3206 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 59, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2011
,, ,,
,
eq k n eq k n
hp
,,
,
kk kk
sr n sr n
hp
,,
,
kk
rdn rdn
hp
,,
,
kk
sdn sdn
hp
k
θ
k
sd
d
kk
sr
d
k
rd
d
k
sd
d
Fig. 2. (a) A three-node relay network. (b) An equivalent two-node network.
and 𝛽 may vary for each link, it is assumed that they are not
changed for all communication links. The entire operation of
the three-node relay network is as follows: in phase 1, the
source transmits messages with variance 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
to the relay
and messages with variance 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
to the destination; in phase
2, the relay transmits messages with variance 𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
to the
destination.
Assume that 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
= 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
, the relay node uses the DF
scheme as the cooperative strategy, the noise power of each
link is independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) circularly
symmetric additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) with unity
variance, and the destination combines the received signals
from the source node in phase 1 and the relay node in phase 2
through the maximal ratio combining. When we assume that
𝑠
𝑘
-𝑟
𝑘
transmission is successful for the entire DF process,
the optimal power allocation problem to maximize the overall
error-free capacity at the destination is given by
max
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
,𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
1
2
log
2
(1 + min{∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
+
∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
, ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
})
subject to
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
+ 𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
2
= 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑛
(1)
where the average of the transmit power of the source node
(𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
) and that of the relay node (𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
) is constrained to
be 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑛
, which is the allocated power on subcarrier 𝑛 at the
source node for direct transmission. Note that it is necessary
to put this power constraint on (1) such that we can make
a fair performance comparison (under equal transmit power)
between the cooperative approach and the direct transmission
scheme. The factor 1/2 in (1) results from the fact that the
signal is transmitted over two time slots (or two phases) in the
cooperative scheme. From [17], the solution to this problem
is
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
= 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
=
∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
+ ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
and 𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
=
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
−∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
+ ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
(2)
when ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
≤∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
and ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
< ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
,where
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
=2𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑛
;if∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
≤∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
or ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
<
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
< ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
, 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
= 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
= 𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
and
𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
=0. With the above definitions, the signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) at the destination node is,
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
+ ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
=
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
+∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
, ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
≤∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
and ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
< ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
, otherwise
≜ ℎ
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
(3)
where ℎ
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
= ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
/(∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
+ ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
) if ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
≤∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
and ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
< ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
;
otherwise, ℎ
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
= ∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
. With (3), the three-node
network can be simplified to an equivalent two-node network
with the corresponding channel gain ℎ
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
and power 𝑝
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
,
as shown in Fig. 2(b). Assume that 𝜍
𝑘
= 𝑑
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑
/𝑑
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
and
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
=(𝑑
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
/𝑑
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
)
𝛽
=(1+𝜍
2
𝑘
− 2𝜍
𝑘
cos 𝜃
𝑘
)
𝛽/2
is the
geometrical gain achieved by the proximity advantage of the
relay node over the destination node [18]. When 𝑠
𝑘
-𝑟
𝑘
and
𝑟
𝑘
-𝑑 links are better than 𝑠
𝑘
-𝑑, ℎ
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
in (3) can be rewritten
as
ℎ
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
=
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
+ ∣ℎ
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
=
𝐿∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑
∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
+ ∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑
−∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
=
𝐿∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑
∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
+ ∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑
−∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
= 𝐿
∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝜍
𝛽
𝑘
+ ∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝜍
𝛽
𝑘
/𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
,
∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
≤∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
and ∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
< ∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
𝜍
𝛽
𝑘
≜ 𝐿𝑔
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
𝑑
−𝛽
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑
(4)
where 𝑔
2
𝑒𝑞,𝑘,𝑛
= ∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
/[∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑟
𝑘
,𝑛
∣
2
𝜍
𝛽
𝑘
+
∣𝑔
𝑟
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
−∣𝑔
𝑠
𝑘
𝑑,𝑛
∣
2
𝜍
𝛽
𝑘
/𝐺
𝑠,𝑘
].
B. A Resource Allocation Problem for Cooperative MU-
OFDM CR Systems
In a CR system, the transmitted power of SUs may cause un-
expected interference to PUs, whether or not PUs are starting
communication on channels currently used by SUs. Thus, an
additional mechanism is needed to protect the communication
links of PUs so that the received signal-to-interference-plus-
noise ratio (SINR) on each PU is larger than a threshold [12],
[13]. By taking into account all PUs, we can modify the SINR
constraint on the power allocated for user 𝑠
𝑘
on subcarrier 𝑛
(i.e., 𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑛
) given by [12] as follows:
𝑝
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑛
≤ min
𝑢=1,2,...,𝑀
1
∣ℎ
𝑠
𝑘
,𝑢
∣
2
(
𝑃
𝑇
∣ℎ
0𝑢
∣
2
𝜁
−
𝑁
0
𝐵
𝑁
) ≜ 𝑃
𝑠
𝑘
,max
(5)
where 𝑃
𝑇
is the transmitted power of each PU, ∣ℎ
0𝑢
∣
2
is the
channel power gain of the link between the transmit PU and