2022 IEEE 95th Vehicular Technology Conference: (VTC2022-Spring) 2022
DOI: 10.1109/vtc2022-spring54318.2022.9861012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of 5G-NR V2N Connectivity in a Centralized Cooperative Lane Change Scenario

Abstract: By means of system-level simulations, we analyze in this paper the performance of Vehicle-to-Network (V2N) connectivity based on the 5th Generation -New Radio (5G-NR) as a support to Cooperative, Connected and Automated Mobility (CCAM), in light of both network and Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC) deployments. Focusing on a canonical centralized Cooperative Lane Change (CLC) use case that involves three vehicles in a cross-border highway environment, we assess the link reliability and the End-to-End (E2E) lat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Both MEC deployment architectures have also been considered in the evaluation, including fully decentralized and highly centralized schemes. For instance, under a highly centralized MEC hypothesis, the overall E2E latency integrates extra delays related to backhaul and core network which are mainly distance-driven, we then assumed 2 ms for each component [9]. This corresponds to lower bounds (typically, under the coarse assumption of 1ms/100km for fiber transport).…”
Section: B Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Both MEC deployment architectures have also been considered in the evaluation, including fully decentralized and highly centralized schemes. For instance, under a highly centralized MEC hypothesis, the overall E2E latency integrates extra delays related to backhaul and core network which are mainly distance-driven, we then assumed 2 ms for each component [9]. This corresponds to lower bounds (typically, under the coarse assumption of 1ms/100km for fiber transport).…”
Section: B Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…UEs are equipped with onboard CoCA/LDM systems to interpret merged CPMs or warning messages from gNodeB, hence requiring low-latency interfaces for information exchange between MEC services and UEs. We also consider several MEC deployment configurations, including fully decentralized (i.e., 1 MEC per gNodeB) and highly centralized (i.e., one per operator data center) schemes [9].…”
Section: Cooperative Collision Avoidancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…MNOs and MEC service providers have been looking for deployment models that help reach trade-offs between the required service KPIs and deployment costs. In order to illustrate the impact of MEC placement on E2E latency, system-level simulations were carried out by Poli et al [13] within a centralized Cooperative Lane Change (CLC) use case involving three vehicles. The targeted round-trip latency is typically in the order of tens of ms, while the exchange delay requirement should be kept lower than 100 ms from the generation time to the reception time [15].…”
Section: End To End Latency For Different Mec Deployment Optionsmentioning
confidence: 99%