pith. sign in

arxiv: 2002.11500 · v1 · submitted 2020-02-26 · 📡 eess.SP · cs.IT· math.IT

Robust Underlay Device-to-Device Communications on Multiple Channels

Mohamed Elnourani , Siddharth Deshmukh , Baltasar Beferull-Lozano , Daniel Romero This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 15:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP cs.ITmath.IT
keywords device-to-device communicationsunderlay networksresource allocationimperfect CSIoutage probabilityuplink downlink joint allocationfairnessmixed-integer optimization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Centralized and decentralized algorithms solve joint uplink-downlink power and channel allocation for D2D underlay networks with imperfect CSI while guaranteeing outage probability and fairness.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper formulates a joint uplink and downlink resource allocation problem that assigns both power levels and channels to D2D pairs and cellular users in an underlay scenario. The objective is to maximize total network rate subject to fairness among D2D pairs and an outage probability constraint that accounts for imperfect channel state information. The resulting mixed-integer non-convex problem is addressed through convex relaxation, fractional programming, and alternating optimization, yielding both a centralized solver and a decentralized version that distributes computation between the base station and the D2D pairs. A convergence analysis establishes that the decentralized procedure reaches stationary points at a quantifiable rate. Simulation results indicate that the obtained allocations meet the outage and fairness targets while delivering higher overall rates than prior methods.

Core claim

The paper claims that convex relaxation combined with fractional programming and alternating optimization produces feasible solutions to the mixed-integer non-convex joint UL/DL resource allocation problem that maximize network sum-rate, enforce fairness across D2D pairs, and satisfy a prescribed outage probability under imperfect CSI; the decentralized variant distributes computation while preserving these guarantees and admits a theoretical convergence rate to stationary points.

What carries the argument

Joint uplink-downlink resource allocation scheme that assigns power and channel resources under outage-probability constraints derived from imperfect CSI.

If this is right

  • The same relaxation and alternation steps can be reused to incorporate additional constraints such as minimum rate per cellular user without changing the overall algorithmic structure.
  • The decentralized procedure reduces base-station computation while keeping communication overhead low, enabling scaling to larger numbers of D2D pairs.
  • Fairness is maintained by explicit weighting of D2D pair utilities inside the objective, so any change in the fairness criterion can be handled by adjusting those weights.
  • Outage guarantees hold for any distribution of channel estimation error whose statistics are known, allowing the framework to accommodate different CSI quality levels.
  • Convergence analysis supplies an explicit iteration bound, so the algorithms can be terminated after a known number of steps with a guaranteed distance to stationarity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same convex-relaxation pattern may transfer to resource allocation problems that include user mobility or time-varying traffic, provided the outage constraint can still be expressed in closed form.
  • If the relaxation gap remains small across diverse network densities, the approach could serve as a building block for multi-cell coordinated resource allocation without requiring a fully centralized solver.
  • Replacing the simulated channel model with real-time feedback from actual devices would test whether the outage-probability guarantee survives hardware impairments not captured in the current analysis.

Load-bearing premise

Convex relaxation and alternating optimization produce allocations whose performance on the original non-convex problem stays close to optimal, and the simulated channel and traffic models match practical underlay conditions.

What would settle it

A set of channel realizations drawn from measured outdoor traces where the realized outage rate for any D2D pair exceeds the design target or the achieved sum-rate falls more than 10 percent below the value predicted by the relaxed solution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2002.11500 by Baltasar Beferull-Lozano, Daniel Romero, Mohamed Elnourani, Siddharth Deshmukh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overall Network model are considered under imperfect CSI. However, the analysis, once again, restricts D2D pairs to access at most one cellular channel. Table I list some of the presented works that jointly perform channel assignment and power allocation compared with our proposed scheme. In this paper, we consider the resource allocation involving both uplink and downlink [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Power feasibility region of the form: maximize PCij ,PDji vi,j (PCij , PDji ) (6) subject to 0 ≤ PCij ≤ PCmax , 0 ≤ PDji ≤ PDmax , PCij gCi N0 + PDjihDj,i ≥ η C min, PDjigDj N0 + PCijhCj ≥ η D min, which should be solved ∀i ∈ C, ∀j ∈ D. This power allocation subproblem coincides with the one arising in [16], [29], [30], which can be solved in closed-form, since the solution should be on the borders of the … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Rate of convergence at random in a 5 m radius circle centered at their respective transmitter. A path-loss model with exponent α = 2 is used in the calculation of all channel gains. The random channel gains are calculated by applying an exponential random distribution around an average calculated from the path-loss model. NC = 10, ND = 10 were used in the experiments with Monte-Carlo averages carried over … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Total Rate vs.  0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.5 1 1.5 Unfairness Algirithm 3 - LCC-ERM Algirithm 3 - FCC Algirithm 3 - LCC-MRM Feng et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fairness vs.  maximum transmitting power and the possibly longer distances between the D2D pairs and the CUs. Moreover, distributing users among both uplink and downlink achieves significantly higher data rates, with Algorithm 4 achieves the highest rates, since the distribution of users is also optimized. VII. CONCLUSION This paper formulates a joint channel allocation and power assignment problem in und… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Outage Probability vs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The total network rate (UL+DL) vs.  pair. Furthermore, it assigns both downlink and uplink resources either jointly or separately. Moreover, it considers uncertainties in the CSI by including probabilistic SINR constraints to guarantee the desired outage probability. Although this problem is a non-convex mixed-integer problem, we solve it in a computationally efficient manner by convex relaxation, quadrat… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Most recent works in device-to-device (D2D) underlay communications focus on the optimization of either power or channel allocation to improve the spectral efficiency, and typically consider uplink and downlink separately. Further, several of them also assume perfect knowledge of channel-stateinformation (CSI). In this paper, we formulate a joint uplink and downlink resource allocation scheme, which assigns both power and channel resources to D2D pairs and cellular users in an underlay network scenario. The objective is to maximize the overall network rate while maintaining fairness among the D2D pairs. In addition, we also consider imperfect CSI, where we guarantee a certain outage probability to maintain the desired quality-of-service (QoS). The resulting problem is a mixed integer non-convex optimization problem and we propose both centralized and decentralized algorithms to solve it, using convex relaxation, fractional programming, and alternating optimization. In the decentralized setting, the computational load is distributed among the D2D pairs and the base station, keeping also a low communication overhead. Moreover, we also provide a theoretical convergence analysis, including also the rate of convergence to stationary points. The proposed algorithms have been experimentally tested in a simulation environment, showing their favorable performance, as compared with the state-of-the-art alternatives.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper formulates a joint uplink/downlink resource allocation problem for underlay D2D networks that maximizes the sum rate subject to fairness among D2D pairs, a target outage probability under imperfect CSI, and power/channel constraints. The resulting mixed-integer non-convex program is solved via convex relaxation, fractional programming, and alternating optimization, yielding both a centralized algorithm and a decentralized variant with low communication overhead. Convergence to stationary points is analyzed, and Monte-Carlo simulations compare performance against state-of-the-art baselines.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work supplies practical, theoretically grounded algorithms for robust joint UL/DL allocation under imperfect CSI—an area where most prior literature either assumes perfect CSI or treats UL and DL separately. The explicit convergence analysis to stationary points together with Monte-Carlo confirmation that realized outage remains below the target are concrete strengths that strengthen the contribution.

minor comments (3)
  1. [§3.2] §3.2: the transition from the original non-convex problem (P1) to the relaxed problem (P2) should explicitly state the conditions under which the relaxation is tight; a short remark on the duality gap or integrality gap would help readers assess solution quality.
  2. [Figs. 4–5] Fig. 4 and Fig. 5: axis labels and legends are too small for print; increasing font size and adding a brief caption sentence explaining the plotted quantity (e.g., “sum rate vs. number of D2D pairs”) would improve readability.
  3. [§4.3] The decentralized algorithm description in §4.3 refers to “local CSI” without specifying which channels are assumed known at each D2D pair; a one-sentence clarification would remove ambiguity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and accurate summary of our work on joint UL/DL resource allocation for D2D underlay networks under imperfect CSI. We are pleased with the recommendation for minor revision and note that the report contains no specific major comments requiring point-by-point responses.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper formulates a mixed-integer non-convex joint UL/DL resource allocation problem under imperfect CSI and solves it via standard convex relaxation, fractional programming, and alternating optimization, with a convergence analysis to stationary points. These techniques are applied directly to the stated objective and constraints without any reduction of claimed performance metrics to fitted parameters, self-definitional quantities, or load-bearing self-citations. Monte-Carlo validation of outage probabilities is independent of the derivation inputs. The central claims rest on externally verifiable optimization methods rather than internal redefinitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The formulation implicitly rests on standard wireless channel models and optimization assumptions common to the field.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5765 in / 1183 out tokens · 27498 ms · 2026-05-24T15:18:12.513121+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ericsson mobility report,

    A.B. Ericsson, “Ericsson mobility report,” 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Ciscoglobal cloud index: forecast and methodology, 2015-2020. white paper,

    Cisco Visual Networking, “Ciscoglobal cloud index: forecast and methodology, 2015-2020. white paper,” 2017

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    Csiszar and J

    I. Csiszar and J. K ¨orner, Information theory: coding theorems for discrete memoryless systems , Cambridge University Press, 2011

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Cellular networks with an overlaid device to device network,

    B. Kaufman and B. Aazhang, “Cellular networks with an overlaid device to device network,” in Proc. Asilomar Conf. Sig., Syst., Comput. IEEE, 2008, pp. 1537–1541

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    A survey on device-to-device communication in cellular networks,

    A. Asadi, Q. Wang, and V . Mancuso, “A survey on device-to-device communication in cellular networks,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1801–1819, 2014

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Device-to-device communication in lte-advanced networks: A survey,

    J. Liu, N. Kato, J. Ma, and N. Kadowaki, “Device-to-device communication in lte-advanced networks: A survey,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1923–1940, 2015

    work page 1923

  7. [7]

    A survey of device-to-device communications: Research issues and challenges,

    F. Jameel, Z. Hamid, F. Jabeen, S. Zeadally, and M. A. Javed, “A survey of device-to-device communications: Research issues and challenges,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts. , vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 2133–2168, 2018

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Mode selection for device-to-device communication underlaying an lte-advanced network,

    K. Doppler, C. H. Yu, C. B. Ribeiro, and P. Janis, “Mode selection for device-to-device communication underlaying an lte-advanced network,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Commun., Netw. Conf. IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–6

    work page 2010

  9. [9]

    Cognitive spectrum access in device-to-device-enabled cellular networks,

    A. H. Sakr, H. Tabassum, E. Hossain, and D. I. Kim, “Cognitive spectrum access in device-to-device-enabled cellular networks,” IEEE Commun. Mag. , vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 126–133, 2015

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Interference-aware resource allocation for device-to-device communications as an underlay using sequential second price auction,

    C. Xu, L. Song, Z. Han, Q. Zhao, X. Wang, and B. Jiao, “Interference-aware resource allocation for device-to-device communications as an underlay using sequential second price auction,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. IEEE, 2012, pp. 445–449

    work page 2012

  11. [11]

    Resource allocation using a reverse iterative combinatorial auction for device-to-device underlay cellular networks,

    C. Xu, L. Song, Z. Han, D. Li, and B. Jiao, “Resource allocation using a reverse iterative combinatorial auction for device-to-device underlay cellular networks,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. IEEE, 2012, pp. 4542–4547

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Resource allocation for device-to-device communications underlaying heterogeneous cellular networks using coalitional games,

    Y . Chen, B. Ai, Y . Niu, K. Guan, and Z. Han, “Resource allocation for device-to-device communications underlaying heterogeneous cellular networks using coalitional games,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 4163–4176, 2018

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Distributed resource allocation for d2d communication underlaying cellular networks,

    R. Yin, G. Yu, C. Zhong, and Z. Zhang, “Distributed resource allocation for d2d communication underlaying cellular networks,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun. IEEE, 2013, pp. 138–143

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    Power allocation for underlay device-to-device communication over multiple channels,

    R. AliHemmati, B. Liang, M. Dong, G. Boudreau, and S. H. Seyedmehdi, “Power allocation for underlay device-to-device communication over multiple channels,” IEEE Trans. Sig. Info. Process. Netw. , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 467–480, 2017

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Distributed power allocation for d2d communications underlaying/overlaying ofdma cellular networks,

    A. Abrardo and M. Moretti, “Distributed power allocation for d2d communications underlaying/overlaying ofdma cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1466–1479, 2017

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    Device-to-device communications underlaying cellular networks,

    D. Feng, L. Lu, Y . Yuan-Wu, G. Y . Li, G. Feng, and S. Li, “Device-to-device communications underlaying cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 3541–3551, 2013

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    Joint mode selection and resource allocation for device-to-device communications,

    G. Yu, L. Xu, D. Feng, R. Yin, G. Y . Li, and Y . Jiang, “Joint mode selection and resource allocation for device-to-device communications,” IEEE Trans. Commun. , vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 3814–3824, 2014

    work page 2014

  18. [18]

    Energy-efficient joint resource allocation and power control for d2d communications,

    Y . Jiang, Q. Liu, F. Zheng, X. Gao, and X. You, “Energy-efficient joint resource allocation and power control for d2d communications,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 6119–6127, 2016. 30

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Distributed learning approach for joint channel and power allocation in underlay d2d networks,

    S. Dominic and L. Jacob, “Distributed learning approach for joint channel and power allocation in underlay d2d networks,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Sig. Process. and Commun. IEEE, 2016, pp. 145–150

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    A joint channel and power allocation scheme for device-to-device communications underlaying uplink cellular networks,

    F. Hajiaghajani, R. Davoudi, and M. Rasti, “A joint channel and power allocation scheme for device-to-device communications underlaying uplink cellular networks,” in IEEE Conf. Comput. Commun. Workshops . IEEE, 2016, pp. 768–773

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    An iterative matching-stackelberg game model for channel-power allocation in d2d underlaid cellular networks,

    Y . Yuan, T. Yang, H. Feng, and B. Hu, “An iterative matching-stackelberg game model for channel-power allocation in d2d underlaid cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun. , vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 7456–7471, 2018

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Fairness-aware energy-efficient resource allocation in d2d communication networks,

    S. Guo, X. Zhou, S. Xiao, and M. Sun, “Fairness-aware energy-efficient resource allocation in d2d communication networks,” IEEE Syst. J. , vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1273–1284, 2018

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Gain-aware joint uplink-downlink resource allocation for device-to-device communications,

    P. Zhao, P. Yu, L. Feng, W. Li, and X. Qiu, “Gain-aware joint uplink-downlink resource allocation for device-to-device communications,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf. IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–5

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Joint uplink and downlink resource allocation for d2d communication underlying cellular networks,

    C. Kai, L. Xu, J. Zhang, and M. Peng, “Joint uplink and downlink resource allocation for d2d communication underlying cellular networks,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Wireless Commun., Sig. Process. IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–6

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    Joint subcarrier assignment with power allocation for sum rate maximization of d2d communications in wireless cellular networks,

    C. Kai, H. Li, L. Xu, Y . Li, and T. Jiang, “Joint subcarrier assignment with power allocation for sum rate maximization of d2d communications in wireless cellular networks,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 4748–4759, 2019

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    Optimal resource allocation for device-to-device communications in fading channels,

    D. Feng, L. Lu, Y . Yuan-Wu, G. Y . Li, G. Feng, and S. Li, “Optimal resource allocation for device-to-device communications in fading channels,” in Proc. IEEE Global Commun. Conf. IEEE, 2013, pp. 3673–3678

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    Qos-aware resource allocation for device-to-device communications with channel uncertainty,

    D. Feng, L. Lu, Y . Yi, G. Y . Li, G. Feng, and S. Li, “Qos-aware resource allocation for device-to-device communications with channel uncertainty,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 6051–6062, Aug 2016

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Outage protection for cellular-mode users in device-to-device communications through stochastic optimization,

    Q. Thieu and H. Hsieh, “Outage protection for cellular-mode users in device-to-device communications through stochastic optimization,” in Proc. IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., May 2015, pp. 1–5

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Optimal power allocation and scheduling for two-cell capacity maximization,

    A. Gjendemsjo, D. Gesbert, G.E. Oien, and S.G. Kiani, “Optimal power allocation and scheduling for two-cell capacity maximization,” in Int. Symp. on modeling and optimization in mobile, ad hoc and wireless networks . IEEE, 2006, pp. 1–6

    work page 2006

  30. [30]

    Underlay device-to-device communications on multiple channels,

    M. Elnourani, M. Hamid, D. Romero, and B. Beferull-Lozano, “Underlay device-to-device communications on multiple channels,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Sig. Process. IEEE, 2018, pp. 3684–3688

    work page 2018

  31. [31]

    D. P. Bertsekas, Nonlinear Programming, Athena scientific Belmont, 1999

    work page 1999

  32. [32]

    Reliable underlay device-to-device communications on multiple channels,

    M. Elnourani, B. Beferull-Lozano, D. Romero, and S. Deshmukh, “Reliable underlay device-to-device communications on multiple channels,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Workshop Sig. Process. Advances Wireless Commun. IEEE, 2019, pp. 1–5

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    Fractional programming for communication systems—part i: Power control and beamforming,

    K. Shen and W. Yu, “Fractional programming for communication systems—part i: Power control and beamforming,” IEEE Trans. Sig. Process., vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2616–2630, May 2018

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Fractional programming for communication systems—part ii: Uplink scheduling via matching,

    K. Shen and W. Yu, “Fractional programming for communication systems—part ii: Uplink scheduling via matching,” IEEE Trans. Sig. Process. , vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 2631–2644, May 2018

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Convex optimization: Algorithms and complexity,

    S. Bubeck et al., “Convex optimization: Algorithms and complexity,” Foundations and Trends R⃝ in Machine Learning , vol. 8, no. 3-4, pp. 231–357, 2015

    work page 2015

  36. [36]

    A block coordinate descent method for regularized multiconvex optimization with applications to nonnegative tensor factorization and completion,

    Y . Xu and W. Yin, “A block coordinate descent method for regularized multiconvex optimization with applications to nonnegative tensor factorization and completion,” SIAM J. on imaging sciences , vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1758–1789, 2013

    work page 2013

  37. [37]

    D. P. Bertsekas, Convex optimization theory , Athena Scientific Belmont, 2009

    work page 2009

  38. [38]

    Convergence of the iterates of descent methods for analytic cost functions,

    P.A. Absil, R. Mahony, and B. Andrews, “Convergence of the iterates of descent methods for analytic cost functions,” SIAM J. on Optimization , vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 531–547, 2005

    work page 2005