5G Spectrum Sharing Challenge

Day: September 29.
Time: 9:00 - 17:00  
Room: Art Lounge


Spectrum Sharing for 5G Wireless Systems
Ankit Kaushik (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany); Felix Wunsch, Andrej Sagainov and Nicolas Cuervo (Communications Engineering Lab, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany); Johannes Demel (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany); Sebastian Koslowski and Holger Jäkel (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Germany); Friedrich K. Jondral (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany)

Subjective winner solution
Spectrum Sharing Between a ZigBee Frequency Hopper and an FSK Modem
Frederic j harris (San Diego State Univ, USA); Richard Bell (SPAWAR, USA)
Low-complexity Air-Interface-Agnostic Cooperative Parasitic Multi-Antenna Spectrum Sharing System
Dimitrios Ntaikos, Konstantinos Ntougias, Bobby Gizas, Foteini Verdou and Constantinos B. Papadias (Athens Information Technology, Greece)
Coexistence Through Adaptive Sensing and Markov Chains
Justin Tallon (University of Dublin, Trinity College & CTVR, Ireland); Christian Bluemm (EADS Innovation Works, Germany); Andre Puschmann (Ilmenau University of Technology, Germany); Francisco Paisana (Trinity College, Ireland); Jonathan van de Belt (Trinity College Dublin, Ireland); Nicholas J. Kaminski (Trinity College Dublin & CTVR, Ireland); Hamed Ahmadi (University College Dublin, Ireland); Paolo Di Francesco (Trinity College Dublin, Ireland)
Robust Spectrum Sharing Through Virtualization
Stefanos Papadakis (FORTH-ICS, Greece); Manolis Surligas (University of Crete & Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas, Institute of Computer Science, Greece); Antonis Makrogiannakis (FORTH-ICS, Greece); Kostis Triantafyllakis (FORTH-ICS & University of Crete, Greece); George Vardakis (FORTH-ICS, Greece); Antonis Tzougarakis (University of Crete & FORTH-ICS, Greece); Georgios Floros (Computer Science Departement, University of Crete, Greece)


Challenge rules

  1. The challenge consists of a learning phase and optimize phase each of 10 minutes duration
  2. Wired or wireless connections other than that with the database server and TX-RX radio pair is not allowed.
  3. Any out of band transmissions will result in immediate disqualification from the challenge.
  4. The objective winner is selected based on the metric explained on the spectrum challenge website
  5. The participants can use custom hardware and software solutions with the limitation of at most two transmit antennas and two receive antennas.


The dimensions of the competition arena is as given below.

Figure 1: Arena

Competition spectrum

A 20MHz spectrum centered at 2.3GHz band will be used for the challenge with a maximum output power of 100mW. A drop in the PSD mask greater than 20dB should be kept at ±11 MHz to the center frequency of the channel.

Figure 2: Spectrum allocation


From the five competing teams, two winners will be selected (one subjective and one objective) in order to balance objective performance and creativity. Throughput is measured as the total bytes delivered to the database by the receiver during the challenge.

Objective winner

The best team improves the product of its throughput and the satisfaction of the PU. The final challenge score will be calculated as a product of SU throughput (TSU) and PU satisfaction. The PU satisfaction (SPU) is calculated from the offered PU throughput (bTPU) and the delivered PU throughput (TPU) as given in equation . A maximum throughput loss tolerance of 10% is admitted. More than 10% PU throughput loss will result in no PU satisfaction at all.


There will be two competition runs and the best score out of the two runs will be selected as the final score.

Subjective winner

The subjective winner will be selected by the jury based on the following parameters

  • Breadth of the solution, i.e., how many cross-layer components combined (learning, sensing, beamforming, novel wafeforms etc)
  • Creativity of the solution, i.e., a novel idea versus a concept well investigated and demonstrated
  • Quality of the paper as determined by the jury
  • Industrial/regulatory relevance of the solution

The jury

The jury consists of the following members:

  • Dominique Noguet from CEA-LETI
  • Ivan Seskar from Winlab - Rutgers
  • Matt Ettus from NI/Ettus research
  • Przemek Pawelczak from TU Delft
  • Sofie Pollin from KU Leuven

Competition Structure and Dates

The competition will run on Tuesday 29 Spetember, as given in the challenge schedule given below (No competition on Day 2). A summary of the challenge and the winners will be announced on the second day (Friday, 2 October). The team with the highest score (best out of two runs) will be selected as the objective winner.

Figure 3: Teams

Figure 4: Challenge Schedule

Contact: dyspanchallenge@esat.kuleuven.be