Optimal Energy and Delay Tradeoffs for Multi-User Wireless Downlinks Michael J. Neely University of Southern California

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Delay Analysis and Optimality of Scheduling Policies for Multihop Wireless Networks Gagan Raj Gupta Post-Doctoral Research Associate with the Parallel.
Advertisements

Optimal Pricing in a Free Market Wireless Network Michael J. Neely University of Southern California *Sponsored in part.
Network Utility Maximization over Partially Observable Markov Channels 1 1 Channel State 1 = ? Channel State 2 = ? Channel State 3 = ? Restless.
Stochastic optimization for power-aware distributed scheduling Michael J. Neely University of Southern California t ω(t)
Dynamic Data Compression in Multi-hop Wireless Networks Abhishek B. Sharma (USC) Collaborators: Leana Golubchik Ramesh Govindan Michael J. Neely.
Delay Reduction via Lagrange Multipliers in Stochastic Network Optimization Longbo Huang Michael J. Neely WiOpt *Sponsored in part by NSF.
Resource Allocation in Wireless Networks: Dynamics and Complexity R. Srikant Department of ECE and CSL University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
EE 685 presentation Optimal Control of Wireless Networks with Finite Buffers By Long Bao Le, Eytan Modiano and Ness B. Shroff.
DYNAMIC POWER ALLOCATION AND ROUTING FOR TIME-VARYING WIRELESS NETWORKS Michael J. Neely, Eytan Modiano and Charles E.Rohrs Presented by Ruogu Li Department.
Stochastic Network Optimization with Non-Convex Utilities and Costs Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Intelligent Packet Dropping for Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs for Wireless Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Dynamic Product Assembly and Inventory Control for Maximum Profit Michael J. Neely, Longbo Huang (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on.
Dynamic Index Coding Broadcast Station N N Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University of Southern California Paper available.
Universal Scheduling for Networks with Arbitrary Traffic, Channels, and Mobility Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Proc. IEEE Conf. on.
Efficient Algorithms for Renewable Energy Allocation to Delay Tolerant Consumers Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Alexandros G. Dimakis University.
Utility Optimization for Dynamic Peer-to-Peer Networks with Tit-for-Tat Constraints Michael J. Neely, Leana Golubchik University of Southern California.
Stock Market Trading Via Stochastic Network Optimization Michael J. Neely (University of Southern California) Proc. IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control.
Delay-Based Network Utility Maximization Michael J. Neely University of Southern California IEEE INFOCOM, San Diego, March.
Dynamic Optimization and Learning for Renewal Systems Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and.
Dynamic Index Coding User set N Packet set P Broadcast Station N N p p p Michael J. Neely, Arash Saber Tehrani, Zhen Zhang University.
Dynamic Optimization and Learning for Renewal Systems -- With applications to Wireless Networks and Peer-to-Peer Networks Michael J. Neely, University.
Max Weight Learning Algorithms with Application to Scheduling in Unknown Environments Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Dynamic Data Compression for Wireless Transmission over a Fading Channel Michael J. Neely University of Southern California CISS 2008 *Sponsored in part.
*Sponsored in part by the DARPA IT-MANET Program, NSF OCE Opportunistic Scheduling with Reliability Guarantees in Cognitive Radio Networks Rahul.
Bandwidth sharing: objectives and algorithms Jim Roberts France Télécom - CNET Laurent Massoulié Microsoft Research.
ADCN MURI Tools for the Analysis and Design of Complex Multi-Scale Networks Review September 9, 2009 Protocols for Wireless Networks Libin Jiang, Jiwoong.
Multi-Hop Networking with Hard Delay Constraints Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California DARPA IT-MANET Presentation, January 2011 PDF of paper.
Cross Layer Adaptive Control for Wireless Mesh Networks (and a theory of instantaneous capacity regions) Michael J. Neely, Rahul Urgaonkar University of.
Lecture 11. Matching A set of edges which do not share a vertex is a matching. Application: Wireless Networks may consist of nodes with single radios,
A Fair Scheduling Policy for Wireless Channels with Intermittent Connectivity Saswati Sarkar Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering University.
1 40 th Annual CISS 2006 Conference on Information Sciences and Systems Some Optimization Trade-offs in Wireless Network Coding Yalin E. Sagduyu Anthony.
Optimal Adaptive Data Transmission over a Fading Channel with Deadline and Power Constraints Murtaza Zafer and Eytan Modiano Laboratory for Information.
Resource Allocation for E-healthcare Applications
Multiple-access Communication in Networks A Geometric View W. Chen & S. Meyn Dept ECE & CSL University of Illinois.
EE 685 presentation Distributed Cross-layer Algorithms for the Optimal Control of Multi-hop Wireless Networks By Atilla Eryılmaz, Asuman Özdağlar, Devavrat.
Optimal Backpressure Routing for Wireless Networks with Multi-Receiver Diversity Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Delay Analysis for Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Bursty Traffic Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix,
By Avinash Sridrahan, Scott Moeller and Bhaskar Krishnamachari.
Kevin Ross, UCSC, September Service Network Engineering Resource Allocation and Optimization Kevin Ross Information Systems & Technology Management.
Utility-Optimal Scheduling in Time- Varying Wireless Networks with Delay Constraints I-Hong Hou P.R. Kumar University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 1/30.
Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California CISS, Princeton University, March 2012 Wireless Peer-to-Peer Scheduling.
1 A Simple Asymptotically Optimal Energy Allocation and Routing Scheme in Rechargeable Sensor Networks Shengbo Chen, Prasun Sinha, Ness Shroff, Changhee.
Competitive Queue Policies for Differentiated Services Seminar in Packet Networks1 Competitive Queue Policies for Differentiated Services William.
Michael J. Neely, University of Southern California CISS, Princeton University, March 2012 Asynchronous Scheduling for.
Utility Maximization for Delay Constrained QoS in Wireless I-Hong Hou P.R. Kumar University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 1 /23.
Stochastic Network Optimization and the Theory of Network Throughput, Energy, and Delay Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
ORSIS Conference, Jerusalem Mountains, Israel May 13, 2007 Yoni Nazarathy Gideon Weiss University of Haifa Yoni Nazarathy Gideon Weiss University of Haifa.
Stochastic Optimal Networking: Energy, Delay, Fairness Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Finite-Horizon Energy Allocation and Routing Scheme in Rechargeable Sensor Networks Shengbo Chen, Prasun Sinha, Ness Shroff, Changhee Joo Electrical and.
Energy-Aware Wireless Scheduling with Near Optimal Backlog and Convergence Time Tradeoffs Michael J. Neely University of Southern California INFOCOM 2015,
Super-Fast Delay Tradeoffs for Utility Optimal Scheduling in Wireless Networks Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
ITMANET PI Meeting September 2009 ITMANET Nequ-IT Focus Talk (PI Neely): Reducing Delay in MANETS via Queue Engineering.
Information Theory for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (ITMANET): The FLoWS Project Competitive Scheduling in Wireless Networks with Correlated Channel State Ozan.
Fairness and Optimal Stochastic Control for Heterogeneous Networks Time-Varying Channels     U n (c) (t) R n (c) (t) n (c) sensor.
Order Optimal Delay for Opportunistic Scheduling In Multi-User Wireless Uplinks and Downlinks Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Content caching and scheduling in wireless networks with elastic and inelastic traffic Group-VI 09CS CS CS30020 Performance Modelling in Computer.
A Perspective on Network Interference and Multiple Access Control Michael J. Neely University of Southern California May 2008 Capacity Region 
Stochastic Optimization for Markov Modulated Networks with Application to Delay Constrained Wireless Scheduling Michael J. Neely University of Southern.
Delay Analysis for Max Weight Opportunistic Scheduling in Wireless Systems Michael J. Neely --- University of Southern California
Energy Optimal Control for Time Varying Wireless Networks Michael J. Neely University of Southern California
Asynchronous Control for Coupled Markov Decision Systems Michael J. Neely University of Southern California Information Theory Workshop (ITW) Lausanne,
Online Fractional Programming for Markov Decision Systems
Delay Efficient Wireless Networking
University of Southern California
energy requests a(t) renewable source s(t) non-renewable source x(t)
Throughput-Optimal Broadcast in Dynamic Wireless Networks
Utility Optimization with “Super-Fast”
Javad Ghaderi, Tianxiong Ji and R. Srikant
Energy-Delay Tradeoffs in Smartphone Applications
Optimal Control for Generalized Network-Flow Problems
Presentation transcript:

Optimal Energy and Delay Tradeoffs for Multi-User Wireless Downlinks Michael J. Neely University of Southern California Infocom 2006, Barcelona, Spain *Sponsored by NSF OCE Grant N Avg. Delay Avg. Power

Assumptions: 1)Random Arrivals A(t) i.i.d. over slots. Rate vector  (bits/slot) 2) Random Channel states S(t) i.i.d. over slots. 3) Transmission Rate Function P(t) --- Power allocation during slot t (P(t)  ) S(t) --- Channel state during slot t t … Time slotted system (t {0, 1, 2, …}) rate  i power P  (P(t), S(t)) Good Med Bad 1 2 N

Assumptions: 1)Random Arrivals A(t) i.i.d. over slots. Rate vector  (bits/slot) 2) Random Channel states S(t) i.i.d. over slots. 3) Transmission Rate Function P(t) --- Power allocation during slot t (P(t)  ) S(t) --- Channel state during slot t t … Time slotted system (t {0, 1, 2, …}) rate  i power P  (P(t), S(t)) Good Med Bad 1 2 N

rate  i power P Good Med Bad 1 2 N Control: Allocate Power (P(t)  ) in Reaction to Current Channel State And Current Queue Backlogs. Goal: Stabilize with Minimum Average Power while also Maintaining Low Average Delay.

rate  i power P Good Med Bad 1 2 N Control: Allocate Power (P(t)  ) in Reaction to Current Channel State And Current Queue Backlogs. Goal: Stabilize with Minimum Average Power while also Maintaining Low Average Delay. [ Avg. Power and Avg. Delay are Competing Objectives! ] What is the Fundamental Energy-Delay Tradeoff?

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P* ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability )

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P* ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability )

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability ) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability ) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability ) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability ) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) ( P* = Min Av. Power for Stability ) V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) Analysis: Use theory of Performance Optimal Lyapunov Scheduling: -Neely, Modiano 2003, Georgiadis, Neely, Tassiulas [F&T 2006, NOW Publishers] Achieves: [O(1/V), O(V)] energy-delay tradeoff V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) P*

1 2 N Our Previous Work on Minimum Power Scheduling with Delay Tradeoffs [Neely Infocom 2005]: V P V Av. Delay O(1/V) O(V) U N (t)U 1 (t) U 2 (t) Analysis: Use theory of Performance Optimal Lyapunov Scheduling: -Neely, Modiano 2003, Georgiadis, Neely, Tassiulas [F&T 2006, NOW Publishers] Achieves: [O(1/V), O(V)] energy-delay tradeoff P*

V P V Av. Delay O(1/V)  ( V ) P* The Fundamental Berry-Gallager Bound for Energy-Delay Tradeoffs in a Single Wireless Downlink: A(t)  (t) =  (P(t), S(t)) Av. Delay >=  ( V ) [Berry, Gallager 2002] Approach Achievability via Technique of Buffer Partitioning.

Precedents for Energy and Delay Optimization for Single Wireless Links: -Berry and Gallager [2002] ( Fundamental Square Root Law ) -Uysal-Biyikoglu, Prabhakar, El Gamal [2002] -Khojastepour and Sabharwal [2004] ( “Lazy Scheduling” and Filter Theory for Static Links ) -Fu, Modiano, Tsitsiklis [2003] -Goyal, Kumar, Sharma [2003] -Zafer and Modiano [2005] ( Dynamic Programming, Markov Decision Theory )

Precedents for Energy and Delay Optimization for Single Wireless Links: -Berry and Gallager [2002] ( Fundamental Square Root Law ) -Uysal-Biyikoglu, Prabhakar, El Gamal [2002] -Khojastepour and Sabharwal [2004] ( “Lazy Scheduling” and Filter Theory for Static Links ) -Fu, Modiano, Tsitsiklis [2003] -Goyal, Kumar, Sharma [2003] -Zafer and Modiano [2005] ( Dynamic Programming, Markov Decision Theory )

Challenging to extend optimal delay results for stochastic systems beyond a single queue because… 1)Parameter Explosion: (cannot practically measure) Number of channel state vectors S grows geometrically with number of links N. Markov Decision Theory and Dynamic Programming requires knowledge of:  S = Pr[ S(t) = S] (for each channel state S ). 2) State Space Explosion: (cannot practically implement) Number of Queueing State Vectors U grows geometrically.

Idea: Combine Techniques of Buffer Partitioning and Performance Optimal Lyapunov Scheduling. 1 2 N V P V Av. Delay P* Goals: 1)Establish the fundamental energy-delay curve for multi-user systems (extend Berry-Gallager to this case). 2)Design a dynamic algorithm to achieve optimal energy-delay tradeoffs. (Must overcome the complexity explosion problem).

Specifically: Define a general power cost metric h( P ) : 1 2 N Define average power cost: Define: h* = Min. avg. power cost for network stability (Push h arbitrarily close to h*, with optimal delay tradeoff…)

Theorem 1: (Characterize h*) Assume . The min average power cost h* is given as the solution to: Define  ( ) = min. avg. power cost h* above. Corollary: For each, there is a stationary randomized alg. such that: 

The Fundamental Energy-Delay Tradeoff:    mild admissibility assumptions Theorem 2 (Multi-User Berry-Gallager Bound): If Then if avg. cost satisfies: We necessarily have: 1 2 N V h V Av. Delay h*  ( V ) O(1/V)

Achieving Optimal Tradeoffs via Buffer Partitioning… Recall the Berry-Gallager threshold algorithm for single queues:  (t) =  (P(t), S(t)) U(t)  max Q U Q drift    L R [Requires full knowledge of channel probs  S ]

Achieving Optimal Tradeoffs via Buffer Partitioning… Recall the Berry-Gallager threshold algorithm for single queues:  (t) =  (P(t), S(t)) U(t)  max Q U Q drift    L R

Achieving Optimal Tradeoffs via Buffer Partitioning… Recall the Berry-Gallager threshold algorithm for single queues:  (t) =  (P(t), S(t)) U(t)  max Q U Q drift    L R

Let’s Consider Multi-Dimensional Buffer Partitioning:         Q U1U1 U2U2 Case N=2 1 2 N Q

Let’s Consider Multi-Dimensional Buffer Partitioning:         Q U1U1 U2U2 Case N=2 Q

Let’s Consider Multi-Dimensional Buffer Partitioning:         Q U1U1 U2U2 Case N=2 (not implementable) Q

Analysis of the Threshold Algorithm: (exchanging sums over the 2 N regions yields…)  i L (t) = Pr[U i (t) <Q]  i R (t) = 1 -  i L (t)

An Online Algorithm for Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs: 1 2 N Define the bi-modal Lyapunov Function: UiUi Q Designing “gravity” into the system:

An Online Algorithm for Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs: 1 2 N Define the bi-modal Lyapunov Function: UiUi Q Designing “gravity” into the system: “Usually” creates proper drift direction…

1 2 N *Key inequality that holds with equality for the stationary threshold algorithm. Need to strengthen the drift guarantees… Want to also ensure for all i {1, 2, …, N}

Need to strengthen the drift guarantees… Want to also ensure for all i {1, 2, …, N} Use Virtual Queue Concept from [Neely Infocom 2005]: X i (t) A i (t) +  1 i R (t)  i (t) +  1 i L (t) indicator functions X i (t+1) = max[X i (t) -  i (t) -  1 i L (t), 0] + A i (t) +  1 i R (t)

Need to strengthen the drift guarantees… Want to also ensure for all i {1, 2, …, N} Use Virtual Queue Concept from [Neely Infocom 2005]: X i (t) A i (t) +  1 i R (t)  i (t) +  1 i L (t) indicator functions X i (t) Stable  i +  1 i L > i +  1 i R

To Stabilize Virtual Queues X i (t) and Actual Queues U i (t):

The Tradeoff Optimal Control Algorithm (TOCA): 1) Every slot t, observe channel state S(t) and queue backlogs U(t), X(t). Allocate power P(t) = P, where P solves: 2) Transmit with rate  i (t) =  i (P(t), S(t)). 3) Update the Virtual Queues X i (t).

Theorem 3 (TOCA Performance): For suitable , Q: 1 2 N V hAv. Delay  ( ) V O(1/V)  ( V )

Beyond the Berry-Gallager Bound: Logarithmic delay! If the Minimum Energy function  ( ) is peicewise linear (not strictly concave), then under suitable , Q, TOCA yields:  ( ) (shown in 1 dimension)

Further, logarithmic delay in this scenario is optimal! Simple One Queue Example: P(t)  ={0, 1} Watt. Two Equally Likely Channel States (GOOD, BAD): U(t)  (t)=  (P(t),S(t))  ( ) Can show that logarithmic delay is necessary and achievable!

Conclusions: 1 2 N V hAv. Delay  ( ) V O(1/V)  ( V ) -Extend Berry-Gallager Square Root Law to Multi-User Systems. -Novel Lyapunov Technique for Achieving Optimal Energy-Delay Tradeoffs. -Overcome the Complexity Explosion Problem. -Channel Statistics, Traffic Rates not Required. -Superior Tradeoff via a Logarithmic Delay Law in exceptional (piecewise linear) cases.