6 views

Uploaded by adnan fazil

Spatial packing of nodes in a wireless adhoc network with long and short hops.

- Icngc2s10 Paper
- Dot Net Project Titles-25 9 15
- Electronic Wireless Sensor Network
- A Novel Intrusion Detection System for Detecting Black-Hole Nodes in MANETS
- Patterned & Protected AODV Against Blackhole, Wormhole and Greyhole Attacks in convalescing Routing for Ad-hoc Network
- Black Hole Attack in MANET Simulation Implimentation and Evaluation
- IRJET-V3I3119
- Dynamic AODV for Mobile Ad-hoc Network
- e_Bliss_ProjectTitleList
- b 03406010
- Mitigate the Control Packets Using Weighted Rough Set Model with LAR Method in MANET
- Optimal Stochastic Location Updates
- IRJET-AN EFFECTIVE INTRUDER DETECTION WITH BACKUP TIME SERIES TECHNIQUES IN WIRELESS NETWORK
- Energy consumption study in mobile ad hoc networks which use AODV routing protocol
- First
- 2007 ONE DTN Mobility Simulator
- Network Engineer
- Netsec00 Manet Sec
- Mohammed Suheel
- Gopakumar+ (1)

You are on page 1of 7

Adnan Fazil and Aamir Hasan

Department of Avionics Engineering, Institute of Avionics

and Aeronautics (IAA), Air University, E-9, islamabad, Pakistan.

Email: {adnan.fazil, aamir.hasan}@mail.au.edu.pk

AbstractScheduling in a wireless ad hoc network is necessary for sharing of the wireless channel by different nodes

to communicate successfully i.e. while meeting the required

SINR threshold. Contrary to the infra-structure based wireless

networks, the wireless ad hoc network require a scheduling

algorithm that should be easily implementable with as little

as possible coordination between different nodes in distributed

fashion. In this paper, we have proposed a receiver guard zone

based scheduling scheme for a wireless ad hoc network with

long and short hops. Our proposed scheduling scheme has a

performance 74% as compared to centralized scheduling

scheme that is considered as optimal but practically infeasible

for wireless ad hoc networks. The proposed scheduling scheme

also has a remarkable gain in transmission capacity as compared

to random ALOHA and Carrier Sense Multiple Access (CSMA).

I. I NTRODUCTION

The need of an efficient ad hoc network is highly desirable

in todays world because of its properties which can be very

useful with new technologies, devices and applications. That

is why we have seen a lot of research and innovations in

this field since last few years, especially on the topic of

capacity and power control in wireless ad hoc networks [1]

[6]. The Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol plays a very

important role in design of a wireless ad hoc network and

has a major impact on capacity due to distributed nature of

this network and simultaneous transmission in same channel

by different contending nodes [3], [7]. Although, network

capacity is an important parameter to be considered while

designing an ad hoc network, but in practical networks, other

parameters like energy efficiency, quality of service, system

robustness, delays etc. should also be considered [8]. In this

paper we are focusing on capacity of a wireless ad hoc network

like in [1], [2], [9], [10].

A. Related Work

The requirement that a wireless communication channel has

to be shared by all the communication devices in a network,

highlights the importance of scheduling in wireless ad hoc

networks [3], [11], [12] and the implementation technique of

a scheduling scheme has major impact on some of network

parameters like end-to-end delay, outages, power efficiency,

data throughput and channel capacity. In [7] the authors used

a stochastic model to find out the optimal scheduling technique

for an ad hoc network. They propose a Medium Access

Control (MAC) protocol which ensures a random exclusion

special reuse but at the cost of higher number of failed

transmissions i.e. greater than 50%. The work in [13] lacks

the analysis of the proposed scheduling scheme in terms of

its special reuse or the ability to protect existing links while

adding new links in the network.

A scheduling algorithm assuming global knowledge of

attenuation in all the transmissions and interference paths was

proposed in [2] along with a power control algorithm that

guaranties optimal power assignment for scheduled subset

of transmissions. Although the proposed scheme is optimal,

it has two obvious short comings. First, such a scheme is

impractical to implement due to absence of any centralized

controller and global information in a wireless ad hoc network,

although it provides a good performance comparison to other

practical algorithms which are suboptimal. Second and more

importantly, incorporating a tight power control algorithm

limits the ability of scheduling scheme to add additional links.

This would be the case when the existing links Signal to

Interference plus Noise Ratio (SINR) requirement cannot be

met as new links are admitted in the system or even if the

SINR requirement can be met, the power assignment of the

existing links would have to be recomputed.

The work in [15] implements a multistage contention protocol in a distributed fashion to realize the spatial packing

which also achieves good performance (close to optimal). But,

the model assumes fixed transmission distances without using

any power control method. In contrast to [9] where a simple

ALOHA type MAC is employed we propose a receiver guard

zone based scheduling scheme as in [3], [14], [16] but we

considered a network with long and short hops instead of

fixed Tx-Rx separation. The work in [3] proposed a system

wide fixed guard zone size, but here we propose a guard

zone that vary with the Tx-Rx separation of the interfering

transmitter i.e. each receiver has different guard zone for

different interfering transmitter and try to optimize the guard

zone radius to have a best compromise between spatial reuse

and probability of outage under Pairwise Power Control (PPC)

scheme [9]. We have considered a realistic network of finite

extent with uniformly distributed nodes in contrast to [17].

B. Main Result

In this paper we have studied the effect of spatial separation

between simultaneous transmissions in an ad hoc network.

TABLE I

N ETWORK PARAMETERS , UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED .

Symbol

R

n

dmin

N

Description

Network Radius

Receiver Noise

Path loss exponent

Minimum required SINR(SIN Rmin )

Short hop Tx-Rx separation

Number of nodes in the network

Value

50m

0.001

4

10dB

R/20

100

enforced by introducing a guard zone around each active

receiver, where guard zone is defined as a region around

an active receiver where transmissions are prohibited by any

transmitter except the intended transmitter for that receiver.

In this paper we have proposed an optimal guard zone and

scheduling scheme which maximizes spatial reuse and can be

implemented easily in a distributed fashion. In the simulation

results we demonstrate that the proposed guard zone based

scheduling scheme gives us a huge improvement in capacity as compared to networks without scheduling i.e random

ALOHA networks. The proposed scheme also achieves good

capacity ( 74%) as compared to the well known optimal but

practically infeasible centralized scheduling scheme.

The rest of this paper is distributed as follows. Section II

explains the system model and also defines some assumptions

used in this study, section III explains the well known near

optimal scheduling algorithm in detail with its implementation

procedure in our simulations. Then section IV is dedicated

to explain the proposed receiver guard zone based scheduling scheme with power control scheme used in this paper,

section V explains the detailed analysis of the proposed

scheduling scheme when compared with random ALOHA,

CSMA and near optimal Joint Scheduling and Power Control

Algorithm (JSPCA). At the end the work is concluded in

section VI.

II. S YSTEM M ODEL AND A SSUMPTIONS

The system model used in this paper utilizes a homogeneous

Poisson Point Process (PPP) for generation of transmitters in

a circular region of radius R meters with density i nodes per

meter square. The receiver for every transmitter is placed at

a distance of dmin or dmax , with 50% probability for each

to generate the short hop and long hop Tx-Rx separations, at

an angle that is uniformly distributed from 0 to 2 radians.

Therefore each transmitter has its own intended receiver.

Stationary Poisson Point Process is a reasonable assumption

for generating nodes in an ad-hoc network [3]. This paper

considers single hop transmissions analysis only, as we are

viewing the network at single time snapshot and all the

nodes are considered to have an omni directional antenna.

Capacity or transmission capacity is defined in this thesis as

the maximum possible density of simultaneous transmissions

that satisfies a minimum target SINR (SIN Rmin = ) at

loss model for signal propagation, and neglected routing, endto-end delay, and energy efficiency. Other network parameters

are as given in table I.

III. J OINT S CHEDULING AND P OWER C ONTROL

A LGORITHM (JSPCA)

Optimum power control under a maximum power constraint

for channelized cellular systems which maximizes spatial

reuse was presented in [18], [19]. The results by these work

were proved by [2] to be also applicable in wireless ad hoc

networks. A JSPCA of [2] limits the interference generated by

simultaneous transmissions in order to increase spatial reuse in

wireless ad hoc networks. They used the scheduling algorithm

which assumes global knowledge of attenuation in all the

transmissions and interference paths to determine the largest

subset of simultaneous transmitters. Their power control algorithm guaranties optimal power assignment for scheduled

subset of transmissions by using foschinis algorithm [19]. The

mathematical description and implementation of this scheme

is given below.

The Joint Scheduling and Power Control Algorithm

(JSPCA) is being implemented using [2], [19]. Starting with

the initial PPP distribution, arrange the pairs in a random

sequence which defines their priority of communication i.e. the

communication between which Tx-Rx pair is most important.

Start with the first one and analyze using [19], whether an

optimal power vector exists or not, for the very first Tx-Rx pair

the power vector will always exist as there are no interferers

for the first pair. Then include the second pair and analyze that

whether an optimal power vector exists for both transmitters

or not. If the vector exists then keep both of them in the

network and if it doesnt exist then discard the second pair (i.e.

dont allow one with the least priority to communicate) and

analyze again after including the next Tx-Rx pair for existence

of optimal power vector. This procedure is same as [2].

Lets we have total N initial Tx-Rx pairs in the network

with each having a minimum SINR requirement of SIN Rmin

denoted by . JSPCA will be applied on the initial distribution of nodes ( i.e. PPP distribution) with nodes density i .

Expression for SINR on lth receiver under JSPCA is as given

in (1)

l =

n+

G P

P ll l

i, l {1, 2, ..., N }

i6=l Gli Pi

(1)

Where,

Gli = Gain from ith transmitter to lth receiver i.e. equal to

1

(dli ) , where dli is the distance between ith transmitter and

lth receiver with free space path loss exponent .

Pi = Power transmitted by ith transmitter.

n = Noise power (thermal noise), considered equal on all

the receivers.

The condition i 6= l is necessary because the power

transmitted by ith transmitter is considered as interference

for lth receiver but this is not the case when i = l because

communication signal for the lth receiver.

dll

, i 6= l

dli

Fli = 0, i = l

Fli =

(2a)

(2b)

is an irreducible matrix with non-negative elements as defined

in (2a) and (2b) . The optimal power vector exists if the perronfrobineous (maximum modulus) Eigen value of matrix F is

less than unity [18], [19]. We will start with first Tx-Rx pair

and keep on analyzing this matrix F by including the pairs

from initial distribution one by one, any new included pair

which gives the perron-frobineous Eigen value greater than or

equal to unity will be excluded from the initial distribution.

In this way, after analyzing the complete distribution, we will

get a scheduled distribution at the end and that will have an

optimal power vector PP areto . The scheduled nodes density

that will be less than or equal to the initial nodes density,

due to exclusion of nodes during scheduling, is denoted by

P areto i .

IV. T HE P ROPOSED A PPROACH

JSPCA is the optimal scheduling algorithm but it is not

feasible for wireless ad hoc networks because of two major reasons discussed earlier. We propose here a distributed

scheduling algorithm for wireless ad hoc networks which is

based on receiver guard zone scheduling and Pairwise Power

Control (PPC).

A. Guard Zone Based Scheduling

In a random access protocol such as random ALOHA, all

the nodes transmit without contending with each other to

have free transmission medium. Naturally when the nodes

density is high in the network, the transmissions under random

ALOHA results in very high potability of outage due to

excessive interference that may not be acceptable for successful communication link between two nodes. One way to

suppress interference is by ensuring spatial separation among

concurrent transmissions by incorporating a guard zone around

active receivers where transmitters (other than the intended

transmitter) are inhibited [3], [16]. The guard zone is defined

as the region around an active receiver where no interfering

transmissions are allowed. There is a trade off between trying

to have minimum probability of outage at each receiver (i.e.

using largest possible guard zone size) and maximizing the

number of simultaneous transmissions in the network (i.e using

smallest possible guard zone size).

The scheduling in wireless ad hoc networks is a very diverse

and rich research topic but a very simple way to find out

the necessity and benefits of scheduling in ad hoc networks

is to use optimal guard zone scheduling [3], [14].In contrast

to [9] where a simple ALOHA-type MAC is employed,

an optimal guard zone of size DOpt around each receiver

is implemented that helps limit the aggregate interference

the average probability of successful communication at each

receiver. where optimal guard zone radius around each receiver

is defined as DOpt = (1 + Opt )dtx , where opt is a variable

which needs to be optimized to have maximum transmission

capacity and dtx is the Tx-Rx separation of the interfering

transmitter, therefore dtx = dmin or dmax . This means that a

receiver inhibits an interfering transmitter of Tx-Rx separation

dmin if it is placed at a distance of less than or equal to

(1 + Opt )dmin and inhibits an interfering transmitter of TxRx separation dmax if it is placed at a distance of less than

or equal to (1 + Opt )dmax .

The guard zone-based scheduling algorithm selects a subset

of initial nodes which are allowed to communicate simultaneously. The algorithm selects this subset of transmitters based

solely on the guard zone criteria from the initial transmission

scenario of N contending Tx-Rx pairs with initial nodes

density of i . The optimal value of guard zone corresponds

to the optimal value of variable i.e. Opt . The variable

varies from 1 to where = 1 is the case where there is

no guard zone or no scheduling i.e. random ALOHA. Guard

zone based scheduling gives us a subset of initial nodes with

nodes density GZ where GZ i .

B. Pairwise Power Control and Probability of Outage

The pairwise power control is a technique in which each

transmitter sets its transmission power such that the communication signal power received at its intended receiver is a

constant i.e. . Therefore according to this definition, if a

transmitter and receiver are separated by a distance d then

the transmitter should have a transmission power equal to

Pt = (d) so that the received signal power at the receiver

is equal to after signal attenuation.This technique is called

pairwise power control because every transmitter and receiver

pair chooses the transmission power without knowing anything

about other Tx-Rx pairs in the network [9]. Therefore each

transmitter in this network will have a transmission power

of P1 or P2 depending on its Tx-Rx separation distance

as P1 = (dmin ) and P2 = (dmax ) . The density of

transmitters that are transmitting simultaneously under PPC is

GZ but the density of receivers with received SINR greater

than or equal to is GZppc which might be less than GZ

due to outages under PPC. Therefore the probability that a

scheduled receiver will be successfully communicating under

PPC is given by

P [SIN Ri ] = 1

GZ GZppc

GZ

(3)

plying pairwise power control (PPC) on guard zone scheduled

nodes and GZppc = GZ (1 ) is the transmission capacity

of the network under guard zone based scheduling and PPC i.e.

the proposed scheme. To find the optimal guard zone radius,

we plot network capacity versus where maxima of the

network capacity gives us = Opt as shown in figure 1

where Opt = 0.9.

The random ALOHA scheme is similar to guard zone

scheduling at = 1 which is equal to guard zone based

scheduling with zero guard zone radius or no scheduling

at all. The transmission capacity under proposed scheduling

scheme is compared with transmission capacity of random

ALOHA in this section. The gain in transmission capacity

under proposed scheme as compared to random ALOHA is

denoted by GALOHA and defined in (4).

GALOHA =

GZppc

ALOHA

(4)

Fig. 1. Initial Nodes density (i ), density of nodes after only guard zone

based scheduling (GZ ), Transmission capacity under JSPCA (P areto )

and transmission capacity under proposed scheme (GZppc ) versus . The

maxima of GZppc at = 0.9 shows that the optimal value of guard zone

correspond to Opt = 0.9 for this network at these network parameters.

V. S IMULATION R ESULTS

The optimal value of guard zone for this network was

calculated as described in previous section for different network parameters at N = 100 and then used for simulations

at different values of N . The network transmission capacity

under proposed scheme is then analyzed by comparison with

Transmission capacity of JSPCA, Transmission capacity of

CSMA which uses guard zone around transmitters and Transmission capacity of ALOHA which doesnt use any type of

scheduling.

under CSMA, transmission capacity under random ALOHA and transmission

capacity under proposed scheme (GZppc ) versus initial number of contending trasmitters in the network (N ).

versus N is given in figure 2 which shows the benefits of

proposed scheme up to some extent. The detailed comparison

of proposed scheme with other three schemes is given in

following subsections.

analyze effect of path loss exponent on GALOHA . (b) GALOHA is plotted

for dmax = dmin and dmax = 2 dmin at = 4 to analyze effect of long

hop Tx-Rx separation on GALOHA .

for a network with long and short hops, where long hop

is twice the short hop i.e. dmax = 2 dmin . As we can

see from the plots when number of initial nodes in the

network (N ) is small, the majority of competing nodes are

able to transmit simultaneously with successful reception at

their respective receivers because of the inherent separation in

of random ALOHA is not that bad. The proposed guard zone

based scheduling drastically outperforms random ALOHA at

large N because it utilizes space more efficiently. We can

also see that for small value of , the value of GALOHA

reaches above 400 because small path loss exponent rewards

scheduling. Figure 3(b) shows plots of GALOHA for two

networks , one with all the Tx-Rx separations equal to 2.5m

(i.e. dmax = dmin ) and other with long and short hops

where dmax = 2 dmin . This figure shows that the proposed

scheduling is much more beneficial for long and short hop

networks where its gain compared to random ALOHA exceeds

400.

B. Proposed Scheme Versus CSMA

The MAC protocol in IEEE 802.11 uses Carrier Sense

Multiple Access (CSMA) scheme for simultaneous transmissions by different nodes in a wireless network. Since CSMA

is the technique which is currently used by Wireless Local

Area Network (WLAN), therefore the comparison of proposed

guard zone based scheduling with CSMA will be a useful

analysis. CSMA protocol is equivalent to have a system wide

fixed guard zone around each active transmitter instead of

receiver. For comparison, we simulated the optimal CSMA by

optimizing the spatial reuse and consequently the transmission

capacity for the network used in this paper.

The results for GCSM A which is defined as the gain

in transmission capacity under proposed guard zone based

scheduling as compared to transmission capacity under CSMA

GZppc

are shown in figure 4. As figure shows

i.e. GCSM A = CSM

A

clearly, the proposed scheduling performs better than CSMA

specially when N (initial nodes density) is large. Figure 4(a)

shows that the proposed scheduling gives us more than 50%

gain in capacity at large N . We can also see that small value of

path loss exponent () rewards proposed scheduling for large

initial nodes density (i.e. at large N ), but GCSM A has large

value for large at small N . This also shows that GCSM A is

less sensitive to path loss exponent than GALOHA .

Figure 4(b) shows that the proposed scheduling has much

more benefit for a network with long and short hops as it

can accommodate long hops more easily as compared to

CSMA. We can see that if our network has a constant Tx-Rx

separation throughout the network, then the proposed guard

zone scheduling performs almost 23% better than CSMA, but

if the network has a combination of short and long hops then

our proposed scheduling outperforms the widely used CSMA

by more than 50% .

C. Proposed Scheme Versus JSPCA

A global search with central scheduler for an ad hoc

network was proposed in [2] to maximize spatial reuse, which

determines the largest subset of the initial contending nodes

that can communicate simultaneously. Randomly ordering the

Tx-Rx pairs from 1 to N in this paper is definitely suboptimal

in the sense that the scheduling phase schedules transmissions

in a sequence, instead of searching for the largest possible

Fig. 4. (a) GCSM A is plotted for dmax = 2 dmin at = 3 and = 4

to analyze effect of path loss exponent on GCSM A . (b) GCSM A is plotted

for dmax = dmin and dmax = 2 dmin at = 4 to analyze effect of long

hop Tx-Rx separation on GCSM A .

criteria. But this is necessary for wireless ad hoc networks,

because of their distributed nature, since the size of the search

space grows exponentially with the initial nodes density or

N . The selection of transmitters from a random sequence

one by one is similar to a realistic implementation of ad

hoc network e.g. scheduling the transmitters in a sequence

of desired data/communication signal generation.

The results for transmission capacity gain with respect to

JSPCA which is defined as gain in transmission capacity

under proposed guard zone based scheduling as compared to

areto

are shown in figure 5. We can see from figure 5(a) that the

proposed scheme gives us transmission capacity 74% of

the near optimal scheme (JSPCA). the gain i.e. GP areto starts

to decrease with N but then it starts to increase with N at

higher initial nodes density when transmission capacity under

JSPCA starts to saturate. we can also see that for a small

fixed number of initial contending nodes N , this gain increases

with increase in path loss exponent. But for a large fixed

and CSMA for a wireless ad hoc network with long and short

hops and it can even outperform the near optimal JSPCA for

small path loss exponent at very large initial nodes density

under the assumed system model and network parameters.

The proposed scheduling and its simulated results are suboptimal because of some reasons (i) it searches in a sequence

after arranging all the nodes in a random manner instead of

searching for a largest possible subset (ii) it uses same guard

zone size around all receivers to inhibit a specific interferer

(iii) we optimized the guard zone radius for N = 100 and

then used that Opt for N = 1 300 for simulations, but

the performs can be even better than the simulated one if we

optimize guard zone size for each value of N i.e. if we can

define optimal guard zone size as a function of initial number

of contending nodes Opt = f (N ) which we have left for

future work. Now we can say along with these results that the

proposed guard zone based scheduling scheme for a wireless

ad hoc network at = 3 5 has a performance 74% of

near optimal but practically infeasible JSPCA.

R EFERENCES

Fig. 5. (a) GP areto is plotted for dmax = 2 dmin at = 3, 4 and 5 to

analyze effect of path loss exponent on GP areto . (b) GP areto is plotted for

dmax = dmin , dmax = 2 dmin and dmax = 3 dmin at = 4 to

analyze effect of long hop Tx-Rx separation on GP areto .

exponent. We can also see that the proposed guard zone based

scheduling outperforms the near optimal JSPCA at very large

initial density and small value of path loss exponent.

Figure 5(b) shows the effect of long hop Tx-Rx separation

value on GP areto . We can see that for a small fixed value

of N , GP areto for a network with fixed Tx-Rx separation of

dmin is much better than GP areto for a network with long

and short hops. But for a very large fixed number of initial

nodes N , GP areto for a network with long and short hops is

much better than the other two networks, this is because of the

nature of JSPCA which prefers short hops while scheduling.

VI. C ONCLUSIONS

In this paper we have studied the effects of guard zone

based scheduling on a network with long and short hops.

We have seen that the proposed guard zone based scheduling

scheme used a guard zone to prohibit a transmitter depending

on interferers Tx-Rx separation. This study shows that the

proposed scheduling can perform much better than ALOHA

Transaction on Information Theory, vol.46, pp. 388-404, March. 2000.

[2] T. ElBatt and A. Ephremides, Joint Scheduling and Power Control for

Wireless Ad hoc Networks, IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communications, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 7485, Jan. 2004.

[3] A. Hasan and J. G. Andrews, The Guard Zone in Wireless Ad Hoc

Networks, IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communications, vol. 3, no.

3, pp. 897-06, Mar, 2007.

[4] Massimo Franceschetti, Olivier Dousse, David N. C. Tse and Patrick

Thiran, Closing the Gap in the Capacity of Wireless Networks Via

Percolation Theory, IEEE Transaction on Inform Theory, vol. 53, NO.

3, Mar 2007.

[5] S. Lv, W. Zhuang, X. Wang, and X. Zhou, Scheduling in wireless

ad hoc networks with successive interference cancellation, in Proc. Of

IEEE INFOCOM11, 2011.

[6] Han-Chiuan Luo, Eric Hsiao-Kuang Wu and Gen-Huey Chen, Minimizing Ceased Areas with Power Control for Spatial Reuse in IEEE 802.11

Ad Hoc Networks, IEEE 17th International Conference on Parallel and

Distributed Systems, 2011.

[7] F. Baccelli, B. Blaszczyszyn, and P. Muhlethaler, A Spatial reuse

ALOHA MAC Protocol for Multihop Wireless Mobile Networks,

Technical Report 4955, INRIA, Oct. 2003.

[8] M. Chiang and M. Yang, Towards network X-ities from a topological

point of view: Evolvability and scalability, in Proceedings of Allerton

Conf. on Comm., Control, and Computing, Sept. 2004.

[9] S. Weber, X. Yang, J. G. Andrews, and G. de Veciana, Transmission

Capacity of Ad Hoc Networks with Outage Constraint, IEEE Transaction on Information Theory, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 4091-102, Dec. 2005.

[10] S. Toumpis and A. J. Goldsmith, Capacity Regions for Wireless Ad

hoc Networks, IEEE Transaction on Wireless Communications, vol. 2,

no. 4, pp. 73648, July 2003.

[11] S. Ramanathan and E. L. Lloyd, Scheduling Algorithms for Multihop

Radio Networks, IEEE/ACM Transaction Net., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 16677,

Apr. 1993.

[12] A. Muqattash, M. Krunz, and W. E. Ryan, Solving the Near-far Problem

in CDMA-based Ad hoc Networks, Ad hoc Networks Journal, vol. 1,

no. 4, pp. 43553, Nov. 2003.

[13] A. Muqattash and M. Krunz, CDMA-based MAC protocol for wireless

ad hoc networks, in Proc. SIGMOBILE, June 2003, pp. 153164.

[14] A. Hasan and J. G. Andrews. Scheduling using near-optimal guard

zones for CDMA ad hoc networks, In Proc. IEEE International

Conference on Communications, volume 9, pages 40024007, Jun. 2006.

[15] X. Yang, A. Hasan, G. de Veciana, and J. G. Andrews, MAC Protocols

for Spread Spectrum Ad Hoc Networks: Spatial Thinning vs. Packing,

in Proc. CISS, Mar. 2005.

[16] Aamir Hasan, M. Ali and Zahid Ali, Modeling Aggregate Interference

in Ad Hoc Networks, International Bhurban Conference on Applied

Sciences & Technology (IBCAST), January, 2010.

[17] S. Weber, J. G. Andrews, and N. Jindal, An overview of the transmission capacity of wireless networks, IEEE Transaction on Communications, vol. 58, pp. 35933604, December 2010.

[18] Jens Zander, Performance of Optimum Transmitter Power Control

in Cellular Radio Systems, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR

TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 41, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1992.

[19] G. J. Foschini and Z. Miljanic, A Simple Distributed Autonomous

Power Control Algorithm and its Convergence, IEEE TRANSACTIONS

ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY, vol. 43, no. 4, November. 1993.

- Icngc2s10 PaperUploaded byDwivedi Upendra
- Dot Net Project Titles-25 9 15Uploaded byAdd K
- Electronic Wireless Sensor NetworkUploaded bypeyman_qz_co
- A Novel Intrusion Detection System for Detecting Black-Hole Nodes in MANETSUploaded byMegan Bell
- Patterned & Protected AODV Against Blackhole, Wormhole and Greyhole Attacks in convalescing Routing for Ad-hoc NetworkUploaded byijcsis
- Black Hole Attack in MANET Simulation Implimentation and EvaluationUploaded byrubygill89
- IRJET-V3I3119Uploaded byPranav Jain
- Dynamic AODV for Mobile Ad-hoc NetworkUploaded byijcsis
- e_Bliss_ProjectTitleListUploaded byraaj_niit
- b 03406010Uploaded byInternational Journal of computational Engineering research (IJCER)
- Mitigate the Control Packets Using Weighted Rough Set Model with LAR Method in MANETUploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Optimal Stochastic Location UpdatesUploaded byRukshana Meeran
- IRJET-AN EFFECTIVE INTRUDER DETECTION WITH BACKUP TIME SERIES TECHNIQUES IN WIRELESS NETWORKUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Energy consumption study in mobile ad hoc networks which use AODV routing protocolUploaded byvanespasov
- FirstUploaded byKapil Meena
- 2007 ONE DTN Mobility SimulatorUploaded byaadequest
- Network EngineerUploaded bymadankrishna2005
- Netsec00 Manet SecUploaded bysyedbin2014
- Mohammed SuheelUploaded byToora Sing
- Gopakumar+ (1)Uploaded byGopakumar S
- UntitledUploaded byapi-77103731
- ALARM & RECTIFI.xlsUploaded byjitendra_eng
- ADhoc RoutingUploaded byumasikamani
- Ns2 Projects Ieee 2015Uploaded byRamesh Gavva
- Performance of Efficient CBRP in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETS)Uploaded byNguyễn Gia Trí
- A survey on routing protocols for wireless sensor networksUploaded byChandra Shekhar Gohiya
- 4.1.2.9 Packet Tracer - Documenting the Network Instructions - CCNAv6.ComUploaded byPol AnduLan
- Mobile Ad-Hoc Network: Working of Routing protocols and ApplicationUploaded byInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Lutful kabir talukder.docUploaded byLutfulKabirPorag
- 0-619-06489-7_gloss_fpUploaded byHarsh Chaudhry

- Casio 991 Ms User ManualUploaded byilg1
- OHSAS18001Uploaded bySuresh Murugan
- Opening and Closing Remarks for Letters+VocabularyUploaded byAttie7613
- Opening and Closing Remarks for Letters+VocabularyUploaded byAttie7613
- tokyo gasUploaded byadnan fazil
- PhD Dessertation Dr. Aamir HasanUploaded byadnan fazil
- 04103675Uploaded byadnan fazil
- Nature Looks at The100 Most-cited PapersUploaded byadnan fazil
- Zander 1992Uploaded byadnan fazil
- Zander 1992Uploaded byadnan fazil
- Foschini_Miljanic_1993, power control in wireless networkUploaded byadnan fazil
- The Outage Probability of Ad Hoc Network in Nakagami FadingUploaded byadnan fazil
- solution of few problems from kays estimation bookUploaded byadnan fazil
- NTS User GuideUploaded byapi-3711253
- Electromagnetic Compatibility of Cardiac PacemakerUploaded byadnan fazil

- Cool Infographics Table of ContentsUploaded byeroteme.thinks8580
- Tutorial 3Uploaded byMurtaza Rizvi
- HI-TEC(compliadOR c))Uploaded bybalta1957
- Bgp Case StudiesUploaded byPravin Satpute
- GRB100-6644-1.2Uploaded byChristos Apostolopoulos
- Guide to HART Communications With FIELDVUE InstrumentsUploaded bySatyadev Raju
- ProStream1000 DiviTrackMX 07-02 RSUploaded byChris Hutch
- Shrew Software VPN VpnhelpUploaded byJorge Enrique Munoz
- Draft Hutton Rtcweb Nat Firewall Considerations 01Uploaded byNguyen Tran Nhan
- Online Banking ThesisUploaded byAbdul Mannan
- GeorgiosPinitas MScUploaded byTruong van Truong
- gc420-en-gbUploaded byPrabhul Kumar
- Docu 33675Uploaded byrambabu
- README-Windows.txtUploaded bySrinivasa Chary Sunny
- Et200s 2ai i 4wire St Manual en-USUploaded bycucu
- Software Requirements and Specifications - Project CharterUploaded byRave Arevalo
- List of latest software versions and corresponding service bulletins.xlsUploaded bygonzalo_barrio
- Advance JavaUploaded bymegha
- Sir Sherwin's Computer Tutorial_ Computer NetworkingUploaded byAura Lee
- Microstation_WorkflowUploaded byGeorgeman López
- Mu LogUploaded by2231909
- Phil Agre - Toward Critical Technical PracticeUploaded bypdavila
- WDWM CiscoUploaded byCarlos Moreno
- Config de Link AggregationUploaded byEdwin Edison Sichaca Guzman
- Selenium_Documentation (1).pdfUploaded byPuneeta Gupta Agrawal
- Lucent QIPUploaded bySatetasa Lutharr
- MSP Tutorial StillLife Complete v1.4Uploaded byFaz Diapason
- cad Module 1.pptUploaded byKuldeep Shrivastava
- Chapter 6 Production Activity ControlUploaded byKamble Abhijit
- FEC-COMPACT_ENUS.pdfUploaded byhoracioterragno