Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 67, Issue 2, pp 295–314 | Cite as

Determining the Representative Factors Affecting Warning Message Dissemination in VANETs

  • Francisco J. Martinez
  • Chai Keong Toh
  • Juan-Carlos Cano
  • Carlos T. Calafate
  • Pietro Manzoni
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we present a statistical analysis based on the 2k factorial methodology to determine the representative factors affecting traffic safety applications in Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). Our purpose is to determine what are the key factors affecting Warning Message Dissemination (WMD) in order to concentrate on such parameters, thus reducing the amount of required simulation time when evaluating VANETs. Simulation results show that the key factors affecting warning messages delivery are: (i) the transmission range, (ii) the radio propagation model used, and (iii) the density of vehicles. Based on this statistical analysis, we evaluate a compound key factor: neighbor density. This factor combines the above-mentioned factors into a single entity, reducing the number of factors that must be taken into account for VANET researchers to evaluate the benefits of their proposals.

Keywords

Vehicular ad hoc networks Performance evaluation Inter-vehicle communication 2k factorial analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Jain R. (1991) The art of computer systems performance analysis: Techniques for experimental design, measurement, simulation, and modelling. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gupta, R. A., Agarwal, A. K., Chow, M. Y., Wang, W. (2007). Performance assessment of data and time-sensitive wireless distributed networked-control-systems in presence of information security. Military communications conference 2007, MILCOM 2007, IEEE. (pp. 1–7). doi:10.1109/MILCOM.2007.4455044
  3. 3.
    Liu, C., MacGregor, M. H., Harms, J. (2008). Improving multipath routing performance in wsns by tuning IEEE 802.11 parameters. In MobiWac ’08: Proceedings of the 6th ACM international symposium on Mobility management and wireless access (pp. 142–146). ACM, New York, NY, USA. doi:10.1145/1454659.1454686
  4. 4.
    Vaz de Melo, P. O., da Cunha, F. D., Almeida, J. M., Loureiro, A. A., Mini, R. A. (2008). The problem of cooperation among different wireless sensor networks. In MSWiM ’08: Proceedings of the 11th international symposium on modeling, analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile systems (pp. 86–91). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/1454503.1454521
  5. 5.
    Perkins, D., Hughes, H., Owen, C. (2002). Factors affecting the performance of ad hoc networks. IEEE international conference on communications 2002 (Vol. 4, pp. 2048–2052). doi:10.1109/ICC.2002.997208
  6. 6.
    Perkins D., Hughes H. (2002) Investigating the performance of tcp in mobile ad hoc networks. Computer Communications 25(11–12): 1132–1139. doi:10.1016/S0140-3664(02)00024-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buchegger, S., Le Boudec, J. Y. (2002). Performance analysis of the confidant protocol. In MobiHoc ’02: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing (pp. 226–236). ACM, New York, NY, USA doi:10.1145/513800.513828
  8. 8.
    McClary D. W., Syrotiuk V. R., Lecuire V. (2008) Adaptive audio streaming in mobile ad hoc networks using neural networks. Ad Hoc Networks 6(4): 524–538. doi:10.1016/j.adhoc.2007.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    (2006). Task Group p: IEEE P802.11p: Wireless access in vehicular environments (WAVE). IEEE Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tseng Y. -C., Ni S. -Y., Chen Y. -S., Sheu J. -P. (2002) The broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc network. Wireless Networks 8: 153–167MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Toh C. K. (2001) Ad hoc mobile wireless networks: Protocols and systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cavin, D., Sasson, Y., Schiper, A. (2002). On the accuracy of MANET simulators. In Proceedings of the second ACM international workshop on Principles of mobile computing (pp. 38–43). ACM, New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yoon, J., Liu, M., Noble, B. (2003). Random waypoint considered harmful. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOMM 2003. San Francisco, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martinez, F. J., Cano, J.-C., Calafate, C. T., Manzoni, P. (2008). CityMob: a mobility model pattern generator for VANETs. In IEEE vehicular networks and applications workshop (Vehi-Mobi, held with ICC). Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martinez, F. J., Toh, C. -K., Cano, J. -C., Calafate, C. T., Manzoni, P. (2009). Realistic radio propagation models (RPMs) for VANET simulations. In IEEE wireless communications and networking conference (WCNC). Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jiang, D., Chen, Q., Delgrossi, L. (2007). Communication density: A channel load metric for vehicular communications research. In IEEE internatonal conference on Mobile adhoc and sensor systems, 2007. MASS 2007 (pp. 1–8). doi:10.1109/MOBHOC.2007.4428734
  17. 17.
    Tiwari, G., Fazio, J., Pavitravas, S. (2000). Passenger car units for heterogeneous traffic using a modified density method. In Proceedings of fourth international symposium on highway capacity (pp. 246–257). Transportation Research Board.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nguyen, H. N., Shinoda, Y. (2009). A node’s number of neighbors in wireless mobile ad hoc networks: A statistical view. In Proceedings of Eighth international conference on networks, 2009 (pp. 52–60). doi:10.1109/ICN.2009.35
  19. 19.
    Ferrari, G., Tonguz, O. (2004). Minimum number of neighbors for fully connected uniform ad hoc wireless networks. In IEEE international conference on communications (Vol. 7, pp. 4331–4335). doi:10.1109/ICC.2004.1313365
  20. 20.
    Sanchez J., Ruiz P., Liu J., Stojmenovic I. (2007) Bandwidth-efficient geographic multicast routing protocol for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sensors Journal 7(5): 627–636. doi:10.1109/JSEN.2007.894149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco J. Martinez
    • 1
  • Chai Keong Toh
    • 2
    • 3
  • Juan-Carlos Cano
    • 4
  • Carlos T. Calafate
    • 4
  • Pietro Manzoni
    • 4
  1. 1.University of ZaragozaTeruelSpain
  2. 2.ALICO Systems, Inc.TorranceUSA
  3. 3.National Cheng Kung UniversityTainanTaiwan
  4. 4.Universitat Politècnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations