Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

User QoE Influenced Spectrum Trade, Resource Allocation, and Network Selection

  • Published:
International Journal of Wireless Information Networks Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In future wireless networks, we envision more dynamic telecommunication paradigm, where the dynamics may be translated into dynamic service offerings and user profiles etc. We further expect that the wireless communication market will be influenced when the user-centric network selection vision is realized. By the user-centric network selection vision, we mean that users will be free to select any available network operator or service provider on short term contractual basis. This dictates that operators will compete for their share of a common user pool on much smaller time quanta when compared with the current long term user contacts with the operators. One intuitive strategy of operators will be to incentivize users by offering different QoS and service price offers. As the operators’ offers are influenced by their incurring costs. This necessitates to study the market behavior at different levels and investigate the operator and user behavior at these level. In this paper, we categorize and position the communication players and model the interaction between players at different levels. We introduce the learning aspects in the interaction and investigate the equilibrium strategies of involved stake-holders i.e., users and operators. We also model the utility functions of all the involved stake-holders. We also examine the risk-sensitive utility functions in order to cover both risk-seeking and risk-averse in the user QoEs. We implement the user-centric approach and compare it against our proposed network-centric resource utilization and call blocking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Network infrastructure and air-time, the spectrum resource may include CDMA, GSM, LTE, UMTS, HSDPA etc.

  2. In tradition spectrum management, the spectrum chunks are allocated to a specific radio access technology on long-term basis.

References

  1. T. Geithner, F. Sivrikaya, M. A. Khan, C. Trong, and S. Albayrak, Network level cooperation for resource allocation in future wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Wireless Days Conference ’08, 2008.

  2. C. Trong, F. Sivrikaya, M. A. Khan, A. C. Toker, and S.Albayrak, Cooperative game theoretic approach to integrated bandwidth sharing and allocation. In: Proceedings of the GameNets’09, pp. 1–9, 2009.

  3. M. A. Khan, F. Sivrikaya, S. Albayrak, and K. Q. Mengal, Auction based interface selection in heterogeneous wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IFIP conference on Wireless days, WD’09, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2009, pp. 265–270, IEEE Press.

  4. D. Zhao, X. Shen, and J.W. Mark, Radio resource management for cellular cdma systems supporting heterogeneous services. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

  5. P. José and A. Gutiérrez, Packet scheduling and quality of service in HSDPA, Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University, Denmark, 2003.

  6. S. Shin, S. Bahng, I. Koo, and K. Kim, Qos-oriented packet scheduling schemes for multimedia traffics in ofdma systems. In: 4th International Conference on Networking, 2005.

  7. X. Liu, E.K.P. Chong, and N.B. Shroff, A framework for opportunistic scheduling in wireless networks. Computer Networks, Vol. 41, pp.451–474.

  8. H. Wang, L. Ding, P. Wu, Z. Pan, N. Liu, and X. You, Dynamic load balancing and throughput optimization in 3gpp lte networks. In: IWCMC, 2010.

  9. X. Wang and H. Schulzrinne, An integrated resource negotiation, pricing, and qos adaptation framework for multimedia applications. In: IEEE JSAC, pp. 2514–2529, 2000.

  10. V. Gazis, N. Hossos, N. Alonistioti, and L. Merakos, On the complexity of always best connected in 4g mobile networks. In: Vehicular Technology Conference, Vol. 4, Oct 2003.

  11. X. Gelabert, J. Pérez-Romero, O. Sallent, R. Agusti, and F. Casadevall, Radio resource management in heterogeneous networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Working erogeneous Networks, 2005.

  12. K. Murray and D. Pesch, Policy based access management and handover control in heterogeneous wireless networks. In: 60th Vehicular Technology Conference, 2004.

  13. L. Giupponi, R. Agusti, J. Perez-Romero, and O. Sallent, A novel joint radio resource management approach with reinforcement learning mechanisms. In: 24th IEEE Ineternation Conference on Performance, Computing, and Communications, 2005.

  14. S.K. Das, H. Lin, and M. Chatterjee, An econometric model for resource management in competitive wireless data networks. IEEE Network, Vol. 18, No. 6 pp. 20–26, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. D. Niyato and E. Hossain, Bandwidth allocation in 4g heterogeneous wireless access networks: A noncooperative game theoretical approach. In: Proceedings of IEEE Global Telecom. Conf. GLOBECOM ’06, pp. 1–5, 2006.

  16. N. Halder and J. B. Song, Game theoretical analysis of radio resource management in wireless networks: A non-cooperative game approach of power control. IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp. 184–192, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Beckman and G. Smith, Shared networks: making wireless communication affordable. Wireless Communications, IEEE [see also IEEE Personal Communications], Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 78–85, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. J. Hultell, K. Johansson, and J. Markendahl, Business models and resource management for shared wireless networks. In: Vehicular Technology Conference, 2004. VTC2004-Fall. 2004 IEEE 60th, Vol. 5, pp. 3393–3397, 2004.

  19. DARPA Next Generation Communication Program. http://www.sharedspectrum.com/resources/darpa-next-generation-communications-program/.

  20. M. M. Buddhikot, P. Kolodzy, S. Miller, K. Ryan, and J. Evans, Dimsumnet: New directions in wireless networking using coordinated dynamic spectrum access. In: IEEE WoWMoM05, pp. 78–85, 2005.

  21. V. Rodriguez, K. Moessner, and R. Tafazolli, Market-driven dynamic spectrum allocation: Optimal end-user pricing and admission control for cdma. In: Proceedings of IST Mobile and Wireless Communication Summit, 2005.

  22. V. Rodriguez, K. Moessner, and R. Tafazolli, Auction driven dynamic spectrum allocation: optimal bidding, pricing and service priorities for multi-rate, multi-class cdma. In:The proceedings of 16th Internation Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), pp. 1850–1854, 2005.

  23. K. Ryan, E. Aravantinos, and M. M. Buddhikot, A new pricing model for next generation spectrum access. In: Proceedings of the first international workshop on Technology and policy for accessing spectrum, TAPAS ’06, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM.

  24. A.P. Subramanian, M. Al-Ayyoub, H. Gupta, S.R. Das, and M.M. Buddhikot, Near-optimal dynamic spectrum allocation in cellular networks. In: 3rd IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, DySPAN, pp. 1–11, 2008.

  25. L. Yang, L. Cao, and H. Zheng, Physical interference driven dynamic spectrum management. In: Proc. of IEEE DySPAN, 2008.

  26. L. Xu, R. Toenjes, T. Paila, W. Hansmann, M. Frank, and M. Albrecht, Drive-ing to the internet: Dynamic radio for ip services in vehicular environments. In: The Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Local Computer Networks, 2000.

  27. http://smartradioview.blogspot.com/2007/07/overdrive-projecthomepage.htm. Accessed on Feb 24, 2011.

  28. C. Camarn and D. De Miguel, Mobile virtual network operator (mvno) basics, 2008.

  29. P. M. Parker, The 2010 Report on Virtual Network Operators (MVNO): World Market Segmentation by City. Icon Group International, 329 pp, July 6, 2009.

  30. M. A. Khan and U. Toseef, User utility function as quality of experience (qoe). In: Proceedings of the ICN’11, pp. 99–104, 2011.

  31. R. W. Rosenthal, A class of games possessing pure-strategy nash equilibria. International Journal of Game Theory, doi:10.1007/BF01737559, Vol. 2, pp. 65–67, 1973.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. D. Monderer and L. S. Shapley, Potential games, Games and Economic Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 124–143, 1996.

  33. H. P. Young, Learning by trial and error, Games and Economic Behavior, Vol. 65, pp. 626–643, 2009.

  34. H. Tembine, Distributed learning in dynamic robust games: dynamics, algorithms and network applications. Lecture notes, 2010.

  35. N. Nisan, T. Roughgarden, E. Tardos, and V. V. Vazirani, editors, Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. T. Suyama and M. Yokoo, Strategy/false-name proof protocols for combinatorial multi-attribute procurement auction. In: AAMAS ’04: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 160–167, 2004.

  37. Z. Wu and Q. Yin, A heuristic for bandwidth allocation and management to maximize user satisfaction degree on multiple mpls paths. In: Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, 2006. CCNC 2006. 3rd IEEE, Vol. 1, pp. 35–39, 2006.

  38. H. Chan, P. Fan, and Z. Cao, A utility-based network selection scheme for multiple services in heterogeneous networks. In: Wireless Networks, Communications and Mobile Computing, 2005 International Conference on, Vol. 2, pp. 1175–1180, 2005.

  39. A. C. Toker, F. Cleary, M. Fiedler, L. Ridel, and B. Yavuz, Perimeter: Privacy-preserving contract-less, user centric, seamless roaming for always best connected future internet. In: 22th World Wireless Research Forum, 2009.

  40. H. J. Kim, D. H. Lee, J. M. Lee, K. H. Lee, W. Lyu, and S. G. Choi, The qoe evaluation method through the qos-qoe correlation model. In: Networked Computing and Advanced Information Management, 2008. NCM ’08. Fourth International Conference on, Vol. 2, pp. 719–725, 2008.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DAI-Labor/Technische Universität Berlin, Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, 10585, Berlin, Germany

    Manzoor Ahmed Khan, Fikret Sivrikaya, Sahin Albayrak & Barbara Ulrike Konz

  2. Telecommunications Department SUPELEC, Paris, France

    Hamidou Tembine

Authors
  1. Manzoor Ahmed Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamidou Tembine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fikret Sivrikaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sahin Albayrak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Barbara Ulrike Konz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manzoor Ahmed Khan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Khan, M.A., Tembine, H., Sivrikaya, F. et al. User QoE Influenced Spectrum Trade, Resource Allocation, and Network Selection. Int J Wireless Inf Networks 18, 193–209 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10776-011-0164-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10776-011-0164-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation