ASSIGNMENT OF CHANNELS IN CELLULAR NETWORK USING EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHM A Dissertation Synopsis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for

the award of degree of MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY In ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING Submitted By Vijay Saini (Roll No. 11001503033) Under Guidance of

Mr. Mridul Chawla

Assistant Professor DCRUST ,Murthal

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING DEENBANDHU CHHOTU RAM UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SONIPAT-131039 1

Abstract
The availability of frequency channels is limited in mobile cellular communication systems. So the available frequency channels should be assigned in cellular cells with optimum efficiency. A new algorithm, firefly algorithm (FA)[1] is proposed here to assign the frequency channels to the cells. The cost function has been optimized using Firefly Algorithm (FA). Such assignments are made so that interference between calls is minimized, while demands for channels in each cell are satisfied. The proposed frequency channel allocation scheme has been studied with different number of channels and different number of cells, and the results are promising.

1. Introduction
Now a days mobile cellular communication have become more popular. Number of mobile users is increasing day by day. But the frequency spectrum is limited to meet the demands of increasing number of mobile users. So the channel assignment problem has become an important issue to be solved. Several techniques have been used to solve the channel assignment problem[2,3,4]. There are three types of schemes used in channel assignment problem : 1. Fixed Channel Assignment (FCA): In this scheme[4], each cell in the network is permanently assigned a set of channels, avoiding interference. 2. Dynamic Channel Assignment (DCA): In this scheme [5], all the channels are kept in a central pool so that every cell has access to every channel.channels are assigned to users as per demand depending on interference constraints.

3. Hybrid Channel Assignment (HCA): In this scheme [6], the set of available channels is divided into two parts, one of which is allocated to the network according to the FCA scheme and the other as per DCA scheme. Here, i propose a DCA scheme that employs Firefly Algorithm. In the DCA scheme, whenever a new call arrives, the entire assignment of channel is rearranged based on interference constraints.

2. Literature Review Till now many methods have been employed to solve this channel assignment problem. This problem is a real time problem, means that at every instant of time users are entering into the new cells and therefore 2

new allocation of channels has to be done such that three constraints must be satisfied. As time is progressing new heuristic algorithms are coming which can be applied to this particular type of problem. These algorithms are problem specific, means that, an algorithm is good to solve a problem need not hold good to solve another problem. Our aim is to allocate channels in the cells according to traffic requirement in the cells meeting interference constraints within minimum time such that no blocking of calls occurs. Different algorithms allocate channels in the cells in different time and also as the complexity of problem increases different algorithms gives different results. Some of the algorithms are as follows: 1. Genetic Algorithm 2. Particle Swarm Optimization 3. Artificial Neural network 4. Simulated Annealing 5. Bio-Geography Based Optimization 6. Tabu Search Method According to Mithun Chakraborty, (2005) :A PSO based approach is considered to solve the CAP .Problem of allocating channels to users in all the cells satisfying the above three constraints is considered to be NP-complete, signifying that as the size of the problem grows, the calculation time grows not in a polynomial way but rather in an exponential way. It is mentioned that the channel assignment problem is equivalent to graph coloring problem, when only cochannel constraints are considered, that is the entries in C matrix is either 0 or 1. Obviously the actual channel assignment problem is more complex. Different cost functions bear the different weight according to their importance. According to Srinivas Pinagapany and A V Kulkarni (1999):A genetic algorithm approach is considered and relevant results are shown. A compatibility matrix is generated based on the interference constraints and this compatibility matrix is compared with the solution matrices generated using Genetic Algorithm. Number of violations after comparison will lead to interference cost. A network at any time t is considered. 3

According to Goutam Chakraborty and Basabi Chakraborty (1999):A genetic algorithm approach is considered and relevant results are shown. Most of the algorithms for the channel assignment problem assume that the number of carriers is fixed (say K) and is known a-priori. K is sometimes calculated using some heuristics and is usually much larger than the optimum value (minimum bandwidth required). According to Kate A. Smith(1998):The algorithm by passing through generations (in case of GA ). The success of GA approach, as in, strongly depends on the proper choice of the value of mutation probability, whose right value is different for different size of the problem. Our method that is based on genetic algorithm (GA) is inspired by recombination accomplished with electromagnetic constraints with using crossover operator that is GA operator. According to Jae-Sook Im (1995) :A Genetic approach and Neural approach is considered and a relevant comparison between the two is studied. According to X.S. Yang (2010):All concepts of Algorithms are explained. Firefly algorithm is developed by X.S.Yang.

3. Channel Assignment Problem (CAP) and Assumptions 3.1 CAP Constraints

In a CAP whole geographical area is divided into a number of smaller areas called cells. Each cell has a base station providing service to the users in that cell. Whenever a user in a cell makes a call, it must be provided with a channel, a channel is nothing but a pair of frequency band (uplink and downlink) on the available frequency spectrum. In the mobile cellular network, Interference is said to be occurred when two cells use the same channel and/or when two cells use channels adjacent to each other on the spectrum and/or when two channels are assigned to the same cell; these types of interference are called Co-channel Interference, Adjacent Channel Interference and

Co-site Interference respectively [5]. Interference lower down the signal-to-noise ratio at the receiving end, leading to the deterioration of quality of service. The interference is minimized if the following three constraints are satisfied: Co-channel Constraint (CCC): The same channel cannot be simultaneously assigned to a pair of cells unless there is a minimum geographical separation between cells. Adjacent Channel Constraint (ACC): Adjacent channels cannot be assigned to a pair of cells unless there is a minimum distance between channel frequencies. Co-site Constraint (CSC): A pair of channels can be assigned in the same cell only if there is a minimum separation in frequency between them. These constraints are called Electromagnetic Compatibility Constraints (EMC). EMC constraints together with the traffic demand constraint, are known as hard constraints. Traffic Demand Constraint: The number of channels assigned in each cell must be equal to the number of channels demanded in that cell. A solution to the CAP must satisfy the hard constraints.

3.2 CAP Assumptions

1. The geographical cells are assumed to be hexagonal in shape and placed in a nonoverlapping queue. 2. I consider the start-up situation where no channels are assigned to the cells initially. Call is served only after a channel is requested in the cell. 3. Total number of channels demanded in cells is assumed to be equal or greater than the number of channels available for allocation. 4. A single queue of hexagonal cells is considered and all available channels are to be assigned to these cells based on traffic and three constraints.

4. Channel Assignment Problem Formulation

4.1. The Allocation Matrix , Interference matrix and Demand Vector

Let n denote the number of cells in a system and m be the total number of channels. Then, for this system, an m x n matrix is called as allocation matrix A [7], Allocation matrix A can be written as

i=1,2,..,m ; k=1,2,,n
Each row of Aij represents cell i. Number of 1s in i cell. In CAP interference matrix leads to interference cost. Interference matrix is derived from the allocation matrix A. An n x n matrix is called as interference matrix interfij .
th

row represents the number of channels assigned in that

i=1,2,..,m
Demand vector dv represents the number of channels demanded or no. of users in each cell. It is a single row vector having n number of elements. ith element of dv vector represents number of users demanding frequency channels in ith cell.

dv={d1, d2, d3,, di, .. dm} where

m=total no. of cells th di=i cell demanding di no. of channels

4.2 Formulation of Cost Function

We have used the cost function or objective function derived from the interference matrix interfii and cost derived from traffic demand constraint. Interf_cost = CSC_cost + ACC_cost We have to minimize the interf_cost. Where

Where

Where i=1,2,..,m ; j=1,2,,m

Where

Where i

Though the number of channels assigned to each cell is equal to the no. of channels demanded yet there is a possibility that the sum of no. of channels demanded can be more than total no. of frequency channels available. So there is a possibility of call blocking in any cell. Therefore we have considered traffic demand constraint cost.

total_cost = w1( interf_cost) + w2( traf_cost) where w1 and w2 are weight factors [8] showing the importance of particular cost. w1=8000 and w2=1 is considered . This total_cost is minimized using PSO Algorithm and the allocation matrix for minimum cost is selected as final solution matrix.

5. Review on PSO Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)

5.1.1 Swarm Intelligence Particle swarm optimization (PSO) was developed by Kennedy and Eberhart in 1995, based on swarm behaviour such as fish and bird schooling in nature. Many algorithms such as ant colony algorithms and virtual ant algorithms use the behaviour of the so-called swarm intelligence. Particle swarm optimization may have some similarities with genetic algorithms and ant algorithms, but it is much simpler because it does not use mutation/crossover operators as used in GA. Instead, it uses the real-number randomness and the global communication among the swarm particles. This algorithm searches the space of an objective function by adjusting the trajectories of individual agents, called particles, as these trajectories form piecewise paths in a quasi-stochastic manner. The movement of a swarming particle consists of two major components: a stochastic component and a deterministic component. Each particle is attracted toward the position of the current global best g* and its own best location x* in history, while at the same time it has a tendency to move randomly. When a particle finds a location that is better than any previously found locations, then it updates it as the new current best for particle i. There is a current best for all n particles at any time t during iterations. The aim is to find the global best among all the current best solutions until the objective no longer improves or after a certain number of iterations. The movement of particles is represented in Figure 5.1 where x* is the current best for particle i, and g* min {f(xi)} for (i = 1,2, ...,n) is the current global best.

Figure 5.1 : Schematic representation of the motion of a particle in PSO, moving towards the global best g* and the current best x* for each particle i. [2]

5.1.2 PSO Algorithm The essential steps of the particle swarm optimization can be summarized as the pseudo code shown in Figure. Let Xi and Vi be the position vector and velocity for particle i, respectively. The new velocity vector is determined by the following formula: [ Where and ] [ ] (5.1)

are two random vectors, and each entry taking the values between 0 and 1. The Hadamard is defined as the entry wise product, that is [ ] . The

product of two matrices

parameters a and are the learning parameters or acceleration constants, which can typically be taken as, say, .

The initial locations of all particles should distribute relatively uniformly so that they can cover over most regions, which is especially important for multimodal problems. The initial velocity of a particle can be taken as zero, that is . The new position can then be updated by (5.2) Although vi can be any values, it is usually bounded in some range [0,Vmax].

Particle Swarm Optimization Objective function f(x), x = (xi ,....,xp)T Initialize locations xi and velocity vi of n particles. Find g* from min{f(x1) ,..., f(xn)} (at t = 0) while ( criterion ) t = t + 1 (pseudo time or iteration counter) for loop over all n particles and all p dimensions Generate new velocity it+1 Calculate new locations xit+1 = xit + it+1 Evaluate objective functions at new locations xit+1 Find the current best for each particle xi* end for Find the current global best g* end while Output the final results xi* and g* Figure 5.2 : Pseudo code for PSO [1]

10

Initialize Program Parameters

Figure 5.3 : Flow-Chart for PSO Program

Generation of Population of Random Solution Matrix Meeting CCC

ite=ite + 1

Update Matrix to meet Demand Constraint in each solution Matrix Find difference between demand and actual assigned channelsin each cell i.e. gives Traffic_cost Find interference Matrix (i.e. CSC+ACC) from each solution matrix Find sum of each interference matrix i.e. gives inter_cost Find Total_cost for each solution matrix Total_cost= interf_cost + Traffic_cost

Save the solution matrix having minimum Total_cost

For graph purpose min. cost with corresponding ite is saved

NO

If present min. < global min.

YES

Replace global mimimum with present minimum

Change location of Particles (i.e. solution matrix) according to PSO expression

NO

ite maximum limit crosses

YES

Saved solution matrix with minimum cost is the Required Channel assignment Matrix Display the Graph showing decreasing of cost with every iteration

11