Impact of Geographical Separation on Spectrum Sharing Markets (2407.20909v1)
Abstract: With the increasing demand for wireless services, spectrum management agencies and service providers (SPs) are seeking more flexible mechanisms for spectrum sharing to accommodate this growth. Such mechanisms impact the market dynamics of competitive SPs. Prior market models of spectrum sharing largely focus on scenarios where competing SPs had identical coverage areas. We depart from this and consider a scenario in which two competing SPs have overlapping but distinct coverage areas. We study the resulting competition using a Cournot model. Our findings reveal that with limited shared bandwidth, SPs might avoid overlapping areas to prevent potential losses due to interference. Sometimes SPs can strategically cooperate by agreeing not to provide service in the overlapping areas and, surprisingly, customers might also benefit from such cooperation under certain circumstances. Overall, market outcomes exhibit complex behaviors that are influenced by the sizes of coverage areas and the bandwidth of the shared spectrum.
- The White House, “National spectrum strategy,” 2024.
- “Spectrum Innovation Initiative: National Radio Dynamic Zones (SII-NRDZ),” https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/spectrum-innovation-initiative-national-radio/505990/nsf22-579.
- T. Nguyen, H. Zhou, R. Berry, M. Honig, and R. Vohra, “The cost of free spectrum,” Operations Research, vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 1217–1229, 2016.
- P. Maillé, B. Tuffin, and J.-M. Vigne, “Competition between wireless service providers sharing a radio resource,” in International Conference on Research in Networking. Springer, 2012, pp. 355–365.
- R. Berry, M. Honig, T. Nguyen, V. Subramanian, and R. Vohra, “The value of sharing intermittent spectrum,” Management Science, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 5242–5264, 2020.
- K. Mu and R. Berry, “Market impacts of pooling intermittent spectrum,” in Proc. of IEEE DySPAN, 2024.
- ——, “Market impacts of relaxed incumbent protection in spectrum sharing,” in Proc. of IEEE ICC Workshop, 2024.
- Z. Xie and R. A. Berry, “Market models of spectrum attacks with shared spectrum,” in Proc. of IFIP WiOpt, 2023.
- E. Altman, A. Kumar, C. Singh, and R. Sundaresan, “Spatial SINR games of base station placement and mobile association,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1856–1869, 2012.
- S. A. Al-Ahmed, M. Z. Shakir, and S. A. R. Zaidi, “Optimal 3D UAV base station placement by considering autonomous coverage hole detection, wireless backhaul and user demand,” Journal of Communications and Networks, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 467–475, 2020.
- H. B. Salameh, A. Masadeh, and G. El Refae, “Intelligent drone-base-station placement for improved revenue in B5G/6G systems under uncertain fluctuated demands,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 106 740–106 749, 2022.
- A. Coluccia and E. Altman, “SINR base station placement and mobile association games under cooperation,” in Proc. of IEEE WONS, 2012.
- J. A. Stine and C. E. Caicedo Bastidas, “Enabling spectrum sharing via spectrum consumption models,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 725–735, 2015.
- C. E. C. Bastidas, J. A. Stine, A. Rennier, M. Sherman, A. Lackpour, M. M. Kokar, and R. Schrage, “IEEE 1900.5.2: Standard method for modeling spectrum consumption: Introduction and use cases,” IEEE Communications Standards Magazine, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 49–55, 2018.
- P. Netalkar, A. Zahabee, C. E. C. B. Bastidas, I. Kadota, D. Stojadinovic, G. Zussman, I. Seskar, and D. Raychaudhuri, “Large-scale dynamic spectrum access with IEEE 1900.5.2 spectrum consumption models,” in Proc. of IEEE WCNC, 2023.
- D. Stojadinovic, P. Netalkar, C. E. C. Bastidas, I. Kadota, G. Zussman, I. Seskar, and D. Raychaudhuri, “A spectrum consumption model-based framework for DSA experimentation on the COSMOS testbed,” in Proc. of ACM WiNTECH, 2021.