Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of scheduling algorithms for radio resource allocation in future communication networks

ABSTRACT:

Background

Wireless links are fast becoming the key communication mode. However, as compared to the wired link, their characteristics make the traffic prone to time- and location-dependent signal attenuation, noise, fading, and interference that result in time varying channel capacities and link error rate. Scheduling algorithms play an important role in wireless links to guarantee quality of service (QoS) parameters such as throughput, delay, jitter, fairness and packet loss rate. The scheduler has vital importance in current as well as future cellular communications since it assigns resource block (RB) to different users for transmission. Scheduling algorithm makes a decision based on the information of link state, number of sessions, reserved rates and status of the session queues. The information required by a scheduler implemented in the base station can easily be collected from the downlink transmission.

Methods

This paper reflects on the importance of schedulers for future wireless communications taking LTE-A networks as a case study. It compares the performance of four well-known scheduling algorithms including round robin (RR), best channel quality indicator (BCQI), proportional fair (PF), and fractional frequency reuse (FFR). The performance of these four algorithms is evaluated in terms of throughput, fairness index, spectral efficiency and overall effectiveness. System level simulations have been performed using a MATLAB based LTE-A Vienna downlink simulator.

Results

The results show that the FFR scheduler is the best performer among the four tested algorithms. It also exhibits flexibility and adaptability for radio resource assignment.

SUBMITTER: Ashfaq K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8157178 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Finding the genetic causes of quantitative traits is a complex and difficult task. Classical methods for mapping quantitative trail loci (QTL) in miceuse an F2 cross between two strains with substantially different phenotype and an interval mapping method to compute confidence intervals at each position in the genome. This process requires significant resources for breeding and genotyping, and the data generated are usually only applicable to one phenotype of interest. Recently, we reported the application of a haplotype association mapping method which utilizes dense genotyping data across a diverse panel of inbred mouse strains and a marker association algorithm that is independent of any specific phenotype. As the availability of genotyping data grows in size and density, analysis of these haplotype association mapping methods should be of increasing value to the statistical genetics community. RESULTS: We describe a detailed comparative analysis of variations on our marker association method. In particular, we describe the use of inferred haplotypes from adjacent SNPs, parametric and nonparametric statistics, and control of multiple testing error. These results show that nonparametric methods are slightly better in the test cases we study, although the choice of test statistic may often be dependent on the specific phenotype and haplotype structure being studied. The use of multi-SNP windows to infer local haplotype structure is critical to the use of a diverse panel of inbred strains for QTL mapping. Finally, because the marginal effect of any single gene in a complex disease is often relatively small, these methods require the use of sensitive methods for controlling family-wise error. We also report our initial application of this method to phenotypes cataloged in the Mouse Phenome Database. CONCLUSION: The use of inbred strains of mice for QTL mapping has many advantages over traditional methods. However, there are also limitations in comparison to the traditional linkage analysis from F2 and RI lines. Application of these methods requires careful consideration of algorithmic choices based on both theoretical and practical factors. Our findings suggest general guidelines, though a complete evaluation of these methods can only be performed as more genetic data in complex diseases becomes available.