The 17th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’06)

THROUGHPUT OF WLAN WITH TDMA AND SUPERIMPOSED TRANSMISSION

WITH RESOURCE AND TRAFFIC CONSTRAINTS
Thomas Deckert and Gerhard Fettweis
Vodafone Chair Mobile Communications Systems
Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden
Germany
{deckert,fettweis}@ifn.et.tu-dresden.de

A BSTRACT by the German research project WIGWAM studying a 1 Gbit/s

For a specific high-throughput wireless local area network sys-
tem based on OFDM we study the sum rate of multiple access
with time multiplexing or superimposed transmission (TDMA,
SUP). In allocating resources we consider a minimum gran-
ularity, i. e., size of the smallest unit that a user can be al-
lotted. We further assume packet switched traffic with most
traffic carried by only a few large packets and relatively little
data carried by a large number of small packets. We show and
quantify that given the granularity and traffic constraints the
sum rate may be drastically reduced compared to the uncon-
strained case. This happens whenever mapping (small) packets
to resource units (OFDM symbols) incurs matching losses. As
these losses are highest in TDMA, it suffers most. Moreover,
we show that allowing more users to be active helps to maintain
a high throughput in SUP only.
Our analysis and results apply to scenarios with the de-
scribed features where the transmitters know the average chan-
nel statistics, the receiver has perfect channel state information
and the total received power is the same in all schemes.
I. I NTRODUCTION
We consider the multiple access scenario, i. e., multiple users
want to transmit messages to one common receiver. Many re-
searchers have considered the capacity of the multiple-access
scenario (see [1, 5] and references therein). In this work we fo-
cus on the sum rate for TDMA and for superimposing several
user transmissions (SUP) if constraints on the rates (in aver-
age and maximum sense) apply. Superimposing transmissions
is similar to CDMA in that each user uses all the band all the
time but without explicitly requiring the spreading operation.
An analogous investigation for the third basic multiple access
technique, (O)FDMA, will be presented elsewhere. The rate
comparison between OFDMA and TDMA is similar to that of
SUP and TDMA although different effects are at work.
The rate constraints are motivated by the packet size distri-
bution of the traffic typically carried by the system. For the
multi-antenna case with channel knowledge at the transmitters
this is the topic of a smart queuing theoretic approach in [2].
In this paper we consider the single-antenna case where the
transmitters know the channel statistics only. Moreover, we
deal with the minimum resource granularity inherent in each
system, i. e., the minimum amount of data that can be trans-
mitted in one transmit opportunity. We consider a particular
wireless local area network (WLAN) system based on orthog-
onal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) being developed
air interface [4].
In the next section we summarize the features of WLAN traf-
fic and derive two rate constraints that will be important to our
analysis. We state in general terms the sum rate maximization
to be solved for each multi-access scheme. In Section III. we
describe the physical layer. Then we carry out the sum rate
maximization for TDMA in Section IV. and for SUP in Sec-
tion V.. We summarize in Section VI. and argue that SUP out-
performs TDMA in our application.
II. T RAFFIC M ODEL AND P ROBLEM S TATEMENT
We consider a WLAN where data flows in packets. For
such systems it is known from a multitude of measurements,
e. g., [7–9], that the traffic is carried by packets of very dis-
parate size. Roughly, the packet size distribution can be re-
garded as bi- or tri-modal, i. e., there are only two to three
typical packet sizes. Also, while the bulk data is carried by
large packets they are few in number compared to much smaller
packets which are due to control signaling (e. g., acknowledg-
ments) and low-rate user traffic.
We base this work on a slightly simplified packet size distri-
bution with two traffic classes – one to model a stream of large
packets of high rate transmissions that we call the H class, the
other corresponding to low rate traffic in small packets – the
L class. Now we can characterize the traffic by two typical
packet sizes, SH and SL , and corresponding typical rates, RH
and RL . If ηH , ηL give the fraction of packets in the H and L
class then RH = ηH SH /(T B) and RL = ηL SL /(T B). Here,
T is the total observation time and B is the available band-
width. (In a slight misuse of terms by “rate” we mean “spectral
efficiency”, i. e., data rates averaged over T and B measured in
bits per complex dimension.) Thus, for the typical ratio of L
rate to H rate, ρ, we obtain
RL ηL SL
ρ= = . (1)
RH ηH SH
Inspired by the above cited measurements we consider L pack-
ets of size 50 bytes and H packets of size 1500 bytes and ρ to
be in the 0.1 . . . 0.3 range typically.
We aim to analyze what effect the parameters ρ, SL and SH
have on the overall throughput of the system. In particular,
we are interested in how to best exploit the rates offered by
the physical layer while mapping the traffic to it. The result
strongly depends on the physical layer itself and on the multi-
ple access scheme. Thus, we consider a specific OFDM-based

1-4244-0330-8/06/$20.00
2006
c IEEE
The 17th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’06)
physical layer as described in [4] that is designed to deliver
high throughput by providing high spectral efficiency.
Currently, in OFDM-based WLANs packets are time-
multiplexed though typically via random access methods. For
the system laid out in [4] a user with favorable channel condi-
tions may be able to transmit several hundred bytes in a single
OFDM symbol. But as stated before, lots of packets are con-
siderably smaller than that. With stringent latency constraints
a user cannot wait for additional packets in order to aggregate
them. This is especially a concern in an uplink scenario. Then,
the user is not able to exploit the rate offered by the physical
layer. This motivates the introduction of a maximum requested
rate for a class. We define it to be the rate (more exactly: spec-
tral efficiency) that is necessary to transmit a single packet in
exactly one OFDM symbol, i. e.,
SL SH
r̂L = , r̂H = , (2)
M M
where M denotes the number of sub-carriers and r̂L , r̂H
are measured in bits per sub-carrier channel use (abbreviated
“bits/dim”).
Summarizing, our objective is to determine what multiple
access scheme, TDMA or SUP, has higher throughput in our
system scenario. We define as the throughput the maximum
sum rate, RS , given that the total system energy is constrained
and rate restrictions apply. Thus, for each scheme we need to
solve the optimization problem
U

quence detection on the received signal
RS = max Ru (Θ), (3)
Θ U
u=1
where Ru denotes the rate of user u averaged over T and B
and the optimization is over the vector parameter Θ. Varying
Θ is subject to the following constraints:
(i) Constant system energy. Equivalently, the signal-to-noise
ratios (SNRs) of the users averaged over T and B sum up
to a constant γS . We call γS the system SNR.
(ii) Constant typical rate ratio. We aim to guarantee a fixed
ratio of rates for the L and H traffic classes at all times. We
map these classes to at least one “logical” user per class.
For the sum rates of L users, RL , and H users, RH , we
require RL (Θ) = ρRH (Θ).
(iii) Maximum requested rates. Corresponding to their typical
packet sizes the L and H users can efficiently exploit an
offered rate only if it is at most equal to the maximum re-
quested rate, r̂L and r̂H , respectively. Allocating a larger
rate to a user would not increase the effective throughput
as it just wastes resources (time, bandwidth or energy).
In Sections IV., V. we recast the problem with respect to
TDMA and SUP.
III. S YSTEM M ODEL
We now introduce the setup of our multiple access system and
the channel model.
Both multiple access schemes are considered ideal, i. e.,
there are no guard intervals or guard sub-carriers necessary,
and we assume symbol and frequency synchronous reception
of all users. U users share an available bandwidth B and a
transmission (frame) duration T . In TDMA the entire band-
width is used exclusively by user u ∈ U = {1, . . . , U } for a
duration µu T , 0 ≤ µu ≤ 1, u µu = 1. In SUP each user is
allocated all of the bandwidth during all of the time where we
do not require explicitly the usual spreading operation. As we
consider discrete time and frequency, T corresponds to N tem-
poral samples and B to M sub-carriers. The system performs
power control such that the total energy received during time T
is constrained. This makes the schemes use the same amount
of resources (duration, bandwidth, energy).
The transmitters send sequences of symbols from a zero-
mean complex Gaussian alphabet corresponding to code
words. All sequences of a transmitter are equally likely. In line
with [4] a sequence is mapped to all of the user’s sub-carriers
rather than to a single sub-carrier. The transmitters do not know
the instantaneous channel state. Hence they fix their rate and
power for the entire transmission.
We assume that all users are subject to stringent delay re-
quirements and thus encounter slow fading; a scenario typi-
cal of indoor applications like WLANs. Hence, we model the
channel as being constant during the transmission of one code
word (block fading). The channel may be frequency selective
but we assume frequency-flat fading on each sub-carrier.
The receiver performs optimum maximum likelihood se-


y(n, m) = hu (m)xu (n, m) + v(n, m), (4)
u=1
where xu (n, m) is the symbol sent by user u at time n and
sub-carrier m, hu (m) is the corresponding channel coefficient
with E[|hu (m)|2 ] = 1 and v(n, m) denotes the complex white
Gaussian receiver noise. In TDMA for every (n, m) only one
of the xu (n, m) is nonzero, and single-user detection suffices.
In SUP joint maximum likelihood decoding (JD) of the {xu }
is optimal but often too complex. Thus we look at successive
decoding with interference cancellation (SIC). The user signals
are decoded one-by-one with subsequent decoding steps oper-
ating on the received signal with the interference by all preced-
ing users canceled out.
IV. TDMA R EFERENCE C ASE
In this section we adapt (i)-(iii) to obtain the sum rate perfor-
mance of TDMA. We will use this as reference for our discus-
sion of SUP in Section V..
In our case it suffices to consider multiplexing U = 2 users
only. This is because
• we have two traffic classes that determine the requested
rates (as rate ratio ρ and maximum values r̂L , r̂H ) and
• the users know the average channel statistics only and are
power controlled such that multi-user diversity cannot be
exploited as in [6].
The 17th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’06)

Thus, the active users of the same traffic class are indistinguish- 6
TDMA

Effective throughput RS / bits/dim

able and are collectively considered as a “logical” user repre- SUP
senting that class. We denote the user corresponding to the L 5
class by index L and the H class user by index H. U =2
4 U =3
To maximize the sum rate we can adapt the user powers and r̂L → ∞
the duration for which the users are active. With the user SNRs r̂L = 0.67
3
γL and γH as well as µH = 1 − µL we take the optimization
parameter to be Θ = [γL , γH , µL ]. The energy constraint (i) 2
becomes
µL γL + (1 − µL )γH ≤ γS . (5) 1

The average user rates, needed in (3) and (ii), depend on 0

0 5 10 15 20 25
the SNR and relative duration of the user, i. e., RL (Θ) = System SNR γS
RL (γL , µL ), RH (Θ) = RH (γH , 1 − µL ), as
Figure 1: Throughput for varying γS and 1 or 2 L users.
R(γ, µ) = µf (γ, p). (6) RL /RH = 0.2.

Here, f (γ, p) is the maximum rate a single user can achieve
with SNR γ during its active time µT . Furthermore, p is the
outage probability, i. e., with probability p the user faces a
channel that does not support the fixed rate f (γ, p) of the user.
More formally, we may write
f (γ, p) = arg max {Pr (C(γκ) < r) < p} , (7)
r maximization of RS depends on µL only and reduces to
where the instantaneous capacity of a single link conditioned
on a particular channel state is [3]
M γS − µL γL
1

C(γκ) = log (1 + κ(m)γ) . (8)
M m=1 2
In (7), (8) κ denotes the M -dimensional channel power vector
given by κ(m) = |h(m)|2 .
Finally, we consider condition (iii). An active user gets to
transmit at least one OFDM symbol. Without packet aggrega-
tion the rate r̂ that is necessary to transmit a single packet in
just one OFDM symbol is the maximum rate the user can ex-
ploit. We call r̂ the maximum requested rate. If the user was
granted a higher rate it still could not transmit more data (in
fact, there may be no more data available). Thus, (iii) can be
rewritten as
f (γL , p) ≤ r̂L , (9)
f (γH , p) ≤ r̂H .
Note that by assuming the medium access layer not to do packet
aggregation we consider the worst case. However, this is rel-
evant in applications like network-gaming that have stringent
delay constraints such that packet aggregation might be im-
possible after all. Furthermore, by invoking this assumption
we can clearly separate the physical layer-related effects from
mechanisms of the higher layers.
Now, given system SNR γS , rate ratio ρ and maximum re-
quested rates r̂L and r̂H , we can obtain RS based on (3) con-
strained by (5), (ii) and (9). Consider first that (9) is inactive.
Then the maximum sum rate is that of a single user with SNR
γS , RS = f (γS , p), which is achieved by setting equal the user
SNRs, γL = γH = γS . This holds regardless of ρ and is a
consequence of f (γ, p) being concave in γ.
For too large γS constraint (9) becomes active. As r̂L < r̂H
the L user will be restricted first. In this case the power granted
to the L user can be reduced such that its instantaneous rate
equals r̂L , and thus γL < γS is fixed with f (γL , p) = r̂L .
As long as the H user is not restricted itself it may use more
power such that γH = (γS − µL γL )/(1 − µL ) > γS . Now the
  
1
RS = max 1+ µL r̂L (10)
µL ρ
 
s.t. µL r̂L = ρ (1 − µL ) f ,p .
1 − µL
Note that RS according to (10) is based on unequal user SNRs
which is suboptimal for maximizing RS given system SNR γS .
Therefore RS < f (γS , p) in this case. According to (10) µL
should be chosen as large as possible. The rate requirements
are met by having the L user transmit most of the time and at
low SNR while giving the H user most of the system energy to
transmit only now and then.
Eventually, at some γS∗ the H user will become re-
stricted as well, i. e., with µ∗L solving (10) we have
f ((γS∗ − µ∗L γL )/(1 − µ∗L ), p) = r̂H . At γS∗ the sum rate has
−1 −1
achieved its maximum, RS∗ = (1 + ρ)/(r̂H + ρr̂L ). Larger
SNRs will not increase the effective throughput as no additional
packets can be mapped to the physical layer resources.
Example: TDMA throughput for Gbit WLAN system.
For the system in [4] Fig. 1 shows the maximum sum rate of
TDMA for varying system SNR γS at fixed rate ratio ρ = 0.2.
With M = 596 sub-carriers as in [4] and packet sizes of
50 and 1500 bytes we have r̂L = 0.67 bits/dim and r̂H =
20.13 bits/dim, respectively. The channel is modeled as block
fading and frequency selective with an IEEE 802.11n channel
D power delay profile and 100 MHz bandwidth. The outage
probability is p = 0.01.
In Fig. 1 the dotted line, denoted r̂L → ∞, shows the uncon-
strained single user reference curve. TDMA follows this curve
as long as the maximum rate constraint (9) is inactive, i. e., as
long as RS (γS ) < r̂L . For larger SNR values the rate loss due
to mismatching small packets to OFDM symbols becomes dra-
matically apparent. The maximum rate achieved if (9) is active
The 17th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’06)

Effective throughput RS / bits/dim 5 5

r̂L → ∞
4 4
r̂L → ∞

RL / bits/dim
3 3
SUP
TDMA
2 2
TDMA RL /RH
SUP
1 U =2 1 r̂L = 0.67
U =3
U =4
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Rate ratio ρ = RL /RH RH / bits/dim
Figure 2: Throughput for varying rate ratio RL /RH and one to Figure 3: Two user rate regions for SUP and TDMA uncon-
three L users. γS = 20 dB and r̂L = 0.67. strained by (iii). γS = 20 dB.

instantaneous rate region is [2]

in both users is RS∗ = 3.45 bits/dim which is attained for SNRs
beyond practical relevance. We will return to the remaining
curves in later sections.
Fig. 2 shows RS for fixed γS = 20 dB and varying ρ. As
is intuitively clear the rate loss becomes more severe the larger
the rate ratio, i. e., the relative number of small packets, gets.
The huge gap between the single-user reference and TDMA
motivates considering another multiple access scheme.
V. S UPERIMPOSED T RANSMISSION
We now turn to SUP which makes possible simultaneous trans-
mission of several users. This, in turn, reduces the number
of bits a user can transmit per OFDM symbol compared to
TDMA. Therefore the maximum rate constraints (iii) become
less stringent and we should see an increased sum rate com-
pared to TDMA. Again, we begin by adapting the constraints
to SUP before analyzing the sum rate.
As in SUP a user is allocated entire OFDM symbols the max-
imum rate constraint (iii) appears as stringent as in TDMA.
However, as each user is transmitting all the time the energy
constraint becomes
U

tem does not perform time multiplexing between rate vectors.
γu ≤ γS
u=1
which implies that in all non-trivial cases the SNR of user u
is less than γS . Consequently, its instantaneous rate is smaller
than that of a single user unconstrained by (iii) which in turn
relaxes (iii). Given a system energy constraint adding more
users reduces the power of a single user and further eases (iii).
Thus, in contrast to TDMA, considering more than two users
may be beneficial.
To obtain the user rates we have to account for mutual depen-
dencies of the users due to interference. Thus we collectively
determine the rates of all users by obtaining the rate region first.
As argued in Section III. we use SIC at the receiver. Users are
decoded in order π = [π(1), . . . , π(U )] which is a permuta-
tion of [1, . . . , U ]. Given decoding order and channel states the
 

U 
Rπ (γ, {κu }) = R ∈ R+  ∀u ∈ U : Rπ(u) ≤
   
π(U ) π(U )



C γj κj , 1 − C  γj κj , 1 . (12)
j=π(u) j=π(u+1)
and the outage rate region with outage probability p is
  
Cπ (γ) = R ∈ RU 
+ Pr (R ∈ Rπ (γ,{κu })) ≥ 1−p . (13)
User π(1) is decoded in the presence of all other users. Con-
sequently, it should transmit at a rate sufficiently lower than
its single-user capacity to make up for the additional interfer-
ence. User π(U ) is decoded lastly. If all previous decoding
stages are successful it will experience single-user conditions
and may transmit at rates up to its single-user capacity. Con-
sequently, we choose π such that lower rate users are decoded
before higher rate users. In our study we are concerned with
RL < RH (ρ < 1) and so the H user is decoded last.
Before we continue we determine how many users should
be considered. To that end Fig. 3 shows the two user rate
region (13) for γS = 20 dB and the parameters used in Sec-
tion IV.. Observe that the rate region is concave. Our sys-
(11) Therefore we do not apply the convex hull operation to this rate
region to achieve the convex capacity region. This assumption
is rooted in our constraint (ii) which asks for a constant rate
ratio at all times. While this is suboptimal with respect to the
maximum sum rate the loss is obviously limited (see dashed
curve).
The reason for the concavity of the rate region is the fol-
lowing: As the transmitters do not know the channels exactly
outage events occur, i. e., decoding may fail in some SIC stage
i. This will leave interference due to user π(i) in the system
which affects decoding in all following stages. In particular,
decoding in some stage j > i may fail as well and more-
over, it may fail only because stage i failed. Thus, in contrast
to systems with perfect channel information at the transmit-
ters ([10]), SIC does not achieve capacity, and its rate region
without time multiplexing between rate vectors is concave.
The 17th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’06)
Note from Fig. 3 that RS is largest if either RL or RH are
zero. This implies that to maximize RS as few users as possi-
ble should transmit with their largest possible rate. Due to con-
straint (ii) there must be at least two. Due to (iii) it may make
sense to allow more users to transmit. We will see that for our
practical system design of interest the L user class reaches its
maximum rates (iii) sooner than the H user class and will limit
the system performance. If that happens we may add more L
users. Thus, we discuss the case of U users among which ex-
actly one is an H user and U − 1 users are L users. If U > 2
then at least U − 2 L users transmit with their maximum rate of
r̂L and one L user may transmit at a rate smaller than r̂L . This
L user will be decoded first and before the remaining L users
whose exact decoding order is irrelevant.
Now we can rewrite the sum rate maximization problem as

U
RS (ρ) = max max Ru (Θ), (14)
Θ R∈Cπ (γ)
u=1
the rate ratio constraint (ii) as
U

gets large. On the other hand, with otherwise unchanged pa-
Ru (Θ) = ρR1 (Θ) (15)
u=2
and the maximum rate constraint (iii) as
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
r̂H u = 1
Ru (Θ) ≤ , (16)
r̂L u ∈ {2, . . . , U }
where user 1 is considered the H user and the remaining users
the L users. Note that here Ru is a constant rate rather than a
quantity averaged over time as in TDMA. Thus, the maximum
rate user u needs to transmit a single packet in one OFDM sym-
bol, r̂, must be compared to Ru directly and we have (16). The
optimization parameter Θ = [γ, π] combines the vector of user
SNRs γ = [γ1 , . . . , γU ] and the decoding order.
With (11), (15) and (16) we can obtain RS from (14) for
every choice of U , γS and ρ. For the system parameters as in
Section IV. Figs. 1, 2 show RS versus γS and ρ, respectively,
for up to U = 4 users.
As expected the sum rate achieves larger values compared to
TDMA even for U = 2. Apart from the rate loss due to multi-
access interference SUP follows the single user reference over
a larger range of γS in Fig. 1, and over a larger range of ρ in
Fig. 2. This is a consequence of the different maximum rate
constraints (iii) in TDMA (9) and SUP (16).
Sticking with U = 2, at some γS∗ the maximum rate con-
straint (16) becomes active. In our case of r̂L  r̂H the L user
is restricted only, i. e., RL = r̂L . However, due to (15) the rate
of the H user is restricted also. We have RH = r̂L /ρ and thus
 
1
RS = r̂L 1 + (17)
ρ [9] Diane Tang and Mary Baker. Analysis of a local-area wireless network.
regardless of the system SNR and bandwidth allocation, i. e.,
spending γS > γS∗ only wastes energy. This argument can be
extended to U > 2 by replacing r̂L with (U − 1)r̂L in (17). The
relevant curves for our example are given in Figs. 1, 2.
While with U = 2 it is impossible to improve RS by increas-
ing γS , in contrast to TDMA adding more users can be benefi-
cial. We add more L users as that user class limits performance.
Then, as evident from Fig. 1 the throughput increases further
with increasing γS > γS∗ . Moreover, Fig. 2 demonstrates that
adding more users helps maintaining a large throughput even
with high rate ratio ρ. However, note that the throughput with
U > 2 users never exceeds that with U − 1, confirming that as
few users as possible should transmit.
VI. C ONCLUSION
We have investigated the achievable sum rate of TDMA and
SUP under system energy and rate constraints. The constraints
on rate ratio and maximum requested rates have been obtained
from an abstraction of measured packet size distributions. We
put a particular emphasis on WLAN systems as in [4]. For
these we found that the need of every such system to transmit
a large number of small packets severely limits the throughput
of conventional time-multiplexing based multiple access if the
number of bits that must be transmitted in one OFDM symbol
rameters, SUP reduces the number of bits that one user must
transmit in one OFDM symbol and the throughput is much in-
creased over TDMA.
This research was supported by the German Ministry of Ed-
ucation and Research within the project Wireless Gigabit with
Advanced Multimedia Support (WIGWAM) under grant 01 BU
370.
R EFERENCES
[1] Ezio Biglieri, John Proakis, and Shlomo Shamai (Shitz). Fading chan-
nels: Information-theoretic and communications aspects. IEEE Trans.
Inform. Theory, 44(6):2619–2692, October 1998.
[2] Holger Boche and Marcin Wiczanowski. Queueing theoretic optimal
scheduling for multiple input multiple output multiple access channel.
In Proc. ISSPIT 2003, pages 576–579. IEEE, 2003.
[3] Giuseppe Caire, Giorgio Taricco, and Ezio Biglieri. Optimum power
control over fading channels. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 45(5):1468–
1489, July 1999.
[4] Gerhard Fettweis and Ralf Irmer. WIGWAM: System concept develop-
ment for 1 Gbit/s air interface. In 14th Wireless World Research Forum
(WWRF 14), San Diego, USA, July 2005.
[5] Andrea Goldsmith. Wireless Communications. Cambridge Univ. Press,
New York, 2005.
[6] R. Knopp and P.A. Humblet. Information capacity and power control in
single-cell multiuser communications. In Proc. Intern. Conf. Commun.,
ICC 1995, volume 1, pages 331–335. IEEE, June 1995.
[7] David Kotz and Kobby Essien. Analysis of a campus-wide wireless net-
work. In Proc. 8th ACM MOBICOM, pages 107–118. ACM Press, 2002.
[8] Chen Na, Jeremy K. Chen, and Theodore S. Rappaport. Hotspot traf-
fic statistics and throughput models for several applications. In Proc.
GLOBECOM 2004, volume 5, pages 3257–3263. IEEE, November 2004.
In Proc. 6th ACM MOBICOM, pages 1–10. ACM Press, 2000.
[10] David N.C. Tse and Stephen V. Hanly. Multiaccess fading channels–
Part I: Polymatroid structure, optimal resource allocation and throughput
capacities. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 44(7):2796–2815, November
1998.