next page, where n = |R(s)| denotes the number of relays
the secondary transmitters and the interference power constraint m1 −1

Q of the primary user, the transmit power of the SS and in R(s), γPmax = Pmax /σ 2 , γQ = Q/σ 2 , and H = jwj .
j=0
the ith relay SRi should be no more than min(Pmax , Q/gsp )
Proof: See Appendix A. 
and min(Pmax , Q/gip ), respectively. In order to maximize
In the second-hop transmission, the N th best relay selected
the transmission performance of the secondary system, the
from the successful decoding relay set R(s) forwards the
secondary transmitters transmit signals with the maximum
source messages to the SD. N should be less than or equal
allowable transmit power. Hence, the transmit power at SS
to |R(s)|. It is worth noting that the N th best relay selection
can be written as PS = min(Pmax , Q/gsp ), where gsp denotes
makes sense only when R(s) is not empty, since N ≥ 1.
the channel coefficient of the link between SS and P U . Simi-
With the N th best relay selection scheme, the received SNR
larly, the transmit power at SRi is given by PRi = min(Pmax ,
at the SD is
Q/gip ).
In the first-hop transmission, the SS broadcasts messages to γrd = N th max (γid ) = N th max (γid ), (4)
relays. As a result, the received SNR at the ith relay SRi is i∈R(s) γsi ≥γth
868 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015

where N th max(·) denotes the N th maximum item, γid =
min(Pmax ,Q/gip )gid
σ2 denotes the received SNR at the SD if the
ith relay of R(s) forwards source messages to the SD in the
second phase.
Lemma 2: The CDF of γrd is given as (5), shown at the
bottom of the page.
Proof: See Appendix B.  the N th best relay selection scheme, the asymptotic outage
Finally, the SD decodes source messages. Hence, the equiv-
alent end-to-end received SNR is γrd in the transmission proce-
dure, and the mutual information of secondary system is given as
1
C= log2 (1 + γrd ).
2
According to the Shannon information theory, the outage oc-
curs when C < R. We denote the event that the N th best relay
is selected as SN . Therefore, the conditional outage probability
of the secondary system given SN and R(s) (|R(s)| ≥ N ) is
calculated as
Pr (outage|SN , R(s)) = Fγrd (γth ).
Considering all the possibilities of R(s), the outage proba-
bility of the secondary system with the N th best relay selection
scheme can be written as the following expression according to
the law of total probability.

M Proof: See Appendix D.
n
Pr(outage|SN ) = CM Pr (R(s)) Fγrd (γth ).
n=N
Substituting (3) and (5) into (8), the exact outage probability for
the N th best relay selection can be obtained.
IV. A SYMPTOTIC O UTAGE P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
In this part, we derive the asymptotic outage probability
expression in high SNR regions to reveal the diversity per-
formance of the secondary system with the N th best relay
selection scheme.
For a relay selection diversity communication system, the
diversity order is an important performance metric. It is defined
as d = − limγ→∞ (log Pout (γ)/ log(γ)), where γ denotes the
SNR of systems. The diversity order essentially indicates the
number of received independent fading signals at the receiver.
To derive the diversity order of the secondary system with
probability in high SNR regions should be obtained firstly. For
the simplicity of analysis, as [13] and [25], we set γ = 1/σ 2 to
represent the SNR of the secondary system in the subsequent
discussions. Hence, the high SNR region arises while σ 2 → 0.
(6) According to the asymptotic behavior of γ(n, x), we have
xn
lim γ(n, x) = . (9)
x→0 n
Note that the n in (9) is not necessarily an integer. Therefore,
the asymptotic outage performance analysis in this section is
applicable to the cases of arbitrary Nakagami fading parame-
ters, including the non-integer ones.
(7) Lemma 3: The probability of the successful decoding relay
set R(s) can be asymptotically approximated as (10), shown at
the bottom of the next page,where ∝ represents “proportional to.”
Proof: See Appendix C. 
Lemma 4: The asymptotic expression for the CDF of γrd is
written as (11), shown at the bottom of the next page.

(8) By utilizing Lemma 3 and Lemma 4, and substituting (10)
and (11) into (8), the asymptotic outage probability of the
secondary system with the N th best relay selection scheme can
be obtained as (12), shown at the bottom of the next page.
Meanwhile, we can see from (12) that
M  m1 (M −n)+m3 (n−N +1)
1
Pr(outage|SN ) ∝ . (13)
γ
n=N
In high SNR regions, the higher order terms of 1/γ can be
omitted. From (13), the n = N term (i.e., (1/γ)m1 (M −N )+m3 )

⎡
⎤n ⎡
⎤M −n
 
γ m1 , m 1 γth
γPmax γ m 1 , m1 γth
γPmax γ m 2 , m2 Q
Pmax  −n+i
n M 
⎣
Pr (R(s)) = 1− ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ + Cni CM
l
−n+i (−1)
i+l
Γ(m1 ) Γ(m1 ) Γ(m2 ) i=0 l=0 w0 +...+wm1 −1 =l


l!mm
m2 γQ +m1 γth l  H  1 −1 
m2 +H m  wj 
2 Γ m2 + H,
2
γPmax m1 γth γQ 1 1
× (3)
Γ(m2 ) γQ m2 γQ + m1 γth l j=0
wj ! j!

⎧




N 
k−1 ⎨ γ m3 , γm3 x γ m4 , Pm4 Q Γ m4 , Pmmax
4Q
P max
Fγrd (x) = Cnk−1 Ck−1
u
(−1)k−1−u max
+
⎩ Γ(m3 ) Γ(m4 ) Γ(m4 )
k=1 u=0
⎡
 ⎤⎫n−u
Γ m4 + i, γ3P 4 Q  xm i  xm −(m4 +i) ⎬
xm +m γ

m 3 −1
mm 4
⎣ 3 3 ⎦
− 4 max
+ m4 (5)
Γ(m4 ) i! γQ γQ ⎭
i=0
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS 869

is left when m1 ≤ m3 , and the n = M term (i.e.,
(1/γ)m3 (M −N +1) ) is left when m1 > m3 . To sum up,
the asymptotic outage probability of secondary system in
high SNR regions is proportional to (1/γ)m1 (M −N )+m3 when
m1 ≤ m3 , but it is proportional to (1/γ)m3 (M −N +1) when
m1 > m3 . Hence, the diversity order of the secondary system
is min(m1 , m3 ) × (M − N ) + m3 . It is indicated that the
diversity performance of the secondary system with the N th
best relay selection scheme is affected by the channel fading
severity parameters of the transmission links, as well as the
difference between the number of relays M and the order of
the selected relay N . The channel fading severity parameters
of the interference links have no impact on the diversity order.
V. S ELECTION P ROBABILITY OF THE N TH B EST R ELAY
U NDER L IMITED F EEDBACK
The relay selection process is mainly based on the obtained
channel knowledge. In practice, due to imperfect CSI feedback,
the chosen relay may not be the best one. Limited feedback is
often used to perform relay selection [26]. In this section, we
discuss the impact of limited feedback on the relay selection
process.
The relay is selected according to the SNR of SRi -SD γid
(i ∈ R(s)). Considering channel reciprocity, we assume relay
SRi can acquire the channel fading coefficient of SRi -SD.
Therefore, γid is available at SRi . In order to select a relay,
SRi should feedback its SNR γid to the decision-making node
who performs relay selection.
We assume that L bits are used to feedback the SNRs, so
there are q = 2L quantization intervals. Given the quantized
codebook {γ̂1 , γ̂2 , · · · , γ̂q }, the quantized value of γid (i ∈
R(s)) is determined by
γ̂id = arg min |γid − γ̂|. (14)
γ̂∈{γ̂1 ,γ̂2 ,···,γ̂q }
Then each relay transmits the index of its quantized value to
the decision-making node. We assume that γid falls into each
quantization interval with equal probability p = 1/q through
some non-uniform quantizer.
With limited feedback, the SNRs of different relays may fall
into the same quantization interval. The “best” relay selection
depends on the best quantization interval, i.e., the quantization
interval with the largest quantized value that contains at least
one relay. We denote the set of relays whose SNR falls into
the best quantization interval as R(b). R(b) is a subset of the
successful decoding relay set R(s). For a given R(s) with
n = |R(s)|, when n = 0, i.e., R(s) is empty, no relay would be
selected. When n > 0, i.e., R(s) is not empty, the probability
that there are nb relays in the best quantization interval for the
case of nb < n can be calculated as

q−1
Pr (|R(b)| = nb |R(s)) = Cnnb pnb (1 − ap)n−nb . (15)
a=1
For the case of nb = n, i.e., all relays are in the same quantiza-
tion interval, the probability that there are nb relays in R(b) for

  m1 M −n  m1 (M −n)  

γ→∞ 1 m1 γth 1 1 m2 Q
Pr (R(s)) ≈ γ m2 ,
Γ(m1 + 1) γ Γ(m2 ) Pmax Pmax
 m1 (M −n)  
1 m2 Q
+ Γ m1 (M − n) + m2 , (10)
m2 Q Pmax

 m3 (n−k+1)  n−k+1

γ→∞ 
N
m3 x 1
Fγrd (x) ≈ Cnk−1
γ Γ(m3 + 1)Γ(m4 )
k=1
 m 3    m3  n−k+1 
1 m4 Q 1 m4 Q
× γ m4 , + Γ m3 + m4 , (11)
Pmax Pmax m4 Q Pmax

M  N  m1 (M −n)+m3 (n−k+1) n k−1  M −n  n−k+1

γ→∞ γth CM Cn mm 1
mm 3

Pr(outage|SN ) ≈ 1 3
γ Γ(m2 ) Γ(m1 + 1) Γ(m3 + 1)Γ(m4 )
n=N k=1
 m 3    m3  n−k+1
1 m4 Q 1 m4 Q
× γ m4 , + Γ m3 + m4 ,
Pmax Pmax m4 Q Pmax
 m1 (M −n)    m1 (M −n)  
1 m2 Q 1 m2 Q
× γ m2 , + Γ m1 (M − n) + m2 , (12)
Pmax Pmax m2 Q Pmax
870 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015

the given R(s) can be expressed as = 1 − Pr{γsr > x} Pr{γrd > x}

Pr (|R(b)| = nb |R(s)) = qpn . (16) = 1 − (1 − Fγsr (x)) (1 − Fγrd (x)) . (21)

The “best” relay is selected from R(b) randomly, i.e., each relay Since there is only one relay node, the CDF of γrd is the
in R(b) is chosen with probability n1b . We denote the event same as the CDF of γid in (42). Due to the symmetric channel
that the N th best relay is chosen as SN (N = 1, 2, · · · , n). conditions, γsr has the same distribution as γrd . We rewrite it as
Therefore, the conditional selection probability of the N th best



mp Q mp Q
relay given R(s) is expressed as γ ms , γm sx
Pmax
γ m p , Pmax Γ m p , Pmax
Fγsr(x) = Fγrd(x)= +

n
1 Γ(ms ) Γ(mp ) Γ(mp )
Pr (SN |R(s)) = Pr (|R(b)| = nb |R(s)) . (17) ms −1
  i  −(mp +i)
mp p 
m
nb 1 ms x ms x
nb =N − + mp
Γ(mp ) i=0 i! γQ γQ
According to the law of total probability, the selection prob-  
ability of the N th best relay under limited feedback is given by m s x + mp γ Q
× Γ mp + i, . (22)

M γPmax
Pr(SN ) = n
CM Pr (R(s)) Pr (SN |R(s)) , (18)
n=N According to the definition, the ergodic capacity of the
secondary system can be expressed as
where Pr(R(s)) can be calculated as (3). 
Combining this with the results in Section III, we can obtain 1 ∞
C̄ = log2 (1 + x)fγe2e (x) dx. (23)
the outage probability of the secondary system with limited 2 0
feedback as
By using the same method as [27], we can rewrite the expres-

M
sion for the ergodic capacity as
Pout = Pr (R(s) = ∅)+ Pr(SN ) Pr(outage|SN ). (19)  ∞
N =1 1 1
C̄ = (1 − Fγe2e (x)) dx
2 ln 2 0 1 + x
VI. E XACT E RGODIC C APACITY A NALYSIS  ∞
1 1
= (1 − Fγsr (x)) (1 − Fγrd (x)) dx.
In this section, we derive the exact ergodic capacity of the 2 ln 2 0 1 + x
cognitive DF relay network over Nakagami-m fading channels. (24)
Specifically, we study the special case where there is only one
single relay in the secondary system, i.e., M = 1 and N = 1. By substituting (22) into (24) and utilizing the series repre-
Additionally, we consider symmetric channel conditions where sentation of the incomplete Gamma function [24, eq. (8.352.6)],
the channels associated with the first hop and the second hop we can get (25), shown at the bottom of the page, where A and
have the same parameters. The fading severity parameters of the B(v) are defined as
secondary transmission links are denoted as m1 = m3 = ms  ∞ i+j
while those of the interference links are denoted as m2=m4=mp . x − 2ms x
A= e γPmax dx (26)
For the case of M = 1 and N = 1, the end-to-end SNR of 0 1+x
the secondary system is given by
and
γe2e = min(γsr , γrd ). (20)  ∞
xi+j − 2ms x
B(v) = v
e γPmax dx, (27)
Thus the CDF of γe2e can be written as 0 (1 + x)(ms x + mp γQ )

Fγe2e (x) = Pr {min(γsr , γrd ) ≤ x} respectively.

  2

m s −1 m s −1

1 1 mi+j
s mp Q 1
C̄ = 2 γ mp , i+j
A
2 ln 2 (Γ(mp )) i=0 j=0 i!j! Pmax γPmax
   1 1
m+j−1
mp Q 1 mp Q
− Pmax
+ γ mp , (m p γ Q ) mp
Γ(m p + j)e B(mp + j − k)
Pmax γPi max k! γPkmax
k=0
   1 1
mp +i−1
mp Q 1 mp Q
− Pmax
+ γ mp , j
mp
(mp γQ ) Γ(mp + i)e B(mp + i − l)
Pmax γP l! γPl max
l=0

max

 p m Q 2  
mp +i−1 mp +j−1
1 1
mp − Pmax
+ (mp γQ ) e Γ(mp + i)Γ(mp + j) B(2mp + i + j − l − k) (25)
l!k! γPl+k
l=0 k=0 max
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS 871

By using [24, eq. (3.353.5)], we obtain

 
2ms
2ms
A = (−1)i+j−1 e γPmax Ei −
γPmax

i+j  h
γPmax
+ (h − 1)!(−1)i+j−h . (28)
2ms
h=1

To calculate the function B(v), we should consider two cases.

For the case of ms
= mp γQ , by splitting the term 1/(1 +
x)(ms x + mp γQ )v , we get
 ∞ i+j
1 x − γ2ms x
B(v) = e Pmax dx
(mp γQ − ms )v 0 1 + x
 
Φ1

v  ∞
ms xi+j − γ2ms x
− e Pmax dx .

p Q −ms )
(m γ a (ms x+mp γQ )v+1−a
a=1 0 
Φ2 Fig. 2. Outage probability versus interference power constraint to noise
(29) ratio for different channel fading severity parameters with M = 6, N = 2,
Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.

The integral term Φ1 is the same as A. The integral term Φ2

can be calculated with the help of the Meijer’s G-function [28]. VII. N UMERICAL R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSIONS
Specifically, the term 1/(ms x + mp γQ )v+1−a in Φ2 can be
In this section, we present numerical results to validate our
expressed as
theoretical analysis in Sections III–VI. A detailed investigation
1 is given on the impact of the interference power constraint,
(ms x + mp γQ )v+1−a the maximum transmit power constraint, the fading severity
 ! 
1 1 1,1 ms x !! a − v parameters, the number of relays and the relay selection scheme
= G .
(mp γQ )v+1−a Γ(v + 1 − a) 1,1 mp γQ ! 0 on the outage and diversity performance of the secondary
(30) system. The effect of limited feedback on the relay selection
probability is also studied.
By substituting (30) into Φ2 and using [24, eq. (7.813.1)], we Fig. 2 illustrates the exact outage probability of the secondary
have system versus the interference power constraint to noise ratio
 i+j+1 Q/σ 2 for various channel fading severity parameters. The
1 1 γPmax
Φ2 = number of relays M and the order of the selected relay N are set
(mp γQ )v+1−a Γ(v + 1 − a) 2ms
 !  to 6 and 2, respectively. The solid lines represent our analytical
Pmax !! −i − j, a − v results, and the square symbols represent the Monte Carlo
× G1,2 . (31)
2,1
2mp Q ! 0 simulation results. From Fig. 2, we can see that our analytical
results match well with the simulation results, which validates
Thus B(v) is obtained for the case of ms
= mp γQ . our theoretical analysis. The outage performance improves with
For the case of ms = mp γQ , B(v) can be written as the increase of the fading severity parameters. It is worth noting
 ∞ that the outage probability has a decline in the low Q region.
1 xi+j − 2ms x
B(v) = v v+1
e γPmax dx. (32) This is because when Q gets smaller, there are fewer relays
ms 0 (1 + x)
available in the successful decoding relay set, so the chance
By the same way we get Φ2 , we can obtain the closed-form that the N th best relay makes sense (N ≤ |R(s)|) gets smaller.
expression for (32). Besides, the outage performance improves with the increase of
In conclusion, we obtain B(v) as (33), shown at the bottom Q in the median Q region, but will reach saturation when Q is
of the page. large enough due to the existence of Pmax .
By substituting A and B(v) which are given by (28) and (33), Fig. 3 plots the outage probability of the secondary system
respectively, into (25), we can get the closed-form expression versus the maximum transmit power constraint to noise ratio
for the system ergodic capacity. Pmax /σ 2 . For the similar reason of the case in Fig. 2, the outage

⎧ 
i+j+1
! 
Pmax ! −i−j,a−v
v
⎪
⎨ (mp γQ1−ms )v A− ms γPmax
G1,2 for ms
= mp γQ
2,1 2mp Q !
1 1
(mp γQ −ms )a (mp γQ )v+1−a Γ(v+1−a) 2ms 0 ,
B(v) =
⎪

a=1

! 
⎩ 1v 1
i+j+1 !
G1,2 Pmax ! −i−j,−v ,
γPmax γ
ms Γ(v+1) 2ms 2,1 2ms 0 for ms = mp γQ
(33)
872 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015
Fig. 3. Outage probability versus maximum transmit power constraint to
noise ratio for different channel fading severity parameters with M = 6, N =
2, Q/σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.
Fig. 4. Outage probability versus interference power constraint to noise ratio
for different numbers of relays (M ) with N = 2, m1 = m2 = m3 = m4 =
3, Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.
probability has a decline in the low Pmax region and reaches
saturation in the high Pmax region.
Fig. 4 illustrates the impact of the number of relays M on
the outage performance of the secondary system with the N th
best relay selection (N = 2). In the median and high Q regions,
more relays can provide better outage performance. It is also
observed that the turning point between the low Q region and
the median Q region shifts left with the increase of M .
Fig. 5 gives the outage performance of the secondary system
for different relay selection schemes. The number of relays M
is set to 6. It shows that in the median and high Q regions, the
outage performance decreases with the increase of the order of
the selected relay (i.e., N ) since the performance of the second
hop is worsened. In addition, we can observe that the turning
point between the low Q region and the median Q region shifts
right with the increase of N .
The impact of the fading severity of the transmission links
and the interference links on the outage performance is illus-
trated in Fig. 6. It is observed that the fading severity of the
Fig. 5. Outage probability versus interference power constraint to noise ratio
for different orders of selected relays (N ) with M = 6, m1 = m2 = m3 =
m4 = 2, Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.
Fig. 6. Outage probability versus interference power constraint to noise ratio
for different fading severity of the transmission links and the interference links
with M = 6, N = 2, Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.
transmission links has great impact on the outage performance,
but the fading severity of the interference links has little impact
on the outage performance. This is in compliance with the
results in [29] which investigates the imperfect CSI of the
transmission links and the interference links.
Fig. 7 plots the impact of the fading severity of the first-
hop links and the second-hop links on the outage performance.
From this figure, we can see that when the number of relays
M is relatively small, the fading severity of the second-hop
links has more influence on the outage performance than that
of the first-hop links. But when M is relatively large, these two
hops have nearly equal impact on the outage performance of the
secondary system.
Figs. 8 and 9 present the exact and asymptotic outage proba-
bility curves according to Sections III and IV. From these two
figures, we can observe that the asymptotic outage probability
is very close to the exact one in high SNR regions. It is
indicated that our asymptotic outage probability expression
can be used to effectively evaluate the outage performance
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS 873

Fig. 7. Outage probability versus interference power constraint to noise ratio Fig. 9. The exact and asymptotic outage probability versus system SNR (γ =
for different fading severity of first-hop links and second-hop links with N = 2, 1/σ 2 ) for different relay selection scheme with m1 = m2 = m3 = m4 = 2,
Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz. Q = 10 dB, Pmax = 10 dB, σ 2 = 1 and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.

Fig. 10. Selection probability of the N th best relay versus the number of feed-
Fig. 8. The exact and asymptotic outage probability versus system SNR (γ = back bits (L) with M = 10, m1 = m2 = 3, Q/σ 2 = 10 dB, Pmax /σ 2 =
1/σ 2 ) for different fading severity of the transmission links with M = 4, N = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.
2 and m2 = m4 = 2, Q = 10 dB, Pmax = 10 dB and R = 1 bit/s/Hz.

of the secondary system in high SNR regions, even for non-

integer fading severity parameters. According to our analysis
in Section IV, the diversity order of the secondary system
is min(m1 , m3 ) × (M − N ) + m3 , which coincides with the
slope of the curves in these figures.
In Fig. 10, the selection probability of the N th best relay
with limited feedback is illustrated. From this figure, we can
observe that the selection probability of the relay decreases
with the increase of N . This means the probability that a
better relay is selected is larger than the probability that a
worse relay is selected in the limited feedback scenario. For
the best relay, as the number of feedback bits L increases, its
selection probability gets larger. For the worse relays (N ≥ 3),
the selection probability decreases with the increase of L.
Fig. 11 depicts the ergodic capacity of the secondary system
with one single relay. It can be observed that the ergodic
Fig. 11. Ergodic capacity versus interference power constraint to noise ratio
capacity improves with the increase of the interference power for different fading severity of the transmission links and the interference links
constraint Q and will reach saturation when Q is large enough with M = 1, N = 1 and Pmax /σ 2 = 10 dB.
874 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015

due to the maximum transmit power constraint Pmax . It can The first summand in (34) can be calculated as
also be seen that the fading severity of the transmission links   n   M −n
has much greater impact on the ergodic capacity than that of Pmax gsi Pmax gsi
I1 = Pr ≥ γ th Pr < γ th
the interference links. As the fading of the transmission links σ2 σ2
gets severer, the capacity of the secondary system will decrease  
Q
greatly. However, as the fading of the interference links gets × Pr Pmax <
gsp
severer, the capacity will increase when Q is small and will
  n   M −n  
decrease when Q is large. γth σ 2 γth σ 2 Q
= 1−Fgsi Fgsi Fgsp
Pmax Pmax Pmax
VIII. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORKS ⎡
 ⎤n ⎡
 ⎤M −n
γ m1 , m 1 γth
γPmax γ m1 , m 1 γth
γPmax
In this paper, we study the performance of an underlay = ⎣1 − ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
cognitive DF relay network with the N th best relay selec- Γ(m1 ) Γ(m1 )
tion over Nakagami-m fading channels, considering both the

maximum transmit power limit and the interference power γ m2 , Pmmax
2Q

constraint. The exact and asymptotic outage probability ex- × . (35)

Γ(m2 )
pressions for such system are derived. Through asymptotic
analysis, we obtain the diversity order of the secondary system, In the second summand, it is found that all parts are corre-
which is min(m1 , m3 ) × (M − N ) + m3 , where M represents lated with the variable gsp . Hence, the second summand can be
the number of relays and m1 , m3 denote the fading severity written as
parameters of the first-hop transmission link and the second-  ∞   n   M −n
hop transmission link. It is indicated that the fading severity of Qgsi Qgsi
I2 = Pr ≥ γth Pr < γth fgsp (t)dt
channels, the number of relays and the relay selection scheme Q
Pmax
σ2 t σ2 t
have great impact on the outage performance of the secondary ⎡
 ⎤n ⎡
 ⎤M −n
system. The selection probability of the N th best relay is  ∞ γ m1 , m1γγQth t γ m1 , m1γγQth t
given in the limited feedback scenario. Besides, we obtain the = ⎣1 − ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
Q Γ(m 1 ) Γ(m 1 )
exact ergodic capacity for the special case where there is one P max

single relay in the secondary system. The theoretical analysis mm 2 m2 −1 −m2 t

2 t e
is validated by simulations. The results show that the fading × dt
Γ(m2 )
severity of the transmission links has more impact on the outage
 ⎡
 ⎤M −n+i
performance as well as the ergodic capacity than that of the
n  ∞ γ m1 , m1γγQth t
interference links. In this paper the direct link for the secondary = Cni (−1)i ⎣ ⎦
system is not considered. We believe that considering the direct i=0 P
Q Γ(m1 )
max
link can be an interesting topic in our future works. 
mm2 tm2 −1 e−m2 t
× 2 dt (36)
A PPENDIX A Γ(m2 )
P ROOF OF L EMMA 1
Then, utilizing the following expansion for an incomplete
According to the definition of R(s), the probability of the set
gamma function [24, eq. (8.352.6)]:
R(s) can be written as
⎡ ⎤ $ %

n−1 i
x
# # γ(n, x) = Γ(n) 1 − e −x
. (37)
Pr(R(s)) = Pr⎣ (γsi ≥ γth ), (γsi < γth )⎦ i=0
i!
i∈R(s) i
∈R(s)
⎡ ⎤ I2 can be transformed into
# Pmax gsi  #
Pmax gsi

Q⎦ ⎡
 ⎤M −n+i
= Pr⎣ ≥ γth , < γth , Pmax<  
σ2 σ2 gsp 
n ∞ γ m1 , m1γγQth t
i∈R(s) i
∈R(s) I2 = Cni (−1)i ⎣ ⎦
  Q Γ(m1 )
i=0 Pmax
I1
⎡ ⎤ 
# Qgsi  # 
Qg

Q
mm2 tm2 −1 e−m2 t
× 2 dt
+ Pr⎣ ⎦,
si
≥ γth , < γth , Pmax ≥ Γ(m2 )
σ 2 gsp σ 2 gsp gsp
i
∈R(s)

i∈R(s)
 ⎡
j ⎤M −n+i
  m1 γth t
I2 
n ∞ 
m 1 −1
⎢ m γ t
− 1γ th γQ ⎥
(34) = Cni (−1)i ⎣1−e Q
⎦
i=0
Q
Pmax j=0
j!
where the first summand denotes that all relays can successfully 
2 m2 −1 −m2 t
decode in the set R(s), and the second summand denotes that mm
2 t e
× dt
the other relays decode failed. Γ(m2 )
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS 875


−n+i 

n M
mm 2 ∞ 
N
= Cni CM
l
−n+i (−1)
i+l 2
tm2 −1 = Cnk−1 [Pr(γid ≤ x)]n−k+1 [Pr(γid < x)]k−1
i=0
Γ(m2 ) Q
l=0 Pmax k=1
⎡ ⎤l  N
 1 −1  j
−
m1 γth l+m2 γQ m
1 m1 γth t = Cnk−1 [Fγid (x)]n−k+1 [1−Fγid (x)]k−1 , (41)
×e γQ t
⎣ ⎦ dt (38)
j! γQ k=1
j=0
where Fγid (x) is expressed as
According to the multinomial theorem, the term  
  min(Pmax , Q/gip )gid
m
1 −1
j l Fγid (x) = Pr(γid ≤ x) = Pr ≤ x
1 m1 γth t σ2
j! γQ in (38) can be expanded as    
j=0 Pmax gid Q Qgid Q
⎡ ⎤l = Pr ≤ x, Pmax< +Pr 2 ≤ x, Pmax ≥

m 1 −1  j 
σ2
 ip
g σ gip

gip
⎣ 1 m1 γth t ⎦ Pmax gid Q
j! γQ = Pr ≤ x Pr Pmax <
j=0 σ2 gip
    
 1 −1
m j wj  J1
1 1 m1 γth t  ∞  
= l! Qgid
wj ! j! γQ + Pr ≤ x fgip (t)dt . (42)
w0 +w1 +···+wm1 −1 =l j=0 Q σ2 t
⎧ ⎫ 
Pmax

 ⎨
m1 γth t
H m
1 −1
1
 wj⎬
1 J2
= l! ,
⎩ γQ wj ! j! ⎭ Utilizing the CDF of gip and gid , J1 can be easily calculated as
w0 +w1 +···+wm1 −1 =l j=0



(39) m4 Q
γ m3 , γm 3x
Pmax
γ m ,
4 Pmax
J1 = . (43)
m
1 −1
Γ(m3 ) Γ(m4 )
where H = jwj . So I2 can be rewritten as
j=0 For J2 , the integral can be calculated as following by using
−n+i


n M  mm
the expansion expression (37) as follows:
2 l!
2

I2 = Cni CM
l
−n+i (−1)
i+l

Γ(m2 )  ∞ γ m3 , m3 xt 4 m4 −1 −m4 t
i=0 l=0 w0 +w1 +...+wm1 −1 =l γQ mm4 t e
J2 = dt
 H m
1 −1   wj  Q Γ(m 3 ) Γ(m 4 )
m1 γth 1 1 Pmax
×  ∞  m3 −1  i 
− γ 3 t  1 m3 x
γQ wj ! j! mm 4 m x
j=0 4 m4 −1 −m4 t
 = t e 1−e Q t dt
 ∞ m1 γth l+m2 γQ
Γ(m4 ) P Q i=0
i! γQ
m2 −1+H −
max
t
× t e γQ
dt
  
Q
Γ m4 , Pmmax
4Q
4 m 3 −1 i
Pmax mm 1 xm3
−n+i
 = − 4

n M  mm Γ(m4 ) Γ(m4 ) i=0 i! γQ
2 l!
2

= Cni CM
l
−n+i (−1)
i+l
Γ(m2 )  −(m4 +i)  
i=0 l=0 w0 +w1 +...+wm1 −1 =l xm3 xm3 + m4 γQ
× + m4 Γ m4 + i, .
 H  m2 +H γQ γPmax
m1 γth γQ
×
γQ m2 γQ + m1 γth l (44)
  m 1 −1  wj 
m2 γQ + m1 γth l 1 1 Substituting (43) and (44) into (42), we can get Fγid (x).
× Γ m2 +H, × .
γPmax wj ! j! Then from (41), we can obtain Fγrd (x) as (5).
j=0

(40)
A PPENDIX C
Substituting (35) and (40) into (34), we can obtain (3). P ROOF OF L EMMA 3
According to (9), I1 can be written as the following expres-
sion in high SNR regions:
A PPENDIX B
m1 ⎤n⎡
m1 ⎤M −n

⎡
P ROOF OF L EMMA 2 m1 γth m1 γth
γ m , m2 Q
γ→∞ Pmax γ 2
I1 ≈ ⎣1− ⎦ ⎣ Pmax γ ⎦ Pmax
According to the expression of γrd (4), the CDF of γrd can Γ(m1 +1) Γ(m1 +1) Γ(m2 )
be written as


    m1 M −n γ m , m2 Q
1 m1 γth 2 Pmax
Fγrd (x) = Pr N th max γid ≤ x ≈ . (45)
i∈R(s) Γ(m1 + 1) Pmax γ Γ(m2 )
876 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 33, NO. 5, MAY 2015

For I2 , it can be approximated written as [6] S. S. Ikki and M. H. Ahmed, “Performance analysis of adaptive decode-
and-forward cooperative diversity networks with best-relay selection,”
⎡
m 1 ⎤ n ⎡
m1 ⎤M −n
 ∞ m1 γth t m1 γth t IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 68–72, Jan. 2010.
γ→∞ Qγ Qγ [7] T. Q. Duong, V. N. Q. Bao, and H.-J. Zepernick, “Exact outage probability
I2 ≈ ⎣1 − ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ of cognitive AF relaying with underlay spectrum sharing,” Electron. Lett.,
P
Q Γ(m 1 + 1) Γ(m 1 + 1) vol. 47, no. 14, pp. 1001–1002, Aug. 2011.
max
[8] J. Lee, H. Wang, J. G. Andrews, and D. Hong, “Outage probability of cog-
mm2 tm2 −1 e−m2 t nitive relay networks with interference constraints,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
× 2 dt Commun., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 390–395, Feb. 2011.
Γ(m2 )
⎡
m1 ⎤M −n
m1(M−n) [9] Y. Guo, G. Kang, N. Zhang, W. Zhou, and P. Zhang, “Outage perfor-
m1 γth 1   mance of relay-assisted cognitive-radio system under spectrum-sharing
Qγ m2 m2 Q constraints,” IET Electron. Lett., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 182–184, Jan. 2010.
≈⎣ ⎦ Γ m1 (M −n)+m2 , . [10] Z. Yan, X. Zhang, and W. Wang, “Outage performance of relay assisted
Γ(m1 +1) Γ(m2 ) Pmax
hybrid overlay/underlay cognitive radio systems,” in Proc. IEEE WCNC,
Cancun, Mexico, Mar. 2011, pp. 1920–1925.
(46) [11] L. Luo, P. Zhang, G. Zhang, and J. Qin, “Outage performance for cog-
nitive relay networks with underlay spectrum sharing,” IEEE Commun.
Substituting (45) and (46) into (34), we can obtain (10). Lett., vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 710–712, Jul. 2011.
[12] Z. Yan, X. Zhang, and W. Wang, “Exact outage performance of cognitive
relay networks with maximum transmit power limits,” IEEE Commun.
A PPENDIX D Lett., vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 1317–1319, Dec. 2011.
P ROOF OF L EMMA 4 [13] H. Ding, J. Ge, D. Costa, and Z. Jiang, “Asymptotic analysis of coopera-
tive diversity systems with relay selection in a spectrum-sharing scenario,”
According to (9), J1 can be written as the following expres- IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 457–472, Feb. 2011.
[14] K. Tourki, K. A. Qaraqe, and M.-S. Alouini, “Outage analysis for underlay
sion in high SNR regions: cognitive networks using incremental regenerative relaying,” IEEE Trans.

 Veh. Technol., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 721–734, Feb. 2013.
 m 3 γ m , m 4 Q [15] V. N. Q. Bao, T. Q. Duong, D. B. Costa, G. C. Alexandropoulos, and
γ→∞ 1 m3 x 4 Pmax
J1 ≈ . (47) A. Nallanathan, “Cognitive amplify-and-forward relaying with best relay
Γ(m3 + 1) Pmax γ Γ(m4 ) selection in non-identical Rayleigh fading,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 17,
no. 3, pp. 475–478, Mar. 2013.
For J2 , it can be written as [16] T. Q. Duong, D. B. Costa, M. Elkashlan, and V. N. Q. Bao, “Cognitive
 ∞  m3 m4 m4 −1 −m4 t amplify-and-forward relay networks over Nakagami-m fading,” IEEE
γ→∞ 1 m3 xt m4 t e Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 2368–2374, Jun. 2012.
J2 ≈ dt [17] T. Q. Duong, D. B. Costa, T. A. Tsiftsis, C. Zhong, and A. Nallanathan,
Q Γ(m3 + 1) Qγ Γ(m4 ) “Outage and diversity of cognitive relaying systems under spectrum shar-
⎛
⎞
Pmax
ing environments in Nakagami-m fading,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 16,
 m 3 Γ m + m , m 4 Q no. 12, pp. 2075–2078, Dec. 2012.
m3 x 3 4 Pmax
= ⎝ ⎠. (48) [18] C. Zhong, T. Ratnarajah, and K. Wong, “Outage analysis of decode-and-
m4 Qγ Γ(m3 + 1)Γ(m4 ) forward cognitive dual-hop systems with the interference constraint in
Nakagami-m fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 60, no. 6,
pp. 2875–2879, Jul. 2011.
Substituting (47) and (48) into (42), we can obtain the [19] T. Q. Duong, K. J. Kim, H. J. Zepernick, and C. Tellambura, “Oppor-
asymptotic expression for the CDF of γid as tunistic relaying for cognitive network with multiple primary users over
 m 3  m 3 Nakagami-m fading,” in Proc. IEEE ICC, Budapest, Hungary, Jun. 2013,
γ→∞ m3 x 1 1 pp. 5668–5673.
Fγid (x) ≈ [20] S. S. Ikki and M. H. Ahmed, “On the performance of cooperative-
γ Γ(m3 + 1)Γ(m4 ) Pmax
   m 3   diversity networks with the Nth best-relay selection scheme,” IEEE Trans.
m4 Q 1 m4 Q Commun., vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 3062–3069, Nov. 2010.
× γ m4 , + Γ m3 +m4 , . (49) [21] S-I. Chu, “Performance of amplify-and-forward cooperative communica-
Pmax m4 Q Pmax tions with the Nth best-relay selection scheme over Nakagami-m fading
channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 172–174, Feb. 2011.
From (49), we can easily obtain that [22] A. M. Salhab, F. Al-Qahtani, S. A. Zummo, and H. Alnuweiri, “Out-
age analysis of Nth-best DF relay systems in the presence of CCI over
γ→∞
1 − Fγid (x) ≈ 1. (50) Rayleigh fading channels,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 697–
700, Apr. 2013.
[23] X. Zhang, Z. Yan, Y. Gao, and W. Wang, “On the study of outage per-
Substituting (49) and (50) into (41), we can obtain the formance for cognitive relay networks (CRN) with the Nth best-relay
asymptotic expression for the CDF of γrd as (11). selection in Rayleigh-fading channels,” IEEE Wireless Commun. Lett.,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 110–113, Feb. 2013.
[24] I. S. Gradshteyn, I. M. Ryzhik, A. Jeffrey, and D. Zwillinger, Table of
R EFERENCES
Integrals, Series and Products., 7th ed. New York, NY, USA: Academic,
[1] S. Haykin, “Cognitive radio: Brain-empowered wireless communica- 2007.
tions,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 201–220, [25] Y. Zhao, R. Adve, and T. Lim, “Symbol error rate of selection amplify-
Feb. 2005. and-forward relay systems,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 10, no. 11,
[2] A. Goldsmith, S. Jafar, I. Maric, and S. Srinivasa, “Breaking spectrum pp. 757–759, Nov. 2006.
gridlock with cognitive radios: An information theoretic perspective,” [26] R. Tannious and A. Nosratinia, “Spectrally-efficient relay selection with
Proc. IEEE, vol. 97, no. 5, pp. 894–914, May 2009. limited feedback,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1419–
[3] R. Pabst et al., “Relay-based deployment concepts for wireless and mo- 1428, Oct. 2008.
bile broadband radio,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 80–89, [27] J. Si, Z. Li, H. Huang, J. Chen, and R. Gao, “Capacity analysis of cognitive
Sep. 2004. relay networks with the PU’s interference,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 16,
[4] J. Laneman, D. Tse, and G. Wornell, “Cooperative diversity in wireless no. 12, pp. 2020–2023, Dec. 2012.
networks: Efficient protocols and outage behavior,” IEEE Trans. Inf. [28] Meijer G-Function, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://functions.wolfram.
Theory, vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 3062–3080, Nov. 2004. com/PDF/MeijerG.pdf
[5] D. S. Michalopoulos and G. K. Karagiannidis, “Performance analy- [29] K. Tourki, K. A. Qaraqe, and M. M. Abdallah, “Outage analysis of
sis of single relay selection in Rayleigh fading,” IEEE Trans. Wireless spectrum sharing cognitive DF relay networks using outdated CSI,” IEEE
Commun., vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 3718–3724, Oct. 2008. Commun. Lett., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 2272–2275, Dec. 2013.
ZHANG et al.: PERFORMANCE OF COGNITIVE RELAY NETWORKS OVER NAKAGAMI-m FADING CHANNELS
Xing Zhang (M’10–SM’14) received the Ph.D. de-
gree from Beijing University of Posts and Telecom-
munications (BUPT), Beijing, China, in 2007. Since
July 2007, he has been with the School of Infor-
mation and Communications Engineering, BUPT,
where he is currently an Associate Professor. He is
the author/coauthor of two technical books and more
than 50 papers in top journals and international con-
ferences and filed more than 30 patents (12 granted).
His research interests are mainly in wireless com-
munications and networks, green communications
and energy-efficient design, cognitive radio and cooperative communications,
traffic modeling, and network optimization.
Prof. Zhang has served on the editorial boards of several international jour-
nals, including KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems and the
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, and as a TPC Cochair/
TPC member for a number of major international conferences, including Mobi-
Quitous 2012, IEEE ICC/GLOBECOM/WCNC, CROWNCOM, Chinacom,
etc. He received the Best Paper Award in the 9th International Conference
on Communications and Networking in China (Chinacom 2014) and the 17th
International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications
(WPMC 2014).
Yan Zhang (SM’10) received the Ph.D. degree from
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Since
August 2006, he has been with Simula Research
Laboratory, Fornebu, Norway, where he is currently
the Head of the Department of Networks. His recent
research interests include wireless networks,
machine-to-machine communications, and smart
grid communications. He is a Regional Editor or an
Associate Editor on the editorial board and a Guest
Editor of a number of international journals.
877
Zhi Yan received the B.Sc. degree in mechani-
cal engineering and automation and the Ph.D. de-
gree in communication and information system from
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunica-
tions (BUPT), Beijing, China, in 2007 and 2012,
respectively. From August 2012 to March 2014, he
was a Researcher with the Network Technology Re-
search Center, China Unicom Research Institute. He
is currently an Assistant Professor with the School
of Electrical and Information Engineering, Hunan
University, Changsha, China. His current research
interests are in the cognitive radio, cooperative communication, and cellular
network traffic analysis and modeling.
Jia Xing received the B.S. degree in communica-
tion engineering in 2012 from Beijing University
of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China,
in 2012 where she is currently working toward
the M.S. degree in the Key Laboratory of Univer-
sal Wireless Communications, School of Informa-
tion and Communication Engineering. Her research
interests include cognitive radio and cooperative
communication.
Wenbo Wang received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. de-
grees from Beijing University of Posts and Telecom-
munications (BUPT), Beijing, China, in 1986, 1989,
and 1992, respectively. He is currently a Professor
with and the Executive Vice Dean of the Graduate
School, BUPT. He is also the Deputy Director of the
Key Laboratory of Universal Wireless Communica-
tion, Ministry of Education. He has published more
than 200 journal and international conference papers
and 6 books. His current research interests include
radio transmission technology, wireless network the-
ory, and software radio technology.