2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.410
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance Evaluation of Data Delivery Mechanism For Cognitive Radio Vehicular and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, due to the unsuccessful reception of messages, there are a lot of chances of the data packet loss and due to this packet loss some safety messages also experience loss and cannot reach the specified destination. In order to overcome this challenge, the TARS protocol plays a very important role and shows high PDR, meaning the protocol builds a reliable connection between the two vehicles as well as the connection between the RSU and vehicle, with minimum packet and message loss [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. The RSU transmits the warning message up to one hop neighbor (which lies in its transmission range) and the direction based forwarding mechanism minimizes the packet loss chances, which also helps to improve the packet delivery ratio [ 44 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, due to the unsuccessful reception of messages, there are a lot of chances of the data packet loss and due to this packet loss some safety messages also experience loss and cannot reach the specified destination. In order to overcome this challenge, the TARS protocol plays a very important role and shows high PDR, meaning the protocol builds a reliable connection between the two vehicles as well as the connection between the RSU and vehicle, with minimum packet and message loss [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. The RSU transmits the warning message up to one hop neighbor (which lies in its transmission range) and the direction based forwarding mechanism minimizes the packet loss chances, which also helps to improve the packet delivery ratio [ 44 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [8], [28] shows that with increase of number of vehicles the PDR increases. Arora et al [29] claimed that with increase of number of vehicles PDR increases but in case of attack with increase of number of vehicles PDR decreases.…”
Section: Resource Testingmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Moreover, in [18] Wang studies the impact of the contention window on throughput; even if it is not clear on which channel the work is focused, the throughput analysis is very interesting for different sizes of the contention window. In [19], Garg et al evaluate the performance of a data delivery mechanism for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks and Cognitive Radio (CR) Vehicular networks; they find that CR networks outperform VANETs when multiple types of packets are transmitted in a vehicle-to-vehicle environment. In [20], Taherkani and Pierre propose a multiobjective algorithm for congestion control in VANETs; their proposal is evaluated under highway and urban scenarios to find that it outperforms schemes like CSMA/CA, D-FPAV (Distributed-Fair Power Adjustment for Vehicular Environments), and CABS (Context Awareness Beacon Scheduling).…”
Section: Broadcast Models For the Control Channelmentioning
confidence: 99%