Carrier load balancing and packet scheduling for multi-carrier systems

Authors:
Yuanye Wang;Klaus I. Pedersen;Troels B. Sørensen;Preben E. Mogensen
Affiliations:
Radio Access Technology section in the Department of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University, Denmark;Nokia Siemens Networks, Denmark;Radio Access Technology section in the Department of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University, Denmark;RATE section at Aalborg University and Nokia Siemens Networks, Denmark
Venue:
IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications
Year:
2010

Citing 2
Cited 2

An overview of next-generation mobile WiMAX technology

IEEE Communications Magazine
Evolution of cdma2000 cellular networks: multicarrier EV-DO

IEEE Communications Magazine

Robust scheduling algorithm for guaranteed bit rate services

International Journal of Mobile Communications
A joint resource allocation scheme for OFDMA-based wireless pervasive networks with carrier aggregation

International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Computing

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.01

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we focus on resource allocation for next generation wireless communication systems with aggregation of multiple Component Carriers (CCs), i.e., how to assign the CCs to each user, and how to multiplex multiple users in each CC. We first investigate two carrier load balancing methods for allocating the CCs to the users- Round Robin (RR) and Mobile Hashing (MH) balancing - by means of a simple theoretical formulation, as well as system level simulations. At Layer-2 we propose a simple cross-CC packet scheduling algorithm that improves the coverage performance and the resource allocation fairness among users, as compared to independent scheduling per CC. The Long Term Evolution (LTE)-Advanced is selected for the case study of a multi-carrier system. In such a system, RR provides better performance than MH balancing, and the proposed simple scheduling algorithm is shown to be effective in providing up to 90% coverage gain with no loss of the overall cell throughput, as compared to independent scheduling per CC.