Data-driven resource allocation with traffic load prediction

Research Paper


Wireless big data is attracting extensive attention from operators, vendors and academia, which provides new freedoms in improving the performance from various levels of wireless networks. One possible way to leverage big data analysis is predictive resource allocation, which has been reported to increase spectrum and energy resource utilization efficiency with the predicted user behavior including user mobility. However, few works address how the traffic load prediction can be exploited to optimize the data-driven radio access. We show how to translate the predicted traffic load into the essential information used for resource optimization by taking energy-saving transmission for non-real-time user as an example. By formulating and solving an energy minimizing resource allocation problem with future instantaneous bandwidth information, we not only provide a performance upper bound, but also reveal that only two key parameters are related to the future information. By exploiting the residual bandwidth probability derived from the traffic volume prediction, the two parameters can be estimated accurately when the transmission delay allowed by the user is large, and the closed-form solution of global optimal resource allocation can be obtained when the delay approaches infinity. We provide a heuristic resource allocation policy to guarantee a target transmission completion probability when the delay is no-so-large. Simulation results validate our analysis, show remarkable energy-saving gain of the proposed predictive policy over non-predictive policies, and illustrate that the time granularity in predicting traffic load should be identical to the delay allowed by the user.


predictive resource allocation big data traffic load energy saving 


  1. [1]
    N. Bhushan, J. Y. Li, D. Malladi, et al. Network densification: the dominant theme for wireless evolution into 5G [J]. IEEE commun. mag., 2014, 52(2): 82–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Jardak, P. Mähönen, J. Riihijärvi, et al. Spatial big data and wireless networks: experiences, applications, and research challenges [J]. IEEE network, 2014, 28(4): 26–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    C. M. Song, Z. H. Qu, N. Blumm, et al. Limits of predictability in human mobility [J]. Science, 2010, 327(5968): 1018–1021.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Atawia, H. Abou-zeid, H. S. Hassanein, et al. Robust resource allocation for predictive video streaming under channel uncertainty [C]//IEEE Global Communications Conference, Austin, USA, 2014: 4683–4688.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Z. Lu, G. De Veciana. Optimizing stored video delivery for mobile networks: the value of knowing the future [C]//The 32nd IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, Turin, Italy, 2013: 2706–2714.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    N. Bui, J. Widmer. Mobile network resource optimization under imperfect prediction [C]//IEEE 16th International Symposium on A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, Boston, USA, 2015: 1–9.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    C. T. Yao, C. Y. Yang, Z. X. Xiong. Energy-saving predictive resource planning and allocation. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 2016, 64(12): 5078–5095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. Abou-Zeid, H. S. Hassanein. Predictive green wireless access: exploiting mobility and application information [J]. IEEE wirel. commun., 2013, 20(5): 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    R. P. Li, Z. F. Zhao, X. Zhou, et al. Energy savings scheme in radio access networks via compressive sensingbased traffic load prediction [J]. Transactions on emerging telecommunications technologies, 2014, 25(4): 468–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Mardani, G. B. Giannakis. Estimating traffic and anomaly maps via network tomography [J]. IEEE/ACM transactions on networking, 2016, 24(3): 1533–1547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Nadembega, A. Hafid, T. Taleb. A destination and mobility path prediction scheme for mobile networks [J]. IEEE transactions on vehicular technology, 2015, 64(6): 2577–2590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Y. Shi, M. Larson, A. Hanjalic. Collaborative filtering beyond the user-item matrix: a survey of the state of the art and future challenges [J]. ACM computing surveys, 2014, 47(1): 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    E. Oh, B. Krishnamachari, X. Liu, et al. Toward dynamic energy-efficient operation of cellular network infrastructure [J]. IEEE communications magazine, 2011, 49(6): 56–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    G. Auer, V. Giannini, C. Desset, et al. How much energy is needed to run a wireless network? [J]. IEEE wireless communications, 2011, 18(5): 40–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. K. Das, S. K. Sen, K. Basu, et al. A framework for bandwidth degradation and call admission control schemes for multiclass traffic in next-generation wireless networks [J]. IEEE journal on selected areas in communications, 2003, 21(10): 1790–1802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    A. O. Allen. Probability, statistics, and queueing theory: with computer science applications [M]. San Diego: Gulf Professional Publishing, 1990.MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    S. Boyd, L. Vandenberghe. Convex optimization [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. Hare, et al. On the Lambert W function [J]. Advances in computational mathematics, 1996, 5(1): 329–359.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    TR 36.814 V1.2.0. Further advancements for E-UTRA physical layer aspects (Release 9) [S]. 3GPP, 2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Posts & Telecom Press and Springer Singapore 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beihang UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.China Mobile Research InstituteBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations