Use of Non-monotonic Utility in Multi-Attribute Network Selection

  • Farooq Bari
  • Victor C.M. Leung
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 44)


In the past few decades several wide-area and local-area wireless access technologies have emerged. Network convergence across these different access technologies holds a promise of enabling ubiquitous service availability but faces several technical challenges. With anticipated proliferation of multimode IP devices, the optimal selection of a service delivery network among multiple IP-based wireless access alternatives is one of the important issues that is actively studied and discussed in several standardization forums. Use of multi-attribute decision making (MADM) algorithms has been proposed in the past for network selection decisions in a heterogeneous wireless network environment. A direct comparison of these algorithms is difficult as this would require the use of another MADM algorithm. A better approach instead is to ascertain the appropriateness of the algorithm to the problem space. This chapter provides the basis for evaluating the appropriateness of MADM algorithms for network selection. It analyzes the use of MADM algorithms such as TOPSIS, ELECTRE and GRA for network selection and argues that GRA provides the best approach in scenarios where the utilities of some of the attributes are non-monotonic. We propose a novel stepwise approach for GRA that uses multiple reference networks and explain how it works with network selection scenarios.


Gray Relational Analysis Service Type Network Selection Attribute Weight Reference Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Interworking with External Networks Task Group, IEEE 802.11u, tgu_update.htm
  2. 2.
    “Media Independent Handover”, IEEE 802.21,
  3. 3.
    3GPP Technical Specification Group Services and Systems Aspects; 3GPP System Architecture Evolution: Architecture Enhancements for non-3GPP accesses (2007), 3GPP Technical Report 23.402.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Triantaphyllou E (2002), Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song Q, Jamalipour A (2004), “Quality of Service Provisioning in Wireless LAN/UMTS Integrated Systems using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Grey Relational Analysis”, Proc. IEEE Globecom, TX, USA.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Song Q, Jamalipour A (2005), “Network selection in an integrated wireless LAN and UMTS environment using mathematical modeling and computing techniques”, IEEE Wireless Commun., 12(3), 42–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Song Q, Jamalipour A (2005), “A network selection mechanism for next generation networks”, Proc. IEEE ICC, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stevens-Navarro E,. Wong VWS (2006), “Comparison between Vertical Handoff Decision Algorithms for Heterogeneous Wireless Networks,” Proc. IEEE VTC-Spring, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Mehtods and Applications, Springer Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Benayoun R, Roy B, Sussmann N (1966), “Manual de reference du programme electre, Note de Sythese et Formation,” Direction Scietifique SEMA, N. 25.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deng JL (1989), “Introduction to Grey System”, J. Grey Syst., 1(1), 1–24.MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of Electrical & Computer EngineeringThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations