1
Power Control for D2D Underlaid Cellular
Networks: Modeling, Algorithms and Analysis
Namyoon Lee, Xingqin Lin, Jeffrey G. Andrews, and Robert W. Heath Jr.
Wireless Networking and Communication Group
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712 USA
E-mail : {namyoon.lee, xlin, rheath}@utexas.edu, jandrews@ece.utexas.edu
arXiv:1305.6161v2 [cs.IT] 19 Nov 2013
Abstract—This paper proposes a random network model for
a D2D underlaid cellular system using stochastic geometry and
develops centralized and distributed power control algorithms.
The goal of the centralized power control is two-fold: ensure the
cellular users have sufficient coverage probability by limiting the
interference created by underlaid D2D users, while scheduling
as many D2D links as possible. For the distributed power
control method, the optimal on-off power control strategy is
proposed, which maximizes the sum rate of D2D links. Analytical
expressions are derived for the coverage probabilities of cellular,
D2D links, and the sum rate of the D2D links in terms of the
density of D2D links and the path-loss exponent. The analysis
reveals the impact of key system parameters on the network
performance. For example, the bottleneck of D2D underlaid
cellular networks is the cross-tier interference between D2D links
and the cellular user, not the D2D intra-tier interference when
the density of D2D links is sparse. Simulation results verify the
exactness of the derived coverage probabilities and the sum rate
of D2D links.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Device-to-device (D2D) communication underlaid with cel-
lular networks allows direct communication between mobile
users [1]–[3]. D2D is an attractive approach for dealing
with local traffic in cellular networks. The initial motivation
for incorporating D2D communication in cellular networks
is to support proximity-based services, e.g. social network-
ing applications or media sharing [3]. Assuming there are
proximate communication opportunities, D2D communication
may also increase area spectral efficiency, improve cellular
coverage, lower end-to-end latency, or reduce handset power
consumption [4], [2]. In spite of these potential gains, the
coexistence of D2D and cellular communication in the same
spectrum is challenging due to the difficulty of interference
management [2]. Specifically, the underlaid D2D signal be-
comes a new source of interference. As a result, cellular links
experience cross-tier interference from the D2D transmissions
whereas the D2D links need to combat not only the inter-
D2D interference but also the cross-tier interference from the
cellular transmissions. Therefore, interference management is
essential to ensure successful coexistence of cellular and D2D
links.
Power control is an effective approach to mitigate interfer-
ence in wireless networks; it is broadly used in current wireless
systems. In this paper, we propose power control methods
for interference coordination and analyze their performance in
D2D underlaid cellular networks. In particular, we consider a
hybrid random network model using stochastic geometry and
develop two different power control algorithms for the pro-
posed network model. With a carefully designed (centralized)
power control technique, we show that multiple D2D links
may communicate successfully while guaranteeing reliable
communication for the existing cellular link. This shows that,
with an appropriate power control technique, underlaid D2D
links help to increase the network sum-throughput without
causing unacceptable performance degradation to existing cel-
lular links.
A. Related Work
There has been considerable interest in power control
techniques for D2D underlaid cellular networks. A simple
power control scheme was proposed in [5] for a single-cell
scenario and deterministic network model, which regulates
D2D transmit power to protect the existing cellular links. To
maximize the sum rate of the network, a D2D transmit power
allocation method was proposed in [6] for the deterministic
network model. A dynamic power control mechanism for a
single D2D link communication was proposed in [7], which
targets improving the cellular system performance by mit-
igating the interference generated by D2D communication.
The main idea was to adjust the D2D transmit power via
base station (BS) to protect cellular users. In [8], a power
minimization solution with joint subcarrier allocation, adaptive
modulation, and mode selection was proposed to guarantee
the quality-of-service demand of D2D and cellular users. In
prior work [1], [2], [5], [7]–[17], D2D power control strategies
are developed and evaluated in a deterministic D2D link
deployment scenario. For a random network model, spectrum
sharing between ad hoc and cellular networks was studied in
[18]–[20] but power control – an essential component of D2D
underlaid cellular networks – has not been addressed. Power
control has been studied in other random ad hoc networks
without considering cellular networks (see e.g. [21]–[23]). In
our paper, we propose power control algorithms and analyze
their performance in a D2D underlaid cellular network.
B. Contributions
In this paper, we consider a D2D underlaid cellular network
in which an uplink cellular user intends to communicate with
 2

the BS while multiple D2D links coexist in the common D2D link 8
D2D link 3 D2D link 10

spectrum. In such a network, we model the D2D user’s

(transmitter’s) locations using a spatial Poisson point process Uplink user
D2D transmitter
(PPP). The rationale is that stochastic geometry is an useful D2D link 2

tool to model irregular spatial structure of D2D locations D2D receiver

Base station
D2D link 6
and analytically quantify the interference in D2D underlaid D2D link 5 Macro user

cellular networks. In this D2D underlaid cellular system, we D2D link 1

propose a centralized and a distributed power control algo- D2D link 7 D2D link 4
rithm. The main idea of the centralized algorithm is to design D2D link 9

the transmit power of mobile users so as to maximize the

signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the cellular
link while satisfying the individual target SINR constraints
for D2D links. Using the fact that the centralized power
allocation problem is convex, we solve it with a feasibility set
increment technique. A main observation is that the centralized
power control approach is possible to significantly improve the
overall cellular network throughput due to the newly underlaid
D2D links while guaranteeing the coverage probability of pre-
existing cellular links.
We also propose a simple distributed on-off power control
algorithm. Note that the centralized algorithm requires global
channel state information (CSI) possibly at a centralized
controller, which may incur high CSI feedback overhead. To
resolve this issue, the proposed on-off power control method
requires CSI knowledge about the direct link between the
transmitter and its corresponding receiver only. In particular,
for the distributed power control method, we derive analytic
expressions including the coverage probabilities of both cel-
Fig. 1. A single-cell D2D underlaid cellular system: one macro user
establishes a cellular link with the BS while five active D2D links are
established in a circular disk centered at the BS and with radius R. In this
model, the active D2D links outside the circular disk are considered as out-
of-cell D2D interference; however, out-of-cell interference from the marcro
users belonging to the other cells is ignored.
denotes the coverage region of a BS centered at the origin. We
assume that one cellular uplink user is uniformly located in
this region. Further, we assume that the locations of the D2D
transmitters are distributed in the whole R2 plane according to
a homogeneous PPP Φ with density λ. The associated receiver
with a D2D transmitter is located at a fixed distance away with
isotropic direction. We assume all nodes have one antenna.
Under the given assumptions, the number of D2D trans-
mitters in C is a Poisson random variable with mean E[K] =
λπR2 . Given a particular realization of the PPP Φ, the received
signals at D2D receiver k and the BS are written as
K
−α −α
X α

lular and D2D links and the sum rate of D2D links. One yk =hk,k dk,k sk +hk,0 dk,0 s0 +
2 2
hk,` dk,`
2
s` +nk , (1)
important insight obtained from the analysis is that on-off `=1,`6=k
K
power control strategy for the uplink user is actually optimal in −α/2
X −α/2
terms of the coverage probability of the cellular link, agreeing y0 =h0,0 d0,0 s0 + h0,k d0,k sk + n0 , (2)
k=1
with the finding in ad hoc networks [23]. Further, we derive
the optimal D2D transmission probability which maximizes where subscript 0 is used for the uplink signal to the BS and
the sum rate of D2D links when the distributed on-off power subscript k, k 6= 0, are used for D2D links; sk and s0 denote
control algorithm is used. In contrast to the centralized power the signal sent by D2D transmitter k and the uplink user; yk
control method, the distributed power control algorithm is not and y0 represent the received signal at D2D receiver k and the
sufficient to guarantee reliable cellular communication, though BS; nk and n0 denote the additive noise at D2D receiver k
it does improve the cellular network throughput by additional and the BS distributed as CN (0, σ 2 ); hk,` and h0,k represent
D2D communication. We verify the results by simulating two the distance-independent fading from D2D transmitter ` to
different D2D link deployment scenarios. receiver k and the channel from D2D transmitter k to the
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In BS, and are independently distributed as CN (0, 1). Here, we
Section II, the proposed model for D2D underlaid cellular assume the distance dependent path-loss model, i.e., d−α k,` for
networks is described. The proposed power control algorithms all k, ` where dk,j denotes the distance from transmitter j
are presented in Section III. In Section IV, the analytical to receiver k and α is the path-loss exponent. The transmit
expressions for the coverage probabilities of the cellular and power satisfies the peak power constraints, i.e., |s0 |2 ≤ Pmax,c ,
typical D2D link are derived and validated through comparison |sk |2 ≤ Pmax,d for k ∈ {1, 2, . . . , K}.
with the simulation results. For the distributed power control, Then the SINR at D2D receiver k and the BS are given by
the sum rate of D2D links is derived in Section V. Simulation |hk,k |2 d−α
k,k pk
results are provided in Section VI to compare the performance SINRk (K, p) = K
(3),
|hk,0 |2 dk,0 p0 + `6=k |hk,` |2 d−α
−α P 2
of the proposed algorithms, which are followed by our con- k,` p` + σ
clusions in Section VII. |h0,0 |2 d−α
0,0 p0
SINR0 (K, p) = PK , (4)
II. S YSTEM M ODEL k=1 |h0,k |2 d−α
0,k pk + σ
2

In this section, we present the system model and describe where p = [p0 , p1 , . . . , pK ]T denotes transmit power profile
network metrics that will be used in this paper. vector with pi being the transmit power of transmitter i.
We consider a D2D underlaid cellular network, as shown Note that our system model ignores out-of-cell interference
in Fig. 1. In this model, let the circular disk C with radius R from macro users in the other cells. Nevertheless, the proposed
 3

model is able to capture the effect of dominant interference, where Gk,` = |hk,` |2 d−α k,` and ` ∈ {1, 2, . . . , } and k ∈
which mainly determines the network performance. For the {1, 2, . . . , }. This optimization problem is compactly written
case of the uplink user transmission, the dominant interferer is in a vector form as
the nearest D2D transmitter in the cell because the interference g0T p
power of the nearest D2D transmission is strong than the max cT
p g0 p + σ2
power of the out-of-cell interference with high probability.
subject to (I − F) p ≥ b
For the case of the typical D2D transmission, the dominant
interferer to any D2D link is either the uplink transmission 0 ≤ p ≤ pmax , (9)
or the nearest D2D transmission in the cell. Therefore, our where g0T = [G0,0 , 0, . . . , 0], g0c T = [0, G0,1 , G0,2 , . . . , G0,K ],
system model captures the dominant interference effect for pmax = [Pmax, c , Pmax, d , . . . , Pmax, d ]T , and the normalized
the both uplink and D2D links; it is possible to offer a tight channel gain matrix F and target SINR vector b are defined
upper performance of the D2D underlaid cellular system. as
We are interested in the coverage probability of the cellular (
link and D2D links. The cellular coverage probability is 0, k = `,
Fk,` = βk Gk,`
defined as Gk,k , k 6= `.
T
(C) (C) β0 σ 2 β1 σ 2 β 2 σ 2 βK σ 2

P̄cov (β0 ) = E[Pcov (p, β0 )] = E[P(SINR0 (K, p) ≥ β0 )], (5)
b = , , , ..., .
G0,0 G1,1 G2,2 GK,K
where β0 represents the minimum SINR value for reliable
uplink connection. Similarly, the D2D coverage probability is Since the objective function (linear-fractional function) is
defined as quasi-convex and the constraint set is convex (a polytope in
(D) (D)
particular) with respect to power profile vector p, the optimal
P̄cov (βk ) = E[Pcov (p, βk )] = E[P(SINRk (K, p) ≥ βk )], (6) solution is able to be obtained by using standard convex
where βk represents the minimum SINR value for reliable programming tools, provided that the feasible set is nonempty.
D2D link connections. Further, we define the ergodic sum rate Note that the matrix F = [f0 , f1 , . . . , fK ] is comprised of
of D2D links as nonnegative elements and is irreducible because all the active
"K # D2D links interfere each other. By the Perron-Frobenious
(7) theorem, the following well-known lemma proved in [24] gives
X
(D)
R =E log2 (1+SINRk (K, p)) .
k=1
a necessary and sufficient condition on the feasibility of the
optimization problem (9).
III. P OWER C ONTROL A LGORITHMS Lemma 1: [24] The constraint set in the optimization
When the global CSI is available at the central controller, problem (9) is nonempty if and only if the maximum modulus
a centralized power control algorithm is proposed, which eigenvalue of F is less than one, i.e., ρ(F) < 1, where ρ(·)
maximizes the SINR of the cellular link while satisfying the denotes the spectral radius of a matrix.
SINR constraints for both the cellular link and D2D links. We next describe our proposed centralized algorithm to
Further, when the transmitter has CSI of the direct link of the solve the optimization problem (9). First we assume that D2D
corresponding receiver only, a distributed on-off power control receivers can feedback all the perfect normalized channel gains
algorithm is proposed. G i,k and target SINR information βi to the BS. Using this
assumption, the BS then computes the transmit power used
A. Centralized Power Control for both D2D transmitters and the uplink user. Note that
A main difference between ad hoc networks and underlaid the feasible set should be nonempty to obtain the optimal
D2D cellular networks is that centralized power control is solution, i.e., ρ(F) < 1. Since the normalized channel gains
possible when the D2D links are managed by the BS. For Gi,k , however, are random variables (the locations of all the
other management strategies, centralized power control is able transmit nodes are random variables), there exists a non-
to provide an upper bound on what can be achieved with more zero probability that the power control solution is infeasible,
decentralized algorithms. i.e., P({ρ(F) ≥ 1}) 6= 0, especially when the number of
Suppose that the BS has global channel state information D2D links K is large. When the solution is infeasible, an
(CSI). Under this assumption, the centralized power control admission control method is needed in conjunction with the
problem is formulated as power control algorithm to provide a feasible solution to
the power control problem by selecting a subset of D2D
G0,0 p0
max PK links. This D2D link selection problem PK may
be solved by
{p0 ,p1 ,...,pK } G p + σ 2 K
k=1 0,k k brute-force search, which requires r=1 r computations.
G0,0 p0 The computational complexity grows exponentially with K.
subject to PK ≥ β0
2 Instead of brute-force search, we propose an efficient D2D link
k=1 G0,k pk + σ
Gk,k pk selection algorithm with low computational complexity for this
PK ≥ βk , problem. The key idea is to drop D2D communication links
Gk,0 p0 + `6=k Gk,` p` + σ 2
successively that causes the maximum sum of the interference
0 ≤ p0 ≤ Pmax, c , power in the network until the feasibility condition is satisfied.
0 ≤ pk ≤ Pmax, d , (8) For K given D2D links, we first test feasibility condition
 4

TABLE I
P ROPOSED C ENTRALIZED P OWER C ONTROL A LGORITHM

Step Algorithm
Initialization Set initial F` for ` = 0, assuming K D2D links are all active.
Step 1 Test feasibility condition ρ(F` ) < 1. If this condition is satisfied, go to Step 5. Otherwise, go to Step 2.
Step 2 Pick the column of F` such that k̂ = arg maxk∈K/{0} kfk` k2 .
Step 3 Generate a reduced matrix F̂` by removing the k̂-th column and row vectors in F` .
Step 4 Update F`+1 = F̂` by increasing ` = ` + 1. Go to Step 1.
Step 5 Solve the optimization problem in (9).

of the optimization problem in (9). If ρ(F) > 1, i.e., the the randomness in the network modeling is not a key part of
feasibility set is empty, we select the k̂-th D2D transmitter the algorithm, rather it is a component of the analysis to show
such that it creates the maximum sum of interference power to that it works.
all other receivers, i.e., k̂ = arg maxk∈K/{0} kfk k2 , and then
accordingly we remove the k̂-th row and column to reduce IV. C OVERAGE P ROBABILITY A NALYSIS F OR
the size of matrix F. We keep reducing the size of matrix F D ISTRIBUTED P OWER C ONTROL
until the feasibility condition is satisfied. Table I summarizes In this section, we derive the cellular link coverage probabil-
the proposed D2D link selection method in conjunction with ity, propose an optimal power control strategy for the cellular
power control. link under the average transmit power constraint, and derive
the D2D link coverage probability. To analyze the coverage
B. Distributed On-Off Power Control Algorithm
probabilities using the tool of stochastic geometry, we assume
In this subsection, we provide a distributed power con- that the transmit power of each D2D transmitter is i.i.d. with
trol algorithm. The distributed power control is an effective distribution function Fpk (·) and that the transmit power of
interference mitigation method that requires no coordination the uplink user is independent and has distribution function
between transmitters; the signaling overheads for sharing CSIT Fp0 (·). Note that the coverage probability analysis we provide
is not needed. In the absence of coordination, each D2D in this section is valid for any distributed power control
transmitter chooses its transmit power to maximize its own algorithms that select its own transmit power independently
rate towards its intended receiver, disregarding the interference of the transmit power used at the other D2D transmitters.
caused to the others. The proposed on-off method is to select
the D2D transmit power from the decision set {0, Pmax, d } A. Cellular Link Coverage Probability
solely based on knowledge of the direct link information
Assume that the BS is located at the origin. The SINR of
and a nonnegative threshold Gmin that is fixed and known
the typical uplink is given by
by all users. Specifically, the power used by D2D pair k
is Pmax, d when the link quality is good in the sense that p0 |h0,0 |2 d−α
0,0
SINR0 = P . (12)
|hk,k |2 d−α
k,k > Gmin , and 0 otherwise. Mathematically, pk |h0,k |2 d−α 2
k∈Φ 0,k + σ

Pmax, d with Ps Further, since the cellular user’s location is distributed uni-
pk = (10)
0 with 1 − Ps . formly in the circle with radius R, the distribution function of
the distance d0,0 of the cellular link is given by
where Ps denotes the transmit probability given by 
 0 if r < 0;
Ps = P[|hk,k |2 d−α α


k,k > Gmin ] = exp −Gmin dk,k . (11)
Fd0,0 (r) = r2
if 0 ≤ r ≤ R;
 R2
Note that the proposed power control method is distributed 1 if r ≥ R.
as each D2D transmitter decides its transmit power by the The following theorem provides an analytical formula for the
own channel gain |hk,k |2 and threshold Gmin . For a given uplink coverage probability.
distribution of the channel gain, selecting a proper threshold
Gmin (the transmission probability Ps ) plays an important role Theorem 1: The cellular link coverage probability is
in determining the sum rate performance of the D2D links.
 2

On the one hand, choosing a large Gmin (a small Ps ), reduces
(C)
P̄cov (β0 ) = EX e−a1 X−a2 X α , (13)
the inter-D2D interference. On the other hand, larger Gmin 2 h 2i
(smaller Ps ) leads to smaller number of active D2D links πλβ α
where a1 = σ 2 β0 , a2 = sinc( 02 ) E pkα , X = p−1 α
0 d0,0 with
within the disk. Therefore, a good choice of Gmin balancing R 1 1
α

these two competing factors leads to achieve a high D2D sum
rate performance. This motives us to optimize the Gmin (Ps )
for maximizing the D2D sum rate performance. That problem
is tackled in Section V.
Remark: The proposed power control algorithm may be
useful in non-random networks because it can be applicable
in any realization of the proposed random network. Therefore,
cdf FX (x) = Fd0,0 (x α p α )dFp0 (p).
Proof: See Appendix A.
Theorem 1 provides an intuition that how important network
parameters affect the cellular link coverage probability. For
(C)
example, we observe that P̄cov (β0 ) depends
h 2 i on two D2D-
related network parameters: λ and E pkα . In particular,
 5

(C)
P̄cov (β0 ) decreases as the density λ of D2D transmitters
1
increases, which is intuitive as higher D2D link density causes λ=0.00002 (Analytic)
more interference to the cellular link. Further, the random 0.9 λ=0.00005 (Simulation)
(C)
D2D power control pk affects P̄cov (β0 ) only through its α2 -th λ=0.00005 (Analytic)
0.8
moment. This implies that the system can control the λ=0.00002 (Simulation)
h 2impact
i
of D2D links on the cellular link by constraining E pkα and 0.7

then find the optimal distribution of p0 to maximize cellular 0.6

P [SIR>β ]
0
link coverage probability.
0.5
Example 1 (A Closed Form Expression): Let us consider
0.4
the case where the uplink user uses a constant transmit power
p0 = Pmax,c and ignore the noise σ 2 = 0. With path-loss 0.3
exponent α = 4, a standard value in terrestrial outdoor wireless
(C) 0.2
systems, the expression of P̄cov (β0 ) simplifies substantially as
Z R ! 0.1
(C) a2 2r
P̄cov (β0 ) = exp p r2 2
dr 0
0 Pmax,c R −5 0 5 10 15 20
SIR (dB)
√
 
πλ √β0 √
1 − exp − E[ pk ]R2 Fig. 2. Coverage probability performance of the uplink user with a set of
sinc(1/2) Pmax,c parameters dk,k = 50 m, R = 500 m, Pmax,c = 100 mW, Pmax,d = 0.2
= √
πλ √β0 √ . (14) mW, P[Gk,k > Gmin = 0.5], and λ ∈ {0.00002, 0.00005}.
E[ pk ]R2
sinc(1/2) Pmax,c

Further, if the D2D transmitters send the signal using power coverage probability of the cellular link is a function of
Pmax,d with probability Ps = 0.5, the coverage probability the transmit power p0 and the distance d0,0 of the uplink
becomes user. Conditioning on the location for the uplink user, i.e.
d0,0 = d, the cellular link coverage probability is reduced
Pmax,d √
 2
q 
1 − exp − π(λ/2)R
2
β α −1 2 −α
(C) sinc(1/2) Pmax,c 0
as φ(p0 ) = e−a1 d p0 −a2 d p0 . Under the average and peak
P̄cov (β0 ) = . (15)
Pmax,d √
q
π(λ/2)R2
β power constraints of the uplink transmission power p0 , the
sinc(1/2) Pmax,c 0
optimal distribution function of p0 , i.e., Fp0 , is obtained by
This expression explicitly shows that the coverage perfor- solving the following optimization problem:
mance of the cellular link is jointly determined by three Z
factors: 1) the average number of active D2D transmitters maximize φ(p0 )dFp0 (p0 )
E[K] = π(λ/2)R2 ,q2) the power ratio between the cellular Z
Pmax,d
and the D2D user Pmax,c , and 3) the target threshold β0 .
subject to p0 dFp0 (p0 ) = Pavg, c
To validate our analysis, we compare the coverage probability Z
expression in (15) with the simulation result. As illustrated dFp0 (p0 ) = 1
in Fig 2, the coverage probability performance of the uplink
p0 ≤ Pmax,c . (17)
user is well matched with the corresponding Monte Carlo
simulation over the entire range of β0 and different λ ∈ Note that (17) is an infinite-dimensional optimization problem
{0.00002, 0.00005}. because the distribution function Fp0 may have an infinite
(C)
We next provide a simple lower bound for P̄cov (β0 ), which number of degrees of freedom. Although this class of opti-
is useful for an arbitrary path-loss exponent value and noise- mization problem is not solvable in general, we are able to find
limited case. The lower bound simply depends on the certain the optimal solution of the distribution function Fp0 thanks to
moments of p0 and d0,0 (rather than the distributions). This a remarkably simple structure for the optimization problem in
lower bound is formalized in the following corollary. (17), which is stated in the following theorem.
(C)
Corollary 1: Cellular link coverage probability P̄cov can
Theorem 2: There exists a non-degenerate p? (d) ∈ (0, ∞)
be lower bounded as
that maximizes φ(p 0)
p0 . Further, conditional on d0,0 = d the
(C) (C)
P̄cov (β0 ) ≥ P̄cov,lb (β0 ) optimal power allocation strategy maximizing the cellular link
α
·E[p−1
2 2 −1
2 coverage probability is on-off power control.
0 ]−a2 ( 2+α ) R ·(E[p0 ])
2 2
= e−a1 2+α R
α α
. (16)
Proof: See Appendix C.

Proof: See Appendix B.
B. Optimal Cellular Link Power Control Strategy
In this subsection, we provide an optimal power control
strategy for the cellular link when the cellular user has location
information of distance d0,0 . As shown in Theorem 1, the
From Theorem 2, the on-off power control strategy provides
the cellular user with the optimal coverage probability perfor-
mance and the optimal transmission power p?0 (d) is a maxi-
mizer of the function φ(p 0)
p0 . Although the exact expression of
?
p0 (d) is difficult to obtain, we are able to find a closed form
expression in the interference limited regime, i.e., σ 2 = 0.
 6

Corollary 2: For the interference limited regime (σ 2 = 0), target SIR β0 . In the regime of p̃0 (d) ≥ Pmax, c (i.e., the user is
the optimal transmit power of the cellular user placed at the located at around the cell edge), the cellular user sends a signal
Pavg,c
distance d0 = d with respect to the BS is with its maximum transmit power with probability Pmax,c due
to the peak power constraint; thus, the coverage probability
p?0 (d) = max {min {p̃0 , Pmax,c } , Pavg, c } . (18) 2
decreases linearly with respective to β0α again.
 2 α2 We provide an example to help the understanding of three
2E[pkα ] d α


where p̃0 (d) = αsinc( 2 ) E[K]α/2 β0 R . different behaviors on the coverage probability performance.
α
Example 2 (Three Different Behaviors of the Cellular
Proof: Let x = p10 . Then, for the interference limited Link Coverage Probability): In this example, let us consider
regime, the objective function for the uplink power
optimiza- a set of typical parameters: the path-loss exponent α = 4, the
tion problem becomes φ(x)x = x exp −a2 d2 x2/α . From the cell radius R = 500m, the target SINR β0 = 6 dB, the average
first order optimality condition, i.e., ∂φ(x)x
∂x = 0, we obtain number of D2D links E[K] = λπR2 = 39, and the average
2
α πλβ0α 2
and maximum transmit power constraints of the cellular user
the maximizer x∗ = ( 2aα2 d2 ) 2 . Putting a2 = 2 E[pk ]
sinc( α )
α
=
2
Pavg, c = 0.1 W and Pmax, c = 0.2 W. Further, we assume that
2
E[K]β0α the D2D links use a constant transmit Pmax,d = 0.0001
power √
2
R2 sinc( α
E[pk ] and using p∗0 = x1∗ , we obtain the p̃0 (d) in
)
α
√ p
(18). Since the transmit power should satisfy the maximum W, which gives us E[ pk ] = Pmax, d = 0.0001. In this
transmit power constraint, we take the minimun value between set of parameters, the transmit power of the cellular link is
p̃0 (d) and Pmax,c . Note that since the cellular user uses binary expressed in terms of the distance d as
power control, the cellular user’s transmit probability becomes 1 !2  2
Pavg, c E[pk2 ] 2 d
p? (d) ≤ 1 . p̃0 (d) = E[K] β0
0
2sinc( 21 ) R
Using the optimal cellular user transmit power obtained in  2
Corollary 2, we have a closed form expression on the cellular d
' 0.375 × W. (21)
user coverage probability for the interference-limited regime. R

Corollary 3: For the interference limited regime (σ 2 = 0) If the cellular user is located in the half of cell ra-
and a given uplink user distance d, the cellular user coverage dius d = R2 , the optimal uplink transmission power
probability becomes as in (19). p?0 (R/2) = max {min {p̃0 , Pmax, c } , Pavg, c } = 0.1 W because
Proof: Recall that under the assumptions of interference of p̃0 (R/2) ' 0.093 < 0.1 W, implying that the average
limited regime and the fixed distance of uplink user, the transmit power is used in this regime. Thus, the cellular user
(C)
cellular user coverage
(C)
probability becomes P̄cov (d; β0 ) = coverage probability becomes P̄cov (R/2, β0 ) ' 0.743. Alter-
natively, if we consider that the cellular user is located at mid
  2
2 −α
Ep0 e−a2 d p0
. Since the optimal power control strategy range of the cell edge with d = 0.7R, then the transmission
of the uplink user is the binary power control, i.e., p0 = p?0 (d) power of the cellular user becomes p?0 (0.7R) = 0.183 W,
P c P c which means that the uplink user opportunistically sends its
with probability p?avg, and p0 = 0 with probability 1 − p?avg, ,
0 (d) 0 (d)
the coverage probability expression is reduced as uplink signal using transmit power 0.183 W with probability
of 100
183 . Therefore, it gives a coverage probability performance
Pavg, c  
(C)
(C)
P̄cov (d; β0 ) = ? exp −a2 d2 p?0 (d)−2/α . (20) P̄cov (0.7R, β0 ) ' 0.3298. For the regime of d = R, the
p0 (d)
optimal transmit power of the cellular link p?0 (R) = 0.2 W
2
E[K]β α 2 (the maximum transmit power); thus, the coverage probability
Using the solution of p?0 (d) in (18) and a2 = R2 sinc(02 ) E[pkα ], (C)
performance in this regime is P̄cov (R, β0 ) ' 0.216.
α
we obtain the desired coverage probability expression.
(C)
The coverage probability of the cellular user P̄cov (d; β0 ) C. D2D Link Coverage Probability
behaves in three different ways according to the location of We derive an expression for the coverage probability for
the user d. When p̃0 (d) < Pavg, c (i.e., the user is located the typical D2D link. Consider an arbitrary communication
at around the cell center), the cellular user uses the constant D2D pair k and assume that the D2D receiver is located at
transmit power Pavg, c ; this results in the coverage proba- the origin. Then,
2
bility decreases exponentially with respective to β0α . When
Pavg, c < p̃0 (d) < Pmax, c (i.e., the user is located at mid pk |hk,k |2 d−α
k,k
SINRk = P ,
range of the cell edge), the on-off power control strategy is x∈Φ\{k} pi |hk,i |2 ||xi ||−α + p0 |hk,0 |2 d−α
k,0 + σ
2

activated. In this regime, the cellular user increases its transmit (22)
power proportionally to dα , implying that the cellular user
where ||xi || = dk,i . Using the same approach we used to
should increase the transmit power according to the inverse of
prove
h Theorem 1, we
i need toh compute two Laplace transforms
path-loss, agreeing with intuition. Further, the uplink user is 2 −α P 2 −α
i
required to increase the transmit power linearly according to E e−sp0 |hk,0 | dk,0 and E e−s x∈Φ\{k} pi |hk,i | ||xi || to
α
E[K] 2 where K is the random number of D2D links in the derive the distribution of hSINRk . i
2 −α
coverage of the BS. From this on-off power control strategy, First let us focus on E e−sp0 |hk,0 | dk,0 . As we assume the
the coverage probability decreases linearly with respect to the uplink user and the D2D receiver are randomly positioned in
 7

  2 
2
Pavg, c E[K]β α d 2 −2/α




 Pmax, c exp − sinc( 20) E[pkα ] R Pmax,c , for p̃0 (d) ≥ Pmax, c ,

 α

 (
Pavg, c exp 2
−α )
, for Pavg, c < p̃0 (d) < Pmax, c ,


(C)
 2
α/2
P̄cov (d; β0 ) = 2E[p α ] d α
(19)
  k
αsinc( 2 )
 E[K]α/2 β0 ( )
R
α



  2 
2
E[K]β0α d 2


−2/α
 exp −

2 E[p ]
α
k R Pavg, c for p̃0 (d) ≤ Pavg, c .
sinc( α )

the disk with radius R, the pdf fdk,0 (r) is given by [25]
! 1
r
2 λ=0.00002 (Simulation)
2r 2  r  r r
fdk,0 (r)= 2 cos−1 − 1− 2 , 0 ≤ r ≤ 2R. 0.9 λ=0.00002 (Analytic)
R π 2R πR 4R λ=0.00002 (Approximated)
0.8 λ=0.00005 (Simulation)
(23) λ=0.00005 (Analytic)
λ=0.00005 (Approximated)
Besides, |hk,0 |2 is a random variable with the exponential 0.7

distribution, i.e. |hk,0 |2 Exp(1) and p0 has cdf Fp0 (p). Noting 0.6
further that p0 , |hk,0 |2 , and dk,0 are independent, we have

P[SINR>β]
λ=0.00002
0.5
h i ZZ ∞Z 2R
−sp0 |hk,0 |2 d−α −α
E e k,0 = e−sphr −h fdk,0 (r)drdhdFp0 (p). 0.4
0 0
(24) 0.3
With a similar approach as in the previous subsection, it is
0.2 λ=0.00005
possible to derive the complementary cumulative distribution
function (ccdf) of SINRk , and the coverage probability for the 0.1
typical D2D link is given in the following theorem.
0
−5 0 5 10 15 20
Theorem 3: The coverage probability of the typical D2D SIR (dB)
link is given by
  Fig. 3. Coverage probability performance of the typical D2D link with a set
2 of parameters dk,k = 50 m, p0 = 100 mW, pk = 0.1 mW, R = 500 m,
(D) −b1 Z−b2 Z α
P̄cov (β) = EZ e L̂Y (βZ)] , (25) and λ ∈ {0.00002, 0.00005}.
 
2 1 1
2
where b1 = σ β, b = E[pk ], Z = p−1
πλβ α α
2
an approximation of E 1+ dακ ' , which is ob-
k dk,k with
α κ2/α
2 2
sinc( α ) 1+ E[d
k,0
k,0]2
1 1
(x p i)dF (p), Y = p0 |hk,0 |2 d−α
R
cdf FZ (z) =h F dk,k α α
pk k,0 and
tained from numerical observations, we have an approximated
−sp0 |hk,0 |2 d−α expression on the coverage probability as
LY (s) = E e . k,0
!
2
(D) πλβ α 2 1
Proof: See Appendix D. P̄cov (β) ' exp − 2 dk,k  2/α d2 ,
sinc( α )
To shed further light on the significance of the expression 1+ β ppk0 k,k
E[dk,0 ]2
derived in Theorem 3, it is instructive to consider a special 2
!
πλβ α 2 1
case where all D2D transmitters communicate with their = exp − 2 dk,k 2/α ,
sinc( α ) d2k,k

corresponding receivers with a fixed distance dk,k using a fixed 1 + β ppk0 (128R/(45π))2
transmit power pk . When the BS uses also a constant transmit (27)
power p0 , we are able to derive a closed from expression
of the coverage probability for the typical D2D link in the where the equality follows from the first moment of dk,0 ,
interference limited regime σ 2 = 0 as E[dk,0 ] = 128R
45π given in [25].
2
! d α  To validate our analysis, we compare the analytic expres-
(D) πλβ α − α2 α2 2 p
−β p 0 dk,k |hk,0 |2 sions (exact and approximated) in (26) and (27) with simula-
P̄cov (β) = exp − p p d E e k k,0
sinc( α2 ) k k k,k tion results. Fig. 3 depicts the analytical expressions alongside
2
!   the result of the corresponding Monte Carlo simulation for
πλβ α 1 the entire range of β and different λ. The agreement is
= exp − d2 E α  ,
sinc( α2 ) k,k

1+β p0 dk,k accurate. Further, the approximated expression on the coverage
pk dk,0
probability in (27) provides a very precise approximated
(26) performance, especially when α = 4 case.
where the second equality comes from the fact that |hk,0 |2 ∼
exp(1) and the expectation in (26) is over dk,0 . V. S UM R ATE A NALYSIS OF D2D L INKS
We further consider a simple but approximated expression In this section, we analyze the sum rate of D2D links when
of the coverage probability for the typical D2D link. With the proposed on-off power control is applied and characterize
 8

the optimal threshold of the on-off power control, which approximated transmission capacity of D2D links given as
maximizes the sum-rate of D2D links.
R(D) (β) = λ̃πR2 log2 (1 + β)P[SIRk ≥ β]
A. Sum Rate of D2D Links 2
!
π λ̃β α d2
k,k log2 (1 + β)
Let us denote the normalized inter-D2D P link interference ' λ̃πR2 exp − (32)
sinc( α2 )
2
power at the k-th D2D receiver as Ik = `6=k |hk,` |2 d−α 1+ κβ α
k,` for
2
!
k, ` ∈ {1, 2, . . . , |S|} where |S| denotes the number of active 2
πλPs β α d2k,k log2 (1 + β)
links selected by the proposed on-off power control algorithm, = λPs πR exp − . (33)
sinc( α2 )
2
1+ κβ α
i.e., |S| = λP[|hk,k |2 d−α 2 2
k,k ≥ Gmin ]πR = λ̃πR . Further,
Pmax, c
let p̃ = Pmax, d denote the transmission power ratio between To this end, we first compute the optimal transmission prob-
the D2D transmitter and the uplink user. Assuming Gaussian ability Ps by solving the optimization problem:
signal transmission from all the active links, the distribution of
the interference becomes Gaussian. Then, the achievable sum max R(D) (β)
rate of D2D links is written as subject to 0 < Ps ≤ 1 (34)
|hk,k |2 d−α
"K !#
k,k
X
(D)
R =E log2 1+ Although the objective function is not concave, the optimal
Ik + |hk,0 |2 d−α
k,0 p̃
k=1 solution of Ps can be obtained by using the first order
= |S|E [log2 (1 + SIRk )] , optimality condition since the objective function has an unique
= λ̃πR2 × R̄d2d . (28) optimum point. The first order optimality condition yields
2
Using the SIR distribution of the typical D2D link given in πλβ α d2k,k
(26), the ergodic rate of the typical D2D link can be rewritten 1− Ps = 0, (35)
sinc( α2 )
as
Z ∞  
2
sinc( α )
R̄d2d = log2 (1+x)P[SIRk ≥ x]dx from which we have Ps? = min 2 , 1 . Finally, since
0 πλβ α d2k,k
Z ∞ (D)
Pcov (x) Ps = P[|hk,k |2 d−α
k,k > Gmin ], the optimal on-off threshold can
= dx be obtained as
0 1+x
! − ln(Ps? )

2
∞ π λ̃x α d2k,k G?min =
Z
1 1 . (36)
= exp − E  α dx dα
0 1+x sinc( α2 ) d
1+xp̃ k,k
k,k
dk,0
(29) Using the solution of Ps? , the approximated transmission
capacity in (33) can be expressed as
 is taken over dk,0 . Using an approxi-
where the expectation

2
  
1 1 πλβ α d2
mation of E 1+ ακ ' κ2/α
, we have an approximated  λπR2 exp − sinc( 2 k,k
 log2 (1+β)
, for β < β̃,
d 1+ E[d 2
k,0
k,0 ]
2 (D) α) 1+κβ α
expression of the ergodic rate of the typical D2D link in (29) R (β) ' 2
 sinc( α ) R β − α2 log2 (1+β)
2  
for β > β̃.

as exp(1) dk,k 2
1+κβ α
Z ∞ 2
π λ̃x α d2k,k
! (37)
1 1
R̄d2d ' exp − 2 2 dx
0 1+x sinc( α ) 2

d   α2
1+(xp̃) α E[dk,k
k,0 ]
sinc( α
2
)
where β̃ = πλd2k,k
. The transmission capacity of the D2D
(30)
Z ∞ 2
2
! links behaves differently depending on the relative relationship
1 π λ̃x α dk,k 1 between the target SINR value β and network parameters:
= exp − 2 2 dx, (31)
0 1+x sinc( α ) 1+ κx α path-loss exponent α and the density of D2D links λ, and the
 2 2 distance of D2D link dk,k . In the case where β is smaller

Pmax,c α dk,k
 α
where κ = Pmax,d 128R/(45π) . Interestingly, the approxi-
sinc( α
2
) 2
than πλd2 , all D2D transmitters are scheduled, which
mated expression of the ergodic rate of the typical D2D link in k,k

(31) is determined by two factors: (1) the Laplace transform of leads to achieve the same performance with that of no power
the total interference power control. Meanwhile, when β is large enough, the D2D links
 created2
by all active links on the are scheduled with the transmission probability Ps? , which
π λ̃x α d2k,k
entire network, i.e., exp − sinc( 2 ) and (2) the approximated results in mitigating the inter-D2D interference. In particular,
α α
effect of the uplink interference 1
. sinc( α
2
) 2
1+κx α
2 in the case of β > πλd2 , the transmission capacity of
k,k

the D2D links becomes independent of the density of nodes

B. Optimizing D2D ON-Off Threshold λ. Further, the transmission capacity of underlaid D2D links
2
With the characterized ergodic sum rate of D2D links, we increases linearly with the spatial packing ratio dR2 of D2D
k,k
optimize the D2D on-off threshold Gmin by maximizing the transmissions.
 9

TABLE II
T HE S UM R ATE P ERFORMANCE OF D2D L INKS
1

Density of D2D links (λ) 0.00001 0.00003 0.00005 0.9

Sum Rate (Simulation) 13.98 27.83 33.93
Sum Rate (38) 13.63 26.29 32.54 0.8
Cellular Link

800 0.7

0.6
600

P [SIR>β]
0.5 D2D Link
400
Uplink user 0.4
P <1
s
200 Centralized PC
D2D Rx 0.3
On−Off PC
D2D Tx
0 0.2 No PC
Centralized PC
BS
0.1 On−Off PC
−200
No PC
0
−400 −5 0 5 10 15 20
SIR (dB)

−600

Fig. 5. Coverage probability performance of both the cellular and D2D links
−800
−800 −600 −400 −200 0 200 400 600 800
according to different power control methods when the D2D links are sparse,
i.e., λ = 0.00002.
Fig. 4. A snap shot of link geometry for a D2D underlaid cellular
network when the dense D2D link deployment scenario, i.e., λ=0.00005.
In our simulation, we consider out-of-cell interference created by the D2D
transmission for the warp-around effect.
is isotropically dropped at a fixed distance dk,k = 50m away
from the D2D transmitter. Since the D2D communication are
By integration of the transmission capacity in (37) with supposed to be of short range compared to the cellular link,
respect to β, we have the sum rate of D2D links as we assume that the average transmit power of the cellular
2
! user and D2D links are equal to Pmax, c = 100 mW and
πλx α d2k,k
Z β̃
(D) λπR2 Pmax, d = 0.1 mW. Since the number of D2D links K is
R ' exp − dx a random variable and we evaluate the coverage probability
sinc( α2 )
2
0 (1+ κx α )(1 + x)
Z ∞ 2 2 and sum rate performance of the proposed algorithms by
sinc α2


x− α R averaging 1000 independent realizations. Further, the optimal
+ 2 dx. (38)
β̃ (1+ κx α )(1 + x) exp(1) dk,k transmission scheduling parameter Gmin is obtained as in (36).
To validate our analysis, we compare the analytical result of The parameters used in the simulations are summarized in
the D2D sum rate with that obtained through Monte Carlo Table III.
simulation. Table II shows the sum rate performance of the 2) Coverage Probability Comparison in Sparse D2D Link
D2D links under different D2D line densities when α = 4, Deployment: Suppose the sparse D2D link deployment sce-
and dk,k = 50 m, R = 500 m, Pmax,c = 100 mW, and nario where the average number of D2D links in the cell equals
Pmax,d = 0.1 mW. It can be seen that the analytcial results E[K] = πR2 λ = 15.7. In this scenario, we compare the cov-
well match the simulation results. erage probability of the cellular link and the D2D links under
different D2D power control algorithms. As shown in Fig. 5,
we observe that the proposed power control methods improve
VI. S IMULATION R ESULTS the cellular user coverage probability. The proposed power
In this section, we provide numerical results for the D2D control methods also provide increased D2D link coverage
underlaid cellular system. From our simulation results, we first probability compared to the no power control case, especially
show the performance gain of the proposed power control in the high target SINR regime. This implies that the power
methods compared to the no power control case in terms of control methods are efficient to mitigate both intra-D2D and
the cellular user and the D2D user coverage probability. cross-tier interference when D2D links communicate with a
1) Simulation Setup: Fig. 4 shows one snap shot of the high data rate. In particular, one remarkable observation is that
cell geometry. As illustrated, the BS is located at the center the centralized power control achieves nearly perfect cellular
position (0, 0) in R2 plane and the cellular user is uniformly user coverage probability performance, i.e., (no outage) in
dropped within the range of R = 500 m. The D2D transmitters the low target SINR values, while successfully supporting
are dropped according to PPP with the density parameter a large number of active D2D links (48 %) when target
λ ∈ {0.00002, 0.00005} in a ball centered at the origin and SNIR β = 3 dB. Meanwhile, the on-off distributed power
the radius of R + 250 m so that the average number of D2D control method yields performance gains for both cellular
links are E[K] = πR2 λ ∈ {15, 39} while removing cell and D2D links compared to that of no power control case
edge effect on the D2D link performance. Further, for a given when the target SINR is larger than 12 dB. This is because
D2D transmitter’s location, the corresponding D2D receiver the proposed on-off power control method provides the same
 10

TABLE III
S IMULATION PARAMETERS

Paramers Values
Cell radius (R) 500 (m)
The D2D link range (dk,k ) 50 (m)
D2D link density (λ) 0.00002 and 0.00005
Average number D2D links (K) E[K] = πR2 λ ∈ {15, 39}
Path-loss exponent (α) 4
Target SINR threshold (β) from -6 to 21 (dB)
The maximum transmit power of the cellular user Pmax, c = 100 mW
The maximum transmit power of the D2D transmitters Pmax, d = 0.1 mW
Noise variance (σ 2 ) for 1MHz bandwidth -143.97 (dBm)
The number of realizations 1000 geometry drops

1
greater than 3 dB. Although the D2D user coverage probability
Centralized PC
performance decreases in the dense scenario, the total number
0.9
On−Off PC of successful D2D transmissions is large than that of the
0.8 No PC sparse D2D link deployment scenario. For example, when
Centralized PC
0.7 the target SINR is 3 dB, the total numbers of successful
On−Off PC
No PC D2D transmissions in both sparse and dense scenarios are
0.6 (D)
about |S|sparse = E[KPcov (3)] = 15 × 0.5 ' 7.5 and
P[SIR>β]

Cellular Link
0.5 (D)
|S|dense = E[KPcov (3)] = 39 × 0.27 ' 10, respectively.
Ps<1
0.4

0.3 VII. C ONCLUSIONS

0.2 In this paper, we proposed a new network model for a D2D
0.1
underlaid cellular system based on stochastic geometry. In
D2D Link this system, we proposed both centralized and decentralized
0
−5 0 5 10 15 20 power control algorithms. One consequence of the results we
SIR (dB)
observed is that the centralized power control approach leads
to improve the cellular network throughput performance due to
Fig. 6. Coverage probability performance of the cellular link according to the additional underlaid D2D links while supporting reliable
different power control methods when the D2D links are dense, i.e., λ =
0.00005. communication for the uplink cellular user. Meanwhile, the
distributed power control approach is not enough to guarantee
reliable cellular links; however, it also improves the cellular
performance with the
 no power  control case until β < 12 network throughput by allowing D2D links to be underlaid
?
2
sinc( α ) in the network. Future work could investigate the effect of
dB, i.e., Ps = min 2 , 1 = 1 while it is activated
2 πλβ α dk,k multiple antennas at the base station, other cell interference,
when β > 12 dB. For example, when the target SINR is 15 and joint optimization across the resource allocation and power
dB, the on-off power control method provides 13% cellular control.
link and 5% D2D link coverage probability performance gains
compared to the no power control case. A PPENDIX
3) Coverage Probability Comparison in Dense D2D Link
A. Proof of Theorem 1
Deployment: Consider a dense D2D link deployment scenario
where the average number of D2D links in the cell equals First notice that
E[K] = πR2 λ = 39. For the dense D2D link deployment, as (C)
P̄cov = P(SINR0 ≥ β0 )
shown in Fig. 6, we observe similar trends as in the sparse !
D2D link deployment case. One interesting point is that the p0 |h0,0 |2 d−α0,0
=P P 2 ||x ||−α + σ 2
≥ β0
performance degradation of the cellular user is not significant k∈Φ p k |h0,k | k
as the number of D2D links increases when the centralized X
!!
power allocation method is applied because the proposed ad- = P |h0,0 |2 ≥ β0 p−1 α
0 d0,0 pk |h0,k |2 ||xk ||−α +σ 2
mission control ensures that the uplink user is protected. This k∈Φ
implies that the centralized power control method is able to
h i
−β0 p−1 α
0 d0,0 ( pk |h0,k |2 ||xk ||−α +σ 2 )
P
=E e k∈Φ
support reliable uplink performance regardless of the density h i h i
2 −1 α −1 α 2 −α
=E e−σ β0 p0 p0,0 E e−β0 p0 d0,0 ( k∈Φ pk |h0,k | ||xk || ) ,
P
of D2D links. Meanwhile, the D2D user coverage probability
performance becomes deteriorated because of the increased
(39)
intra-D2D link interference. It is notable that the proposed
on-off power control method improves the performance of where in the second last equality we use the fact that |h0,0 |2 ∼
the cellular and D2D link coverage probabilities compared Exp(1) and thus P(|h0,0 |2 ≥ x) = e−x . Conditioned on the
to that of no power control case when the target SINR is transmit power of the typical uplink transmitter p0 = p and
 11

the distance d0,0 = d from the cellular transmitter to BS, we and consider the following relaxed conditional cellular link
next compute the second term (39).
h ToPthis end, we2 need−αthei coverage optimization problem:
Laplace transform LΦ (s) = E e−s( k∈Φ pk |h0,k | ||xk || )
Z
max φ(p)dFp0,0 (p)
given as
Z
2 π2 2
 
2
− α
sin( 2 π)
E pkα λs α subject to pdFPC (p) = Pavg, c . (47)
LΦ (s) = e α . (40)
p
Let dL(p) = Pavg, dFp0,0 (p). Then the above optimization
Using LΦ (s) yields c
problem is equivalently formulated as
2
2 π2
 2
2 Z
− α λβ0α E pkα d2 p− α φ(p)
(C) −σ 2 β0 p−1 dα sin( 2 π)
max Pavg, c · dL(p)
P̄cov|p0 =p,d0,0 =d =e e α .
p
(41) Z
subject to dL(p) = 1. (48)
De-conditioning with respect to p0 and d0,0 yields the uplink
(C)
coverage probability P̄cov . The last step is to derive the whose optimal solution is L? (p? (d)) − L? (p?− (d)) = 1 and
probability distribution of X = p−1 α
0 d0,0 : L? (p) = 0 for p 6= p? (d). Therefore, we conclude that the
binary power control strategy is optimal.
FX (x) = P(p−1 dα ≤ x)
Z 0 0,0
1
= P(d0,0 ≤ (xp) α )dFp0 (p) D. Proof of Theorem 3
Z To prove Theorem 3, we need to derive the ccdf of SINRk .
1 1
= Fd0,0 (x α p α )dFp0 (p). (42) To this end, using Slivnyak’s theorem [26], it is easy to see
that
h P 2 −α
i
LΦ\{k} (s) = E e−s x∈Φ\{k} pi |hk,i | ||xi || |k ∈ Φ = LΦ (s)
B. Proof of Corollary 1
2
 
2 2
πλ
−a1 x−a2 x α − E pkα s α
Let φ(x) = e . We compute the first and second =e sinc( 2 )
α . (49)
derivative of φ(x) as follows:
  It follows that
0
−a1 x−a2 x α
2
2 2 −1
φ (x) = −e a1 + a2 x α , (43) P(SINRk ≥ β) (50)
α
pk |hk,k |2 d−α
!
 2
2
2 2 k,k
00
φ (x) = e−a1 x−a2 x α a1 + a2 x α −1 =P P 2 ||x ||−α +p |h 2 −α
≥β
α p |h
x∈Φ\{k} i k,i | i 0 k,0 | dk,0 + σ2
    
2
−a1 x−a2 x α 2 2 2
+e a2 1− x α −2 . (44) X
α α =P|hk,k |2 ≥ βp−1 α 
k dk,k pi |hk,i |2 ||xi ||−α+p0 |hk,0 |2 d−α
k,0 +σ
2

00
x∈Φ\{k}
As α > 2, φ (x) ≥ 0 for x ≥ 0 and thus φ(x) is convex for (51)
x ≥ 0. Applying Jensen’s inequality, we obtain h −1 α 2 −α 2 −α 2
i
= E e−βpk dk,k ( x∈Φ\{k} pi |hk,i | ||xi || +p0 |hk,0 | dk,0 +σ )
P
 2
 2
(C)
P̄cov = EX e−a1 X−a2 X α ≥ e−a1 E[X]−a2 E[X] α , (45) h i
(52)
2 −1 α
= Ep−1 dα e−σ βpk dk,k LΦ (βp−1 α −1 α
k dk,k )LY (βpk dk,k ) ,
where E[X] = E p−1 = E[p−1
 α
 α k k,k
0 d0,0 0 ]E[d0,0 ] due to the (53)
α
independence of PC and DC . Finally, E[d0,0 ] can be computed
explicitly. which completes the proof.
Z
E[d0,0 ] = rα dFd0,0 (r)
α R EFERENCES
[1] K. Doppler, M. Rinne, C. Wijting, C. Ribeiro, and K. Hugl, “Device-
Z R to-device communication as an underlay to LTE-Advanced networks,”
2r
= rα 2 dr IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 42–49, December
0 R 2009.
2 [2] G. Fodor, E. Dahlman, G. Mildh, S. Parkvall, N. Reider, G. Miklós,
= Rα . (46) and Z. Turányi, “Design aspects of network assisted device-to-device
2+α communications,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 50, no. 3, pp.
170–177, March 2012.
[3] 3GPP, “3rd generation partnership project; technical specification group
C. Proof of Corollary 2 SA; feasibility study for proximity services (ProSe) (release 12),” 3GPP
Note that φ(p) is positive-valued and continuous when p > TR 22.803 V1.0.0, August 2012.
[4] M. Corson, R. Laroia, J. Li, V. Park, T. Richardson, and G. Tsirtsis,
0. Also, limp→0+ φ(p)p → 0 and limp→∞ φ(p) p → 0. These “Toward proximity-aware internetworking,” IEEE Wireless Communi-
facts imply that there exists a non-degenerate p? (d) ∈ (0, ∞) cations, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 26–33, 2010.
φ(p) [5] C. H. Yu, O. Tirkkonen, K. Doppler, and C. Ribeiro, “On the perfor-
that achieves
R the maximum value of p . If we ignore the mance of device-to-device underlay communication with simple power
constraint dFp0,0 (p) = 1 and p ≤ Pmax,c for the time being control,” in IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, 2009, pp. 1–5.

[6] C. H. Yu, K. Doppler, C. Ribeiro, and O. Tirkkonen, “Resource sharing
optimization for device-to-device communication underlaying cellular
networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 10,
no. 8, pp. 2752 – 2763, August 2011.
[7] J. Gu, S. J. Bae, B.-G. Choi, and M. Y. Chung, “Dynamic power
control mechanism for interference coordination of device-to-device
communication in cellular networks,” in Third International Conference
on Ubiquitous and Future Networks, June 2011, pp. 71–75.
[8] X. Xiao, X. Tao, and J. Lu, “A QoS-aware power optimization scheme
in OFDMA systems with integrated device-to-device (D2D) communi-
cations,” in IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, September 2011,
pp. 1–5.
[9] F. Fitzek, M. Katz, and Q. Zhang, “Cellular controlled short-range
communication for cooperative P2P networking,” Wireless Personal
Communications, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 141–155, January-February 2004.
[10] H. Wu, C. Qiao, S. De, and O. Tonguz, “Integrated cellular and ad
hoc relaying systems: iCAR,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in
Communications, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 2105–2115, October 2001.
[11] H. Hsieh and R. Sivakumar, “On using peer-to-peer communication
in cellular wireless data networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 57–72, January-February 2004.
[12] P. Janis, C. Yu, K. Doppler, C. Ribeiro, C. Wijting, and K. Hugl,
“Device-to-device communication underlaying cellular communications
systems,” International Journal of Communications, Network and Sys-
tem Sciences, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 169–178, June 2009.
[13] B. Kaufman and B. Aazhang, “Cellular networks with an overlaid device
to device network,” in IEEE Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems
and Computers, October 2008, pp. 1537–1541.
[14] L. Lei, Z. Zhong, C. Lin, and X. Shen, “Operator controlled device-
to-device communications in LTE-Advanced networks,” IEEE Wireless
Communications, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 96–104, June 2012.
[15] P. Janis, V. Koivunen, C. Ribeiro, K. Doppler, and K. Hugl,
“Interference-avoiding MIMO schemes for device-to-device radio under-
laying cellular networks,” in IEEE International Symposium on Personal,
Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, September 2009, pp. 2385–
12
2389.
[16] C. H. Yu and O. Tirkkonen, “Device-to-device underlay cellular net-
work based on rate splitting,” in IEEE Wireless Communications and
Networking Conference, April 2012, pp. 262–266.
[17] V. Chandrasekhar, J. G. Andrews, T. Muharemovic, Z. Shen, and
A. Gatherer, “Power control in two-tier femtocell networks,” IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 4316–4328,
August 2009.
[18] K. Huang, V. K. Lau, and Y. Chen, “Spectrum sharing between cellular
and mobile ad hoc networks: transmission-capacity trade-off,” IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1256–
1267, September 2009.
[19] J. Lee, J. G. Andrews, and D. Hong, “Spectrum-sharing transmission
capacity,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 10,
no. 9, pp. 3053–3063, September 2011.
[20] X. Lin and J. G. Andrews, “Optimal spectrum partition and mode
selection in device-to-device overlaid cellular networks,” submitted to
IEEE Globecom, March 2013.
[21] F. Baccelli, B. Blaszczyszyn, and F. Tournois, “Downlink admis-
sion/congestion control and maximal load in CDMA networks,” in IEEE
Infocom, vol. 1. IEEE, 2003, pp. 723–733.
[22] N. Jindal, S. Weber, and J. G. Andrews, “Fractional power control
for decentralized wireless networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 5482–5492, August 2008.
[23] X. Zhang and M. Haenggi, “Random power control in poisson net-
works,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 60, no. 9, pp.
2602–2611, September 2012.
[24] G. Foschini and Z. Miljanic, “A simple distributed autonomous power
control algorithm and its convergence,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 641–646, November 1993.
[25] D. Moltchanov, “Distance distributions in random networks,” Ad Hoc
Networks, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 1146–1166, March 2012.
[26] D. Stoyan, W. Kendall, and J. Mecke, Stochastic Geometry and its
Applications. Wiley New York, 1995.