Comparative Analysis of Scheduling Algorithms in 5G Uplink Transmission

M. Mamode, T. P. Fowdur
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Scheduling Algorithms in 5G Uplink Transmission","authors":"M. Mamode, T. P. Fowdur","doi":"10.55708/js0105005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": 5G is the successor to 4G technology and it has enabled a new level of user experience with much greater speeds and much lower latencies. Scheduling is the method of allocating resources for transmission of data. In this paper, three scheduling algorithms have been investigated, namely Proportional Fair, Round Robin and Best CQI. An uplink 5G system with one base station and four user equipment were used to evaluate the three algorithms by varying four sets of parameters. Simulation results showed that the Round Robin algorithm was the fairest of all three algorithms by displaying almost similar resource share percentage for the four user equipment. Proportional Fair algorithm was observed to yield a higher throughput than the Round Robin algorithm for a specific user in some cases. It offered a better trade-off between throughput and fairness. In the case where distance of user 1 from the base station was 100m, the system simulated with the proportional fair technique yielded a peak throughput 30% higher than the system simulated with Round Robin technique. On the other hand, the Best CQI algorithm displayed a peak throughput value about 35% higher than the proportional fair algorithm for the 100m distance case. The Best CQI algorithm was found to be the least fair of all three algorithms as it favored users with better channel conditions.","PeriodicalId":156864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55708/js0105005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: 5G is the successor to 4G technology and it has enabled a new level of user experience with much greater speeds and much lower latencies. Scheduling is the method of allocating resources for transmission of data. In this paper, three scheduling algorithms have been investigated, namely Proportional Fair, Round Robin and Best CQI. An uplink 5G system with one base station and four user equipment were used to evaluate the three algorithms by varying four sets of parameters. Simulation results showed that the Round Robin algorithm was the fairest of all three algorithms by displaying almost similar resource share percentage for the four user equipment. Proportional Fair algorithm was observed to yield a higher throughput than the Round Robin algorithm for a specific user in some cases. It offered a better trade-off between throughput and fairness. In the case where distance of user 1 from the base station was 100m, the system simulated with the proportional fair technique yielded a peak throughput 30% higher than the system simulated with Round Robin technique. On the other hand, the Best CQI algorithm displayed a peak throughput value about 35% higher than the proportional fair algorithm for the 100m distance case. The Best CQI algorithm was found to be the least fair of all three algorithms as it favored users with better channel conditions.
5G上行传输调度算法对比分析
5G是4G技术的继承者,它以更快的速度和更低的延迟实现了新的用户体验水平。调度是为数据传输分配资源的方法。本文研究了比例公平、轮循和最佳CQI三种调度算法。一个具有一个基站和四个用户设备的上行5G系统通过改变四组参数来评估这三种算法。仿真结果表明,对于四种用户设备,轮询算法显示的资源共享百分比几乎相同,是三种算法中最公平的。我们观察到,在某些情况下,对于特定用户,比例公平算法比轮询算法产生更高的吞吐量。它在吞吐量和公平性之间提供了更好的权衡。在用户1与基站的距离为100米的情况下,使用比例公平技术模拟的系统产生的峰值吞吐量比使用轮询技术模拟的系统高30%。另一方面,在100m距离情况下,Best CQI算法的峰值吞吐量值比比例公平算法高35%左右。最佳CQI算法被发现是所有三种算法中最不公平的,因为它偏爱具有较好信道条件的用户。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信