Analytical models for single-hop and multi-hop ad hoc networks

Alizadeh-Shabdiz, F.; Subramaniam, Suresh

doi:10.1109/broadnets.2004.15

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other related multihop ad hoc networks are described in [35][36][37][38][39][40]. In Section 4.10 the average delays for three traditional forms of multiple access control protocols, TDMA, FDMA, and CDMA, are derived using queueing theory results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medium Access Control

Wong¹,

Kong²,

Liang³

et al. 2008

Wireless Broadband Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medium Access Control

Wong¹,

Kong²,

Liang³

et al. 2008

Wireless Broadband Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some simplifying assumptions made by several previous studies are also adapted here in order to provide an analytically tractable solution to the problem: (1) disk radio model, (2) Poisson offered traffic, (3) bit error‐free channel, and (4) stationary nodes. No assumption is imposed either on the topology or on the traffic pattern.…”

Section: Problem Model and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The average throughput includes all successfully delivered packets at the link layer; thus, any retransmission increases the average throughput. The calculation of average throughput is adapted from the IEEE 802.11 DCF‐based analyses for single‐hop networks and for multi‐hop networks , and the average throughput is given by:

S = \frac{τ (1 - p) b_{italic DATA}}{\overset{σ_{n}}{true}}

where b D A T A is the number of bits of DATA packet including headers, τ is the probability of transmission, p is the collision probability, and

\overset{σ_{n}}{true}

is the average slot duration given by

\overset{σ_{n}}{true} = τp T_{italic tc} + τ (1 - p) T_{italic ts} + p_{italic cs} \overset{σ}{true} .

p c s is the probability that a node executes carrier sensing when NAV is zero and is calculated by summing up the steady‐state probabilities of all idle states of the discrete time Markov Chain model of IEEE 802.11 DCF introduced in .…”

Section: Throughput Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Owing to the comparable complexity increase when switching from single‐hop to multi‐hop network architecture, these studies are based on either simulations or simplified assumptions. For example, the hidden terminal effect is not considered in , whereas Barowski, Biaz, and Agrawal additionally assumes that each node is either relay or source. The analysis in accounts for intra‐path interference (interference of simultaneous transmissions of different links of the same path) and does not take into account the inter‐path interference (interference of simultaneous transmissions of different paths), and its applicability is limited to networks where other flows do not intersect with the intended path.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Goodput and throughput comparison of single‐hop and multi‐hop routing for IEEE 802.11 DCF‐based wireless networks under hidden terminal existence

Aydoğdu

Karasan

2015

Wireless Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate how multi-hop routing affects the goodput and throughput performances of IEEE 802.11 distributed coordination function-based wireless networks compared with direct transmission (single hopping), when medium access control dynamics such as carrier sensing, collisions, retransmissions, and exponential backoff are taken into account under hidden terminal presence. We propose a semi-Markov chain-based goodput and throughput model for IEEE 802.11-based wireless networks, which works accurately with both multi-hopping and single hopping for different network topologies and over a large range of traffic loads. Results show that, under light traffic, there is little benefit of parallel transmissions and both single-hop and multi-hop routing achieve the same end-to-end goodput. Under moderate traffic, concurrent transmissions are favorable as multi-hopping improves the goodput up to 730% with respect to single hopping for dense networks. At heavy traffic, multi-hopping becomes unstable because of increased packet collisions and network congestion, and single-hopping achieves higher network layer goodput compared with multi-hop routing. As for the link layer throughput is concerned, multi-hopping increases throughput 75 times for large networks, whereas single hopping may become advantageous for small networks. The results point out that the end-to-end goodput can be improved by adaptively switching between single hopping and multi-hopping according to the traffic load and topology.

show abstract

“…Analytical study is performed in order to explore the benefits of the proposed MCR protocol. There existing research 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 are establishing the analytical models for the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol under certain assumptions. An IEEE 802.11 backoff model is proposed in Reference 19 under the saturation state, while the non‐saturated model is presented in Reference 20.…”

Section: Analytical Modeling Of Packet Delivery Ratiomentioning

confidence: 99%

MCR: MAC‐assisted congestion‐controlled routing for wireless multihop networks

Hsu¹,

Feng²

2012

Wireless Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Techniques for improving network congestion have been proposed in different fields. In recent years, the congestion control problems were studied to enhance the routing performance in wireless multihop networks (WMNs). In this paper, the network allocation vector (NAV) introduced by the contention‐based medium access control (MAC) protocols is utilized for the determination of the channel status around a wireless node (WN). A MAC‐assisted congestion‐controlled routing (MCR) algorithm is proposed to alleviate the network congestion problem by adopting the information from the MAC layer. The routing path is selected based on the congestion‐free probability along the path for transmitting the data packets. Moreover, the adaptive path‐switching scheme and the aggressive hop‐reduction (AHR) local repair mechanism further enhance the routing performance of the proposed MCR algorithm. The effectiveness of the MCR protocol is evaluated via both the analytical study and the simulation results. Without consuming excessive control packets for each WN, the MCR algorithm can achieve better performance when compared with other existing schemes, especially under the scenarios with network congestion. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Analytical models for single-hop and multi-hop ad hoc networks

Cited by 24 publications

References 4 publications

Medium Access Control

Medium Access Control

Goodput and throughput comparison of single‐hop and multi‐hop routing for IEEE 802.11 DCF‐based wireless networks under hidden terminal existence

MCR: MAC‐assisted congestion‐controlled routing for wireless multihop networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About