Zero-Determinant Strategies: A Game-Theoretic Approach for Sharing Licensed Spectrum Bands

We consider private commons for secondary sharing of licensed spectrum bands with no access coordination provided by the primary license holder. In such environments, heterogeneity in demand patterns of the secondary users can lead to constant changes in the interference levels, and thus can be a source of volatility to the utilities of the users. In this paper, we consider secondary users to be service providers that provide downlink services. We formulate the spectrum sharing problem as a non-cooperative iterated game of power control where service providers change their power levels to fix their long-term average rates at utility-maximizing values. First, we show that in any iterated 2x 2 game, the structure of the single-stage game dictates the degree of control that a service provider can exert on the long-term outcome of the game. Then we show that if service providers use binary actions either to access or not to access the channel at any round of the game, then the long-term rate can be fixed regardless of the strategy of the opponent. We identify these rates and show that they can be achieved using mixed Markovian strategies which will be also identified.

[1]  George Kesidis,et al.  Distributed Contention Window Control for Selfish Users in IEEE 802.11 Wireless LANs , 2007, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[2]  Cem U. Saraydar,et al.  Efficient power control via pricing in wireless data networks , 2002, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[3]  W. Marsden I and J , 2012 .

[4]  Shane Greenstein,et al.  Promoting Efficient Use of Spectrum Through Elimination of Barriers to the Development of Secondary Markets , 2001 .

[5]  Michael L. Honig,et al.  Distributed interference compensation for wireless networks , 2006, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[6]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  Spectrum sharing for unlicensed bands , 2005, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[7]  W. Press,et al.  Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma contains strategies that dominate any evolutionary opponent , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Architecting noncooperative networks , 1995, Eighteenth Convention of Electrical and Electronics Engineers in Israel.

[9]  David Starobinski,et al.  Pricing Strategies for Spectrum Lease in Secondary Markets , 2010, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[10]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The evolution of cooperation. , 1984, Science.

[11]  M.M. Buddhikot,et al.  Understanding Dynamic Spectrum Access: Models,Taxonomy and Challenges , 2007, 2007 2nd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks.

[12]  Dusit Niyato,et al.  Competitive Pricing for Spectrum Sharing in Cognitive Radio Networks: Dynamic Game, Inefficiency of Nash Equilibrium, and Collusion , 2008, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[13]  H. Vincent Poor,et al.  Mechanisms and Games for Dynamic Spectrum Allocation: Preface , 2013 .

[14]  Levente Buttyán,et al.  Nash equilibria of packet forwarding strategies in wireless ad hoc networks , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[15]  K. J. Ray Liu,et al.  Game theory for cognitive radio networks: An overview , 2010, Comput. Networks.

[16]  R. Srikant,et al.  DARWIN: distributed and adaptive reputation mechanism for wireless ad-hoc networks , 2007, MobiCom '07.

[17]  George Kesidis,et al.  A Channel Aware MAC Protocol in an ALOHA Network with Selfish Users , 2012, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[18]  Koushik Kar,et al.  Portfolio Optimization in Secondary Spectrum Markets , 2015, EAI Endorsed Trans. Wirel. Spectr..

[19]  S. T. Chung,et al.  A game-theoretic approach to power allocation in frequency-selective gaussian interference channels , 2003, IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, 2003. Proceedings..

[20]  Eitan Altman,et al.  Discrete Power Control: Cooperative and Non-Cooperative Optimization , 2007, IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[21]  David Starobinski,et al.  Spot pricing of secondary spectrum access in wireless cellular networks , 2009, TNET.

[22]  Eitan Altman,et al.  CDMA Uplink Power Control as a Noncooperative Game , 2002, Wirel. Networks.

[23]  Martin A. Nowak,et al.  Equal Pay for All Prisoners , 1997 .

[24]  Hamid Aghvami,et al.  Cognitive Radio game for secondary spectrum access problem , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.

[25]  R. Aumann,et al.  Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium , 1995 .

[26]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[27]  Andreas F. Molisch,et al.  Wireless Communications , 2005 .