Top Banner
Cooperative Techniques in Networks Abdellatif Zaidi Universit´ e Paris-Est Marne La Vall´ ee, France abdellatif.zaidi@univ-mlv.fr Spring School on 5G Communications Hammamet, March 2014 Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 1 / 90
95

Cours Abdellatif ZAIDI

May 26, 2017

Download

Documents

asupcom
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
  • Cooperative Techniques in Networks

    Abdellatif Zaidi

    Universite Paris-Est Marne La Vallee, France

    abdellatif.zaidi@univ-mlv.fr

    Spring School on 5G CommunicationsHammamet, March 2014

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 1 / 90

  • Tutorial Goals

    Review and discuss some important aspects of cooperative communications innetworks

    Provide intuition for basic concepts

    Connect with recent results

    Encourage research activity

    Contribute to networking practice

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 2 / 90

  • Recurring Themes and Take-Aways

    1 Many approaches, benefits, and challenges to utilizing relaying and cooperativecommunications in networks.

    2 Relaying also includes, or should also include, multihop (store-and-forward routing)and network coding.

    3 The capacity of relay systems is difficult to analyze, but the theory is surprisinglyflexible and diverse.

    4 Although generalizations to networks with many nodes are in general not easy,there are schemes which scale appropriately.

    5 In networks with interference, relaying can help, not only by adding power/energyspatially, but also by allowing distributed interference cancellation; and in generalthis boots network capacity.

    6 To cope with network interference efficiently, classic relaying schemes as such ingeneral do not suffice, and need be combined carefully with other appropriatetechniques.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 3 / 90

  • Caveats

    1 I assume familiarity with: entropy, mutual information, capacity of discretememoryless and additive white Gaussian noise channels, rate-distortion theory

    2 References are not provided in the main slides; only selected references are given atthe end. These, along with the references therein, point to many other recentpapers on relaying and cooperative communications in networks.

    3 Time constraints limit the scope to less than originally planned.

    4 I may go fast. Please feel free to stop me, whenever you want to.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 4 / 90

  • Tutorial Outline

    Part 1: Basics on Cooperation

    Part 2: Cooperation in Presence of Interference

    Part 3: Interaction and Computation

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 5 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation

    Part I : Basics on Cooperation

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 6 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation

    Outline: Part 1

    1 Introduction and Models

    2 Protocols

    Amplify-and-Forward (AF)Decode-and-Forward (DF)Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    3 Information Rates

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 7 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Introduction and Models

    Wireless Network

    A communication network has devices andchannels

    Network purpose: enable message exchangebetween nodes

    Main features of wireless networks:

    - Fading: electromagnetic scattering,

    absorption, node mobility, humidity

    - Broadcasting: nodes overhear wireless

    transmissions (creates interference)

    W1 (X1,Y1)

    WN (XN,YN)

    p(y1, . . . ,yN|x1, . . . ,xN)

    Wk (Xk,Yk)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 8 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Introduction and Models

    Fast and Slow Fading

    Space-time models for huv:

    - Deterministic: electromagnetic wave propagation equations

    - Random: {huv,i}ni=1 is a realization of an integer-time stochasticprocess {Huv,i}ni=1(The random model admits uncertainty and is simpler).

    Marginal distributions of the Huv,i:

    - Assume the Huv,i, i = 1, . . . , n, have the same marginal distribution

    Huv during a given communication session

    - No fading: Huv is a known constant

    - Rayleigh fading: Huv is complex, Gaussian, 0-mean, unit var.

    Temporal correlation: two extremes

    - Fast fading: huv,i are independent realizations of Huv

    - Slow fading: Huv,i = Huv for all i

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 9 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Introduction and Models

    Discrete Memoryless Network Model

    There are M source messages Wm,m = 1, 2, . . . ,M .

    Message Wm is estimated as message Wm(u)at certain nodes u

    W1 (X1,Y1)

    WN (XN,YN)

    p(y1, . . . ,yN|x1, . . . ,xN)

    Wk (Xk,Yk)

    Source model:

    - Messages are statistically independent

    - Sources are not bursty

    Device model:

    - Node u has one input variable Xu and one output variable Yu

    - Causality: Xu,i = fu,i(local messages, Yi1u ), i = 1, . . . , n

    - Cost constraint example: E[f(Xu,1 . . . , Xu,n)] Pu

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 10 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Introduction and Models

    Discrete Memoryless Network Model (Cont.)

    W1 (X1,Y1)

    WN (XN,YN)

    p(y1, . . . ,yN|x1, . . . ,xN)

    Wk (Xk,Yk)

    Channel model:

    - A network clock governs operations: node u transmits Xu,i betweenclock tick (i 1) and tick i, and receives Yu,i at tick i

    - Memoryless: Yu,i generated by Xu,i, all u, via the channel

    PY1Y2Y3...|X1X2X3...()

    Capacity region: closure of set of all (R1, R2, . . . , RM ) for which

    Pr[m,u

    {Wm 6= Wm

    }]can be made close to zero for large n

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 11 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Introduction and Models

    Node Coding/Broadcasting

    Traditional approach:

    - Channels treated as point-to-point links

    - Data packets traverse paths (sequences of nodes)

    Other possibilities:

    Broadcasting: nodes overhear wireless transmissionsNode coding: nodes process

    - reliable message or packet bits (network coding)- reliable or unreliable symbols (relaying/cooperation)

    These concepts already appear in 3-node networks

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 12 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols

    Building Block

    1

    2

    3 WW

    Direct transmission from Node 1 to Node 3

    Multihop transmission through Node 2

    Amplify-and-Forward (AF)Decode-and-Forward (DF)Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    Capacity still unknown

    Multiaccess problem: from Nodes 1 and 2 to Node 3Broadcast problem: from Node 1 to Nodes 2 and 3Feedback problem: output at Node 2 is a form of feedback

    Superposition coding, binning, feedback techniques, etc.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 13 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols

    Direct Transmission

    Encoder Decoder WXn1 Y

    n3

    Xn2 = bn

    PY3|X1,X2(y3|x1, x2)W

    Relay does not participate, i.e., X2,i = b (often 0) for all i

    A standard random coding argument shows that rates

    R < Rdir := maxPX1|X2 (|b),b

    I(X1;Y3|X2 = b)

    are achievable

    Rdir is in fact capacity if the relay channel is reversely degraded, i.e.,

    PY2Y3|X1X2() = PY3|X1X2()PY2|Y3()

    (Think: Y2 is a noisy version of Y3)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 14 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols

    Multihop Transmission

    Node 1 transmits to Node 2, and Node 2 transmits to Node 3

    Motivated by a cascade of two channels, i.e.,

    PY n2 Y n3 |Xn1 Xn2 () = PY n2 |Xn1 ()PY n3 |Xn2 ()

    Question: What should Node 2 transmit ?

    Non-Regenerative / Amplify-and-Forward (AF)Node 2 sets X2,i = Y2,ik for some k 1Compress-and-Forward (CF) / Estimate-Forward (EF)Node 2 conveys a quantized version of Y n2 to Node 3Regenerative / Decode-and-Forward (DF)Node 2 decodes W and re-encodes into a codeword Xn2

    Transmissions usually occur in a pipeline of two (or more) blocks (potentially ofvarying sizes)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 15 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols

    Block Pipeline

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block BBlock B-1Block 2

    R R

    y2[B 1]

    Block 1

    x1(w1)

    y2[1] y2[2] y2[B]

    y3[1] y3[2] y3[B]y3[B 1]

    R 0

    a

    b

    x1(w2) x1(wB1)

    f(B1)2 ({y2[i]}B2i=1 )f

    (2)2 (y2[1]) f

    (B)2 ({y2[i]}B1i=1 )

    B blocks, each of length n channel uses. Message W = (w1, w2, . . . , wB)

    Block 1 fills the pipeline; and block B empties the pipelineBlocks 2 through B can blend broadcast and multiaccess

    Extremes

    n = 1, B large: Like an intersymbol interference (ISI) channeln large, B = 2: No interblock interference, half-duplex

    n,B large: Effective rate (B1)nRnB =(B1)B R R

    Memory within and among input blocks allowed through f(i)2

    ({y2[j]

    }i1j=1

    )Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 16 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block BBlock B-1Block 2

    R R

    y2[B 1]

    Block 1

    x1(w1)

    y2[1] y2[2] y2[B]

    y3[1] y3[2] y3[B]y3[B 1]

    R 0

    a

    b

    x1(w2) x1(wB1)

    y2[1] y2[B 1]y2[B 2]

    Choose f(i)2 () to be a linear function:

    Discrete Channels

    Often x2[i] , f(i)2

    ({y2[j]

    }i1j=1

    ):= y2[i 1]

    Requires Y2 X2Continuous Channels

    Often x2[i] , f(i)2

    ({y2[j]

    }i1j=1

    ):= y2[i 1]

    chosen subject to a power constraint

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 17 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Multihop AF, B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    y2[1]

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    If Node 3 decodes using only Block 2, R achievable if

    R < Rmaf := maxPX1,1|X2,1 (|b),a,b

    1

    2I(X1,1;Y3,2|X2,1 = b,X1,2 = a)

    I(X1,1;Y3,2|X2,1 = b,X1,2 = a) computed for the effective channelPY3,2|X1,1X1,2X2,1(|, a, b) in which X2,2 = Y2,1Also known as non-regenerative repeating

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 18 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Diversity AF, B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    y2[1]

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    If Node 3 decodes using both Blocks 1 and 2, then R achievable for

    R < Rdaf := maxPX1,1|X2,1 (|b),a,b

    1

    2I(X1,1;Y3,1Y3,2|X2,1 = b,X1,2 = a)

    Similar to repetition coding, except X2,2 = Y2,1 is a corrupted version of X1,1

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 19 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Non-Orthogonal AF (NAF), B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R R

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    y2[1]

    y3[1] y3[2]

    b

    x1(w1) x1(w2)

    If Node 1 sends new information in Block 2, and Node 3 decodes using bothBlocks 1 and 2, then R achievable for

    R < Rndaf := max1

    2I(X1,1X1,2;Y3,1Y3,2|X2,1 = b)

    with max over PX1,1|X2,1(|b)PX1,2|X2,1(|b) and bA combination of DAF and Direct from Node 1 to Node 3

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 20 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    Intersymbol Interference AF (IAF)

    Pipeline with n = 1, B creates an effective intersymbol interference (ISI)channel

    Input memory important in this case (waterfilling)

    Additional improvements with bursty AF, mainly at low SNR

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 21 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)

    AF Summary

    Schemes discussed so far are all special cases of Block Pipeline AF.

    GenerallyRmaf < Rdaf < Rndaf < Riaf

    but coding and decoding grows increasingly complex

    MAF, DAF, and NDAF with B = 2 are useful for half-duplex systems

    IAF with B is useful for full-duplex systems

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 22 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block BBlock B-1Block 2

    x1(w1, w2)

    R R

    y2[B 1]

    Block 1

    x1(1, w1) x1(wB1, 1)

    y2[1] y2[2] y2[B]

    x2(1) x2(w1) x2(wB2) x2(wB1)

    y3[1] y3[2] y3[B]y3[B 1]

    x1(wB2, wB1)

    R 0

    f(i)2 (): in block i, Relay uses y2[i 1] to decode message wi1, and re-encodes it

    into x2(wi1)

    Joint typicality decoding: look at wi1 s.t. x1(wi2, wi1), y2[i 1] is jointlytypical given x2(wi2)

    Multi-user codebooks designed jointly

    x1[i] := x1(wi1, wi) and x2[i] := x2(wi1) both depend upon wi1x1[i] := x1(wi1, wi) also depends upon wiJoint distributions PX2()PX1|X2()Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 23 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Multihop DF, B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    x2(w)

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    Let q be the fractional length of Block 1 (Block 2 of fractional length q := 1 q)At the end of Block 1, Node 2 decodes message w reliably if

    R < qI(X1;Y2|X2 = b)

    and w = w with high probability

    If Node 3 decodes using only Block 2, R achievable if

    R < qI(X2;Y3|X1 = a)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 24 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Multihop DF (MDF), B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    x2(w)

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    Thus, a rate R is achievable if

    R < Rmdf := max0q1

    min{q maxPX1|X2 (|b),b

    I(X1;Y2|X2 = b),

    = q maxPX2|X1 (|a),a

    I(X2;Y3|X1 = a)}

    Routing: Time-sharing between Direct from Node 1 to Node 2 and Direct fromNode 2 to Node 3

    Also known as regenerative repeating

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 25 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Diversity DF (DDF), B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    x2(w)

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    If Node 3 decodes using both Blocks 1 and 2, then R achievable for

    R < Rddf := max min{qI(X1,1;Y2,1|X2,1 = b),qI(X1,1;Y3,1|X2,1 = b)+ qI(X2,2;Y3,2|X1,2 = a)}

    with max over PX1,1|X2,1(|b)PX2,2|X1,2(|a), a, b, and 0 q 1

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 26 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Non-Orthogonal DDF (NDDF), B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    b x2(w1)

    y3[1] y3[2]

    x1(w1) x1(w2)

    If Node 1 sends new information in Block 2, and Node 3 decodes using bothBlocks 1 and 2, then R achievable for

    R < Rnddf,2 := max min{qI(X1,1;Y2,1|X2,1 = b),qI(X1,1;Y3,1|X2,1 = b)+ qI(X1,2X2,2;Y3,2)}

    with max over PX1,1|X2,1(|b)PX1,2X2,2(), a, b, and 0 q 1Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 27 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Non-Orthogonal DDF (NDDF), B

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block BBlock B-1Block 2

    x1(w1, w2)

    R R

    y2[B 1]

    Block 1

    x1(1, w1) x1(wB1, 1)

    y2[1] y2[2] y2[B]

    x2(1) x2(w1) x2(wB2) x2(wB1)

    y3[1] y3[2] y3[B]y3[B 1]

    x1(wB2, wB1)

    R 0

    All blocks of length n

    Three encoding and decoding algorithms: differ in complexity and delay

    requirements.

    Regular enc., sliding-window dec.: R < I(X2;Y3) + I(X1;Y3|X2)Regular enc., backward dec.: R < I(X1, X2;Y3)Irregular enc., successive dec.: binning at encoding (Cover, El Gamal)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 28 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    Non-Orthogonal DDF (NDDF), B

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block BBlock B-1Block 2

    x1(w1, w2)

    R R

    y2[B 1]

    Block 1

    x1(1, w1) x1(wB1, 1)

    y2[1] y2[2] y2[B]

    x2(1) x2(w1) x2(wB2) x2(wB1)

    y3[1] y3[2] y3[B]y3[B 1]

    x1(wB2, wB1)

    R 0

    All blocks of length n

    Rate R is achievable if

    R < Rnddf, := max min{I(X1;Y2|X2), I(X1X2;Y3)}

    with max over PX1X2()Rnddf, is in fact capacity if relay channel is physically degraded, i.e,

    PY2Y3|X1X2() = PY2|X1X2()PY3|Y2X2()

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 29 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)

    DF Summary

    Schemes discussed so far are all special cases of Block Pipeline DF.

    GenerallyRmdf < Rddf < Rnddf,2 < Rnddf,

    but coding and decoding grows increasingly complex

    MDF, DDF, and NDDF with B = 2 are useful for half-duplex systems

    NDDF with B is useful for full-duplex systems

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 30 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    Multihop CF, B = 2

    Relay

    Destination

    Source

    Block 2

    R 0

    Block 1

    y2[1] y2[2]

    x2(s1)

    y3[1] y3[2]

    a

    b

    x1(w)

    s1 is s.t. y2[s1] := y2[1]

    Basic Idea: in block i, relay quantizes (scalar or vector) y2[i 1] andcommunicates it to the destination.

    Details

    Fix distributions PX1|X2(|b) and PY2|Y2X2 , to be optimized laterGenerate d2nRe quantization codewords y2[s] independently and i.i.d.according to the marginal PY2|X2(y2|b), s = 1, 2, . . . , 2

    nR.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 31 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    Multihop CF

    Details (cont.)

    Upon receiving y2[1], relay quantizes it by finding a joint typical y2[1] in thequantization codebook. This is likely for n large if R > I(Y2; Y2|X2 = b)The destination first utilizes y3[2] to decode the compression index s1. This canbe done with no error if

    R < maxPX2|X1 (|a),a

    I(X2;Y3|X1 = a)

    Then, the destination utilizes y2[s1] := y2[1] to decode message w. This can bedone with no error if

    R < Rmcf := max I(X1; Y2|X2 = b)

    with max over PX1|X2(|b), PY2|Y2X2(|, b), a and b such thatI(Y2; Y2|X2 = b) < maxPX2|X1 (|a) I(X2;Y3|X1 = a)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 32 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    CF Wyner-Ziv Compression

    Y n3Xn1 WW

    Y n2 : Xn2

    Y n2

    Send B 1 independent messages over B blocks (each of length n)At the end of block i, relay chooses a description yn2 [i] of y

    n2 [i]

    Since the receiver has side information yn3 [i] about yn2 [i], we use Wyner-Ziv coding

    to reduce rate necessary to send yn2 [i]

    R > I(Y2; Y2|X2, Y3)

    = I(Y2; Y2|X2) I(Y3; Y2|X2)

    The bin index is sent to the receiver in block i+ 1 via xn2 [i+ 1]

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 33 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    CF Wyner-Ziv Compression (Cont.)

    Y n3Xn1 WW

    Y n2 : Xn2

    Y n2

    At the end of block i+ 1, the receiver first decodes xn2 [i+ 1] from which it findsyn2 [i]

    R < I(X2;Y3)

    It then finds unique wi s.t. xn1 (wi), x

    n2 [i], y

    n2 [i], y

    n3 [i] are jointly typical

    R < I(X1; Y2, Y3|X2)

    Compress-Forward rate

    RCF = maxPX1PX2PY2|Y2,X2

    I(X1; Y2, Y3|X2)

    subject to I(Y2; Y2|X2, Y3) I(X2;Y3)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 34 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)

    Summary

    What we covered in this section:

    Summarized basic elements of relay channels, including direct, multihop,broadcast, and multiaccess transmission

    Introduced mechanics of various kinds of relay processing, includingamplify-and-forward, decode-and-forward, and compress-and-forward

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 35 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates

    Information Rates

    The purpose of this section is to refine the above analysis, study numericalexamples, and develop insight based on rate.

    Sc

    S

    The capacity region C is usually difficult to compute. A useful outer bound on C isthe cut-set bound.

    Let S N and let Sc be the complement of S in N. A cut separating Wm fromone of its estimates Wm(u) is a pair (S, S

    c) where Wm is connected (immediately)to a node in S but not in Sc, and where u Sc.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 36 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : Cut-set Bound

    Cut-Set Bound

    Let XS = {Xu : u S}Consider any choice of encoders, and compute

    PXNYN (a, b) =[ 1n

    ni=1

    PXN,i(a)]PYN|XN (b|a)

    where PXN,i() is the marginal input distribution at time i.Let M(S) be the set of messages separated from one of their sinks by the cut(S, Sc).

    Cut bound: any (R1, R2, . . . , RM ) C satisfiesmM(S)

    Rm I(XS;YSc |XSc)

    Cut-set bound for fixed PXN (): intersection over all S of (R1, . . . , RM ) satisfyingthe above bounds

    Cut-set bound: union over PXN () of all such regions

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 37 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : Cut-set Bound

    Cut-Set Bound Examples

    Point-to-point channel:C PX ()I(X;Y )

    Relay channel:

    C PX1X2() min{I(X1;Y2Y3|X2), I(X1X2;Y3)}

    The cut-set bound is usually loose, e.g., for two-way channels, broadcast channels,relay channels, etc.

    Multiple access Broadcast

    X1 Y3

    X2

    X1

    Y2 : X2

    Y3

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 38 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : Wireless Geometry

    Wireless Geometry

    Relay is a full-duplex device

    Powers and Noise

    E[X2u] Pu, u = 1, 2Zi, i = 2, 3, ind. Gaussian

    E[Z2i ] = N , i = 2, 3Source and Dest. kept fixed. Relaymoves on the circle. The model is:

    Y2 =H12|d|/2

    X1 + Z2

    Y3 = H13X1 +H23

    1 d2/2

    X2 + Z3

    1

    d

    1 d2

    2

    1 3

    To compare rates, we will consider two settings:

    No Fading: Huv is a known constant, CSIR + CSITFast Uniform-phase fading: Huv = e

    j2uv where uv is uniform in[0, 2), with CSIR, No CSIT

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 39 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : CF

    CF Rates for AWGN Channels

    Recall the Compress-Forward Lower Bound in the DM Case

    C maxPX1PX2PY2|Y2,X2

    I(X1; Y2, Y3|X2)

    subject to I(Y2; Y2|X2, Y3) I(X2;Y3)For AWGN channels, a natural choice is

    Y2 = Y2 + Z2

    where Z2 is Gaussian with variance N2.

    X1 and X2 are chosen as independent, Gaussian, and with variances P1 and P2,respectively.

    The smallest possible N2 is when

    I(Y2; Y2|X2Y3) = I(X2;Y3)

    which gives

    N2 = NP1(|H12|2/d12 + |H13|2/d13

    )+N

    P2|H23|2/d23

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 40 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : CF

    CF Rates for AWGN Channels

    For full-duplex relays

    R = I(X1; Y2, Y3|X2)

    = log2

    (1 +

    P1|H12|2

    d12(N + N2)+P1|H13|2

    d13N

    )bits/use

    Comments:

    As SNR23 := |H23|2P2/d23N we have N2 0 and Y2 Y2 andR becomes

    R = maxPX1X2 ()

    I(X1;Y2Y3|X2)

    This is a cut rate so CF is optimal as SNR23 .Important insight: use CF when the relay is near the destination, andnot AF or DF (see the rate figure).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 41 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : DF

    DF Rates for AWGN Channels

    Recall the DF block structure where x2(wb1) is generated by PX2 , andx1(wb1, wb) by PX1|X2(|x2,i(wb1)) for all i.

    After block b, the DF relay decodes wb at rate

    R < I(X1;Y2|X2)

    Backward decoder rate: decode wb after block b+ 1 by using y3[B],b = B,B 1, . . . , 1, at rate

    R < I(X1X2;Y3)

    Sliding-window decoder rate: decode wb after block b+ 1 by using y3[b] andy3[b+ 1], b = 1, 2, . . . , B 1, at rate

    R < I(X1;Y3|X2) + I(X2;Y3) = I(X1X2;Y3)

    where the first information term is due to y3[b], and I(X2;Y3) is due to y3[b+ 1](treat x1(wb, wb+1) as interference).

    DF rate:R = max

    PX1X2

    min {I(X1;Y3|X2), I(X1X2;Y3)}

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 42 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : DF

    DF Rates for AWGN Channels

    For AWGN channels, choose Gaussian PX1X2 with E[|X1|2] = P1, E[|X2|2] = P2and = E[X1X?2 ]/

    P1P2.

    The DF rate is

    R = max

    min{

    log2

    (1 +

    P1|H12|2(1 ||2)d12N

    ),

    log2

    (1 +

    P1|H13|2

    d13N+P2|H23|2

    d23N+

    P1P2Re{H13H?23}

    d13d23N

    )}Comments:

    As SNR12 := |H12|2P1/d12N , optimal 1 and R becomes

    R = maxPX1X2

    I(X1X2;Y3)

    This is a cut rate so DF is optimal as SNR12 .Important insight: use DF when the relay is near the source (see therate figure).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 43 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : AF

    AF Rates for AWGN Channels

    AF processing: set

    X2,i = aY2,i1 = a(H12,i1

    d12X1,i1 + Z2,i1

    )where a is chosen to satisfy the relay power constraint.

    Destination output:

    Y3,i =H13,id13

    X1,i + aH23,id23

    (H12,i1d12

    X1,i1 + Z2,i1)

    + Z3,i

    AF effectively converts the channel into a unit-memory inter-symbol interferencechannel. The transmitter should thus perform a water-filling optimization of thespectrum of Xn1 .

    It turns out the relay should not always transmit with maximum power.

    More generally:

    X2,i = ~a[Y2,i1, Y2,i2, , Y2,iD

    ]TAmounts to filtering-and-forwarding.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 44 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : AF

    Rates For AWGN Channels, No Fading

    P1/N = 10 dB, P2/N = 20 dB, = 1, Huv = 1

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 11.5

    2

    2.5

    3

    3.5

    4

    distance d

    Rat

    e

    cutset bound

    Rate DF

    Rate CF

    Relay off

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 45 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : AF

    Rates For Fast Uniform Phase Fading, CSIR and No CSIT

    For CF, choose Y2 = Y2ej12 + Z2 where Z2 is Gaussian with 0-mean and var.

    N2.

    Straightforward algebra leads to same CF rate as for AWGN relay channels.

    For DF, Straightforward algebra leads to

    R = max

    min{

    log2

    (1 +

    P1(1 ||2)d12N

    ),

    E[

    log2

    (1 +

    P1d13N

    +P2d23N

    +ej(1213)

    P1P2

    d13d23N

    )]}By Jensens inequality and E[ej(1213)] = 0, the best is zero!Intuition: Without phase knowledge, source and relay transmissions cannotcombine coherently.

    Important insight: Coherent combining requires CSIT at either the source or relaynode and seems unrealistic in mobile environments

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 46 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : AF

    Rates For Fast Uniform Phase Fading Channels, CSIR andNo CSIT

    P1/N = 10 dB, P2/N = 20 dB, = 2, Huv = ej2uv

    0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 11.5

    2

    2.5

    3

    3.5

    4

    distance d

    Rat

    e

    cutset bound

    Rate DF

    Rate CF

    Relay off

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 47 / 90

  • Basics on Cooperation Information Rates : AF

    Summary

    What we covered in Part I:

    1 Summarized basic elements of relay channels, including direct, multihop,broadcast, and multiaccess transmission

    2 Introduced mechanics of various kinds of relay processing, includingamplify-and-forward, decode-and-forward, and compress-and-forward

    3 Reviewed a cut-set bound

    4 Reviewed information theory for cooperative protocols, including AF, CF, DF.

    5 Examples of rate gains for a wireless relay channel

    6 Gave insight on protocol choice based on geometry and constraints

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 48 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference

    Part II: Cooperation in Presence of Interference

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 49 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference

    Goal

    The purpose of this section is to give a high level overview of some issues thatarise in interference relay networks.

    Show, through examples, that classic relaying techniques in general do not sufficeas such in such networks, and need be combined appropriately with more advancedtechniques.

    Discuss what roles relays can play in such networks, in addition to adding power,reducing path-loss, combating fading and increasing coverage.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 50 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference

    Outline: Part 2

    1 CF Generalization to Networks / Noisy Network Coding

    2 Relaying in Presence of Additive Outside Interference

    - Interference Not Known

    - Interference Known Only to Relay

    - Interference Known Only to Source

    3 Generalisation: Channels with States

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 51 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Noisy Network Coding

    Wyner-Ziv Compression for Two Receivers or More

    ?

    Y n3Xn1 WW

    Y n2 : Xn2

    Y n4 W

    R = I(Y2; Y2|X2Y4) R = I(Y2; Y2|X2Y3)

    CF is a good candidate for relaying in networks with no CSIT, such as mobileenvironments.

    In networks, which side information to take into account ?

    - Multiple-description coding not optimal and complex for many users!

    Binning rate (and so, the overall rate) depends on the considered side information

    More generally, Wyner-Ziv type compressions require the quantized version yn2 [i] tobe tailored for a specific receiver

    The problem is even more complex in networks with more than two receivers!

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 52 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Noisy Network Coding

    Noisy Network Coding

    W1 (X1,Y1)

    WN (XN,YN)

    p(y1, . . . ,yN|x1, . . . ,xN)

    Wk (Xk,Yk)

    Alternate compression: noisy network coding (Kim, El Gamal 2011)

    Standard compression, i.e., no binning!

    Every message is transmitted b times

    Receiver decodes using all blocks without explicitly decoding the compressionindices

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 53 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Noisy Network Coding

    Noisy Network Coding: Outline of Proof

    Source node sends same message b times; relays use compress-forward; decodersuse simultaneous decoding

    No binning; dont require decoding compression indices correctly!

    For simplicity, consider proof for relay channel

    The relay uses independently generated compression codebooks:

    Bj = {yn2 (lj |lj1) lj , lj1 [1 : 2nR2 ]}, j [1 : b]

    lj1 is compression index of Yn2 (j 1) sent by the relay in block j

    The senders use independently generated transmission codebooks:

    Cj = {(xn1 (j,m), xn2 (lj1))m [1 : 2nbR], lj , lj1 [1 : 2nR2 ]}, j [1 : b]

    Encoding: Sender transmits Xn1 (j,m) in block j [1 : b] Upon receiving Y n2 (j)and knowing Xn2 (lj1), the relay finds jointly typical Y

    n2 (lj |lj1), and sends

    Xn2 (lj) in block j + 1.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 54 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Noisy Network Coding

    Example: Interference Channel with Intermittent Feedback

    Encoder 1

    Encoder 2

    Decoder 1

    Decoder 2

    DM

    IC

    G

    F

    Xn1

    Xn2 Yn4 W2

    Y n3

    Y n2

    Y n1

    WY1,Y

    2,Y

    3,Y

    4|X

    1,X

    2,SW1

    W2

    S1

    W1

    S2

    Feedback provided only intermittently: at time i:

    - Feedback-event with proba. p1 on Dec. 1 Enc.1, and p2 on Dec. 2 Enc.2Pr{Y1[i] = Y3[i]} = p1 and Pr{Y2[i] = Y4[i]} = p2

    - Erasure-event with proba. p1 on Dec. 1 Enc.1, and p2 on Dec. 2 Enc.2Pr{Y1[i] = } = 1 p1 and Pr{Y2[i] = } = 1 p2

    ? Can model this type of FB using a memoryless state-pair (S1, S2), with

    S1 Bern-p1 and S2 Bern-p2, and (S1, S2) pS1,S2(s1, s2)Capacity region is unknown in general, even without feedback!

    Classic partial-DF schemes inefficient here, because of the intermittence

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 55 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Noisy Network Coding

    Example: IC with Intermittent Feedback (Cont.)

    Encoder 1

    Encoder 2

    Decoder 1

    Decoder 2

    DM

    IC

    G

    F

    Xn1

    Xn2 Yn4 W2

    Y n3

    Y n2

    Y n1

    WY1,Y

    2,Y

    3,Y

    4|X

    1,X

    2,SW1

    W2

    S1

    W1

    S2

    Key idea: each transmitter compresses, a-la noisy network coding, its output FBand sends it to both receivers.

    Optimal for linear deterministic IC model

    Y3[i] = H11X1[i] + H12X2[i]

    Y4[i] = H22X2[i] + H21X1[i]

    Recovers known results on linear deterministic IC (Tse et al.) if p1 = p2 = 1

    More generally, optimal for Costa-El Gamal injective deterministic IC model

    - Details in [Zaidi Interference channels with generalized and intermittentfeedback, IEEE Trans. IT, 2014]

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 56 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Interference Amplification

    RC with Unknown Outside Interferer

    Node 4 is an unknown interferer

    E[X24 ] = QE[Z2i ] = 1, i = 2, 3E[X2i ] = 1, i = 1, 2

    1

    2

    3 WW

    4

    We focus on the shown geometry. Node 4 interferes on both links, to the relay anddestination. The model is

    Y2 = H12X1 +H42X4 + Z2

    Y3 = H13X1 +H23X2 +H43X4 + Z3

    Previous schemes may all perform poor if transmit power at Node 4 is too large(strong interferer).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 57 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Interference Amplification

    Amplifying the Interference

    Important insight:

    Interference X4 is different from noise (has a structure !)

    Treat the interference as desired information, and amplify it instead ofcombating it!

    The destination first decodes the interference, cancels its effect, and thendecodes message W interference-free

    Rationale:

    Consider the following IC, powers and noise variances set to unity for simplicity.

    SNR1 , |g11|2, SNR2 , |g22|2

    INR1 , |g21|2, INR2 , |g12|2

    W1W1

    W2W2

    g11

    g22

    g21

    g12

    Strong interference regime: INR1 SNR1 and INR2 SNR2Decoding interference is optimal in the strong interference regime.

    The relay steers the network to the strong interference regime in which theinterference can be decoded and so its effect canceled out!

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 58 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Interference Amplification

    Amplifying the Interference

    Important insight:

    Interference X4 is different from noise (has a structure !)

    Treat the interference as desired information, and amplify it instead ofcombating it!

    The destination first decodes the interference, cancels its effect, and thendecodes message W interference-free

    Rationale:

    Consider the following IC, powers and noise variances set to unity for simplicity.

    SNR1 , |g11|2, SNR2 , |g22|2

    INR1 , |g21|2, INR2 , |g12|2

    W1W1

    W2W2

    g11

    g22

    g21

    g12

    Strong interference regime: INR1 SNR1 and INR2 SNR2Decoding interference is optimal in the strong interference regime.

    The relay steers the network to the strong interference regime in which theinterference can be decoded and so its effect canceled out!

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 58 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Binning

    Partially Known Interferer

    To gain intuition, consider the Gaussian model

    Y2 = X1 + S + Z2

    Y3 = X1 +X2 + S + Z3

    E[S2] = Q, E[X2i ] = Pi, i = 1, 2E[Z2i ] = Ni, i = 2, 3

    1

    2

    3 WW

    4

    The interference S can be known to all or only a subset of the nodes

    Node k, k = 1, 2, 3, knows the interference from Node 4

    - strictly-causally: if, at time i, it knows Si1 , (S1, . . . , Si1)

    - causally: if, at time i, it knows Si , (S1, . . . , Si1, Si)

    - non-causally: if, at time i, it knows Sn , (S1, . . . , Si1, Si, . . . , Sn)

    ? In all cases, interference can be learned, e.g., through relaying or by

    means of cognition.

    In general, asymmetric models, are more difficult to solve!

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 59 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Binning

    Collaborative Binning Against Interference

    Recall Costas Dirty Paper Coding for a point-to-point AWGN channel

    - Input-output relation: Y = X + S + Z

    E[X2] P , E[S2] = Q, E[Z2] = NS known non-causally to Tx, but not to Rx

    -Optimal precoding: Tx sends X = U S, with = P/(P +N)Capacity C = I(U ;Y ) I(U ;S) = log2(1 + P/N)Intuition: Y = U + (1 )S +N , 1 0

    Symmetric case: S is known to both source and relay (non-causally)

    X2 = (1 )(U1 1S), =P1/

    P (1),

    X1 = (U1 1S) + (U2 2S) +X 1, X 1 N(0, P1)

    with P (1) = (P1 +

    P2)

    2, P (2) = P1 and

    k =P (k)

    P (1) + P (2) + (P1 +N2), k = 1, 2.

    eliminates completely the effect of the interference S! (optimal if channel isphysically degraded).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 60 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Binning

    Collaborative Binning Against Interference

    Recall Costas Dirty Paper Coding for a point-to-point AWGN channel

    - Input-output relation: Y = X + S + Z

    E[X2] P , E[S2] = Q, E[Z2] = NS known non-causally to Tx, but not to Rx

    -Optimal precoding: Tx sends X = U S, with = P/(P +N)Capacity C = I(U ;Y ) I(U ;S) = log2(1 + P/N)Intuition: Y = U + (1 )S +N , 1 0

    Symmetric case: S is known to both source and relay (non-causally)

    X2 = (1 )(U1 1S), =P1/

    P (1),

    X1 = (U1 1S) + (U2 2S) +X 1, X 1 N(0, P1)

    with P (1) = (P1 +

    P2)

    2, P (2) = P1 and

    k =P (k)

    P (1) + P (2) + (P1 +N2), k = 1, 2.

    eliminates completely the effect of the interference S! (optimal if channel isphysically degraded).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 60 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Interference Known Only at Relay

    Case of no interference, with DF

    The source knows the relay input Xn2The source can therefore jointly design Xn1 through PX1,X2(x1, x2)This ensures some coherence gain as in multi-antenna transmission

    R < I(X1, X2;Y3)

    Case of interference known only at relay, with DF

    Issue: coherent transmission is difficult to obtainRelay should exploit the known Sn

    X2,i = 2,i(Yi12 , S

    n)

    Source does not know Sn, and therefore X2,i

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 61 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Coding

    Complete interference mitigation is impossible, due to the asymmetry

    Main idea:

    decompose relay input as

    X2 = U1 + X2

    X2 : zero mean Gaussian with variance P2, [0, 1]U1 : zero mean Gaussian with variance P2, = 1 U1 is independent of S and correlated with X1X2 is correlated with S and independent of X1

    E[U1X1] = 12P1P2, E[X2S] = 2s

    P2Q

    X2 is generated using a Generalized DPC (2s 0)

    U2 = X2 + S

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 62 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Coding

    Complete interference mitigation is impossible, due to the asymmetry

    Main idea:

    decompose relay input as

    X2 = U1 + X2

    X2 : zero mean Gaussian with variance P2, [0, 1]U1 : zero mean Gaussian with variance P2, = 1 U1 is independent of S and correlated with X1X2 is correlated with S and independent of X1

    E[U1X1] = 12P1P2, E[X2S] = 2s

    P2Q

    X2 is generated using a Generalized DPC (2s 0)

    U2 = X2 + S

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 62 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Information Rate

    Theorem

    The capacity of the general Gaussian RC with interference known non-causally only atthe relay is lower-bounded by

    RinG = max min

    {1

    2log(

    1 +P1 + P2 + 2

    12

    P1P2

    P2 +Q+N3 + 22sP2Q

    )+

    1

    2log(

    1 +P2(1 22s)

    N3

    ),

    1

    2log(

    1 +P1(1 212)

    N2

    )}

    where the maximization is over parameters [0, 1], 12 [0, 1], 2s [1, 0], and = 1 .

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 63 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Upper Bounding Technique

    Source Relay

    R < I(X1;Y2, Y3, S|X2)= I(X1;Y2, Y3|S,X2)

    (Source,Relay) Destination

    R < I(X1, X2;Y3|S)

    The term I(X1;S|Y3) is the rate loss due to not knowing the interference at thesource as well

    Has connection with MAC with asymmetric CSI

    But, with a different proof technique

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 64 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Upper Bounding Technique

    Source Relay

    R < I(X1;Y2, Y3, S|X2)= I(X1;Y2, Y3|S,X2)

    (Source,Relay) Destination

    R < I(X1, X2;Y3|S) I(X1;S|Y3)

    The term I(X1;S|Y3) is the rate loss due to not knowing the interference at thesource as well

    Has connection with MAC with asymmetric CSI

    But, with a different proof technique

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 64 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    How Tight is the Lower Bound ?

    Proposition

    For the physically degraded Gaussian RC, we have:1) If P1, P2, Q, N2, N3 satisfy

    N2 max[1,0]

    P1N3(P2 +Q+N3 + 2P2Q)

    P1N3 + P2(1 2)(P1 + P2 +Q+N3 + 2P2Q)

    ,

    then channel capacity is given by

    CDG =1

    2log(1 +

    P1N2

    ).

    2) If the maximum for the upper bound is attained at the boundary 212 + 22s = 1, then

    the lower bound is tight.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 65 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    How Tight is the Lower Bound ? (cont.)

    Bounds for GRC also meet in some extreme cases:

    Arbitrarily strong interference, i.e., Q

    C =

    {min{ 1

    2log(1 + P1

    N2), 1

    2log(1 + P2

    N3)} (DG RC)

    12

    log(1 + P2N3

    ), if P2N3 P1

    N2(General GRC)

    Zero-power at the relay, i.e., P2 = 0

    C =

    {12

    log(1 + P1Q+N3

    ) (DG RC)12

    log(1 + P1Q+N3

    ), if P1Q+N3

    P1N2

    (General GRC)

    No interference, i.e., Q = 0 (DG RC)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 66 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    The Deaf Helper Problem

    What if the relay cannot hear the source ?

    Finite interference

    subtract as much as possible from Snot optimum in general

    Arbitrarily stong interference

    Constructed a dammed codeword X2 (independent of X1) by DPC,X2 = U2 SAt the destination: decode U2 first and then X1Cleans-up the channel for X1 if

    I(U2;Y3) (U2;S) > 0.

    Transmission at

    I(X1;Y3|S) =1

    2log2(1 +

    P1N3

    )

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 67 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Relay

    Example : Degraded Gaussian RC

    P1 = P2 = Q = N3 = 10 dB

    0 5 10 15 20 25 300.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    P1/N

    2 [dB]

    Rate

    Lower bound

    Trivial upper bound

    Upper bound

    Trivial lower bound

    0 5 10 15 20 25 300

    0.5

    1

    2 12+

    2 2s

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 68 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    RC with Interference Known Only at Source

    Model

    Y2 = X1 + S + Z2

    Y3 = X1 +X2 + S + Z3

    E[S2] = Q, E[X2i ] = Pi, i = 1, 2E[Z2i ] = Ni, i = 2, 3

    1

    2

    3 WW

    4

    The interference S is known non-causally to only the source

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 69 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Coding

    Two different techniques:

    1 Lower bound 1: reveal the interference to the relay

    interference exploitation (binning) is performed also at relay

    (share message and interference)

    2 Lower bound 2: reveal to the relay just what the relay would send had the relay

    known the interference

    interference exploitation (binning) is performed only at source

    (share X = (V, S), suitable for oblivious relaying)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 70 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Coding

    Two different techniques:

    1 Lower bound 1: reveal the interference to the relay

    interference exploitation (binning) is performed also at relay

    (share message and interference)

    2 Lower bound 2: reveal to the relay just what the relay would send had the relay

    known the interference

    interference exploitation (binning) is performed only at source

    (share X = (V, S), suitable for oblivious relaying)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 70 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Lower Bound 2

    If the interference were also known at relay

    Beginning of block i:

    Source sends x1[i] := x1(wi1, wi) | v(wi1, j?V ),u(wi1, wi, j?U ), s[i]Relay sends x[i] | v(wi1, j?V ), s[i]

    In our case (interference at only source)

    The source knows wi1 and s[i], and so x[i]

    The source transmits x[i] to the relay, ahead of time, in block i 1The relay estimates x[i] from y2[i 1], and sends x2[i] x[i] in block i

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 71 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Lower Bound 2

    Outline:

    Beginning of block i:

    Source looks for u(wi, j?i ) such that (u(wi, j

    ?i ), s[i]) Tn

    Source looks for u(wi+1, j?i+1) such that (u(wi+1, j

    ?i+1), s[i+ 1]) Tn ; and then

    computes x[i+ 1] | u(wi+1, j?i+1), s[i+ 1]Source quantizes x[i+ 1] into x[mi]

    uR(mi, jRi)

    u(wi, ji )

    Martons coding Superposition coding

    (wi, mi)

    u(wi, jUi)

    uR(mi, jRi)

    v(wi1)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 72 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Lower Bound 2: Martons Coding

    Theorem

    The capacity of the DM RC with interference known only at source is lower bounded by

    Rlo = max I(U ;Y3) I(U ;S)

    subject to the constraint

    I(X; X) < I(UR;Y2) I(UR;S) I(UR;U |S)

    where maximization is over all joint measures onS U UR X1 X2 X X Y2 Y3 of the form

    PS,U,UR,X1,X2,X,X,Y2,Y3

    = QSPU,UR|SPX1|U,UR,SPX|U,SPX|X1X2=XWY2,Y3|X1,X2,S .

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 73 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Lower Bound 2 (Gaussian Case)

    Test channel:

    X = aX + X, a := 1D/P2, X N(0, D(1D/P2)), 0 D P2X N(0, P2), with E[XX] = E[XS] = E[XS] = 0X1R N(0, P1), with E[X1RS] = 0, 0 1

    U =( P1

    P2+

    P2 DP2

    )X + S

    UR = X1R + R(S +

    P1

    P1 +P2 D

    X),

    with

    =(P1 +

    P2 D)2

    (P1 +

    P2 D)2 + (N3 +D + P1)

    R =P1

    P1 +N2.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 74 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Lower Bound

    Theorem

    The capacity of the Gaussian RC with interference known only at source is lowerbounded by

    RloG = max1

    2log(

    1 +(P1 +

    P2 D)2

    N3 +D + P1

    ),

    where

    D := P2N2

    N2 + P1

    and the maximization is over [0, 1], with := 1 .

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 75 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    How Tight are the Bounds ? (Contd)

    Bounds for GRC meet in some extreme cases:

    Arbitrarily small noise at relay, i.e., N2 0,

    CG =1

    2log(

    1 +(P1 +

    P2)

    2

    N3

    ) o(1)

    where o(1) 0 as N2 0.Arbitrarily strong noise at relay, i.e., N2 ,

    RupG =1

    2log(1 +

    P1N3

    )

    RloG =1

    2log(1 +

    P1N3 + P2

    ).

    If P1 , bounds meet asymptotically in the power at the source if P2 P1,yielding

    CG-orth =1

    2log(1 +

    P1N3

    ) + o(1)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 76 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference Cognitive Source

    Example

    P1 = Q = N3 = 10 dB, P2 = 20 dB

    20 10 0 10 20 30 40 500

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    1.4

    1.6

    1.8

    2

    P1/N

    2 [dB]

    Rate

    Lower bound (Theorem 4)

    Lower bound (Theorem 5)

    Upper bound (Theorem 3)

    Upper bound (Cutset bound)

    Trivial lower bound

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 77 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference General Framework

    RC with States

    More generally, S may represent any information about the channel (fading, activity,..)

    SOURCE DESTINATION

    RELAYX2

    Y3X1 W WWY2,Y3|X1,X2,SW W

    Y2

    Sn

    RELAY

    DESTINATIONSOURCEX1

    Y2 X2

    Y3 W WW W

    Sn

    WY2,Y3|X1,X2,S

    Thourough results, as well as strictly-causal CSI case, in:

    - Zaidi et al., Bounds on the Capacity of the Relay Channel with Noncausal Stateat Source, EEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, Vol. 59, No. 5, May 2013, pp. 2639-2672.

    - Zaidi et al. Cooperative Relaying with State Available Non-Causally at theRelay, EEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 5, no. 56, pp. 2272-2298, May 2010.

    - Zaidi et al., Capacity Region of Cooperative Multiple Access Channel withStates, IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, Vol. 59, No. 10, 2013, pp. 6153-6174

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 78 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference General Framework

    MAC with Delayed CSI

    MACDecoder

    Encoder 2

    Encoder 1

    Si1

    Wc

    Xn2

    Xn1

    Y n

    WY |X1,X2,S(Wc, W1)

    W1

    Si1

    Both encoders send Wc. Encoder 1 also sends W1

    Both encoders know the states only strictly causally

    1,i : WcW1 Si1 X1, i = 1, . . . , n

    2,i : WcSi1 X2, i = 1, . . . , n

    Decoder: : Yn WcW1

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 79 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference General Framework

    Main Results

    1 CSI given with delay to only transmitters increases the capacity region

    - Zaidi et al., Cooperative MAC with states, IT 2013

    2 Gains obtained through a Block-Markov coding in which the encoders jointlycompress the CSI of the last block, using an appropriate compression scheme

    3 Reminiscient of quantizing-and-transmitting noise in a non-degraded BC examplewith common noise at receivers by Dueck (Cf: Partial feedback for two-way andBC, Inf. Contr. 1980)

    - MAT scheme (Maddah Ali, Tse): interference S here. In block i,Transmitter sends a linear function of (S[i 1],X[i 1]). This can be seenas a compressed version S = V = f(X,S) PV |X,S

    - Lapidoth et al., MAC with causal and strictly causal CSI, IT 2013

    - Li et al., MAC with states known strictly causally, IT 2013

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 80 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference General Framework

    Capacity Region in Some Special Cases

    Let DsymMAC be the class of discrete memoryless two-user cooperative MACs, denoted byD

    symMAC, in which the channel state S, assumed to be revealed strictly causally to both

    encoders, can be obtained as a deterministic function of the channel inputs X1 and X2and the channel output Y , as

    S = f(X1, X2, Y ).

    Theorem

    For any MAC in the class DsymMAC defined above, the capacity region Cs-c is given by theset of all rate pairs (Rc, R1) satisfying

    R1 I(X1;Y |X2, S)Rc +R1 I(X1, X2;Y )

    for some measurePS,X1,X2,Y = QSPX1,X2WY |S,X1,X2 .

    Example: model Y = X1 +X2 + S. Capacity Rc +R1 log(1 + (P1 +

    P2)

    2/Q).

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 81 / 90

  • Cooperation in Presence of Interference General Framework

    Delayed CSI Not Always Helps !

    Proposition

    Delayed CSI at the encoders does not increase the sum capacity

    max(Rc,R1) Cs-c

    Rc +R1 = maxp(x1,x2)

    I(X1, X2;Y ).

    Proposition

    Delayed CSI at only the encoder that sends both messages does not increase thecapacity region of the cooperative MAC.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 82 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Part III: Interaction and Computation

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 83 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Outline: Part 3

    1 Interaction for Sources Reproduction

    2 Interaction for Function Computation

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 84 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Setup

    A B

    M1

    M2

    ...

    Mt

    fA(X, Y ) fB(X, Y )

    YX

    Under what conditions is interaction useful ?

    How useful is interaction ?

    What is the best way to interact ?

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 85 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Interaction for Sources Reproduction Losslessly

    Discrete memoryless multi-source (X1, Y1), . . . , (Xn, Yn) i.i.d. pX,Y (x, y)

    Goal: Reproduce X = (X1, X2, . . . , Xn) at B with probability 1 as n

    A BM1

    R1 = H(X|Y )

    (X1, . . . , Xn) (Y1, . . . , Yn)

    (X1, . . . , Xn)

    One round Slepian-Wolf Coding is optimal

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 86 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Interaction for Lossy Sources Reproduction

    Discrete memoryless multi-source (X1, Y1), . . . , (Xn, Yn) i.i.d. pX,Y (x, y)

    Goal: Reproduce X = (X1, X2, . . . , Xn), with E[d(X, X)] DX as n

    A B

    M1

    M2

    ...

    Mt

    (Y1, . . . , Yn)(X1, . . . , Xn)

    X = (X1, . . . , Xn)Y = (Y1, . . . , Yn)

    R2

    Rt

    R1

    Interaction is useful

    Rsum := R1 +R2 + . . .+Rt minPU1|X

    I(U1;X|Y ) + minPU2|Y

    I(U1;Y |X)

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 87 / 90

  • Interaction and Computation

    Interaction for Fonction Computation

    Discrete memoryless multi-source (X1, Y1), . . . , (Xn, Yn) i.i.d. pX,Y (x, y)

    Goal: Reproduce fA = fA(X,Y), with E[d( fA(X,Y), fA(X,Y))] DA asn

    A B

    M1

    M2

    ...

    Mt

    (Y1, . . . , Yn)(X1, . . . , Xn)

    R2

    Rt

    R1

    fB(X,Y)fA(X,Y)

    Interaction is useful

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 88 / 90

  • Wrap-Up

    Wrap-Up

    1 Many approaches, benefits, and challenges to utilizing relaying and cooperativecommunications in networks.

    2 Relaying also includes, or should also include, multihop (store-and-forward routing)and network coding.

    3 The capacity of relay systems is difficult to analyze, but the theory is surprisinglyflexible and diverse.

    4 Although generalizations to networks with many nodes are in general not easy,there are schemes which scale appropriately.

    5 In networks with interference, relaying can help, not only by adding power/energyspatially, but also by allowing distributed interference cancellation; and in generalthis boots network capacity.

    6 To cope with network interference efficiently, classic relaying schemes as such ingeneral do not suffice, and need be combined carefully with other appropriatetechniques.

    Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 89 / 90

  • Wrap-Up

    Selected References

    - T. Cover and A. El Gamal, Capacity theorems for the relay channel, IEEE Trans.Inf. Theory, Vol. 25, Sep. 1979, pp. 572-584.

    - G. Kramer, M. Gastpar and P. Gupta, Cooperative strategies and capacitytheorems for relay networks, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, Sep. 2005, pp. 3037-3037.

    - N. Laneman, D. Tse and G. Wornell, Cooperative diversity in wireless networks:Efficient protocols and outage behaviour, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 50, Dec.2004, pp. 3062-3080.

    - A. Zaidi, S. Kotagiri and N. Laneman, Cooperative relaying with State AvailableNon-Causally at the Relay, EEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 5, no. 56, pp.2272-2298, May 2010.

    - A. Zaidi et al., Bounds on the capacity of the relay channel with noncausal stateat source, EEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, Vol. 59, No. 5, May 2013, pp. 2639-2672.

    - A. Zaidi et al., Capacity region of cooperative multiple access channel withstates, IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, vol. 59, No. 10, 2013, pp. 6153-6174

    - S.-H. Lim, Y.-H. Kim and A. El Gamal, Noisy Network Coding, IEEE Trans. Inf.Theory, vol. 57, May 2011, pp. 3132-3152.

    - A. Avestimeher, S. Diggavi and D. Tse, Wireless network information flow: adetermenistic approach, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, May 2011, pp. 3132-3152.

    - A. El Gamal and Y.H-. Kim, Network information theory, Cambridge UniversityPress, 2011.Abdellatif Zaidi Cooperative Techniques in Networks 90 / 90

    Basics on CooperationIntroduction and ModelsProtocolsProtocols : Amplify-and-Forward (AF)Protocols : Decode-and-Forward (DF)Protocols : Compress-and-Forward (CF)Information RatesInformation Rates : Cut-set BoundInformation Rates : Wireless GeometryInformation Rates : CFInformation Rates : DFInformation Rates : AF

    Cooperation in Presence of InterferenceNoisy Network CodingInterference AmplificationBinningCognitive RelayCognitive SourceGeneral Framework

    Interaction and ComputationWrap-Up