1 / 19

Resource Allocation for E-healthcare Applications

Resource Allocation for E-healthcare Applications. Qinghua Shen. content. Intro: e-healthcare system Research issues Preliminary results conclusion. Intro: e-healthcare system. Randomness of the requests. Computing: Medical information processing. Body channel. Limited sensor energy.

saeran
Download Presentation

Resource Allocation for E-healthcare Applications

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Resource Allocation for E-healthcare Applications QinghuaShen

  2. content • Intro: e-healthcare system • Research issues • Preliminary results • conclusion

  3. Intro: e-healthcare system Randomness of the requests Computing: Medical information processing Body channel Limited sensor energy Wban: Remote monitoring Emergency traffic support Wbans: Hospital information collection Mobility distributed

  4. content • Intro: e-healthcare system • Research issues • Preliminary results • conclusion

  5. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • single sensor application • Network model • one PDA and one sensor with Pmax • Time is partitioned into slots with length T • a pilot of duration αT required for transmission. • Two decisions made by the sensor at each time slot • sleep decision s(i) • Transmission decision b(i) • Traffic and Channel Model • A(i): a maximum Amax and Dmax • h(i) : pathloss in power, bounded by minimum hmin and maximum hmax • i.i.d, stationary and ergodic • Energy Cost Model • Queue Update Listening Transmission

  6. Power vs. Delay trade-off • Energy Efficient Approaches • Opportunistic Transmission • exploiting channel dynamics • Sleep Scheduling • Originate from sensor networks, reduce idle listening • Delay requirements • Worst case delay Guarantee Dmax • deterministic delay requirement • Average sense delay • little’s law

  7. Power vs. Delay trade-off • Relationship between Energy and Delay single link • Power-Rate relationship • Shannon capacity formulation • A practical approximation --monomial function • The average power consumption • Service rate delay relationship • Queue: service process bµ(n) and the arrival rate A(n), service process is determined by transmission policy • Q(n)=Q(n-1)+A(n) - bµ(n) • Queue of a system is related to the delay • Average Delay • Worst Case Delay Qmaxdoesn’t guarantee a Dmax

  8. Power vs. Delay trade-off • Problem Formulation Power vs. Delay I (average sense delay[1]) • Optimization Objective • for V>0, the goal is to find the policy µ to minimize • Define the minimal average power can be achieved as the power needed to serve average arrival rate with no delay consideration, denoted by • , it’s the solution of the following problem with a policy Ψ(H) . • minimize EP(H, Ψ(H)) • subject to: E (Ψ(H)) • The policy for no delay consideration doesn’t need to take current queue state into decision making. • lower bound is proofed[1] • and a drift policy achieves it [1] R. Berry and R. Gallager, “Communication over fading channels with delay constraints,” IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1135–1149, 2002.

  9. Power vs. Delay trade-off • Problem Formulation Power vs. Delay II (Worst Case Delay ) • BT problem: B unit of traffic needed to transmitted by the deadline T • Continuous case, Markov Channel, monomial power rate function [2]formulation and solution • system updating equation • cost function and cost-to-go function • solve the Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equation backwards to obtain the optimal control policy • Discrete case, i.i.d channel [3] • monomial: optimal policy • Shannon: no closed form • scheduling policy characteristics • More opportunistically when deadline is far away • less opportunistically when queue length is large Transmission policy [2] MurtazaZafer and EytanModiano, Optimal Rate Control for Delay-Constrained Data Transmission over a Wireless Channel. IEEE Transactions on information theory, Vol. 54, No. 9, Sept. 2008. [3] J. Lee and N. Jindal, “Energy-efficient scheduling of delay constrained traffic over fading channels,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Communications, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1866–1875, 2009.

  10. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Problem formulation • 1) Lyapunov optimization theory[4] adopted • why not DP: • Curse of dimensionality • characteristics of Lyapunov optimization • decomposes a time average objective into objectives for each time slot • capture the trade-off between different system performance metrics • 2) Original Problem • goal: average power consumption • constraints: bounded delay, feasible rate [4] M. Neely, “Stochastic network optimization with application to communication and queueing systems,” Synthesis Lectures on Communication Networks, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–211, 2010.

  11. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Problem formulation • 3) Worst-Case Delay Constraint Transform[5] • Why? No direct link between maximum delay and maximum queue • a virtual queue Z(t) with a virtual arrival rate • Z(t) updates: • Lemma: Suppose system is controlled so that Z(i) Zmax, Q(i) Qmax, for all i, for some positive constants Zmax, Qmax. Then all data • in queue is transmitted with a maximum delay Dmax: • Transform: from bounded delay to bounded queue length [5] M. Neely, A. Tehrani, and A. Dimakis, “Efficient algorithms for renewable energy allocation to delay tolerant consumers,” in Proc. IEEE SmartGridComm’ 10, pp. 549–554, 2010.

  12. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Problem formulation • 4) Transform using Lyapunov optimization • why? Objectives for each time slot with illustration of the trade-off • a.quadratic form Lyapunov function • b. one-step Laypunov drift • c. upper bound of the drift • d. upper bound of the drift plus a weighted cost function • New objectives: min • Weighted cost function • Logic of minimization • minimizing the upper bound of the drift controls the delay • minimizing cost function is to minimize the energy consumption

  13. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Problem formulation • Final problem Objectives: average of all possible states for each time nonlinear Control variables: two decision variables one binary one integer

  14. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Algorithm design • two step algorithm • sleep scheduling • Where , and is the expectation of minimum of • Opportunistic Transmission • maximal available transmission amount given current channel

  15. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Performance Analysis • delay performance • Algorithm designed doesn’t guarantee non-positive drift • define two conditions • necessary for worst case delay guarantee Theorem 1. If above conditions hold, then deterministic upper bounds exist for actual queue and virtual queue as follows: • Recall lemma • Worst cast delay increase within • power consumption performance Theorem 2. Given the minimal power consumption P* that the system can achieve, the average power consumption of our proposed algorithm Pave satisfies: Pave P* + C/V , where C is a constant, at the cost of a worst-case delay increases within O(V ). • Stationary randomize policy

  16. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • simulation setup • Body channel • model suggested by IEEE 802.15 task group 6 under the frequency band 2.4GHz • Wake up ratio: the fraction of time slots in which the sensor wakes up among the number of total time slots • Parameters' Value

  17. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Simulation results • Data accumulation: for potential better channel • Flat cliff: not in a very good channel condition • Sharp cliff: in a good channel condition • Delay growth can be bounded a linear function of weighting factor • Larger weighting factor, poorer delay

  18. Single sensor WBAN scheduling • Simulation results • The gap between power consumption of our algorithm and the optimal one can be bounded by a function of the inverse of weighting factor • Smaller wakeup ratio, less power consumption • Larger virtual arrival rate, smaller delay • Larger virtual arrival rate, larger wakeup ratio

  19. Conclusion and Future works • A scheduling policy for single sensor WBAN application • Address the energy delay trade-off problem for WBAN • limited transmission power • random traffic and channel • worst case delay guarantee • Propose a scheduling policy for the problem • Utilize both sleep and opportunistic transmission for energy saving • Achieve worst case delay • Show trade-off between power consumption and delay

More Related