B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....started. A way to stabilize the system is by increasing the retransmission delays. Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms (e.g. 7, 10, 18] Those protocols in which data packets are used to resolve collisions achieve throughput below 0. 6 [24]. More recent MAC protocols have been proposed that implement collision resolution using either control packets that are much smaller than data packets, or are based on the ability of the transmitted to abort transmission rapidly after detecting collision (e.g. 6, 11, 19] Among those stable ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

....feedback, unless stated otherwise. The rst upper bound on the capacity of the multiple access channel, for the in nitely many users model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [90] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate were given in [29, 79, 80, 110]. The best known upper bound appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [110] Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [87] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, Jerrum, Kannan, ....

....for the in nitely many users model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [90] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate were given in [29, 79, 80, 110] The best known upper bound appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [110]. Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [87] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, Jerrum, Kannan, and Paterson [46] showed that every backo protocol is transient if the arrival rate is at least ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple-access system, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 23 (1987) 64-78.

....feedback, unless stated otherwise. The rst upper bound on the capacity of the multiple access channel, for the in nitely many users model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [90] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate were given in [29, 79, 80, 110]. The best known upper bound appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [110] Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [87] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, Jerrum, Kannan, ....

V.A. Mikhailov, and T.S. Tsybakov, Upper bound for the capacity of a random multiple access system, Probl. Information Transmission 17 (1981) 63-67.

....on collision resolution protocols. Considerable effort has been spent on finding upper bounds to the maximum throughput that can be achieved in an infinite population model with Poisson arrivals and ternary feedback. The best upper bound known to date is 0. 568 and is due to Tsybakov and Likhanov [53]. Practical multiple access communication systems are prone to various types of errors. Collision resolution protocols that operate in presence of noise errors, erasures and captures have been studied in [9] 10] 12] 42] 54] Collision resolution protocols yielding high throughputs for ....

B.S. Tsybakov and N.B. Likhanov, Upper Bound on the Capacity of a Random Multiple Access System. Probl. Inf. Trans., 23 (3), 224-236, January 1988.

....information on whether zero, one, or more than one packets were sent to the channel at that time step. In this case, stable protocols are known for 0:4878 Delta Delta Delta (Vvedenskaya Pinsker [21] and there is no stable protocol for 0:587 Delta Delta Delta (Mikhailov Tsybakov [17]) but if the stronger feedback of the exact number of packets that tried at the current step is sent to each sender, then there is a stable protocol for all 1 (Pippenger [18] A weaker feedback model which is more realistic for the purposes of PRAM emulation and optical routing is ....

.... i ) thus, any polynomial backoff protocol in particular is unstable for all 0 [13] and Aldous extended this to the case of binary exponential backoff, a modification of which is the Ethernet protocol [2] Also, any stable protocol in the infinite case must have 0:587 Delta Delta Delta [17]. In striking contrast to Kelly s result, the important work of [9] showed, among other things, that in the finite senders case most polynomial backoff protocols are stable for all 1. However, their proven upper bound for E[W ave ] is 2 f(n) where f(n) n O(1) For applications such as ....

V. A. Mikhailov and T. S. Tsybakov. Upper bound for the capacity of a random multiple access system. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 17:90--95, 1981. Also presented at the IEEE Information Theory Symposium, 1981.

....(14) with respect to a to obtain the tightest bound. Thus, we have reached the final result, namely that C f = a 0 minC f (a) 0.587 is an upper bound to capacity for any protocol. This general approach was later sharpened by Zhang and Berger ( Zhang85) and again by Tsybakov and Likhanov ([Tsyba87]) who showed that C f 0.578 and C f 0.568 respectively. There are also some tighter bounds available for restricted classes of algorithms. For example, a bound of C 0.505 for the class of free access algorithms is readily obtainable using Mikhailov and Tsybakov s technique [Tsyba85b] In ....

B. S. Tsybakov and N. B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple-access system, " Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 23(3), pp.64-78 (224-236) (July-Sept. 1987).

....stated otherwise. The first upper bound on the capacity of the multiple access channel, for the infinitely many users model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [83] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate of the capacity were given in [25, 73, 74, 101]. The best known upper bound on the capacity appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [101] Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [81] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, ....

....model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [83] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate of the capacity were given in [25, 73, 74, 101] The best known upper bound on the capacity appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [101]. Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [81] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, Jerrum, Kannan, and Paterson [40] showed that every backoff protocol is transient if the arrival rate is at ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple-access system, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 23 (1987) 64--78.

....stated otherwise. The first upper bound on the capacity of the multiple access channel, for the infinitely many users model with Poisson arrivals, was shown to be at most 0:774 by Pippinger [83] by an information theoretic argument. Improvements of this estimate of the capacity were given in [25, 73, 74, 101]. The best known upper bound on the capacity appears to be 0:568, it was proved by Tsybakov and Likhanov [101] Some specialized bounds are known, if the class of protocols is restricted. Panwar, Towsley and Wolf [81] showed that 0:5 is an upper bound for the class of FCFS algorithms. Goldberg, ....

V.A. Mikhailov, and T.S. Tsybakov, Upper bound for the capacity of a random multiple access system, Probl. Information Transmission 17 (1981) 63--67.

....in the queueing model [11] We will not describe queueing model results here, but the reader is referred to [2, 8, 11, 21] Much work has gone into determining upper bounds on the capacity that can be achieved by a full sensing protocol. The current best result is due to Tsybakov and Likhanov [23] who have shown that no protocol can achieve capacity higher than 0:568. For more information, see [4, 9, 18, 22] In the full sensing model, one typically assumes that messages are born at real times which are chosen uniformly from the unit interval. Recently, Loher [14, 15] has shown that if ....

B.S. Tsybakov and N. B. Likhanov, Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple-access system, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 23(3) (1987) 64-78.

....is by means of collision resolution mechanisms. Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms for collision resolution (e.g. 4] 7] 20] Those protocols in which data packets are used to resolve collisions achieve throughput below 0:6 [22] for a single channel and fully connected networks. Several MAC The work at UCSC was supported in part by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under grant DAAB07 95 C D157 protocols have been proposed that implement collision resolution using either control packets that are much ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

....is by means of collision resolution mechanisms. Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms for collision resolution (e.g. 4] 7] 20] Those protocols in which data packets are used to resolve collisions achieve throughput below 0:6 [22] for a single channel and fully connected networks. Several MAC The work at UCSC was supported in part by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under grant DAAB07 95 C D157 protocols have been proposed that implement collision resolution using either control packets that are much ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

....be started. A way to stabilize the system is by increasing the retransmission delays. Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms (e.g. 5,8,14] Those protocols in which data packets are used to resolve collisions achieve throughput below 0:6 [20]. More recent MAC protocols have been proposed that implement collision resolution using either control packets that are much smaller than data packets, or are based on the ability of the transmitter to abort transmission rapidly after detecting collision (e.g. 3,9,11] Among those stable MAC ....

....in detail. For simplicity, we present CARMANTQ assuming a fully connected network in which collision resolution is implemented using an RTS CTS message exchange with non persistent carrier sensing. CARMA NTQ is more attractive than previous dynamic reservation schemes for wireless (and wired) LANs [11,13,17 20] in that it does not require time synchronization or the definition of control frames of fixed duration over which the slots for the data frame can be reserved. It is also more attractive than token passing schemes in that no fixed schedule exists for passing the token. Section 2 also outlines ....

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

....efficient way can be devised by using collision resolution. Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms for collision resolution (e.g. 9, 17, 40] In these protocols data packets are used to resolve collisions achieving throughputs below 0:6 [55] for a single channel and fully connected networks. The focus of this dissertation is the design and analysis of MAC protocols that mitigate multiple access interference by means of two basic mechanisms: a) use of small control packets requesting or reserving the right to access the channel, and ....

....T PROP T PROC ) End End End Figure 4.4: CARMA Specification 67 5. CARMA NTQ Several stable MAC protocols have been proposed in the past based on tree splitting algorithms (e.g. 9, 17, 40] Those protocols in which data packets are used to resolve collisions achieve throughput below 0:6 [55]. More recent MAC protocols have been proposed that implement collision resolution using either control packets that are much smaller than data packets, or are based on the ability of the transmitter to abort transmission rapidly after detecting collision (e.g. 6, 18, 31] Among those stable ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

....maximal throughput, one can obtain upper bounds on the throughput in the original problem. The first to obtain such a bound was Pippenger [75] who showed that the maximum stable throughput cannot exceed 0.73. A series of similar efforts followed and the currently known least upper bound [76] is 0.587. Some researchers conjectured that the optimal value might be 0.5, but this claim was quickly abandoned as baseless. In this brief (about five year) but intense, saga about zeroing in on the maximum stable throughput of random access over the collision channel, there was a modest degree ....

V.A. Mikhailov and B.S. Tsybakov, "Upper bound for the capacity of a random multiple access system," Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, Vol. 17, pp. 90-95, 1981.

....of collision with freshly generated (at rate t packets slot, say) packets. When a packet is retransmitted, the retransmission is sucessful with probability exp( t) This leads to the condition t exp( t) to have a stable system, or t .5671. This number is smaller than the best known upperbound [5] on the achievable throughput with ternary feedback when there is no free access restriction. I C N 1 N N 1 N 1 C C N 2 N 2 C N 1 N 2 C N N 2 C N N 3 C N 1 N 3 C N 2 N 3 C N 0 C N 1 0 S S S S S C N 2 0 C N 2 1 C N 1 1 C N 1 C 2 0 C 2 1 C 2 2 C 1 0 C 1 1 0 S i,s c c c c s s s s s s c c c s c c s s ....

V.A. Mikhailov and B.S. Tsybakov, "Upper Bound for the Capacity of a Random Multiple Access System", Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 90-95, Jan. 1981. 11

....model above, without necessarily constructing a realizable one, has also received considerable attention. Due to the complicated nature of the problem, the maximum throughput is an elusive quantity, and to this date only a sequence of upper bounds have been found. The sharpest such bound is 0. 587 [6]. There have also been efforts to design realizable protocols which achieve higher throughput than the 0.587 bound by assuming that some additional feedback information is available to the system (and hence deviating from condition (ii) For instance, in [4] the authors assume that after each ....

V. A. Mikhailov and B. S. Tsybakov, "Upper Bound for the Capacity of a Random Multiple Access System ", Problemi Peredachi Informatsii, vol. 17, pp. 9095, 1981.

....each time step, each user receives information indicating whether zero, one, or more than one messages were sent to the channel at that time step. Stable protocols are known [12, 23] for the case in which is sufficiently small (at most :4878 Delta Delta Delta ) However, Tsybakov and Likhanov [22] have shown that, in the infinitely many users model, no protocol achieves a throughput better than 0.568. That is, in the limit, only a 0.568 fraction of the time steps are used for successful sends. By contrast, Pippenger [20] has shown that if the exact number of messages that tried at each ....

B.S. Tsybakov and N. B. Likhanov, Upper Bound on the Capacity of a Random Multiple-Access System, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 23(3) (1987) 64--78.

No context found.

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

No context found.

B.S. Tsybakov, and N.B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of random multiple access system," Problems of Information Transmission, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 224-236, July-Sept. 1987.

No context found.

B. S. Tsybakov and N. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple access system," Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 246--236, July-Sept. 1987.

No context found.

B. S. Tsybakov and N. B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple access system," Problemy Peredachi Informatsii,vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 246--236, Jan. 1988.

No context found.

B. S. Tsybakov and N. B. Likhanov, "Upper bound on the capacity of a random multiple-access system, " Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 23(3), pp.64-78 (224-236) (July-Sept. 1987).

No context found.

V. A. Mikhailov and B. S. Tsybakov, "Upper bound for the capacity of a random multiple access system," Probl. Pered. Inform., vol. 17, pp. 90--95, 1981.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC