 is a mixed integer programming (MIP) problem which is hard to solve. Therefore, as in [@concave_function][@multilevel_waterfilling], we relax the integer constraint of (\[constraint\_t\_binary\]) as $t_{k,m}\in \mathds{R}_+, \forall k, m$. This continuous relaxation makes $t_{k,m}$ the time sharing factor of each SP. The relaxed problem then becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{objective_Rate_I_relaxed}
\max_{{\bm p},{\bm t}} ~\frac{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}t_{k,m}~w_{k}\log\left(1+a_{k,m}\frac{p_{k,m}}{t_{k,m}}\right)~~\text{s.t.}~~
(\ref{constraint_power_consumption}),
(\ref{constraint_t_k}), (\ref{constraint_t_m}),
(\ref{constraint_power_0}), ~\text{and}\\
\label{constraint_t_0}
t_{k,m}\geq 0,\text{ }\forall k, m.\end{aligned}$$ Note that the value of the objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) is the same as that of the original objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_MIP\]) when $t_{k,m}\in\{0,1\}, \forall k, m$. This objective function is concave because it is a nonnegative weighted sum of concave functions in the form of $x\log(1+\frac{y}{x})$ which is concave in $(x, y)$ [@concave_function]. Since (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) is a standard convex programming problem, it can be solved by numerical search algorithms such as the interior-point method [@Book_Boyd]. However, the optimal $t_{k,m}$ may not be integer-valued. Therefore, we opt to solve this problem by the dual method which can provide an upper bound for problem (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) (by the weak duality [@Book_Boyd]). In Section \[sec\_dual\_type\_I\_total\], it will be shown that the solution obtained by the dual method has $t_{k,m}\in\{0,
is a mixed integer programming (MIP) problem which is hard to resolve. consequently, as in [ @concave_function][@multilevel_waterfilling ], we relax the integer constraint of (\[constraint\_t\_binary\ ]) as $ t_{k, m}\in \mathds{R}_+, \forall k, m$. This continuous liberalization make $ t_{k, m}$ the time sharing gene of each SP. The relaxed trouble then becomes $ $ \begin{aligned } 
 \label{objective_Rate_I_relaxed } 
 \max_{{\bm p},{\bm t } } ~\frac{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}t_{k, m}~w_{k}\log\left(1+a_{k, m}\frac{p_{k, m}}{t_{k, m}}\right)~~\text{s.t.}~~ 
 (\ref{constraint_power_consumption }), 
 (\ref{constraint_t_k }), (\ref{constraint_t_m }), 
 (\ref{constraint_power_0 }), ~\text{and}\\ 
 \label{constraint_t_0 } 
 t_{k, m}\geq 0,\text { } \forall k, m.\end{aligned}$$ Note that the value of the objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\ ]) is the same as that of the original objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_MIP\ ]) when $ t_{k, m}\in\{0,1\ }, \forall k, m$. This objective routine is concave because it is a nonnegative weighted sum of concave affair in the mannequin of $ x\log(1+\frac{y}{x})$ which is concave in $ (x, y)$ [ @concave_function ]. Since (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\ ]) is a standard convex programming problem, it can be solved by numerical search algorithm such as the interior - point method [ @Book_Boyd ]. However, the optimum $ t_{k, m}$ may not be integer - valued. Therefore, we opt to solve this problem by the double method which can provide an upper bound for problem (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\ ]) (by the weak dichotomy [ @Book_Boyd ]). In Section \[sec\_dual\_type\_I\_total\ ], it will be shown that the solution obtained by the dual method has $ t_{k, m}\in\{0,
 is a mixed integer programoing (MIP) problem which is hadd to souve. Therefore, as in [@concave_fnnctuon][@muotilevel_waterfilling], wd relax tje integwr cibstraint oh (\[constraint\_t\_bjkary\]) cs $t_{k,m}\in \mathds{R}_+, \forall k, k$. This continumur xelaxation makes $t_{k,m}$ the time sharind factot lf each SP. The relsved lgonlem then becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\lagel{objebtive_Rate_I_relaxed}
\kax_{{\bm p},{\bm t}} ~\frac{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}h_{k,m}~w_{n}\log\left(1+a_{k,m}\frac{p_{k,m}}{h_{k,m}}\right)~~\texj{a.t.}~~
(\rqd{constraint_puwer_consumktnon}),
(\ref{consttaint_t_k}), (\ref{constraint_t_m}),
(\ref{constrxint_ppwer_0}), ~\text{abd}\\
\oabfn{constraint_v_0}
t_{k,m}\gez 0,\text{ }\forall k, m.\end{dligned}$$ Note that the vanue of the objective funrtion (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_telaxed\]) is tke same as that of thw irigital mbjezrivd fhnrtikn (\[objfctmve\_Rate\_I\_MIP\]) when $t_{k,m}\in\{0,1\}, \forall k, m$. This obkesnove function is cogcwve because it is a nonnegative weighteg shm of concave functions in the form of $x\log(1+\ftac{y}{x})$ whicr is concave in $(x, y)$ [@concave_function]. Since (\[objectiee\_Ratx\_I\_felcwcd\]) ir a standard convex programming problem, it can bq splned by numerical fearch algotihhkf such as the internkr-loint method [@Book_Blyd]. Howgver, tye optimaj $t_{k,k}$ may not be integer-valued. Rherefore, we ipt to solve this 'roblem by tke duak metnod which can provide au upped bound for problem (\[kcjective\_Rate\_I\_relxxec\]) (ty the wtxk duality [@Book_Bord]). In Secvion \[xec\_dual\_gype\_O\_total\], it will bf shown that the solutioj obtcined by the duwl method has $t_{k,m}\in\{0,
is a mixed integer programming (MIP) problem hard solve. Therefore, in [@concave_function][@multilevel_waterfilling], we (\[constraint\_t\_binary\]) $t_{k,m}\in \mathds{R}_+, \forall m$. This continuous makes $t_{k,m}$ the time sharing factor each SP. The relaxed problem then becomes $$\begin{aligned} \label{objective_Rate_I_relaxed} \max_{{\bm p},{\bm t}} ~\frac{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}t_{k,m}~w_{k}\log\left(1+a_{k,m}\frac{p_{k,m}}{t_{k,m}}\right)~~\text{s.t.}~~ (\ref{constraint_t_k}), (\ref{constraint_t_m}), (\ref{constraint_power_0}), ~\text{and}\\ \label{constraint_t_0} t_{k,m}\geq 0,\text{ }\forall k, m.\end{aligned}$$ Note that the of objective (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) the same as that of the original objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_MIP\]) when $t_{k,m}\in\{0,1\}, \forall k, m$. This function is concave because it is a nonnegative sum of concave functions the form of $x\log(1+\frac{y}{x})$ which concave $(x, y)$ Since is standard convex programming it can be solved by numerical search algorithms such as the interior-point method [@Book_Boyd]. However, the optimal may not Therefore, we to this by the dual can provide an upper bound for the weak duality [@Book_Boyd]). In Section \[sec\_dual\_type\_I\_total\], it be shown the solution obtained by the dual has $t_{k,m}\in\{0,
 is a mixed integer programminG (MIP) probleM whicH is HarD tO solVe. ThErefore, as in [@conCAve_fUnction][@multilevel_waterFilliNg], WE relAX tHe intEger conSTrAINt oF (\[cOnStrAiNT\_t\_BinarY\]) as $T_{k,m}\in \maThds{R}_+, \foralL k, m$. thIs continuous RElAxation makEs $t_{K,m}$ the time shaRinG factoR oF eaCH SP. ThE reLaxed ProbleM Then beComes $$\begiN{aLIgned}
\lABel{objeCTIvE_RatE_I_relaxed}
\max_{{\bm p},{\bm T}} ~\FrAC{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}t_{k,m}~W_{k}\log\lEfT(1+A_{k,M}\FRac{P_{k,m}}{T_{k,m}}\right)~~\teXt{S.t.}~~
(\ref{COnstraiNT_pOWER_coNSumption}),
(\ref{coNstraint_t_k}), (\rEF{coNstraiNt_T_m}),
(\rEF{constRaint_PoWEr_0}), ~\tExt{and}\\
\label{ConsTraint_t_0}
t_{k,M}\geq 0,\teXT{ }\forall K, M.\end{aliGned}$$ NoTe tHat The vALuE oF thE oBJecTIvE fuNCtiOn (\[objectIvE\_RAte\_I\_rElaxED\]) IS The sAme As thAt of tHe original objEctIve fUNctIon (\[obJectiVe\_RaTe\_i\_MIP\]) wHen $t_{k,m}\In\{0,1\}, \forAlL k, m$. This objectivE funCtion is coNcaVe BecAuSe it iS A nonneGatIve WeighteD sum of cONcaVe FUNCtIons in the form of $x\loG(1+\fRAC{y}{X})$ which is ConcavE In $(X, y)$ [@COncave_fuNcTioN]. SinCE (\[ObjecTive\_rAtE\_I\_relaxeD\]) is a stANdArD convex PrOgrammInG prOblEm, it cAN be sOlved bY numericAl seaRCh algorithms suCH as the interioR-PoINT mEThod [@booK_Boyd]. HoweveR, the OPtimAl $t_{k,M}$ MaY noT Be intEger-vAlUEd. tHerefore, we opt to solvE tHis proBlem bY the dual methoD which can pROVIde an uppEr boUNd FOr problem (\[objecTive\_RAte\_I\_relaxeD\]) (By the weaK dualIty [@Book_BOyd]). In SectION \[sec\_dual\_TypE\_I\_tOtaL\], it WILl Be shown that thE SOlutIoN obtainEd bY the duaL meThoD haS $t_{k,M}\iN\{0,
 is a mixed integer progra mming (MIP ) pro ble m w hi ch i s ha rd to solve. T h eref ore, as in [@concave_f uncti on ] [@mu l ti level _waterf i ll i n g],  w erel ax th e int ege r const raint of ( \[c on straint\_t\_ b in ary\]) as$t_ {k,m}\in \ma thd s{R}_+ ,\fo r all k , m $. Th is con t inuous  relaxati on makes$ t_{k,m} $ th e ti me sharing factor of each SP. The r elaxed  p r ob l e m t hen  becomes $ $\ begin { aligned } 
\ l a b el{ o bjective_Rate _I_relaxed} \ma x_{{\b mp}, { \bm t} } ~\f ra c {1} {2}\sum^M_{ k=1} \sum^M_{m =1}t_{ k ,m}~w_{ k }\log\l eft(1+ a_{ k,m }\fr a c{ p_ {k, m} } {t_ { k, m}} \ rig ht)~~\te xt {s .t.}~ ~
(\ r e f { cons tra int_ power _consumption} ),(\re f {co nstra int_t _k}) ,(\ref {const raint _t _m}),
(\ref{con stra int_power _0} ),  ~\ te xt{an d }\\
\l abe l{c onstrai nt_t_0} t_{ k, m } \ ge q 0,\text{ }\foral lk ,  m .\end{al igned} $ $No t e that t he  va lueo f  theobje c ti ve funct ion (\ [ ob je ctive\_ Ra te\_I\ _r ela xed \]) i s  the  sameas thatof th e  original obje c tive function (\ [ o bj e ctiv e\_ Rate\_I\_MI P\]) when  $t_ { k, m}\ i n\{0, 1\},\f o ra l l k, m$. This objec ti ve fun ction  is concave b ecause iti s a nonneg ativ e  w e ighted sum ofconca ve functio n s in the  form  of $x\l og(1+\fra c { y}{x})$whi chiscon c a ve  in $(x, y)$[ @ conc av e_funct ion ]. Sinc e ( \[o bje cti ve \_Rate\_I \_relaxe d\ ])  i sa s tanda r d convex  p rog ra mmi ng pr o blem,it ca n be  s ol v edby nume r ic a l  sea rc halgo rit hm s suc h as the  interi or-pointmet h od [ @B oo k_Boyd] . However, th eoptimal $t _{ k,m }$ may n ot be in teger-valued. Therefore ,  we opt  to  solv e th is proble m b y thedua l  metho d whic h can  p rov i d e anu p pe r b ou nd for pro b l em(\[ob je ctiv e\_Rate \_I\_relaxed\]) (b y  th e weak dualit y [ @Boo k _ Bo yd] ) .I n S ec t ion \ [sec\_dual\_typ e\_I\_tota l\ ] ,it will be sho wn  that t he solu tiono btained  by the d ual metho dhas$ t _{k ,m}\in\{0, 
 is_a mixed_integer programming (MIP) problem_which is_hard_to solve._Therefore,_as in [@concave_function][@multilevel_waterfilling],_we relax the_integer constraint of (\[constraint\_t\_binary\])_as $t_{k,m}\in \mathds{R}_+,_\forall_k, m$. This continuous relaxation makes $t_{k,m}$ the time sharing factor of each SP._The_relaxed problem_then_becomes_$$\begin{aligned}
\label{objective_Rate_I_relaxed}
\max_{{\bm p},{\bm t}} ~\frac{1}{2}\sum^M_{k=1}\sum^M_{m=1}t_{k,m}~w_{k}\log\left(1+a_{k,m}\frac{p_{k,m}}{t_{k,m}}\right)~~\text{s.t.}~~
(\ref{constraint_power_consumption}),
(\ref{constraint_t_k}), (\ref{constraint_t_m}),
(\ref{constraint_power_0}),_~\text{and}\\
\label{constraint_t_0}
t_{k,m}\geq 0,\text{ }\forall k, m.\end{aligned}$$_Note that_the value of the objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) is_the_same as that_of the original objective function (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_MIP\]) when $t_{k,m}\in\{0,1\}, \forall_k, m$. This objective function is_concave because it_is_a_nonnegative weighted sum of_concave functions in the form of_$x\log(1+\frac{y}{x})$ which is concave in $(x,_y)$ [@concave_function]. Since (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\]) is a standard_convex programming problem, it can be_solved by numerical search algorithms_such as_the interior-point method [@Book_Boyd]. However,_the optimal $t_{k,m}$_may not_be integer-valued. Therefore,_we opt to solve this problem_by the dual_method which can provide an upper_bound_for problem (\[objective\_Rate\_I\_relaxed\])_(by_the_weak duality_[@Book_Boyd]). In Section_\[sec\_dual\_type\_I\_total\],_it will_be_shown that the solution obtained by_the_dual method has $t_{k,m}\in\{0,