A Classification and Performance Comparison of Mobility Models for Ad Hoc Networks

Abstract. In mobile ad hoc network research, simulation plays an important role in determining the network characteristics and measuring performance. On the other hand, unrealistic simulation conditions may be misleading, instead of being explanatory. For this reason, constructing simulation models closer to the real circumstances is very significant. Movement behavior of mobile entities is one of the most important concepts for the realistic simulation scenarios in mo-bile ad hoc networks. In this study, we first provide a survey and a new hybrid classification of existing mobility models in the literature. We implemented the random direction and boundless simulation area models on Scalable Wireless Ad Hoc Network Simulator (SWANS) and conducted simulations of Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) protocol for these as well as the random walk and random waypoint models. Our comparative results for the mobility models are discussed on a variety of simulation settings and parameters.

A Survey on Emulation Testbeds for Mobile Ad-hoc Networks

AbstractMobile Ad hoc Network (MANET) can be said as a collection of mobile nodes, which builds a dynamic topology and a A resource constrained network. In this paper, we present a survey of various testbeds for Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Emulator provides environment without modifications to the software and validates software solutions for ad hoc network. A field test will show rather the simulation work is going on right track or not and going from the simulator to the real thing directly to analyze the performance and compare the results of routing protocols and mobility models. Analyzing and choosing an appropriate emulator according to the given environment is a time-consuming process. We contribute a survey of emulation testbeds for the choice of appropriate research tools in the mobile ad hoc networks

Review of Ad Hoc Networks scenarios and challenges in years 2015-2019

A Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) protocol performance analysis depends on the type of simulation tools, mobility models, and metrics used. These parameters\u27 choice is crucial to researchers because it may produce an inaccurate result if it is not well chosen. The challenges researcher is facing are on the choice of these four parameters. Our survey shows an inclination to used Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector routing (AODV) for performance comparison and enhancement of it by the researcher. Network simulation 2 (NS2) was the most selected tool, but we observe a decline in its utilization in recent years. Random Waypoint Mobility model (RWPM) was the most used mobility model. We have found a high percentage of the published article did not mention the mobility models use; this will make the result difficult for performance comparison with other works. Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR), End to End Delay (E2ED) were the most used metrics. Some authors have self-developed their simulation tools; the authors have also used new metrics and protocols to get a particular result based on their research objective. However, some criteria of choosing a protocol, metrics, mobility model, and simulation tool were not described, decreasing the credibility of their papers\u27 results. Improvement needs to be done in the Ad-hoc network in terms of benchmark, acceptable scenario parameters. This survey will give the best practice to be used and some recommendations to the Ad-hoc network community

A survey on network simulators in three-dimensional wireless ad hoc and sensor networks

© 2016 The Author(s). As steady research in wireless ad hoc and sensor networks is going on, performance evaluation through relevant network simulator becomes indispensable procedure to demonstrate superiority to comparative schemes and suitability in most literatures. Thus, it is very important to establish credibility of simulation results by investigating merits and limitations of each simulator prior to selection. Based on this motivation, in this article, we present a comprehensive survey on current network simulators for new emerging research area, three-dimensional wireless ad hoc and sensor networks which is represented by airborne ad hoc networks and underwater sensor networks by reviewing major existing simulators as well as presenting their main features in several aspects. In addition, we address the outstanding mobility models which are main components in simulation study for self-organizing ad hoc networks. Finally, open research issues and research challenges are discussed and presented

Mobility Models for Vehicular Communications

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15497-8_11The experimental evaluation of vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs) implies elevate economic cost and organizational complexity, especially in presence of solutions that target large-scale deployments. As performance evaluation is however mandatory prior to the actual implementation of VANETs, simulation has established as the de-facto standard for the analysis of dedicated network protocols and architectures. The vehicular environment makes network simulation particularly challenging, as it requires the faithful modelling not only of the network stack, but also of all phenomena linked to road traffic dynamics and radio-frequency signal propagation in highly mobile environments. In this chapter, we will focus on the first aspect, and discuss the representation of mobility in VANET simulations. Specifically, we will present the requirements of a dependable simulation, and introduce models of the road infrastructure, of the driver’s behaviour, and of the traffic dynamics. We will also outline the evolution of simulation tools implementing such models, and provide a hands-on example of reliable vehicular mobility modelling for VANET simulation.Manzoni, P.; Fiore, M.; Uppoor, S.; Martínez Domínguez, FJ.; Tavares De Araujo Cesariny Calafate, CM.; Cano Escribá, JC. (2015). Mobility Models for Vehicular Communications. En Vehicular ad hoc Networks. Standards, Solutions, and Research. Springer. 309-333. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-15497-8_11S309333Bai F, Sadagopan N, Helmy A (2003) The IMPORTANT framework for analyzing the impact of mobility on performance of routing protocols for adhoc networks. Elsevier Ad Hoc Netw1:383–403Baumann R, Legendre F, Sommer P (2008) Generic mobility simulation framework (GMSF). In: ACM mobility modelsBononi L, Di Felice M, D’Angelo G, Bracuto M, Donatiello L (2008) MoVES: A framework for parallel and distributed simulation of wireless vehicular ad hoc networks. Comput Netw 52(1):155–179Cabspotting Project (2006) San Francisco exploratorium’s invisible dynamics initiative. http://cabspotting.org/index.htmlCamp T, Boleng J, Davies V (2002) A survey of mobility models for ad hoc network research. Wirel Commun Mobile Comput 2(5):483–502. Special issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research, Trends and ApplicationsCavin 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. ACM, New York, pp 38–43Choffnes D, Bustamante F (2005) An integrated mobility and traffic model for vehicular wireless networks. In: ACM VANETDavies V (2000) Evaluating mobility models within an ad hoc network. Master’s thesis, Colorado School of Mines, Boulder, Etats-UnisEhling M, Bihler W (1996) Zeit im Blickfeld. Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Zeitbudgeterhebung. In: Blanke K, Ehling M, Schwarz N (eds) Schriftenreihe des Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, vol 121. W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, pp 237–274ETH Laboratory for Software Technology (2009) K. Nagel. http://www.lst.inf.ethz.ch/research/ad-hoc/car-traces/Fiore M, Härri J (2008) The networking shape of vehicular mobility. In: ACM MobiHoc, Hong Kong, ChinaFiore M, Haerri J, Filali F, Bonnet C (2007) Vehicular mobility simulation for VANETS. In: Proceedings of the 40th annual simulation symposium (ANSS 2007), Norfolk, VAFleetnet Project - Internet on the Road (2000) NEC Laboratories Europe. http://www.neclab.eu/Projects/fleetnet.htmGawron C (1998) An iterative algorithm to determine the dynamic user equilibrium in a traffic simulation model. Int J Mod Phys C 9(3):393–407Haerri J, Filali F, Bonnet C (2009) Mobility models for vehicular ad hoc networks: a survey and taxonomy. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 11(4):19–41. doi: 10.1109/SURV.2009.090403 . http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2009.090403Härri J, Fiore M, Filali F, Bonnet C (2011) Vehicular mobility simulation with VanetMobiSim. Simulation 87(4):275–300. doi: 10.1177/0037549709345997 . http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0037549709345997Hertkorn G, Wagner P (2004) The application of microscopic activity based travel demand modelling in large scale simulations. In: World conference on transport researchHuang E, Hu W, Crowcroft J, Wassell I (2005) Towards commercial mobile ad hoc network applications: a radio dispatch system. In: Sixth ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing (MobiHoc 2005), Urbana-Champaign, ILJaap S, Bechler M, Wolf L (2005) Evaluation of routing protocols for vehicular ad hoc networks in city traffic scenarios. In: ITSTJardosh A, Belding-Royer E, Almeroth K, Suri S (2003) Towards realistic mobility models for mobile ad hoc networks. In: ACM/IEEE international conference on mobile computing and networking (MobiCom 2003), San Diego, CAKim J, Sridhara V, Bohacek S (2009) Realistic mobility simulation of urban mesh networks. Ad Hoc Netw 7(2):411–430Krajzewicz D (2009) Kombination von taktischen und strategischen Einflüssen in einer mikroskopischen Verkehrsflusssimulation. In: Jürgensohn T, Kolrep H (eds) Fahrermodellierung in Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf, pp 104–115Krajzewicz D, Blokpoel RJ, Cartolano F, Cataldi P, Gonzalez A, Lazaro O, Leguay J, Lin L, Maneros J, Rondinone M (2010) iTETRIS - a system for the evaluation of cooperative traffic management solutions. In: Advanced microsystems for automotive applications 2010, VDI-Buch. Springer, Berlin, pp 399–410Krajzewicz D, Erdmann J, Behrisch M, Bieker L (2012) Recent development and applications of SUMO—simulation of urban mobility. Int J Adv Syst Measur 5(3/4):128–138Krauss S (1998) Microscopic modeling of traffic flow: investigation of collision free vehicle dynamics. Ph.D. thesis, Universität zu KölnKrauss S, Wagner P, Gawron C (1997) Metastable states in a microscopic model of traffic flow. Phys Rev E 55(304):55–97Legendre F, Borrel V, Dias de Amorim M, Fdida S (2006) Reconsidering microscopic mobility modeling for self-organizing networks. Network IEEE 20(6):4–12. doi: 10.1109/MNET.2006.273114Mangharam R, Weller D, Rajkumar R, Mudalige P (2006) GrooveNet: a hybrid simulator for vehicle-to-vehicle networks. In: IEEE MobiquitousMartinez FJ, Cano JC, Calafate CT, Manzoni P (2008) Citymob: a mobility model pattern generator for VANETs. In: IEEE vehicular networks and applications workshop (Vehi-Mobi, held with ICC), BeijingMiller J, Horowitz E (2007) FreeSim: a free real-time freeway traffic simulator. In: IEEE ITSCNagel K, Schreckenberg M (1992) A cellular automaton model for freeway traffic. J Phys I 2(12):2221–2229Nagel K, Wolf D, Wagner P, Simon P (1998) Two-lane traffic rules for cellular automata: a systematic approach. Phys Rev E 58:1425–1437NOW - Network on Wheels Project (2008) Hartenstein H, Härri J, Torrent-Moreno M. https://dsn.tm.kit.edu/english/projects_now-project.phpPiorkowski M, Raya M, Lugo A, Papadimitratos P, Grossglauser M, Hubaux JP (2008) TraNS: realistic joint traffic and network simulator for VANETs. ACM Mobile Comput Commun Rev 12(1):31–33Rindsfüser G, Ansorge J, Mühlhans H (2002) Aktivitätenvorhaben. In: Beckmann K (ed) SimVV Mobilität verstehen und lenken—zu einer integrierten quantitativen Gesamtsicht und Mikrosimulation von Verkehr, Ministry of School, Science and Research of Nordrhein-WestfalenSaha A, Johnson D (2004) Modeling mobility for vehicular ad hoc networks. In: ACM VANETSeskar I, Maric S, Holtzman J, Wasserman J (1992) Rate of location area updates in cellular systems. In: IEEE 42nd vehicular technology conference, 1992, vol 2, pp 694–697. doi: 10.1109/VETEC.1992.245478Sommer C, German R, Dressler F (2011) Bidirectionally coupled network and road traffic simulation for improved ivc analysis. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 10(1):3–15Tian J, Haehner J, Becker C, Stepanov I, Rothermel K (2002) Graph-based mobility model for mobile ad hoc network simulation. In: SCS ANSS, San DiegoTreiber M, Helbing D (2002) Realistische mikrosimulation von strassenverkehr mit einem einfachen modell. In: ASIM, Rostock, AllemagneTreiber M, Hennecke A, Helbing D (2000) Congested traffic states in empirical observations and microscopic simulations. Phys Rev E 62(2):1805–1824UDel Models for Simulation of Urban Mobile Wireless Networks (2009) Stephan Bohacek. http://www.udelmodels.eecis.udel.eduUMass DieselNet Project (2009) UMass diverse outdoor mobile environment (DOME). https://dome.cs.umass.edu/umassdieselnetUppoor S, Trullols-Cruces O, Fiore M, Barcelo-Ordinas JM (2015) Generation and analysis of a large-scale urban vehicular mobility dataset. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 1:1. PrePrints. doi: 10.1109/TMC.2013.27Varschen C, Wagner P (2006) Mikroskopische Modellierung der Personenverkehrsnachfrage auf Basis von Zeitverwendungstagebuchern. Stadt Region Land 81:63–69Yoon J, Liu M, Noble B (2003) Random waypoint considered harmful. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOMM 2003, San Francisco, CAZheng Q, Hong X, Liu J (2006) An agenda-based mobility model. In: 39th IEEE annual simulation symposium (ANSS-39-2006), Huntsville, A

Virtual Communication Stack: Towards Building Integrated Simulator of Mobile Ad Hoc Network-based Infrastructure for Disaster Response Scenarios

Responses to disastrous events are a challenging problem, because of possible damages on communication infrastructures. For instance, after a natural disaster, infrastructures might be entirely destroyed. Different network paradigms were proposed in the literature in order to deploy adhoc network, and allow dealing with the lack of communications. However, all these solutions focus only on the performance of the network itself, without taking into account the specificities and heterogeneity of the components which use it. This comes from the difficulty to integrate models with different levels of abstraction. Consequently, verification and validation of adhoc protocols cannot guarantee that the different systems will work as expected in operational conditions. However, the DEVS theory provides some mechanisms to allow integration of models with different natures. This paper proposes an integrated simulation architecture based on DEVS which improves the accuracy of ad hoc infrastructure simulators in the case of disaster response scenarios.Comment: Preprint. Unpublishe

Robotic Wireless Sensor Networks

In this chapter, we present a literature survey of an emerging, cutting-edge, and multi-disciplinary field of research at the intersection of Robotics and Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) which we refer to as Robotic Wireless Sensor Networks (RWSN). We define a RWSN as an autonomous networked multi-robot system that aims to achieve certain sensing goals while meeting and maintaining certain communication performance requirements, through cooperative control, learning and adaptation. While both of the component areas, i.e., Robotics and WSN, are very well-known and well-explored, there exist a whole set of new opportunities and research directions at the intersection of these two fields which are relatively or even completely unexplored. One such example would be the use of a set of robotic routers to set up a temporary communication path between a sender and a receiver that uses the controlled mobility to the advantage of packet routing. We find that there exist only a limited number of articles to be directly categorized as RWSN related works whereas there exist a range of articles in the robotics and the WSN literature that are also relevant to this new field of research. To connect the dots, we first identify the core problems and research trends related to RWSN such as connectivity, localization, routing, and robust flow of information. Next, we classify the existing research on RWSN as well as the relevant state-of-the-arts from robotics and WSN community according to the problems and trends identified in the first step. Lastly, we analyze what is missing in the existing literature, and identify topics that require more research attention in the future