fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 1
Abstract—In this paper, we study the non-orthogonal dynamic Scenario I: Each active (admitted) D2D link is assigned
spectrum sharing for device-to-device (D2D) communications in one subband and each subband is exploited by at most one
the D2D underlaid cellular network. Our design aims to maximize D2D link. This scenario allows us to design efficient and
the weighted system sum-rate under the constraints that (i) each
cellular or active D2D link is assigned one subband and (ii) low-complexity algorithms, which can be used to address the
the required minimum rates for cellular and active D2D links design in more general settings. This scenario is especially
are guaranteed. To solve this problem, we first characterize beneficial for the dense deployment of D2D communications.
the optimal power allocation solution for a given subband Scenario II: Each active (admitted) D2D link can be as-
assignment. Based on this result, we formulate the subband signed multiple subbands and each subband is exploited by at
assignment problem by using the graph-based approach, in which
each link corresponds to a vertex and each subband assignment most one D2D link. This scenario requires more complicated
is represented by a hyper-edge. We then propose an Iterative resource allocation design compared to scenario I. This is
Rounding algorithm and an optimal Branch-and-Bound (BnB) because beside the design issues of scenario I, scenario II
algorithm to solve the resulting graph-based problem. We prove requires to determine the number of subbands allocated to
that the Iterative Rounding algorithm achieves at least 1/2 of the each D2D link.
optimal weighted sum-rate. Extensive numerical studies illustrate
that the proposed Iterative Rounding algorithm significantly out- Scenario III: Each active (admitted) D2D link can be
performs conventional spectrum sharing algorithms and attains assigned multiple subbands and each subband can be exploited
almost the same system sum-rate as the optimal BnB algorithm. by multiple D2D links. Resource allocation for this scenario
is certainly very challenging. In fact, even if the subband
Index Terms—Device-to-device communication, cellular net- assignment solution can be determined, the power allocation
works, resource allocation, subband assignment, power alloca- problem is still strongly NP-Hard [6]; therefore, only heuristic
tion. algorithms can be developed to obtain a feasible solution with
practically affordable computation complexity. Furthermore,
I. I NTRODUCTION to solve the resource allocation in this scenario, the channel
The fast growth of mobile traffic has motivated the de- state information (CSI) of the interfering channels among D2D
velopment of enabling technologies for significant network links over all subbands must be available. Estimation of such
capacity enhancement in future wireless networks [1]. Device- CSI may not be feasible in many practical D2D applications,
to-device communications has been proposed as a mean to especially in the dense D2D communications setting, due to
improve the system spectral and energy-efficiency and reduce the large CSI estimation and signaling overhead.
traffic load in the core network [2]–[4]. Specifically, in the Due to the potential benefits of studying scenario I, many
dense networks, D2D communications can improve the system existing works focus on designing efficient resource allocation
spectral efficiency significantly since spatial spectrum reuse algorithms for this scenario [7]–[14]. Early works consider
is exploited effectively through enabling short-range D2D simple network settings such as the system with only one
communication links. Efficient radio resource management for cellular link and one D2D link [7]. Moreover, most existing
D2D communications is essential to realize these benefits. resource allocation designs assume that channel allocations
In general, spectrum assignment for cellular and D2D links for cellular links have been predetermined [7]–[22]. From
can be performed in the orthogonal or non-orthogonal manner the admission control perspective, the current literature either
[5]. Moreover, non-orthogonal resource allocation for D2D and ignores the link selection issue or proposes only greedy
cellular links can be divided into three scenarios as described link selection algorithms [10], [13], [17], [21]. Generally,
in the following. D2D communications can be assisted and controlled by the
cellular base-station (BS) [5] through which optimization of
Copyright
2016
c IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. How- the subband assignment, power allocation, and link selection
ever, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be obtained for both cellular and D2D links would lead to the best system
from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
Manuscript received June 26, 2015; revised December 08, 2015 and May performance.
15, 2016; accepted July 23, 2016. Solving this joint design problem for any aforementioned
T. D. Hoang and L. B. Le are with INRS-EMT, Université du Québec, scenarios requires us to deal with the nonlinear power alloca-
Montréal, Québec, Canada. Emails: {tuong.hoang,long.le}@emt.inrs.ca.
T. Le-Ngoc is with Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, tion and optimization of integer variables related to the sub-
McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada. Emails: tho.le-ngoc@mcgill.ca band assignments and link selection. Even for a given power
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 2
TABLE I
S UMMARY OF RELATED WORKS AND OUR CURRENT WORK
allocation and link selection solution, we still need to tackle In general, joint optimization of subband and power allo-
an integer subband assignment problem, which is NP-Hard in cation is required for efficient resource utilization in multi-
general. Therefore, it is very challenging to tackle this joint channel wireless systems. The setting with multiple D2D and
design problem even for scenario I. Moreover, development of cellular links sharing multiple channels is considered in several
an efficient and low-complexity resource allocation algorithm recent works [11]–[15]. In [11], the system sum-rate optimiza-
is of great interest for practical implementation. The current tion for D2D and cellular links is considered. Nonetheless, the
work focuses on resource allocation design for scenarios I and authors assume that each cellular link has been pre-allocated
II and we reserve the study of scenario III for our future works. one subband and the work aims at optimizing the matching
of each D2D link with one cellular link so that the sum rate
is maximized. The joint D2D mode selection and resource
A. Related Works
allocation framework is proposed in [12] where each D2D
Resource allocation design for the setting in which D2D link can either reuse the resource of cellular links or exploit
and cellular links share a single channel is investigated in the dedicated resource assuming that the resource allocation
[7]–[10], [16]. In particular, the authors of [7] consider the for cellular links is pre-determined. Resource allocation for
power allocation and mode selection problem to maximize the D2D communication is investigated in [13] where the heuristic
sum-rate where they study the power allocation problem for matching design between D2D and cellular links based on their
each mode where there are only one cellular link and one relative distance is adopted. Moreover, the stable marriage
D2D link. Joint power and rate control of D2D and cellular matching algorithms are adopted in [14], [15] to determine the
links is studied in [8], and the mode switching problem for efficient matching between cellular and D2D links. Although
D2D communication is investigated in [9]. Both works [8] all these existing works focus on scenario I mentioned above,
and [9], however, consider the system with one D2D link link selection is not studied, these works assume that the
and one cellular link. In [10], the power control design is resource allocations of the cellular links are pre-determined.
pursued to optimize the spectrum efficiency of D2D links Resource allocation designs, which allow multiple D2D
in vehicular systems while the joint admission control, mode links to reuse the same resource, are studied in several
selection, and power control problem is studied for a general recent papers [17]–[23], [30], [31]. In particular, the works in
D2D communication system in [16]. Both works [10] and [16] [17] and [18] employ the dynamic programming approach to
consider the systems with multiple cellular and D2D links and solve the resource allocation for the D2D underlaying cellular
a single channel.
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 3
network. The joint subchannel and power allocation design optimization problem in our design. Moreover, to solve
using an interference-graph method is conducted in [23], a this problem, we first derive the optimal power allocation
semi-distributed resource allocation algorithm is proposed in for a given subband assignment for one pair of cellular
[19], and the iterative algorithms are developed in [30], [31]. and D2D links, which enables us to determine the con-
However, the authors propose to share the downlink cellular tribution of each subband assignment to the optimization
resources with D2D links, which is not recommended in the objective. Based on this result, we transform the original
LTE-A standard. In [20], the authors propose a joint spectrum resource allocation problem into the subband assignment
and power allocation algorithm for the D2D underlaying problem.
cellular system assuming that the power of each D2D link is • We formulate the subband assignment problem by em-
fixed and the interference from cellular links to D2D links is ploying the graph-based approach. Since each link can
negligible. Moreover, in [21], a two-step resource allocation exploit a subband orthogonally or non-orthogonally, we
algorithm is proposed where greedy subband assignment is introduce the concept of virtual cellular and D2D links
performed in the second step after the power allocation in to capture all possible types of subband assignments.
the first step. Finally, in [22] the graph coloring algorithm We then formulate a graph-based problem where each
is proposed to match cellular resources with one or two link/subband and subband assignment correspond to one
D2D links; nevertheless, the power allocation is not studied. vertex and one hyper-edge in the underlying graph, re-
For most aforementioned works, the channel assignments for spectively. This problem belongs to the family of three-
cellular links are assumed to be pre-determined, only heuristic dimensional matching problems, which are generally NP-
algorithms are proposed, and link selection for D2D links is Hard.
not investigated. • We develop a novel Iterative Rounding algorithm to
Game theory has also been employed for D2D resource solve the subband assignment problem based on the
allocation design in several existing works [24]–[29]. Auction combination of linear programming and efficient round-
based resource allocation for D2D communications is studied ing techniques. Specifically, in each iteration we solve
in [24]. The two-stage Stackelberg game is employed to a relaxed version of the subband assignment problem
engineer the resource allocation in [25] where the cellular BS for unallocated subbands and network links. Then, we
is the leader and D2D links are the followers. Non-cooperative develop a sophisticated mechanism to arrange fractional-
game formulation is adopted to design the resource allocation weight edges of the underlying graph in an appropriate or-
for D2D links in [26], and the coalitional game approach der and employ the Local Ratio Method [32] to determine
is employed to solve the joint mode selection and resource some subband assignments. Moreover, the unassigned
allocation in [28]. For the game theory approach adopted in subbands and network links are used to form the network
[24]–[29], D2D and cellular links usually act as the players graph based on which we can decide further subband
and the obtained stable solution could be satisfactory for all assignments in the next iteration by using the same
users but it may not be necessarily the most efficient solution. procedure. We prove that the weighted sum-rate achieved
Moreover, these works do not consider link selection for D2D by this Iterative Rounding algorithm is at least half of the
links and subband assignment optimization for cellular links. optimal weighted sum-rate. In addition, we present an
We summarize these related works and their characteristics optimal Branch and Bound (BnB) algorithm, which has
in Table I where PA and SA stand for power allocation and significantly lower computational complexity compared
subband allocation, respectively. It can be observed that none to the optimal exhaustive search algorithm.
of these existing works addresses all following design aspects: • Numerical results demonstrate that the Iterative Rounding
consideration of a general setting with multiple cellular and algorithm achieves almost the same sum-rate as that
D2D links, joint subband allocation optimization for cellular attained by the optimal BnB algorithm. In addition,
and D2D links, D2D link selection, QoS guarantees for both these two algorithms result in up to 40% sum-rate gain
cellular and D2D links, and theoretical performance analysis compared to the conventional algorithms in [13] and
of developed sub-optimal algorithms. [14]. Moreover, numerical results also confirm that in the
dense D2D communications scenario, resource allocation
design under scenario I can achieve reasonably good
B. Contributions and Novelty of the Current Work
performance. Finally, we show that by using the Iterative
This paper focuses on the radio resource allocation for D2D Rounding algorithm in the two-step design approach to
communications in cellular networks for the first scenario and address scenario II, we can achieve dramatically higher
the developed algorithm for scenario I is employed to tackle sum-rate than those due to the conventional algorithms
the resource allocation for scenario II. Specifically, our work in [27], [28].
makes the following contributions.
• We formulate the resource allocation problem for joint The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. In
D2D link selection, subband assignment, and power con- Section II, we describe the system model and problem formu-
trol that aims at maximizing the weighted sum-rate while lation. The optimal power allocation is described in Section III,
guaranteeing the minimum rate requirements of individ- followed by the description of subband assignment algorithms
ual cellular and active (selected) D2D links. The D2D link in Section IV. Discussions of algorithm complexity, signaling,
selection is indeed embedded into the considered joint and further extensions are given in Section V. In Section VI,
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 4
we present the numerical results, and Section VII concludes weighted sum-rate of all selected D2D links and cellular links
the paper. while satisfying the minimum required rates of cellular links
and active D2D links. Specifically, the QoS requirements of
II. S YSTEM M ODEL AND P ROBLEM F ORMULATION cellular links are expressed as3
A. System Model
rk (p, ρ) ≥ Rkmin ∀k ∈ Kc . (4)
We consider the spectrum sharing problem among multiple
D2D and cellular links in the uplink direction. Let N = In addition, the minimum rate requirement of an D2D link
{1, · · · , N } with size |N | = N be the set of subbands in the when it is selected is described as
system.1 We denote Kc = {1, · · · , Kc } as the set of cellular X [n]
links, Kd = {Kc + 1, · · · , Kc + Kd } as the set of D2D links, rk (p, ρ) ≥ I{ ρk = 1}Rkmin ∀k ∈ Kd , (5)
and K = Kc ∪ Kd as the set of all communications links with n∈N
size |K| = Kc + Kd = K. We assume that each subband can
be allocated to at most one cellular and one D2D link, which where I{A} denotes the indicator function, which equals to 1
P [n]
means that cellular and D2D links utilize available subbands if A is true and equals 0, otherwise. Here, we have ρk =
n∈N
orthogonally within its tier. 1 for each selected D2D link k, which is assigned exactly one
[n]
Let hkl be the channel gain from the transmitter of link l subband. The power constraints of all the links are given as
to the receiver of link k on subband n. We denote Pkmax as
the maximum transmit power of link k ∈ K. In addition, we
X [n]
pk ≤ Pkmax ∀k ∈ K. (6)
denote the power vectors on subband n and all the subbands n∈N
[n] [n]
as p[n] = [p1 , · · · , pK ]T , and p = vec[p[1] , · · · , p[N ] ],
[n] [n] Moreover, we assume that each subband can be allocated to
respectively. For clarity, we will also use pCk and pDl to
explicitly denote the powers of cellular link k and D2D link l only one cellular link and one D2D link, which is captured by
on subband n, respectively. To represent assignment decision the following constraints
[n]
of subband n to link k ∈ K, we define a binary variable ρk X [n]
[n]
where ρk = 1 if the subband n is assigned to link k ∈ K, and ρk ≤ 1 ∀n ∈ N (7)
[n] k∈Kc
ρk = 0, otherwise. We also define the subband assignment
[n]
X
[n] [n]
vectors ρ[n] = [ρ1 , · · · , ρK ]T and ρ = vec[ρ[1] , · · · , ρ[N ] ]. ρk ≤ 1 ∀n ∈ N . (8)
For convenience, we adopt the following notations: Kk ≡ Kc k∈Kd
if k ∈ Kc and Kk ≡ Kd if k ∈ Kd .
In addition, each cellular link is assigned one subband and
The signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) achieved
each D2D link can use one subband, which are captured by
by link k ∈ K on subband n can be expressed as
the following subband assignment constraints
[n] [n] [n]
[n] ρk pk hkk
Γk (p[n] , ρ[n] ) = ,
X [n]
[n] P [n] [n] [n]
(1) ρk = 1 ∀k ∈ Kc (9)
σk + ρl pl hkl
n∈N
l∈K\Kk
[n]
X
[n]
ρk ≤ 1 ∀k ∈ Kd (10)
where σk denotes the noise power for link k on subband n, n∈N
P [n] [n] [n]
and ρl pl hkl is the interference due to other links in [n]
ρk ∈ {0, 1} ∀k ∈ K ∀n ∈ N . (11)
l∈K\Kk
the K\Kk set. The achievable rates of link k ∈ K on subband
n and all the subbands can be expressed as Note that we only achieve equality in the constraint (10) if
the corresponding D2D link is selected (active) and assigned
[n] [n]
rk (p[n] , ρ[n] ) = log2 1 + Γk (p[n] , ρ[n] ) , (2) one subband accordingly. The considered resource allocation
X [n] problem can now be formulated as
rk (p, ρ) = rk (p[n] , ρ[n] ), (3)
X X
n∈N
max R = αrk (p, ρ) + (1 − α)rk (p, ρ)
p,ρ
where the rate is calculated in b/s/Hz, which is normalized by k∈Kc k∈Kd
the bandwidth of one subband. subject to (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11),
(12)
B. Problem Formulation where α is a weight parameter that controls spectrum sharing
of cellular and D2D links.
We assume that each cellular link or active D2D link is To solve this problem, we first investigate the optimal power
allocated one subband, which is suitable for uplink com- allocation solution for a given subband assignment based on
munications [33].2 Our design objective is to maximize the which we can develop subband assignment algorithms.
1 Each subband can be a carrier and sub-channel in the multi-carrier wireless
networks (e.g., LTE-based wireless networks). 3 In practice, it can be infeasible to support these minimum rate constraints.
2 Extension to the case where each link can be allocated multiple subbands In this work, we assume, however, that these constraints can always be
is discussed in Section V.C. supported.
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 5
III. O PTIMAL P OWER A LLOCATION A LGORITHM where ADl , BDl , and △Dl are specified in Appendix A.
Note that we allow each cellular and active D2D link to use Then, the optimal power allocation solution of problem (14)
only one subband in the problem formulation (12). Therefore, is characterized in the following proposition whose proof is
if link m ∈ K is allocated subband n exclusively then the given in Appendix A.
max
optimal power for this link is Pm and the corresponding Proposition 1. If the optimal power allocation solution of
contribution of this link to the objective value is problem (14) is in the form (Pkmax , pDl ) then it belongs the
max [n]
αlog2 1 + Pm [n] hmm
following set
if m ∈ Kc
wm[n]
, σm max [n] (13) (1) (2) (3)
P
(1 − α)log 1 + m [n]mm h
if m ∈ Kd . {(Pkmax , PDl ), (Pkmax , PDl ), (Pkmax , PDl )},
2
σm
(3)
S1 , if PDl ∈ [0, Plmax ] (19)
However, if cellular link k and D2D link l share subband n
(1) (2)
max max
{(Pk , PDl ), (Pk , PDl )}, otherwise.
then the optimal power allocation must be determined from
the following optimization problem4
Similarly, let us define
[n] [n] [n]
max wkl , αrCk + (1 − α)rDl ( min [n] [n]
)
[n]
pCk , pDl
[n]
(1) (2Rk − 1)(Plmax hkl + σk )
PCk , max , 0 (20)
[n] [n] (14) [n]
s.t. rCk ≥ Rkmin , rDl ≥ Rlmin hkk
( [n]
! )
[n] [n]
pCk ∈ [0, Pkmax ], pDl ∈ [0, Plmax ], (2) 1 Plmax hll [n]
PCk , min [n] min − σl , Pkmax (21)
[n] [n]
hlk 2Rl − 1
[n] pCk hkk [n]
where rCk = log2 1 + [n] [n] [n] and rDl = (3)
p
σk +pDl hkl PCk , (−BCk + △Ck )/ACk , (22)
[n] [n]
pDl hll
log2 1 + [n] [n] [n] . where ACk , BCk , and △Ck are calculated as
σl +pCk hlk
In fact, (14) presents the power allocation problem for 1 1 − β max 1
weighted sum-rate maximization of two communication links. ACk = hkk h2lk , BCk = P hll hlk hkk + σl hlk hkk ,
β 2β l β
For this problem, it has been proved in [34] that if the problem
1
is feasible then the optimal transmit powers P = (pCk , pDl ) CCk = σl hkk (σl + Plmax hll ) − Plmax hll hlk (σl + Plmax hkl ),
have the form β
2 1−α
△Ck = BCk − ACk CCk , β = .
P ∈ {(Pkmax , pDl ), (pCk , Plmax )}. (15) α
In [34], the authors consider maximizing the sum-rate of two Then, we have following results.
interfering links without minimum rate constraints. For each Proposition 2. If the optimal power allocation solution of
possible optimal power allocation solution given in (15), the problem (14) is in the form (pCk , Plmax ), then it belongs to
sum-rate objective function becomes a concave function of one the following set
variable and the optimal solution to maximize such a concave
(1) (2) (3)
function belongs to the set of extreme points in the power set, {(PCk , Plmax ), (PCk , Plmax ), (PCk , Plmax )},
i.e., (0, Plmax ), (Pkmax , 0), or (Pkmax , Plmax ).
(3)
In contrast to [34], we deal with the maximization of S2 , if PCk ∈ [0, Pkmax ] (23)
(1) (2)
the weighted sum rate of one D2D link and one cellular {(PCk , Plmax ), (PCk , Plmax )}, otherwise.
link with minimum rate constraints. To address this more
complicated problem, we have to transform the weighted sum- Proof. The proof is omitted due to the space constraint.
rate objective function and the transformed function is neither
concave nor convex as described in (36) of Appendix A. In Combining the results in Propositions 1 and 2, we can
addition, the feasible region of this constrained problem is characterize the optimal solution structure of problem (14) in
more complicated than that of the problem in [34]. Hence, the following theorem.
characterization of the optimal power allocation solution in Theorem 1. If the problem (14) is feasible then its Soptimal
this setting is more challenging. power allocation solution belongs to the set S ∗ , S1 S2 .
Let us now define the following quantities:
( ) Since S ∗ contains at most 6 possible power allocation
min [n] [n]
(1) (2Rl − 1)(Pkmax hlk + σl ) solutions, we can determine the optimal solution by examining
PDl , max [n]
, 0 (16) all potential solutions in S ∗ easily. Therefore, the optimal
hll
( [n]
! ) contribution to the system weighted sum-rate for each subband
(2) 1 Pkmax hkk [n] max n due to exclusive and co-sharing solutions in (13) and (14),
PDl , min [n] min − σk , Pl (17) [n] [n]
hkl 2Rk − 1 denoted as wm and wkl , respectively, can be determined
(3)
p accordingly. If problem (13) or (14) is not feasible, we will
PDl , (−BDl + △Dl )/ADl , (18) [n] [n]
set wm = −Q or wkl = −Q where Q is a sufficiently large
4 This power allocation problem aims at maximizing the contribution of the number so that link m or the pair of D2D link k and cellular
underlying subband assignment to the system weighted sum-rate. link l is not assigned subband n.
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 6
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 7
(t) (t)
and one (xe = 1), namely Ea and Eu , respectively.
(t)
We then arrange the edges in the set Eu with fractional
subband assignment variables in phase 2 based on which we
employ the Local Ratio Method in phase 3 to determine the
(t)
set of additional subband assignments Eg . Phases 2 and
3 have been indeed appropriately designed to minimize the
performance loss due to rounding of the fractional subband
(t) (t)
assignment variables. The edges in Ea ∪ Eg will be used to
perform the corresponding subband assignments for cellular
and/or D2D links in each iteration. Finally, we update the set
of available subbands and inactive links and go back to phase
1 of the next iteration until convergence. The main operations
of the algorithm are illustrated in Fig. 2.
2) Resource Allocation Algorithm: Detailed operations of
the Iterative Rounding Algorithm are presented in Algorithm
1. In each iteration t, we have to solve a subband assign-
ment problem formulated in (27) whose underlying graph
is formed by the sets of vertexes and edges (V (t) , E (t) ),
i.e., V = V (t) , E = E (t) , which is a sub-graph of original
Fig. 2. The flowchart of Iterative Rounding Algorithm graph with the corresponding sets (V 0 , E 0 ). We initialize the
algorithm with V (t) = V 0 , E (t) = E 0 in the first iteration
t = 1. Moreover, we use Eal to denote the set of edges
i.e., it is allocated one subband if it is selected (active) or it corresponding to all subband assignments accumulated over
is not allocated any subband if it is not selected (inactive). iterations. The operations of three phases conducted in each
This explains the need to use inequality instead of equality iteration t are described in the following.
constraints in C2. Note also that the constraint C2 is not
applied to the virtual D2D link 0d since its degree can be Algorithm 1 Iterative Subband Assignment Algorithm
greater than 1, i.e., there are multiple cellular links using their 1: Initialization t = 1, Eal = ∅, V (t) = V 0 , E (t) = E 0
allocated subbands exclusively. 2: while Vn (Eal ) 6= N and Vc (Eal ) ∪ Vd (Eal ) 6= Kc ∪ Kd do
For problem IP(V, E), if we relax the integer allocation 3: Phase 1:
constraint xe ∈ {0, 1} ∀e ∈ E to xe ∈ [0, 1] ∀e ∈ E 4: Solve x∗ = argmax LP(V (t) , E (t) ).
(t) (t)
then we obtain the corresponding linear relaxation problem, Ea = {e ∈ E (t) |x∗e = 1}, Eu = {e ∈ E (t) |0 < x∗e < 1}.
which is refereed to as LP(V, E) in the sequel. Note that 5: Phase 2:
(t) (t) (t)
Set Eua ← ∅, Euu ← Eu .
IP(V 0 , E 0 ) corresponds to the original subband allocation 6:
(t)
for i = 1 to |Eu | do
problem, which is challenging to address since there may not 7:
(t)
e∗ = argmin c(Euu , e).
exist a polynomial-time algorithm to solve it. To overcome (t)
e∈ Euu
(t) (t)
this challenge, we propose two algorithms to solve problem Eua ← Eua ∪ e∗ .
(t) (t)
IP(V 0 , E 0 ) in the following, namely Iterative Rounding algo- Euu ← Euu − e∗ .
rithm, and optimal BnB algorithm. 8: end for
(t) (t)
Eu ← Eua
9: Phase 3:
(t) (t) (t)
10: Eg ← LR(Eu , w(Eu )).
B. Iterative Rounding Algorithm (t) (t)
11: Eal = Eal ∪ Ea ∪ Eg .
1) Outline of Design Principals: It can be observed that the t ← t + 1.
linear relaxation problem LP(V 0 , E 0 ) can be solved easily by Update V (t) ← V 0 − V (Eal ) and E (t) = E(V (t) ).
standard optimization solutions, i.e., simplex or interior point 12: end while
13: Output Eal and perform subband assignments according to the
method [35]. However, solving problem LP(V 0 , E 0 ) often edges in set Eal .
results in fractional values for some edges e (0 < xe < 1).
To address this issue, we propose an Iterative Rounding
Algorithm in which we solve a linear relaxation problem a) Linear Relaxation Phase: In this phase, we solve the
and perform suitable rounding for fractional variables in each linear programming relaxation problem LP(V (t) , E (t) ) (line
iteration. This is repeated until all links are active or all 4 in Algorithm 1), and obtain two sets of subband assignment
subband are allocated. variables whose values are fractional (smaller than 1) and
Specifically, the Iterative Rounding Algorithm performs the equal to one, respectively. Specifically, let x∗ denote the
following operations in three phases of each iteration t. In optimal solution of problem LP(V (t) , E (t) ) then we define
phase 1, it solves the linear relaxation problem for inactive these two sets as
links and available subbands corresponding to the graph with Ea(t) = {e ∈ E (t) |x∗e = 1} (28)
the set of vertexes V (t) and the set of edges E (t) , which results
in two sets of variables equal to fractional values (0 < xe < 1) Eu(t) = {e ∈ E (t)
|0 < x∗e < 1}, (29)
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 8
Algorithm 2 LR(E, w(E)) assignments then this rounding operation would minimize
1: Etemp ← ∅, j = 1. the impacts to other unallocated edges and therefore the
2: repeat performance loss.
3: Choose from E the smallest index edge e∗ . (t)
At the end of each iteration t, we obtain the set Eg , which
4: ej ← e∗
5: Update Etemp ← Etemp ∪ ej and j ← j + 1 contains edges corresponding further subband assignments.
(t) (t)
6: For each edge e′ ∈ E ∩ E(V (e)), Finally, Ea and Eg are added to the “assignment” set Eal at
1. Update the weight value we′ ← we′ − we∗ . the end of each iteration (line 11 in Algorithm 1). In Algorithm
2. If we′ ≤ 0, E ← E − e′ 2 LR(E, w(E)) where w(E) is the original weighted vector
7: until E = ∅
8:
(|E
Es temp
|+1)
=∅
corresponding to the edges in E, in which we is the weighted
9: for j = |Etemp | to 1 do value of edge e obtained from the optimal power allocation
10: Choose edge ej ∈ Etemp to do the following described in Section III. As we consider a particular edge e,
(j+1)
If V (ej ) ∩ V (Es
(j) (j+1)
) = ∅, Es ← Es
(j)
∪ ej , else Es ← we decrease the weight of each coupled edge e′ of e by we
(j+1)
Es . (line 6). Here, edges e′ and e are defined to be coupled if they
11: end for share at least one vertex and we assume that e is coupled with
(1)
12: Return Es .
itself. After these weight updates, any edges with non-positive
(t)
weights will be excluded from being added to set Eg . In the
(t) end, we exclude some further edges so that each edge in the
which are associated with LP(V (t) , E (t) ). We define Vu = (1)
returned set Es is not coupled with any other edges in this
(t) (t) (t)
V (Eu ) and Va = V (Ea ) as the sets of vertexes associated set (lines 9-11 of Algorithm 2).
(t) (t)
with Ea and Eu , respectively. We refer to edges in the set 3) Properties of Iterative Rounding Algorithm: Firstly, we
(t)
Eu as fractional edges in the sequel. To proceed further, let state an important property related to the linear relaxation
E(V ) represent the set of edges each of which has at least phase.
one of its vertexes in the set V . Based on x∗ , we obtain the
assignment vectors x∗a and x∗u corresponding to edges in the Proposition 3. x∗u is also an optimal solution of problem
(t) (t)
(t) (t)
sets E(Va ) and E(Vu ), respectively. Now, Eu and x∗u
(t) LP(Vu , E(Vu )).
are used in the following two phases to determine additional (t)
Recall that Vu is the set of vertexes corresponding to the
subband assignments. (t)
fractional edges, and E(Vu ) is the set of edges each of which
b) Fractional Edge Arrangement Phase: The objective of (t)
has at least one of its vertexes in Vu .
this phase is to arrange the fractional edges, which helps select
additional edges for further subband assignments (lines 6-8 Proof. The proof is given in Appendix B.
Algorithm 1). Toward this end, we define a coupling parameter
c(e, E) for each fractional edge e as The results in Proposition 3 are very useful because it
implies that one can split the linear programming prob-
lem LP(V (t) , E (t) ) into two linear programming problems
X
c(e, E) , x∗e′ , (30)
(t) (t) (t) (t)
e′ ∈E∩E(V (e)) LP(Vu , E(Vu )) and LP(Va , E(Va )) of smaller size. In
(t) (t)
addition, problem LP(Va , E(Va )) has the integer optimal
where V (e) is the set of vertexes of edge e. In fact, c(e, E) (t) (t)
solution and problem LP(Vu , E(Vu )) has the fractional
represents the sum of fractional values of edges in set E that optimal solution. Consequently, we can perform subband as-
have at least one common vertex with edge e. In this phase, (t)
(t) signments corresponding to the edges in Ea which provides
we arrange the edges in Eu in the ascending order of their one part of the final subband assignment solution. Moreover,
coupling parameters. Specifically, the edge arrangement pro- (t) (t)
(t) we only need to solve problem LP(Vu , E(Vu )) to deter-
cedure is executed as follows. Initially, c(e, Eu ) is calculated mine further subband assignments.
(t)
for all edges e ∈ Eu . Then, the edge having smallest coupling In addition, we need to investigate the solution obtained
(t)
parameter is selected and removed from Eu . These procedure from each iteration of the algorithm.
(t) P To facilitate the de-
is repeated until all the edges in Eu is arranged. Moreover, scription, let we denote z(E) = e∈E we as total weight
we assume that edges are indexed in the order they are added of all edges in E, and l∗ (V, E) be the optimal objective value
(t,i)
to set Eua in line 7 of Algorithm 1. The set of arranged edge of problem LP(V, E). At each iteration t, we perform the
(t) (t)
Eu is used for the next phase of the algorithm. rounding operations to obtain set Eg based on the solution
c) Local Ratio Rounding Phase: In the third phase, we (t) (t)
of problem LP(Vu , E(Vu )).
employ the Local Ratio Method [32] to assign the remaining
bandwidth resources to fractional edges, which is described in Proposition 4. The total weight of selected edges in set
(t)
Algorithm 2, LR(E, w(E)). The way these assignments are Eg (line 10 of Algorithm 1) is at least half of the optimal
(t)
performed can be explained as follows. The rearranged edges objective of the linear relaxation problem, i.e., z(Eg ) ≥
1 ∗ (t) (t)
obtained at the end of phase two of Algorithm 1 are considered 2 l (Vu , E(Vu )).
sequentially to perform further subband assignments in the
(t) Proof. The proof is given in Appendix C
order of increasing indexes of Eu . The idea is that if we
sequentially round up edges starting from those with small- The above proposition characterizes the achieved objective
est coupling parameters and perform corresponding subband in each iteration t. We now state the main results that char-
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 9
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 10
or D2D link can be allocated multiple subbands (scenario II). BnB BnB
500 Iterative 450
We adopt the two-step approach to perform resource allocation Conv_optimization
Iterative
Conv_optimization
for this general case. In the first step, we determine the number 450
Conv_game
400
Conv_game
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
of subbands that must be allocated to each link m, denoted as Maximum power of D2D link (W)
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Maximum power of D2D link (W)
1
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 11
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 12
650
600
Fig. 11. System sum rate versus Fig. 12. Number of active D2D Fig. 13. Sum rate versus Kc (Com- Fig. 14. Sum rate versus Kc (Com-
Kd as Kc = 10 links versus Kd as Kc = 10 paring with [27]) paring with [28])
700 650
600
The latter algorithm implements the resource allocation by 600
algorithm, each D2D link is assigned one subband, the “Pro- 0 300
4 16 28 40 4 16 28 40
posed Extension 1” and “Proposed Extension 2” determine Number of D2D links Numbere of D2D links
the number of subbands assigned to each D2D link by using
the outcomes of “Conventional 1” and “Conventional 2” Fig. 15. Sum rate versus Kd (Com- Fig. 16. Sum rate versus Kd (Com-
paring with [27]) paring with [28])
algorithms, respectively. Moreover, the “Proposed multi-fair”
algorithm assigns the same number of subbands to all admitted
D2D links. We also consider the “Full admission” scheme among different designs for scenarios I and II decreases.
where all D2D links are admitted without performing adaptive Moreover, except for cases where Kd is in the interval [8, 16],
D2D link selection. Finally, the “Proposed multi-sequential” the performances of the “Proposed multi-fair” and “Proposed
algorithm determines the number of subbands for D2D links as multi-sequential” algorithms are similar. This illustrates the
follows. First, each D2D link is assigned one subband. Then, regions where fair subband allocation can be adopted to enjoy
if there are still available subbands, we sequentially assign one both low computation complexity and good performance.
more subband to one D2D link, which results in the highest
improvement of the system sum-rate in each iteration.
Figs. 13 and 14 show the sum-rate versus the number of VII. C ONCLUSION
cellular links Kc as Kd = 25 (Kd is shown, otherwise). It In this paper, we have developed efficient resource alloca-
can be seen that the proposed algorithms (“Proposed single”, tion algorithms for D2D underlaid cellular network systems.
“Proposed Extension 1”, and “Proposed Extension 2”) perform The proposed algorithms are differentiated mainly by their
significantly better than the conventional algorithms, which subband assignment designs, which are developed based on the
confirms the efficacy of the proposed joint subband and power optimal power allocation solution for individual pairs of cel-
allocation design. The “Proposed single” algorithm even per- lular and D2D links on any subband. We have established the
forms better than the “Proposed Extension 1” and “Proposed theoretical performance guarantee for the Iterative Rounding
Extension 2” algorithms. This implies that in the dense D2D algorithm and analyzed the computational complexity of the
communication scenario, assignment of a single subband for proposed algorithms. Numerical results have confirmed that
each D2D link results in sufficiently good performance. In the proposed designs result in better performance than state-
addition, the “Proposed single” algorithm achieves higher of-the-art algorithms.
sum rate for Kd = 50 than for Kd = 25 thanks to the
additional multiuser diversity gain. Finally, the “Proposed
A PPENDIX A
single” algorithm results in better sum-rate than that of the
P ROOF OF P ROPOSITION 1
“Full admission”, which demonstrates the benefits of adaptive
D2D link selection. In problem (14), we only consider subband n. There-
Figs. 15 and 16 show the sum-rate versus the number of fore, we omit the index n in this Appendix for brevity.
D2D links Kd as Kc = 20. It is shown that as Kd is If the optimal power of problem (14) belongs to the set
small, assignment of multiple subbands for each D2D link (Pkmax , pDl ), then we only have to find the optimal power
(scenario II) can result in better performance. However, as allocation of D2D link i.e., pDl . The rates achieved by
the number of D2D links increases, the performance gap cellular link k and D2D link l can be expressed, respectively,
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 13
(t)
as rCk = log2 (1 + Pkmax hkk /(σk + pDl hkl )), and rDl = if e ∈ E(Vu ), and x′e = 0, otherwise. On the other hand,
log2 (1 + pDl hll /(σl + Pkmax hlk )). we have
It can be verified that rCk is monotonically decreasing with
pDl ; hence, to satisfy minimum rate requirement of cellular
l(V (t) , E (t) ), x∗ ) = l(Va(t) , E(Va(t) ), x∗a ) + l(Vu(t) , E(Vu(t) ), x∗u )
min
link k we must have pDl ≤ Pkmax hkk /(2Rk −1)−σk /hkl . (37)
Similarly, rDl is monotonically increasing with pDl . Hence, l(V (t) , E (t) ), x′ ) = l(Va(t) , E(Va(t) ), x∗a ) + l(Vu(t) , E(Vu(t) ), xo ).
min
pDl ≥(2Rl −1)(Pkmax hlk +σl )/hll . As a result, to obtain a (38)
(1) (2)
feasible solution, we must have pDl ∈ [PDl , PDl ], where
(t) (t) (t) (t)
Since l(Vu , E(Vu ), x∗u )<l(Vu , E(Vu ), xo ), we have
( min
) l(V (t) , E (t) , x∗ )<l(V (t) , E (t) , x′ ). Hence, x∗ is not the op-
(1) (2Rl − 1)(Pkmax hlk + σl )
PDl = max , 0 (34) timal solution of LP(V (t) , E (t) ), which is a contradiction.
hll
max
(2) 1 Pk hkk max
PDl = min − σ k , Pl . (35) A PPENDIX C
hkl 2Rkmin − 1
P ROOF OF PROPOSITION 4
In addition, we modify wkl as wkl = α(rCk + βrDl ) where The proof of Proposition 4 is equivalent to the proof of the
β = (1 − α)/α. Now we define following inequality
β X 1 X ∗
Pkmax hkk
pDl hll we ≥ x e we , (39)
f (pDl ) = 1+ 1+ . (36) 2
σk + pDl hkl σl + Pkmax hlk e∈Es
(1) (t)
e∈Eu
(1)
Then, maximizing wkl is equivalent to maximizing f (pDl ). where Es is the set of edges returned in Algorithm
(t) (t)
The optimal value of f (pDl ) can be found by solving the equa- LR(Eu , w(Eu )), and x∗e corresponds to edge e in x∗u which
(t) (t)
tion f ′ (pDl ) = 0. The derivative of f (pDl ) can be expressed is the optimal solution of problem LP(Vu , E(Vu )). To
as f ′ (pDl ) = (ADl p2Dl + 2BDl pDl + CDl )/DDl where complete the proof of this proposition, we use the results in
ADl = βhll h2kl , BDl = 0.5β − 1Pkmax hkk hkl hll + βσk hkl hll , the following lemma whose proof can be adapted from that in
CDl = βσk hll (σk +Pkmax hkk )−Pkmax hkk hkl (σl +Pkmax hlk ), [38] with some minor modifications.
and DDl = (σl + Pkmax hlk )(σk + pl hkl )2 .
If △Dl = BDl 2
− ADl C√ > 0, f ′ (pDl ) = Lemma 1. In iteration t of Algorithm 1, the chosen edge
Dl
e∗ in each sub-iteration i always has the coupling parameter
0 has two √ solutions (−BDl ± △Dl )/A√ Dl . In addition, (t)
with the unarranged edges (Euu ) being smaller than 2, i.e..,
(−BDl − △Dl )/ADl < 0 and (−BDl + △Dl )/ADl are ∗ (t)
respectively the minimum and maximum points of function c(e , Euu ) ≤ 2.
(3) √
f (pDl ). Let us denote PDl = (−BDl + △Dl )/ADl . If Recall that we employ the Local Ratio Method in Algo-
(3) (1) (2) (3)
PDl ∈ [PDl , PDl ], PDl is the optimal solution of problem rithm 2 to allocate the resources to some fractional edges
(3) (1) (2) (t)
(14). On the other hand, if PDl ∈ / [PDl , PDl ], f (pDl ) is a in Eu . Therefore, all the lines mentioned in the following
(1) (2) (1) (2) correspond to Algorithm 2. We notice that each time we update
monotonic function in [PDl , PDl ]; therefore, PDl or PDl is
(t)
the optimal solution of problem (14). Etemp (line 5), we also modify weighted vector of Eu (line
If △Dl < 0, which means that f ′ (pDl ) > 0 ∀pDl or 6). Therefore, we have |Etemp | + 1 iterations updating the
(t) (t) (t)
f (pDl ) is a monotonic function of pDl then f (pDl ) achieves its weight vector of Eu . We define w(j) (Eu ) and w̄(j) (Eu )
(1) (2) (t)
maximum at PDl or PDl . Therefore, in any cases, the optimal respectively as the weight vectors of Eu before and after
solution of problem (14) belongs to S1 which completes the weight update in iteration j (1 ≤ j ≤ |Etemp | + 1 ). We now
(t) (t) (t)
proof of the proposition. define ŵ(j) (Eu ) = w(j) (Eu ) − w̄(j) (Eu ). In addition,
(j) (j) (j)
we denote we , w̄e , and ŵe are respectively the elements
(j) (j) (j)
corresponding to edge e in we , w̄e , and ŵe . Note that
A PPENDIX B in lines 3 and 10 in Algorithm 2 we consider the same set
P ROOF OF P ROPOSITION 3 of edges Etemp ; therefore, each index j (1 ≤ j ≤ |Etemp |) in
lines 3 and 10 corresponds to a specific edge ej ∈ Etemp .
We prove the proposition by contradiction. Specifically, We prove the proposition by induction on number of edges
(j)
we show that if x∗u is not an optimal solution of problem in Es . At first, the statement in the proposition holds in the
(t) (t)
LP(Vu , E(Vu )), then x∗ is not the optimal solution of base case at iteration j = |Etemp | + 1 since at that iteration
(|E |+1) (t)
problem LP(V (t) , E (t) ). First, consider problem LP(V, E) Es temp = ∅ and w(|Etemp |+1) (Eu ) ≤ 0, where 0 is a
and let us denote l(V, E, x) as the objective value asso- zero vector. We assume the induction hypothesis that at any
ciated with x and the optimal objective value is l∗ (V, E). iteration j ( 1 < j ≤ |Etemp | + 1) we have
Suppose that xo 6= x∗u is the optimal solution of problem
(t) (t)
LP(Vu , E(Vu )). Now we define a new vector x′ where
X 1 X ∗ (j)
we(j) ≥ x e we . (40)
(t)
the value of its element is set as x′e = 1 if e ∈ Ea , x′e = xoe (j)
2 (t)
e∈Es e∈Eu
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 14
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TWC.2016.2597283, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATION, TO APPEAR 15
[15] L. Wang and G. L. Stuber, “Pairing for resource sharing in cellular [37] D. Gale and L.S. Shapley, “College admissions and the stability of
Device-to-Device underlays,” IEEE Network, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 122 marriage,” Amer. Math. Monthly, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 9–15, Jan. 1962.
–128, Mar. 2016. [38] L. C. Lau, R. Ravi, and M. Singh, Iterative Methods in Combinatorial
[16] Y. Ren, F. Liu, Z. Liu, C. Wang, and Y. Ji, “Power control in D2D- Optimization. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011.
based vehicular communication networks,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech., vol. Tuong Duc Hoang (S’14) received the B.Eng.
64, no. 12, pp. 5547–5562, Dec. 2015. (Honor) degree from Hanoi University of Technol-
[17] L. A.-Kanj, H. V. Poor, and Z. Dawy, “Optimal cellular offloading via ogy, Vietnam, in 2010, and the M.S. degree from
Device-to-Device Communication networks with fairness constraints,” Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Tech-
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 4628–4643, Aug. nology (KAIST), Daejeon, Korea, in 2013. He is
2014. currently a Ph.D. candidate at the Institut National
[18] F. Malandrino, Z. Limani, C. Casetti, and C. F. Chiasserini, de la Recherche Scientifique-Energy, Materials, and
“Interference-aware downlink and uplink resource allocation in Hetnets Telecommunications Center (INRS-EMT), Univer-
with D2D support,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 5, pp. sité du Québec, Montréal, QC, Canada. His re-
2729–2741, Jan. 2015. search interest includes radio resource management
[19] S. Maghsudi and S. Stanczak, “Hybrid centralized-distributed resource for wireless communication systems with special
allocation for Device-to-Device communication underlaying cellular emphasis on heterogeneous networks including D2D communications and
networks,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech., vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 2481–2495, Apr. dense networks.
2016.
[20] R. Yin, C. Zhong, G. Yu, Z. Zhang, K. K. Wong, and X. Chen, “Joint
spectrum and power allocation for D2D communications underlaying
cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech., vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 2182–
2195, Apr. 2016.
[21] W. Zhao and S. Wang, “Resource sharing scheme for Device-to-Device
communication underlaying cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Commun.,
Long Bao Le (S’04-M’07-SM’12) received the
vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 4838–4848, Dec. 2015.
B.Eng. (with Highest Distinction) degree from Ho
[22] H. Zhang, L. Song, and Z. Han, “Radio resource allocation for Device-
Chi Minh City University of Technology, Vietnam,
to-Device underlay communication using hypergraph theory,” IEEE
in 1999, the M.Eng. degree from Asian Institute of
Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 4852–4861, July 2016.
Technology, Pathumthani, Thailand, in 2002, and
[23] R. Zhang, X. Cheng, L. Yang, and B. Jiao, “Interference graph based
the Ph.D. degree from the University of Mani-
resource allocation (InGRA) for D2D Communications underlaying
toba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, in 2007. He was a
cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 3844–
postdoctoral researcher at Massachusetts Institute of
3850, Aug. 2015.
Technology (2008-2010) and University of Waterloo
[24] C. Xu, L. Song, Z. Han, Q. Zhao, X. Wang, X. Cheng, and B. Jiao, “Effi-
(2007-2008). Since 2010, he has been with the In-
ciency resource allocation for device-to-device underlay communication
stitut National de la Recherche Scientifique (INRS),
systems: A reverse iterative combinatorial auction based approach,”
Université du Québec, Montréal, QC, Canada where he is currently an
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 348–358, Sep. 2013.
associate professor. His current research interests include smartgrids, cognitive
[25] Q. Ye, M. Al-Shalash, C. Caramanis, and J. G. Andrews, “Distributed
radio and dynamic spectrum sharing, radio resource management, network
resource allocation in device-to-device enhanced cellular networks,”
control and optimization for wireless networks. He is a co-author of the book
IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 441–454, Feb. 2015.
Radio Resource Management in Multi-Tier Cellular Wireless Networks (Wiley,
[26] R. Yin, G. Yu, H. Zhang, Z. Zhang, and G. Y. Li, “Pricing-based in-
2013). Dr. Le is a member of the editorial board of IEEE Communications
terference coordination for D2D communications in cellular networks,”
Surveys and Tutorials and IEEE Wireless Communications Letters. He has
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1519–1532, Mar.
served as a technical program committee chair/co-chair for several IEEE
2015.
conferences including IEEE WCNC, IEEE VTC, and IEEE PIMRC.
[27] D. Wu, J. Wang, R. Q. Hu, Y. Cai, and L. Zhou, “Energy-efficient
resource sharing for mobile Device-to-Device multimedia communica-
tions,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech., vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 2093–2103, Jun. 2014.
[28] D. Wu, Y. Cai, R. Q. Hu, and Y. Qian, “Dynamic distributed resource
sharing for mobile D2D communications,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Com-
mun., vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 5417–5429, Oct. 2015.
[29] Y. Zhao, Y. Li, Y. Cao, T. Jiang, and N. Ge, “Social-aware resource Tho Le-Ngoc (F97) obtained his B.Eng. (with
allocation for Device-to-Device communications underlaying cellular Distinction) in Electrical Engineering in 1976, his
networks,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 6621– M.Eng. in 1978 from McGill University, Montreal,
6634, Dec. 2015. Canada, and his Ph.D. in Digital Communications
[30] T. D. Hoang, L. B. Le, and T. Le-Ngoc, “Joint subchannel and power in 1983 from the University of Ottawa, Canada.
allocation for D2D communications in cellular networks,” in Proc. IEEE During 1977-1982, he was a R&D Senior Engi-
WCNC’2014, Apr. 2014. neer with Spar Aerospace Limited, Ste. Anne-de-
[31] T. D. Hoang, L. B. Le, and T. Le-Ngoc, “Resource allocation for D2D Bellevue, Canada, and involved in the development
communications under proportional fairness,” in Proc. IEEE Globe- and design of satellite communications systems.
com’2014, Dec. 2014. During 1982-1985, he was Engineering Manager of
[32] R. B. Yehuda, K. Bendel, A. Freund, and D. Rawitz, “Local ratio: A the Radio Group in the Department of Development
unified framework for approximation algorithms. In memoriam: Shimon Engineering of SRTelecom Inc., St. Laurent, Canada, where he developed the
Even 1935–2004,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 422–463, Dec. new point-to-multipoint DA-TDMA/TDM Subscriber Radio System SR500.
2004. During 1985-2000, he was a Professor at the Department of Electrical and
[33] A. Abdelnasser, E. Hossain, and D. I. Kim, “Tier-aware resource Computer Engineering of Concordia University, Montreal, Canada. Since
allocation in OFDMA macrocell-small cell networks,” IEEE Trans. 2000, he has been with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineer-
Commun., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 695–710, Feb. 2015. ing of McGill University. His research interest is in the area of broadband
[34] M. Ebrahimi, M. A. Maddah-Ali, and A. K. Khandani, “Power allocation digital communications. He is a fellow of the Institute of Electrical and
and asymptotic achievable sum-rates in single-hop wireless networks,” Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the Engineering Institute of Canada (EIC), the
in Proc. IEEE CISS, pp. 498–503, Mar. 2006. Canadian Academy of Engineering (CAE) and the Royal Society of Canada
[35] C. Roos, T. Terlaky, and J. Vial, Interior Point Methods for Linear (RSC). He is the recipient of the 2004 Canadian Award in Telecommunications
Optimization. Springer, Press, 2005. Research, and recipient of the IEEE Canada Fessenden Award 2005. He holds
[36] H. W. Kuhn, “The Hungurian method for the assignment problem,” a Canada Research Chair (Tier I) on Broadband Access Communications.
Naval Res. Logistics Quart., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 83–97, Mar. 1955.
1536-1276 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.