By Topic

Capacity and Coding for Two Common Wireless Erasure Relay Networks with Optimal Bandwidth Allocation

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)

This paper considers two simple wireless network configurations - the multiple access relay channel (MARC) and the multiple relay channel (MRC) - in which the links making up the network time-share the medium and the assumed loss mechanisms are memoryless packet erasures. The capacity region of the MARC and the capacity of the MRC are derived as functions of the link erasure rates. This is done assuming (i) optimal sharing of bandwidth among the transmitters, and (ii) perfect knowledge at the destination of erasure patterns on all the links. Moreover, it is shown that easily-implemented capacity-approaching codes for the binary erasure channel, such as LDPC or Tornado codes, can be used to attain any achievable rate(s). Finally, these capacity results are unchanged in the presence of feedback of erasure location information to all nodes. For the erasure MARC, the results imply a simple strategy, viz., that the relay should help only those sources that have a weaker direct channel to the destination than the relay itself - regardless of the quality of the source-to-relay channels. For the erasure MRC, the solution has a more complex, inductive structure: the participation of a relay r in the optimal strategy depends on the best throughput that can be achieved using only those relays with a better link to the destination than r.

Published in:

Wireless Communications, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:11 ,  Issue: 12 )