Faculty Publications

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://idr.nitk.ac.in/handle/123456789/18736

Publications by NITK Faculty

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.Mobility models

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Analysis of mobile beacon aided in-range localization scheme in ad hoc wireless sensor networks
    (2006) Srinath, T.V.; Katti, A.K.; S, V.S.
    In this paper, We mathematically model the In-Range localization scheme in the presence of a Mobile Beacon. In the In-Range localization scheme, a sensor with unknown location is localized to a disc centered at the position of the beacon, if the sensor under consideration can successfully decode a transmission from the beacon. In our approach a Mobile Beacon guided by a mobility model is used to generate the virtual beacons, there by eliminating the need to deploy static beacons that are required in the classical In-Range localization scheme. For analysis, we consider a Mobile Beacon guided by the Random Way Point (RWP) mobility model with In-Range localization scheme. The main contribution of this paper consists of mathematical models for the In-Range localization parameters in the presence of a Mobile Beacon guided by the RWP mobility model. Copyright 2006 ACM.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Simulation based performance comparison of community model, GFMM, RPGM, manhattan model and RWP-SS mobility models in MANET
    (2009) Gowrishankar, S.; Sarkar, S.K.; Basavaraju, T.G.
    A characteristic feature of ad hoc networks is the infrastructure less and seamless connectivity of the wireless mobile nodes. Mobility plays an important role in the connectivity of these nodes. In this paper a performance comparison of five important mobility models; Community Model, Group Force Mobility Model (GFMM), Reference Point Group Mobility (RPGM), Manhattan Mobility Model and Random Waypoint-Steady State (RWP-SS) Mobility Model has been analyzed. Community Model, GFMM and RPGM Mobility Models are pure group mobility models, while Manhattan Mobility Model can be considered as a pseudo Group Mobility Model. We have included RWP-SS to give a whole picture of how group mobility models stand against a random model like RWP-SS. From our analysis we deduce that group mobility models hold inherent advantage over mobility models like Random Waypoint models. Among the group mobility models, Community model has good performance when compared to other mobility models. Energy Consumption of these mobility models has also been analyzed. Various Metrics like Packet Delivery Ratio, Average Network Delay, Network Throughput, Routing Overhead and Number of Hops have been considered. The results obtained in our paper colligates with the theoretical results in [20]. We also claim that our work is the first to compare these five different mobility models together. © 2009 IEEE.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Assessment of objective functions under mobility in RPL
    (Springer Verlag, 2018) Sanshi, S.; Jaidhar, J.
    Due to the technological advancement in Low-power and Lossy Network (LLN), the sensor node mobility has become a basic requirement. Routing protocol designed for LLN must ensure certain requirements in a mobile environment such as reliability, flexibility, scalability to name a few. To meet the needs of LLN, Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) released the standard IPv6 Routing Protocol for LLNs (RPL). RPL depends on Objective Function (OF) to select optimized routes from source to destination. However, the standard did not specify which OF to use. In this study, performance analysis of different OFs such as Objective Function zero (OF0), Energy-based Objective Function (OFE), Delay-Efficient Objective Function (OFDE), and Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function (MRHOF) is carried out under different mobility models, which makes this study unique. The metrics used to measure the performance are latency, packet delivery ratio (PDR), and power consumption. Simulation results demonstrate that under different mobility models, MRHOF achieved better results in terms of PDR and power consumption, while OFDE shows better results in terms of latency compared to other OFs. © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Performance comparison of MANET routing protocols
    (2010) Kumar, J.; Kulkarni, M.; Gupta, D.
    A Mobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary network without using any existing infrastructure. Since not many MANETs are currently deployed, research in this area is simulation based. We have compared different routing protocols like DSR, DSDV, AODV to study the mobility characteristics of different scenarios in which MANETs may be deployed. Evaluation of the impact of different mobility models on the performance of these routing protocols is carried out, based upon different parameters-throughput, Packet delivery ratio, end to end delay, and offered traffic load. Also, mobility models are compared based on these performance parameters in various routing protocols. © 2010 Praise Worthy Prize S.r.l. - All rights reserved.