1: \documentclass[12pt, journal, onecolumn]{IEEEtran}
2: %\documentclass[12pt,article,onecolumn]{IEEEtran}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{amssymb}
5: \usepackage{cite}
6: \usepackage{epsfig}
7: \usepackage{epsf}
8: \usepackage{theorem}
9: %\topmargin 0in
10:
11: %\setlength{\textheight}{8.5in}
12: %\setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in}
13: %\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0in}
14: %\setlength{\evensidemargin}{0.4in}
15: % %\input{psfig}
16: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1}
17: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}
18: \newtheorem{lem}{Lemma}
19: \def\bibname{\bf References}
20:
21: %\pagestyle{empty}
22: \begin{document}
23: \pagenumbering{arabic}
24: \title{\textbf{Scheduling and Codeword Length Optimization in Time Varying Wireless Networks}}
25: \author{Mehdi Ansari Sadrabadi, Alireza Bayesteh and Amir K. Khandani \\
26: \small Coding \& Signal Transmission Laboratory(www.cst.uwaterloo.ca)\\
27: Dept. of Elec. and Comp. Eng., University of Waterloo\\ Waterloo, ON, Canada, N2L 3G1 \\
28: Tel: 519-884-8552, Fax: 519-888-4338\\e-mail: \{mehdi, alireza,
29: khandani\}@cst.uwaterloo.ca} \maketitle
30:
31: \begin{abstract}
32: In this paper, a downlink scenario in which a single-antenna base
33: station communicates with $K$ single antenna users, over a
34: time-correlated fading channel, is considered. It is assumed that
35: channel state information is perfectly known at each receiver, while
36: the statistical characteristics of the fading process and the fading
37: gain at the beginning of each frame are known to the transmitter. By
38: evaluating the random coding error exponent of the time-correlated
39: fading channel, it is shown that there is an optimal codeword length
40: which maximizes the throughput. The throughput of
41: the conventional scheduling that transmits to the user with the maximum
42: signal to noise ratio is examined using both fixed length codewords and variable
43: length codewords. Although optimizing the codeword length improves
44: the performance, it is shown that using the conventional scheduling,
45: a gap of $\Omega(\sqrt{\log \log\log K})$ exists between the
46: achievable throughput and the maximum possible throughput of the
47: system. A simple scheduling that considers both the
48: signal to noise ratio and the channel time variation is proposed. It is shown that by using this scheduling, the gap between the achievable throughput and
49: the maximum throughput of the system approaches zero.
50: %Finally, the delay of the system under the proposed strategies are compared.
51: \end{abstract}
52:
53: \begin{keywords}
54: Downlink scheduling, multiuser diversity, Rayleigh fading, time varying channels.
55: \end{keywords}
56:
57: \section{Introduction}
58: In wireless networks, diversity is a means to combat the time
59: varying nature of the communication link. Conventional diversity techniques over point-to-point links, such
60: as spatial diversity and frequency diversity are widely used and offer performance improvements. In multiuser wireless
61: systems, there exists another form of diversity, called
62: \textit{multiuser diversity}~\cite{dumbantenna}. In a broadcast
63: channel where users have independent fading and feed back their
64: signal to noise ratio (SNR) to the base station (BS), system
65: throughput is maximized by transmitting to the user with the
66: strongest SNR~\cite{dumbantenna, hanly}.
67:
68: Multiuser diversity was introduced first by Knopp and Humblet
69: \cite{KH}. It is shown that the optimal transmission strategy in the
70: uplink of multiuser systems using power control is to only let the
71: user with the largest SNR transmit. A similar result is shown to be
72: valid for the downlink~\cite{Tse-mud}. Multiuser diversity underlies
73: much of the recent works for downlink scheduling \cite{agrawal,
74: liu, liu1, borst} as in
75: Qualcomm's high data rate (HDR) system~\cite{bender,cdma}.
76: In~\cite{jalali, borst}, the opportunistic scheduling is based on the
77: highest data rate which can be reliably transmitted to each user. Distributed scheduling is proposed
78: in an uplink scenario, where full channel state information (CSI) is
79: not required at the transmitter~\cite{qin, shamaitel}. Multiuser diversity has also been studied in the context of multiple antenna systems~\cite{dumbantenna}, \cite{multiuser-mimo} and ad-hoc
80: networks~\cite{Tse-mobi}.
81:
82:
83: In wireless networks, the rate of channel variations is
84: characterized by maximum Doppler frequency which is proportional to
85: the velocity. Utilizing multiuser diversity in such environments
86: needs to be revisited since the throughput depends not only on the
87: received SNR, but also on how fast the channel varies over time.
88:
89: In this paper, we consider a broadcast channel in which a BS
90: transmits data to a large number of users in a time-correlated flat
91: fading environment. It is assumed that CSI is perfectly known to the receivers, while BS only knows the
92: statistical characteristics of the fading process for all the users
93: (which is assumed to be constant during a long period). Moreover,
94: each user feeds back its channel gain to the BS at the beginning of
95: each frame. Based on this information, BS selects a single user for
96: transmission in each frame, in order to maximize the throughput. For
97: the case of Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) or block fading, it
98: is well known that increasing the codeword length results in
99: improving the achievable throughput. However, in a time varying
100: channel, it is not possible to obtain arbitrary small error
101: probabilities by increasing the codeword length. In fact, increasing
102: the codeword length also results in increasing the fading
103: fluctuations over the frame, and consequently, the throughput will
104: decrease. Therefore, it is of interest to find the optimum codeword
105: length which maximizes the throughput.
106:
107:
108: In this paper, a downlink scenario in which a single-antenna base
109: station communicates with $K$ single antenna users, over a
110: time-correlated fading channel, is considered. We analyze different
111: user selection strategies; i)~the BS transmits data to the user with
112: the strongest SNR using fixed length codewords (conventional
113: multiuser scheduling), ii)~the BS transmits data to the user with
114: the strongest SNR using variable length codewords, and iii)~the BS
115: transmits data to the user that achieves the maximum throughput
116: using variable length codewords. We show that in all cases the
117: achievable throughput scales as $\log \log K$. Moreover, in cases
118: (i) and (ii), the gap between the achievable throughput and the
119: maximum throughput scales as $\sqrt{\log \log \log K}$, while in
120: case (iii), this gap approaches zero.
121:
122:
123: The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section
124: \ref{model}, the model of time-correlated fading channel is
125: described. In Section \ref{analysis}, different user selection
126: strategies are discussed and the corresponding throughput of the
127: system is derived for each strategy, for $K \to \infty$. Finally, in Section \ref{conclusion}, we conclude the
128: paper.
129:
130: Throughout this paper, $\mathbb{E} \{ .\}$ and $\mbox{var} \{
131: .\}$ represents the expectation and variance, respectively, ``$\log
132: $" is used for the natural logarithm, and rate is expressed in
133: \emph{nats}. For given functions $f(N)$ and $g(N)$, $f(N)=O(g(N))$ is
134: equivalent to $\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \left| \frac{f(N)}{g(N)}
135: \right| < \infty$, $f(N)=o(g(N))$ is equivalent to $\lim_{N
136: \rightarrow \infty} \left| \frac{f(N)}{g(N)} \right| =0$,
137: $f(N)=\omega(g(N))$ is equivalent to $\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty}
138: \frac{f(N)}{g(N)} = \infty$, and $f(N)=\Omega(g(N))$ is equivalent
139: to $\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \frac{f(N)}{g(N)} =c$, where
140: $0<c<\infty$.
141:
142: \section{System model}\label{model}
143: The channel of any given user is modeled as
144: a time-correlated fading process. It is assumed that the channel
145: gain is constant over each channel use (symbol) and varies from
146: symbol to symbol, following a Markovian random process. Assume that the
147: fading gain of $k^{\rm{th}}$ user is $\boldsymbol
148: {h}_k=[h_{1,k},\ldots,h_{N_k,k}]^T$ where $ h_{i,k}, 1\leq i \leq
149: N_k$ are complex Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit
150: variance and $N_k$ is the codeword length of the $k^{\rm{th}}$ user. The received
151: signal for the $k^{\rm{th}}$ user is given by
152: \begin{equation}
153: \boldsymbol{r}_k = \boldsymbol{S}_k\boldsymbol{h}_k +
154: \boldsymbol{n}_k,
155: \end{equation}
156: where $\boldsymbol{S}_k = \mbox{diag}(s_{1,k}, s_{2,k}, \ldots,
157: s_{N_k,k})$ is the transmitted codeword with the power constraint\footnote{Obviously,
158: for maximizing the throughput, the power constraint translates to $ \mathbb{E} \{|s_{i,k}|^2 \} = P$.}
159: $ \mathbb{E} \{|s_{i,k}|^2 \} \leq P$, and
160: $\boldsymbol{n}_k$ is AWGN with zero mean and covariance matrix $\boldsymbol{I}$.
161: Assume that $h_{0,k}$ is the fading
162: gain at the time instant before $\boldsymbol{S}_k$ is transmitted.
163: The sequence $u_{i,k}=|h_{i,k}|$, $0 \leq i \leq N_k$, is assumed
164: to be a stationary ergodic chain with the following probability
165: density function \cite{fading}:
166: \begin{eqnarray}\label{pu0}
167: f_{u_{0,k}}(u)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 2ue^{-u^2} & u\geq 0\\
168: 0 & \textrm{otherwise}\end{array} \right.,
169: \end{eqnarray}
170: \begin{equation}\label{corrfading}
171: f(u_{1,k}, u_{2,k}, \cdots, u_{N_k,k} |
172: u_{0,k})=\prod_{i=1}^{N_k}q_k(u_{i,k} |u_{i-1,k}),
173: \end{equation}
174: where,
175: \begin{eqnarray}
176: q_k(u|v)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
177: \frac{2u}{1-\alpha_k^2}\exp\left(-\frac{u^2+\alpha_k^2v^2}{1-\alpha_k^2}\right)\mathcal{I}_0(\frac{2\alpha_k
178: u v}{1-\alpha_k^2}) & u\geq 0 \\ 0 & \textrm{otherwise}
179: \end{array} \right. \notag
180: \end{eqnarray}
181: in which $0 <\alpha_k <1$ describes the channel correlation
182: coefficient of the $k^{\rm{th}}$ user. It is assumed that $\alpha_k$, $1 \leq k \leq K$, are i.i.d. random variables with uniform distribution which remain fixed during the entire transmission, and $\mathcal{I}_0(.)$ denotes the modified
183: Bessel function of order zero. It is assumed that CSI is perfectly known at each receiver,
184: while the statistical characteristics of the fading process and
185: $u_{0,k}$, $1 \leq k \leq K$ are known to the transmitter.
186:
187: \section{Throughput Analysis} \label{analysis}
188: In this section, we derive the achievable throughput of the system
189: in the asymptotic case of $K \to \infty$.
190: We define the $k^{\rm{th}}$ user's throughput per channel use, denoted by $T_k$, as
191: \begin{eqnarray} \label{T}
192: T_k \triangleq R_k (1-p_e (k)),
193: \end{eqnarray}
194: where $R_k$ is the transmitted rate per channel use and $p_e(k)$ is
195: the frame error probability for this user. Using the concept of
196: random coding error exponent \cite{gallager}, $p_e (k)$ can be
197: upper-bounded as
198: \begin{eqnarray} \label{pe}
199: p_e (k)\leq \inf_{0 \leq \rho \leq 1} e^{-N(E_{k}(\rho)-\rho
200: R_k)}.
201: \end{eqnarray}
202: For simplicity of analysis, we use this upper-bound in evaluating
203: the throughput. This bound is tight for rates close to the capacity
204: as used in \cite{gallagerdelay, telgal, kaplan}.
205:
206: Assuming $s_{i,k}, 1\leq i \leq N_k$, are Gaussian
207: and i.i.d., it is shown that the random coding error exponent for the
208: $k^{\rm{th}}$ user, $E_{k}(\rho)$, is given by~\cite{kaplan},
209: \begin{equation}\label{ekro}
210: E_{k}(\rho)= -\frac{1}{N_k}\log \mathbb{E}_{\boldsymbol{u}_k}
211: \left \lbrace
212: \prod_{i=1}^{N_k}\left(\frac{1}{1+\frac{P}{1+\rho}u_{i,k}^2}\right)^{\rho }
213: \right \rbrace.
214: \end{equation}
215: where $\boldsymbol{u}_k=[u_{1,k},\ldots,u_{N_k,k}]$.
216:
217: In the following, we assume that $u_{0,k}\gg 1$. Since in
218: strategies introduced in this work, a user is selected if the
219: corresponding initial fading gain is maximum or above a certain
220: threshold, this assumption is valid when the number of users is
221: large.
222: \begin{thm}\label{throu}
223: For the channel model described in the previous section, and
224: assuming $u_{0,k}$ is known, we have
225: \begin{equation}\label{errorex}
226: E_{k}(\rho) = \frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k}
227: \rho\log\left(1+\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2\alpha_k^{2i}}{(1+\rho)}\right)+
228: O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_{0,k}}}\right)-O\left(e^{-u^2_{0,k}}\right).
229: \end{equation}
230: \end{thm}
231: \textbf{Proof}: See Appendix A.
232:
233: Minimizing (\ref{pe}) is equivalent to maximizing $E_k(\rho)-\rho
234: R_k$. Noting (\ref{errorex}), we have
235: \begin{eqnarray}\label{errorex2}
236: E_k(\rho)-\rho R_k
237: &=&\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k}\rho\log\left(1+\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2\alpha_k^{2i}}{(1+\rho)}\right)-\rho
238: R_k+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_{0,k}}}\right)-O\left(e^{-u^2_{0,k}}\right)\notag \\
239: &=&\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k}\rho\log\left(\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2\alpha_k^{2i}}{(1+\rho)}\right)-\rho
240: R_k+\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k}\rho\log\left(1+\frac{(1+\rho)}{Pu_{0,k}^2\alpha_k^{2i}}\right) \notag \\
241: &+& O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_{0,k}}}\right)-O\left(e^{-u^2_{0,k}}\right)\notag \\
242: &=&\frac{\rho}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k}\left(\log\left(Pu_{0,k}^2\right)+2i\log(\alpha_k)-\log(1+\rho)\right)-\rho
243: R_k \notag \\
244: &+&\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{i=1}^{N_k} O\left(\frac{1}{u_{0,k}^2}\right)+ O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_{0,k}}}\right)-O\left(e^{-u^2_{0,k}}\right)\notag \\
245: &=&\rho[\log(Pu_{0,k}^2)+(N_k+1)\log(\alpha_k)-\log(\rho+1)-R_k]\notag \\
246: &+& O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_{0,k}}}\right)-O\left(e^{-u^2_{0,k}}\right)
247: \end{eqnarray}
248: It is easy to show that $\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}$ which maximizes
249: (\ref{errorex2}) for large values of $u_{0,k}$ is
250: \begin{eqnarray}\label{roopt}
251: \begin{array}{rl}
252: \log(1+\rho_k^{\rm{opt}})+\frac{\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}}{1+\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}}=\beta_k,
253: & \beta_k<\log(2)+\frac{1}{2}\\
254: \rho_k^{\rm{opt}}=1, & \beta_k \geq
255: \log(2)+\frac{1}{2}
256: \end{array}
257: \end{eqnarray}
258: where
259: \begin{equation}\label{betadef}
260: \beta_k =\log(Pu_{0,k}^2)+(N_k+1)\log(\alpha_k)-R_k.
261: \end{equation}
262: Using (\ref{T}), (\ref{pe}), (\ref{errorex}) and (\ref{errorex2}), we have
263: \begin{eqnarray}\label{tsim}
264: T_k &=&R_k\left[1-e^{-N_k\left(E_k(\rho_k^{\rm{opt}})-\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}R_k\right)}\right] \notag \\
265: &=&R_k \left[1-e^{-\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}N_k\left(\log(Pu_{0,k}^2)+
266: (N_k+1)\log(\alpha_k)-\log(\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}+1)- R_k\right)}\right].
267: \end{eqnarray}
268: It is easy to show that $T_k$ is a concave function of variables
269: $R_k$ and $N_k$, and the values of $R_k$ and $N_k$ which maximize
270: the throughput ($R_k^{\rm{opt}}$ and $N_k^{\rm{opt}}$) satisfy the
271: following equations\footnote{Note that we have relaxed the condition of $N_k$ being integer. However, since the optimizing $N_k$ tends to infinity as $K \to \infty$, this assumption does not affect the result.}:
272: \begin{equation}\label{Ropt}
273: R_k^{\rm{opt}}=\log(Pu_{0,k}^2)+(2N_k^{\rm{opt}}+1)\log(\alpha_k)-\log(\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}+1),
274: \end{equation}
275: \begin{equation}\label{Nopt}
276: N_k^{\rm{opt}}=\sqrt{\frac{\log\left(1+\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}N_k^{\rm{opt}}R_k^{\rm{opt}}\right)}{\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1})}}.
277: \end{equation}
278: It follows that $N_k^{\rm{opt}} \to \infty$ and $R_k^{\rm{opt}} \to
279: \infty$ as $u_{0,k} \to \infty$. Using (\ref{Ropt}) and
280: (\ref{Nopt}), (\ref{tsim}) can be re-written as follows:
281: \begin{eqnarray}\label{tsimsim}
282: T_k=\left(\log\left(\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2}{\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}+1}\right)+(2N_k^{\rm{opt}}+1)\log(\alpha_k)\right)\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}N_k^{\rm{opt}}R_k^{\rm{opt}}}\right)
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: Substituting (\ref{Ropt}) in (\ref{betadef}), we have
285: \begin{equation}\label{beta}
286: \beta_k=N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1})+\log(\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}+1).
287: \end{equation}
288: From (\ref{roopt}) and (\ref{beta}), it is concluded that
289: \begin{eqnarray}\label{roex}
290: \rho_k^{\rm{opt}}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
291: \frac{N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1})}{1-N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1})} & \quad N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1})< \frac{1}{2} \\
292: 1 & \quad N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1}) \geq \frac{1}{2}
293: \end{array}\right.
294: \end{eqnarray}
295: Noting (\ref{Ropt}) and
296: (\ref{roex}), for $\alpha_k=1$, we have $\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}=0$ and
297: $R_k^{\rm{opt}} = \log(Pu_{0,k}^2)$ which corresponds to the
298: capacity of a quasi-static fading channel (for large values of channel gain $u_{0,k}^2$).
299:
300: In the following, we obtain the asymptotic throughput of the $k^{\rm{th}}$ user. Since there are two regions for $\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}$ as shown in $(\ref{roex})$, we calculate the closed form formula of the throughputs of these two cases separately.
301: \begin{itemize}
302: \item ($\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}=1$): The corresponding asymptotic throughput is
303: obtained by substituting (\ref{Ropt}) and (\ref{Nopt}) in (\ref{tsim})
304: as follows:
305: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Tasym}
306: T_{k} & = & \log\left(\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2}{2}\right)- 2
307: \sqrt{\log(\alpha_k^{-1})\log\log\left(\frac{Pu_{0,k}^2}{2}\right)} \times \nonumber \\
308: &{}&\left(1+O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(u_{0,k})}{\log\log(u_{0,k})}\right)\right).
309: \end{eqnarray}
310: From (\ref{Nopt}), the optimum codeword length scales as follows:
311: \begin{eqnarray} \label{noptscal}
312: N_k^{\rm{opt}} \sim \sqrt{\frac{\log \log (Pu_{0,k}^2)}{\log \alpha^{-1}}}.
313: \end{eqnarray}
314: Note that if $\alpha_k$ is fixed and $\alpha_k \neq 1$, then
315: $N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1}) \geq \frac{1}{2}$ for large
316: values of $u_{0,k}$ and (\ref{Tasym}) is appliable.
317: \item ($\rho_k^{\rm{opt}}<1$):
318: We limit the calculation of the throughput to the assumption of $N_k^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_k^{-1}) \sim o(1)$ to be able to derive the following closed form formula by using (\ref{tsimsim}) and (\ref{roex}):
319: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Tasym0}
320: T_{k} & = & \log(Pu_{0,k}^2)- 2
321: \sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_k^{-1})\log\log\left(Pu_{0,k}^2\right)} \times \nonumber \\
322: &{}&\left(1+O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(u_{0,k})}{\log\log(u_{0,k})}\right)\right)-o(1).
323: \end{eqnarray}
324: The corresponding optimum codeword length scales as follows:
325: \begin{eqnarray} \label{noptscal2}
326: N_k^{\rm{opt}} \sim \sqrt[3]{\frac{\log \log (Pu_{0,k}^2) }{(\log \alpha^{-1})^2}} .
327: \end{eqnarray}
328: As we will see later, this special case is sufficient to accomplish the calculations required in \ref{sub3}.
329: \end{itemize}
330: From the above equations, it is concluded that the throughput not
331: only depends on the initial fading gain, $u_{0,k}$, but also on the
332: fading correlation coefficient. Moreover, the throughput is an
333: increasing function of the channel correlation coefficient.
334:
335: In the following, we introduce three scheduling strategies in order to
336: maximize the throughput; i) Traditional scheduling in which the
337: user with the largest channel gain is selected (SNR-based scheduling)
338: and the codeword length is assumed to be fixed. ii) SNR-based scheduling with optimized codeword length regarding the
339: channel condition of the selected user, and iii) Scheduling
340: which exploits both the channel gain and the channel correlation coefficient of the users. The
341: asymptotic throughput of the system is derived under each
342: strategy for $K \to \infty$.
343:
344: \subsection{Strategy I: SNR-based scheduling with fixed codeword length}
345: The BS transmits to the user with the maximum initial fading gain.
346: The codeword length of all users is fixed, i.e., $N_1=N_2= \cdots =
347: N_K =N$. The codeword length $N$ is selected such that the throughput of the system is maximized. The BS adapts the data rate
348: to maximize the throughput of the selected user.
349: \begin{thm}
350: The asymptotic throughput of the system under Strategy I scales as
351: \begin{equation}
352: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 \sim \log\left(\frac{P\log
353: K}{2}\right)-2\sqrt{\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha^{-1})\}\log\log\log K},
354: \end{equation}
355: as $K \to \infty$.
356: \end{thm}
357:
358: For simplicity of
359: notation, we define $\upsilon_k \triangleq u_{0,k}^2$. Let
360: $\upsilon= \max_{1\leq k\leq K}\upsilon_k $ and $\alpha$ be the
361: corresponding correlation coefficient of the selected user. Setting
362: the derivative of (\ref{tsim}) with respect to $R_k$ to zero, we
363: find the rate of the selected user and the corresponding throughput
364: in terms of $\upsilon$ and $\alpha$ as follows\footnote{We drop user
365: index of parameters $R$ and $\rho^{ \rm{opt}}$ for the selected
366: user.} :
367: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Ropt1}
368: R&=&\log\left(\frac{P\upsilon}{1+\rho^{
369: \rm{opt}}}\right)+(N+1)\log(\alpha)-\frac{\log(1+\rho^{
370: \rm{opt}}NR)}{\rho^{\rm{opt}}N},
371: \end{eqnarray}
372: \begin{eqnarray}\label{t1av}
373: \mathcal{T}_1(\upsilon,\alpha)&=&\left[\log\left(\frac{P\upsilon}{1+\rho^{
374: \rm{opt}}}\right)+(N+1)\log(\alpha) -\frac{\log(1+\rho^{
375: \rm{opt}}NR)}{\rho^{ \rm{opt}} N}\right] \times \notag\\
376: && \left[1-\frac{1}{1+\rho^{ \rm{opt}}NR}\right],
377: \end{eqnarray}
378: where noting (\ref{roopt}), $\rho^{\rm{opt}}$ is determined as
379: follows:
380: \begin{eqnarray}\label{roopt1}
381: \begin{array}{rl}
382: \log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}})+\frac{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}=\beta,
383: & \beta<\log(2)+\frac{1}{2}\\
384: \rho^{\rm{opt}}=1, & \beta \geq
385: \log(2)+\frac{1}{2}
386: \end{array}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: Using (\ref{betadef}) and (\ref{Ropt1}), we have
389: \begin{equation}\label{beta1}
390: \beta=\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}})+\frac{\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}NR)}{\rho^{
391: \rm{opt}}N}.
392: \end{equation}
393: %Note that (\ref{beta1}) is equivalent to (\ref{betadef}).
394: Let us define $R^*$ and event $\mathcal{A}$ as follows:
395: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Rsdef}
396: %\label{beta1def} \beta &\triangleq& R^* - R \stackrel{(\ref{Ropt1})}{\geq} 0. \\
397: R^* &\triangleq& \log (P \upsilon) + (N+1)
398: \log(\alpha)\notag \\
399: &\stackrel{(\ref{Ropt1}), (\ref{beta1})}{=}& R+\beta,
400: \end{eqnarray}
401: \begin{equation}\label{conda}
402: \mathcal{A}\equiv \{R^* > \frac{1}{2} \log \log K\},
403: \end{equation}
404: In the following, we derive upper-bounds for the
405: throughput of the system in terms of $R^*$ and $\mathcal{A}$ which we use later in Lemma \ref{lem1} and Lemma \ref{lem2}.
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 &=& \mathbb{E}
408: \{\mathcal{T}_1(\upsilon,\alpha)\}
409: \notag\\
410: &\stackrel{(\ref{Ropt1}), (\ref{t1av})}{\leq}& \mathbb{E} \{R\}\notag\\
411: &=& \mathbb{E} \{R | \mathcal{A}\}\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} +
412: \mathbb{E}\{R|\mathcal{A}^C\} \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}^C\} \notag \\
413: &\stackrel{(\ref{Rsdef})}{=}& \left( \mathbb{E} \{R^* |
414: \mathcal{A}\} - \mathbb{E} \{\beta | \mathcal{A}\}\right) \mbox{Pr}
415: \{\mathcal{A}\} + \mathbb{E}
416: \{R|\mathcal{A}^C\} \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}^C\} \notag\\
417: \label{khaf1} &\leq& \mathbb{E} \{R^*\} -\mathbb{E} \{\beta |
418: \mathcal{A}\} \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} \\
419: \label{khaf2} &\leq&\mathbb{E} \{R^*\}
420: \end{eqnarray}
421: where (\ref{khaf1}) is derived by replacing $R$ with $R^*$, noting $R\leq R^*$, and %In the following, we consider two cases:\\
422: $\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\}$ can be computed as follows:
423: \begin{eqnarray}
424: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} &=& \mbox{Pr} \{\log (P \upsilon) + (N+1)
425: \log \alpha > \frac{1}{2} \log \log K\} \notag\\
426: &=& 1- \mbox{Pr} \{\log (P \upsilon) + (N+1)
427: \log \alpha \leq \frac{1}{2} \log \log K\} \notag\\
428: &=& 1-\int_{0}^{\infty} \mbox{Pr} \left. \left \lbrace \log \alpha <
429: \frac{1}{N+1} \left(\frac{1}{2} \log \log K - \log (P x) \right)
430: \right| x
431: \right \rbrace f_{\upsilon}(x) d x \notag\\
432: &=& 1-\int_{0}^{\infty} F_{\alpha} \left(e^{\frac{1}{N+1}
433: \left(\frac{1}{2} \log \log K - \log (P x) \right)} \right)
434: f_{\upsilon}(x) d x,
435: \end{eqnarray}
436: where $f_y(.)$ and $F_y(.)$ are probability density function and
437: cumulative density function of random variable $y$, respectively.
438: Noting that $\alpha$ has a uniform distribution, we have
439: \begin{eqnarray} \label{pra}
440: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} &=& 1-e^{\frac{\log \log K}{2(N+1)}}
441: \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{-\frac{\log (P x)}{N+1}} f_{\upsilon}(x)
442: dx \notag\\
443: &\sim& 1-e^{-\frac{\log \log K+ 2\log(P)}{2(N+1)}},
444: \end{eqnarray}
445: where the second line follows from the fact that $\upsilon \sim
446: \log K$, with probability one \cite{sharif}.
447:
448: According to $(\ref{roopt1})$, there are two regions for $\rho^{
449: \rm{opt}}$ of the selected user. To obtain the throughput of the
450: system, we upper-bound the throughput in these two regions in Lemma
451: \ref{lem1} and Lemma \ref{lem2}, respectively. Then, we derive a
452: lower-bound for the throughput of the system in Lemma \ref{lem3}.
453: \begin{lem}\label{lem1}
454: Assuming $\beta < \log(2)+\frac{1}{2}$, the throughput of Strategy I
455: is upper-bounded as follows:
456: \begin{eqnarray}\label{tlem1}
457: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{11} \lesssim
458: \log (P \log K)-(\log(\log \log K -2\log(2))) \mathbb{E}
459: \{ \log (\alpha^{-1})\}\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{A}\}.
460: \end{eqnarray}
461: \end{lem}
462: \textbf{Proof:} Using (\ref{roopt1}) and (\ref{beta1}) and noting
463: $\beta < \log(2)+\frac{1}{2}$, we obtain
464: \begin{eqnarray}\label{nloginq}
465: (\rho^{\rm{opt}})^{-1} + (\rho^{\rm{opt}})^{-2} = \frac{N}{\log
466: (1+\rho^{\rm{opt}} N R)}.
467: \end{eqnarray}
468: Noting $\rho^{\rm{opt}} < 1$, it follows from (\ref{nloginq}) that
469: \begin{equation}\label{nlognr}
470: N > \log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}} N R).
471: \end{equation}
472: Assuming $R$ is large enough, from (\ref{nloginq}), we have
473: \begin{equation}\label{ron2}
474: \frac{\rho^{\rm{opt}}NR}{\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N R)}>2R \Rightarrow
475: \rho^{\rm{opt}} N > 2.
476: \end{equation}
477: Using (\ref{nlognr}) and (\ref{ron2}), we can write
478: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Nkhaf}
479: N &\stackrel{(\ref{nlognr})}{>}& \mathbb{E}\left\{\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}} N R)|\mathcal{A}\right\}\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} \notag \\
480: &\stackrel{(\ref{ron2})}{>}& \mathbb{E}\{(\log (1+2R))|\mathcal{A}\}\mbox{Pr}(\mathcal{A}) \notag \\
481: &\stackrel{a}{>}& (\log(\log \log K -2\log(2))) \mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{A}\}
482: \end{eqnarray}
483: where ($a$) results from the fact that conditioned on $\mathcal{A}$, we have $R=R^*-\beta>\frac{1}{2} \log
484: \log K-\frac{1}{2}-\log(2)$.
485: Noting that $\upsilon \sim \log K + O(\log
486: \log K)$ with probability one~\cite{sharif}, we can write the
487: throughput of the system as follows: {\setlength\arraycolsep{.5pt}
488: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t1case1}
489: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{11} & \stackrel{(\ref{Rsdef}),(\ref{khaf2})}{\leq} &
490: \mathbb{E} \{ \log (P \upsilon) +
491: (N+1)\log(\alpha)\} \notag\\
492: &=& \mathbb{E} \{ \log (P\upsilon)\} -(N+1) \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha^{-1})\} \notag\\
493: &\stackrel{(\ref{Nkhaf})}{\lesssim}& \log (P \log K)-(\log(\log \log K
494: -2\log(2))) \mathbb{E} \{ \log
495: \alpha^{-1}\}\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{A}\}.
496: \end{eqnarray}}
497: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
498:
499:
500: \begin{lem}\label{lem2}
501: Assuming $\beta \geq \log(2)+\frac{1}{2}$, the throughput of Strategy I is upper-bounded as follows:
502: \begin{eqnarray}\label{t1case2}
503: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{12} \lesssim \log \left(\frac{P \log
504: K}{2}\right) - 2 \sqrt{\mathbb{E} \{\log \alpha^{-1}\}} \sqrt{\log
505: \log\log K}.
506: \end{eqnarray}
507: \end{lem}
508: \textbf{Proof:} Noting $\beta \geq \log(2)+ \frac{1}{2}$, from
509: (\ref{roopt1}), we have $\rho^{\rm{opt}}=1$. Hence, using (\ref{Rsdef}) and
510: (\ref{khaf1}) and noting $\upsilon \sim \log K$, we can write
511: \begin{eqnarray} \label{tcase2}
512: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{12} &\leq& \log \left(P \log K\right) -
513: (N+1) \mathbb{E} \{\log (\alpha^{-1}) \}- \mathbb{E} \{\beta |
514: \mathcal{A}\} \mbox{Pr}
515: \{\mathcal{A}\} \notag\\
516: &\stackrel{(\ref{beta1})}{\lesssim}& \log \left(P \log K\right) -
517: (N+1) \mathbb{E} \{\log (\alpha^{-1}) \}- \mathbb{E} \{\log(2)+
518: \frac{\log(1+NR)}{N} | \mathcal{A}\} \mbox{Pr}
519: \{\mathcal{A}\} \notag\\
520: &\stackrel{a}{\lesssim}& \log \left(P \log K\right) - (N+1)
521: \mathbb{E}
522: \{\log (\alpha^{-1}) \} \notag \\
523: & & - \left[\frac{\log(\frac{1}{2} \log \log
524: K-\frac{\log(1+N\log(P\log K))}{N}-\log(2))}{N} +
525: \frac{\log N}{N}+\log(2)\right]\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\}, \notag \\
526: \end{eqnarray}
527: where ($a$) follows from the fact that conditioned on $\mathcal{A}$,
528: we have
529: \begin{eqnarray}
530: R&=&R^*-\beta \notag \\
531: &>&\frac{1}{2} \log \log K-\frac{\log(1+NR)}{N}-\log(2) \notag \\
532: &>&\frac{1}{2} \log \log K-\frac{\log(1+N\log(P\log K))}{N}-\log(2),
533: \end{eqnarray}
534: The last line results from the fact that $R<\log(P\log K)$ which follows from (\ref{Ropt1}).
535: Substituting (\ref{pra}) in (\ref{tcase2}), and setting the
536: derivative of $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{12}$ to zero with respect to
537: $N$, we obtain
538: \begin{eqnarray} \label{nopt}
539: N^{\rm{opt}} \sim \sqrt{\frac{\log \log \log K}{\mathbb{E} \{\log
540: \alpha^{-1}\}}} [1+o(1)].
541: \end{eqnarray}
542: Substituting (\ref{pra}) and (\ref{nopt}) in (\ref{tcase2}), the result of the lemma follows.
543: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
544:
545: \begin{lem}\label{tkm}
546: Assume that $N$ is set as in (\ref{nopt}). Then, under condition
547: $\mathcal{A}$, we have $\rho^{\rm{opt}}=1$ as $K \to \infty$.
548: \end{lem}
549: \textbf{Proof:} If $\rho^{\rm{opt}}<1$, then using (\ref{roopt1}),
550: we have $\beta<\frac{1}{2}+\log(2)$. Noting (\ref{nlognr}) and
551: (\ref{ron2}), we can write
552: \begin{eqnarray}
553: N^{\rm{opt}}&\stackrel{(\ref{nlognr})}{>}&\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R) \notag \\
554: &\stackrel{(\ref{ron2})}{>}&\log(1+2R) \notag \\
555: &\stackrel{(\ref{Rsdef})}{=}&\log(1+2(R^*-\beta)) \notag \\
556: &>&\log(2R^*-2\log(2)) \notag \\
557: &\stackrel{(\ref{conda})}{\sim}&\log\log\log K,
558: \end{eqnarray}
559: which contradicts (\ref{nopt}). \\
560: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
561:
562: \begin{lem}\label{lem3}
563: The throughput of Strategy I is lower-bounded as follows:
564: \begin{eqnarray}\label{tlem3}
565: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 \gtrsim
566: \log \left(\frac{P \log K}{2}\right) - 2 \sqrt{\mathbb{E}
567: \{\log \alpha^{-1}\}\log\log\log K}.
568: \end{eqnarray}
569: \end{lem}
570: \textbf{Proof:} Choosing $N=N^{\rm{opt}}$ and subsequently replacing $\rho^{\rm{opt}}=1$ (Lemma \ref{tkm}), we compute $R$
571: in (\ref{Ropt1}), under condition $\mathcal{A}$, as follows:
572: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rless}
573: R&=&R^*-\beta \notag \\
574: &>& \frac{1}{2}\log\log K - \log(2)- \frac{\log(1+N^{\rm{opt}}R)}{N^{\rm{opt}}} \notag \\
575: &>& \frac{1}{2}\log\log K - \log(2)- \frac{\log(1+N^{\rm{opt}}\log\log K)}{N^{\rm{opt}}} \notag \\
576: &\sim& \frac{1}{2}\log\log K - \sqrt{\mathbb{E} \{\log
577: \alpha^{-1}\}\log\log\log K)}
578: \end{eqnarray}
579: Using (\ref{t1av}) and (\ref{Rsdef}), we can lower-bound
580: $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_1$ as
581: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t1l}
582: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 &\geq& \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{1
583: |\mathcal{A}} \mbox{Pr}
584: \{\mathcal{A}\} \notag\\
585: &=& \mathbb{E} \left. \left \lbrace \left[R^*-\log(1+\rho^{
586: \rm{opt}}) -\frac{\log(1+\rho^{ \rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R)}{\rho^{\rm{opt}}
587: N^{\rm{opt}}}\right] \left[1-\frac{1}{1+\rho^{ \rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R}\right]\right|
588: \mathcal{A} \right \rbrace \times
589: \notag\\
590: &&\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\},
591: \end{eqnarray}
592: where $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{1 |\mathcal{A}}$ denotes the
593: throughput of the system conditioned on $\mathcal{A}$. Since $\mathbb{E}\{R^*\}=\mathbb{E}\{R^*|\mathcal{A}\}
594: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}\} + \mathbb{E}\{R^*|\mathcal{A}^C\}
595: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{A}^C\}$, and $\mathbb{E}\{R^*|\mathcal{A}\}>
596: \mathbb{E}\{R^*|\mathcal{A}^C\}$, it follows that
597: $\mathbb{E}\{R^*|\mathcal{A}\} \geq \mathbb{E}\{R^*\}$. Having this
598: fact, noting Lemma (\ref{tkm}) and using (\ref{pra}), (\ref{rless}) and (\ref{t1l}), we can write
599: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t1low}
600: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 &\geq&
601: \left(\mathbb{E}\{R^*\}-\log(2)-\mathbb{E} \left. \left \lbrace
602: \frac{\log (1+ N^{\rm{opt}} \log\left(\frac{P\log
603: K}{2}\right))}{N^{\rm{opt}}}\right| \mathcal{A} \right \rbrace
604: \right) \times \notag\\
605: &&\left( 1-\frac{1}{1+N^{\rm{opt}}(\frac{1}{2}\log\log K -
606: \sqrt{\mathbb{E} \{\log \alpha^{-1}\}\log\log\log K)}) }\right)
607: \left(
608: 1-e^{-\frac{\log \log K}{2(N^{\rm{opt}}+1)}}\right) \notag\\
609: &\sim& \log \left(\frac{P \log K}{2}\right) - 2 \sqrt{\mathbb{E}
610: \{\log \alpha^{-1}\}\log\log\log K} .
611: \end{eqnarray}
612: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
613:
614: \textbf{The Proof of Theorem 2}:
615: Lemma (\ref{lem1}) and Lemma (\ref{lem2}) provide upper-bounds on two complementary cases where $\rho^{\rm{opt}}$ of the selected user is either less than $1$ or equal to $1$ in (\ref{tlem1}) and (\ref{t1case2}), respectively. Lemma (\ref{lem3}) lower-bounds the throughput of the system as in (\ref{tlem3}). Comparing (\ref{tlem1}), (\ref{t1case2}) and (\ref{tlem3}), we conclude the result of the theorem.\\
616: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
617: \textit{Remark 1-} To prove Theorem $2$,
618: we utilize the distribution function of $\alpha$ to calculate
619: $\mbox{Pr}(\mathcal{A})$. The value of $\mbox{Pr}(\mathcal{A})$ is
620: used in (\ref{t1case1}), (\ref{tcase2}) and (\ref{t1low}). For
621: $\mbox{Pr}(\mathcal{A})=1-o\left(\frac{1}{\log \log K}\right)$,
622: (\ref{t1case1}), (\ref{tcase2}) and (\ref{t1low}) are valid. Therefore, the
623: assumption of uniform distribution for the correlation coefficients
624: can be relaxed if $\mbox{Pr}(\mathcal{A})=1-o\left(\frac{1}{\log
625: \log K}\right)$.
626:
627: \subsection{Strategy II: SNR-based scheduling with adaptive codeword length}
628: In this scheme, the BS transmits to the user with the maximum
629: initial fading gain. The rate and codeword length are selected to
630: maximize the corresponding throughput.
631:
632: \begin{thm}
633: Assuming $K \to \infty$, the asymptotic throughput of the system
634: under Strategy II scales as follows:
635: \begin{equation}
636: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_2 \sim \log\left(\frac{P\log
637: K}{2}\right)-2\mathbb{E}\{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\}\sqrt{\log\log\left(\frac{P\log
638: K}{2}\right)}.
639: \end{equation}
640: \end{thm}
641: \textbf{Proof}: The throughput of the system can be written as
642: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t2}
643: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_2 = \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2 | \mathcal{B}}
644: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}\}+ \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2| \mathcal{B}^C}
645: \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}^C\},
646: \end{eqnarray}
647: where $\mathcal{B}$ represents the event that $\rho^{\rm{opt}}=1$,
648: $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2| \mathcal{B}}$ denotes the throughput
649: conditioned on $\mathcal{B}$, and $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2|
650: \mathcal{B}^C}$ is the throughput of the system conditioned on
651: $\mathcal{B}^C$, the complement of $\mathcal{B}$. Using
652: (\ref{Tasym}), we can write
653: \begin{eqnarray}
654: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2| \mathcal{B}} &=& \mathbb{E} \left. \left
655: \lbrace \log\left(\frac{P\upsilon}{2}\right)- 2
656: \sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})\log\log\left(\frac{P\upsilon}{2}\right)}
657: \left(1+
658: O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(\upsilon)}{\log\log(\upsilon)}\right)\right)
659: \right| \mathcal{B} \right \rbrace, \notag
660: \\
661: \end{eqnarray}
662: where $\upsilon = \max_{1\leq k\leq K} \upsilon_k$, and $\alpha$ is
663: the channel correlation coefficient of the selected user. Noting
664: that $\upsilon \sim \log K + O(\log \log K)$ with probability one,
665: and $\upsilon$ and $\alpha$ are independent, we have
666: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t2a}
667: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2| \mathcal{B}} &\sim& \log \left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right) - 2\mathbb{E}\left. \left \lbrace\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})} \right|
668: \mathcal{B}\right \rbrace
669: \sqrt{\log\log \left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right)} \times \notag\\
670: & &\left(1+O\left(\frac{\log \log \log \log K}{\log \log \log
671: K}\right)\right).
672: \end{eqnarray}
673: Using (\ref{roex}) and (\ref{noptscal}), we can write
674: \begin{eqnarray}\label{acondn}
675: \mathcal{B} &\equiv& N^{\rm{opt}} \log (\alpha^{-1}) \geq
676: \frac{1}{2} \notag\\
677: &\cong& \sqrt{\log (\alpha^{-1})} \sqrt{\log \log \log K} \geq
678: \frac{1}{2}.
679: \end{eqnarray}
680: Uniform distribution for $\alpha$ results in exponential
681: distribution for $X \triangleq \log (\alpha^{-1})$, i.e., $f_{X} (x)
682: = e^{-x} u(x)$. Let us define $\epsilon \triangleq \frac{1}{4 \log
683: \log \log K}$. $\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{B}\}$ can be derived as follows:
684: \begin{eqnarray}\label{prb}
685: \mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{B}\}&=&\mbox{Pr} \{ \log(\alpha^{-1}) \geq \epsilon\}\notag \\
686: &=& e^{-\epsilon}
687: \end{eqnarray}
688: Using (\ref{prb}), we have
689: \begin{eqnarray} \label{elogalphainva}
690: \mathbb{E}\left. \left \lbrace\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})} \right|
691: \mathcal{B}\right \rbrace &=& \frac{\int_{\mathcal{B}} \sqrt{x} e^{-x} dx}{\mbox{Pr}
692: \{\mathcal{B}\}}\notag\\
693: &=& \frac{\int_{\epsilon}^{\infty} \sqrt{x} e^{-x} dx}{\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}\}}\notag\\
694: &\sim& \frac{\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} - \epsilon \sqrt{\epsilon}
695: e^{-\epsilon}}{e^{-\epsilon}} \notag\\
696: &\sim& \mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} (1+O(\epsilon)).
697: \end{eqnarray}
698: Similarly, we can write
699: \begin{eqnarray}\label{elogbc}
700: \mathbb{E}\left. \left \lbrace\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})} \right|
701: \mathcal{B}^C\right \rbrace &=& \frac{\int_{0}^{\epsilon} \sqrt{x} e^{-x} dx}{\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}^C\}}\notag\\
702: &\sim& \frac{ \epsilon \sqrt{\epsilon}
703: e^{-\epsilon}}{1-e^{-\epsilon}} \notag\\
704: &\sim& O(\sqrt{\epsilon}).
705: \end{eqnarray}
706: Using (\ref{tsimsim}), $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2 | \mathcal{B}^C}$
707: can be written as
708: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t2ac}
709: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2|\mathcal{B}^C} &=& \mathbb{E} \left. \left
710: \lbrace \left(\log \left(\frac{P \upsilon}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}
711: \right)-(2N^{\rm{opt}}+1)\log(\alpha^{-1})\right)\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}}}\right)
712: \right| \mathcal{B}^C\right
713: \rbrace \notag\\
714: &\stackrel{a}{\gtrsim}& \mathbb{E} \left. \left \lbrace \left(\log
715: \left(\frac{P \upsilon}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}
716: \right)-2\frac{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}-\log(\alpha^{-1})\right)\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}}}\right)
717: \right| \mathcal{B}^C\right \rbrace \notag \\
718: &\stackrel{b}{\gtrsim}& \mathbb{E} \left. \left \lbrace \left(\log
719: \left(\frac{P \upsilon}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}
720: \right)-2\frac{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}-\log(\alpha^{-1})\right)\left(1-\frac{1}{1+R^{\rm{opt}}}\right)
721: \right| \mathcal{B}^C\right
722: \rbrace \notag\\
723: &\gtrsim& \log \left(\frac{P \log
724: K}{2}\right)-\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha^{-1})| \mathcal{B}^C\}-2 \notag \\
725: &\stackrel{(\ref{elogbc})}{\gtrsim}&\log \left(\frac{P \log K}{2}\right)-2-O(\sqrt{\epsilon}),
726: \end{eqnarray}
727: where ($a$) follows from (\ref{roex}) which implies $N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha^{-1})=\frac{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}{1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}}$ conditioned on $\mathcal{B}^C$ and ($b$) results from the following inequality:
728: \begin{eqnarray}\label{n2inq}
729: \rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}} &\stackrel{(\ref{roex})}{=}&
730: \frac{R^{\rm{opt}}(N^{\rm{opt}})^2\log(\alpha^{-1})}{1-N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha^{-1})}\notag\\
731: &{\geq}& R^{\rm{opt}}(N^{\rm{opt}})^2\log(\alpha^{-1})\notag \\
732: &\stackrel{(\ref{Nopt})}{=}& R^{\rm{opt}}\frac{\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}})}{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}\notag \\
733: &\stackrel{a}{\geq}& R^{\rm{opt}} \log(1+N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}})\notag \\
734: &\gtrsim& R^{\rm{opt}}
735: %&\gtrsim& \log \left(\frac{P \log
736: %K}{2}\right)-\log(\alpha^{-1})-2.
737: \end{eqnarray}
738: where ($a$) follows from the fact that $\frac{\log(1+\rho^{\rm{opt}}N^{\rm{opt}}R^{\rm{opt}})}{\rho^{\rm{opt}}}$ is a decreasing function of $\rho^{\rm{opt}}$.
739: Moreover, using (\ref{tsimsim}) and noting
740: that $\upsilon \sim \log K$ with probability one, we have
741: \begin{eqnarray} \label{t2acu}
742: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2|\mathcal{B}^C} &\leq& \mathbb{E} \left.
743: \left \lbrace \log \left(P \upsilon
744: \right) \right | \mathcal{B}^C\right \rbrace \notag \\
745: &\lesssim&\log (P \log K)
746: \end{eqnarray}
747: Combining (\ref{t2ac}) and (\ref{t2acu}), we have
748: \begin{equation}\label{inqt2}
749: \log \left(\frac{P \log K}{2}\right)-2-O(\sqrt{\epsilon}) \lesssim
750: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_{2|\mathcal{B}^C} \lesssim \log \left(\frac{P
751: \log K}{2}\right)+ \log(2)
752: \end{equation}
753: Substituting (\ref{t2a}) and (\ref{inqt2}) in (\ref{t2}) and noting
754: (\ref{prb}) and (\ref{elogalphainva}), after some manipulations, we have
755: \begin{eqnarray}
756: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_2 & \sim & \left(\log \left( \frac{P \log
757: K}{2}\right) - 2\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}|\mathcal{B}\} \sqrt{\log
758: \log\left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right)} \right) \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}\} \notag \\
759: &+& \left(\left(\frac{P \log K}{2}\right) + \Omega(1) \right)\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}^C\}\notag \\
760: &\sim& \log \left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right) -2\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} \sqrt{\log
761: \log\left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right)} \notag \\
762: &+&2\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} \sqrt{\log
763: \log\left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right)}\epsilon \sqrt{\epsilon}e^{-\epsilon} +\Omega(1)O(\sqrt{\epsilon})\notag \\
764: &\sim& \log \left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right) - 2\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} \sqrt{\log
765: \log\left( \frac{P \log K}{2}\right)}+O(\sqrt{\epsilon})
766: \end{eqnarray}
767: which completes the proof of Theorem 3.\\
768: \rightline{$\blacksquare$} \textit{Remark 1-} To prove Theorem 3, we
769: used the following properties:
770: \begin{eqnarray}
771: \mathbb{E}\left. \left \lbrace\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}
772: \right|\mathcal{B}\right \rbrace \sim \mathbb{E}
773: \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}\} (1+O(\epsilon))\notag\\
774: \mathbb{E}\left. \left \lbrace\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})}
775: \right|\mathcal{B^C}\right \rbrace \sim O(\sqrt{\epsilon}) \notag \\
776: \mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{B}^C\}\sim O(\epsilon),
777: \end{eqnarray}
778: where $\epsilon \sim \frac{1}{\log \log
779: \log K}$. The theorem is valid for any distribution function of $\alpha$ that satisfies the above properties. \\
780: \textit{Remark 2-} Since $\mathbb{E} \{\sqrt{x} \} \leq \sqrt{\mathbb{E} \{x\}}$,
781: for $x >0$, it is concluded that the achievable rate of Strategy II
782: is higher than that of Strategy I. More precisely,
783: \begin{eqnarray}
784: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_2 -\overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 &\sim& 2 \left(
785: \sqrt{\mathbb{E} \{\log(\alpha^{-1})\}} - \mathbb{E}
786: \{\sqrt{\log(\alpha^{-1})} \} \right) \sqrt{\log \log \log K}.
787: \end{eqnarray}
788: For the case of uniform distribution for $\alpha$, we have
789: \begin{eqnarray}
790: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_2 -\overline{\mathcal{T}}_1 &\sim& 0.228
791: \sqrt{\log \log \log K}.
792: \end{eqnarray}
793: \textit{Remark 3-} Although $\lim_{K \to \infty}
794: \frac{\overline{\mathcal{T}}_1}{\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{\max}} =
795: \lim_{K \to \infty}
796: \frac{\overline{\mathcal{T}}_2}{\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{\max}} =1$,
797: where $\overline{\mathcal{T}}_{\max} \sim \log \left(P \log
798: K\right)$ is the maximum achievable throughput for a quasi-static
799: fading channel \cite{sharif}, there exists a gap of
800: $\Omega(\sqrt{\log \log \log K})$ between the achievable throughput
801: of Strategies I and II, and the maximum throughput. As we show
802: later, this gap is due to the fact that the channel correlation
803: coefficients of the users are not considered in the scheduling. In
804: fact, this gap approaches zero by exploiting the channel
805: correlation, which is discussed in Strategy III.
806:
807:
808: \subsection{Strategy III: Scheduling based on both SNR and channel
809: correlation coefficient with adaptive codeword length }\label{sub3}
810: To maximize the throughput of the system, the
811: user which maximizes the expression in (\ref{tsimsim}) should be serviced.
812: Here, for simplicity of analysis,
813: we propose a sub-optimum scheduling that considers
814: the effect of both SNR and channel correlation in the user
815: selection. In this strategy, each user is required to feed back its
816: initial fading gain only if it is greater than a pre-determined
817: threshold $\sqrt{\Theta}$, where $\Theta$ is a function of the
818: number of users. Among these users, the BS selects the one with the
819: maximum channel correlation coefficient. The data rate and codeword
820: length are selected to maximize the corresponding throughput. The
821: following theorem gives the system throughput under this strategy.
822: \begin{thm}\label{s3}
823: Using Strategy III, with $\Theta$ satisfying
824: \begin{equation}\label{tetta}
825: \log K -o(\log K) \lesssim \Theta \lesssim \log K - \log\log K -\omega(1),
826: \end{equation}
827: the throughput of the system scales as
828: \begin{eqnarray}\label{T3}
829: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_3 &\gtrsim& \log\left(P\log K\right)- o(1)
830: %2\sqrt[3]{\mu(\Theta,K)
831: %\log\log \left(P \Theta\right)}\times \notag\\
832: %&&\left(1+ O \left(\frac{\log \log \log (\Theta)}{\sqrt{\log \log
833: %(\Theta)}}\right)\right),
834: \end{eqnarray}
835: \end{thm}
836: \textbf{Proof:} Define ${\cal S} \triangleq \{k|\upsilon_k \geq
837: \Theta\}$ and $\alpha_{\max}\triangleq \max_{k\in {\cal S}}\alpha_k
838: $. Let $\upsilon$ be the squared initial fading gain of the user
839: corresponding to $\alpha_{max}$. We define the event $\mathcal{G}$
840: as follows:
841: \begin{equation}\label{gevent}
842: \mathcal{G}\equiv N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\sim
843: o(1),
844: \end{equation}
845: where $N^{\rm{opt}}$ is the corresponding codeword length as
846: computed from (\ref{Nopt}). Using (\ref{Tasym0}) and (\ref{gevent}),
847: we can write
848: \begin{equation}\label{t31}
849: \overline{\mathcal{T}}_3\geq
850: \mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{G}\}\mathbb{E}\{\mathcal{T}_3(\upsilon,\alpha_{\max})|\mathcal{G}\}
851: \end{equation}
852: where following (\ref{Tasym0}),
853: \begin{eqnarray}\label{t3con}
854: \mathbb{E}\{\mathcal{T}_3(\upsilon,\alpha_{\max})|\mathcal{G}\} &=&
855: \mathbb{E} \left \lbrace \log\left(P\upsilon\right)
856: -2\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}{} \right. \nonumber \\ & &
857: \left. \sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\upsilon\right)} \left. \left[1+ O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(\upsilon)}{\log\log(\upsilon)}\right)\right]-o(1) \right |\mathcal{G}\right \rbrace
858: \end{eqnarray}
859: Noting that $\{\mathcal{T}_3(\upsilon,\alpha_{\max})|\mathcal{G}\}$ in (\ref{t3con})
860: is an increasing function of $\upsilon$, we have
861: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Teq}
862: \mathbb{E}\{\mathcal{T}_3(\upsilon,\alpha_{\max})|\mathcal{G}\}
863: &\geq&
864: \log\left(P\Theta\right)-2\mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}|\mathcal{G}\}
865: \nonumber \\ & & \sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\Theta\right)} \left[1+
866: O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(\Theta)}{\log\log(\Theta)}\right)\right] -o(1)\notag\\
867: &\stackrel{a}{\geq}&
868: \log\left(P\Theta\right)-2\mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}\}
869: \nonumber \\ & & \sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\Theta\right)} \left[1+
870: O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(\Theta)}{\log\log(\Theta)}\right)\right] -o(1)\notag\\
871: &\stackrel{b}{\geq}&\log\left(P\Theta\right)-2\sqrt[3]{\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}}
872: \nonumber \\ & & \sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\Theta\right)} \left[1+
873: O\left(\frac{\log\log\log(\Theta)}{\log\log(\Theta)}\right)\right]-o(1),
874: \end{eqnarray}
875: where ($a$) follows from the fact that $\mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}|\mathcal{G}\} \leq \mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}\} $ and ($b$) results from the convexity of cube root.
876: For large values of $K$,
877: $\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}$ can be approximated
878: as follows (See Appendix B):
879: \begin{eqnarray}\label{kasy}
880: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} &\backsimeq&
881: \frac{1}{Ke^{-\Theta}}
882: \left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{Ke^{-\Theta}}\right)\right)+
883: e^{-Ke^{-\Theta}} (\Theta - \log K).
884: \end{eqnarray}
885: Noting (\ref{kasy}), for values of $\Theta$
886: satisfying (\ref{tetta}), we have
887: \begin{equation}\label{o1}
888: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}\log\log\left(\Theta\right) \sim o(1).
889: \end{equation}
890: Using (\ref{Teq}) and (\ref{o1}), we can write
891: \begin{equation}\label{t3}
892: \mathbb{E}\{\mathcal{T}_3(\upsilon,\alpha_{\max})|\mathcal{G}\} \geq \log\left(P\log K\right)- o(1).
893: \end{equation}
894: To compute $\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{G}\}$ defined in (\ref{gevent}), we
895: use Chebychev inequality.
896: \begin{eqnarray}\label{cheb}
897: \mbox{Pr}\left\{|\mathcal{Z}-\mathbb{E}\{\mathcal{Z}\}|
898: <\sqrt{\sqrt[3]{\log
899: K}\mbox{var}\{\mathcal{Z}\}}\right\}>1-\frac{1}{\sqrt[3]{\log K}},
900: %\mbox{Pr}\left\{|N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})-\mathbb{E}\{N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}|
901: %<\sqrt{\log
902: %K\mbox{var}\{N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}}\right\}\notag
903: %\\ >1-\frac{1}{\log K}
904: \end{eqnarray}
905: where $\mathcal{Z}=N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})$. Noting
906: (\ref{noptscal2}), (\ref{tetta}) and (\ref{kasy}), we have
907: \begin{eqnarray}\label{meanna}
908: \mathbb{E}\{N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} &\stackrel{(\ref{noptscal2})}{\leq}&
909: \mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\log\log\left(P\upsilon_{\max}\right)}\}\notag
910: \\ & = & \mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}\}\mathbb{E}\{\sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\upsilon_{\max}\right)}\}\notag
911: \\ &\stackrel{a}{\lesssim} & \sqrt[3]{\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}}\sqrt[3]{\log\log\left(P\log K\right)} \notag \\
912: &\stackrel{(\ref{o1})}{=}&o(1)
913: \end{eqnarray}
914: where ($a$) follows from the fact the $\upsilon_{\max} \sim \log(K)$ with probability one.
915: %For large values of $K$, we can approximate
916: %$\mbox{var}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}$ as follows (See Appendix
917: %C):
918: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{vari}
919: % \mbox{var}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} &\backsimeq&
920: % \frac{1}{K^2e^{-2\Theta}}-\frac{e^{-Ke^{-\Theta}}}{2}
921: % (\log(Ke^{-\Theta}))^2.
922: % \end{eqnarray}
923: Also, noting (\ref{noptscal2}), (\ref{tetta}) and (\ref{kasy}), we have
924: \begin{eqnarray}\label{varasy}
925: \mbox{var}\{N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}&=&
926: \mbox{var}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\log\log\left(P\upsilon\right)}\}\notag
927: \\&\leq&
928: \mathbb{E}\{(\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\log\log\left(P\upsilon\right))^{\frac{2}{3}}\}\notag
929: \\ &\leq &
930: (\mathbb{E}\{{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})}\})^{\frac{2}{3}} (\mathbb{E}\{\log\log\left(P\upsilon\right)\})^{\frac{2}{3}} \notag
931: \\ &\stackrel{(\ref{tetta}), a}{\lesssim} & O\left(\frac{1}{(\log K)^{\frac{2}{3}}}\right) O((\log \log \log K)^{\frac{2}{3}}) \notag
932: \\ & = & O\left(\left(\frac{\log \log \log K}{\log K}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}\right)
933: %\\ &\stackrel{(\ref{tetta}), (\ref{vari})}{\lesssim} &O\left(\frac{1}{(\log K)^{\frac{2}{3}}}\right)\sqrt[3]{\mbox{var}\{\log\left(P\upsilon\right)\}}\notag
934: %\\ &\stackrel{a}{\lesssim} &
935: %O\left(\frac{1}{(\log
936: %K)^{\frac{2}{3}}}\right)O\left(\sqrt[3]{\frac{\log\log K}{\log
937: %K}}\right) \notag \\
938: %&\lesssim&O\left(\frac{\log\log K}{\log K}\right),
939: \end{eqnarray}
940: where ($a$) follows from the fact that $\upsilon \sim \log K +O(\log
941: \log K)$ with probability one. Substituting (\ref{meanna}) and
942: (\ref{varasy}) in (\ref{cheb}), we have
943: \begin{eqnarray}\label{pr}
944: \mbox{Pr}\left\{|N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})-o(1)| <
945: O\left(\left(\frac{\log \log\log K}{\sqrt{\log K}}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\right)\right\}>1- \frac{1}{\sqrt[3]{\log K}}
946: \end{eqnarray}
947: Noting (\ref{t31}), (\ref{t3}), and (\ref{pr}), the result of the theorem follows.
948: \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
949: \textit{Remark 1-} The uniform
950: distribution of the correlation coefficients is not a necessary
951: condition for Theorem \ref{s3}. In fact, Theorem \ref{s3} is valid
952: if $\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{G}\}\sim 1- o\left(\frac{1}{\log \log K}\right)$. $\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{G}\}$ can be written as
953: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rem}
954: \mbox{Pr}\{N^{\rm{opt}}\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})<
955: g(K)\}&=&\mbox{Pr}\{\sqrt[3]{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\log\log\left(P\log
956: K\right)}< g(K)\} \notag \\
957: &=&\mbox{Pr}\{\alpha_{\max}>e^{\frac{-{g(K)}^3}{\log\log\left(P\log
958: K\right)}}\} \notag \\
959: &=& 1- (F_{\alpha}(e^{\frac{-{g(K)}^3}{\log\log\left(P\log
960: K\right)}}))^K
961: \end{eqnarray}
962: where $g(K)$ satisfies $g(K)\sim o(1)$. Noting (\ref{rem}), there must exist a function $g(K)$ such that
963: $F_{\alpha}(e^{\frac{-{g(K)}^3}{\log\log\left(P\log K\right)}})\sim
964: 1-\omega\left(\frac{\log \log \log K}{K}\right)$ to satisfy $\mbox{Pr}\{\mathcal{G}\}\sim 1- o\left(\frac{1}{\log \log K}\right)$.
965: Hence, there exists a larger class of distributions that satisfy the
966: requirements for this theorem.
967:
968: % \section{Delay Analysis}\label{delay}
969: % Although utilizing multiuser diversity in wireless networks improves
970: % the throughput of the system, it defects the fairness among the users and increases the system delay.
971: % Scheduling algorithms for broadcast channels that provide delay
972: % constraints have been well studied in the literature \cite{vj,
973: % shakot, liu-delay}.
974: % %In \cite{vj}, the authors incorporate the channel state information
975: % %in their scheduling while providing delay constraints for packets.
976: % In \cite{ferg, kingman}, average delay over the users is analyzed
977: % and it is shown that the average d$o(1)$elay is of the order of the number of
978: % users. In ~\cite{sharif-delay}, system delay is defined as the
979: % minimum number of channel uses that guarantees all users
980: % successfully receive $m$ packet and analyzed in an opportunistic
981: % broadcast scenario.
982: %
983: % In this section, we analyze the delay of the system under the
984: % mentioned scheduling strategies. We define the delay as the minimum
985: % value of $D$ that satisfies the following:
986: % \begin{eqnarray}
987: % \mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}_D\} \rightarrow 1,
988: % \end{eqnarray}
989: % where $\mathcal{B}_D$ is the event that all users receive at least
990: % one packet during $D$ blocks of transmission. Since in Strategies I
991: % and II, the user with the best channel condition is serviced, by the
992: % same argument as in \cite{sharif-delay}, the delay of the system can
993: % be shown to scale at least as $K \log K$. More precisely,
994: % \begin{eqnarray}
995: % \mathfrak{D}_{1}=\mathfrak{D}_{2} \sim K \log K + \omega (1),
996: % \end{eqnarray}
997: % where $\mathfrak{D}_{1}$ and $\mathfrak{D}_{2}$ stand for the delay
998: % of the system under Strategies I, and II, respectively. The
999: % following theorem gives the scaling law for the delay of the system
1000: % under Strategy III:
1001: % \begin{thm}
1002: % Under the condition of Theorem \ref{s3},
1003: % we have
1004: % \begin{eqnarray}
1005: % \mathfrak{D}_3 \gtrsim e^{\Theta + K e^{-\Theta} + \log \Theta },
1006: % \end{eqnarray}
1007: % where $\mathfrak{D}_{3}$ denotes the delay of the system under
1008: % Strategy III.
1009: % \end{thm}
1010: % \textbf{Proof-} Without loss of generality, assume
1011: % $\alpha_1 \leq \alpha_2 \cdots \leq \alpha_K$. Note that for large number of
1012: % users, we have $\Theta \gg 1$. First, we obtain the probability of selecting the
1013: % $k^{\textrm{th}}$ user in each frame, denoted by $p_k$.
1014: % \begin{eqnarray}
1015: % p_k&=& \frac{\mbox{Pr}(\upsilon_k \geq
1016: % \Theta)\prod_{i=k+1}^{K}\mbox{Pr}(\upsilon_i \leq
1017: % \Theta)}{1-(1-e^{-\Theta})^K}
1018: % \nonumber \\
1019: % &=& \frac{e^{-\Theta}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-k}}{1-(1-e^{-\Theta})^K},
1020: % \end{eqnarray}
1021: % where $(1-e^{-\Theta})^K$ is the probability of existing no users
1022: % with channel norm above the threshold, which is negligible \footnote{From
1023: % (\ref{upsil}), we have $K e^{-\Theta} \gg 1$.}. Hence,
1024: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{pkdef}
1025: % p_k \simeq e^{-\Theta}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-k}.
1026: % \end{eqnarray}
1027: % Defining $\mathcal{F}_{D,i}$ as the event that user $i$ is not
1028: % serviced during $D$ blocks of transmission and $\eta_D \triangleq \mbox{Pr}
1029: % \{\mathcal{B}_D\}$, we have
1030: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{delay3}
1031: % \eta_D &=& 1- \mbox{Pr}\{\bigcup_{m=1}^{K} \mathcal{F}_{D,m}\}
1032: % \notag
1033: % \\&=& 1 - \sum_{k=1}^{K} (-1)^{k+1} \sum_{1 \leq i_1 < i_2 <
1034: % \cdots <i_k \leq K} \mbox{Pr} \{ \bigcap_{m=1}^{k}
1035: % \mathcal{F}_{D,i_m}\} \notag\\
1036: % &=& 1-\sum_{k=1}^{K} (-1)^{k+1} \sum_{1 \leq i_1 < i_2 < \cdots <i_k
1037: % \leq K} \left(1-\sum_{m=1}^{k}p_{i_m} \right)^D.
1038: % \end{eqnarray}
1039: % In deriving (\ref{delay3}), we assume that the fading gains of
1040: % consecutive blocks are independent. However, the correlation between
1041: % the two consecutive initial fading gain of a particular user depends
1042: % on the codeword length which is a function of $\Theta$ and is
1043: % generally not zero. The more correlation between the fading gains
1044: % of the consecutive frames, the more likely that the current user in
1045: % service is selected for the next frame. Therefore, (\ref{delay3}) is
1046: % a lower bound for the delay of the system.
1047: %
1048: % A lower bound and upper bound for $\eta_D$ can be given as,
1049: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{eta1}
1050: % \eta_D \geq 1- \sum_{k=1}^{K} (1-p_k)^D,
1051: % \end{eqnarray}
1052: % and
1053: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{eta2}
1054: % \eta_D &\leq& 1-\sum_{k=1}^{K} (1-p_k)^D + \sum_{1 \leq i <j \leq K}
1055: % (1-p_i -p_j)^D \notag\\
1056: % &\leq& 1-\sum_{k=1}^{K} (1-p_k)^D +\frac{1}{2} \left(
1057: % \sum_{k=1}^{K} (1-p_k)^D\right)^2.
1058: % \end{eqnarray}
1059: % From (\ref{delay3}), (\ref{eta1}), and (\ref{eta2}), it is realized
1060: % that in order to satisfy $\mbox{Pr} \{\mathcal{B}_D\} \to 1$, we
1061: % must have
1062: % \begin{equation}\label{phidef}
1063: % \Phi \triangleq \sum_{k=1}^{K} (1-p_k)^D\to 0.
1064: % \end{equation}
1065: % Substituting (\ref{pkdef}) in (\ref{phidef}), we have
1066: % \begin{eqnarray}\label{phi}
1067: % \Phi &=& \sum_{i=1}^K \left( 1-e^{-\Theta}
1068: % (1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-i}\right)^D \notag\\
1069: % &\backsimeq& \int_{1}^{K} \exp \{- D e^{-\Theta}
1070: % (1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-x}\} dx \notag\\
1071: % &\sim& e^{\Theta} \frac{e^{-De^{-(\Theta +K
1072: % e^{-\Theta})}}}{De^{-(\Theta +K e^{-\Theta})}}.
1073: % \end{eqnarray}
1074: % Noting (\ref{phi}), we have $\Phi \to 0$, if the
1075: % following condition satisfies:
1076: % \begin{eqnarray}
1077: % D \sim e^{\Theta + K e^{-\Theta}} (\Theta + \log \Theta + \omega
1078: % (1)),
1079: % \end{eqnarray}
1080: % which incurs the result of the theorem.
1081: %
1082: % \rightline{$\blacksquare$}
1083: % Assuming $\Theta \sim \log K - \varphi
1084: % (K)$, where $\varphi (K) = o(\log K)$, it can be easily shown that
1085: % $\frac{\mathfrak{D}_3}{\mathfrak{D}_1}>e^{e^{\varphi (K)}-\varphi
1086: % (K)}$. It follows from Theorem 4 that in order to achieve $\lim_{K
1087: % \to \infty} T_{\max} - T_3 =o(1)$, we must have $\varphi (K) >\log \log \log \log K$. Hence,
1088: % \begin{eqnarray}
1089: % \frac{\mathfrak{D}_3}{\mathfrak{D}_1} > \frac{ K}{ \log K}.
1090: % \end{eqnarray}
1091: % In Strategies I and III, the codeword length scales as $\sqrt{\log\log\log K}$
1092: % and $\log\log\log K$, respectively. Comparing the delays of Strategies I and III per channel use ($\delta_1$ and $\delta_3$), we have
1093: % \begin{eqnarray}
1094: % \frac{\delta_3}{\delta_1} > \frac{ K\sqrt{\log\log\log K}}{\log K}.
1095: % \end{eqnarray}
1096: % In other words, although using Strategy III, one can approach the
1097: % maximum throughput of the system, it produces much more delay in
1098: % the system than Strategies I and II.
1099:
1100: \section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
1101: A multiuser downlink communication over a time-correlated fading
1102: channel has been considered. We have proposed three scheduling
1103: schemes in order to maximize the throughput of the system. Assuming
1104: a large number of users in the system, we show that using SNR-based
1105: scheduling, a gap of $\Omega(\sqrt{\log \log \log K})$ exists
1106: between the achievable throughput and the maximum throughput of the
1107: system. We propose a simple scheduling, considering both the SNR and
1108: channel correlation of the users. We show that the gap between the throughput of the
1109: proposed scheme and the maximum throughput of the system approaches zero as the
1110: number of users tends to infinity.
1111: %Moreover, the delay of the system
1112: % under the proposed strategies are compared. It is realized that the
1113: % third strategy, despite achieving the maximum throughput of the
1114: % system, produces much more delay than the conventional scheduling.
1115:
1116: \section*{Appendix A}
1117: For simplicity, we drop the user index. Noting (\ref{ekro}), we have
1118: $E_0(\rho)= -\frac{1}{N}\log I_N$, where
1119: \begin{equation}
1120: I_N=\int_{u_N}...\int_{u_1} \prod_{i=1}^N
1121: \left(\frac{1}{1+\frac{P}{1+\rho}u_i^2}\right)^{\rho} p(\textbf{u}|u_0) du_i.
1122: \end{equation}
1123: Using (\ref{corrfading}), we have
1124: \begin{eqnarray}
1125: I_N=\int_{u_N}...\int_{u_1} \prod_{i=1}^N \frac{2u_i}{1-\alpha^2}\exp\left\{-\frac{u_i^2+\alpha^2u_{i-1}^2}{1-\alpha^2}\right\}
1126: \mathcal{I}_0\left(\frac{2\alpha u_i u_{i-1}}{1-\alpha^2}\right)\left(\frac{1}{1+\frac{P}{1+\rho}u_i^2}\right)^{\rho } du_i.
1127: \end{eqnarray}
1128: Substituting $v_i=\frac{u_i}{u_0\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)/2}}$, $0\leq i \leq N$, we have
1129: \begin{eqnarray}\label{IN}
1130: I_N=\int_{v_N}...\int_{v_1} \prod_{i=1}^N u_0^2v_i e^{-\frac{v_i^2+\alpha^2v_{i-1}^2}{2/u_0^2}} \mathcal{I}_0(\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1}) f(v_i) dv_i \nonumber \\
1131: =\int_{v_N}...\int_{v_1} \prod_{i=1}^N u_0^2v_i e^{-\frac{(v_i -\alpha v_{i-1})^2}{2/u_0^2}}e^{-\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1}} \mathcal{I}_0(\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1})f(v_i) dv_i,
1132: \end{eqnarray}
1133: where,
1134: \begin{equation}\label{fdef}
1135: f(v_i)=\left(\frac{1}{1+\frac{Pu_0^2(1-\alpha^2)}{2(1+\rho)}v_i^2}\right)^{\rho}.
1136: \end{equation}
1137: For large values of $u_0$, we evaluate the following integral.
1138: \begin{eqnarray}
1139: I&=& u_0^2 v e^{-\frac{(v -\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}}e^{-u_0^2 v \mu} \mathcal{I}_0( u_0^2 v \mu)\varphi(v) \notag \\
1140: &=&\int_{0}^{\infty} g(v) \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv,
1141: \end{eqnarray}
1142: where $g(v) \triangleq \sqrt{2\pi} v u_0 \mathcal{I}_0( u_0^2 v \mu)e^{- u_0^2 v \mu }\varphi(v)$ and $\varphi(v)$ is differentiable and satisfies $0 \leq \varphi(v) \leq 1$ and $\varphi(v)\sim O(\frac{1}{u_0^\rho})$. Noting that ~\cite{approx}
1143: \begin{eqnarray}\label{beselaprox}
1144: \mathcal{I}_0(z)e^{-z}\sqrt{2\pi z}=1+O\left(\frac{1}{z}\right), \qquad z\gg 1
1145: \end{eqnarray}
1146: it is easy to show that $g^{(n)}(\mu)$ is bounded for $\mu \geq 0$ and $n\geq 1$. Using Taylor series of $g(\upsilon)$ about $\mu$, we have
1147: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Ig}
1148: I&=&\int_{0}^{\infty} \left(g(\mu)+ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{g^{(n)}(\mu)}{n!}(v-\mu)^n \right) \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv \notag \\
1149: &=& g(\mu)(1-Q(\mu u_0))+ \int_{0}^{\infty} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{g^{(n)}(\mu)}{n!}(v-\mu)^n \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv \notag \\
1150: &=& g(\mu)(1-Q(\mu u_0))+ \int_{[\mu-\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}]^+}^{\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{g^{(n)}(\mu)}{n!}(v-\mu)^n \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv +\varepsilon \notag \\
1151: &=& g(\mu)(1-Q(\mu u_0)) + O\left(\frac{g'(\mu)}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)+\varepsilon.
1152: \end{eqnarray}
1153: where $\varepsilon$ can be bounded as follows:
1154: \begin{eqnarray}\label{epsil}
1155: \varepsilon &\stackrel{a}{\leq}& \int_{0}^{[\mu-\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}]^+} \frac{g(v)}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv +\int_{\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}}^{\infty} \frac{g(v)}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}}e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv \nonumber \\
1156: & \stackrel{b}{\leq} & \sqrt{2\pi}u_0 \int_{0}^{[\mu-\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}]^+} \frac{v}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}} e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv + \sqrt{2\pi}u_0 \int_{\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}}^{\infty} \frac{v}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}} e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv \nonumber \\
1157: &\leq& 2\sqrt{2\pi}u_0 \int_{\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}}^{\infty} \frac{v}{\sqrt{2\pi/u_0^2}} e^{-\frac{(v-\mu)^2}{2/u_0^2}} dv \nonumber \\
1158: &=& 2\sqrt{2\pi}u_0 \left(Q(\sqrt{u_0})\left(\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)+ \int_{\sqrt{u_0}}^{\infty} Q(z) dz \right)\notag \\
1159: &\stackrel{c}{\leq}& 2\sqrt{2\pi}u_0 \left(\left(\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)e^{-\frac{u_0}{2}} + \int_{\sqrt{u_0}}^{\infty} e^{-\frac{z^2}{2}} dz \right)\notag \\
1160: &\stackrel{d}{\leq}& 2\sqrt{2\pi} e^{-\frac{u_0}{2}} u_0 \left(\left(\mu+\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right) + \sqrt{2\pi} \right) \notag \\
1161: &\leq& O\left(u_0e^{-\frac{u_0}{2}}\right)
1162: \end{eqnarray}
1163: where ($a$) results from the fact that $g(\mu)\geq 0$, ($b$) is valid because $\mathcal{I}_0(\mu z)e^{-\mu z}\leq 1$ for $ \mu\geq 0$ and $z\geq 0$, and ($c$) and ($d$) follow from the fact that $Q(z)\triangleq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_z^{\infty} e^{-t^2/2} dt \leq e^{-z^2/2}$.
1164: Moreover, using (\ref{beselaprox}), we can write
1165: \begin{eqnarray}\label{fg}
1166: g(\mu)&=& \varphi(\mu) \sqrt{2\pi} \mu u_0 \mathcal{I}_0( u_0^2 \mu^2)e^{- u_0^2 \mu^2 } \notag \\
1167: & =&\varphi(\mu)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{u_0^2}\right)\right).
1168: \end{eqnarray}
1169: Also, using (\ref{beselaprox}) and noting $\varphi(v)\sim O(\frac{1}{u_0^\rho})$, we have
1170: \begin{eqnarray}\label{gg}
1171: g(v)= \varphi(v)\sqrt{\frac{v}{\mu}}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{u_0^2}\right)\right)\notag \\
1172: \Rightarrow O(g'(v))=O\left(\frac{\varphi(v)}{2\sqrt{v\mu}}+\varphi'(v)\sqrt{\frac{v}{\mu}}\right) \notag \\
1173: \Rightarrow O(g'(\mu))=O(\varphi(\mu)).
1174: \end{eqnarray}
1175: Using (\ref{Ig}), (\ref{epsil}), (\ref{fg}) and (\ref{gg}), we have
1176: \begin{eqnarray}\label{If}
1177: I&=&\varphi(\mu)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)+O\left(u_0e^{-\frac{u_0}{2}}\right)\notag \\
1178: &\stackrel{a}{=}&\varphi(\mu)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right),
1179: \end{eqnarray}
1180: where ($a$) follows from the fact that $\varphi(\mu)=O\left(\frac{1}{u_0^{\rho}}\right)$.
1181: Applying (\ref{If}) in (\ref{IN}), we have
1182: \begin{eqnarray}\label{In}
1183: I_N &=&\int_{v_{N-1}}...\int_{v_1} f(\alpha v_{N-1})\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)\left( 1-Q(\alpha v_{N-1} u_0) \right)\times \nonumber \\ & & \prod_{i=1}^{N-1} u_0^2v_i e^{-\frac{(v_i -\alpha v_{i-1})^2}{2/u_0^2}-\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1}}\mathcal{I}_0(\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1})f(v_i) dv_i \nonumber \\
1184: &=&\int_{v_{N-2}}...\int_{v_1} f(\alpha^2 v_{N-2})f(\alpha v_{N-2})\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)^2\left( 1-Q(\alpha^2 v_{N-2} u_0) \right)\times \nonumber \\ & &\left( 1-Q(\alpha v_{N-2} u_0) \right) \prod_{i=1}^{N-2} u_0^2v_i e^{-\frac{(v_i -\alpha v_{i-1})^2}{2/u_0^2}-\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1}}\mathcal{I}_0(\alpha u_0^2 v_i v_{i-1})f(v_i) dv_i \nonumber \\& =& \cdots =\prod_{i=1}^N f(\alpha^i v_0)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)\left( 1-Q(\alpha^i v_0 u_0) \right)
1185: \end{eqnarray}
1186: Substituting $v_0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)/2}}$, we have
1187: \begin{eqnarray}\label{inapp}
1188: I_N &=& \prod_{i=1}^N f\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\alpha^i}{\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)}}\right)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)\left( 1-Q\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\alpha^i u_0}{\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)}}\right) \right) \notag \\
1189: &=&\prod_{i=1}^N f\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\alpha^i}{\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)}}\right)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)\left( 1-O\left(e^{-u^2_0}\right) \right)
1190: %\notag \\&=&\prod_{i=1}^N f\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}\alpha^i}{\sqrt{(1-\alpha^2)}}\right)\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{u_0}}\right)\right)
1191: \end{eqnarray}
1192: Using (\ref{fdef}) and (\ref{inapp}) and noting $E_0(\rho)=
1193: -\frac{1}{N}\log I_N$, we conclude Theorem \ref{throu}.
1194:
1195: \section{Appendix B}
1196: $\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{max}^{-1})\}$ can be derived as follows
1197: \begin{eqnarray} \label{pa}
1198: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} = \sum_{n=1}^{K} \left.
1199: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\right| |{\cal S}|=n\} \mbox{Pr}
1200: \{ |{\cal S}|=n\}.
1201: \end{eqnarray}
1202: Since $\alpha_k$, $k=1, \cdots, K$, are i.i.d. random variables with
1203: uniform distribution, we can write
1204: \begin{eqnarray} \label{pa0}
1205: F_{\alpha_{\max}} (\alpha \left| |{\cal S}|=n )\right. &=& \alpha^n \notag\\
1206: \Rightarrow \left. \mathbb{E} \{ \log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\right|
1207: |{\cal S}|=n\} &=& \int_{0}^{1} \log (\alpha^{-1}) n \alpha^{n-1}
1208: d \alpha \notag\\
1209: &=& \frac{1}{n},
1210: \end{eqnarray}
1211: where $F_{X} (.)$ denotes the cumulative density function of the
1212: random variable $X$. Indeed, $|{\cal S}|$ is a binomial random
1213: variable with parameters $K$ and $e^{-\Theta}$. (Since $\upsilon_k=u_{0,k}^2$ and $u_{0,k}$ has a Rayleigh distribution, we have
1214: $\mbox{Pr}(\upsilon_k \geq \Theta)=e^{-\Theta}$). Hence,
1215: \begin{eqnarray}\label{pa1}
1216: \mbox{Pr}\{|{\cal S}|=n\}
1217: =\binom{K}{n}e^{-n\Theta}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n}.
1218: \end{eqnarray}
1219: Substituting (\ref{pa0}) and (\ref{pa1}) in (\ref{pa}), we have
1220: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ealpha0}
1221: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} = \sum_{n=1}^{K}
1222: \binom{K}{n} \frac{1}{n} e^{-n\Theta} (1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n}.
1223: \end{eqnarray}
1224: Let us define $\lambda(K)\triangleq \sum_{n=1}^{K} \binom{K}{n}\frac{1}{n}
1225: e^{-n\Theta}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n}$.
1226: \begin{eqnarray}
1227: \lambda(K)=\sum_{n=0}^{K-1} \binom{K}{n+1}\frac{e^{-(n+1)\Theta}}{n+1} (1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n-1} \nonumber \\
1228: =(1-e^{-\Theta})\sum_{n=0}^{K-2} \binom{K-1}{n+1}\frac{e^{-(n+1)\Theta}}{n+1} (1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n-2} +\nonumber \\
1229: e^{-\Theta}\sum_{n=0}^{K-1} \binom{K-1}{n}\frac{1}{n+1} e^{-n\Theta}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n-1} \nonumber \\
1230: =(1-e^{-\Theta})\lambda(K-1)+\frac{1}{K}-\frac{(1-e^{-\Theta})^K}{K}
1231: \end{eqnarray}
1232: Solving the iteration considering $\lambda(1)=e^{-\Theta}$, we derive
1233: $\lambda(K)$ which is equal to $\mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}$.
1234: \begin{equation} \label{ealpha}
1235: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\}=\sum_{n=1}^{K}
1236: \frac{1}{n}(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K-n}-(1-e^{-\Theta})^{K}\sum_{n=1}^{K}\frac{1}{n}.
1237: \end{equation}
1238: For large values of $K$, we can approximate (\ref{ealpha}) as
1239: \begin{eqnarray}\label{kasyB}
1240: \mathbb{E}\{\log(\alpha_{\max}^{-1})\} &\backsimeq&
1241: (1-e^{-\Theta})^K \left(\int_{1}^{K} \frac{(1-e^{-\Theta})^{-x}dx}{x} -\int_{1}^{K}\frac{dx}{x} \right){} \nonumber \\
1242: &\stackrel{a}{\backsimeq}&\frac{1}{-K\log(1-e^{-\Theta})}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{-K\log(1-e^{-\Theta})}\right)\right)
1243: \nonumber \\ & & +(1-e^{-\Theta})^K (\Theta-\log K) \notag\\
1244: &\backsimeq& \frac{1}{Ke^{-\Theta}}
1245: \left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{Ke^{-\Theta}}\right)\right)+
1246: e^{-Ke^{-\Theta}} (\Theta - \log K).
1247: \end{eqnarray}
1248: where ($a$) results from the following approximations~\cite{approx}:
1249: \begin{eqnarray}
1250: \int_{-\tau}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-t}}{t} dt \simeq \frac{e^{\tau}}{\tau}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{\tau}\right)\right)-i\pi \qquad \tau \gg 1 \\
1251: \int_{-\tau}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-t}}{t} dt \simeq \log(\tau) -i\pi \qquad 0 <\tau \ll 1
1252: \end{eqnarray}
1253:
1254: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
1255:
1256: \bibitem{dumbantenna}
1257: {P. Viswanath, D.N.C. Tse, R. Laroia}, ``Opportunistic beamforming using dumb
1258: antennas,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.~48, pp.~1277--1294, June
1259: 2002.
1260:
1261: \bibitem{hanly}
1262: { D. N. C. Tse and S. Hanly}, ``Multiaccess fading channels: Part i:
1263: Polymatroid structure, optimal resource allocation and throughput
1264: capacities,,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Information Theory}, vol.~44, p.~2796–2815,
1265: Nov. 1998.
1266:
1267: \bibitem{KH}
1268: { R. Knopp and P. A. Humblet}, ``Information capacity and power control in
1269: single-cell multiuser communications,'' {\em IEEE ICC'95}, vol.~1, pp.~331 --
1270: 335, June 1995.
1271:
1272: \bibitem{Tse-mud}
1273: {D. Tse}, ``Optimal power allocation over parallel gaussian channels,'' in {\em
1274: Proc. Int. Symp. on Inform. Theory}, p.~27, June 1997.
1275:
1276: \bibitem{agrawal}
1277: {R. Agrawal, A. Bedekar, R. La, and V. Subramanian}, ``A class and channel
1278: condition based weighted proportionally fair scheduler,'' {\em in Teletraffic
1279: Engineering in the Internet Era, Proc. Int. Teletraffic Congr.}, vol.~ITC-17,
1280: p.~553–565, Sept. 2001.
1281:
1282: \bibitem{liu}
1283: {X. Liu, E. K. P. Chong, and N. B. Shroff}, ``Opportunistic transmission
1284: scheduling with resource-sharing constraints in wireless networks,'' {\em
1285: IEEE JSAC}, vol.~19, pp.~2053--2064, Oct. 2001.
1286:
1287: \bibitem{liu1}
1288: { Y. Liu and E. Knightly}, ``Opportunistic fair scheduling over multiple
1289: wireless channels,'' in {\em Proc. of 2003 IEEE INFOCOM}, p.~1106–1115,
1290: April 2003.
1291:
1292: \bibitem{borst}
1293: {S. Borst and P. Whiting}, ``Dynamic rate control algorithms for {HDR}
1294: throughput optimization,'' in {\em Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2001}, vol.~2,
1295: pp.~976--985, April 2001.
1296:
1297: \bibitem{bender}
1298: {P. Bender, P. Black, M. Grob, R. Padovani, N. Sindhushayana, and A. Viterbi},
1299: ``{CDMA/HDR}: A bandwidth efficient high-speed wireless data service for
1300: nomadic users,'' {\em IEEE Communications Magazine}, pp.~70--77, July 2000.
1301:
1302: \bibitem{cdma}
1303: {\em {CDMA} 2000: High Rate Packet Data Air Interface Specification}.
1304: \newblock Std. TIA/EIA IS-856, Nov. 2000.
1305:
1306: \bibitem{jalali}
1307: {A. Jalali, R. Padovani, and R. Pankaj }, ``Data throughput of {CDMA/HDR}: A
1308: high efficiency, high data rate personal wireless system,'' in {\em Proc.
1309: IEEE Vehicular Tech. Conference}, vol.~3, pp.~1854--1858, May 2000.
1310:
1311: \bibitem{qin}
1312: {X. Qin and R. Berry }, ``Exploiting multiuser diversity for medium access
1313: control in wireless networks,'' in {\em Proc. IEEE, INFOCOM}, pp.~1084--1094,
1314: 2003.
1315:
1316: \bibitem{shamaitel}
1317: { S. Shamai and E. Telatar}, ``Some information theoretic aspects of
1318: decentralized power control in multiple access fading channels,'' in {\em
1319: Proc. Inform. Theory and Networking Workshop}, 1999.
1320:
1321: \bibitem{multiuser-mimo}
1322: {N. Sharma and L. H. Ozarow }, ``A study of opportunism for multiple-antenna
1323: systems,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.~51, pp.~1804 -- 1814, May
1324: 2005.
1325:
1326: \bibitem{Tse-mobi}
1327: {M. Grossglauser and D. Tse}, ``Mobility increases the capacity of ad-hoc
1328: wireless networks,'' in {\em Proc. INFOCOM 2001}, vol.~3, pp.~1360--1369,
1329: 2001.
1330:
1331: \bibitem{fading}
1332: {A. N. Trofimov}, ``Convolutional codes for channels with fading,'' in {\em
1333: Proc. Inform Transmission}, vol.~27, pp.~155--165, Oct. 1991.
1334:
1335: \bibitem{gallager}
1336: R.~G. Galager, {\em Information theory and Reliable communication}.
1337: \newblock J. Wiley, New York, 1968.
1338:
1339: \bibitem{gallagerdelay}
1340: { R. A. Berry and R. G. Gallager}, ``Communication over fading channels with
1341: delay constraints,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.~48, pp.~1135 --
1342: 1149, May 2002.
1343:
1344: \bibitem{telgal}
1345: {E. Telatar and R. G. Gallager }, ``Combining queueing theory with information
1346: theory for multiaccess,'' {\em IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun.}, vol.~13,
1347: pp.~963--969, May 1995.
1348:
1349: \bibitem{kaplan}
1350: { G. Kaplan and S. Shamai }, ``Achievable performance over the correlated
1351: rician channel,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Commun.}, vol.~42, pp.~2967 -- 2978, Nov.
1352: 1994.
1353:
1354: \bibitem{sharif}
1355: {M. Sharif and B. Hassibi}, ``On the capacity of mimo broadcast channels with
1356: partial side information,'' {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.~51,
1357: pp.~506 -- 522, Feb. 2005.
1358:
1359: \bibitem{approx}
1360: Y.~L. Luke, {\em The special functions and their approximations}.
1361: \newblock New York, Academic Press, 1969.
1362:
1363: \end{thebibliography}
1364:
1365:
1366:
1367:
1368: \end{document}
1369: