A survey on incremental relaying protocols in cooperative communication

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 15 | Dec-2014 | IWCPS-2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 23
A SURVEY ON INCREMENTAL RELAYING PROTOCOLS IN
COOPERATIVE COMMUNICATION
Rinu Titus1
, Unnikrishnan M2
, Premkumar C.V3
1
Student, Department of Electronics, SOE CUSAT, Kerala, India
2
Student, Department of Electronics, SOE CUSAT, Kerala, India
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Electronics, SOE CUSAT, Kerala, India
Abstract
Cooperative communication is one of the latest techniques in wireless communication to form virtual antenna arrays. Cooperative
communication is an alternative method for MIMO (Multiple input multiple output) system. This scheme assumes TDMA (Time
division multiple access) channel accessing and divides the communication into two phases which includes direct transmission
and retransmission by the relay terminal. A few cooperative diversity protocols ,for example fixed relaying, selection relaying
and incremental relaying are used in order to perform different sorts of processing by the relay terminals, and combining at the
destination terminals. Each diversity protocol exhibits its own unique performance. Fixed relaying can be further classified into
amplify and forward (AF) relaying and decode and forward (DF) relaying. In AF , relay users amplifies the signal and
retransmits it, and in the case of DF, the relay users decodes and retransmits the signal. The Selection relaying is performed by
taking the fading coefficient into account.
In this report, the recent works on incremental relaying protocol has been summarized. Incremental relaying is based on the
feedback mechanism. In this scheme, relay users perform retransmission only if needed, based on the received SNR (Signal to
noise ratio) or decoding error that occurs during direct transmission. It is used in cooperative communication in order to attain
efficient use of degrees of freedom and to overcome bandwidth inefficiency. The authors have presented a number of protocols
such as Incremental selection amplify and forward (ISAF), Joint incremental selection relaying (JISR), Fractional Incremental
relaying (FIR), Selective Fractional Incremental relaying (SFIR) and Efficient Incremental relaying (EIR).
Keywords: Cooperative diversity, Relaying, Signal to noise ratio, Hybrid automatic repeat request, Spectral
efficiency.
--------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years the communication technology has
developed exponentially in order to meet user needs.
Cooperative communication is one of the latest technologies
used in Wireless communication. Cooperative
communication helps to achieve a very high data rate.
Comprehensive theory, implementation and performances of
cooperative communication and related topics is given by J
N Laneman [1],B Zhao [2],Q.F Zhou [3], H. Long et al.[5]
M M. Fareed [17],and a significant number of papers are
available in this research area.
Cooperative communication establishes its implementation
by providing cooperative diversity. Thus the network that
uses cooperative communication is also termed as
cooperative diversity network. In a cooperative
communication system, each wireless user will transmit its
own data and cooperatively transmits data of other users in
the network. Fig-1 and Fig-2 represents a cooperative
diversity network scenario. This particular technique can be
used instead of Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) [2],
[3] technology. Cooperative communication works by
creating a virtual network of nodes that are ready to
cooperate. The nodes can be any wireless device such as
mobile phones, laptops, etc. Each node provides its antenna
to form virtual antenna networks. This technique overcomes
the limitations of MIMO networks such as increased space
utilization and issues related to incorporating several
antennas into one system.
Relaying is used in cooperative diversity networks primarily
to employ different types of processing by the relay
terminals and combining at the destination terminals. These
networks are built based on the classical relay channel
model [4] and inspects the issue of creating and exploiting
cooperative diversity by utilizing a collection of distributed
antennas belonging to different terminals, each with its data
to transmit. Repetition coding [5] is used in this system
because of its ease of access and very low implementation
complexity. Relaying protocols used in cooperative-
diversity networks are Fixed relaying, Selection relaying
and Incremental relaying [1], [6]. This paper discusses the
incremental relaying protocols in detail. Cooperative
diversity scenario is divided into two phases such as Phase
1 and Phase 11. Phase 1 is generalized as broadcast phase in
which source broadcasts packets, So that it can be heard by
relays and destination. Phase 11 relays forward the packet
that it receives during phase 1. Usually phase 1 is similar in
all the relaying protocols. Only the processes and procedures
in phase 11 distinguish the various relaying protocols.

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig -1: Cooperative diversity scenario for a two user system
(S: source, R: relay, D: destination)
Fig -2: Cooperative diversity scenario for multi user system
[5]
This rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2
briefly explains the system model . And in section 3 we
outline general cooperative diversity protocols. Section 4
presents a literature survey of incremental relaying protocols
in detail. Finally in section 5 the paper is summarized.
2. SYSTEM MODEL
The system model is considered for single relay cooperative
networks. We assume the terminals to operate in time
division multiple acces (TDMA) scheme with QPSK
signals. The channel is frequency non-selective Rayleigh
fading with AWGN (Additive white Gaussian noise)
transmission. Let i and j represents two terminal nodes, then
aij, nij represent the link coefficient and AWGN respectively
between the terminals. Each channel coefficient can be
modeled as independent complex Gaussian random variable
with variance σij
2
and mean zero, Given  ij is the
instantaneous SNR and ρij is the average SNR between
terminals i and j .Let R’ represent the spectral efficiency and
Δij is the SNR offsets. The base band equivalent cooperative
diversity channel can be modeled as follows:
During phase 1, the received signals at the destination and
relay will be as follows
Yd=as,dXs+nsd (1)
Yr=asrXs+nsr (2)
where Xs represents the source transmitted signal.
The received signal at the destination during phase 11 is
Yd=ardXr+nrd (3)
Where the relay transmitted signal is given by Xr .
3. COOPERATIVE DIVERSITY PROTOCOLS
Cooperative diversity protocols are described in detail by
Leneman [1] and Aria Nosratinia and Ahmadreza Hedayat
[6]. Cooperative diversity mainly uses fixed, selection and
incremental relaying protocols. In this paper, the analysis is
performed by considering the transmission of packet data.
In all the cooperative diversity protocols, the transmission of
packets is being done in two phases. These operations are
illustrated in Fig-1.
 Phase 1: Coordination phase - In this phase, users
(source, destination, relay) exchange their own
source data and control messages with each other
and/or the destination.
 Phase 11: Cooperation phase - In this phase, the
users cooperatively retransmit their messages to the
destination.
Cooperative diversity transmission is performed by several
numbers of protocols such as Fixed relaying, Selection
relaying and Incremental relaying. Leneman [1] proposed
all these protocols in 2004 and researches in this field are
still going on to modify these protocols to obtain a better
performance.
 Fixed relaying: The received signals subject to their
power constrains will either be amplified, or
received signals are re-encoded followed by
decoding operation and retransmit the messages.
 Selection relaying: The transmitting terminals are
allowed to select a suitable cooperative action based
upon the measured SNR between them.
 Incremental relaying: This scheme improves the
performance of existing fixed or selection relaying
by exploiting limited feedback from the destination
and relaying whenever necessary.
3.1 Fixed relaying
Fixed relaying is classified into two
 Amplify and forward.
 Decode and forward.
3.1.1 Amplify and Forward (AF)
In AF, noisy versions of the transmitted signal from the
partner users will be received at every user terminal. The
user then amplifies and retransmits this noisy version. The
base station proceeds the processing by combining the
information sent by the user and partner users, and settles on
a final decision about the transmitted bit. Even though the
noise is amplified by cooperation, the base station receives
two independently faded forms of the signal and can make
better decisions on the detection of data.
The expression for probability of outage for amplify and
forward scheme is given as
22 2 2 '
,
2 2 2
, , ,
1 2 1
2
R
s r rdout
AF
s d s r r d
p
SNR
 
  
   
    
  
(4)

_______________________________________________________________________________________
3.1.2 Decode and Forward (DF)
Aria Nosratinia and Ahmadreza Hedayat [6] describes
decode and forward system as follows. In the decode and
forward protocol user tries to decode the partner’s data and
then proceeds to retransmit the detected data. The base
station then combines the data sent by the user and partner,
and settles on a final decision about the transmitted bit. The
decoding process at the relay terminal removes the noise
unlike AF protocol.
The expression for probability of outage for decode and
forward scheme is given as
2 '
2
,
1 2 1R
out
DF
s r
p
SNR
  
    
  
(5)
3.2 Selection Relaying (SR)
Selection relaying is performed by taking the fading
coefficient into account. Optimum selection relaying
protocols are discussed by Su and Xin Liu [7]. Fading
coefficients [8][9] can be measured accurately in
cooperative terminals and they are known to the receivers.
So in selection relaying, transmission is adapted in
accordance with fading coefficients. Adaptation is done as
stated below.
 Measured fading coefficient falls below a certain
threshold: The source progresses with its
transmission to the destination, in the form of
repetition or more powerful codes.
 Measured fading coefficient lies above the
threshold: The relay progress with its transmission
by either amplify and forward or decode and
forward, in order to achieve diversity gain.
The probability of outage for selection relaying scheme is
given by
2 2
,
2 2 2
, , ,
1
2
s r rdout
SDF
s d s r r d
p
 
  
 
   
 
(6)
3.3 Incremental Relaying (IR)
Incremental relaying is developed in order to achieve
efficient spectral efficiency and efficient use of degrees of
freedom. This particular relaying protocol is discussed in
detail in the next section. According to this protocol relay
retransmits only if the reception of the packet fails in first
phase. IR can be of either IAF (Incremental Amplify and
Forward) or IDF (Incremental Decode and Forward) based
on the action that is performed by the relay.
The probability of outage for incremental relaying scheme is
given by
22 2 '
,
2 2 2
, , ,
1 2 1
2
R
s r rdout
IAF
s d s r r d
p
SNR
 
  
   
    
  
(7)
The performance curve of analytical outage probability for
all the diversity protocols discussed so far is given in Fig-3.
Fig- 3 performance plot of AF,DF, SR, IAF with respect to
outage probability and rate normalized SNR[1]
4. INCREMENTAL RELAYING PROTOCOLS
Incremental relaying protocol is the key interest of this
paper. A number of authors have proposed and analyzed the
implementation of this particular protocol. Performance
analysis of incremental relaying is still an interesting
research field. Leneman [1] Ikki and Ahemed [10] [11],
Bastami and Olfat [12], Zhou and Lau [15], Long and Zheng
[16], Kuang and Chunjing Hu[18], M M Fareed et al.[19]
have stated in detail and have evaluated performance of
Incremental relaying protocol. like amplify and forward,
decode and forward protocol, during phase 1, source mobile
node broadcasts the packets to all the other nodes including
relays and destinations. But during the second phase the
relay retransmits data packets only in the necessary
conditions. This means that the relay retransmits only if the
reception of the packet fails in the first phase. This is done
by providing a limited feedback from the destination, which
indicates the success or failure of the packet in the direct
transmission phase. Thus the protocol tries to save the
spectrum by restricting the relaying process only to the
necessary conditions [1].
The feedback information regarding the success or failure in
incremental relaying (IF) scheme is determined by the
destination is based on either instantaneous SNR (signal to
noise ratio) or decoding error. Leneman [1] states that
incremental relaying can be viewed as an extension of
hybrid ARQ [10]. In ARQ (automatic repeat request) source
performs retransmission if destination sends a negative
acknowledgement. In incremental relaying the relay
performs the retransmission. ARQ protocols for two user
cooperative networks have been discussed in detail by
Zahng,Wang et al. [13]. They introduced two types of ARQ
protocols. Post cooperative and Pre cooperative ARQ
protocols. Post cooperative ARQ is a fixed relaying
protocol, in which both source and relay take part in every

_______________________________________________________________________________________
ARQ round. Post cooperative ARQ is evaluated by using
Alamouti space time coding in [14].
 Step 1: Initially data packet is broadcasted from the
source, and then the relay and the destination
receives it. Destination then tries to decode the
message. If errors are detected while decoding, a
negative acknowledgement (NACK) information is
sent to source and relay, or else, the
acknowledgement (ACK) information is sent.
 Step 2: If the relay receives NACK information in
step 1 then it transmits the data packet received
during initial broadcasting, or else, the source starts
a new transmission.
Zhou and Lau [15] introduced two new protocols for
incremental relaying in 2008, and they analysed the
protocols by calculating probability of outage and spectral
efficiency. Then in the year 2009, H Long, Kan Zheng [16]
et al. used fractional incremental relaying protocol as a
modification of existing incremental relaying protocols. And
Brante, Souza et al. [17] further considered incremental
relaying protocol based on fractional incremental relaying
and mentioned it as cooperative partial retransmission
scheme in their research paper by 2011. Selective fractional
incremental relaying (SFIR) is the other protocol which is
used in incremental relaying. In SFIR, fractional incremental
relaying (FIR) and incremental redundancy (IRD) protocol
is the selected scheme as introduced by J. Kuang, C. Hu et al
[18] in 2010. And the latest works of incremental relaying is
termed as efficient incremental relaying for fading channels
as given by M M Fareed, M S Alouini [19] in July 2014.
4.1 Incremental Selection Amplify and Forward
(ISAF)
The ISAF protocol is proposed by Zhou and Lau [15].
According to this protocol there are three feedback
messages indicating success, half- success, and failure. So in
order to use ISAF the feedback message will be of two bits.
In ISAF at the end of phase 1 destination will broad cast one
of 3 messages. The 3 feedback messages that are introduced
by Zhou and Lau [15] are as following.
I. Success: Success message is generated when the
destination decodes the information without any error during
phase 1. In this case relay will not perform any
retransmission and source proceeds to send the next packet.
II. Half success: If the destination is not able to decode the
packet in phase 1 and then if destination determines that
doubling the SNR will allow a successful decoding of the
packet. In this case a ‘half success’ message will be broad
casted by the destination. So once if the half success
message is received then relay will not perform
retransmission, instead retransmission will be performed by
the source. Combining the signals received in the two
phases will double the overall SNR, that is, enhanced by 3
dB, so that the destination will decode the packet without
errors.
III. Failure: Suppose if the destination cannot decode the
packet successfully in Phase I. Also in addition, it realises
that doubling the SNR will not permit a successful decoding
of the packet. At that time, it will broadcast a ‘failure’
message. For this case, during phase 11 the relay amplifies
and forwards the information signal that it received in phase
1. The outage probability of ISAF is given below
22 2 '
,
2 2 2
, , ,
3 2 1
8
R
s r rdout
ISAF
s d s r r d
p
SNR
 
  
   
    
  
(8)
4.2 Joint Incremental Selection Relaying (JISR)
JISR protocol is also proposed by Zhou and Lau [15] with
some modifications in the operation when ‘failure’ message
is received as feedback after phase 1. JISR utilizes the
channel state information (CSI) between the source and the
relay that is known at the relay side in order to take actions
during phase 11. JISR protocol operates in a similar manner
that of ISAF protocol when ‘success’ and ‘half success’
feedbacks are received. In the case of failure feedback relay
will perform any of the following actions.
I. Relay encode and forward packet: If relay has
successfully decoded the packet that it received during
phase 1, will be encoded and forward the packet during
retransmission.
II. Relay amplify and forward the packet: If relay has not
successfully decoded the packet that it received during
phase 1, then it will just amplify and forward the packet
during retransmission.
The information regarding whether the relay has been
successfully decoded the signal or not during phase 1, will
be determined from the channel condition of the source to
the relay.
Outage probability of JISR protocol is given as
22 2 '
,
2 2 2
, , ,
3 2 1
8
R
s r rdout
JISR
s d s r r d
p
SNR
 
  
   
    
  
(9)
Performance analysis plot of ISAF and JISR protocols
based on outage probability is given in fig- 4. Also ISAF
and JISR is compared with IAF and SDF.

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig- 4 Performance curve for JISR,ISAF,IAF and SDF
cooperative network[15].
4.3 Fractional Incremental Relaying (FIR)
In this scheme the idea of partial retransmission HARQ
[20], [21] is introduced into incremental relaying protocol in
order to achieve spectral efficiency. In the IR protocol so far
we have discussed, transmission of the entire packet by
relay is a waste of system resource if powerful channel
coding is utilized. Fractional incremental relaying (FIR) was
proposed by H.Long,K zheng et al. [16] . G G de Oliveira
Brante, R.D Souza et al. [17] also studied in detail about
FIR in 2011. They termed FIR as cooperative partial
retransmission in their work. The idea of FIR is explained as
follows.
According to FIR, during phase 11, relay divides the packet
into fractions and relay retransmits only a fraction of the
original message when the destination requests a
retransmission. If the ACK information is received or the
maximum number of relaying transmissions is reached,
source starts a new transmission. FIR scheme is developed
based on the partial retransmission strategy: “When a packet
of data needs to be retransmitted, that packet is not repeated
entirely. Instead, symbols of that packet are repeated, a few
at a time, sequentially, as needed.”
The partial retransmission strategy makes more effective use
of channel than the full retransmission ARQ strategy [13].
The system operates under the incremental decode and
forward (IDF) cooperative protocol using Type-I HARQ
with chase combining (CC) [20]. In FIR the code rate
changes at each retransmission, and as a consequence, the
decoder is more complex in order to support different code
rates[8]. Fig-5 illustrates the FIR frame scheme. Detailed
protocol description of FIR is given in [16]. H.Long,K
zheng et al. [16] done performance analysis and simulation
of the protocol and concluded that the FIR protocol makes
more efficient use of channel freedom degrees and spends
less relay transmission duration.
Fig -5: Illustration of FIR scheme [16].
The FIR protocol is described as follows:
Let ‘N’ be the total number of packets. ‘L1’ denotes the
number of coded bits in each packet. And ‘M’ denotes the
modulation level. ‘NFir’ be the number of fractions that a
packet is divided into in relay. ‘L2’ is defined as the number
of coded bits in each fraction. ‘i’ denotes the number of
packets. Where ‘i’ varies from 1,2..N. ‘j’ represents
fractions into which each packet is divided. ‘j’ varies from
1, 2 ….., NFir.
 Step 1: Initialize i=1.Source transmits a packet with
L1/M symbols.
 Step 2: Relay receives the packet and divides it into
‘NFir’ fractions with L1/ (M*NFir) symbols each
L2=L1/NFir.
 Step 3: Destination receives the packet and tries to
decode the message.
 3.1: If errors are detected, the NACK
information is sent to Source and Relay.
 3.2: Otherwise, the ACK information is sent.
 Step4:
 4.1: If the ACK information is received or the
maximum number of relaying transmissions is
reached, Source starts a new transmission, go
back to Step 1.
 4.2: Otherwise, R transmits the j’th fraction of
the packet just received, j=j+1, go back to Step
3.
Let the instantaneous SNR between source and destination
be represented by  SD and equivalent SNR of the received
signal in phase 11 be represented by
eq
R .P0( ) and P( )
represent the approximate BER (bit error rate) performance
under instantaneous SNR  with code word length L1 and
the approximate BER performance under AWGN channel
respectively. For FIR protocol [16] ,BLER (Block error
rate) performance is calculated as
0 ,
1
( ) ( )
FIRN
FIR eq
E SD i SD R
i
P E P P  

 
  
 
 (10)
Since average SNR( ρij ) and instantaneous SNR (  ) are
related BLER is evaluated against ρij in performance
analysis (Fig-6).

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig -6: Performance comparison of FIR and IAF for
different values of SNR offset [16].
In general if EP is the BLER and RP is the probability for
relay transmission then the spectral efficiency is given by
1 EP
T


 (11)
Where, T is the transmission duration and is given by
1 RT P  (12)
So in FIR Probability of relay transmission RP is smaller
compared to all the protocols discussed so far. This is
because of the reason that In the FIR protocol, when a
packet of data needs to be transmitted by relay node,
symbols are transmitted a few at a time as needed instead of
the entire packet [15]. Thus the relay transmission duration
will be less So according to equation (11) spectral efficiency
will be high. Normalized spectral efficiency performance
plot is given in fig-4d.
4.4 Selective Fractional Incremental Relaying
(SFIR)
Selective Fractional Incremental Relaying (SFIR) protocol
is the modification of FIR .SFIR is proposed by J. Kuang, C.
Hu et al [18]. SFIR protocol is based on the FIR and the
IRD (incremental redundancy) [18] protocols. The FIR and
the IRD protocols are similar in the first phase through the
source destination link, but different in phase 11. The FIR
and the IRD protocols are adaptively selected during phase
11 (retransmission) according to the performance and the
overhead .The boundary condition for adaptively selecting
FIR and IRD protocols is being calculated on the basis of
the instantaneous channel conditions. If the function of
instantaneous SNR from source to destination is greater than
instantaneous SNR of packet fraction at destination, then
phase 11 is proceeded with IRD protocol else FIR is
performed. The detailed protocol description of FIR and
IRD is given in [18]. Simulation results in [18] demonstrate
that the SFIR protocol makes more efficient use of degrees
of freedom compared to the FIR and the IRD protocols.
Fig -7: Normalized spectral efficient performance
comparison of SFIR with FIR and IRD [18].
Outage probability of SFIR is obtained by modifying the
analysis of FIR by taking into account the IRD protocol in
required section. The outage probability obtained will be
less compared to that of FIR.
Comparison of spectral efficiency performance of IRD,FIR,
and SFIR is given in Fig- 7. From the plot it is clear that
SFIR out performs IRD and SFIR protocols.
4.5 Efficient Incremental Relaying (EIR)
In this scheme a group of N packets are send from source in
phase 1. So unlike all the relaying protocols, according
efficient incremental relaying (EIR)[19], a group of packets
is sent during phase 1. At the end of phase 1 the destination
sends feedback to the relay in order to indicate that M
number of packets out of N packets is received with low
SNR. So in phase 11 the relay forwards only a compartment
of weakest packets as instructed and these packets are then
combined with the directly received signal using Maximal
ratio combining (MRC) and decoded at the destination.
Along with this scheme three threshold based schemes are
introduced in order to increase the throughput of the
scheme. These protocols are introduced by M M Fareed, M
S Alouini [19] in 2014 for fading channels.
For the efficient incremental relaying in which the weakest
packets are retransmitted, we are considering N packets out
of which M number of packets are weakest ones , the Total
packet error rate (PER) is calculated in [19] as
1 1
1 1M N
T
i i MCi i
PER PER PER
N N  
   (13)

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Where ciPER is the PER of ith
weakest packet from i=1 to
M that are decoded at destination using MRC and iPER is
the PER of packets from direct link.
Thus the basic scheme under incremental relaying is that the
relay forwards the M weakest packets ranked based on their
direct link SNR. The three threshold based schemes other
than the basic efficient incremental relaying protocol are as
follows.
EIR with threshold at destination (EIR-TD): Packets with
the weakest SNR among all the packets are forwarded by
the relay based on a threshold SNR at destination. PER of
EIR-TD [19] is as follows
1 1
1 1
( ) ( )
Dir
M N
TD
i i MR
PER PER i PER i
N N  
   (14)
Where ( )RPER i is the PER of ith
weakest packet from i=1
to M that are decoded at destination using MRC and
iPER is the PER of packets from direct link that are with
higher SNR than the threshold SNR i .
EIR with threshold at relay (EIR-TR): Packets at the
relay are forwarded only when the received SNR is above a
certain threshold. Packet error rate of EIR-TR[19] is
( ) ( ) ( )
[1 ( )][ ( )]
EIR TR
SR r NC
SR r CO
PER i F PER i
F PER i



 

(15)
Where ( )SR rF  is the probability that the received SNR at
the relay is less than the threshold r , ( )NCPER i is the
PER with no cooperation and ( )COPER i is the PER with
cooperation.
EIR with threshold at relay and destination EIR-TRD:
In this scheme, thresholds are introduced at both the relay
and the destination.
The packet error rate and the efficiency of the proposed
scheme is calculated to get analytical insight, and provided
numerical results to validate the performance of the
proposed scheme. The PER [19] at the destination for the ith
packet where i=1,2,... ,M can be written as
( ) [1 ( ( ))] ( )
( ( )) ( )
EIR TRD
r NC
r CO
PER i P co i PER i
P co i PER i

   (16)
Where ( ( ))rP co i is the probability for cooperation given
by
( ( )) ( ) ( )r r SR SR r i DP co i P P      (17)
( )NCPER i is the PER with no cooperation, and
( )COPER i is the PER with cooperation.
Fig -8: Performance curve of EIR-TD for different values
of threshold Dτ for BPSK signalling [19].
Performance analysis curve of EIR-TD protocol with respect
to PER and SNR is given in Fig 8 And performance
analysis plot of EIR-TR and EIR-TRD can be found in [19].
5. SUMMARY
This study contains a brief description of cooperative
diversity protocols and a detailed examination of
incremental relaying protocols. A detailed discussion of five
incremental relaying protocols has been made. The analysis
in all the protocols is performed by considering the Rayleigh
fading channels and system model of single source relay and
destination. ISAF (incremental selection amplify and
forward) and JISAF protocols give an improved
performance based on outage probability in comparison with
traditional incremental relaying protocols. As far as FIR and
SFIR are concerned spectrum efficiency is improved. EIR
protocol is analyzed by considering three cases EIR-
TD,EIR-TR and EIR-TRD. So in order to get a better
performance in spectral efficiency and outage behavior
simultaneously, it has been observed that two or more
incremental relaying protocols have to be combined there by
completely modifying a new protocol.
REFERENCES
[1]. J. Nicholas Laneman, D. N. C. Tse, and G. W. Wornell,
“Cooperative diversity in wireless networks: Efficient
protocols and outage behavior”IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 50, no. 12, pp. 3062–3080, 2004.
[2]. Paul Raj A.J , Gore D A ,Nabar R.U, Bolcskei H “An
overview of MIMO communications-a key to Giga-bit
wireless ” Proceedings of the IEEE(Volume 92,issue 2)
[3]. Andrea Goldsmith “Wireless communications” ISBN-
13 978-0-521-70416-8 , Cambridge university press 2005

_______________________________________________________________________________________
[4]. T. M. Cover and A. A. El Gamal, “Capacity theorems
for the relay channel,”IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. IT-
25, pp. 572–584, Sept. 1979.
[5]. J.Nicholas Laneman, Gregory W. Wornell “Distributed
Space–Time-Coded Protocols for Exploiting Cooperative
Diversity in Wireless Networks” IEEE Transactions on
information theory” Vol. 49, NO. 10, October 2003
[6]. Aria Nosratinia and Ahmadreza Hedayat,Todd E.Hunter
“Cooperative communication in wireless networks” IEEE
communications magazine,October 2004.
[7]. Weifeng Su, Xin Liu “On Optimum Selection Relaying
Protocols in Cooperative Wireless Networks” IEEE
Transactions on Communications, VOL. 58, NO. 1, January
2010.
[8]. Theodore S Rappaport “Wireless communications”2nd
ed. Pearson education 2002.
[9]John G.Proakis “Digital communications”3rd
ed.McGraw
Hill,Inc 1995
[10]. S.S. Ikki, M H. Ahmed “Performance Analysis of
Decode-and-Forward Incremental Relaying Cooperative-
Diversity Networks over Rayleigh Fading Channels”
Vehicular Technology Conference, 2009.
[11]. S.S. Ikki, M.H. Ahmed “Performance analysis of
incremental-relaying cooperative-diversity networks over
Rayleigh fading channels” Published in IET
communications, February 2011 ( Vol .5,Iss 3,pp.337-349).
[12]. A.H bastami, A Olifat “Optimal Incremental relaying
in cooperative diversity systems” Published in IET
Communications, January 2013 (Vol 7.Iss 2, pp. 152-168)
[13]. C.Zang W.Wang ,G . Wei “Design of ARQ protocols
for two-user cooperative diversity systems in wireless
networks” Elsevier,Science direct Computer
communications, pp.1111-1117, 2009
[14]. Branka Vucetic,Jinhong Yuan “Space-Time Coding”
John Wiley & Sons Ltd,2003
[15]. Q. Zhou and F. Lau, “Two incremental relaying
protocols for cooperative networks,”IET Commun., vol. 2,
no. 10, pp. 1272–1278, Nov. 2008
[16]. H. Long, K. Zheng, W. Wang, and F. Wang,
“Approximate performance analysis of the incremental
relaying protocol and modification,” inProc. IEEE 70th
VTC-Fall, Anchorage, AK, USA, Sep. 2009, pp. 1–5
[17]. Glauber Gomes de Oliveira Brante, Richard Demo
Souza and Marcelo Eduardo Pellenz “Cooperative partial
retransmission scheme in incremental decode-and-forward
relaying.” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications
and Networking20112011:57.
[18]. Jinghua Kuang, Chunjing Hu, Hang Long, Kan Zheng,
Wenbo Wang “Selective Fractional Incremental Relaying
Protocol in Cooperative Systems” International Conference
on Communications, Circuits and Systems (ICCCAS), 2010
[19]. Muhammad Mehboob Fareed, Mohamed-Slim
Alouini, Hong-Chuan Yang “Efficient Incremental Relaying
for Packet Transmission Over Fading Channels” IEEE
Transactions on Wireless communications, Vol. 13, No. 7,
JULY 2014
[20]. Bin Zhao, Matthew C. Valenti “Practical Relay
Networks: A Generalization of Hybrid-ARQ” IEEE Journal
on selected areas in communications, Vol. 23, No. 1,
January 2005
[21]. C Lott, O Milenkovic, E Soljanin, “Hybrid ARQ:
theory, state of the art and future directions”, in Proc IEEE
Information Theory Workshop on Information Theory for
Wireless Networks, 1–5 (2007).
BIOGRAPHIES
Rinu Titus received the B.Tech degree
from Sahrdaya College of Engineering and
Technology, University of Calicut in 2012.
She is currently pursuing her M.Tech
degree in Electronics and Communication
Engineering with specialization in
Wireless Technology from School of Engineering, CUSAT.
Email: rinutitus@gmail.com
Unnikrishnan M received the B Tech
Degree in Electronics and Communication
Engineering from College of Engineering
Trikaripur, Kerala, India, in 2012. He is
now pursuing M Tech degree in
Electronics and Communication with
specialization in Wireless Technology at CUSAT, Kochi,
India, Email:unnikrishnanm60@gmail.com
Premkumar C.V received his M.Tech
from CUSAT in 2005 June. He is currently
serving as a faculty member at CUSAT
since 2001. His interested research field is
Wireless Communication.
Email: premkumar@cusat.ac.in

A survey on incremental relaying protocols in cooperative communication

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to A survey on incremental relaying protocols in cooperative communication (20)

More from eSAT Publishing House (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A survey on incremental relaying protocols in cooperative communication