1

Non-Preemptive Queueing-Based Performance
Analysis Of Dynamic Spectrum Access For Vehicular
Communication System Over TV White Space

Mst. Najnin Sultana
Graduate School of IT & Telecommunications,
Inha University,
Incheon, South Korea
Naj250@gmail.com



Kyung Sup Kwak
Graduate School of IT & Telecommunications,
Inha University,
Incheon, South Korea
kskwak@inha.ac.kr



Abstract--- Recently Television White Spaces are used without
license according to FCC rule. It is based on dynamically
selection of available TV spectrum (white spaces). It gives a
possibility of new sets of applications. In vehicular wireless
communication system, these white spaces can easily be used on
an opportunistic base. To model a multi-access multiuser
architecture and analyze network performances in both wired
and wireless system queueing theory has been massively used. In
this paper we modeled a vehicular dynamic spectrum access
(VDSA) system by using queueing theory which uses vacant TV
channels for communication. Dynamically assigned allowed
available channels are modeled as servers. To efficient use of
these limited number of channels we defined some non-
preemptive priority classes among users. The availability of
servers is occurred in a time-location phenomenon. This paper
examined the feasibility analysis of vehicular dynamic spectrum
access performance through TV white spaces via multi server
multi priority non-preemptive queueing theory. Both M/M/m and
M/G/m models are employed to evaluate the probability of all
channels are busy, the amount of channel utilizations by different
priority class users and also to calculate the transmission
latencies.

Keywords--- VDSA, Non-Preemptive Queueing, M/M/m, M/G/m,
UHF TV Channels.
I. INTRODUCTION
Intelligent transportation promises the convergence of
modern information technology (IT), communication
infrastructure, and sensing technology with standard
transportation systems to improve safety, reduce transportation
times, minimize vehicle wear, and optimize fuel consumption.
Applications of ITS range from vehicle-based collision
avoidance to general traffic monitoring and toll collection.
Dedicated short range communication (DSRC) is a robust
communication system to encompass all such vehicle-to-
vehicle, vehicle-to-infrastructure communication [1]. In 1999,
FCC allocated 75 MHz of spectrum in the 5.9GHz band for
DSRC. The standard for this system is IEEE802.11p. 5.9
DSRC provides data rate up to 27 Mbps and covers the range
from 100 to 1000 meters [2]. In addition, DSRC has a new
interest in vehicular-based communication in the 700 MHz
band. The 700MHz frequency band offers a significant
coverage advantage over current 5.9 GHz DSRC
implementations. At an identical transmitter power, a low-
frequency signal will have greater range than a high-frequency
signal due to 2 Journal of Electrical and Computer
Engineering decreased free space attenuation and lower
absorption by various building materials and obstructions [3].
Dynamic spectrum access (DSA) was first demonstrated in
2006 by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) and Shared Spectrum Company (SSC) of Vienna,
VA, which enables users of virtually any modern radio device
to utilize dynamic spectrum access techniques and thereby
dramatically improve spectrum efficiency, communications
reliability, and deployment time. A quantitative assessment of
DSA was made in [5].
Several licensed frequency bands could facilitate DSA-
based vehicular communication networks. But the UHF
television frequency range has been identified as a primary
candidate frequently due to its relatively static frequency
channel usage by incumbent TV broadcasters. The band
ranges from 470 to 698 MHz (Channel 14 through Channel
51) [6].
The FCC has recently explored the use of unused 700MHz
spectrum for white space applications. These are unlicensed
applications that actively avoid interference with licensed
applications in the same band. On February 17, 2009, the FCC
released the final rules for “Unlicensed Operation in the TV
Broadcast Bands” [7]. TV Band Devices (TVBDs) are divided
into two categories: fixed and personal/portable.
Personal/portable devices are restricted to channels 21 – 51
(except Channel 37) and are allowed a maximum EIRP of 100
mW on non-adjacent channels and 40 mW on adjacent
channels. Channel 37 is used for vehicular communication.
For portable device, a Cognitive Radio Standard has declared
in these channels [8].
In order to utilize vacant UHF TV channels for vehicular
communications, all vehicles must follow the rules defining
TV band devices (TVBDs) published by FCC on November
14, 2008. The vacant channels in this frequency range are
shared among wireless microphones and TVBDs [9].
To model multiple access schemes or transmission delay in
a communication system, queueing theory has been
extensively used [10, 11]. In Cognitive Radio system, some
works have been made based on queueing theory to calculate
throughput and delay and dynamic channel allocation [12, 13].
The study of queueing models with service interruptions is
very old fashion. Nowadays, different kinds of traffic models
have been employed in queueing system to model the primary
users who have the license the spectrum and the secondary
users who are unlicensed but authorized users use the vacant
channels opportunistically. In [14], an M/G/1 queue is used to
model a system containing one primary user and multiple
secondary users, where the secondary users function as
cooperative forwarder for primary users. A multiserver-
multipriority preemptive model is employed in [15] where
43 978-1-4577-1177-0/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE ICUFN 2011
2

when among secondary users there are also some priorities.
When the higher priority secondary users enter the systems,
they treated as same as like primary users, the lower priorities
in service should be quit the channel. So, it increases the
transmission latencies for lower priority ones.
In [13] they used a dynamic learning algorithm (DSL) to
assign channel among users based on different utility
functions, delay deadlines, traffic priorities in Cognitive Radio
networks. A G/M/K/0 queueing model is employed in [16]
which multiplexed the arrival processes formed by primary
and secondary users. However, the total bandwidth is assumed
to be fixed here.
In this paper we applied multi-server, multi-class non-
preemptive queueing model to evaluate the quantitative
measure of the available resources through TV vacant
channels in the case of VDSA system. In [15], the authors
generated a spectral map of these white channels along I-90 in
the states of Massachusetts in America based on a geo-
location database approach. We use the same geo-location
database approach from [15] and set two priorities based on
arrival rate and service rate among secondary users but higher
priority users don’t preempt the lower ones.
The rest of the paper organized as follows. In section II we
model the VDSA system at the system level using queueing
theory. After that in III we give the exact and approximate
solutions for the different performance measurement
parameters. Section IV shows the corresponding results and
analysis of VDSA system in TV white bands along I-90.
Finally in section V we conclude our paper. MATLAB is used
as a source code and to analyze the system performance.
II. SYSTEM MODEL
For traveling vehicles across location-varying vacant TV
channels, to assign vacant spectrums dynamically is an
opportunistic multiple access scenarios shown in Fig.1.
To use UHF TV channels, instead of the entire UHF TV
range, the authors in [6] selected 600 - 750 MHz and captured
4 sweeps per minute on average along the length of I-90 • The
sweep index increases from 1 on the top left corner of Fig. 2
and indicates the traveling along 1-90 in the state of MA from
west to east. The western most point in their study was West
Stockbridge, MA and the eastern most point was Boston, MA.
Fig. 2 shows the spectral temporal database of available
channels.
To predict the performance measure based on this spectral-
temporal database and the estimated number of cars in the
proximity we consider a time-location snapshot when the
vehicles are travelling along the highways instead of the total
hours of driving. Because depending on location as well as
time in each direction the number of cars per kilometer will be
varied. Each time-location snapshot is about one minute in
time and one kilometer in distance. Here, performance
measures are made on a transmission of a typical packet.
We consider the transmission range is as same as defined
in DSRC, 300 meters. And it is assumed that at each instance
the bandwidth requirements for all types of communications
including both point-to-point and broadcast and also vehicle-
to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications are
same.




Fig.1. Opportunistic vehicular spectrum access in vacant TV channels.

Fig.2. TV Channel availability at different locations along I-90 in the
state of Massachusetts, USA [6].
After some assumption and abstractions a vehicular
communication system can be modeled as a virtual queueing
system. The queue is only used to approximate the process,
not representing a real entity. We don’t consider each vehicle
as a customer. Rather we consider a pair of communication
entities as a customer. A communication set is defined as the
set of transmitters and receivers performing wireless
transmission regardless the transmission is one-to-one, one-to-
many, or possibly multiple-to-multiple if cooperative
transmission is employed. The bandwidth request from each
communication set is considered as an entity that enters the
queue for service. Fig. 3 demonstrates the virtual queueing
system.
Then the available bandwidth resources within the
transmission range of the vehicular communication set are
modeled as server. There are 30 TV channels available in total
for access of portable TVBD. So, we consider 30 servers here.
Each server is assumed to handle one communication link at a
time.
Due to very short transmission time of a packet in compare
with snapshot; we assumed a static channel here. Within one
snapshot there is no service interruption is also considered
during the travelling location change with different TV
channel availability.
The transmission time of each communication link is
modeled as the service time of each communication set. The
response time of delivering a packet includes the transmission
time as well as waiting time when all channels are busy. Few
times are also spent during channel sensing and searching the
channel availability list.



44
3


Fig.3. Packet-based queueing model for VDSA in vacant UHF TV bands.
CSMA/CA with moderate traffic load is assumed to be
employed by the transceiver on each vehicle to prevent
collision. In the case of heavy load the performance of
CSMA/CA is not so good so it will not be give an accurate
result for VDSA multiple access system and may give an
overly optimistic prediction of performance measure. In the
case of light traffic load of data packets, the packet collision
can be avoided in a well manner in CSMA/CA, thus VDSA
multiple access system can be readily consider as a virtual
queue following a FCFS or based on different criteria priority
queue is also handled.
In this paper, in the queueing model we consider different
priority classes of users using the vacant bands. There is no
service interruption of lower priority when higher priority
customer enters the system and lower one is in service. Higher
priority customer should wait in particular queue assigned for
higher priority until the service completion of lower priority
user. After completion the service higher one enters in service
even though some lower priority customers are in their
assigned queue from earlier the higher one.
The services of secondary users are only stopped when
primary users demand that channels in which the services are
going on. But we avoid this topic here. We also not consider
any kind of interference, extensively long transmission delay,
and channel jamming.
That means we consider a multi server multi priority non-
preemptive model whose performance measures will be done
based on the average number of cars as well as the available
vacant UHF TV channels within the transmission range.
III. SOLUTIONS FOR THE QUEUEING MODEL
The basic model of multi server multi priority queue is
depicted in Fig. 4. It consists of two servers and there are only
two classes of customers. The heterogeneous priority structure
is constructed by giving class A non-preemptive priority over
class B on Si, while class B receives priority over class A on
S2. The service discipline within each class is FCFS. Both
arrival and service processes are stochastic processes with
class dependent parameters. We assume that the arrival
process is Poisson, with arrival rates λ
a
and λ
b
for class A and
Class B respectively. Consequently, the interarrival times are
exponentially distributed. It is also assumed that the service
times are exponentially distributed, with parameters 1/
a
and
1/
b
.
There are so many approaches to calculate the queue
length and waiting time for each class. Gail, Kao, Wagner et al
have studied multiserver non-preemptive model with two
priority classes [17, 18, 19]. Kao implemented a power–series
method for the two priority queues. Kella et al [20] calculated
the waiting time for non-preemptive priority M/M/m queue as
follows:


Fig. 4. The Basic model of priority queue (two classes-two servers).
w
¯
k
= (1 −P
ç
) +P
ç
(1-p
k
)y¯(s)
1-p
k
y¯(s)
(1)
where, γ be the length of time from an instant when all servers
are busy, an arbitrary customer enters service and there are no
class-a customers in queue, until the first moment there after
that the number of busy servers decreases to m-1 or a
customer from one of the classes k, k+1,…,n enters service.
The Laplace-Stieltjes transform (LST) [21] of γ is given by,

y¯(s) = E|c
-sy
]
= _s +z
u
+mp − |(s +z
u
+mp)
2
− 4z
u
mp]
1
2 _ (2z
u
)
-1

(2)
and P
Q
is the probability that all servers are busy,

P
ç
=
(mp)
m
m!(1-p)
j∑
(mp)
n
n!
+
(mp)
m
m!(1-p)
m-1
n=0
[
-1
(3)

and

p = z¡(mp) , p
k
= ∑ p
ì
k
ì=1
, z
u
= ∑ z
ì ì<k

Wagner applied matrix-analytic methods to calculate the
Laplace-Stieltjes Transform of the actual waiting time.
Leemans, Venkataramani et al. [22] considered the stationary
distribution of queue lengths and waiting times. They also
used three dimensional state spaces and applied a matrix-
geometric method to analyze the queue [23, 24]. Federgruen et
al [25] characterized the performance space of M/G/m non-
preemptive queueing system.
For M/M/m system, the average waiting time for different
priority classes customer [26],
w
k
=
p
k
P
Q
x
k
(1-p
k
)
(4)

where p
k
=
∑ x
i
N
i
k
i=1

.

Then the response time,

I
k
=
1
µ
+w
k
(5)

For M/G/1 multi priority system, the waiting time and the
response time are as follows:

w
k
=
∑ x
i
X
i
2 n
i=1
2(1-p
1
-⋯-p
k-1
)(1-p
1
-⋯-p
k
)
(6)

I
k
=
1
µ
k
+w
k
(7)

45
4

For multiple servers, the calculation of the mean residual
time R =
1
2
∑ z
ì
X
i
2 n
ì=1
is not so easy. But if the service times of
all priority classes are identically and exponentially
distributed, then we calculate R in a convenient way. If all
priority classes have exponentially distributed service times
with common mean 1/µ, then (6) have a closed form solution
with R =
P
Q

, where P
Q
is the probability of all channels are
busy.
Again, if we set higher priority to customers of short
service times, the average delay per customer tends to be
reduced. Then for a non-preemptive system with two customer
classes A and B, with respective arrival and service rates λ
A
,

A
and λ
B
, µ
B
, and if 
A >
µ
B
, then the average delay per
customer,

I =
x
A
1
A
+x
B
1
B
x
A
+x
B
(8)

is smaller when A is given priority over B than when B is
given priority over A.
IV. ANALYSIS OF VDSA IN VACANT UHF TV
CHANNELS
In this work, we use the data collected from Interstate I-90
in the state of Massachusetts shown in Fig.3 of [15]. The
information about the available bandwidth in vacant UHF TV
channels are extracted from Fig.5 of [6]. We reproduce the
average number of cars per kilometer along I-90 using Fig.
3(b) of [15] and again interpolate the samples which shown in
Fig. 5.
From Fig. 1 we can understand that most white channels
are adjacent to TV channels being used for broadcast. So, the
output power of portable devices in vacant channels adjacent
to TV broadcasting channels should keep under 40 mW.
It is assumed that the transmitting vehicle and the
receiving vehicle of a communication pair are separated by the
transmission range, 300 meters. So, any car within the 500
meters sensing the communication pair cannot use the same
channel. So, in a snapshot the number of cars increases to 1.3
times of the average number of cars per kilometer. As a
consequence the number of customers that is number of
communication set considered is about 65% of the total
number of cars per kilometer on I-90 in a snapshot.
Considering data rate for each higher priority customer is
800 kbps and for each lower priority customer is 400 kbps.
Average packet length is assumed of 500 bytes. We consider
moderate traffic load that means sub-urban area. So,
Okumura-Hata path loss model is used. Here, we use two
types of arrival rates of 20 messages/second and 60
messages/second for two priority classes with meaninterarrival
time of 100 ms. In this analysis, both M/M/m and M/G/m
models are used.
We considering about 20% customers have higher priority.
For the arrival rate of 20 message/second for priority 1
customers experience comparatively less blocking probability.
With arrival rate of 60 message/second priority 2 customers
experience higher probability to get the channels are busy. In
the area of Boston both classes have higher probability.
Fig.7 shows the maximum mean response time of 12 ms
for priority 2 customers at Boston in both M/M/m and M/G/m
FCFS models where both priority classes have same data rate
of 800 kbps. The maximum response time of 11 ms is again
obtained for the priority 2 customers where lower data rate of
400 kbps are assigned to priority 2 customers and higher data
rate of 800 kbps are assigned to priority 1 customers. For
priority 1 customers we also have higher mean response time
at Boston of about 10 ms but still lower than that of priority 2
customers. The second largest values for mean response time
are obtained at Auburn.
It is noticeable that for the same priority class of customer
we have equal mean response time for both M/M/m and
M/G/m model. It has been happened due to different waiting
times in both model are less comparable with transmission
time in non-preemptive queueing model as there is no service
interruption due to priority. We also see that when we use two
different service rates for two classes and given highest
priority to higher service rate reduces the average amount of
mean response time. In addition, if we compare these results
with [15] where preemptive queueing model is used, we see
that in our model we have too much reasonable mean response
time which meets the requirement of DSRC very well for all
cases and for all kinds of customers.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we analyze the feasibility of VDSA in vacant
UHF TV white space. We use multi-server multi-priority non-
preemptive queueing model to evaluate the system
performance. The models are applied to the vehicles traveling
along I-90 in the state of Massachusetts. The results show that
in suburban area, vacant TV band is a feasible resource for
vehicle communication which meets the requirements of
DSRC. Because we have much lower mean response time for
each class of customers in the suburban area, in a consequence
we can say that in area of much lower traffic load such as rural
area, this resource also be useful.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was supported by the MKE (The Ministry of
Knowledge Economy), Korea, under the ITRC (Information
Technology Research Center) support program supervised by
the NIPA (National IT Industry Promotion Agency) (NIPA-
2011-C1090-1121-0001).

Fig. 5. Average number of cars per kilometer along I-90.
46
5



Fig. 6. The Probability of all channel being busy observed by different classes customers.



Fig.7. The predicted response times for customers of two priority classes, for both
M/M/m, M/G/m (FCFS, with two different service rates for two priority classes) model.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Jiang, V. Taliwal, A. Meier, W. Holfelder, and R. Herrtwich, “Design
of 5.9 GHz DSRC-based vehicular safety communication,” IEEEWireless
Communications, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 36–43, 2006.
[2] “Standard Specification for Telecommunications and Information
Exchange Between Roadside and Vehicle Systems–5GHz Band Dedicated
Short Range Communications (DSRC) Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications,” ASTM Std. E2213-03, 2003.
Available: http://www.astm.org/.
[3] R. Sevlian, C. Chun, I. Tan, A. Bahai, and K. Laberteaux, “Channel
Characterization for 700MHz DSRC Vehicular Communication”, Journal of
Electrical and Computer Engineering Received 19 March 2010; Accepted 5
July 2010, vol. 2010, Article ID 840895, 9 pages.
[4] I. Mitola, J., “Cognitive radio for flexible mobile multimedia
communications,” in Mobile Multimedia Communications, 1999. (MoMuC
’99) 1999 IEEE International Workshop on, 1999, pp. 3–10.
[5] S. Pagadarai and A. Wyglinski, “A quantitative assessment of wireless
spectrum measurements for dynamic spectrum access,” in 4th International
Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and
Communications (CROWNCOM), Jun. 2009.
[6] S. Pagadarai, A. Wyglinski, and R. Vuyyuru, “Characterization of vacant
UHF TV channels for vehicular dynamic spectrum access,” in IEEE Vehicular
Networking Conference (VNC), 2009, pp. 1–8.
[7] Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bsnds, Final Rules. Available:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-3279.pdf
[8] J. Wang, M. Song, S. Santhiveeran, K. Lim, G. Ko, K. Kim, S. Hwang, M.
Ghosh, V. Gaddam, and K. Challapali, “First Cognitive Radio Networking
Standard for Personal/Portable Devices in TV White Spaces,” in IEEE
Symposia on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks(DySPAN
2010), Singapore, 2010.
[9] Federal Communications Commission, “In the Matter of Unlicensed
Operation in the TV Broadcast Bands, Additional Spectrum for Unlicensed
Devices Below 900 MHz and in the 3 GHz Band.”
[10] G. Li and H. Liu, “Dynamic resource allocation with finite buffer
constraint in broadband OFDMA networks,” IEEE Wireless Comm. And
Networking, vol. 2, pp. 1037–1042, 2003.
[11] G. Song, Y. Li, and M. Inc, “Utility-based resource allocation and
scheduling in OFDM-based wireless broadband networks,” IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 127–134, 2005
[12] H. Li, “Socially optimal queuing control in cognitive radio systems:
Pricing and learning,” in IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking
Conference (WCNC), 2010.
[13] H. Shiang and M. van der Schaar, “Queuing-based dynamic channel
selection for heterogeneous multimedia applications over cognitive radio
networks,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 896–909,
2008.
[14] C. Zhang, X. Wang, and J. Li, “Cooperative Cognitive Radio with
Priority Queueing Analysis,” IEEE International Conference on
Communications (ICC), 2009.
[15] S. Chen, A. M. Wyglinski, R. Vuyyuru and O. Altintas, “Feasibility
Analysis of Vehicular Dynamic Spectrum Access via Queueing Theory
Model,” IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, p – 223 – 230, 2010.
[16] S. Keshavamurthy and K. Chandra, “Multiplexing Analysis for Dynamic
Spectrum Access,” in Military Communications Conference (MILCOM),
2006, pp. 1–7.
[17] H.R. Gail, S.L. Hantler, B.A. Taylor, “Analysis of a nonpreemptive
priority multiserver queue,” Advances in Applied Probability 20 (1988) 852-
879.
[18] Edward P.C. Kao, Sandra D. Wilson, “Analysis of nonpreemptive
priority queues with multiple servers and and two priority classes,” European
Journal of Operational Research ,Volume 102, Issue 1, 1 October 1997,
Pages 227-241.
[19] D. Wagner, “Waiting times of a finite-capacity multi-server model with
non-preemptive priorities,” European Journal of Operational Research 118
(1999) 181-193.
[20] O. Kella, and U. Yechiali, “Waiting times in the non-preemptive priority
M/M/c queue”, Communications in Statistics - Stochastic Models, 1, 257-262,
1985.
[21] L. Kleinrock, Queueing Systems: Volume 2: Computer Applications. John
Wiley & Sons New York, 1976.
[22] H. Leemans, G. Dedene , “Queue Lengths and Waiting Times in the
Two-Class Two-Server Queue with Nonpreemptive Heterogeneous Priority
Structures”, Belgium. Available:
https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/118550.
[23] H. Leemans, K.U.Leuven, “A matrix-geometric solution for the
multiserver nonpreemptive priority queueing model with mixed priorities”,
Belgium.
Available: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/7074//items-by-
author?author=Leemans%2C+Herlinde%3B+U0003217
47
6

[24] B. Venkataramani, S. K. Bose and K. R. Srivathsan, “Queuing analysis
of a non-pre-emptive MMPP/D/1 priority system”, Computer
Communications, Volume 20, Issue 11, 15 October 1997, Pages 999-1018.
[25] A. Federgruen and H. Groenevelt, “M/G/c Queueing Systems with
Multiple Customer Classes: Characterization and Control of Achievable
Performance under Nonpreemptive Priority Rules”, MANAGEMENT
SCIENCE, Vol. 34, No. 9, September 1988, pp. 1121-1138.
[26] D. Bertsekas, R. Gallager, Data Networks, 2
nd
Edition, Prentice-Hall,
New Jersey, 1992.





































48

There are 30 TV channels available in total for access of portable TVBD. SYSTEM MODEL For traveling vehicles across location-varying vacant TV channels. Here. After that in III we give the exact and approximate solutions for the different performance measurement parameters. the authors in [6] selected 600 . However. Rather we consider a pair of communication entities as a customer. MA and the eastern most point was Boston. traffic priorities in Cognitive Radio networks. II. Within one snapshot there is no service interruption is also considered during the travelling location change with different TV channel availability. We consider the transmission range is as same as defined in DSRC. Because depending on location as well as time in each direction the number of cars per kilometer will be varied. 300 meters. to assign vacant spectrums dynamically is an opportunistic multiple access scenarios shown in Fig. we assumed a static channel here. The bandwidth request from each communication set is considered as an entity that enters the queue for service. the total bandwidth is assumed to be fixed here. Opportunistic vehicular spectrum access in vacant TV channels. 2 shows the spectral temporal database of available channels. The rest of the paper organized as follows. Finally in section V we conclude our paper. Each time-location snapshot is about one minute in time and one kilometer in distance. Few times are also spent during channel sensing and searching the channel availability list. We don’t consider each vehicle as a customer. To predict the performance measure based on this spectraltemporal database and the estimated number of cars in the proximity we consider a time-location snapshot when the vehicles are travelling along the highways instead of the total hours of driving.2 when among secondary users there are also some priorities.1. or possibly multiple-to-multiple if cooperative transmission is employed. Fig. instead of the entire UHF TV range. delay deadlines. 2 and indicates the traveling along 1-90 in the state of MA from west to east. Fig.2. A G/M/K/0 queueing model is employed in [16] which multiplexed the arrival processes formed by primary and secondary users. When the higher priority secondary users enter the systems. In [15]. We use the same geo-location database approach from [15] and set two priorities based on arrival rate and service rate among secondary users but higher priority users don’t preempt the lower ones. one-tomany. Fig. MA. In [13] they used a dynamic learning algorithm (DSL) to assign channel among users based on different utility functions.1. Each server is assumed to handle one communication link at a time. multi-class nonpreemptive queueing model to evaluate the quantitative measure of the available resources through TV vacant channels in the case of VDSA system. performance measures are made on a transmission of a typical packet. Due to very short transmission time of a packet in compare with snapshot. Then the available bandwidth resources within the transmission range of the vehicular communication set are modeled as server. MATLAB is used as a source code and to analyze the system performance. Section IV shows the corresponding results and analysis of VDSA system in TV white bands along I-90. USA [6].750 MHz and captured 4 sweeps per minute on average along the length of I-90 • The sweep index increases from 1 on the top left corner of Fig. we consider 30 servers here. they treated as same as like primary users. The transmission time of each communication link is modeled as the service time of each communication set. The queue is only used to approximate the process. TV Channel availability at different locations along I-90 in the state of Massachusetts. A communication set is defined as the set of transmitters and receivers performing wireless transmission regardless the transmission is one-to-one. Fig. The western most point in their study was West Stockbridge. So. it increases the transmission latencies for lower priority ones. So. To use UHF TV channels. the authors generated a spectral map of these white channels along I-90 in the states of Massachusetts in America based on a geolocation database approach. In section II we model the VDSA system at the system level using queueing theory. 3 demonstrates the virtual queueing system. The response time of delivering a packet includes the transmission time as well as waiting time when all channels are busy. After some assumption and abstractions a vehicular communication system can be modeled as a virtual queueing system. 44 . And it is assumed that at each instance the bandwidth requirements for all types of communications including both point-to-point and broadcast and also vehicleto-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications are same. not representing a real entity. In this paper we applied multi-server. the lower priorities in service should be quit the channel.

Consequently. extensively long transmission delay. The service discipline within each class is FCFS. We also not consider any kind of interference. and channel jamming. The heterogeneous priority structure is constructed by giving class A non-preemptive priority over class B on Si. SOLUTIONS FOR THE QUEUEING MODEL The basic model of multi server multi priority queue is depicted in Fig. with parameters 1/a and 1/b. For M/M/m system. In the case of heavy load the performance of CSMA/CA is not so good so it will not be give an accurate result for VDSA multiple access system and may give an overly optimistic prediction of performance measure. with arrival rates λa and λb for class A and Class B respectively. Kao. The services of secondary users are only stopped when primary users demand that channels in which the services are going on. There is no service interruption of lower priority when higher priority customer enters the system and lower one is in service. while class B receives priority over class A on S2. until the first moment there after that the number of busy servers decreases to m-1 or a customer from one of the classes k.n enters service. That means we consider a multi server multi priority nonpreemptive model whose performance measures will be done based on the average number of cars as well as the available vacant UHF TV channels within the transmission range. Federgruen et al [25] characterized the performance space of M/G/m nonpreemptive queueing system. 4. Higher priority customer should wait in particular queue assigned for higher priority until the service completion of lower priority user. k+1. But we avoid this topic here. in the queueing model we consider different priority classes of users using the vacant bands. Packet-based queueing model for VDSA in vacant UHF TV bands. We assume that the arrival process is Poisson. the interarrival times are exponentially distributed. The Laplace-Stieltjes transform (LST) [21] of γ is given by. The Basic model of priority queue (two classes-two servers).3 Fig. Wagner et al have studied multiserver non-preemptive model with two priority classes [17. thus VDSA multiple access system can be readily consider as a virtual queue following a FCFS or based on different criteria priority queue is also handled. 19]. It consists of two servers and there are only two classes of customers. It is also assumed that the service times are exponentially distributed. There are so many approaches to calculate the queue length and waiting time for each class. an arbitrary customer enters service and there are no class-a customers in queue. the average waiting time for different priority classes customer [26]. Kella et al [20] calculated the waiting time for non-preemptive priority M/M/m queue as follows: 45 where.  = ∑  . 24]. [22] considered the stationary distribution of queue lengths and waiting times.  = ∑   ! ∑   ! + !    (3) Wagner applied matrix-analytic methods to calculate the Laplace-Stieltjes Transform of the actual waiting time. the packet collision can be avoided in a well manner in CSMA/CA.  = +   =  = (5) For M/G/1 multi priority system. Both arrival and service processes are stochastic processes with class dependent parameters. where  =    =     (4)  ∑    . γ be the length of time from an instant when all servers are busy.….  = and  = / . (1) (2) and PQ is the probability that all servers are busy. 4. Gail. After completion the service higher one enters in service even though some lower priority customers are in their assigned queue from earlier the higher one. III. In the case of light traffic load of data packets. 18. Leemans. Venkataramani et al. In this paper. the waiting time and the response time are as follows:  ⋯  ⋯   ∑       +  (6) (7) .3. Kao implemented a power–series method for the two priority queues. Then the response time.   =     =  +  +  −  +  +   − 4   2          = 1 −   +      Fig. They also used three dimensional state spaces and applied a matrixgeometric method to analyze the queue [23. CSMA/CA with moderate traffic load is assumed to be employed by the transceiver on each vehicle to prevent collision.

Because we have much lower mean response time for each class of customers in the suburban area. We consider moderate traffic load that means sub-urban area. then (6) have a closed form solution  with  = . 300 meters. So.3 times of the average number of cars per kilometer. µ B. The second largest values for mean response time are obtained at Auburn. It has been happened due to different waiting times in both model are less comparable with transmission time in non-preemptive queueing model as there is no service interruption due to priority. ANALYSIS OF VDSA IN VACANT UHF TV CHANNELS In this work. with respective arrival and service rates λA. the calculation of the mean residual   time  = ∑   is not so easy. V. For priority 1 customers we also have higher mean response time at Boston of about 10 ms but still lower than that of priority 2 customers. In this analysis. the average delay per customer tends to be reduced. Average packet length is assumed of 500 bytes. Then for a non-preemptive system with two customer classes A and B.4 For multiple servers. The information about the available bandwidth in vacant UHF TV channels are extracted from Fig. =       (8) is smaller when A is given priority over B than when B is given priority over A. under the ITRC (Information Technology Research Center) support program supervised by the NIPA (National IT Industry Promotion Agency) (NIPA2011-C1090-1121-0001). 5.3 of [15]. We use multi-server multi-priority nonpreemptive queueing model to evaluate the system performance. 5. in a consequence we can say that in area of much lower traffic load such as rural area. It is assumed that the transmitting vehicle and the receiving vehicle of a communication pair are separated by the transmission range. IV. We reproduce the average number of cars per kilometer along I-90 using Fig. Considering data rate for each higher priority customer is 800 kbps and for each lower priority customer is 400 kbps. we use two types of arrival rates of 20 messages/second and 60 messages/second for two priority classes with meaninterarrival Fig. where PQ is the probability of all channels are busy. we see that in our model we have too much reasonable mean response time which meets the requirement of DSRC very well for all cases and for all kinds of customers. any car within the 500 meters sensing the communication pair cannot use the same channel. Fig. So. then the average delay per customer. The maximum response time of 11 ms is again obtained for the priority 2 customers where lower data rate of 400 kbps are assigned to priority 2 customers and higher data rate of 800 kbps are assigned to priority 1 customers. we analyze the feasibility of VDSA in vacant UHF TV white space. So. we use the data collected from Interstate I-90 in the state of Massachusetts shown in Fig. 46 . 1 we can understand that most white channels are adjacent to TV channels being used for broadcast. 3(b) of [15] and again interpolate the samples which shown in Fig. But if the service times of   all priority classes are identically and exponentially distributed. With arrival rate of 60 message/second priority 2 customers experience higher probability to get the channels are busy. CONCLUSION In this paper. For the arrival rate of 20 message/second for priority 1 customers experience comparatively less blocking probability. It is noticeable that for the same priority class of customer we have equal mean response time for both M/M/m and M/G/m model. this resource also be useful. Again. The results show that in suburban area. the output power of portable devices in vacant channels adjacent to TV broadcasting channels should keep under 40 mW. The models are applied to the vehicles traveling along I-90 in the state of Massachusetts. Here. time of 100 ms.7 shows the maximum mean response time of 12 ms for priority 2 customers at Boston in both M/M/m and M/G/m FCFS models where both priority classes have same data rate of 800 kbps. Average number of cars per kilometer along I-90. In the area of Boston both classes have higher probability. both M/M/m and M/G/m models are used. We considering about 20% customers have higher priority. If all priority classes have exponentially distributed service times with common mean 1/µ. A and λB. if we compare these results with [15] where preemptive queueing model is used. if we set higher priority to customers of short service times. In addition. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research was supported by the MKE (The Ministry of Knowledge Economy). and if A > µ B. So. From Fig. in a snapshot the number of cars increases to 1.5 of [6]. Korea. As a consequence the number of customers that is number of communication set considered is about 65% of the total number of cars per kilometer on I-90 in a snapshot. then we calculate R in a convenient way. vacant TV band is a feasible resource for vehicle communication which meets the requirements of DSRC. Okumura-Hata path loss model is used. We also see that when we use two different service rates for two classes and given highest priority to higher service rate reduces the average amount of mean response time.

Zhang. 9 pages. Gaddam. “Socially optimal queuing control in cognitive radio systems: Pricing and learning. 2010. K. Kella. Leemans. K. S.7. Jun. Bahai. 2010. 1999. Additional Spectrum for Unlicensed Devices Below 900 MHz and in the 3 GHz Band.” IEEE Communications Magazine.. B. Song. Li. Altintas. E2213-03. M/G/m (FCFS. M. 1037–1042. Dedene . And Networking. REFERENCES [1] D. Belgium. 2006. A.” European Journal of Operational Research . [23] H. [11] G. [4] I. Pagadarai. for both M/M/m. pp. S. van der Schaar. [3] R. 13. Liu. 6. pp. “Queue Lengths and Waiting Times in the Two-Class Two-Server Queue with Nonpreemptive Heterogeneous Priority Structures”. Chandra. “Multiplexing Analysis for Dynamic Spectrum Access. Queueing Systems: Volume 2: Computer Applications. 5. 2010. Fig. “Waiting times of a finite-capacity multi-server model with non-preemptive priorities. Wyglinski. Hwang. Kim. [14] C. 1985.” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.astm.L. “Analysis of a nonpreemptive priority multiserver queue.be/handle/123456789/118550.kuleuven. [18] Edward P.A. 2009.gov/2009/pdf/E9-3279. Available: http://www. Singapore. “Characterization of vacant UHF TV channels for vehicular dynamic spectrum access.” IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). Wagner. V. Holfelder. 2005 [12] H. p – 223 – 230. [9] Federal Communications Commission. A. “Dynamic resource allocation with finite buffer constraint in broadband OFDMA networks. [19] D. J. 2009. “Cooperative Cognitive Radio with Priority Queueing Analysis. Communications in Statistics . Song.” in IEEE Symposia on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks(DySPAN 2010). Jiang. 1976. Wyglinski. pp. “Queuing-based dynamic channel selection for heterogeneous multimedia applications over cognitive radio networks. Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering Received 19 March 2010. no. 2010. no. A. vol. 5. vol. Keshavamurthy and K. Y. 2. C. Issue 1. Meier. [7] Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bsnds.Leuven. Tan. and K. “Analysis of nonpreemptive priority queues with multiple servers and and two priority classes. 3–10. vol. pp. Chun.” in 4th International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications (CROWNCOM). G.5 Fig. K.” IEEE Wireless Comm. “In the Matter of Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bands. (MoMuC ’99) 1999 IEEE International Workshop on. “A quantitative assessment of wireless spectrum measurements for dynamic spectrum access. Lim. [22] H. [20] O. X. 1999. 1. [6] S. 1–8. Ko. Taliwal. Challapali. Hantler. Sevlian. [13] H. Kleinrock.C. “First Cognitive Radio Networking Standard for Personal/Portable Devices in TV White Spaces. Gail. “Waiting times in the non-preemptive priority M/M/c queue”. Inc. V. with two different service rates for two priority classes) model. “Design of 5. and J. Li and H.” ASTM Std. Wyglinski. vol. 10.” in Military Communications Conference (MILCOM). 2003. and R. “Cognitive radio for flexible mobile multimedia communications.” Advances in Applied Probability 20 (1988) 852879. Available: https://lirias. Shiang and M.” in IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC). 2009. 896–909. “Channel Characterization for 700MHz DSRC Vehicular Communication”. Belgium. W. The predicted response times for customers of two priority classes. [2] “Standard Specification for Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between Roadside and Vehicle Systems–5GHz Band Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications. Kao. Ghosh. Accepted 5 July 2010.” European Journal of Operational Research 118 (1999) 181-193. 1–7. Sandra D.” IEEEWireless Communications. no. pp. Li. Pages 227-241.” IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference.U. Chen. vol. Wang. “Feasibility Analysis of Vehicular Dynamic Spectrum Access via Queueing Theory Model. Laberteaux.org/.Stochastic Models.kuleuven. 12.” [10] G.gpo. Available: http://edocket. 2003. and R. [21] L. 2006.” in Mobile Multimedia Communications. pp. “Utility-based resource allocation and scheduling in OFDM-based wireless broadband networks. [17] H.be/handle/123456789/7074//items-byauthor?author=Leemans%2C+Herlinde%3B+U0003217 47 . [15] S. John Wiley & Sons New York.” in IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC). Wang.Volume 102. Yechiali. Santhiveeran. Wilson. The Probability of all channel being busy observed by different classes customers. Pagadarai and A. and K. 36–43. M. I. Leemans.pdf [8] J. Final Rules. G. 127–134. and M.9 GHz DSRC-based vehicular safety communication. 1 October 1997.R. Li. [16] S. Herrtwich. Article ID 840895. Vuyyuru. R. [5] S. 43. 257-262. Vuyyuru and O. M.access. “A matrix-geometric solution for the multiserver nonpreemptive priority queueing model with mixed priorities”. pp. A. and U. Available: https://lirias. S. 2008. Mitola. Taylor.

34. No. Vol. September 1988. Groenevelt. Prentice-Hall. Pages 999-1018. 1992. Computer Communications. “Queuing analysis of a non-pre-emptive MMPP/D/1 priority system”. pp. R. 2nd Edition. Bose and K. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE. 9. Data Networks. Volume 20. Bertsekas. Venkataramani. K. Issue 11. R. 1121-1138. Federgruen and H. [26] D. 15 October 1997.6 [24] B. New Jersey. 48 . Srivathsan. Gallager. [25] A. “M/G/c Queueing Systems with Multiple Customer Classes: Characterization and Control of Achievable Performance under Nonpreemptive Priority Rules”. S.