Cognitive MIMO Radio: A Competitive Optimality Design Based on Subspace Projections

Cognitive MIMO Radio: A Competitive Optimality Design Based on Subspace Projections

Authors: Gesualdo Scutari, Daniel P. Palomar, Sergio Barbarossa

Cognitive MIMO Radio: A Competitive Optimality Design Based on Subspace   Projections
Cognitiv e MIMO Radio: A Comp etitiv e Optimalit y Design Based on Subspae Pro jetions Gesualdo Sutari 1 , Daniel P . P alomar 2 , and Sergio Barbarossa 1 E-mail: { sutari, sergio } info om.uniroma1.it, palomarust.hk 1 Dpt. INF OCOM, Univ. of Rome La Sapienza, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Rome, Italy 2 Dpt. of Eletroni and Computer Eng., Hong K ong Univ. of Siene and T e hnology , Hong K ong. Submitted to IEEE Signal Pr o  essing Magazine , Mar h 17, 2008. A epted July 24, 2008. 1 In tro dution Radio regulatory b o dies are reen tly reognizing that rigid sp etrum assignmen t gran ting exlusiv e use to liensed servies is highly ineien t., due to the high v ariabilit y of the tra statistis aross time, spae, and frequeny . Reen t F ederal Comm uniations Commission (F CC) measuremen ts sho w that, in fat, the sp etrum usage is t ypially onen trated o v er ertain p ortions of the sp etrum, while a signian t amoun t of the liensed bands (or idle slots in stati time division m ultiple aess systems with burst y tra) remains un used or underutilized for ninet y p eren t of time [1℄. It is not surprising then that this ineieny is motiv ating a urry of resear h ativities in engineering, eonomis and regulation omm unities in the eort of nding more eien t sp etrum managemen t p oliies. As p oin ted out in man y reen t w orks [2, 3, 4, 5℄, the most appropriate approa h to ta kle the great sp etrum v ariabilit y as a funtion of time and spae alls for dynami aess strategies that adapt to the eletromagneti en vironmen t. Cognitiv e Radio (CR) originated as a p ossible solution to this problem [6℄ obtained b y endo wing the radio no des with ognitiv e apabilities, e.g., the abilit y to sense the eletromagneti en vironmen t, mak e short term preditions, and reat in telligen tly in order to optimize the usage of the a v ailable resoures. Multiple paradigms asso iated with CR ha v e b een prop osed [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ℄, dep ending on the p oliy to b e follo w ed with resp et to the li ense d users, i.e. the users who ha v e aquired the righ t to transmit o v er sp ei p ortions of the sp etrum buying the relativ e liense. The most ommon strategies adopt a hierar hial aess struture, distinguishing b et w een primary users, or legay sp etrum holders, and se  ondary users, who aess the liensed sp etrum dynamially , under the onstrain t of not induing Qualit y of Servie (QoS) degradations in tolerable to the primary users. Within this on text, three basi approa hes ha v e b een onsidered to allo w onurren t omm uniations: sp e trum overlay, underlay and interwe ave . 1 1 There is no strit onsensus on some of the basi terminology in ognitiv e systems [ 4 ℄. Here w e use in terw ea v e as in [5℄ whi h is sometimes referred to as o v erla y omm uniations [4 ℄. 1 In o v erla y systems, as prop osed in [7℄, seondary users allo ate part of their p o w er for seondary transmissions and the remainder to assist (rela y) the primary transmissions. By exploiting sophistiated o ding te hniques su h as dirt y pap er o ding based on the kno wledge of the primary users' message and/or o deb o ok at the ognitiv e transmitter, these systems oer the p ossibilit y of onurren t transmissions without apait y p enalties. Ho w ev er, although in teresting from an information theoreti p ersp etiv e, these te hniques are diult to implemen t as they require nonausal kno wledge of the primary signals at the ognitiv e transmitters. In underla y systems, the seondary users are also allo w ed to share resoures with the primary users, but without an y kno wledge ab out the primary users' signals and under the strit onstrain t that the sp etral densit y of their transmitted signals fall b elo w the noise o or at the primary reeiv ers. This in terferene onstrain t an b e met using spread sp etrum or ultra-wideband omm uniations from the seondary users. Both transmission te hniques do not require the estimation of the eletromagneti en vironmen t from seondary users, but they are mostly appropriate for short distane omm uniations, b eause of the strong onstrain ts imp osed on the maxim um p o w er radiated b y the seondary users. Con v ersely , in terw ea v e omm uniations, initially en visioned in [ 6℄, are based on an opp ortunisti or adaptiv e usage of the sp etrum, as a funtion of its real utilization. Seondary users are allo w ed to adapt their p o w er allo ation as a funtion of time and frequeny , dep ending on what they are able to sense and learn from the en vironmen t, in a nonin trusiv e manner. Rather than imp osing a sev ere onstrain t on their transmit p o w er sp etral densit y , in in terw ea v e systems, the seondary users ha v e to gure out when and wher e to transmit. Dieren tly from underla y systems, this opp ortunisti sp etrum aess requires an opp ortunit y iden tiation phase, through sp etrum sensing, follo w ed b y an opp ortunit y exploitation mo de [4℄. F or a fasinating motiv ation and disussion of the signal pro essing  hallenges faed in in terw ea v e ognitiv e radio systems, w e suggest the in terested reader to refer to [ 2℄. In this pap er w e fo us on opp ortunisti resoure allo ation te hniques in hierar hial ognitiv e net- w orks, as they seem to b e the most suitable for the urren t sp etrum managemen t p oliies and legay wireless systems [4℄. W e are sp eially in terested in devising the most appropriate form of onurren t omm uniations of ognitiv e users omp eting o v er the ph ysial resoures let a v ailable from primary users. Lo oking at opp ortunisti omm uniation paradigm from a broad signal pro essing p ersp etiv e, the se- ondary users are allo w ed to transmit o v er a m ulti-dimensional spae, whose o ordinates represen t time slots, frequeny bins and (p ossibly) angles, and their goal is to nd out the most appropriate transmission strategy , assuming a giv en p o w er budget at ea h no de, exploring all a v ailable degrees of freedom, under the onstrain t of induing a limited in terferene, or no in terferene at all, at the primary users. In general, the optimization of the transmission strategies requires the presene of a en tral no de ha ving full kno wledge of all the  hannels and in terferene struture at ev ery reeiv er. But this p oses a serious implemen tation problem in terms of salabilit y and amoun t of signaling to b e ex hanged among the no des. The required extra signaling ould, in the end, jeopardize the promise for higher eieny . T o o v erome this diult y , w e onen trate on deen tralized strategies, where the ognitiv e users are able 2 to self-enfore the negotiated agreemen ts on the sp etrum usage without the in terv en tion of a en tralized authorit y . The philosoph y underlying this approa h is a  omp etitive optimality riterion, as ev ery user aims for the transmission strategy that unilaterally maximizes his o wn pa y o funtion. The presene of onurren t seondary users omp eting o v er the same resoures adds dynamis to the system, as ev ery seondary user will dynamially reat to the strategies adopted b y the other users. The main question is then to establish whether, and under what onditions, the o v erall system an ev en tually on v erge to an equilibrium from whi h ev ery user is not willing to unilaterally mo v e, as this w ould determine a p erformane loss. This form of equilibrium oinides with the w ell-kno wn onept of Nash Equilibrium (NE) in game theory (see, e.g., [8 , 9℄). In fat, game theory is the natural to ol to devise deen tralized strategies allo wing the seondary users to nd out their b est resp onse to an y giv en  hannel and in terferene senario and to deriv e the onditions for the existene and uniqueness of NE. Within this on text, in this pap er, w e prop ose and analyze a totally deen tralized approa h to design ognitiv e MIMO transeiv ers, satisfying a omp etitiv e optimalit y riterion, based on the a hiev emen t of Nash equilibria. T o tak e full adv an tage of all the opp ortunities oered b y wireless omm uniations, w e assume a fairly general MIMO setup, where the m ultiple  hannels ma y b e frequeny  hannels (as in OFDM systems) [10℄-[12 ℄, time slots (as in TDMA systems) [ 10, 11℄, and/or spatial  hannels (as in transmit/reeiv e b eamforming systems) [13℄. Whenev er a v ailable, m ultiple an tennas at the seondary transmitters ould b e used, for example, to put n ulls in the an tenna radiation pattern of seondary transmitters along the diretions iden tifying the primary reeiv ers, th us enabling the share of frequeny and time resoures with no additional in terferene. Our initial goal is to pro vide onditions for the existene and uniqueness of NE p oin ts in a game where seondary users omp ete against ea h other to maximize their p erformane, under the onstrain t on the maxim um (or n ull) in terferene indued on the primary users. The next step is then to desrib e lo w-omplex totally distributed te hniques able to rea h the equilibrium p oin ts of the prop osed games, with no o ordination among the seondary users. 2 System Mo del: Cognitiv e Radio Net w orks W e onsider a senario omp osed b y heterogeneous wireless systems (primary and seondary users), as illustrated in Figure 1 . The setup ma y inlude p eer-to-p eer links, m ultiple aess, or broadast  hannels. The systems o existing in the net w ork do not ha v e a ommon goal and do not o op erate with ea h other. Moreo v er, no en tralized authorit y is assumed to handle the net w ork aess from seondary users. Th us, the seondary users are allo w ed, in priniple, to omp ete for the same ph ysial resoures, e.g., time, frequeny , and spae. W e are in terested in nding the optimal transmission strategy for the seondary users, using a deen tralized approa h. A fairly general system mo del to desrib e the signals reeiv ed b y the seondary users is the Gaussian ve tor in terferene  hannel: y q = H q q x q + X r 6 = q H r q x r + n q , (1) 3 Figure 1: Hierar hial ognitiv e radio net w ork with primary and seondary users. where x q is the n T q -dimensional blo  k of data transmitted b y soure q , H q q is the n R q × n T q (omplex)  hannel matrix b et w een the q -th transmitter and its in tended reeiv er, H r q is the n R q × n T r ross- hannel matrix b et w een soure r and destination q , y q is the n R q -dimensional v etor reeiv ed b y destination q , and n q is the n R q -dimensional noise plus in terferene v etor. The rst term in the righ t-hand side of ( 1) is the useful signal for link q , the seond and third terms represen t the Multi-User In terferene (MUI) reeiv ed b y seondary user q and aused from the other seondary users and the primary users, resp etiv ely . The v etor n q is assumed to b e zero-mean irularly symmetri omplex Gaussian with arbitrary (nonsingular) o v ariane matrix R n q . F or the sak e of simpliit y and la k of spae, w e onsider here only the ase where the  hannel matries H q q are square nonsingular. W e assume that ea h reeiv er is able to estimate the  hannel from its in tended transmitter and the o v erall MUI o v ariane matrix (alternativ ely , to mak e short term preditions, with negligible error). 2 The reeiv er sends then this information ba k to the transmitter through a lo w bit rate (error-free) feedba k  hannel, to allo w the transmitter to ompute the optimal transmission strategy o v er its o wn link. The mo del in (1) represen ts a fairly general MIMO setup, desribing m ultiuser transmissions o v er m ultiple  hannels, whi h ma y represen t frequeny  hannels (as in OFDM systems) [ 10℄-[12 ℄, time slots (as in TDMA systems) [10 , 11 ℄, or spatial  hannels (as in transmit/reeiv e b eamforming systems) [13℄. Dif- feren tly from traditional stati or en tralized sp etrum assignmen t, the ognitiv e radio paradigm enables seondary users to transmit with o v erlapping sp etrum and/or o v erage with primary users, pro vided that the degradation indued on the primary users' p erformane is n ull or tolerable. Ho w to imp ose in ter- ferene onstrain ts on seondary users is a omplex and op en regulatory issue [2, 4℄. Roughly sp eaking, restritiv e onstrain ts ma y marginalize the p oten tial gains oered b y the dynami resoure assignmen t me hanism, whereas lo ose onstrain ts ma y aet the ompatibilit y with legay systems. Both determinis- ti and probabilisti in terferene onstrain ts ha v e b een suggested in the literature [1, 2, 4 , 15 ℄, namely: the 2 Ho w to obtain b oth  hannel-state information and MUI o v ariane matrix estimation go es b ey ond the sop e of this pap er; the in terested reader ma y refer to, e.g., [ 2, 4℄, where lassial signal pro essing estimation te hniques are prop erly mo died to b e suessfully applied in a ognitiv e radio en vironmen t. 4 maxim um MUI in terferene p o w er lev el p ereiv ed b y an y ativ e primary user (the so-alled interfer en e temp er atur e limit ) [1, 2℄ and the maxim um probabilit y that the MUI in terferene lev el at ea h primary user's reeiv er ma y exeed a presrib ed threshold [4, 15℄. In the presene of sensing errors, the aess to  hannels iden tied as idle should also dep end on the go o dness of the  hannel estimation. As sho wn in [17℄, in this ase the optimal strategy is probabilisti, with an probabilit y dep ending on b oth the false alarm and miss probabilities. In this pap er w e are primarily in terested in analyzing the on ten tion among the seondary users o v er a m ultiuser  hannel where there are primary users as w ell. T o limit the omplexit y of the problem, in the eort to nd out distributed te hniques guaran teed to on v erge to NE p oin ts, w e restrit our analysis to onsider only deterministi in terferene onstrain ts, alb eit expressed in a v ery general form. In partiular, w e en visage the use of the follo wing p ossible in terferene onstrain ts (see also Figure 2 ): Co.1 Maximum tr ansmit p ower for e ah tr ansmitter : E n k x q k 2 2 o = T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q , (2) where Q q denotes the o v ariane matrix of the sym b ols transmitted b y user q and P q is the transmit p o w er in units of energy p er transmission. Co.2 Nul l  onstr aints : U H q Q q = 0 , (3) where U q is a strit tall matrix (to a v oid the trivial solution Q q = 0 ), whose olumns represen t the spatial and/or the frequeny diretions along with user q is not allo w ed to transmit. W e assume, without loss of generalit y (w.l.o.g.), that ea h matrix U q is full-olumn rank. Co.3 Soft shaping  onstr aints : T r  G H q Q q G q  ≤ P a ve q , (4) where the matries G q are su h that their range spae iden ties the subspae where the in terferene lev el should b e k ept under the required threshold. 3 Co.4 Pe ak p ower  onstr aints : the a v erage p eak p o w er of ea h user q an b e on trolled b y onstraining the maxim um eigen v alue [denoted b y λ max ( · ) ℄ of the transmit o v ariane matrix along the diretions spanned b y the olumn spae of G q : λ max  G H q Q q G q  ≤ P peak q , (5) where P peak q is the maxim um p eak p o w er that an b e transmitted along the spatial and/or the frequeny diretions spanned b y the olumn spae of G q . 3 The in terferene temp erature limit onstrain t [2 ℄ is giv en b y the aggregated in terferene indued b y all seondary users. In this pap er, w e assume that the primary user imp osing the soft onstrain t, has already omputed the maxim um tolerable in terferene p o w er P a ve q for ea h seondary user. The p o w er limit P a ve q an also b e the result of a negotiation or opp ortunisti based pro edure b et w een primary users (or regulatory agenies) and seondary users. 5 Figure 2: Example of n ull/soft shaping onstrain ts. The struture of the n ull onstrain ts in (3) is a v ery general form to express the strit limitation imp osed on seondary users to prev en t them from transmitting o v er the sub  hannels o upied b y the primary users. These sub  hannels are mo deled as v etors b elonging to the subspae spanned b y the olumns of ea h matrix U q . This form inludes, as partiular ases, the imp osition of n ulls o v er: 1) the frequeny bands o upied b y the primary reeiv ers; 2) the time slots o upied b y the primary users; 3) the angular diretions iden tifying the primary reeiv ers as observ ed from the seondary transmitters. In the rst ase, the subspae is spanned b y a set of IFFT v etors, in the seond ase b y a set of anonial v etors, and in the third ase b y the set of steering v etors represen ting the diretions of the primary reeiv ers as observ ed from the seondary transmitters. It is w orth emphasizing that the struture of the n ull onstrain ts in (3 ) is m u h more general than the three ases men tioned ab o v e, as it an inorp orate an y om bination of the frequeny , time and spae o ordinates. The use of the spatial domain an greatly impro v e the apabilities of ognitiv e users, as it allo ws them to transmit o v er the same frequeny band but without in terfering. This is p ossible if the seondary transmitters ha v e an an tenna arra y and use a b eamforming that puts n ulls o v er the diretions iden tifying the primary reeiv ers. Of ourse, this requires the iden tiation of the primary reeiv ers, a task that is m u h more demanding than the detetion of primary transmitters [4℄. As an example, there are some reen t w orks sho wing that, in the appliation of CR o v er the sp etrum allo ated to ommerial TV, one migh t exploit the lo al osillator leak age p o w er emitted b y the RF fron t end of the TV reeiv er to lo ate the reeiv ers [18 ℄. Of ourse, in su h a ase, the detetion range is quite short and this alls for a deplo ymen t of sensors v ery lose to the p oten tial reeiv ers. A dieren t senario p ertains to ellular systems. In su h a ase, the mobile users migh t b e rather hard to lo ate and tra k. Ho w ev er, the base stations are relativ ely easier to iden tify . Hene, in a ellular system op erating in a time-division duplexing (TDD) mo de, the seondary users ould exploit the time slot allo ated for the uplink  hannel and put a n ull in the diretion of the base stations. This w ould a v oid an y in terferene to w ards the ellular system 6 users, without the need of tra king the mobile users. The soft shaping onstrain ts expressed in (4 ) and (5) represen t a onstrain t on the total a v erage and p eak a v erage p o w er radiated (pro jeted) along the diretions spanned b y the olumn spae of matrix G q . They are a relaxed form of (3) and an b e used to k eep the p ortion of the in terferene temp erature generated b y ea h seondary user q under the desired v alue. In fat, under (4 )-(5), the seondary users are allo w ed to transmit o v er some sub  hannels o upied b y the primary users, but only pro vided that the in terferene that they generate falls b elo w a presrib ed threshold. F or example, in a MIMO setup, the matrix G q in (4) w ould on tain, in its olumns, the steering v etors iden tifying the diretions of the primary reeiv ers. Within the assumptions made ab o v e, in v oking the apait y expression for the single user Gaussian MIMO  hannel − a hiev able using random Gaussian o des b y all the users − the maxim um information rate on link q for a giv en set of users' o v ariane matries Q 1 , . . . , Q Q , is [19℄ R q ( Q q , Q − q ) = log det  I + H H q q R − 1 − q H q q Q q  (6) where R − q , R n q + X r 6 = q H r q Q r H H r q (7) is the MUI plus noise o v ariane matrix observ ed b y user q and Q − q , ( Q r ) r 6 = q is the set of all the users' o v ariane matries, exept the q -th one. Observ e that R − q dep ends on the strategies Q − q of the other pla y ers. 3 Resoure Sharing among Seondary Users based on Game Theory Giv en the m ultiuser nature of the senario desrib ed ab o v e, the design of the optimal transmission strate- gies of seondary users w ould require a m ultiob jetiv e form ulation of the optimization problem, as the information rate a hiev ed on ea h seondary user's link onstitutes a dieren t single ob jetiv e fun- tion. The globally optimal solutions of su h a problem − the P areto optimal surfae of the m ultiob jetiv e problem − w ould dene the largest rate region a hiev able b y seondary users, giv en the p o w er onstrain ts Co.1 - Co.4 : the rate v etor prole R ( Q ⋆ ) , [ R 1 ( Q ⋆ ) , . . . , R Q ( Q ⋆ )] is P areto optimal if there exists no other rate prole R ( Q ) that dominates R ( Q ⋆ ) omp onen t-wise, i.e., R ( Q ⋆ ) ≥ R ( Q ) , for all feasible Q 's, where at least one inequalit y is strit. Unfortunately , the omputation of the rate region is analytially in tratable and th us not appliable in a ognitiv e radio senario, sine ev ery salar/m ultiob jetiv e optimization problem in v olving the rates of seondary users in (6) is not on v ex (implied from the fat that the rates R q ( Q ) are nonona v e funtions of the o v ariane matries Q ). F urthermore, ev en in the simpler ase of transmissions o v er SISO parallel  hannels, the net w ork utilit y maximization (NUM) problem based on the rates funtions (6) has b een pro v ed in [24℄ to b e a strongly NP-hard problem, under v arious pratial settings as w ell as dieren t 7  hoies of the system utilit y funtion (e.g., sum-rate, w eigh ted sum-rate, geometri rate-mean). Roughly sp eaking, this means that there is no hop e to obtain an algorithm, ev en en tralized, that an eien tly ompute the exat globally optimal solution. Although in theory , the rate region ould b e still found b y an exhaustiv e sear h through all p ossible feasible o v ariane matries, the omputational omplexit y of this approa h is prohibitiv ely high, giv en the large n um b er of v ariables and users in v olv ed in the optimization. The situation is partiularly ritial in CR systems, where the ognitiv e users sense a v ery large sp etrum. Consequen tly , sub optimal algorithms ha v e b een prop osed in the literature to solv e sp eial ases of the prop osed optimization [20 ℄-[23 ℄, most of them dealing with the maximization of the (w eigh ted) sum-rate in SISO frequeny-seletiv e in terferene  hannels (obtained from our general mo del when the  hannel matries are diagonal, the o v ariane matries redue to the p o w er allo ation v etors, and the n ull/soft shaping onstrain ts are remo v ed) [20 , 21℄. Due to the nonon v ex nature of the problem, these algorithms either la k global on v ergene or ma y on v erge to p o or sp etrum sharing strategies. F urthermore, ev en if one deides to emplo y a sub optimal metho d, e.g., [ 20 ℄-[23℄, the algorithms are not suitable for CR systems as they are en tralized and th us annot b e implemen ted in a distributed w a y . These te hniques require a en tral authorit y (or no de in the net w ork) with kno wledge of the (diret and ross-)  hannels to ompute all the transmission strategies for the dieren t no des and then to broadast the solution. This s heme w ould learly p ose a serious implemen tation problem in terms of salabilit y of the net w ork and amoun t of signaling to b e ex hanged among the no des, whi h mak es su h an approa h not app ealing in the senario onsidered in this pap er. T o o v erome the ab o v e diulties and rea h a b etter trade-o b et w een p erformane and omplexit y , w e shift our fo us to a dieren t notion of optimalit y: the omp etitiv e optimalit y riterion; whi h motiv ates a game theoretial form ulation of the system design. Using the onept of NE as the omp etitiv e optimalit y riterion, the resoure allo ation problem among seondary users is then ast as a strategi nono op erativ e game, in whi h the pla y ers are the seondary users and the pa y o funtions are the information rates on ea h link: Ea h seondary user q omp etes against the others b y  ho osing the transmit o v ariane matrix Q q (i.e., his strategy) that maximizes his o wn information rate R q ( Q q , Q − q ) in (6 ), giv en onstrain ts imp osed b y the presene of the primary users, b esides the usual onstrain t on transmit p o w er. A NE of the game is rea hed when ea h user, giv en the strategy proles of the others, do es not get an y rate inrease b y unilaterally  hanging his o wn strategy . The rst question to answ er under su h framew ork is whether su h an o v erall dynamial system an ev en tually on v erge to an equilibrium p oin t, while preserving the QoS of primary users. The seond basi issue is if the optimal strategies to b e adopted b y ea h user an b e omputed in a totally deen tralized w a y . W e address b oth questions in the forthoming setions. F or the sak e of simpliit y , w e start onsidering only onstrain ts Co.1 and Co.2 . These onstrain ts are suitable to mo del in terw ea v e omm uniations among seondary users where, in general, there are restritions on when and where they ma y transmit (this an b e done using the n ull onstrain ts Co.2 ). Then, w e allo w underla y and in terw ea v e omm uniations sim ultaneously , b y inluding in the optimization also in terferene onstrain ts Co.3 and Co.4 . 8 3.1 Rate maximization game with n ull onstrain ts Giv en the rate funtions in (6 ) and onstrain ts Co.1 - Co.2 , the rate maximization game is formally dened as: ( G 1 ) : maximize Q q  0 R q ( Q q , Q − q ) sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q , U H q Q q = 0 ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (8) where Q is the n um b er of pla y ers (the seondary users) and R q ( Q q , Q − q ) is the pa y o funtion of pla y er q , dened in (6). Without the n ull onstrain ts, the solution of ea h optimization problem in (8 ) w ould lead to the w ell-kno wn MIMO w aterlling solution [19 ℄. The presene of the n ull onstrain ts mo dies the problem and the solution for ea h user is not neessarily a w aterlling an ymore. Nev ertheless, w e sho w no w that in tro duing a prop er pro jetion matrix the solutions of (8 ) an still b e eien tly omputed via a w aterlling-lik e expression. T o this end, w e rewrite game G 1 in a more on v enien t form as detailed next. In tro duing the pro jetion matrix P R ( U q ) ⊥ = I − U q ( U H q U q ) − 1 U H q (the orthogonal pro jetion on to R ( U q ) ⊥ , where R ( · ) is the range spae op erator), it follo ws from the onstrain t U H q Q q = 0 that an y optimal Q q in (8 ) will alw a ys satisfy: Q q = P R ( U q ) ⊥ Q q P R ( U q ) ⊥ . (9) The game G 1 an then b e equiv alen tly rewritten as: maximize Q q  0 log det  I + ˜ H H q q ˜ R − 1 − q ˜ H q q Q q  sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q Q q = P R ( U q ) ⊥ Q q P R ( U q ) ⊥ ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (10) where ea h ˜ H r q , H r q P R ( U r ) ⊥ is a mo died  hannel and ˜ R − q , R n q + P r 6 = q ˜ H r q Q r ˜ H H r q . A t this p oin t, the problem an b e further simplied b y noting that the onstrain t Q q = P R ( U ⊥ q ) Q q P R ( U ⊥ q ) in (10 ) is redundan t. The nal form ulation then b eomes: maximize Q q  0 log det  I + ˜ H H q q ˜ R − 1 − q ˜ H q q Q q  sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q. (11) This is due to the fat that, for an y user q , an y optimal solution Q ⋆ q in (11) − the MIMO w aterlling solution [13℄ − will b e orthogonal to the n ull spae of ˜ H q q , whatev er ˜ R − q is, implying Q ⋆ q = P R ( U q ) ⊥ Q ⋆ q P R ( U q ) ⊥ . Building on the equiv alene of (8 ) and (11 ), w e an apply the results in [13 ℄ to the game in ( 11) and deriv e the struture of the Nash equilibria of game G 1 , as detailed next. Nash equilibria of game G 1 : Game G 1 alw a ys admits a NE, for an y set of  hannel matries, transmit p o w er of the users, and n ull onstrain ts, sine it is a ona v e game (the pa y o of ea h pla y er is a ona v e funtion in his o wn strategy and ea h admissible strategy set is on v ex and ompat) [13 ℄. Moreo v er, it follo ws from (11) that all the Nash equilibria of G 1 satisfy the follo wing set of nonlinear matrix-v alue xed-p oin t equations [13℄: Q ⋆ q = ˜ WF q  ˜ H H q q R − 1 − q ( Q ⋆ − q ) ˜ H q q  , W ⋆ q Diag  p ⋆ q  W ⋆H q , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (12) 9 where w e made expliit the dep endene of R − q on Q ⋆ − q as R − q ( Q ⋆ − q ) ; the W ⋆ q = W q ( Q ⋆ − q ) is the semi-unitary matrix with olumns equal to the eigen v etors of matrix ˜ H H q q R − 1 − q ( Q ⋆ − q ) ˜ H q q orresp onding to the p ositiv e eigen v alues λ ⋆ q ,k = λ q ,k ( Q ⋆ − q ) , with R − q ( Q − q ) dened in (7); and the p o w er allo ation p ⋆ q = p q ( Q ⋆ − q ) satises the follo wing sim ultaneous w aterlling equation: for all k and q , p ⋆ q ( k ) = µ q − 1 λ ⋆ q ,k ! + , (13) with ( x ) + , max(0 , x ) and µ q  hosen to satisfy the p o w er onstrain t P k p ⋆ q ( k ) = P q . In terestingly , the solution (12) sho ws that the n ull onstrain ts in the transmissions of seondary users an b e handled without aeting the omputational omplexit y: The optimal transmission strategy of ea h user q an b e eien tly omputed via a MIMO w aterlling solution, pro vided that the original  hannel matrix H q q is replaed b y ˜ H q q . This result has an in tuitiv e in terpretation: T o guaran tee that ea h user q do es not transmit o v er a giv en subspae (spanned b y the olumns of U q ), whihever the strategies of the other users are, while maximizing his information rate, one only needs to indue in the  hannel matrix H q q a n ull spae that oinides with the subspae where the transmission is not allo w ed. This is preisely what is done b y in tro duing the mo died  hannel ˜ H q q . The w aterlling-lik e struture of the Nash equilibria as giv en in (12 ) along with the in terpretation of the MIMO w atelling solution as a matrix pro jetion on to a prop er on v ex set as giv en in [13 ℄ pla y a k ey role in studying the uniqueness of the NE and in deriving onditions for the on v ergene of the distributed algorithms desrib ed in Setion 4. The analysis of the uniqueness of the NE go es b ey ond the sop e of this pap er and it is addressed in [14 ℄. What is imp ortan t to remark here is that, as exp eted, the onditions guaran teeing the uniqueness of the NE imp ose a onstrain t on the maxim um lev el of MUI generated b y seondary users that ma y b e tolerated in the net w ork. But, in terestingly , the uniqueness of the equilibrium is not aeted b y the in terferene generated b y the primary users. 3.2 Rate maximization game with n ull onstrain ts via virtual noise shaping In this setion, w e sho w that an alternativ e approa h to imp ose n ull onstrain ts Co.2 on the transmissions of seondary users passes through the in tro dution of virtual in terferers. The idea b ehind this alterna- tiv e approa h an b e easily understo o d if one onsiders the transmission o v er SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels, where all the  hannel matries ha v e the same eigen v etors (the FFT v etors): to a v oid the use of a giv en sub  hannel, it is suien t to in tro due a virtual noise with suien tly high p o w er o v er that sub  hannel. The same idea annot b e diretly applied to the MIMO ase, as arbitrary MIMO  hannel matries ha v e dieren t righ t/left singular v etors from ea h other. Nev ertheless, w e sho w ho w to design the o v ariane matrix of the virtual noise (to b e added to the noise o v ariane matrix of ea h seondary reeiv er), so that the all the Nash equilibria of the game satisfy the n ull onstrain t Co.2 along the sp eied diretions. 10 Let us onsider the follo wing strategi nono op erativ e game: ( G α ) : maximize Q q  0 log det  I + H H q q R − 1 − q ,α H q q Q q  sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (14) where R − q ,α , R − q + α ˆ U q ˆ U H q = R n q + X r 6 = q H r q Q r H H r q + α ˆ U q ˆ U H q , (15) denotes the MUI-plus-noise o v ariane matrix observ ed b y seondary user q , plus the o v ariane matrix α ˆ U q ˆ U H q of the virtual in terferene along R ( ˆ U q ) , where ˆ U q is a tall matrix and α is a p ositiv e onstan t. Our in terest is on deriving the asymptoti prop erties of the solutions of G α , as α → + ∞ . T o this end, w e in tro due the follo wing in termediate denitions rst. F or ea h q , dene the tall matrix ˆ U ⊥ q su h that R ( ˆ U ⊥ q ) = R ( ˆ U q ) ⊥ , and the mo died  hannel matries ˆ H r q = ˆ U ⊥ H q H r q ∀ r , q = 1 , · · · , Q. (16) W e then in tro due the auxiliary game G ∞ , dened as: ( G ∞ ) : maximize Q q  0 log det  I + ˆ H H q q ˆ R − 1 − q ˆ H q q Q q  sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (17) where ˆ R − q , ˆ U ⊥ H q R n q ˆ U ⊥ q + X r 6 = q ˆ H r q Q r ˆ H H r q . (18) It an b e sho wn that games G α and G ∞ are asymptotially equiv alen t in the sense sp eied next. Nash equilibria of games G α and G ∞ : Games G α and G ∞ alw a ys admit a NE, for an y set of  hannel matries, p o w er onstrain ts, and α > 0 . Moreo v er, under mild onditions guaran teeing the uniqueness of the NE of b oth games (denoted b y Q ⋆ α and Q ⋆ ∞ , resp etiv ely), w e ha v e: lim α →∞ Q ⋆ α = Q ⋆ ∞ , (19) i.e., the NE of G α asymptotially oinides with that of G ∞ . Observ e that, similarly to game G 1 , also in games G α and G ∞ , the b est-resp onse of ea h pla y er an b e eien tly omputed via MIMO w aterlling-lik e solutions, and the Nash equilibria of b oth games satisfy a sim ultaneous w aterlling equation. Using (19), one an deriv e the asymptoti prop erties of the (unique) NE of game G α as α → ∞ , through the prop erties of the equilibrium Q ⋆ ∞ of G ∞ . F ollo wing a similar approa h as in Setion 3.1 , one an sho w that ea h Q ⋆ q , ∞ satises the follo wing ondition U H q Q ⋆ q , ∞ = 0 , with U q , H − 1 q q ˆ U q . (20) Condition (20 ) pro vides, for ea h user q , the desired relationship b et w een the diretions of the virtual noise to b e in tro dued in the noise o v ariane matrix of the user (see (18 )) − the matrix ˆ U q − and the real 11 diretions along with user q will not allo ate an y p o w er, i.e., the matrix U q . It turns out that if user q is not allo w ed to allo ate p o w er along U q , it is suien t to  ho ose in (18) ˆ U q , H q q U q . Sine the existene and uniqueness of the NE of game G α do not dep end on α , the (unique) NE of G α (that in general will dep end on the v alue of α ) an b e rea hed using the asyn hronous algorithms desrib ed in Setion 4, irresp etiv e of the v alue of α . Th us, for suien tly large v alues of α , the NE of G α tends to satisfy ondition (20 ); whi h pro vides an alternativ e w a y to imp ose onstrain t Co.2 . 3.3 Rate maximization game with soft and n ull onstrain ts W e fo us no w on the rate maximization in the presene of b oth n ull and soft shaping onstrain ts. The resulting game an b e form ulated as follo ws: ( G 2 ) : maximize Q q  0 R q ( Q q , Q − q ) sub ject to T r  G H q Q q G q  ≤ P a ve q λ max  G H q Q q G q  ≤ P peak q U H q Q q = 0 ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q. (21) W e assume w.l.o.g. that ea h G q is a full-ro w rank matrix, so that the soft shaping onstrain t in ( 21 ) imp oses a onstrain t on the a v erage transmit p o w er radiated b y user q in the whole spae. The soft onstrain ts in (21) are the result of a onstrain t on the o v erall in terferene temp erature limit imp osed b y the primary users [2℄. T ypially , the most stringen t onditions b et w een the p o w er onstrain ts Co.1 and Co.3 is the soft shaping onstrain t Co.3 . This motiv ates the absene in ( 21 ) of the p o w er onstrain t Co.1 , although it ould also b e onsidered. Nash equilibria of game G 2 : W e an deriv e the struture of the Nash equilibria of game G 2 , similarly to what w e did for game G 1 . F or ea h q ∈ Ω , dene the tall matrix U q , G ♯ q U q , where G ♯ q denotes the Monro e-P enrose pseudoin v erse of G q [25 ℄, in tro due the pro jetion matrix P R ( U q ) ⊥ = I − U q ( U H q U q ) − 1 U H q (the orthogonal pro jetion on to R ( U q ) ⊥ ) and the mo died  hannel matries H r q = H r q G ♯ H r P R ( U r ) ⊥ , r , q = 1 , · · · , Q. (22) Using the ab o v e denition, w e an no w  haraterize the Nash equilibria of game G 2 , as sho wn next. The game G 2 admits a NE, for an y set of  hannel matries and n ull/soft shaping onstrain ts. Moreo v er, ev ery NE satises the follo wing set of nonlinear matrix-v alue xed-p oin t equations: Q ⋆ q = G ♯ H q WF q  H H q q R − 1 − q ( Q ⋆ − q ) H q q  G ♯ q , G ♯ H q V ⋆ q diag  p ⋆ q  V ⋆H q G ♯ q ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (23) where V ⋆ q = V q ( Q ⋆ − q ) is the semi-unitary matrix with olumns equal to the eigen v etors of matrix H H q q R − 1 − q ( Q ⋆ − q ) H q q , with R − q ( Q − q ) dened in (7), orresp onding to the ¯ L q = rank ( H q q ) p ositiv e eigen- v alues λ ⋆ q ,k = λ q ,k ( Q ⋆ − q ) , and the p o w er allo ation p ⋆ q = p q ( Q ⋆ − q ) satises the follo wing sim ultaneous 12 w aterlling equation: for all k and q , p ⋆ q ( k ) =      h µ q − 1 λ ⋆ q,k i P p eak q 0 , if P peak q ¯ L q > P a ve q , P peak q , otherwise, (24) where [ · ] P p eak q 0 denotes the Eulidean pro jetion on to the in terv al [0 , P peak q ] and µ q is  hosen to satisfy the p o w er onstrain t P k p ⋆ q ( k ) = P a ve q (see, e.g., [26℄ for pratial algorithms to ompute su h a µ q ). The struture of the Nash equilibria in (23) states that the optimal transmission strategy of ea h user leads to a diagonalizing transmission with a prop er p o w er allo ation, after pre/p ost m ultipliation of the w aterlling solution b y matrix G ♯ q . Similarly to G 1 , the onditions for the uniqueness of the NE of game G 2 an b e obtained, building on the in terpretation of the w aterlling solutions in ( 23) as matrix pro jetion [13℄. As exp eted, the NE of the game is unique, pro vided that the in terferene generated b y seondary users is not to o high. 4 MIMO Asyn hronous Iterativ e W aterlling Algorithm In Setion 3 w e ha v e sho wn that the optimal resoure allo ation among seondary users in hierar hial ognitiv e net w orks orresp onds to an equilibrium of the system, where all the users ha v e maximized their o wn rates, without hamp ering the omm uniations of primary users. Sine there is no reason to exp et a system to b e initially at the equilibrium, the fundamen tal problem b eomes to nd a pro edure that rea hes su h an equilibrium from non-equilibrium states. In this setion, w e fo us on algorithms that on v erge to these equilibria. Sine w e are in terested in a deen tralized implemen tation, where no signaling among seondary and primary users is allo w ed, w e onsider only totally distributed iterativ e algorithms, where ea h user ats indep enden tly of the others to optimize his o wn transmission strategy while p ereiving the other ativ e users as in terferene More sp eially , to rea h the Nash equilibria of the games in tro dued in the previous setion, w e prop ose a fairly general distributed and asyn hronous iterativ e algorithm, alled asyn hronous Iterativ e W aterFilling Algorithm (IWF A). In this algorithm, all seondary users maximize their o wn rate [via the single user MIMO w aterlling solution (12) for game G 1 , (23) for game G 2 , and the lassial MIMO w aterlling solution for games G α and G ∞ ℄ in a total ly asynhr onous w a y , while k eeping the temp erature noise lev els in the liensed bands under the required threshold [2 ℄. A ording to the asyn hronous up dating s hedule, some users are allo w ed to up date their strategy more frequen tly than the others, and they migh t ev en p erform these up dates using outdate d information on the in terferene aused b y the others. Before in tro duing the prop osed asyn hronous MIMO IWF A, w e need the follo wing preliminary de- nitions. W e assume, without loss of generalit y , that the set of times at whi h one or more users up date their strategies is the disrete set T = N + = { 0 , 1 , 2 , . . . } . Let Q ( n ) q denote the o v ariane matrix of the v etor signal transmitted b y user q at the n -th iteration, and let T q ⊆ T denote the set of times n at whi h Q ( n ) q is up dated (th us, at time n / ∈ T q , Q ( n ) q is left un hanged). Let τ q r ( n ) denote the most reen t 13 time at whi h the in terferene from user r is p ereiv ed b y user q at the n -th iteration (observ e that τ q r ( n ) satises 0 ≤ τ q r ( n ) ≤ n ). Hene, if user q up dates his o wn o v ariane matrix at the n -th iteration, then he  ho oses his optimal Q ( n ) q , aording to (12) for game G 1 and (23 ) for game G 2 , and using the in terferene lev el aused b y Q ( τ q ( n )) − q ,  Q ( τ q 1 ( n )) 1 , . . . , Q ( τ q q − 1 ( n )) q − 1 , Q ( τ q q +1 ( n )) q +1 , . . . , Q ( τ q Q ( n )) Q  . (25) Some standard onditions in asyn hronous on v ergene theory that are fullled in an y pratial imple- men tation need to b e satised b y the s hedule { τ q r ( n ) } and {T q } ; w e refer to [13℄ for the details. Using the ab o v e notation, the asyn hronous MIMO IWF A is formally desrib ed in Algorithm 1 b elo w, where the mapping in (27 ) is dened as T q ( Q − q ) , ˜ WF q  ˜ H H q q R − 1 − q ˜ H q q  , q = 1 , · · · , Q , (26) with ˜ WF q ( · ) giv en in (12 ) if the algorithm is applied to game G 1 , and it is dened as T q ( Q − q ) , G ♯ H q WF q  H H q q R − 1 − q H q q  G ♯ q , q = 1 , · · · , Q , with WF q ( · ) giv en in (23) if the algorithm is applied to game G 2 . The mapping T q ( Q − q ) redues to the lassial MIMO w aterlling solution [19℄ if games G α and G ∞ are onsidered. Algorithm 1: MIMO Asyn hronous IWF A Set n = 0 and Q (0) q = any feasible point ; for n = 0 : N it Q ( n +1) q =    T q  Q ( τ q ( n )) − q  , if n ∈ T q , Q ( n ) q , otherwise ; ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q (27) end Con v ergene of the asyn hronous IWF A is studied in [ 13 , 14℄ (see also [11 , 12℄ for sp eial ases of the algorithm), where it w as pro v ed that the algorithm on v erges to the NE of the prop osed games under the same onditions guaran teeing the uniqueness of the equilibrium. The prop osed asyn hronous IWF A on tains as sp eial ases a plethora of algorithms, ea h one obtained b y a p ossible  hoie of the s hedule { τ q r ( n ) } , {T q } . The sequen tial [2, 11, 27 , 28 ℄ and sim ultaneous [11 ℄-[13℄ IWF As are just t w o examples of the prop osed general framew ork. The imp ortan t result stated in [ 11℄-[13 ℄ is that all the algorithms resulting as sp eial ases of the asyn hronous MIMO IWF A are guaran teed to rea h the unique NE of game under the same set of on v ergene onditions, sine on v ergene onditions do not dep end on the partiular  hoie of {T q } and { τ q r ( n ) } [13℄. Moreo v er all the algorithms obtained from Algorithm 1 ha v e the follo wing desired prop erties: - L ow  omplexity and distribute d natur e : Ev en in the presene of n ull and/or shaping onstrain ts, the b est resp onse of ea h user q an b e eien tly and lo ally omputed using a MIMO w aterlling based 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 time [iteration index] Rates of secondary users Sequential IWFA Simultaneous IWFA link #6 link #1 link #2 Figure 3: Sim ultaneous vs. sequen tial IWF A: rates of seondary users v ersus iterations, obtained b y the sequen tial IWF A (dashed-line urv es) and sim ultaneous IWF A (solid-line urv es). solution, pro vided that ea h  hannel H q q is replaed b y the mo died  hannel ˜ H q q (if game G 1 is onsidered) or H q q (if game G 2 is onsidered). Th us, Algorithm 1 an b e implemen ted in a distributed w a y , sine ea h user only needs to measure the o v erall in terferene-plus-noise o v ariane matrix R − q and w aterll o v er ˜ H H q q R − 1 − q ˜ H q q [or o v er H H q q R − 1 − q H q q ℄. - R obustness : Algorithm 1 is robust against missing or outdated up dates of seondary users. This feature strongly relaxes the onstrain ts on the syn hronization of the users' up dates with resp et to those imp osed, for example, b y the sim ultaneous or sequen tial up dating s hemes [11℄-[13 ℄. - F ast  onver gen e b ehavior : The sim ultaneous v ersion of the prop osed algorithm on v erges in a v ery few iterations, ev en in net w orks with man y ativ e seondary users. As an example, in Figure 3 w e sho w the rate ev olution of the of 3 links out 8 seondary users, orresp onding to the sequen tial IWF A and sim ultaneous IWF A as a funtion of the iteration index. As exp eted, the sequen tial IWF A is slo w er than the sim ultaneous IWF A, esp eially if the n um b er of ativ e seondary users is large, sine ea h user is fored to w ait for all the users s heduled in adv ane, b efore up dating his o wn o v ariane matrix. This in tuition is formalized in [11 ℄, where the authors pro vided the expression of the asymptoti on v ergen t fator of b oth the sequen tial and sim ultaneous IWF As. - Contr ol of the r adiate d interfer en e : Thanks to the game theoretial form ulation inluding n ull and/or soft shaping onstrain ts, the prop osed asyn hronous IWF A do es not suer of the main dra wba k of the lassial sequen tial IWF A [27℄, i.e., the violation of the in terferene temp erature limits [2 ℄. Figure 4 sho ws an example of the optimal resoure allo ation based on the game theoretial for- m ulation G 1 , for a ognitiv e MIMO net w ork omp osed b y t w o primary users and t w o seondary users, sharing the same sp etrum and spae. Seondary users are equipp ed with four transmit/reeiv e an- tennas, plaed in uniform linear arra ys ritially spaed at half of the w a v elength of the passband transmitted signal. F or the sak e of simpliit y , w e assumed that the  hannels b et w een the transmitter and the reeiv er of the seondary users ha v e three ph ysial paths (one line-of-sigh t and t w o reeted paths) as sho wn in Figure 4(a). T o preserv e the QoS of primary users' transmissions, n ull onstrain ts 15 0.5 1 1.5 30 210 60 240 90 270 120 300 150 330 180 0 0.5 1 1.5 30 210 60 240 90 270 120 300 150 330 180 0 Null constraint Transmit beamforming pattern of user 1 Transmit beamforming pattern of user 2 (b) Figure 4: Optimal transmit b eamforming patterns at the NE of game G 1 [subplot (b)℄ for a ognitiv e MIMO net w ork omp osed b y t w o primary and t w o seondary users [subplot (a)℄. are imp osed to seondary users in the (line-of-sigh t) diretions of primary users' reeiv ers [see sub- plot (a)℄. F or the senario sho wn in the gure, one n ull onstrain t for ea h pla y er is imp osed along the transmit diretions φ 1 = π / 2 and φ 2 = − 5 π / 12 . This an b e done  ho osing for ea h pla y er q the matrix U q in (21) oiniding with the spatial signature v etor in the transmit diretion φ q , i.e., U q = [1 , exp ( − j 2 π ∆ t q sin( φ q )) , exp ( − j 2 π 2∆ t q sin( φ q )) , exp ( − j 2 π 3∆ t q sin( φ q ))] T , with ∆ t q = 1 / 2 denot- ing the normalized (b y the signal w a v elength) transmit an tenna separation and q = 1 , 2 . In Figure 4(b), w e plot the transmit b eamforming patterns, asso iated to the eigen v etors of the optimal o v ariane ma- trix of the t w o seondary users at the NE, obtained using Algorithm 1. In ea h radiation diagram plot, solid (blue) and dashed (bla k) line urv es refer to the t w o eigen v etors orresp onding to the nonzero eigen v alues (arranged in inreasing order) of the optimal o v ariane matrix [reall that, b eause of the n ull onstrain ts, the equiv alen t  hannel matrix ˜ H q q in (21 ) has rank equal to 2℄. Observ e that the n ull onstrain ts guaran tee that at the NE no p o w er is radiated b y the t w o seondary transmitters along the diretions φ 1 (for transmitted one) and φ 2 (for transmitted t w o), sho wing that in the MIMO ase, the or- thogonalit y among primary and seondary users an b e rea hed in the spae rather than in the frequeny domain, implying that primary and seondary users ma y share frequeny bands, if this is allo w ed b y F CC sp etrum p oliies. 5 Sp eial Cases The MIMO game theoreti form ulation prop osed in the previous setions pro vides a general and unied framew ork for studying the resoure allo ation problem based on rate maximization in hierar hial CR net w orks, where primary and seondary users o exist. In this setion, w e sp eialize the results to t w o senarios of in terest: 1) the sp etrum sharing problem among primary and seondary users transmitting 16 o v er SISO fr e queny-sele tive hannels ; and 2) the MIMO transeiv ers design of heterogeneous systems sharing the same sp etrum o v er unliensed bands. 5.1 Sp etrum sharing o v er SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels with sp etral mask onstrain ts The blo  k transmission o v er SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels is obtained from the I/O mo del in (1), when ea h  hannel matrix H r q is a N × N T o eplitz irulan t matrix, R n q is a N × N diagonal matrix N is the length of the transmitted blo  k (see, e.g., [10℄). This leads to the follo wing eigendeomp osition for ea h  hannel H r q = WD r q W H , where W is the normalized IFFT matrix, i.e., [ W ] ij , e j 2 π ( i − 1)( j − 1) / N / √ N for i, j = 1 , . . . , N and D r q is a N × N diagonal matrix, where [ D r q ] k k , H r q ( k ) is the frequeny-resp onse of the  hannel b et w een soure r and destination q . Within this setup, w e fo us on game G 1 giv en in (8), but similar results ould b e obtained if game G 2 , G α or G ∞ w ere onsidered instead. In the ase of SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels, game G 1 an b e rewritten as: maximize Q q  0 log det  I + H H q q R − 1 − q H q q Q q  sub ject to T r ( Q q ) ≤ P q  W H Q q W  k k ≤ p max q ( k ) , ∀ k = 1 , · · · , N , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (28) where { p max q ( k ) } is the set of sp etral mask onstrain ts, that an b e used to imp ose shaping (and th us also n ull) onstrain ts on the transmit p o w er sp etral densit y (PSD) of seondary users o v er liensed/unliensed bands. Nash equilibria: The solutions of the game in (28 ) ha v e the follo wing struture [10 ℄: Q ⋆ q = W Diag ( p ⋆ q ) W H , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (29) where p ⋆ q , ( p ⋆ q ( k )) N k =1 is the solution to the follo wing set of xed-p oin t equations p ⋆ q = wf q ( p ⋆ − q ) , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (30) with the w aterlling v etor op erator wf q ( · ) dened as [ wf q ( p − q )] k , " µ q − 1 + P r 6 = q | H r q ( k ) | 2 p r ( k ) | H q q ( k ) | 2 # p max q ( k ) 0 , k = 1 , · · · , N , (31) where µ q is  hosen to satisfy the p o w er onstrain t with equalit y P k p ⋆ q ( k ) = P q . Equation (29) states that, in the ase of SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels, a NE is rea hed using, for ea h user, a m ultiarrier strategy (i.e., the diagonal transmission strategy through the frequeny bins), with a prop er p o w er allo ation. This simpliation with resp et to the general MIMO ase, is a onsequene of the prop ert y that all  hannel T o eplitz irulan t matries are diagonalized b y the same matrix, i.e., the IFFT matrix W , that do es not dep end on the  hannel realization. 17 In terestingly , m ultiarrier transmission with a prop er p o w er allo ation for ea h user is still the opti- mal transmission strategy if in (28 ) instead of the information rate, one onsiders the maximization of the transmission rate using nite order onstellations and under the same onstrain ts as in (28) plus a onstrain t on the a v erage error probabilit y . Using the gap appro ximation analysis, the optimal p o w er allo ation is still giv en b y the w aterlling solution (31), where ea h  hannel transfer funtion | H q q ( k ) | 2 is replaed b y | H q q ( k ) | 2 / Γ q , where Γ q ≥ 1 is the gap [10℄. The gap dep ends only on the family of onstella- tion and on error probabilit y onstrain t P e,q ; for M -QAM onstellations, for example, the resulting gap is Γ q = ( Q − 1 ( P e,q / 4)) 2 / 3 (see, e.g., [29 ℄). Rea hing a NE of the game in (28 ) satises a omp etitiv e optimalit y priniple, but, in general, m ultiple equilibria ma y exist, so that one is nev er sure ab out whi h equilibrium is really rea hed. Suien t onditions on the MUI that guaran tee the uniqueness of the equilibrium ha v e b een prop osed in the literature [10 ℄-[12 ℄ and [27, 28℄. Among all, one of the t w o follo wing onditions is suien t for the uniqueness of the NE: X r 6 = q max k   ¯ H r q ( k )   2   ¯ H q q ( k )   2 d 2 q q d 2 r q < 1 , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, and ∀ k = 1 , · · · , N , (32) X r 6 = q max k   ¯ H r q ( k )   2   ¯ H q q ( k )   2 d 2 q q d 2 r q < 1 , ∀ r = 1 , · · · , Q , and ∀ k = 1 , · · · , N , (33) where w e ha v e in tro dued the normalized  hannel transfer funtions H r q ( k ) , ¯ H r q ( k ) /d 2 r q , ∀ r , q , with d r q indiating the distane b et w een transmitter of the r -th link and the reeiv er of the q -th link. F rom ( 32)- (33), it follo ws that, as exp eted, the uniqueness of NE is ensured if seondary users are suien tly far apart from ea h other. In fat, from (32)-(33 ) for example, one infers that there exists a minim um distane b ey ond whi h the uniqueness of NE is guaran teed, orresp onding to the maxim um lev el of in terferene that ma y b e tolerated b y the users. Sp eially , ondition (32 ) imp oses a onstrain t on the maxim um amoun t of in terferene that ea h reeiv er an tolerate; whereas ( 33 ) in tro dues an upp er b ound on the maxim um lev el of in terferene that ea h transmitter is allo w ed to generate. In terestingly , the uniqueness of the equilibrium do es not dep end on the in terferene generated b y the transmissions of primary users. Asyn hronous IWF A: T o rea h the equilibrium of the game, seondary users an p erform the asyn-  hronous IWF A based on the mapping in (31 ). This algorithm an b e obtained diretly from Algorithm 1, as sp eial ase. It w as pro v ed in [12 ℄ that, e.g., under onditions (32 )-(33), the asyn hronous IWF A based on mapping (31) on v erges to the unique NE of game in (28) as Nit → ∞ , for an y set of feasible initial onditions and up dating s hedule. In Figure 5, w e sho w an example of the optimal p o w er allo ation in SISO frequeny-seletiv e  hannels at the NE, obtained using the prop osed asyn hronous IWF A, for a CR system omp osed b y one primary user [subplot (a)℄ and t w o seondary users [subplot (b)℄, sub jet to n ull onstrain ts o v er liensed bands, sp etral mask onstrain ts and transmit p o w er onstrain ts. In ea h plot, solid and dashed-dot line urv es refer to optimal PSD of ea h link and PSD of the MUI plus thermal noise, normalized b y the  hannel 18 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 10 −3 10 −2 10 −1 10 0 10 1 frequency Optimal PSD of Primary User Licensed band 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 10 −4 10 −2 10 0 frequency Optimal PSD of Secondary User 1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 10 −3 10 −2 10 −1 10 0 10 1 frequency Optimal PSD of Secondary User 2 Spectral Mask Null Constraints (licensed band) Null Constraints (licensed band) Spectral Mask (a) (b) Figure 5: Sp etrum sharing among one primary [subplot (a)℄ and t w o seondary users [subplot (b)℄: Optimal PSD of ea h link (solid lines), and PSD of the MUI-plus-thermal noise normalized b y the  hannel transfer funtion square mo dulus of the link (dashed-dot line). transfer funtion square mo dulus of the link, resp etiv ely . In this example, there is a band A (from 50 to 300 frequeny bins) allo ated to an ativ e primary user; there is then a band B (from 300 to 400 frequeny bins) allo ated to liensed users, but temp orarily un used; the rest of the sp etrum, denoted as C , is v aan t. The temp orarily v oid band B an b e utilized b y seondary users, pro vided that they do not o v erome a maxim um tolerable sp etral densit y . The optimal p o w er allo ations sho wn in Figure 5 are the result of running the sim ultaneous IWF A. W e an observ e that the seondary users do not transmit o v er band A and they allo ate their p o w er o v er b oth bands B and C , resp eting a p o w er sp etral densit y limitation o v er band B . 5.2 MIMO transeiv er design of heterogeneous systems in unliensed bands W e onsider no w on a senario where m ultiple unliensed MIMO ognitiv e users share the same unliensed sp etrum and geographial area. The a v ailabilit y of MIMO transeiv ers learly enri hes the p ossibilities for sp etrum sharing as it adds the extra spatial degrees of freedom. In unliensed bands, there are no in terferene onstrain ts to b e satised b y the users. Th us, the game theoretial form ulation as giv en in (8), without onsidering the n ull onstrain ts, seems the most appropriate to study the resoure allo ation problem in this senario. In the follo wing w e refer to game G 1 assuming taitly that the n ull onstrain ts are remo v ed. Similarly to the SISO ase, suien t onditions for the uniqueness of the NE are giv en b y one of the t w o follo wing set of onditions (more general onditions are giv en in [13℄): Lo w MUI reeiv ed: X r 6 = q ρ  H H r q H − H q q H − 1 q q H r q  < 1 , ∀ q = 1 , · · · , Q, (34) Lo w MUI generated: X q 6 = r ρ  H H r q H − H q q H − 1 q q H r q  < 1 , ∀ r = 1 , · · · , Q. (35) Conditions (34 )-(35 ) quan tify ho w m u h MUI an b e tolerated b y the systems to guaran tee the uniqueness of the NE. In terestingly , (32 )-(33 ) and most of the onditions kno wn in the literature [11 , 27 , 28 ℄ for the 19 uniqueness of the NE of the rate-maximization game in SISO frequeny-seletiv e in terferene  hannels and OFDM transmission ome naturally from (34 )-(35 ) as sp eial ases. The Nash equilibria of game G 1 an b e rea hed using the asyn hronous IWF A desrib ed in Algorithm 1, whose on v ergene is guaran teed under onditions (34 )-(35), for an y set of initial onditions and up dating s hedule of the users. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Users’ Sum−Rate n T =n R =6 n T =n R =4 n T =n R =2 n T =n R =1 d rq / d qq Figure 6: Sum-Rate of the users v ersus the in ter-pair distane d r q /d qq ; d r q = d qr , d r r = d qq = 1 , ∀ r, q , for dieren t n um b ers of transmit/reeiv e an tennas . In Figure 6 w e sho w an example of the b enets of MIMO transeiv ers in the ognitiv e radio on text. W e plot in the gure the sum-rate of a t w o-user frequeny-seletiv e MIMO system as a funtion of the in ter-pair distane among the links, for dieren t n um b er of transmit/reeiv e an tennas. The rate urv es are a v eraged o v er 500 indep enden t  hannel realizations, whose taps are sim ulated as i.i.d. Gaussian random v ariables with zero mean and unit v ariane. F or the sak e of simpliit y , the system is assumed to b e symmetri, i.e., the transmitters ha v e the same p o w er budget and the in terferene links are at the same distane (i.e., d r q = d q r , ∀ q , r ), so that the ross  hannel gains are omparable in a v erage sense. F rom the gure one infers that, as for isolated single-user systems or m ultiple aess/broadast  hannels, also in MIMO in terferene  hannels, inreasing the n um b er of an tennas at b oth the transmitter and the reeiv er side leads to a b etter p erformane. The in teresting result, oming from Figure 6, is that the inremen tal gain due to the use of m ultiple transmit/reeiv e an tennas is almost indep enden t of the in terferene lev el in the system, sine the MIMO (inremen tal) gains in the high-in terferene ase (small v alues of d r q /d q q ) almost oinide with the orresp onding (inremen tal) gains obtained in the lo w-in terferene ase (large v alues of d r q /d q q ), at least for the system sim ulated in Figure 6. This desired prop ert y is due to the fat that the MIMO  hannel pro vides more degrees of freedom for ea h user than those a v ailable in the SISO  hannel, that an b e explored to nd out the b est partition of the a v ailable resoures for ea h user, p ossibly anelling the MUI. 20 6 Conlusion and Diretions for F urther Dev elopmen ts In this pap er w e ha v e prop osed a signal pro essing approa h to the design of CR systems, using a omp etitiv e optimalit y priniple, based on game theory . W e ha v e addressed and solv ed some of the  hallenging issues in CR, namely: 1) the establishmen t of onditions guaran teeing that the dynamial in teration among ognitiv e no des, under onstrain ts on the transmit sp etral mask and on in terferene indued to primary users, admits a (p ossibly unique) equilibrium; and 2) the design of deen tralized algorithms able to rea h the equilibrium p oin ts, with minimal o ordination among the no des. W e ha v e seen ho w basi signal pro essing to ols su h as subspae pro jetors pla y a fundamen tal role. The sp etral mask onstrain ts ha v e b een in fat used in a v ery broad sense, meaning that the pro jetion of the transmitted signal along presrib ed subspaes should b e n ull (n ull onstrain ts) or b elo w a giv en threshold (soft onstrain ts). The on v en tional sp etral mask onstrain ts an b e seen as a simple ase of this general set-up, v alid for SISO  hannels and using as subspaes the spae spanned b y the IFFT v etors with frequenies falling in the guard bands. This general setup enompasses m ultian tenna MIMO systems, whi h is partiularly useful for CR, as it pro vides the additional spatial degrees of freedom to on trol the in terferene generated b y the ognitiv e users. Of ourse, this eld of resear h is full of in teresting further diretions w orth of in v estigation. The NE p oin ts deriv ed in this pap er w ere ditated b y the need of nding totally deen tralized algorithms with minimal o ordination among the no des. Ho w ev er, the NE p oin ts ma y not b e P areto-eien t. This raises the issue of ho w to mo v e from the NE to w ards the P areto optimal trade-o surfae, still using a deen tralized approa h. Game theory itself pro vides a series of strategies to mo v e from ineien t Nash equilibria to w ards P areto-eien t solutions, still using a deen tralized approa h, through, for example, rep eated games, where the pla y ers learn from their past  hoies [9℄. Examples of su h games are the aution games, where the autioneer (primary users) dynamially determine resoure allo ation and pries for the bidders (seondary users), dep ending on tra demands, QoS and supply/demand urv es, as evidened in a series of w orks (see, e.g., [30, 31 , 32℄). Rep eated games ma y also tak e the form of negotiations b et w een primary and seondary users, with primary users willing to lease part of their sp etrum to seondary users, under suitable rem unerations [16℄ or under the a v ailabilit y giv en b y seondary users to establish o op erativ e links with the primary users to impro v e their QoS [33℄. Comp etitiv e priing for sp etrum sharing w as also prop osed as an oligop oly mark et where a few primary users oer sp etrum aess opp ortunities to seondary users [34 ℄. An in teresting issue will b e the in tegration of our asyn hronous IWF A in rep eated (aution) games, where the optimization onsiders a set of primary users oering the lease of p ortion of their resoures to a set of seondary users, as a funtion of tra demands, QoS requiremen ts and ph ysial onstrain ts. Our sear h for the uniqueness onditions of the NE and the on v ergene onditions of our prop osed algorithms fored us to simplify the mo del. F or example, w e assumed that ea h reeiv er has an error-free short-term predition of the  hannel. This assumption w as neessary for the mathematial tratabilit y 21 of the problem and to b e able to pro vide losed-form expressions of our ndings. This is useful to gain a full understanding of the problem, without relying on sim ulation results only . Ho w ev er, in pratie, the transmitter is only able to aquire an estimate aeted b y errors and, based on that, to form a predition of the short term future ev olution. An in teresting extension of the presen ted approa h onsists then in taking in to aoun t the eets of estimation errors and dev eloping robust strategies. This is partiularly relev an t in CR systems b eause the strategy adopted b y the ognitiv e users ma y b e more or less aggressiv e dep ending on the reliabilit y of their  hannel sensing. Channel iden tiation has a long history in signal pro essing. The problem b eomes esp eially  hal- lenging in CR net w orks, where the estimation of the  hannel v oids, for example, m ust b e v ery aurate. Nev ertheless, the estimation itself ma y b e impro v ed b y exploiting the a v ailabilit y of a net w ork of no des that ould, in priniple, o op erate to get b etter and b etter estimates of the eletromagneti en vironmen t, w orking as a sensor net w ork of ognitiv e no des. Referenes [1℄ F CC Sp etrum P oliy T ask F ore, F CC Rep ort of the Sp etrum Eieny W orking Group, No v. 2002. http://www.f.gov/sptf/files/S EWGFi nalRe port 1.pdf . [2℄ S. Ha ykin, Cognitiv e Radio: Brain-Emp o w ered Wireless Comm uniations, IEEE Jour. on Sele te d A r e as in Commu- ni ations , v ol. 23, no. 2, pp. 201-220, F ebruary 2005. [3℄ I. F. Akyildiz, W.-Y. Lee, M. C. V uran, S. Mohan t y , NeXt Generation/Dynami Sp etrum A ess/Cognitiv e Radio Wireless Net w orks: A Surv ey , Computer Networks , v ol. 50, pp. 21272159, 2006. [4℄ Q. Zhao and B. Sadler, A Surv ey of Dynami Sp etrum A ess, IEEE Signal Pr o  essing Magazine, v ol. 24, no. 3, pp. 7989, Ma y 2007. [5℄ A. Goldsmith, S. A. Jafar, I. Mari, S. Sriniv asa, Breaking Sp etrum Gridlo  k with Cognitiv e Radios: An Information Theoreti P ersp etiv e, to app ear on IEEE Jour. of Sele te d A r e as in Communi ations (JSA C ). [6℄ J. Mitola, Cognitiv e Radio for Flexible Mobile Multimedia Comm uniation, in Pro . of the IEEE International W orkshop on Mobile Multime dia Communi ations (MoMuC) 1999 , pp. 310, No v em b er 1999. [7℄ N. Devro y e, P . Mitran, V. T arokh, A  hiev able Rates in Cognitiv e Radio Channels, IEEE T r ans. on Information The ory , v ol. 52, pp. 18131827, Ma y 2006. [8℄ M. J. Osb orne and A. Rubinstein, A Course in Game The ory , MIT Press, 1994. [9℄ T. Basar and G. J. Olsder, Dynami Non o op er ative Game The ory , SIAM Series in Classis in Applied Mathematis, Philadelphia, Jan uary 1999. [10℄ G. Sutari, D. P . P alomar, and S. Barbarossa, Optimal Linear Preo ding Strategies for Wideband Non-Co op erativ e Systems based on Game Theory-P art I: Nash Equilibria, IEEE T r ans. on Signal Pr o  essing, v ol. 56, no. 3, pp. 12301249, Mar h 2008. [11℄ G. Sutari, D. P . P alomar, and S. Barbarossa, Optimal Linear Preo ding Strategies for Wideband Non-Co op erativ e Systems based on Game Theory-P art I I: Algorithms, IEEE T r ans. on Signal Pr o  essing, v ol. 56, no. 3, pp. 12501267, Mar h 2008. [12℄ G. Sutari, D. P . P alomar, and S. Barbarossa, Asyn hronous Iterativ e W aterlling for Gaussian F requeny-Seletiv e In terferene Channels, in IEEE T r ans. on Information The ory , v ol. 54, no. 7, pp. 28682878, July 2008. [13℄ G. Sutari, D. P . P alomar, and S. Barbarossa, Comp etitiv e Design of Multiuser MIMO Systems Based on Game Theory: A Unied View, IEEE Jour. of Sele te d A r e as in Communi ations (JSA C ), sp eial issue on Game Theory in Comm uniation Systems , v ol. 26, no.7, Septem b er 2008. [14℄ G. Sutari, D. P . P alomar, and S. Barbarossa, MIMO Cognitiv e Radio: A Game Theoretial Approa h,submitted to IEEE T rans. on Signal Pro essing (2008). See also Pro . of the 9th IEEE W orkshop on Signal Pr o  essing A dvan es for Wir eless Communi ations ( SP A W C 08 ), Reife, P ernam buo, Brazil, July 6-9, 2008. 22 [15℄ Q. Zhao, Sp etrum Opp ortunit y and In terferene Constrain t in Opp ortunisti Sp etrum A ess, in Pro  . of IEEE International Confer en e on A  oustis, Sp e e h, and Signal Pr o  essing (ICASSP), Honolulu, Ha w aii, USA, April 15-20, 2007. [16℄ L. Cao, H. Zheng, Distributed Sp etrum Allo ation via Lo al Bargaining, in Pro . of IEEE SECON 2005 , pp. 475 486, Sept. 2005. [17℄ Y. Chen, Q. Zhao, A. Sw ami, Join t design and separation priniple for opp ortunisti sp etrum aess in the presene of sensing errors, IEEE T r ans. on Information The ory , v ol. 54, pp. 2053 - 2071, Ma y 2008. [18℄ B. Wild and K. Ram handran, Deteting primary reeiv ers for ognitiv e radio appliations,in Pro  . of the IEEE Symp. New F r ontiers Dynami Sp e trum A   ess Networks ( D YSP AN 05 ), pp. 124130, No v. 2005. [19℄ T. M. Co v er and J. A. Thomas, Elements of Information The ory , John Wiley and Sons, 1991. [20℄ W. Y u and R. Lui,  Dual metho ds for nonon v ex sp etrum optimization of m ultiarrier systems, IEEE T r ans. Com- mun ., v ol. 54, pp. 13101322, 2006. [21℄ R. Cendrillon, W. Y u, M. Mo onen, J. V erliden, and T. Bosto en,  Optimal m ulti-user sp etrum managemen t for digital subsrib er lines, IEEE T r ans. Commun., v ol. 54, no. 5, pp. 922933, Ma y 2006. [22℄ S. Y e and R. S. Blum, Optimized Signaling for MIMO In terferene Systems with F eedba k, IEEE T r ans. on Signal Pr o  essing , v ol. 51, no. 11, pp. 2839-2848, No v em b er 2003. [23℄ Y. Rong and Y. Hua,  Optimal p o w er s hedule for distributed MIMO links, in Pro . of the 25th A rmy Sien e Confer en e, No v em b er 2006. [24℄ Z.-Q. Luo and S. Zhang,  Dynami Sp etrum Managemen t: Complexit y and Dualit y , IEEE Jour. of Sele te d T opis in Signal Pr o  essing , v ol. 2, no. 1, pp. 5772, F ebruary 2008. [25℄ R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix A nalysis , Cam bridge Univ. Press, 1985. [26℄ Daniel P . P alomar and J. F onollosa, Pratial Algorithms for a F amily of W aterlling Solutions, IEEE T r ans. on Signal Pr o  essing , v ol. 53, no. 2, pp. 686695, F eb. 2005. [27℄ W. Y u, G. Ginis, and J. M. Cio, Distributed Multiuser P o w er Con trol for Digital Subsrib er Lines, IEEE JSA C , v ol. 20, no. 5, pp. 1105-1115, June 2002. [28℄ Z.-Q. Luo and J.-S. P ang, Analysis of Iterativ e W aterlling Algorithm for Multiuser P o w er Con trol in Digital Sub- srib er Lines," EURASIP Jour. on Applie d Signal Pr o  essing , Ma y 2006. [29℄ J. G. D. F orney and M. V. Eyub oglu, Com bined Equalization and Co ding Using Preo ding, IEEE Communi ations Magazine , v ol. 29, no. 12, pp. 2534, Deem b er 1991. [30℄ Y.-C. Liang, H.-H. Chen, J. Mitola, P . Mahonen, R. K ohno, J. H. Reed Eds., Sp eial Issue on Cognitiv e Radio: Theory and Appliation, IEEE Jour. of Sele te d A r e as in Communi ations (JSA C ), v ol. 26, no. 1, Jan. 2008. [31℄ A. Sw ami, R. A. Berry , A. M. Sa y eed, V. T arokh, Q. Zhao Eds., Sp eial Issue on Signal Pro essing and Net w orking for Dynami Sp etrum A ess, IEEE Jour. of Sele te d T opis in Signal Pr o  essing , v ol. 2, no. 1, F eb. 2008. [32℄ Z. Ji, K. Ra y Liu, Dynami Sp etrum Sharing: A Game Theoretial Ov erview, IEEE Communi ations Ma g azin e, v ol. 45, no. 5, pp. 8894, Ma y 2007. [33℄ O. Simeone, I. Stano jev, S. Sa v azzi, Y. Bar-Ness, U. Spagnolini, R. Pi kholtz, Sp etrum leasing to o op erating ad ho  seondary net w orks, IEEE Jour. of Sele te d A r e as in Communi ations (JSA C ), v ol. 26, no. 1, pp. 203213, Jan. 2008. [34℄ D. Niy ato, E. Hossain, Comp etitiv e Priing for Sp etrum Sharing in Cognitiv e Radio Net w orks: Dynami Game, Ineieny of Nash Equilibrium, and Collusion, IEEE Jour. of Sele te d A r e as in Communi ations (JSA C ), v ol. 26, no. 1, pp. 192202, Jan. 2008. 23

Original Paper

Loading high-quality paper...

Comments & Academic Discussion

Loading comments...

Leave a Comment