Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Algebraic Network Coding Approach to Deterministic Wireless Relay Networks MinJi Kim, Muriel Médard.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Algebraic Network Coding Approach to Deterministic Wireless Relay Networks MinJi Kim, Muriel Médard."— Presentation transcript:

1 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Algebraic Network Coding Approach to Deterministic Wireless Relay Networks MinJi Kim, Muriel Médard

2 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Wireless Network Open problem: capacity & code construction for wireless relay networks – Channel noise – Interference High SNR – Noise → 0 & large gain – Large transmit power High SNR rate region: – TDM, Noise free additive channel [Ray et al. ‘03] – Note: This holds for higher field size (not just binary) [Ray et al. ‘03] [Avestimehr et al. ‘07]“Deterministic model” (ADT model) – Interference – Model noise deterministically – Use binary field – In essence, high SNR regime Model as error free links R1R1 R2R2 Y(e 1 ) Y(e 2 ) e1e1 e2e2 e3e3 Y(e 3 ) Y(e 3 ) = Y(e 1 ) + Y(e 2 ) R1R1 R2R2 log(1+P 2 /N) log(1+P 1 /N) log(1+P 2 /(P 1 +N)) log(1+P 1 /(P 2 +N)) R1R1 R2R2 High SNR

3 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group ADT Network Background Min-cut: minimal rank of an incidence matrix of a certain cut between the source and destination [Avestimehr et al. ‘07] – Requires optimization over a large set of matrices – Min-cut Max-flow Theorem holds for unicast/multicast sessions Matroidal [Goemans et al. ’09] – Algebraic Network Coding is also Matroidal [Dougherty et al. ’07] Unicast code construction algorithms [Goemans et al. ‘09][Yazdi & Savari ‘09][Amaudruz & Fragouli ‘09] Multicast code construction algorithms [Erez et al. ‘10][Ebrahimi & Fragouli ‘10]

4 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Our Contributions Connection to Algebraic Network Coding [Koetter & Médard ‘03]: – Use of higher field size [Ray et al. ’03] 1. 2.Can’t achieve capacity for multicast with just binary field [Feder et al. ’03][Rasala-Lehman & Lehman ’04][Fragouli et al. ‘04] 3.[Jaggi et al. ‘06] “permute-and-add”: Show that network codes in higher field size F q can be converted to binary-vector code in (F 2 ) n without loss in performance R1R1 R2R2 log(1+P 2 /N) log(1+P 1 /N) log(1+P 2 /(P 1 +N)) log(1+P 1 /(P 2 +N)) R1R1 R2R2 High SNR

5 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Our Contributions Connection to Algebraic Network Coding [Koetter & Médard ‘03]: – Use of higher field size [Ray et al. ’03] – Model broadcast constraint with hyper-edges – Capture ADT network problem with a single system matrix M Prove that min-cut of ADT networks = max rank( M ) Prove Min-cut Max-flow for unicast/multicast holds Extend optimality of linear operations to certain non-multicast sessions Incorporate failures and erasures [Lun et al. ‘04] Incorporate cycles – Show that random linear network coding achieves capacity [Ho et al. ‘03] – Do not address ADT network model’s ability to approximate the wireless networks; but show that ADT network problems can be captured by the algebraic network coding framework

6 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group ADT Network Model Original ADT model (Binary field) – Broadcast: multiple edges (bit pipes) from the same node – Interference: additive MAC over binary field Higher SNR: S-V 1 Higher SNR: S-V 2 broadcast interference Algebraic model:

7 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Algebraic Framework Assume higher field size X(S, i) : source process i Y(e) : process at port e Z(T, i) : destination process i Assume linear operations – at the source S : α(i, e j ) – at the nodes V : β(e j, e j’ ) – at the destination T : ε(e j, (T, i))

8 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group System Matrix M= A(I – F ) -1 B T Linear operations – Encoding at the source S : α(i, e j ) – Decoding at the destination T : ε(e j, (T, i)) e1e1 e2e2 e3e3 e4e4 e5e5 e6e6 e7e7 e8e8 e9e9 e 10 e 11 e 12 a b c d f

9 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group System Matrix M= A(I – F ) -1 B T Linear operations – Coding at the nodes V : β(e j, e j’ ) – F represents physical structure of the ADT network – F k : non-zero entry = path of length k between nodes exists – (I-F) -1 = I + F + F 2 + F 3 + … : connectivity of the network (impulse response of the network) e1e1 e2e2 e3e3 e4e4 e5e5 e6e6 e7e7 e8e8 e9e9 e 10 e 11 e 12 a b c d f F = Broadcast constraint (hyperedge) MAC constraint (addition) Internal operations (network code) Linear code with some coefficients fixed by the network!

10 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group System Matrix M = A(I – F ) -1 B T Z = X(S) M e1e1 e2e2 e3e3 e4e4 e5e5 e6e6 e7e7 e8e8 e9e9 e 10 e 11 e 12 a b c d f Input-output relationship of the network Captures rate Captures network code, topology (Field size as well)

11 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Theorem: Min-cut of ADT Networks From [Avestimehr et al. ‘07] – Requires optimizing over ALL cuts between S and T – Not constructive: assumes infinite block length, internal node operations not considered Show that the rank of M is equivalent – System matrix captures the structure of the network – Constructive: the assignment of variables gives a network code e1e1 e2e2 e3e3 e4e4 e5e5 e6e6 e7e7 e8e8 e9e9 e 10 e 11 e 12 a b c d f

12 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Min-cut Max-flow Theorem For a unicast/multicast connection from source S to destination T, the following are equivalent: 1.A unicast/multicast connection of rate R is feasible 2. mincut(S,T i ) ≥ R for all destinations T i 3.There exists an assignment of variables such that M is invertible Proof idea: 1. & 2. equivalent by previous work 3.→1. If M is invertible, then connection has been established 1.→3. If connection established, M = I. Therefore, M is invertible Alternate proof of sufficiency of linear operations for multicast in ADT networks [Avestimehr et al. ‘07]

13 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Corollaries Extend Min-cut Max-flow theorem to other connections: – [Multiple multicast]: Sources S 1 S 2 … S k wants to transmit to all destinations T 1 T 2 … T N – [Disjoint multicast]: – [Two-level multicast]: Two sets of destinations, a set T m for multicast connection, another set T d for disjoint multicast connection. S2S2 T1T1 TNTN Network S1S1 SkSk S T1T1 T3T3 a, b, c, d T2T2 a b, c d Destination wants S T1T1 T3T3 a, b, c, d Destination wants T4T4 T6T6 T5T5 a b, c d Network

14 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Corollaries Extend Min-cut Max-flow theorem to other connections: – [Multiple multicast]: Sources S 1 S 2 … S k wants to transmit to all destinations T 1 T 2 … T N – [Disjoint multicast]: – [Two-level multicast]: Two sets of destinations, a set T m for multicast connection, another set T d for disjoint multicast connection. Random linear network coding achieves capacity for unicast, multicast, and above connections. Extend results to ADT networks with… – Delay – Cycles – Erasures/Failures

15 Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Conclusions ADT network can be expressed with Algebraic Network Coding Formulation – Use of higher field size – Model broadcast constraint with hyper-edge – Capture ADT network problem with a single system matrix M Prove an algebraic definition of min-cut = max rank( M ) Prove Min-cut Max-flow for unicast/multicast holds Show that random linear network coding achieves capacity Extend optimality of linear operations to non-multicast sessions – Disjoint multicast, Two-level multicast, multiple source multicast, generalized min-cut max-flow theorem – Random linear network coding achieves capacity Incorporate delay and failures (allows cycles within the network)


Download ppt "Network Coding and Reliable Communications Group Algebraic Network Coding Approach to Deterministic Wireless Relay Networks MinJi Kim, Muriel Médard."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google