Abstract
IoT networks connect everyday devices to the internet to communicate with one another and humans. It is more cost-effective to analyse and verify the performance of the designed prototype before deploying these complex networks. Network Simulator 3 (ns-3), MATLAB/Simulink, and Uppaal SMC are three industry-leading tools that simulate communicating models, each with strengths and weaknesses. NS3 is suitable for large-scale network simulations, MATLAB/Simulink is suitable for complex models and data analysis, and Uppaal SMC is efficient for real-time probabilistic systems with complex timing requirements, This paper presents a comparative analysis of NS3 and MATLAB/Simulink and Uppaal SMC, based on a Sigfox-based case study, focusing on the behaviour of a single Sigfox node. The comparison is drawn on ease of use, flexibility, and scalability. The results can help researchers make informed decisions when designing and evaluating simulation experiments. They demonstrate that the choice of tool depends on the specific requirements of the simulation project and requires careful consideration of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bakni, M., Chacón, L.M.M., Cardinale, Y., Terrasson, G., Curea, O.: WSN simulators evaluation: an approach focusing on energy awareness. arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.06246 (2020)
Bilgram, A., et al.: An investigation of safe and near-optimal strategies for prevention of covid-19 exposure using stochastic hybrid models and machine learning. Decis. Anal. J. 5, 100141 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100141, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772662222000728
David, A., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Mikučionis, M., Poulsen, D.B.: UPPAAL SMC tutorial. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 17(4), 397–415 (2015)
David, A., Larsen, K.G., Legay, A., Mikučionis, M., Poulsen, D.B., Sedwards, S.: Runtime verification of biological systems. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) ISoLA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7609, pp. 388–404. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34026-0_29
Gnanaselvi, S.: A study on various simulation tools for wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Eng. Res. Manag. (IJERM) 5, 1–3 (2018)
Knight, A.: Basics of MATLAB and Beyond. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2019)
Kochhar, A., Kaur, P., Preeti.: Simulation platforms for wireless sensor networks: how to select?. In: Tuba, M., Akashe, S., Joshi, A. (eds.) Information and Communication Technology for Sustainable Development. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 933, pp. 539–545. Springer, Singapore (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7166-0_54
Korala, H., Georgakopoulos, D., Jayaraman, P.P., Yavari, A.: A survey of techniques for fulfilling the time-bound requirements of time-sensitive IoT applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 54(11s), 1–36 (2022)
Naeem, M., Albano, M., Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, B., Høedholt, A., Laursen, C.Ø.: Modelling and analysis of a sigfox based IoT network using uppaal SMC. IEEE Sens. J. 23, 10577–10587 (2023)
Naeem, M., Albano, M., Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, B., Høedholt, A., Østergaard Laursen, C.: Battery aware analysis of sensor networks in uppaal SMC. In: 2021 10th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO), pp. 1–6. IEEE Budva, Montenegro (2021)
Naeem, M., Albano, M., Magrin, D., Nielsen, B., Guldstrand, K.: A sigfox module for the network simulator 3. In: Proceedings of the WNS3 2022, pp. 81–88 (2022)
Nayyar, A., Singh, R.: A comprehensive review of simulation tools for wireless sensor networks (WSNS). J. Wirel. Netw. Commun. 5(1), 19–47 (2015)
Riley, G.F., Henderson, T.R.: The ns-3 network simulator. In: Wehrle, K., Güneş, M., Gross, J. (eds.) Modeling and Tools for Network Simulation, pp. 15–34. Springer, Berlin (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12331-3_2
Sen, K., Viswanathan, M., Agha, G.: Statistical model checking of black-box probabilistic systems. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 202–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-27813-9_16
Sharma, R., Vashisht, V., Singh, U.: Modelling and simulation frameworks for wireless sensor networks: a comparative study. IET Wirel. Sens. Syst. 10(5), 181–197 (2020)
Sigfox: Sigfox Radio specifications, February 2020. https://storage.googleapis.com/public-assets-xd-sigfox-production-338901379285/abaedf62-56de-402e-93c3-3a9c10a1cb49.pdf
Xian, X., Shi, W., Huang, H.: Comparison of Omnet++ and other simulator for WSN simulation. In: 2008 3rd IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications, pp. 1439–1443. IEEE (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Naeem, M., Albano, M., Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, B. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Uppaal SMC, ns-3 and MATLAB/Simulink. In: Kofroň, J., Margaria, T., Seceleanu, C. (eds) Engineering of Computer-Based Systems. ECBS 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14390. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49252-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49252-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-49251-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-49252-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)