IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO.

9, SEPTEMBER 2010

2695

Performance Analysis of
Two-Tier Femtocell Networks with Outage Constraints
Youngju Kim, Sungeun Lee, Student Members, IEEE, and Daesik Hong, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractThis paper investigates the performance of twotier femtocell networks with cochannel femtocell deployment
while considering cellular geometry and cross-tier interference
in downlink. We derive the per-tier outage probability by
introducing a simplified mathematical model that provides closely
approximate femtocell interference distribution. Based on the
outage probability analysis, we also derive the transmission
capacity that represents the total capacity of the cochannel twotier networks with outage constraints. The performance analysis
provides an accurate characterization of the outage probability
and the transmission capacity, accounting for the density of
randomly scattered femtocells and femtocell transmission power.
Index TermsFemtocell networks, cochannel deployment, outage probability, transmission capacity.

I. I NTRODUCTION
CHIEVING high capacity is a principal aim of wireless
operators, who often encounter small regions of high
demand within a large cell coverage area. The concept of a
femtocell suggests itself as one architectural solution to these
situations. A femtocell is a low power, short range data access
point that enhances indoor coverage, while backhauling their
traffic over the internet protocol network [1]-[3]. A two-tier
femtocell network offsets the burden on the macrocell base
station (BS), provided the femtocells are judiciously placed in
traffic hot spots. Such a configuration can improve capacity
and quality-of-service (QoS) [4].
Previous studies on two-tier networks investigated the uplink capacity in overlaid macrocell/microcell code division
multiple access (CDMA) systems, assuming the operator
planned microcell deployments [5][6]. This assumption may
not be acceptable for the user-deployed femtocell networks
with arbitrary femtocell locations [2]. Chandrasekhar and
Andrews employed a stochastic geometry framework to model
the random spatial distribution of femtocells and derived the
lower bounds on the outage probability while accounting
for cellular geometry, cross-tier interference, and shadowing
effects, and while assuming uplink CDMA with ideal power
control [2]. In [7], the authors studied the problem of spectrum allocation based on frequency division multiple access

Manuscript received February 18, 2009; revised July 21, 2009, January
18, 2010, and May 5, 2010; accepted June 24, 2010. The associate editor
coordinating the review of this paper and approving it for publication was S.
Affes.
This work was supported in part by the Korea Science and Engineering
Foundation through the NRL Program (Grant R0A-2007-000-20043-0), and
in part by the MKE (The Ministry of Knowledge Economy), Korea, under the
ITRC (Information Technology Research Center) support program supervised
by the NIPA (National IT Industry Promotion Agency) (NIPA-2010-(C10901011-0005)).
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea (e-mail: {crispyi, daesikh@yonsei.ac.kr).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TWC.2010.070910.090251

(FDMA) in a two-tier femtocell network. Since they allocate

different frequency channels for macrocells and femtocells,
no analysis of cross-tier interference is included. With respect
to cross-tier interference, the throughput performance of the
cochannel deployment of femtocells with macrocells has been
thoroughly investigated using simulations [4][8][9].
The objective of this paper is to study two-tier networks
with cochannel deployment of femtocells with macrocells,
whereby our focus is on the following questions:
What is the per-tier outage probability in a two-tier
network based on cochannel deployment of macrocell
and femtocell users? What is the effect of the density
of randomly scattered femtocells and their transmission
power?
What is the two-tier network capacity when we factor in
network QoS? How much capacity gain from cochannel
femtocell deployment can be achieved? What will be the
capacity-limiting factor?
Before we can answer these questions, we must first provide a
simplified mathematical model for the stochastic geometry of
femtocells. Using this simplification, we can then derive the
per-tier outage probability in downlink considering cellular
geometry and cross-tier interference. Based on the outage
probability analysis, we define and derive the transmission
capacity (TC) of the two-tier femtocell network.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
The macrocell network consists of multiple macrocells
sharing the same bandwidth. A macrocell has a hexagonal
region of radius . Inside each cell site, macrocell users
are assumed to be uniformly distributed. The users are served
by the BS through a channel, where a channel is occupied by
one user in a macrocell.
The macrocell network is overlaid with a femtocell network
consisting of multiple femtocells, each with radius . We
assume that femtocell BSs at a typical point in time form a
homogeneous spatial Poisson point process (SPPP) = { }
with intensity [2]. The intensity is considered to be the
spatial density, giving the average number of femtocell BSs
per unit area. The average number of femtocell BSs per cell
site is obtained as = , where denotes a macrocell
area. The worst case interference is assumed: every femtocell
uses the same bandwidth as the macrocell for transmission.
Therefore, denotes the set of actual femtocell interferers
per channel with intensity .
Femtocells are assumed to provide closed access to a fixed
set of subscribed indoor users within radio range who are
licensed to use the femtocell for privacy and security reasons
[10]. A femtocell randomly assigns a channel to one femtocell

c 2010 IEEE
1536-1276/10$25.00

2696

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2010

with a path-loss exponent of . The RV is distributed according to (0, 2 ), where = ln1010 , . The interfering
femtocell BSs are denoted by and the set of interfering
femtocell BSs is represented by = { }. The expression
for the aggregated femtocell interference for macrocell user 0
is given by

, =
,
(3)

macrocell
user

femtocell
user

where is the transmission power of the femtocell BS

and represents the distance between femtocell BS
and macrocell user 0. The RV is distributed according
to (0, 2 ). The constant is used to take the wall
penetration loss into account [7][8]. The received signal-tointerference ratio (SIR) for macrocell user 0 at position r can
be expressed as
SIR,r =
Macrocell BS

Desired signal

Femtocell BS

Interfering signal

Fig. 1.
Description of the downlink interference scenario in a two-tier
femtocell network.

user. Fig. 1 describes the downlink interference scenario in the

two-tier femtocell networks being considered here.
We consider the channel model consisting of a path-loss
component and a lognormal shadowing component [11]. In
particular, we assume that a signal transmitted at power is
received with average power according to

0 0 r
,
, + ,

(4)

where 0 is the transmission power and 0 is the lognormal

shadowing between 0 and the user, distributed as (0, 02 ).
The distance between 0 and the user is given by r,
denoting the Euclidean norm with .. A reception is assumed
to be successful provided the SIR seen at the receiver exceeds
a specified > 0, with an outage resulting if this condition is
not satisfied. Rather than work with the SIR, we will instead
work with its inverse = 1/SIR, which can be thought of as
the aggregate cochannel interference power normalized by the
signal power. The outage probability for the macrocell user at
position r with cochannel femtocell density is expressed
as

(1)

,r ( ) = (SIR,r < ) = ( > 1/ ) = (), (5)

where is the distance between the transmitter and receiver,

and is the path-loss exponent. The random variable (RV)
represents the lognormal shadowing with a mean of 0 dB
and a standard deviation of dB, where has a typical
value between 4 to 12 dB for urban environments [12]. The
shadow fading is assumed to be independent across channels
and independent of the transmitter and receiver position. For
simplicity, we will ignore background thermal noise since
the noise contribution is minimal in an interference-limited
network [13].

where = 1/ and () denotes the complementary

cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of .
The aggregate interference , in (3) is known as a powerlaw shot noise process, which unfortunately has no closedform expression for its cumulative distribution function (CDF)
[14]-[16]. The term , makes it difficult to find the distribution () in (5). For this reason, the existing approach
produces a tight lower bound on () by considering only
those strong interferers that are individually capable of causing
an outage at the receiver [2][7][15][16][17].
For the purpose of finding the distribution (), we
consider a different approach based on an approximation. We
approximately express the femtocell distribution, and then we
derive the outage probability () using the approximate
distribution. The following theorem derives an approximate
distribution of the femtocells:
Theorem 1: Let us denote the considered region of the
macrocell network as . Femtocells are randomly distributed
in according to a homogeneous SPPP with intensity .
Suppose that is equally divided into subregions such
that =
=1 and = / , where . denotes
the area. A femtocell BS is placed in with probability
= / , if < 1. The total number of femtocell BSs in
is approximated by binomial distribution with parameters
and , which converges to a Poisson distribution with mean
as 0.

= ,

III. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS OF T WO - TIER F EMTOCELL

N ETWORKS
A. Per-Tier Outage Probability Analysis
1) Macrocell Outage Probability: Let us assume that the
central macrocell BS 0 is placed at the origin. The interfering
macrocell BSs are denoted by , and the set of interfering
macrocell BSs is represented by = { }. The expression
for the aggregated macrocell interference for macrocell user 0
who is located at position r from 0 is given by

, =
,
(2)

where is the transmission power employed by and

denotes the distance between macrocell BS and user 0

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2010

The proof is obtained by induction [18]. From Theorem

1, the distribution of femtocell BSs is approximated with
independent Bernoulli trials taking in space with a success
probability of = / . To numerically express the
approximate femtocell distribution, we define X as the random
vector of independent Bernoulli RVs, where the -th
element indicates whether a femtocell BS is placed in
or not with 1 or 0, respectively. The probability of 1 is . A
realization of X is denoted by x = [1 , , ], which
represents an approximate femtocell configuration. The range
of X is denoted by = {x } with a cardinality of 2 . We
can obtain the distribution () in (5) from the weighted sum
of the distributions of conditioned on the given femtocell
configuration x over as

() =
(x ) (X = x ) .
(6)
x

Since we assume equal subdivisions, (X = x ) is calculated using = / as

(X = x ) =

(1 )

(7)

where = {1, 2, }. The conditional distribution

(x ) in (6) is expressed as

2697

,r ( ), the outage probability for a femtocell user at r with

cochannel femtocell density is derived by
,r ( ) = (SIR,r < )
(
)

ln( ) ,

=
(X = x ) ,
,
x

(12)

where denotes the femtocell SIR requirement, and ,

and , can be obtained in the same way as , and ,
are obtained in the macrocell outage probability calculation.
B. Transmission Capacity Analysis
The outage probability analysis allows us to derive the
capacity performance of cochannel two-tier networks with
QoS (outage probability requirement) constraints. Before we
derive it, we express the capacity of cochannel two-tier networks without QoS constraints, which can be given by spatial
throughput (ST), defined as the net number of successful,
simultaneous transmissions per channel per unit area [15]. The
ST of two-tier femtocell networks with can be expressed
as
(13)
( ) = (1 ( )) + (1 ( )),

where denotes the average number of macrocell communication links per channel in a unit area that is given by
(x ) =
1/ since a channel is occupied by one cellular user. The

average outage probabilities are obtained from (10) and (12)



+
> X = x . as ( ) = r [,r ( )] and ( ) = r [,r ( )].
0 0 r
0 0 r
Since the ST is the total throughput without any QoS

constraints,
it often obscures the fact that high throughput is
(8)
sometimes obtained at the expense of an unacceptably high
Since we already know the distribution (X = x ), the major outage. Taking this outage into account, TC was introduced,
problem in computing the outage probability is then dealing which was defined as the maximum number of successful
with (8). The distribution (x ) is derived in the transmissions in a unit area subject to a specified constraint
Appendix, and the result shows that
on the outage probability [17]. Recently, the TC was used to
(
)
analyze the capacity trade-off between the coexisting cellular
ln() ,
(x ) =
,
(9) and mobile ad hoc networks [16]. In this paper, we will employ
,
the TC as the metric representing the total throughput of twowhere , and , are the mean and the standard deviation tier femtocell networks with QoS constraints.
Let us modify the TC for the considered system. We
corresponding to x , also defined in the Appendix. Finally,
define
the optimum femtocell density as the maximum
the outage probability for a macrocell user at r with cochannel
femtocell density such that at most a fraction of macrocell
femtocell density in (5) can be obtained as
transmissions
and a fraction of femtocell transmissions
(
)

ln( ) ,
are permitted to fail. The optimum femtocell density is then

,r ( ) =
(X = x ) .
obtained by
,
x
(
)
(10)
(14)
= min 1 ( ), 1 ( ) ,
2) Femtocell Outage Probability: The received SIR at a
femtocell user 0 positioned at r from the central macrocell where and denote the macrocell and femtocell outage
probability requirements, respectively. Having found (14),
BS is expressed as
we define the TC of the two-tier femtocell network as the
0 0
corresponding spatial density of successful transmissions, and
,
(11) express it as
SIR,r =
, + ,
( ) = (1 ( )) + (1 ( )).
(15)
where the femtocell user is assumed to be on the edge of
the home femtocell, and denotes the path-loss exponent
for the indoor link. If we allow
a slight abuse of the no
and , =
tations, we can let , =

2
represent the macrocell and femtocell

interference at the femtocell user, respectively. Similar to

The parameters and serve as proxies for the macrocell

and femtocell network QoS. The TC yields the maximum total
throughput that can be obtained in the cochannel two-tier networks subject to a maximum permissible outage probability,
i.e., a QoS requirement.

2698

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2010

TABLE I
S IMULATION PARAMETERS

simulation, Pf = 23 dBm

0.9

Description
Macrocell, femtocell radius
Macrocell transmission power
Femtocell transmission power
Target SIR
Wall penetration loss
Path-loss exponent
lognormal shadow parameters

Value
1000, 20 m
46 dBm
23, 20 dBm
1, 10
-10 dB
4 (outdoor), 3 (indoor)
8 (outdoor)/4 (indoor) dB
8 dB
8 dB

simulation, Pf = 20 dBm

0.8

outage probability

Symbol
,

,
0,
,
,

analysis

0.7
0.6

macrocell

0.5
0.4
0.3

femtocell

0.2
0.9

simulation, Pf = 20 dBm

0
0.1

analysis

0.7

outage probability

0.1

simulation, Pf = 23 dBm

0.8

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

normalized distance from the central macrocell BS

0.6

Fig. 3. Outage probability for macrocell and femtocell users with =

23, 20 dBm according to desired user position, where the average number of
cochannel femtocells per macrocell site is = 50. For the analysis results,
= 0.04 is used.

0.5

macrocell

0.4

femtocell

0.3

Pf = 20 dBm
0.2

P = 23 dBm

0.1
0

20

40

60

80

100

average number of cochannel femtocells per cell site (N f )

Fig. 2. Outage probability for macrocell and femtocell users with =

23, 20 dBm according to the average number of cochannel femtocells per
macrocell site ( ). For the analysis results, = 0.04 is used.

transmission capacity (c)

ST (w/o outage constraint)

TC (w outage constraint =0.1)

1

TC (w outage constraint =0.07)

IV. N UMERICAL R ESULTS

We present the analysis and simulation results achieved
with the system parameters shown in Table I [12]. The setup
consists of a hexagonal macrocell surrounded by two rings
of interfering macrocells. In each macrocell region, cochannel
femtocells are distributed with intensity . Three sectorized
macrocells and omnidirectional femtocells are used [8].
Figs. 2 and 3 plot the outage probabilities for the macrocell
and femtocell users. The close agreement between the analysis
and simulation results indicates the accuracy of the analysis.
The accuracy of the analysis improves as goes to zero, where
is defined in Theorem 1 [19][20]. In Fig. 2, which shows the
per-tier outage probability according to the average number of
cochannel femtocells per cell site, we keep the probability
small enough ( = 0.04) for an accurate analysis and vary
the value of proportionally to the femtocell density by the
relation = /. For sparse femtocell density, a small
is sufficient for an accurate analysis. For high femtocell
density, is increased to about 300 per unit area. The results
represent that the accuracy of the analysis is satisfactory with
those values of and .
Fig. 2 illustrates the outage probability of the desired user
at position 0.5 from the central macrocell BS (a normalized distance) according to the average number of cochannel femtocells. It shows the effect of femtocell interference
on both macrocell and femtocell users with fixed macro-

10

average number of cochannel femtocells per cell site (N f )

Fig. 4. Transmission capacity comparison for different values of versus

average number of cochannel femtocells per macrocell site ( ).

cell interference. As shown in Fig. 2, macrocell users are

more sensitive to femtocell interference than femtocell users.
Deploying femtocells on cochannels with macrocells has a
greater harmful effect on macrocell user outage than femtocell
user outage. The outage performance is affected by the ratio of
the macrocell transmission power to the femtocell transmission
power, not the absolute power values. Reducing the femtocell
transmission power relieves the femtocell interference for
macrocell users while making macrocell interference greater
for femtocell users.
Fig. 3 illustrates the outage probabilities for macrocell
and femtocell users according to the desired user position,
where the average number of cochannel femtocells is 50 in
a macrocell site. This figure shows the effect of macrocell
interference on the macrocell and femtocell outage with fixed
femtocell interference. Macrocell interference depends solely
on the position of the desired user. As the desired macrocell
user approaches the edge of the central macrocell, the received

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2010

2699

60

V. C ONCLUSIONS

transmission capacity (c)

50
1.4
40

f = 0.82

1
0.6

30
0.2
0.06

20

0.1

10

P = 20 dBm
f

Pf = 23 dBm
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

maximum permissible outage probability ()

Fig. 5. Transmission capacity versus maximum permissible outage probability. More precisely, it also shows the TC in the reasonable range of
attainable outage probability ( 0.1) with its corresponding optimum
femtocell density.

macrocell interference increases, so that the macrocell outage

probability increases as well. On the other hand, as the desired
femtocell user approaches the edge of the central macrocell,
the macrocell interference is shrinking, which results in reduced femtocell outage probability. Femtocells near the cell
center cannot provide a satisfactory QoS; rather, they cause
unnecessary interference for other users.
Figs. 4 and 5 show TC performances, where we assume that
the macrocell and femtocell outage probability requirements
are the same ( = ) and denote them with . The optimum
femtocell density is obtained as = 1 () since macrocell
users are more greatly affected by femtocell interference.
In Fig. 4, TC results are compared with ST results. The
average total capacity (ST) is mainly affected by femtocell
transmissions. Since the femtocell interference is not significant for cochannel femtocell transmissions, the total capacity
can be increased by deploying more cochannel femtocells.
In contrast, the average total capacity with QoS constraints
(TC) is determined by the cellular outage probability. In order
to guarantee the cellular outage probability requirement, the
femtocell deployment on the same channel should be limited.
As shown in Fig. 4, only a limited number of cochannel femtocell can be deployed, so the total throughput gain achieved
in cochannel two-tier networks turns to be insignificant for
practical outage requirements in cellular environments.
Fig. 5 depicts the TC versus the attainable outage probability. As the outage probability constraint relaxes, the TC
increases more rapidly in most outage probability range. It
corresponds to the results in Fig. 2 where the macrocell outage
probability increases in a concave fashion. Figs. 4 and 5 also
verify that increased femtocell power provides no significant
increase in either ST or TC. Rather, the TC decreases with
higher femtocell power due to increased femtocell interference. Considering femtocell interference to macrocell users,
using a low femtocell power level might be beneficial to both
macrocell and femtocell throughput.

In this paper, we investigated the performance of a twotier network with a cochannel femtocell deployment. The
main contribution is a comprehensive investigation of the
effect of cochannel interference in two-tier networks. Through
the use of simple mathematical models, we were able to
derive the per-tier outage probability and the TC in terms of
macrocell and femtocell transmission power and cochannel
femtocell density. The accuracy of the analysis is confirmed
by simulations. Our analysis and simulation results verify
that the cochannel femtocell deployment can be beneficial to
the spatial reuse of the spectrum; however, the capacity gain
turns to be insignificant when we factor in QoS requirements.
Our work should serve as a useful reference for studying
femtocell transmission power and spectrum access control
which might alleviate the limit on the capacity of cochannel
two-tier networks.
A PPENDIX
For the distribution calculation (x ), let us define
as
=

+
,
0 0 r
0 0 r

(16)

and then the distribution is given by (x ) =

( > ). To rewrite , we let
=

, =
, =
, =
,

0 r
0
0 r
0
(17)

where and are lognormal RVs distributed as

2
2
(0,
) and (0,
), respectively. The results ob

2
2
2
2
tained are = + 0 and
= 2 + 02 . The RVs

and are correlated and the correlation coefficient for

and is given as 1/2 [18]. Now, can be rewritten
as a weighted summation of a group of correlated lognormal
RVs as follows:

+
=
= . (18)
=

There are several methods that can be used to closely approximate the sum of correlated lognormal RVs using a
lognormal RV. In this paper, we use Wilkinsons method,
which achieves high accuracy for correlated lognormal RVs
[21]. In Wilkinsons method, the mean and standard deviation
of , denoted by , and , , respectively, are obtained
by equating the first two moments of in (18) as
]
[

2
[ ] =
=
/2 ,

)2 ]
[(
2

]=

[

2 +2 +

22

2

=
2 +
.

(19)

2700

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 9, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2010

After some calculations, the mean and variance of can be

found using (19) as follows:
, = 2 ln [ ] 0.5 ln [2 ],
2
,
= ln [2 ] 2 ln [ ].

(20)

Finally, the distribution (x ) is given by

(
)
ln() ,

, (21)
(x ) = ( > ) =
,

2
where () 12 /2 is the CCDF of a standard
normal.
R EFERENCES
[1] V. Chandrasekhar, J. G. Andrews, and A. Gatherer, Femtocell networks:
a survey, IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 46, pp. 5967, Sep. 2008.
[2] V. Chandrasekhar and J. G. Andrews, Uplink capacity and interference avoidance for two-tier femtocell networks, IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 8, pp. 34983509, July 2009.
[3] D. Lopez-Perez, A. Valcarce, G. de la Roche, and Jie Zhang, OFDMA
femtocells: a roadmap on interference avoidance, IEEE Commun. Mag.,
vol. 47, pp. 4148, Sep. 2009.
[4] H. Claussen, Performance of macro- and co-channel femtocells in a
hierarchical cell structure, in Proc. IEEE PIMRC, pp. 15, Sep. 2007.
[5] S. Kishore, L. J. Greenstein, H. V. Poor, and S. C. Schwartz, Uplink
user capacity in a multicell CDMA system with hotspot microcells,
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 13331342, June
2006.
[6] C. S. Kang, H.-S. Cho, and D. K. Sung, Capacity analysis of spectrally
overlaid macro/microcellular CDMA systems supporting multiple types
of traffic, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 52, pp. 333346, Mar. 2003.
[7] V. Chandrasekhar and J. G. Andrews, Spectrum allocation in tiered
cellular networks, IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 57, pp. 30593068, Oct.
2009.

[8] Transmission power control schemes for home nodebs, 3GPP, Tech.
Rep. R4-081877, Aug. 2008.
[9] Simple models for home nodeb interference analysis, 3GPP, Tech.
Rep. R4-080409, Feb. 2008.
[10] V. Chandrasekhar, M. Kountouris, and J. G. Andrews, Coverage
in multi-antenna two-tier networks, IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.,
vol. 8, pp. 53145327, Oct. 2009.
[11] V. Erceg, L. J. Greenstein, S. Y. Tjandra, S. R. Parkoff, A. Gupta, B.
Kulic, A. A. Julius, and R. Bianchi, An empirically based path loss
model for wireless channels in suburban environments, IEEE J. Sel.
Areas Commun., vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 12051211, July 1999.
[12] IST-WINNER II Deliverable D1.1.1 v1.0, WINNER II Interim Channel
Models, Dec. 2006.
[13] J. Zander and S.-L. Kim, Radio Resource Management for Wireless
Networks. Norwood, MA: Artech House, 2001.
[14] S. Lowen, and M. Teich, Power-law shot noise, IEEE Trans. Inf.
Theory, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 13021318, Nov. 1990.
[15] S. Weber, J. G. Andrews, and N. Jindal, The effect of fading, channel
inversion, and threshold scheduling on ad hoc networks, IEEE Trans.
Inf. Theory, vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 41274149, Nov. 2007.
[16] K. Huang, V. K. N. Lau, and Y. Chen, Spectrum sharing between
cellular and mobile ad hoc networks: transmission-capacity trade-off,
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 27, pp. 12561267, Sep. 2009.
[17] S. Weber, X. Yang, J. G. Andrews, and G. de Veciana, Transmission
capacity of wireless ad hoc networks with outage constraints, IEEE
Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 40914102, Dec. 2005.
[18] A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes.
McGraw Hill, 1991.
[19] H. J. Larson, Introduction to Probability. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, 1994.
[20] M. S. Raff, On approximating the point binomial, J. Amer. Statistical
Assoc., vol. 51, no. 274, pp. 293303, June 1956.
[21] A. A. Abu-Dayya and N. C. Beaulieu, Outage probabilities in the
presence of correlated lognormal interferers, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.,
vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 164173, Feb. 1994.