SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 47 , Issue 6 : 771-788(2017) https://doi.org/10.1360/N112017-00033

## Energy-delay tradeoff and optimal base station sleeping control in hyper-cellular networks

• AcceptedMar 21, 2017
• PublishedJun 9, 2017
Share
Rating

### Funded by

• Figure 1

BS operation transition diagram for the single sleep (SS) scheme

• Figure 2

For the multiple sleep (MS) scheme, the normalized average power consumption vs. average delay when the setup time changes. $h_D=0$ s, $h_V=10$ s

• Figure 3

For the $N$-limited scheme, average delay vs. $N$. $h_S=3$ s, exponentially distributed hysteresis time with $h_D=1$ s

• Figure 4

(Color online) For the single sleep scheme, the normalized average power consumption vs. average delay when hysteresis time changes. Exponentially distributed setup time with $h_S=5$ s

• Figure 5

(Color online) Optimal power consumption (normalized by the case without sleep mode) vs. average delay constraint for different schemes. $c_S^2=0$, $h_S=0.25$ s

• Figure 8

State transition diagram for the extended IPP/$M$/1 queueing model with the$N$-based BS sleeping mechanism and power matching

• Figure 11

(Color online) Optimal sleeping threshold $N^*$ and transmit power $P_\text{TR}^*$ under IPP traffic with different arrival rate. $\tau=2$ s, $k=1$, $l=2$ MB

• Figure 12

(Color online) Total power consumption and average delay vs. system utilization $\rho$ and autocorrelation coefficient $\theta$, with SPP traffic $C^2=10$. $r_1= r_2$, $l=2$ MB, $N=1$, $P_\text{TR}=10$ W. (a) Total power consumption; (b) average delay

• Figure 13

(Color online) Optimal BS sleeping mechanism with varying BS current mode under IBP traffic. $E_\text{active}=$protectłinebreak 25 J, $\omega=10$, $\rho=0.2$. (a) $E_\text{SW}=417$ J, arrival state is OFF; (b) $E_\text{SW}=417$ J, arrival state is ON

• Figure 14

(Color online) System cost with varying traffic burstiness under different weight $\omega$. $E_\text{SW}=41.7$ J, $E_\text{active}=\\25$ J, $\rho=0.2$

Citations

Altmetric