Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Bursty Traffic Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix,

Published byMercy Regina Goodwin Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Bursty Traffic Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Bursty Traffic Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix, AZ *Sponsored in part by the DARPA IT-MANET Program, NSF OCE-0520324, NSF Career CCF-0747525 ONOFFONOFFONOFF Capacity Region   -scaled region  ONOFF

2 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007]

3 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007] Example: Matching, NxN Switch Link l

4 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007] Example: Matching, NxN Switch Set S l

5 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007] Example: Matching, Wireless Link l

6 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007] Example: Matching, Wireless Set S l

7 One-Hop Network Model: N = Node set = {1, 2…, N} L = Link set = {1, 2, …, L} S l = Interference Set for link l L General Interference Set Model: S l = l U {links that interfere with link l transmission} [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar Allerton 2005] [Wu, Srikant, Perkins, Trans. Mobile Comput. June 2007] Example: Arb. Interference Sets

8 Queueing Dynamics: -Slotted System: t = {0, 1, 2, 3, …} -One Queue for each link l : Q l (t) = # packets in currently in queue l (on slot t) A l (t) = # new packet arrivals to queue l (on slot t)  l (t) = # packets served from queue l (on slot t) A l (t)  l (t) Q l (t) Q l (t+1) = Q l (t) -  l (t) + A l (t)  l (t) {0, 1}  l (t) = 1 only if Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l X(t) ={Scheduling Options}

9 Queueing Dynamics: -Slotted System: t = {0, 1, 2, 3, …} -One Queue for each link l : Q l (t) = # packets in currently in queue l (on slot t) A l (t) = # new packet arrivals to queue l (on slot t)  l (t) = # packets served from queue l (on slot t) A l (t)  l (t) Q l (t) Q l (t+1) = Q l (t) -  l (t) + A l (t)  l (t) {0, 1}  l (t) = 1 only if Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l X(t) ={Scheduling Options}

10 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region  [Tassiulas, Ephremides 92]: Max Weight Match (MWM) Maximize Q l (t)  l (t) Subject to: (Stabilizes Network, Supports all interior to   (t) X(t)

11 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region  Simpler “Greedy” Scheduling: Maximal Scheduling -Activate any non-empty link that does not conflict. -Keep going until we cannot activate any more links. -Non-unique solution. Easy for distributed implementation.  l (t) = 1 iif Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l

12 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region  Simpler “Greedy” Scheduling: Maximal Scheduling -Activate any non-empty link that does not conflict. -Keep going until we cannot activate any more links. -Non-unique solution. Easy for distributed implementation.  l (t) = 1 iif Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l

13 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region  Simpler “Greedy” Scheduling: Maximal Scheduling -Activate any non-empty link that does not conflict. -Keep going until we cannot activate any more links. -Non-unique solution. Easy for distributed implementation.  l (t) = 1 iif Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l

14 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region  Simpler “Greedy” Scheduling: Maximal Scheduling -Activate any non-empty link that does not conflict. -Keep going until we cannot activate any more links. -Non-unique solution. Easy for distributed implementation.  l (t) = 1 iif Q l (t)>0 AND no other active links  S l

15 Capacity Region:  = {All rate vectors  = ( 1,…, L ) supportable} Capacity Region   -scaled region  Constant-Factor Throughput Results for Maximal Scheduling: [Shah 2003]: 1/2-factor, Matching on NxN Switches [Lin, Shroff 2005]: 1/2-factor, Matching on Graphs [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar 2005]:  -factor, General Constraint Sets [Wu, Srikant, Perkins 05, 07]:  -factor, General Constraint Sets

16 Prior Delay Results: Network of Size N nodes [Leonardi, Mellia, Neri, Marsan Infocom 2001]: NxN Packet Switch, full thruput, MWM, iid arrivals Delay = O(N). [Neely, Modiano, Cheng HPSR 04, TON 07]: NxN Packet Switch, full thruput, MSM-variation, iid arrivals, Delay = O(log(N)). [Deb, Shah, Shakkottai CISS 06]: NxN Packet Switch, 1/2 thruput, iid arrivals Maximal Matching, Delay = O(1).

17 Goals of this paper: Develop a unified treatment of throughput/delay for maximal scheduling with bursty arrivals -Develop Order-Optimal Delay Results -Treat General Interference Sets -Treat Time-Correllated “Bursty” (non-iid) Arrivals We will: 1)Define “Reduced Throughput Region”  * 2)Get Structural Result for General Markovian Traffic: Delay =O(log(# interferers)) 3) Tight and order-optimal (Delay = O(1)) results for 2-state Markov arrivals (such as ON/OFF processes) 4) Get Delay Bounds as a function of spatio-temporal corellations in arrival processes.

18 Markov Arrival Model: -Arrivals A l (t) modulated by ergodic DTMC Z l (t). -Finite State: Z l = {1, …, M l } p l, m (a) = Pr[A l (t)=a| Z l (t)=m] for a {0, 1, 2, …} l, m = E{ A l (t)| Z l (t)=m}, l = E{ A l (t)} = l, m  l, m Assume E{ A l (t)| Z l (t)=m} < infinity for all states m Example (M = 2 states): 12 ll ll [Possibly ON/OFF process] m

19 The Reduced Throughput Region  *: Capacity Region   -scaled region  Reduced Region   Define:  * = {( 1, …, L )} such that:  S l  1 for all l L Example: NxN Switch.7.1.1.1.1.2 0.3.2 0.3 0.2 ** **  * = 0.9 2x2: 3x3:

20 The Reduced Throughput Region  *: Capacity Region   -scaled region  Reduced Region   Example: NxN Switch.7.1.1.1.1.2 0.3.2 0.3 0.2 ** **  * = 0.9 2x2: 3x3:  * is typically within a constant factor  of  [Chaporkar, Kar, Sarkar 05][Lin, Shroff 05] Example: (Bipartite Matching)  * is strictly larger than  /2  S l  1 l L  *:

21 Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling (General Interference Sets): Q (t) = Queue vector = ( Q 1 (t), …, Q L (t)) Use concept of Queue Grouping: Lyapunov Function: L( Q (t)) = Q S l (t) =  S l Q  (t) l L 1 2 Q l (t) Q S l (t) Similar Lyapunov Functions used for stability analysis in: [Dai, Prabhakar 2000], [Wu, Srikant, Perkins 07]

22 1-step Unconditional Lyapunov Drift  (t):  (t) = E{L( Q (t+1)) - L( Q (t))} Drift Theorem:  S l iff l S   (t) = B - Proof Uses Pair-wise Symmetry Property of the General Interference Sets: l L E{ Q l (t) (1 - A S l (t)) } B = Const Depends on Spatial Correlations E{A l A  } A S l (t) =  S l A  (t) = “group” arrivals for S l

23 Quick Delay Result for Arrivals iid over slots: Suppose there is a value  * (0 <  * < 1) s.t.:  * = “relative network loading” (relative to  *) Example: Simple Delay Bound for independent Bernoulli or Poisson Inputs: (independent of network size!) Under any maximal scheduling…

24 Structural Delay Result for General Ergodic Markov Modulated Arrivals (finite state): Theorem: For any maximal scheduling, if  * <1 then: where |S| = 1 + Largest # interferers at any link (< N). Proof: Uses a Delayed Lyapunov Analysis technique to couple sufficiently fast to the stationary distribution. The technique is different from the T-Slot Lyapunov technique of [Georgiadis, Neely, Tassiulas NOW F&T 2006], which would yield looser (O(N)) delay results for bursty arrivals.

25 Structural Delay Result for General Ergodic Markov Modulated Arrivals (finite state): Theorem: For any maximal scheduling, if  * <1 then: where |S| = 1 + Largest # interferers at any link (< N). The coefficient multiplier in the numerator depends on the auto-correlation of the arrival processes A l ( t): E{ A l ( t) A l ( t+k)} (details in paper)

26 More Detailed Analysis for 2-State Markov Modulated Arrivals: 12 ll ll Each A l ( t) has 2-state chain Z l ( t) : Pr[ A l ( t) = a| Z l ( t) = 1] = general dist., rate l Pr[ A l ( t) = a| Z l ( t) = 2] = general dist., rate l (1) (2) Important Special Case: 2-State ON/OFF Processes: ONOFF ll ll

27 Tight (order-optimal) Delay Analysis for 2-State Markov Modulated Arrivals: 12 ll ll Challenge: Lyapunov Drift term contains: E{ Q l ( t) A l ( t)}, E{ Q l ( t) A  ( t)} These Corellations are Difficult to understand! Solution: Use a combination of Lyapunov Drift, Steady State Markov Chain theory, and Linear Algebra. We can isolate and bound the unknown correlations!

28 Tight Delay Result (2-State Arrival Processes): Theorem: For any maximal scheduling, if  * <1: Where: Example: For independent ON/OFF arrival processes, we have…

29 Tight Delay Result (2-State Arrival Processes): Theorem: For any maximal scheduling, if  * <1: Example: For independent ON/OFF arrival processes with 1 packet arrival when ON, we have… ONOFF ll ll ON = 1 Packet Arrival OFF = 0 Packet Arrival

30 Conclusions: ONOFF ll ll ON = 1 Packet Arrival OFF = 0 Packet Arrival  Maximal Scheduling  General Interference Sets  Log(N) Delay Results for General Markov Arrivals  Tight and Order-Optimal (Delay = O(1)) Delay Results for 2-State Chains

Download ppt "Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Bursty Traffic Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix,"

Similar presentations

Optimal Pricing in a Free Market Wireless Network Michael J. Neely University of Southern California *Sponsored in part.

Optimal Pricing in a Free Market Wireless Network Michael J. Neely University of Southern California *Sponsored in part.
Network Utility Maximization over Partially Observable Markov Channels 1 1 Channel State 1 = ? Channel State 2 = ? Channel State 3 = ? 2 2 3 3 Restless.

Network Utility Maximization over Partially Observable Markov Channels 1 1 Channel State 1 = ? Channel State 2 = ? Channel State 3 = ? Restless.
Stochastic optimization for power-aware distributed scheduling Michael J. Neely University of Southern California t ω(t)

Stochastic optimization for power-aware distributed scheduling Michael J. Neely University of Southern California t ω(t)
Tradeoffs between performance guarantee and complexity for distributed scheduling in wireless networks Saswati Sarkar University of Pennsylvania Communication.

Tradeoffs between performance guarantee and complexity for distributed scheduling in wireless networks Saswati Sarkar University of Pennsylvania Communication.
Resource Allocation in Wireless Networks: Dynamics and Complexity R. Srikant Department of ECE and CSL University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Resource Allocation in Wireless Networks: Dynamics and Complexity R. Srikant Department of ECE and CSL University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
EE 685 presentation Optimal Control of Wireless Networks with Finite Buffers By Long Bao Le, Eytan Modiano and Ness B. Shroff.

EE 685 presentation Optimal Control of Wireless Networks with Finite Buffers By Long Bao Le, Eytan Modiano and Ness B. Shroff.
DYNAMIC POWER ALLOCATION AND ROUTING FOR TIME-VARYING WIRELESS NETWORKS Michael J. Neely, Eytan Modiano and Charles E.Rohrs Presented by Ruogu Li Department.

DYNAMIC POWER ALLOCATION AND ROUTING FOR TIME-VARYING WIRELESS NETWORKS Michael J. Neely, Eytan Modiano and Charles E.Rohrs Presented by Ruogu Li Department.
Stochastic Network Optimization with Non-Convex Utilities and Costs Michael J. Neely University of Southern California

Stochastic Network Optimization with Non-Convex Utilities and Costs Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Intelligent Packet Dropping for Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs for Wireless Michael J. Neely University of Southern California

Intelligent Packet Dropping for Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs for Wireless Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Dynamic Product Assembly and Inventory Control for Maximum Profit Michael J. Neely, Longbo Huang (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on.

Dynamic Product Assembly and Inventory Control for Maximum Profit Michael J. Neely, Longbo Huang (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on.
Dynamic Index Coding Broadcast Station 1 1 2 2 N N Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University of Southern California Paper available.

Dynamic Index Coding Broadcast Station N N Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University of Southern California Paper available.
Universal Scheduling for Networks with Arbitrary Traffic, Channels, and Mobility Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Proc. IEEE Conf. on.

Universal Scheduling for Networks with Arbitrary Traffic, Channels, and Mobility Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Proc. IEEE Conf. on.
Utility Optimization for Dynamic Peer-to-Peer Networks with Tit-for-Tat Constraints Michael J. Neely, Leana Golubchik University of Southern California.

Utility Optimization for Dynamic Peer-to-Peer Networks with Tit-for-Tat Constraints Michael J. Neely, Leana Golubchik University of Southern California.
Stock Market Trading Via Stochastic Network Optimization Michael J. Neely (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control.

Stock Market Trading Via Stochastic Network Optimization Michael J. Neely (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control.
Delay-Based Network Utility Maximization Michael J. Neely University of Southern California IEEE INFOCOM, San Diego, March.

Delay-Based Network Utility Maximization Michael J. Neely University of Southern California IEEE INFOCOM, San Diego, March.
Dynamic Optimization and Learning for Renewal Systems Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and.

Dynamic Optimization and Learning for Renewal Systems Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and.
Dynamic Index Coding 12312345 User set N Packet set P Broadcast Station 1 1 2 2 N N p p p Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University.

Dynamic Index Coding User set N Packet set P Broadcast Station N N p p p Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University.
Max Weight Learning Algorithms with Application to Scheduling in Unknown Environments Michael J. Neely University of Southern California

Max Weight Learning Algorithms with Application to Scheduling in Unknown Environments Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Dynamic Data Compression for Wireless Transmission over a Fading Channel Michael J. Neely University of Southern California CISS 2008 *Sponsored in part.

Dynamic Data Compression for Wireless Transmission over a Fading Channel Michael J. Neely University of Southern California CISS 2008 *Sponsored in part.
Towards Simple, High-performance Input-Queued Switch Schedulers Devavrat Shah Stanford University Berkeley, Dec 5 Joint work with Paolo Giaccone and Balaji.

Towards Simple, High-performance Input-Queued Switch Schedulers Devavrat Shah Stanford University Berkeley, Dec 5 Joint work with Paolo Giaccone and Balaji.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google