International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications

Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

Performance of Cooperative Spectrum Sensing in Log-normal

Shadowing and Fading under Fusion Rules

Srinivas Nallagonda, Sanjay Dhar Roy and Sumit Kundu

Department of ECE, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, India
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]

Abstract
The performance of a cognitive radio (CR) user is sometimes limited due to severe fading
or shadowing. In order to detect the primary user (PU) more accurately, we allow the
CR users to cooperate by sharing their information. In this paper we investigate
performance of single CR user and cooperative CR user based spectrum sensing (CSS)
using energy detector (ED) in channels such as Log-normal shadowing, Rayleigh and
Nakagami fading channels. Hard decision combining fusion rule (OR-logic, AND-logic
and MAJORITY-logic) is performed at fusion center (FC) to make the final decision
about the presence of PU. The performance of single CR user based spectrum sensing
scheme has been assessed in terms of missed detection (P m ) and false detection
probabilities (P f ). The performances of energy detector for different values of average
SNR are characterized through complementary receiver operating characteristic (ROC)
curves. Comparison among fusion rules has been investigated for a wide range of
average SNR values in Rayleigh and Nakagami fading channels. A simulation model
has been developed to evaluate performance of CSS in different fading environments.
The performance of CSS has also been studied for various data fusion rules in Log-
normal shadowing channel.

Keywords: Cognitive radio, energy detection, fading channels, fusion rules, detection
probability

1. Introduction
Cognitive radio (CR) technique has been proposed to solve the conflicts between
spectrum scarcity and spectrum under utilization [1]. It allows the CR users to share the
spectrum with primary users (PUs) by opportunistic accessing. The CR user can use the
spectrum only when it does not create any disturbance or interference to PUs.
Therefore, spectrum sensing is the key of cognitive radio technology since it needs to
detect the presence of PUs accurately and quickly. In many wireless applications, it is
of great interest to check the presence and availability of an active communication link
when the PU signal is unknown. In such scenarios, one appropriate choice consists of
using an energy detector (ED) which measures the energy in the received waveform
over an observation time window [2]. Spectrum sensing is a hard task because of
shadowing, fading and time-varying nature of wireless channels [3]. Due to the severe
multipath fading, a cognitive radio may fail to detect the presence of the PU. The
detection performance of a CR can be primarily determined on the basis of two metrics:
probability of false alarm, which denotes the probability of a CR user declaring that a
PU is present when the spectrum is actually free, and the probability of detection, which

15
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

denotes the probability of a CR declaring that a PU is present when the spectrum is

indeed occupied by the PU [4].Cooperative spectrum sensing improves the detection
performance where all CR users sense the PU individually and send their sensing
information in the form of 1-bit binary decisions (1 or 0) to Fusion center (FC). The
hard decision combining rule (OR, AND, and MAJORITY logic) is performed at FC
using a counting rule or voting rule to make the final decision regarding whether the PU
is present or not [5-9]. However, the existing works only examined the collaborative
spectrum sensing with OR-logic fusion, using ED in Log-normal shadowing and the
Rayleigh fading channel [6, 7]. Comparison among hard decision fusion rules for the
case of cooperative spectrum sensing has been investigated in a Suzuki fading channel
[5]. We note that the analytical expression for probability of detection in Rayleigh and
Nakagami fading channel was given in [10, 11]. The performance of single CR user
based spectrum sensing in fading channels such as Rayleigh, Nakagami, Weibull has
been studied in [12].The performance of cooperative spectrum sensing with censoring
of cognitive radios in Rayleigh fading channel has been evaluated in [13, 14].
Contribution of the paper: In this paper, we have presented a new simulation model
to study the performance of single CR and cooperative CR based spectrum sensing
(CSS), using energy detector, over Log-normal shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami
fading channels. Results obtained via our simulation test bed for the case of Log-
Normal shadowing channel match exactly with the results obtained in the paper [6]
under same scenario. Similarly, simulation results for the case of single CR user based
spectrum sensing in Rayleigh and Nakagami fading channel match exactly with the
theoretical results shown in paper [11]. The performance of CSS has been evaluated for
different number of CR users in Log-normal shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami faded
channels through complementary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (plot
of Qm vs. Qf). In particular, the performance of hard decision fusion rules under Log-
normal shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami fading channels has been made.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the system model under
consideration is described. It briefly describes the probabilities of detection and false
alarm over additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel, and fading channels. Our
simulation model is presented in Section 3. Results and discussions are presented in
Section 4. Finally we conclude in Section 5.

2. System Model
The energy detection method is the common method for detection of unknown
signals in noise [2]. The block-diagram of an energy detector is shown in Figure 1. The
input band pass filter (BPF) selects the center frequency f c , and bandwidth of interest,
W.

BPF (.)2 T

 (.)
X(t) 0
Decide
H0 or H1

Figure 1. Block Diagram of an Energy Detector

16
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

The output of BPF filter is passed to a squaring device to measure the received
energy. Then an integrator is placed to determine the observation interval, T. Finally,
output of the integrator, Y, is compared with a detection threshold,  to decide whether
the signal is present or not. We assume that each CR user employs same energy detector
and use the same threshold (  ).

Table 1. Notations and Descriptions

Description Symbol
Signal waveform s (t )
Noise waveform which is modeled as n(t )
a zero-mean white Gaussian random
process
One-sided noise power spectral N 01
density
Signal energy, E s T
E s   s 2 (t )dt.
0

Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) Es

 
N 01
Average SNR 
One-sided bandwidth (Hz), i.e., W
positive bandwidth of low-pass (LP)
signal
Time-bandwidth product m  TW
Carrier frequency fc
Probability of detection Pd
Probability of false alarm Pf
Probability of missed detection Pm  1  Pd
Hypothesis 0 corresponding to no H0
signal transmitted
Hypothesis 1 corresponding to signal H1
transmitted
A Gaussian variate with mean μ and N (  , 2 )
variance σ 2

The received signal x(t ) can be represented as

 n(t ) H0
x(t )   (1)
h * s (t )  n(t ) H1
According to the sampling theorem, the noise process can be expressed as [15],

n(t )  n
i  
i sin c(2Wt  i ), (2)

where sin c( x)  sin(x) and ni  n( 2Wi ) . One can easily check that
x
ni ~ N (0, N 01W ), for all i. (3)

17
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

The noise energy can be approximated over the time interval (0, T), as [2, 11]:
T
1 2m 2
0 n 2
(t ) dt   ni ,
2W i 1
(4)

ni
If we define ni  , then the decision statistic Y can be written as [2, 11]:
N 01W
2m
Y   ni 2 (5)
i 1
Y can be viewed as the sum of the squares of 2m standard Gaussian variates with zero mean
and unit variance. Therefore, Y follows a central chi-square (  2 ) distribution with 2m
degrees of freedom. The same approach is applied when the signal s (t ) is present with the
replacement of each ni by ni  si where si  s( 2Wi ) . The decision statistic Y in this case
will have a non-central  2 distribution with 2m degrees of freedom and a non centrality
parameter 2 [2, 11]. We can describe the decision statistic in short-hand notations as:

  2m , H 0 ,
 2

Y ~ (6)
  2 m (2 ), H 1 .
 2

CR1

Primary user Fusion center

CR2
PU FC

CR3

CRN

Figure 2. Block Diagram of Cooperative Spectrum Sensing

2.1. Non-fading Environment (AWGN Channel)

In non-fading environment the probabilities of detection and false alarm are given by
the following formulas [2, 11].
Pd  P(Y   / H1 )  Qm ( 2 ,  ) (7)
Pf  P(Y   / H 0 )  (m,  / 2) / (m) (8)
where (.,.) is the incomplete gamma function [17] and Qm (.,.) is the generalized
Marcum Q-function [16]. If the signal power is unknown, we can first set the false
alarm probability Pf to a specific constant. By equation (8), the detection threshold 
can be determined. Then, for the fixed number of samples 2TW the detection
probability Pd can be evaluated by substituting  in (7). As expected, Pf is

18
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

independent of  since under H 0 there is no primary signal present. When h is varying

due to fading, equation (7) gives the probability of detection as a function of the
instantaneous SNR,  . In this case, the average probability of detection ( Pd ) may be
derived by averaging (7) over fading statistics [6],

Pd   Qm ( 2 ,  ) f  ( x)dx (9)
x

where f  (x) is the probability density function (pdf) of SNR under fading.

2.2. Log-normal Shadowing

X
The linear channel gain may be modeled by Log-normal random variable e where
X is a zero-mean Gaussian random variable with variance  2 . Log-normal shadowing
is usually characterized in terms of its dB-spread,  dB which is related to  by
  0.1ln(10) dB [6].
2.3. Rayleigh Fading Channel
If the signal amplitude follows a Rayleigh distribution then the SNR  follows an
exponential PDF given by [11]:
f ( )  1 exp     0,   (10)
The average Pd in this case, P dRay , can be evaluated by substituting (10) in (9), here
f  (x) = f ( ) .
m2
   m2


 2
( )  ( 1  ) m1  e 2 (1 )  e 2  k1! ( 2(1 ) ) k 

P dRay  e 1  k
k! 2 (11)
k 0  k 0 
2.4. Nakagami Fading Channel
If the signal amplitude follows a Nakagami distribution then PDF of  follows a
gamma PDF given by [11]:

f ( )  (1M )  M M

M 1

exp  M  ,    0, (12)
where M is the Nakagami parameter. The average Pd in the case of Nakagami channel
( P dNak ) can be evaluated by substituting (12) in (9), here f  (x) = f ( ) .
 m1

P dNak   G1    2/n2! 1 F1 ( M ; n  1; 2 
n

M 
) (13)
 n1 
where 1 F 1(.;.;.) is the confluent hyper geometric function ( (.,.;.)) [17, section 9.2],
  1
 ( M ) 2M 1
 
M

M
, (14)

  ( M )  
2
M 
M
e  / 2 , (15)
and

19
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

G1  2 M 1  M 1!


M 

M

M 
e
 2 M
M 
1   
M

M
M 
M 1

  

     L  
M 2
 
 LM 1  2 
M 
M n
M  n

2 M  (16)
n0

where Ln (.) is the Laguerre polynomial of degree n [17, section 8.970]. We can obtain an
alternative expression for P dRay when setting M=1 in (13) and this expression is numerically
equivalent to the one obtained in (11).

2.5. Fusion Rule

Let N denote the number of users sensing the spectrum. Each CR user makes its own
decision regarding the presence of the PU, and forwards the binary decision (1 or 0) to
fusion center (FC) for data fusion as shown in Fig.2. The PU is located far away from
all CRs. All the CR users receive the primary signal with same local mean signal
power, i.e. all CRs form a cluster with distance between any two CRs negligible
compared to the distance from the PU to a CR. For simplicity we have assumed that t he
noise, fading statistics and average SNR are the same for each CR user. We consider
that the channels between CRs and FC are ideal channels (noiseless). Assuming
independent decisions, the fusion problem where k out of N CR users are needed for
decision can be described by binomial distribution based on Bernoulli trials where each
trial represents the decision process of each CR user. The generalized formula for
overall probability of detection, Qd for the k out of N rule is given by [5]:
N N l
P 1  P N l
Qd     d d
(17)
l k
 l 
where Pd is the probability of detection for each individual CR user as defined by equations
(7) & (9).
The OR-fusion rule (i.e. 1 out of N rule) can be evaluated by setting k=1 in equation (17):
N N
  N
Qd ,OR    Pdl 1  Pd   1    Pdl 1  Pd 
N l N l
 1  (1  Pd ) N (18)
l 1  l  l l 0
The AND-rule (i.e. N out of N rule) can be evaluated by setting k=N in equation (17):
N N
Qd , AND    Pdl 1  Pd   ( Pd ) N
N l (19)
 
lN
l
Finally, for the case of MAJORITY-rule (i.e. N/2 out of N) the
Qd ,MAJ is evaluated by setting k  N / 2 in (17).

3. Simulation Model
The simulation is developed in MATLAB using the following system parameters:
Time-bandwidth product, m = 5, average SNR,  =10 dB and Q f  0.1 . To obtain the
fading channel power distribution one can rely on the amplitude/envelope distribution.
Let us assume that each multipath component (MPC) obeys an instantaneous fading

20
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

amplitude/envelope of a  h with PDF Pa(a). The instantaneous power of the said

fading channel is thus given as g  a2 with PDF Pg (g ) ; its average
g  E{g}  E{a 2 } is often normalized to unity, i.e. g  1, using a simple PDF
transformation, one can relate the PDF of the channel power with the one of the
envelope which is given by [18]:
1
Pg ( g )  Pa ( g ) (20)
2 g
And inversely
Pa (a)  2a.Pg (a 2 ) (21)

3.1. Probability of Detection Simulation in Non-fading (pure AWGN) Channel

i. Generate a BPSK signal s(t) with 1, -1 up to 2TW samples and generate AWGN
signal n(t) with zero mean, variance N 01W i.e., N (0, N 01W ), here N 01  E s /  .
ii. Received signal is x (t) = s (t) + n (t).
iii. Now x (t) is the input to BPF and output of squaring device is x2(t) and passes
2m
through integrator. Then the output of integrator Y is Y   ni 2 (from equation
i 1
(5)).
iv. Detection threshold   can be obtained for each specific value of Pf (from equation
(8)).
v. Compare Y with detection threshold  .
vi. If Y is greater than  , binary decision ‘1’ which indicates PU is present otherwise
binary decision ‘0’ which indicates PU is absent.
vii. The steps (i) to (vi) have been repeated for N number of CRs.
viii. Now each CR user has its own 1-bit binary decision (D), let H = DCR1 + D,CR2 +
DCR3…. + DCRN, then OR-logic fusion (if H>=1), AND-logic fusion( if H = N)
MAJORITY- logic fusion (if H >= N/2) are performed at FC.
ix. The steps (i) to (viii) have been repeated a large number of times and then the average
values of Qd and Qm have been estimated.

3.2. Probability of Detection Simulation in Log-normal Shadowing

i. To generate log-normal shadowing channel gain h, the procedure mentioned as in sub

section 2.2 of section 2, is followed.
ii. Now the received signal is x (t) = h * s (t) + n (t).
iii. Then the steps from (iii) to (ix) as in subsection 3.1 of 3 are followed.
3.3. Probability of Detection Simulation in Rayleigh Fading Channel

i. Envelope/amplitude of channel h follows a Rayleigh distribution. To generate

Rayleigh distribution, we have to find the Rayleigh parameter that can be found by
considering second moment of Rayleigh distribution set to unity.
ii. Generate two Gaussian random variables X1 and X2 with mean zero and variance 0.5,
| h | X 1  X 2 gives Rayleigh distribution.
2 2

21
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

iii. Now the received signal is x (t) = h * s (t) + n (t).

iv. Then the steps from (iii) to (ix) as in subsection 3.1 of 3 are followed.
3.4. Probability of Detection Simulation in Nakagami Fading Channel

i. Envelope/amplitude of channel h follows a Nakagami distribution. Nakagami

distribution can be generated from Gamma distribution. To find the Nakagami
parameters (M, w), second moment of Nakagami distribution is set to unity. Fix the
value of M as 1,2and 3 and find other parameter w.
ii. If the random variable Y ~ gamma (u, v) then we get h ~ Nakagami (M, w) by setting
u=M, v = w/ M in Y ~ gamma (u, v) and h= square root (Y).
iii. Now f the steps (iii) and (ix) as in subsection 3.1 of 3 are followed.

4. Results and Discussion

Using the above mentioned simulation testbed (in MATLAB), the performance of
above single CR and cooperative CR user based spectrum sensing schemes have been
evaluated.

0
10

(i)
Probability of missed detection(Pm)

(ii)
-1
10
(iii)

(iv)
-2
10

-3
10 Aw gn
sigmadB=2 dB
sigmadB=6 dB
-4 sigmadB=12 dB
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Probability of false alarm (Pf)

Figure 3. Complementary ROC ( Pm vs. Pf ) under log-normal Shadowing with

Different dB-spreads (  =10 dB, m =5). AWGN curve is Provided for
Comparison
Figure 3 shows complementary ROC curves for three different dB spreads. A plot for
non-fading (pure AWGN) case is also provided for comparison. Comparing the AWGN
curve with those corresponding to shadowing, we observe that, as increase i n dB-
spreads from 2 dB to 12 dB, probability of missed detection increases [curves (i) to
(iii)]. Spectrum sensing is difficult in the presence of shadowing. Moreover, as
shadowing becomes more intense (higher dB-spread), the received signal strength
decreases due to some obstacles in the environment and hence energy detector’s
performance degrades.
Figure 4 shows the complementary ROC curves under AWGN, Rayleigh and Nakagami
fading scenarios. We observe that Rayleigh fading degrades performance of energy detector

22
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

significantly. To achieve Pm =0.01, probability of false alarm is greater than 0.9, which results
in poor spectrum utilization. Analytical results for the case of Rayleigh fading channel which
are obtained from equation (14) are presented here for comparing with our simulation results.
Different values of Nakagami parameter, M=1 and 3 are considered. Rayleigh fading channel
characteristics would be achieved in a Nakagami fading channel if M is set to 1 [curve (i)].
Increase in Nakagami parameter M=1 to 3, significantly decrease the probability of missed
detection [curves (i) to (ii)). We can say that the performance of energy detector in Nakagami
fading channel (particularly for M=3) is better than the performance in Rayleigh fading
channel (M=1). Analytical results for the case of Nakagami fading channel which are
obtained from equation (16) are presented here for comparing with our simulation results.

0
10

(i)
Probability of missed detection (Pm)

-1
10 (ii)

AWGN,simul (iii)
-2
10 Rayl,simul
Rayl,theory
M=1,siml
-3 M=1,theory
10
M=3,simul
M=3,theory
-4 AWGN,theory
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Probability of false alarm (Pf)

Figure 4. Complementary ROC ( Pm vs. Pf ) under Rayleigh and Nakagami

Fading (  =10 dB, m =5). AWGN Curve is Provided for Comparison

Figure 5 shows the performance comparison of single user’s energy detection based
spectrum sensing in the presence of shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami fading channels.
Nakagami parameter and shadowing dB-spread are assumed to be M=3,  dB =2 dB,
respectively. Comparing the AWGN curve with those corresponding to fading, we observe
that spectrum sensing is difficult in the presence of shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami
fading channel. The performance of energy detector is the best in Nakagami fading channel
than performance in Log-normal shadowing and Rayleigh fading channel.
Figure 6 and Figure 7 show complementary ROC ( Qm vs. Q f ) curves for different
number of cooperative CR users under Log-normal shadowing (σdB=2 dB) and Rayleigh-
Nakagami fading respectively. Non- fading AWGN curve is also shown for comparison
(AWGN and N=1curves matched with curves in [6],[11]). We can observe in these figures
that fusing the decisions of different CR users cancels the effect of shadowing or fading on
the detection performance effectively. Moreover, with increase in N [curves (i) to (v) in both
figures), cooperative spectrum sensing out performs AWGN local sensing and single CR user
based sensing. This is due to the fact that for larger N, with high probability there will be a
user with a channel better than that of the non- fading AWGN case.

23
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

Figure 8 shows the probability of detection ( Qd ) vs.  under Log-normal shadowing,

Rayleigh and Nakagami fading scenarios for different number of cooperative CR users.
Nakagami parameter and shadowing dB-spread are assumed to be M=2,  dB =2 dB,
respectively. We have chosen Q f as 0.1 and m=5 for each curve in this figure. We observe
that there is an excellent improvement in performance of CSS with increase in N and average
SNR. In particular, for a probability of detection equal to 0.9, single user (N=1) spectrum
sensing in Nakagami fading channel requires   12 dB while cooperative sensing with N=3
only needs approximately 7 dB for individual CR users. The Log-normal shadowing with 2
dB- spreads performs better than Nakagami (M=2) fading channel in both cases of single and
cooperative CR user based sensing as average SNR increases from 0 dB to 20 dB.

0
10
(i)
Probability of missed detection (Pm)

-1 (ii)
10
(iii)

-2 (iv)
10

-3 Aw gn
10
Log-normal shadow
Rayleigh
-4 Nakagami
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Probability of false alarm (Pf)

Figure 5. Complementary ROC ( Pm vs. Pf ) under Different Fading Channels

(  =10 dB, m =5). AWGN Curve is Provided for Comparison

0
10

(i)
-1
10 (ii)

(iii)
-2
Qm

10 (iv)

AWGN
-3 N=1(non-cooperation)
10
N=2
N=3 (v)

-4 N=6
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Qf

Figure 6. Qm vs. Qf under log-normal Shadowing (σdB=2dB) for Different

Number of Cooperative CR users (  =10dB, m=5), OR Rule

24
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

0
10

(i)

-1
10 (ii)

(iii)
-2
Qm
10
N=1(non-coop), Rayleigh (iv)
N=3, Rayleigh
-3
N=6, Rayleigh (v)
10
N=1(non-coop), Nakagami
N=3, Nakagami (vi)
-4 N=6, Nakagami
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Qf

Figure 7. Qm vs. Qf under Rayleigh and Nakagami Fading (M=3) for Different
Number of Cooperative CR users (  =10dB, m=5), OR Rule

(iii)
0.8 (i) (ii)

(iv) (v)
0.6 (vi)
Qd

0.4 N=1 (non-coop),Log-norm shadow

N=3,Log-normal shadow ing
N=1 (non-coop),Rayleigh
0.2 N=3, Rayleigh
N=1 (non-coop), Nakagami
N=3, Nakagami
0
0 5 10 15 20
SNR (dB)
Figure 8. Qd vs.  under Different Fading Channel (M=3) for Different Number
of Cooperative CR Users (Qf =0.1 , m=5) , OR Rule

Figure 9 shows the performance of hard decision fusion rules and their comparison based
on complementary receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves for 3 cooperative CR
users under Log-normal shadowing channel. We have chosen  dB =2 dB, m=5 and average
SNR  =10 dB. We observe that for a particular value of Q f  0.1, probability of missed
detection (Qm ) is 0.005, 0.1 and above 0.8 for OR-logic fusion, MAJORITY and AND-logic
fusions respectively. We can say that OR-rule performs better than MAJORITY and AND-
logic fusions (curves (i), (iii) & (iv) respectively). The curve (ii) for non-cooperation case
(N=1) is provided for comparison purpose.

25
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

Figure 10 shows the performance of hard decision rules and their comparison based on
Qd vs. average SNR  for 3 cooperative CR users under Rayleigh and Nakagami fading
channel (M=3),m = 5 and Q f  0.1. In case of performance of CSS in Nakagami fading
channel, for a particular value of average SNR i.e., 6 dB, probability of detection is above
0.8, 0.35 and 0.01 for OR-logic, MAJORITY-logic and AND-logic respectively. We can say
that OR-rule performs better than MAJORITY and AND-logic fusions [curves (i), (iii) and
(v) respectively]. Similarly, the performance of CSS under OR-logic fusion outperforms the
other fusion rules such as MAJORITY and AND-logic fusions [curves (ii), (iv) and (vi)
respectively] in Rayleigh fading channel. Under all cases of logic fusions we observe that the
performance of CSS in Nakagami fading channel is better than the performance in Rayleigh
fading channel.

0
10
(i)

-1
(ii)
10
(iii)

-2
Qm

10 (iv)

-3
10 N=1(non-cooperation)
OR-logic
Majority-logic
-4 AND-logic
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0
10 10 10 10 10
Qf

Figure 9. Performance of Hard Decision Fusion Rules via Qm vs. Qf under

Log-normal Shadowing (  dB =2 dB) for N=3 CR Users

(i)
0.8 (ii)

(iii)

0.6 (iv)
(vi)
(v)
Qd

0.4 OR-logic, Rayleigh

Majority-logic, Rayleigh
AND-logic, Rayleigh
0.2 OR-logic, Nakagami
Majority-logic, Nakagami
AND-logic, Nakagami
0
0 5 10 15 20
SNR (dB)
Figure 10. Performance of Hard Decision Fusion Rules via Qd vs.  under
Rayleigh and Nakagami Fading Channel (M=3) for N=3 CR Users

26
 International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

5. Conclusion
We have investigated the performance of single CR and cooperative CR based
spectrum sensing schemes using energy detection under different fading channels. We
develop a simulation model for the evaluating the performance in terms of miss
detection and false alarm probabilities. The performance of CSS also has been
investigated via probability of detection versus different average SNR values in Log -
normal shadowing, Rayleigh and Nakagami fading channels. The performance of CSS
has been investigated for different data fusion rules (OR, MAJORITY and AND-rules)
using our simulation testbed and the performance has been compared with each other
through complementary ROC. Finally we have shown that cooperative spectrum sensing
using energy detection performs better for OR-logic fusion rule as compared to
MAJORITY and AND- logic fusions under same average SNR conditions in Rayleigh
and Nakagami fading channel. The above study is useful in designing a cooperative
cognitive network.

References
[1] S. Haykin, “Cognitive radio: brain-empowered wireless communications”, IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun,
vol. 23, (2005) February, pp. 201-220.
[2] H. Urkowitz, “Energy detection of unknown deterministic signals,” Proceedings of IEEE, vol. 55, (1967)
April, pp. 523–231.
[3] S. D. Cabric, S. M. Mishra and R. W. Brodersen, “Implementation issues in spectrum sensing for cognitive
radios”, in Proc. of Asilomar Conf. on Signals, Systems, and Computers, vol. 1, (2004) November 7-10, pp.
772–776.
[4] I. F. Akyildiz, B. F. Lo and R. Balakrishnan, “Cooperative Spectrum Sensing in Cognitive Radio Networks:
A Survey”, Physical Communication (Elsevier) Journal, vol. 4, no. 1, (2011) March, pp. 40-62.
[5] S. Kyperountas, N. Correal, Q. Shi and Z. Ye, “Performance analysis of cooperative spectrum sensing in
Suzuki fading channels”, in Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless
Networks and Communications (CrownCom’07), (2008) June, pp. 428-432.
[6] A. Ghasemi and E. S. Sousa, “Collaborative spectrum sensing for opportunistic access in fading
environments”, in Proc. of 1st IEEE Symp. New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks,
Baltimore, USA, (2005) November 8-11, pp. 131-136.
[7] A. Ghasemi and E. S. Sousa, “Opportunistic spectrum access in fading channels through collaborative
sensing”, IEEE Journal on selected Areas in Communications, vol. 2, no. 2, (2007) March, pp. 71-82.
[8] A. Ghasemi and E. S. Sousa, “Impact of user collaboration on the performance of opportunistic spectrum
access,” in Proc. IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall'06), Montreal, September 2006.
[9] W. Zhang, R. Mallik and K. B. Letaief, “Cooperative Spectrum Sensing Optimization in Cognitive Radio
networks,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., (2008) May, pp. 3411-3415.
[10] J. Duan and Y. Li, “Performance analysis of cooperative spectrum sensing in different fading channels”, in
Proc. IEEE Interantional conference on Computer Engineering and Technology (ICCET’10), (2010) June, pp.
v3-64-v3-68.
[11] F. F. Digham, M. S. Alouini and M. K. Simon, “On the energy detection of unknown signals over fading
channels”, in Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC’03), (2003) May, pp. 3575–
3579.
[12] S. Nallagonda, S. Suraparaju, S. D. Roy and S. Kundu, “Performance of energy detection based spectrum
sensing in fading channels”, in Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communication
Technology (ICCCT’11), (2011) September, pp. 575-580.
[13] S. Nallagonda, S. D. Roy and S. Kundu, “Performance of cooperative spectrum sensing with censoring of
cognitive Radios in Rayleigh Fading Channel”, in Proc. of IEEE INDICON 2011, (2011) December.
[14] S. Nallagonda, S. D. Roy and S. Kundu, “Cooperative spectrum sensing with censoring of cognitive Radios
in Rayleigh Fading Channel”, accepted in Proc. of IEEE Eighteenth National conference on Communications
(NCC 2012), (2012) February.
[15] C. E. Shannon, “Communication in the presence of noise”, proc. IRE, vol. 37, (1949) January, pp. 10-21.

27
International Journal of Energy, Information and Communications
Vol. 3, Issue 3, August, 2012

[16] A. H. Nuttall, “Some integrals involving the QM function”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol.
21, no. 1, (1975) January, pp. 95–96.
[17] I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, “Table of Integrals, Series, and Products”, 5th ed. Academic Press, (1994).
[18] Y. Li and M. Dohler, “Cooperative communications: hardware, channel, PHY”, Jhon Wiley & Sons, (2010).

Authors

Srinivas Nallagonda received his B.E. degree in Electronics and

Communication Engineering in 2006 from Osmania University,
Hyderabad, India and M.Tech. degree in Telecommunication
Engineering from NIT Durgapur, India in 2009. He joined as Ph.D.
Scholar in NIT Durgapur in 2010. His research interests include
Cognitive Radio Networks. As of today, he has published nine (9)
research papers in various conferences.

Sanjay Dhar Roy received his B.E. (Hons.) degree in Electronics and
Telecommunication Engineering in 1997 from Jadavpur University,
Kolkata, India and M.Tech. degree in Telecommunication Engineering in
2008 from NIT Durgapur. He received his Ph. D. degree from NIT
Durgapur in 2011. He worked for Koshika Telecom Ltd. from 1997 to
2000. After that he joined the Department of Electronics and
Communication Engineering, National Institute of Technology Durgapur
as a Lecturer in 2000 and is currently an Assistant Professor there. His
research interests include Radio Resource Management, Handoff, and
Cognitive Radio Networks. As of today, he has published fifty (50)
research papers in various journals and conferences. Dr. Dhar Roy is a
member of IEEE (Communication Society) and is a reviewer of IET
Communications, Electronics Letters and Journal of PIER, IJCS, Wiley,
International Journal of Electronics, Taylor & Francis.

Sumit Kundu received his B.E. (Hons.) degree in Electronics and

Communication Engineering in 1991 from NIT, Durgapur, India and
M.Tech. degree in Telecommunication Systems Engineering and Ph.D.
in Wireless Communication Engineering from IIT Kharagpur, India,
respectively. He has been a faculty in the department of ECE, National
Institute of Technology, Durgapur since 1995 and is currently an
Associate Professor there. His research interests include radio resource
management in wireless networks, Wireless Ad Hoc and sensor
networks, and Cognitive Radio Networks. As of today, he has published
hundred (100) research papers in various journals and conferences. He is
a member of IEEE (Communication Society) and is a reviewer of several
IEEE journals.

28