Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.

ca on 20 July 2012

Optimal Transmission Strategy in a

Practical Overlay Cognitive Radio
System
babak abbasi bastami, Ebrahim Saberinia
Date Submitted: 30 April 2010
Date Published: 14 May 2010

Updated information and services can be found at:

http://engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca/ojs2.2/index.php/pptvt/article/view/612

These include:
Subject Classification
Submitting Author's
Comments
Comments

Copyright

Vehicular Technology
IEEE Transaction On Vehicular TechnologyB Parts of the Work
submitted to IEEE Globecom 2010
You can respond to this article at:
http://engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca/ojs2.2/index.php/pptvt/comment/add/612/0

Copyright Date Submitted: 30 April 2010 babak abbasi

bastami et al. This is an open access article distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Canada License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Optimal Transmission Strategy in a Practical

Overlay Cognitive Radio System
Babak Abbasi Bastami, Ebrahim Saberinia
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Abstract
In this paper, we consider a practical overlay cognitive radio system, where primary users have intervals
of silence in their access to the channel. The secondary user senses the channel status and switches either to a
transmission mode or to an idle period. We consider imperfect channel sensing by the secondary user. Furthermore,
to lower the complexity of the system and make it more practical, we assume no channel sensing by the secondary
user when it is in transmission mode. We analyze the system and derive analytical expressions for the interference
on the primary user and the overall data rate of the secondary user based on the system parameters. By the obtained
performance equations, we investigate the optimum values for the secondary user transmission and idle periods
which minimize the interference on the primary user and maximize the secondary user data rate. The results show
that in case of the secondary user imperfect channel sensing, providing the secondary user with a non-zero idle
duration, significantly improves the system performance. Finally, we validate our analysis by MATLAB simulation.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The traditional scheme of allocating radio frequency bands for wireless services results in an inefficient
usage of the spectrum. To improve the utilization of the radio spectrum, a different allocation scheme has
been proposed using cognitive radio systems [1]. In such a system, the cognitive or secondary users share
the licensed spectrum opportunistically with the primary users that hold the license. While these schemes
have the capability to increase the overall utilization of the spectrum, their implementation requires solving
several challenges. The main challenge is to control the amount of interference on the primary user (PU)
caused by the secondary user (SU). Generally, two main approaches have been proposed to control the
interference on the PU. In the spectrum overlay scenario, the SU accesses the spectrum whenever it senses
that the PU is idle. The PU can transmit at any time and the cognitive user should have the ability to
monitor the channel status and decide whether to transmit or not. On the other hand, in the spectrum
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 1 of 19

underlay technique, the secondary user can transmit at any time, but the power spectral density (PSD)
of the transmitted signal should be low enough, preferably at noise level, for small interference on the
PU. However, even in the overlay scheme, channel sensing is used to increase the capacity of the SU.
Using channel information, a power control scheme can be designed for the SU such that it maximizes
its transmission capacity while keeping the interference on the PU below a threshold [2]. On the other
hand, a perfect overlay system may have zero interference. This requires the SU to have the capability to
detect the channel status without any error. Furthermore, it should have the ability to detect immediately
a PU transition from idle to active and suspend its own transmission. Designing such a system is very
complicated. In practical scenarios, we have to consider some possibility of sensing errors for the SU.
Furthermore, we can assume that the SU transmits its signal for a limited period of time without sensing
once it detects a free channel [3]. This means that there will be some interference on the PU. Performance
of overlay cognitive radio systems has been studied in different scenarios. In [4], the interference and the
capacity of the SU are analyzed assuming errorless sensing by the SU. The idle and the active durations
of the PU have been modeled as exponential random variables. Extension of [4] to a general distribution
for the idle and busy times of the PU is presented in [3]. In [5], an analysis has been done for the outage
capacity of the secondary user taking into account the possibility of sensing errors. However, the work in
[5] does not cover the amount of interference on the PU.
In this paper, we study a practical overlay cognitive radio system that may have error in channel sensing.
The primary user switches between idle and busy states according to a Markov model. The secondary user
based on its channel sensing outcome, goes through an idle period or transmits a package with a constant
data length. The duration of the SU transmission time after an idle channel sensing and the duration of
the SU idle time after a busy channel sensing are the two important design parameters in this system. We
derive the analytical expressions of the interference on the primary user and the data rate of the secondary
user and validate our analysis by the simulation results. We apply our analysis to find the optimal values
of the SU transmission and idle periods that maximize the SU data rate while keeping the interference
on the PU below a threshold or minimize the interference on the PU in order to achieve a desired SU
data rate . In [6], we have studied the similar system where the secondary user didnt have any idle time.
The system has been based on a keep sensing scheme in which the SU keeps sensing the channel until
it detects an unoccupied channel and starts data transmission. The addition of the SU idle period results
in saving the energy and avoiding the possible interference on the PU that might occur due to another
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 2 of 19

sensing. However, this idle duration decreases the data rate transmission of the cognitive user. Therefore,
it seems that if we consider the interference on the PU and the bit rate of the SU as our only criteria, the
SU idle period would be unnecessary. This would be true whenever the channel sensing is errorless. It
can be easily verified that providing an idle SU period for an errorless channel sensing does not have any
effect on the interference amount on the PU and just degrades the data rate of the SU. However we show
that, in case of imperfect channel sensing with specified values of probabilities of errors, introducing an
idle time decreases the interference on the PU and therefore, the problem of the optimal SU idle length
should be investigated. We obtain the optimal length of the SU idle period in order to achieve the best
system performance . The paper is organized as follows: in section 2, we introduce the system model.
The analysis of the interference on the primary user and the data rate of the secondary user are discussed
in sections 3 and 4. In section 5, we provide the simulation results and compare them with the derived
analytical results. The effects of the SU parameters on the system performance metrics are investigated
in section 6. The optimization problems of the SU idle and transmission periods are discussed in section
7. Section 8 concludes the paper.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
We consider a wireless communication system where primary users can be inactive for some portion
of time. The busy and idle periods of the primary channel are modeled with two random variables 1
and 2 respectively. The idle period, 1 , is assumed to have exponential distribution. The length of the
transmitted packet of the PU is usually considered as a random variable with a long tail distribution.
Hence, exponential distribution would be a good choice for the busy period, 2 , as well. The markov
model of the primary user is shown in Figure 1. The exponential distribution functions for 1 and 2 ,
f (i ), i = 1, 2, can be written as:
f (i ) = i exp(i i ),

Fig. 1.

(1)

The markov model of the primary user.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 3 of 19

Fig. 2.

The secondary user markov model.

where, 1 =

1
TOFF

and 2 =

1
TON

and TOFF and TON are respectively the average PU idle and active

durations. The secondary user senses the spectrum. If the SU senses a busy channel, it will go thorough
an idle period with duration of Tidle . During this time, the SU neither senses the spectrum nor transmits
any signal. On the other hand, if the SU detects an unoccupied channel, it transmits a packet for duration
of T . During the transmission time, the SU does not perform any sensing. To be more general in our
analysis, we do not assume perfect sensing. The probability of incorrect sensing by the SU when the PU
is idle is assumed to be Pf a (probability of false alarm) and the probability of the incorrect sensing when
the PU is busy is assumed to be Pm (probability of miss detection). Lets denote the sensing duration
of the SU with Ts . We assume that the value of Ts is small comparing to TOFF , TON , Tidle and T . In
fact, we have two types of intervals in the time line of the SU. The first type of the interval is a sensing
interval that follows with an idle duration.The length of this interval is Ts + Tidle . The second type of
the interval is a sensing which results in a SU packet transmission. The duration of this type of interval
is Ts + T .The SU markov model is shown in Figure 2. Based on the aforementioned system model, the
values of the transition probabilities in this figure are P11 = Pf a ,P12 = 1 Pf a whenever the primary
channel is unused and are P11 = 1 Pm ,P12 = Pm whenever the primary channel is busy. Evidently, for
the two other transition probabilities, we have P22 = 1 P11 and P21 = 1 P12 .
The values of the transmission time, T , and the SU idle duration Tidle are the main system design
parameters. They affect two important system performance metrics. The first performance metric is the
amount of interference on the PU from the SU. Since the SU does not perform any sensing during its
transmission period, it is probable that the PU starts transmitting within the transmission time of the SU.
More interference can happen if an erroneous sensing takes place within the PU busy time. Apparently,
increasing the SU idle duration decreases the interference on the primary user. The second performance
metric which is affected by T and Tidle is the bit rate of the SU. The longer the SU transmits once it
detects an idle channel, the higher its achievable data rate is. Also, choosing smaller SU idle duration,
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 4 of 19

leads to a higher data rate. The PU alternates between idle and busy periods, but the secondary user time
line has a different behavior. After each sensing interval of the SU, we may have a transmission interval or
an idle interval based on the output of the sensing information. On the other hand, after any transmission
or idle interval we definitely have a sensing interval. Our analysis of the system is based on the alignment
of the time line of the SU compared to the time line of the primary user. Figure 3 shows the typical time
lines of the primary and secondary users. In the following sections, we evaluate the system performance
equations based on this system model.
III. I NTERFERENCE A NALYSIS

OF THE

P RIMARY U SER

The interference on the PU is proportional to the overlapping time in which both PU and SU are
simultaneously transmitting. In other words we have
Ip = K1 Tov ,

(2)

where, Ip is the expected value of the interference and Tov is the expected value of the overlapping time.
Constant K1 denotes the interference per unit of the overlapping time and depends on the power spectral
density of the SU transmitted signal and the distance between the primary receiver and the secondary
transmitter.
We categorize the collision between the SU and PU busy times into two types. The first type occurs
whenever the PU in in the idle interval and then starts transmission while the SU is still in transmission
period. In this case, the SU senses the unoccupied channel correctly, but the transmission time extends
to the busy period of the PU. Figure 4(a) shows an example of this scenario of collision. On the other
hand, as shown in Figures 4(b) and 4(c), the second type collision, is a result of wrong sensing of the
SU when the channel is being used by the PU. In the following subsections, we derive the corresponding
equations of these two scenarios.

A. Type I collision
This type of collision occurs whenever we have a correct sensing at the idle time of the PU and when
a duration less than T is remaining from that idle time. If the random idle period of the PU, 1 , is
less than the the SU transmission time T , (1 < T ), any correct sensing fits in this scenario and we
dont have interference if all the sensing outcomes in 1 are wrong. Otherwise, if (1 > T ), we have no
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 5 of 19

interference on the PU if we end up with a wrong sensing. In the Appendix, the probability of having this
type of interference has been calculated as P1 and P2 for two different cases of T > Tidle and T < Tidle
respectively.
Suppose with the interference occurrence probability calculated, we have an overlapping period of type
I. Hence, a last correct sensing occurs at a time tls where 0 1 tls T . Let ls = 1 tls . Using
the memoryless property of the exponential distribution, the probability density function of ls would be
ls
)
OFF
T
1exp( T
)
OFF

1
TOFF

exp( T

. The perfect sensing at the time tls causes an overlapping time between the PU and the

SU transmission periods. This overlapping time (ov1 ) can be simply written as follows

T ls T ls 2
ov1 =
.

T >
2

ls

(3)

Since Ts is very small compared to T , we ignored its effect on (3). Using equations (16) and (17) derived
in the Appendix as P1 and P2 , the average value of the overlapping duration would be [7]
Tov1 = E(ov1 )P1

Tidle T
"

Z T T1
idle
TOFF exp(T /TOFF ) TON exp(T /TON ) + (TON TOFF )
= TON
(1 Pf a
(TON TOFF )(1 exp(T /TOFF ))
0

+1

1
TOFF

1
exp( TOFF
)

1 exp( TOFF )

d1 ),
(4)

whenever T Tidle and would be

Tov1 = E(ov1 )P2

0 T < Tidle

Z
TOFF exp(T /TOFF ) TON exp(T /TON ) + (TON TOFF ) Tidle
= TON
( (1 Pf a )
(TON TOFF )(1 exp(T /TOFF ))
0

"

2
T

+1

1
TOFF

2
exp( TOFF
)
idle
exp( TTOFF
)

(5)

whenever T < Tidle . Therefore, in overall, the overlapping time duration of type I, can be obtained by
equations (4) and (5), depending on the value of the SU transmission length respect to its idle period. For
very low probabilities of false alarm, P1 0 and P2 1, thus, this type of the overlapping time would
not be much dependent on Tidle . For perfect sensing scenario Tov1 = E(ov1 ) for all T [6], [7].

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

d2 ),

Page 6 of 19

B. Type II collision
The second type of collision may occur in the busy period of the PU. A portion of the SU idle or
transmission time would be extended to the busy period of the PU. Since the length of the SU idle time is
small compared to TON , for slightly low false alarm probabilities, we can ignore the corresponding portion
of the SU idle time. The average portion of the SU transmission time extended to the busy period of the
PU is the average type I overlapping time (Tov1 ) obtained in the previous subsection. Hence, the total
average duration within which type II of interference may occur is TON Tov1 . During the busy period of
the PU, a combination of the SU sensing and idle intervals (Ts + Tidle )occurs with the probability (1 Pm )
and a combination of a sensing interval with the transmission length (Ts + T ) occurs with the probability
Pm . In the total average time TON Tov1 , the number of the occurrence of the SU transmission would be
approximately
Pm (TON Tov1 )
.
(1 Pm )(Tidle + Ts ) + Pm (T + Ts )
Hence, the average value of the second type of collision, which is the average portion of the time occupied
by the SU transmission period, would be
Tov2 = T

Pm (TON Tov1 )
.
(1 Pm )(Tidle + Ts ) + Pm (T + Ts )

(6)

Using equations (4),(5) and (6), the total average of the overlapping time would be obtained as
Tov = Tov1 + Tov2 .
IV. DATA R ATE A NALYSIS

OF THE

(7)

S ECONDARY U SER

The data rate of the SU is proportional to the amount of time that the SU transmits without overlapping
with the PU. The data rate, Cs , of the SU is
Cs = K2 Tnov ,

(8)

where Tnov is the expected value of the non-overlapping time. Constant K2 denotes the data rate per
unit of the non-overlapping time and depends on factors such as modulation type and symbol duration
of the secondary user. The non-overlapping time occurs in the idle period of the PU. Like what we did
for evaluating the overlapping time, we have to compute the non-overlapping time for two scenarios. The
first scenario as shown in Figure 4(c), happens whenever the PU switches to its idle mode and the SU
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 7 of 19

is still transmitting because of a bad sensing result when the PU was busy. For low probabilities of miss
detection, the probability of having an incorrect sensing in the last T seconds of the PU busy period,
which causes this type of non-overlapping time, would be very small. Actually, with the same argument
we have made in the Appendix to obtain (16) and (17), the probability of the occurrence of this event
would be

P1 = 1

(1 Pm )

"

1
Tidle

+1

1
TON

1
exp( TON
)

1 exp( TON )

d1 ,

(9)

whenever T Tidle and would be

P2 =

Tidle

"

2
T

Pm

+1

TON

2
exp( TON
)

idle
exp( TTON
)

d2 ,

(10)

whenever T < Tidle . Both of the equations (9) and (10) have very small values for a low probability of
miss detection. Therefore, with an accurate approximation, the non-overlapping time value causing from
a miss detection of a busy channel, would be near zero. The values of (9) and (10) also show that for
low miss detection probabilities, it is high probable that the SU idle period occurs within the switching
instant of the PU from busy status to idle status. Suppose a correct sensing occurs somewhere in the last

Tidle seconds of the PU busy period. Let 3 denote the time in which this correct sensing happens before

the ending of the PU busy period. The distribution of 3 is

1
TON

exp( T

ON
T
1exp( T idle )
ON

for 0 3 Tidle . A portion of

the SU idle period occupies some time within the idle duration of the PU. We denote the average value
of this portion of time by . It can be easily verified that

= E(Tidle 3 )(1 Pi ),

(11)

where, the value of Pi (i is either 1 or 2)is determined by (9) or (10). Recall that we assumed that the

value of Tidle is smaller than TOFF or TON . Hence, we didnt consider the case in which Tidle 3 may

occupy the whole TOFF . Manipulating E(Tidle 3 ), (11) can be derived as

= (Tidle TON + Tidle

exp(Tidle /TON )

)(1 Pi ).
1 exp(Tidle /TON )

(12)

For a low probability of miss detection Pi

= 0 and we have

= Tidle TON + Tidle

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

exp(Tidle /TON )
,
1 exp(Tidle /TON )

(13)

Page 8 of 19

which is independent of T .
During the idle period of the PU, a combination of the SU sensing and idle intervals (Ts + Tidle )occurs
with the probability (Pf a ) and a combination of a sensing interval with the transmission length (Ts + T )
occurs with the probability 1 Pf a . Therefore, the mean value of the non-overlapping time which is the
average of the time occupied by the SU transmission time during TOFF , can be approximately obtained
as
Tnov = T

(1 Pf a )(TOFF )
.
Pf a (Tidle + Ts ) + (1 Pf a )(T + Ts )

(14)

From 14, it can be verified that the maximum value of the non-overlapping time is TOFF , which shows
that the longer the idle period of the SU is, the smaller the maximum achievable data rate of the SU is.
V. S IMULATION R ESULTS
In order to verify our analysis, we have performed a simulation of the system using MATLAB. The
simulation is based on the system model described in Figures 1 and 2 for the primary and secondary
users. The two primary and secondary systems were run simultaneously for a long period of time and
the average overlapping and non-overlapping durations were computed. Figure 5 shows the users busy
overlapping time versus the SU transmission period for four different values of the SU idle intervals. The
mean values of the PU channel idle and busy periods are assumed to be TON = 1 and TOFF = 2 which
gives the ratio of 66% for the idle period. The false alarm and miss detection probabilities of the sensing
process are assumed to be respectively 0.1 and 0.2. The sensing duration of the SU is set to 0.01. The
four different values of the SU idle period are 0, 0.1,0.2 and 0.3. Using the same system parameters,
Figure 6 shows the non-overlapping time of the SU busy period versus the SU transmission duration.
In both figures, the dashed lines are the simulation results and the solid lines are the numerical results
based on the equations (7) and (14). The simulation results evidently show the accuracy of the derived
performance equations.
VI. I NFLUENCE

OF THE SYSTEM PARAMETERS ON THE PERFORMANCE METRICS

In this section, we investigate the effect of the SU transmission and idle durations as our two main
intrusive system parameters on the performance metrics. The influence of the SU idle duration on the
system performance is our main point of interest. Figures 7 and 8 show the normalized overlapping and
non-overlapping times of the system versus the SU idle duration for different values of the channel sensing
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 9 of 19

10

error. The overlapping and non-overlapping times are normalized to their maximum values TON and TOFF .
In these figures the SU has a constant transmission time T = 0.2. The PU system parameters are set to
TON = 1 and TOFF = 2. The overall behaviors of Figures 7 and 8 do not change with the variations of
TON , TOFF or T . As shown in Figure 7, in the perfect sensing case (Pf a = Pm = 0), the users overlapping
duration is constant for all values of the SU idle times (Tidle ). On the other hand, in the same zero sensing
error case, the longer the SU idle length is, the smaller the amount of the non-overlapping time is (Figure
8). Hence, the introduction of the SU idle period does not have any effect on the interference amount on
the PU while it decreases the SU data rate. Therefore, in the ideal perfect sensing case, it would be better
considering a scheme without an idle period for the SU(Tidle = 0) as discussed in [6], [7]. The situation
however changes when we consider the possibility of error in sensing the channel. As it is obvious from
Figure 7, in the imperfect channel sensing cases, for near zero SU idle length, the overlapping time period
is relatively high and close to the maximum value (TON ) which results in a great amount of interference
on the PU. The introduction of a non-zero SU idle period, causes the interference to fall rapidly to a lower
amount. Although, we lose a small amount in the SU data rate whenever the SU idle period increases
(Figure 8), we show in the next section that there is an optimal non-zero value for the SU idle period
when the SU channel sensing is imperfect. A typical behavior of the performance metrics respect to the
SU transmission time, is also shown in the Figures 5 and 6 from the simulation section. It is clear that
the longer the SU transmission time is, the more the interference amount on the PU and the bit rate of
the SU would be. This is true for perfect or imperfect channel sensing and for any length of the SU idle
time.
VII. O PTIMIZATION

OF THE SECONDARY USER TRANSMISSION AND IDLE PERIODS

In this section, we discuss how to find the optimum values for the SU transmission period (T ) and the
SU idle length (Tidle ) for given system parameters. We consider two optimization problems. In the first
optimization problem, we find the values of T and Tidle which maximize the SU data rate while keeping the
average interference amount on the PU below a specified threshold. In the second optimization problem,
we investigate the values of T and Tidle which minimize the interference amount on the PU while achieving
a given SU data rate. Hence, The first optimization problem can be stated as maximizing Tnov with respect
to T and Tidle subject to the constraint that Tov = Tovth where Tovth is the threshold value set for
the overlapping time. Similarly, the second optimization problem can be stated as minimizing Tov with
respect to Tidle and T subject to the constraint that Tnov = Tnovth where Tnovth is the desired SU
Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 10 of 19

11

data rate. Following the expressions derived in sections 3 and 4, it can be verified that solving these
optimization problems analytically is not tractable and we need to evaluate the optimum values of T and
Tidle numerically.
To solve the first optimization problem, we use equations (4)-(7) and the given overlapping time threshold,
Tovth , to find the values of T and Tidle which satisfy the equality Tov = Tovth . For any value of Tidle , we
numerically search for the value of T such that Tov = Tovth . Figure 9(a) shows the result of this search
for Tovth = 0.2 and Tovth = 0.4. The system parameters are set to TON = 1, TOFF = 2, Ts = 0.01 and
Pf a = Pm = 0.1. In the next step of solving our optimization problem, for each pair of (T, Tidle ) presented
in Figure 9, we can calculate the corresponding non-overlapping time, Tnov , using (14). Figure 9(b) shows
Tnov as a function of Tidle for the same system parameters. As it can be seen, there is an optimum Tidle ,
where, the value of the non-overlapping time is maximum. The corresponding value of T of this optimal
Tidle can be obtained using Figure 9(a). As a typical example, in Figure 9(b), for Tovth = 0.4, the optimum
value of Tidle is 0.055, with the corresponding T value 0.273 from Figure 9(b). Hence, in this case, the
pair (T, Tidle ) of the SU parameters which is optimal for the system performance, would be (0.273, 0.055).
Similarly, in order to solve the second optimization problem for the same system parameters, first, by
using (14), we find the pairs of (T, Tidle ) which satisfy the equality Tnov = Tnovth . The result is shown
in Figure 10(a). The corresponding overlapping time of each of these pairs is calculated form equations
(4)-(7) and shown in Figure 10(b). The value of Tidle and its corresponding value of T which minimize
the overlapping period are our desired optimal SU system parameters. In Figure 10, for Tnovth = 1.7,
the pair Tidle = 0.082 and T = 0.133 result in the minimum overlapping time between the users busy
periods.
We have also investigated the variation of the optimum SU idle length with the variation of the probabilities of error in sensing in Figure 11.The optimum value of the SU idle length decreases for higher
probabilities of false alarm and increases for higher probabilities of miss detection. This is because, for
a fixed probability of miss detection, with a higher false alarm probability, the SU loses its transmission
opportunity and a higher idle period leads to a lower data rate without any effective impact on the
interference amount on the PU. On the other hand, for a fixed probability of false alarm, with a higher
miss detection probability, the SU idle length avoids more interference on the PU due to the sensing miss
detection without degrading the SU data rate.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 11 of 19

12

VIII. C ONCLUSION
We analyzed a practical overlay cognitive radio system. We considered a medium access layer scheme
in which the secondary user imperfectly senses the channel and transmits data if it senses a free channel or
goes through an idle interval otherwise. The analytical expressions of the interference on the primary user
and the overall data rate of the secondary user were derived and compared with the simulations results. The
results showed that introducing the idle interval for the secondary user improves the system performance
in imperfect sensing. We described algorithms to find the optimum secondary user transmission and idle
durations which minimize the interference on the primary user in order to achieve a particular secondary
user data rate or maximize the data rate of the secondary user while keeping the interference on the
primary user below a specified threshold.
A PPENDIX
O BTAINING

THE INTERFERENCE OCCURRENCE PROBABILITIES ,

P1

AND

P2

In the case of collision type I, we have zero interference on the PU, if we have a series of one or more
than one incorrect sensing outcomes instantly before the PU switches to its busy mode. This series of
imperfect sensing outcomes may start exactly T seconds before the PU idle time ends, may start after
the last non interfering transmission of the SU or may start at the beginning of the PU idle duration (in
case that 1 < T ). Our goal is to evaluate the probability of the occurrence of this event. Suppose the
length of the SU transmission time is greater than its idle period (T Tidle ). We assume that the bunch

of wrong sensing outcomes start at a point x, which is 1 seconds before the beginning of the PU busy

period. Hence 1 = 1 x. Since 0 1 T , its cumulative distribution function can be derived as

P (1 x < 1 |1 x < T ) =

1
1 exp( TOFF
)

T
1 exp( TOFF
)

(15)

This result can also be obtained using the memoryless property

of the exponential distribution. Therefore,

the probability density function of 1 would be

1
)
OFF
1exp( T T )
OFF

1
TOFF

exp( T

for 0 6 1 6 T . According to our scenario,

all the sensing outcomes in 1 interval are wrong. Each incorrect sensing of the SU results in an idle
h i

1
duration Tidle . The number of incorrect sensing outcomes during 1 , is Tidle
+ 1, where [] is the integer
part of the fraction. Hence, the probability of no occurrence of the series of wrong sensing outcomes

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 12 of 19

13

event or the probability of the interference event would be simply

P1 = 1

"

1
Tidle

Pf a

+1

TOFF

1
exp( TOFF
)

1 exp( TOFF )

d1 .

(16)

Now we consider the case in which the SU transmission time length is smaller than its idle duration
(T < Tidle ). In this case, if we have a wrong sensing at most Tidle seconds before the PU idle period ends,
we have zero interference on the PU. Therefore, the interference on the PU occurs, if we have a series of
one or more than one successful sensing outcomes which extend to the PU busy time. We assume that

this series of correct sensing outcomes start at a point y, which is 2 seconds before the beginning of the

PU busy period. Clearly, we have 2 = 1 y and 0 2 Tidle . Based on the aforementioned argument

and the memoryless property of the exponential distribution, the probability density function of 2 would
be

2
1
exp(
)
TOFF
TOFF
Tidle
1exp( T
)
OFF

for 0 6 2 6 Tidle . Therefore, in this case, with the same discussions as the previous

case, the probability of having the series of correct sensing outcomes before the beginning of the PU busy
time or the probability of having the interference on the PU would be derived as
P2 =

Tidle

(1 Pf a )
0

"

2
T

+1

1
TOFF

2
exp( TOFF
)
idle
exp( TTOFF
)

d2 .

(17)

R EFERENCES
[1] S. Haykin, Cognitive radio: Brain-empowered wireless communications, IEEE J. Selected. Areas of Communications, vol.23, no.2, pp.
201-220, Feb 2005.
[2] Hamdi K, Wei Zhang, Ben Letaief K, Power Control in Cognitive Radio Systems Based on Spectrum Sensing Side Information,
IEEE International Conference on communications, pp. 24-28, June 2007.
[3] Huang S, Liu X, Ding Z, Opportunistic spectrum access in cognitive radio networks, Proceedings of the 27th IEEE Conference on
Computer Communications, pp. 1427 - 1435, April 2008.
[4] Urgaonkar R, Neely M.J, Opportunistic Scheduling with Reliability Guarantees in Cognitive Radio Networks, Proceedings of the
27th IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pp.1301 - 1309, April 2008.
[5] Yang, Q. Xu, S. Kwak, K.S, Outage Performance of Cognitive Radio with Multiple Receive Antennas, IEICE TRANSACTION ON
COMMUNICATIONS, vol. E91-B, pp.85-94, Jan 2008.
[6] Bastami B.A, Saberinia E, Optimal Transmission Time of Secondary User in an Overlay Cognitive Radio System, Electronics and
Telecommunications Quarterly, Vol 55, issue 2, 2009.
[7] Bastami B.A, Saberinia E, Optimal Transmission Time of Secondary User in an Overlay Cognitive Radio System, Proceedings of
the 2009 Sixth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations, pp. 1269-1274, 2009.
[8] Huang S, Liu X, Ding Z, Optimal Transmission Strategies for Dynamic Spectrum Access in Cognitive Radio Networks, IEEE
Transactions on Mobile Computing, Vol 8, issue 12,pp. 1636 - 1648 , Dec 2009.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 13 of 19

14

[9] Huang S, Liu X, Ding Z, Optimal Sensing-Transmission Structure for Dynamic Spectrum Access,Proceedings of INFOCOM 2009.
The 28th Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE , pp. 2295 - 2303 , 2009.
[10] Huang S, Liu X, Ding Z, Opportunistic Spectrum Access in Cognitive Radio Networks,Proceedings of INFOCOM 2008. The 27th
Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE , pp. 1427 - 1435 , 2008.
[11] Srinivasa S, Jafar S.A, Soft Sensing and Optimal Power Control for Cognitive Radio, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference,
pp. 1380-1384, Nov 2007.
[12] Srinivasa S, Jafar S.A, Cognitive Radio Networks: How Much Spectrum Sharing is Optimal?, IEEE Global Telecommunications
Conference, pp. 3149-3153, Nov 2007.
[13] Jeon W.S, Jeong D.G, An efficient quiet period management scheme for cognitive radio systems, IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, vol.7, issue.2, pp.505-509, February 2008
[14] Q. Zhao, L. Tong, A. Swami, Decentralized cognitive Mac for Dynamic spectrum access, First IEEE International Symposium on
New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, DySPAN 2005, pp.224232, Nov 2005.
[15] J. Hillenbrand, T.A. Weiss, F.K. Jondral, Calculation of detection and false alarm probabilities in spectrum pooling systems, IEEE
Communications. Letters, vol.9, no.4, pp.349351, April 2005.
[16] R. Etkin, A. Parekh, D. Tse, Spectrum sharing for unlicensed bands, First IEEE International Symposium on Dynamic Spectrum
Access Networks, DySPAN,pp.251-258, 2005.
[17] Q. Zhao, S. Geirhofer, L. Tong, B. M. Sadler, Optimal dynamic spectrum access via periodic channel sensing, in Proc. Wireless
Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), 2007.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 14 of 19

15

Fig. 3.

Typical time lines of the primary and secondary users.

Fig. 4.

Joint timing between the primary and the secondary user.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 15 of 19

16

1
0.9
T

0.8

=0

idle

0.7

Tov

0.6
0.5
0.4

Tidle=0.1

0.3

Tidle=0.2
T

=0.3

idle

0.2
0.1
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2
T

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

Fig. 5. The values of the overlapping time versus the SU transmission duration for various SU idle periods. The simulation and analytical
results are respectively shown by the dashed and the solid lines. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01, Pf a = 0.1,
Pm = 0.2 . The four different values of the SU idle period are 0, 0.1,0.2 and 0.3.

2
1.8
Tidle=0

1.6

Tidle=0.1
Tidle=0.2

1.4

Tidle=0.3

Tnov

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2
T

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

Fig. 6. The values of the non-overlapping time versus the SU transmission duration for various SU idle periods. The simulation and
analytical results are respectively shown by the dashed and the solid lines. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01,
Pf a = 0.1, Pm = 0.2 . The four different values of the SU idle period are 0, 0.1,0.2 and 0.3.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 16 of 19

17

0.9
0.8
0.7

Tov/TON

0.6
P =0.2
e

0.5

P =0.15
e

0.4

P =0.1
e
0.3
Pe=0.05
0.2
Pe=0

0.1
0

0.05

0.1
Tidle

0.15

0.2

Fig. 7. The normalized overlapping time versus the SU idle duration for different values of the channel sensing error. The SU transmission
period is set to T = 0.2. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01, Pf a = Pm = Pe .

0.95

Pe=0
P =0.05
e

0.9
P =0.1
Tnov/TOFF

Pe=0.15

0.85

P =0.2
e

0.8

0.75

0.7

0.05

0.1
T

0.15

0.2

idle

Fig. 8. The normalized non-overlapping time versus the SU idle duration for different values of the channel sensing error. The SU
transmission period is set to T = 0.2. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01, Pf a = Pm = Pe .

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 17 of 19

18

(a)
0.8
Tovth=0.4

0.6

Tovth=0.2

0.4
0.2
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2
Tidle

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

(b)
2

Tnov

1.8
1.6
1.4
0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2
T

idle

Fig. 9. (a) The pairs of the SU idle and transmission periods for fixed overlapping times.(b) The non-overlapping duration versus the SU
idle period for fixed overlapping times. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01, Pf a = Pm = 0.1.

(a)
0.8
Tnovth=1.7

0.6
T

Tnovth=1.8
0.4
0.2
0

0.05

0.1
T

0.15

0.2

0.15

0.2

idle

(b)
0.8

Tov

0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0.05

0.1
T

idle

Fig. 10. (a) The pairs of the SU idle and transmission periods for fixed non-overlapping times.(b) The overlapping duration versus the SU
idle period for fixed non-overlapping times. The system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01, Pf a = Pm = 0.1.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 18 of 19

19

optimum SU idle time

0.4

0.3

0.2
0.2

0.1

0
0.2

0.1
0.15

0.1

0.05
P

Pm

fa

Fig. 11. The optimum value of the SU idle length versus the sensing probability of false alarm and probability of miss detection. The
system parameters are TON = 1,TOFF = 2 ,Ts = 0.01.

Downloaded from engine.lib.uwaterloo.ca on 20 July 2012

Page 19 of 19