See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/344057160

Particle Swarm Optimization based Routing Method for Vehicular Ad-hoc

Network

Conference Paper · July 2020

DOI: 10.1109/ICCSP48568.2020.9182305

CITATIONS READS

7 44

2 authors, including:

Bhushan Yelure
Government College of Engineering
8 PUBLICATIONS   51 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Behavioral Analysis of Routing Protocols in VANET View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bhushan Yelure on 28 November 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Conference on Communication and Signal Processing, July 28 - 30, 2020, India
Particle Swarm Optimization based Routing
Method for Vehicular Ad-hoc Network
Bhushan Yelure and Shefali Sonavane
Abstract—Vehicular Ad-hoc Network (VANET) is a special
subcategory of MANET and has a prominent role in the
deployment of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
applications. Most of the applications in the VANET achieve
communication between vehicles and vehicles to road side unit
through routing by using IEEE 802.11p standard. To make the
routing feasible in the VANET is a challenge due to the fast
movement of the vehicles, way of moving the vehicles and
failure in the communication link. Swarm Intelligence (SI)
methods are used in the process of routing due to similarity in
the behavior of swarms and the routing. These techniques are
used to achieve optimized solutions that ensure flexibility and
robustness in the economical way. In this paper, PSOR routing
protocol is proposed that uses the distance and speed of the
vehicle to determine next forwarding vehicle. Relaying Quality
of Service (QoS) of road scenarios is evaluated using Message
delivery ratio (MDR), overhead, delay and throughput. The
results are compared with other SI techniques such as
AntHocNet and Adaptive QoS-based Routing for VANETs
(AQRV). The simulation results related to PSOR are found
better than AntHocNet and AQRV.
Index Terms—Swarm Intelligence, VANET, Routing, Quality
of Service
I. I NTRODUCTION
ANET is a collection of vehicles through which the
V communication takes place between vehicles & roadside
infrastructure and vehicles. Each vehicle consisting of
various components. The components such as RSUs that
facilitate infrastructure communication and OBU is inside
the vehicle and acts as an interface between vehicles to
attain communication [1-2]. Dedicated Short Range
Communication (DSRC) [3] is a variant of IEEE 802.11p
and used as the communication standard in the VANET. It is
designed by the US FCC and ASTM that allocates a 75
MHz bandwidth out of 5.9 GHz band to have a fast and
secure vehicular communication. VANET plays a major role
to develop several applications of Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS). Some of the applications of ITS such as
co-operative collision warning, lane changing warning,
approaching emergency vehicles are beneficial to make
Bhushan Yelure is with the Dept. of Computer Science &
Engineering, Walchand College of Engineering Sangli, India
(email: bhushan.yelure@walchandsangli.ac.in)
Shefali Sonavane is with the Dept. of Information Techno-
logy, Walchand College of Engineering, Sangli, India (email:
shefali.sonavane@walchandsangli.ac.in)
978-1-7281-4988-2/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
effective transportation. Several real-time projects such as car
to car consortium (C2C) and driving safety support system
(DSSS) are already adopted by top vehicle manufacturers
such as TOYOTA, Lexus and Volkswagen. ITS applications
require the assurance about the Quality of Service (QoS)
[4-7] that makes successful deployment of these applications
in real-time. Components of VANET and its architecture is
shown in the Fig. 1.
Tree
Vehicles
Factory
RSU
V2V communication
V2I communication
Fig. 1. VANET and its components
Routing is one of the important process in VANET that
allows vehicular application, provides the services to the
transport authority and other users. Routing is useful for
packet transmission through the communication between the
source vehicle (Sv) and the destination vehicle (Dv) by
selecting the best paths [3], [6]. The foremost issues in
VANET that require routing are broadcasting, mobility,
topological change, quality of service, network management,
traffic management and fast data transfer. The unpredictable
behavior of drivers, vulnerabilities in the failure of the
communication link and continuous topology changes do not
provide the QoS assurance. Implementation of routing
protocol in VANET environment is challenging due to the
following reasons-
1) Preserving route is a challenge due to the time varying
vehicle density.
2) Because of dynamic nature of VANET, nodes in the
VANET join and leave the network frequently that
results in frequent line breaks.
1573
 All existing protocols related to MANET’s can be optimized
to use for vehicular communication by considering special
characteristics of VANET. The communication used is a
unicast, broadcast, single-hop and multi-hop. Traditional
routing protocols namely reactive and proactive do not
achieve better QoS due to the characteristics of VANET. The
contributions of the paper are as follows:
1) PSOR routing protocol is proposed.
2) Relaying QoS has been determined for the one lane road
segment.
3) To analyze comparative performance analysis of PSOR
with the QoS parameters and compare performance with
standard ACO-based protocols.
Section II disucuss about literature review. Proposed
PSOR routing protocol is introduced in section III.
Experimental design and results are illustrated in section IV.
Last section describes the conclusion.
II. L ITERATURE R EVIEW
Routing in the VANET has emphasis on route discovery
and message dissemination between vehicles. Species’ lives
have been considered as a source of inspiration for VANET
routing. The main idea behind widespread use of SI
techniques in the VANET is due to similarity in the process
of routing and natural communication between species. In a
swarm, an entity acts as per its limited intelligence as well
as the group’s intelligence. They apply changes in their
behavior by making the behavioral observation of the
neighbors. If a better route is used by the individual for the
purpose of finding food, others imitate the same way. SI
techniques are suitable for the routing due to their
characteristics such as adaptability and self-organization,
robustness, scalability and less computational time.
Therefore, four main categories arise from swarm
intelligence studies and they include ant colonies, particle
swarm systems, bee colonies and bacterial foraging [4-5].
A. ACO based techniques used in the VANET
ACO imitates the way of food exploration behavior of
ants. It was developed by Dorigo (1992) to search an
optimum route for a given task represented in the graph [5],
[8]. It uses analogy based on the behavior of ants in search
of the shortest route between their nests and a food source.
ACO adopts a metaheuristic approach. Ants are communal
creatures that reside in colonies. Initially, ants go out of the
colony randomly to search for food and discover the shortest
route from their colonies to the location of the food source.
They return to the colony after food discovery, by using the
same path that is followed, laying paths with pheromones. If
the other ants in the population find the path with the
pheromone, they are likely to select that path for traversing.
Thus, the route is strengthened since there is a growth in the
pheromone deposition by the ants. Pheromone is evaporated
with respect to time. Pheromone reinforcement is quicker for
the shorter path as ants use a strengthened route.
Consequently, the density of pheromone is higher on shorter
1574
Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
routes as compared to the longer routes. Pheromone offers
positive feedback for ants, so ultimately all ants use a
strengthened route.
B. AntHocNet
It is a hybrid and multipath routing protocol [8]. In the route
formation, initially Sv checks for the route information about
the Dv. In the reactive route setup procedure initially, Sv has
no routing information about the requested destination node,
it broadcasts RFant otherwise it unicast RFant to discover the
route towards the Dv. When RFant is at the Dv, RBant goes
back to the Sv. During the journey, RBant accumulates quality
data about every link in the route and pheromone table is
updated at every intermediate vehicle. Once the initial route
is ready, AntHocNet initiates proactive route maintenance. Sv
sent PFant to their Dv. PFant considers both regular and virtual
pheromone for the selection of the next hop node at adjacent
vehicles respectively. When PFant is at the Dv, it is translated
into PBant . It updates the regular pheromone table on their
return journey towards Sv. RPFant and RPBant are used to
handle the problem of a broken link. The performance analysis
is evaluated using delivery ratio and average delay with AODV
routing protocols.
C. AQRV
It uses reactive and proactive components for the route
formation and maintains optimized path. It uses Fant and
Bant as a source of transmission in the reactive stage to
explore and route is formed comprising intersections.
Selection of route is used according to the relaying quality
of road segment in terms of delay, packet delivery ratio and
connectivity probability. Proactive ants are used in the
proactive route maintenance for the updation, expansion and
improvement in the route formation. In the data
transmission, carry and forward method is adopted by using
greedy method.
D. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
PSO [9-10] is a metaheuristic SI techniques that use a
stochastic population and achieve optimization. It is inspired
by real-life social behavior of fish schooling and birds
flocking while doing the movement for food search. It
imitates physical movements of the individual in the swarm
where each particle is guided by its own best position and
the best one of the entire swarm. For any iteration, it
compares the initial solution with all its adjacent neighbors
to determine best solution. Each particle of swarm travels
within personal and global best [11-12].
III. P ROPOSED APPROACH AND ITS METHODOLOGY
PSOR is a proposed routing protocol that uses PSO and
uses a position based routing. It uses GPS to identify the
location of vehicles. It is suitable for the city environment.
Route is upadated dynamically due to frequent postion and
velocity updation. It uses the food foraging behavior of birds
in terms of birds flocking [13-15]. The optimization function
 is defined in terms of fitness function. Fitness function is 6) For each particle, fitness value of each particle is
computed to determine next forwarding vehicle that uses computed and compared with fitness value in the
parameters such as position of the particle, its velocity and memory. If current fitness value is greater, then it acts
distance to its adjacent particle. Packet transfer takes place as global optimum.
with the help of greedy forwarding. Sv finds the adjacent 7) The procedure stops after the last iteration. The best
node closer to the destination and its fitness value is solution is considered as the global best.
determined. The adjacent vehicle having the highest fitness 8) A vehicle with maximum global optimum is the next
value is selected as next forwarding vehicle and the packet is forwarding node and packet is forwarded towards it.
forwarded to that vehicle. The process is repeated iteratively 9) The process is repeated till the packet reaches to the
until packet reaches towards Dv. The fitness function is destination.
calculated for each particle according to its position and
A. Relaying Quality of Service of road segment
velocity [16-17]. Fitness function is represented in eq n (1)
given below. Dealing with QoS is the most challenging task in the
VANET due to the selection of route, selection of QoS
j
 parameters and enhancement in the performance measure is
M inF itness = w1 .dist(ni , nj ) + w2 .speed(ni , nj ) (1) required. Relaying QoS of the road is represented in terms
j=1
of combined service parameters like delay, message delivery
Where, w1 , w2 are weight parameters, ni , nj represents vehi- ratio, overhead and throughput. Delay indicates how much
cles, dist(ni , nj ) indicates Euclidian Distance between adja- time it takes for a packet of data to get from one designated
cent vehicles and speed(ni , nj ) is the average speed of vehi- point to another. Delay ultimately reflects recent transmission
cles concerning maximum speed. channel load, vehicle density and vehicle distribution.
Each particle is considered as a vehicle and its position is Message delivery ratio specifies the effectiveness of the
named as particle position and it is calculated using the eq n (2). routing protocol decision. Routing overhead represents the
The velocity of the particle is indicated by V1 and V2 and it generated routing packets divided by sent data packets. This
is expressed in the eq n (3). metric indicates additional bandwidth used up by the
overhead in the delivery of the data. Throughput computes
p(t + 1) = p(x[j]) + V1 (t + 1) (2) the total number of the delivered data packets in terms of
bits, divided by the entire simulation time. In other words, it
expresses maximum data transmitted in time unit and
V1 (t + 1) = w.V1 (t) + (c1 .r1 .xdif f g) + (c2 .r2 .xdif f ) (3) measured in Kbps and Mbps. Relaying QoS is expressed as a
cost of communication and it is expressed as given in eq n (5).
Where, p(t+1) is updated position of the particle, V1 (t+1) is
updated velocity of the particle at the current iteration, V1 (t) RelayingQoS = w1.o + w2.d + w3.m + w4.t (5)
is velocity of the particle at the previous iteration, w, c1 , c2 are
Where, o is the overhead, d is the delay , m is MDR and
acceleration coefficients, r1 , r2 are random uniform numbers
t indicates throughput. Weight parameters are represented by
in between 0 and 1, xdiff is previous position of particle (local
w1 , w2 , w3 , w4 and their value lies in between 0 to 1.
best) and XdiffG is updated position of particle (global best).
The speed of a vehicle is calculated using the eq n (4). IV. E XPERIMENTAL D ESIGN
T otalV
 ehicles
1 TABLE I
Speed = . Speed (4) S IMULATION PARAMETERS AND THEIR SPECIFICATION [20-21]
T otalV ehicles j=1
Parameter Specification
Basically PSOR algorithms has the following steps. Antenna-Model Omni-Directional Antenna
1) Sv initializes the swarm. Radio-Propagation Model TwoRayGround
MAC protocol IEEE 802.11p
2) A swarm is made up of N particles that shows N can- Interface Queue Type Droptail, priority queue
didate solutions within search space. Particle represents CBR Connections 3-15
vehicles in the VANET. CBR Interval 0.3s
3) Every particle has its distinct position (quality of Packet Size 128-byte-2048-byte
Communication Range 250meter
solution) and velocity (its competence to travel in the Simulation Time 300s and 600s
direction of alternative solutions that may be better). Mobility Traces IDM-IM with CFM
4) Each particle selects the best position and uses velocity Number of Vehicles (nodes) 50
of the particle to move towards a new best position. Speed 5m/s - 24m/s
Population size 50
The adjustment of the position to the global optimum is Iterations 10
made feasible using the best position of individuals and Evaluated Routing protocols AntHocNet, AQRV & PSOR
the whole swarm.
5) At each iteration, each particle updates its velocity and Mobility generators play a vital role in the VANET to
position. enhance the realism of trace by generating them and used as

1575

Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 an input to the network simulator. Trace file uses parameters Performance of MDR with changing packet size
such as speed of the vehicle, arrival rate of vehicles and 100
PSOR-300
number of lanes for the trace file generation. Trace file AQRV-300
AntHocNet-300
comprises position of vehicles at a particular instant of time, 80
PSOR-600
total simulation time and its profiles. The VanetMobiSim AQRV-600
AntHocNet-600
[18-21] is the mobility generator used to generate the 60

MDR (%)
mobility trace file that uses popular car following model
40
named IDM-IM. The trace file used for the simulation
consists of 50 vehicles. The trace files are simulated for 5
20
and 10 minutes. The trace file used consists of 42, 40 road
segments and 24, 23 intersections respectively. The
0
experimental setup is arranged according to IETF and RFC 128 256 512 1024 2048
Packet size (bytes)
3561. The parameters used for the simulation is indicated in
Table I. Fig. 2. MDR performance with changing packet size

A. Results
between Sv and Dv. The results for the delay is shown
To test the protocol performance, simulation is run under in Fig. 3.
various packet size and time mentioned in Table I. Several
routing protocols based on SI are widely used for evaluating
Performance of delay with changing packet size
the performance analysis of routing in the VANET. This 3
PSOR-300
study uses routing approaches based on the ACO such as AQRV-300
ANTHOCNET and AQRV and compared with the PSOR. 2.5 AntHocNet-300
PSOR-600
The parameters used to analyze QoS are MDR, overhead, 2
AQRV-600
AntHocNet-600
delay and throughput. The results are represented in Table II
Delay(s)

and Table III respectively. 1.5

1) MDR 1
In case of 300s for 128-byte packet size, 12.47% and
0.5
44.33% enhancement is observed in the successful
message delivery for the PSOR as compared to AQRV 0
and AntHocNet. In case of 600s for 128-byte packet 128 256 512 1024 2048
Packet size (bytes)
size, 26.69% and 50.60% enhancement is observed in
the successful message delivery for the PSOR as Fig. 3. Delay performance with changing packet size
compared to AQRV and AntHocNet.
In case of 300s for 2048-byte packet size, 5.07% and 3) Overhead
20.50% enhancement is observed in the successful For the packet size 128-byte and 300s simulation
message delivery for the PSOR as compared to AQRV
and AntHocNet. In case of 600s for 2048-byte packet Performance of overhead with changing packet size
size, 23.40% and 51.06% enhancement is observed in 70
PSOR-300
the successful message delivery for the PSOR as 60
AQRV-300
AntHocNet-300
compared to AQRV and AntHocNet. The results for PSOR-600
50
the MDR is illustrated in Fig. 2. AQRV-600
AntHocNet-600
2) Delay
Overhead

40
In case of 300s for 128-byte packet size, 0.61s and 30
0.48s less time is taken by the message to reach
20
towards the destination in PSOR as compared to
AQRV and AntHocNet. In case of 600s for 128-byte 10
packet size, as compared to above-said protocols, 0
PSOR takes 0.64s and 0.63s less time to traverse the 128 256 512 1024 2048
Packet size (bytes)
message in between Sv and Dv.
In case of 300s for 2048-byte packet size, 0.75s and Fig. 4. Overhead with changing packet size
0.097s less time is taken by the message to reach
towards destination in PSOR as compared to protocols time, PSOR generates 1.44 and 4.92 less overhead for
in the study. In case of 600s for 2048-byte packet size, considered protocols. When the packet size is
as compared to protocols in the study, PSOR takes 2048-byte, AntHocNet produces 15.47 and 8.20 less
1.65s and 1.86s less time to traverse the message overhead as compared to PSOR and AQRV.

1576

Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE II
S IMULATION RESULTS FOR CHANGING PACKET SIZE (300 S )

Packet PSOR AQRV AntHocNet

size(bytes)
MDR Delay Overhead Throughput MDR Delay Overhead Throughput MDR Delay Overhead Throughput
(%) (s) (kbps) (%) (s) (kbps) (%) (s) (kbps)
128 95.10 0.0504 8.16 77.93 82.63 0.668 9.60 67.71 50.77 0.532 13.08 48.11
256 95.14 0.0508 15.26 78.02 85.47 0.613 17.07 70.09 65.36 0.240 16.13 57.78
512 95.18 0.0515 29.43 78.12 92.05 0.316 30.82 74.6 75.17 0.077 23.35 64.11
1024 95.39 0.0515 29.32 78.59 86.44 0.749 30.54 74.35 68.46 0. 276 24.57 58.48
2048 95.53 0.0520 38.60 78.99 90.45 0.803 31.33 73.21 75.03 0.148 23.13 63.92

TABLE III
S IMULATION RESULTS FOR CHANGING PACKET SIZE (600 S )

Packet PSOR AQRV AntHocNet

size(bytes)
MDR Delay Overhead Throughput MDR Delay Overhead Throughput MDR Delay Overhead Throughput
(%) (s) (kbps) (%) (s) (kbps) (%) (s) (kbps)
128 94.74 0.0506 10.01 50.75 68.05 0.694 14.24 36.45 44.14 0.685 12.88 27.34
256 94.87 0.0511 18.94 50.84 74.68 0.826 24.26 40.01 42.38 1.668 23.69 24.48
512 94.85 0.0522 36.79 50.87 79.87 1.606 43.86 42.84 40.22 1.989 46.05 22.41
1024 94.73 0.0523 36.80 50.99 78.52 1.339 44.51 41.91 42.37 2.172 43.95 23.61
2048 94.96 0.0530 48.50 51.03 71.56 1.704 64.45 38.42 43.9 1.921 53.74 24.14

For the packet size 128-byte and 600s simulation time, Performance of throughput with changing packet size
PSOR generates 4.23 and 2.87 less overhead for 100
PSOR-300
considered protocols. When the packet size is AQRV-300
AntHocNet-300
2048-byte, PSOR produces 15.95 and 5.24 less 80
PSOR-600
overhead as compared to AQRV and AntHocNet. The AQRV-600
Throughput (kbps)

AntHocNet-600
results for the overhead is presented in Fig. 4. 60

4) Throughput
40
10.22kbps and 29.82kbps throughput enhancement is
observed in the PSOR with respect to the considered
20
protocols, when the packet is of 128-byte and
simulation time is 300s. When the packet size is varied
0
to 2048-byte, throughput rises with 5.78kbps and 128 256 512 1024 2048
Packet size (bytes)
15.07kbps as compared to the AQRV and AntHocNet.
In case of 600s, when the size of the packet is 128- Fig. 5. Throughput with changing packet size
byte, PSOR observed 14.30kbps and 23.41kbps growth
in the throughput for the protocols under consideration
respectively. When the size of the packet is 2048-byte, TABLE IV
R ESULT FOR RELAYING Q O S FOR THE VARIOUS ROAD SEGMENT
PSOR observed 12.61kbps and 26.89kbps growth in the
throughput. The results for the throughput is shown in Packet size Relaying QoS for 300s Relaying QoS for 600s
Fig. 5. (Bytes)
PSOR AQRV AntHoc PSOR AQRV AntHoc
Net Net
B. Relaying Quality of Service of road segment 128 45.75 40.45 27.63 40.59 30.76 21.49
Relaying QoS is expressed as a cost of communication and 256 47.20 43.26 34.46 42.43 35.51 22.85
512 50.06 48.79 40.07 46.00 41.78 26.35
it is evaluated for the protocols used in the study. The result 1024 50.20 47.13 37.23 45.99 41.24 26.87
is shown in Table IV. 2048 52.18 48.29 39.96 48.41 42.55 29.32

C. Discussion
Simulation is performed by variation in simulation time
and packet size. Simulation results indicate that, PSOR
produces better results related to parameters such as MDR,
delay, throughput and overhead. In data transmission, PSOR
controls the control messages that result in less overhead.
The selection of best particle (next forwarding adjacent
vehicle) is based on the updated particle’s position and
velocity. It uses carry forward approach i.e. packet is carried
and stored till the next forwarding vehicle is determined,
then it is forwarded to the next adjacent vehicle thus, this
protocol minimizes routing loops that result in the minimum
delay. It observes better MDR and throughput due to the
vehicle’s travel direction, connectivity enhancement between
vehicles, ability to cope up with changing topology.

1577

Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 In AQRV, growth in the MDR and throughput is observed
for the packet size upto 512 bytes. When size of the packet
is higher than 512 bytes, reduction in MDR is observed.
Similarly, the delay required to transmit the message is
declined till the size of packet is 512 bytes, afterward delay
increases with the larger packet size as it requires more time
to transmit. Control packets generated is higher resulting in
high overhead.
In AntHocNet, MDR and throughput increase with
increasing packet size. It does not cope up with changes in
topology that increase message drop during transmission.
Routing decision has been taken depending on the current
pheromone value that affects MDR. Thus, overall it produces
less MDR and throughput compared to the variants. For 300s
scenario, delay minimizes with packet size up to a certain
threshold, after threshold, delay is increasing. In case of
600s, delay required is higher with large packet size. Thus,
delay incurred is higher due to their intrinsic reactive and
proactive behavior. As the packet size is increasing, increase
in the overhead is observed.
V. C ONCLUSION
This study presents a PSOR routing protocol based on
particle swarm optimization for VANET that achieves better
QoS. The global optimum solution based on fitness value is
determined with the help of velocity and position of the
particle. This is used to determine the next vehicle closer to
the Dv. The message is forwarded through carry and forward
technique. The experimental results indicate that a higher
packet size results in better MDR, throughput and less delay,
overhead for scenario comprising variations in the simulation
time and the packet size. As the simulation time is higher,
PSOR achieve better performance. Moreover, relaying QoS
is determined for the variants used in the study and it shows
that PSOR achieves better relaying QoS. Thus, the result
shows PSOR is a suitable routing strategy in VANET. In
future, it is possible to extend the work by applying two-lane
and four-lane scenarios that show a realistic highway
scenario.
R EFERENCES
[1] Saif Al-Sultan, Moath M. Al-Doori, Ali H. Al-Bayatti, Hussien Zedan,
“A comprehensive survey on vehicular ad hoc network,” Journal of
network and computer applications, vol. 37, no. 2014, pp. 380-389
2014.
[2] M. Dixit, R. Kumar and A. K. Sagar, “VANET: Architectures, research
issues, routing protocols, and its applications,” 2016 International
Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation (ICCCA),
Noida, pp. 555-561, 2016.
1578
Authorized licensed use limited to: GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING. Downloaded on September 07,2022 at 12:20:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
View publication stats
[3] Bitam, Salim, Abdelhamid Mellouk, and Sherali Zeadally,
“Bio-inspired routing algorithms survey for vehicular ad hoc
networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 17, no.2,
pp. 843-867, 2014.
[4] H. Zhang, X. Wang, P. Memarmoshrefi and D. Hogrefe, “A survey of
ant colony optimization based routing protocols for mobile ad hoc
networks,” IEEE access, vol. 5, no. 2017, pp. 24139-24161, 2017.
[5] Yang, Xin-She, “Nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithms,” Luniver
press, 2010.
[6] Toutouh, Jamal, Jos´e Garc´ıa-Nieto, and Enrique Alba, “Intelligent
OLSR routing protocol optimization for VANETs,” IEEE transactions
on vehicular technology, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 1884-1894, 2012.
[7] G. Li, L. Boukhatem, and J. Wu, “Adaptive Quality-of-Service-Based
Routing for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks with Ant Colony Optimization,”
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 3249-
3264, 2017.
[8] Di Caro, Gianni, Frederick Ducatelle, and Luca Maria Gambardella,
“AntHocNet: an ant-based hybrid routing algorithm for mobile ad hoc
networks,” International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from
Nature, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004.
[9] Rangaraj, J., and M. Anitha, “Implementing Energy Optimization by a
Novel Hybrid Technique for Performance Improvement in Mobile Ad
Hoc Network,” International Journal of Applied Engineering Research,
vol.12, no.22, pp. 12029-12035, 2017.
[10] Kechmane, Laila, Benayad Nsiri, and Azeddine Baalal, “A hybrid
particle swarm optimization algorithm for the capacitated location
routing problem,” International Journal of Intelligent Computing and
Cybernetics, 2018.
[11] H. Shen, Y. Zhu, T. Liu and L. Jin, “Particle Swarm Optimization in
Solving Vehicle Routing Problem,” 2009 Second International
Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation,
Changsha, Hunan, pp. 287-291, 2009.
[12] Hernafi, Yassine, Mohamed Ben Ahmed, and Mohammed Bouhorma,
“ACO and PSO algorithms for developing a new communication
model for VANET applications in smart cities,” Wireless Personal
Communications, vol. 96, no.2, pp. 2039-2075, 2017.
[13] Harrabi, Samira, Ines Ben Jaffar, and Khaled Ghedira, “Novel optimized
routing scheme for vanets,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 98, pp.32-
39, 2016.
[14] Bhairo Singh Rajawat, Ranjeet Singh Tomar, Mayank Satya Prakash
Sharma, Brijesh Kumar Chaurasia, “Improved Election of Cluster
Head Using CH-PSO for Different Scenarios in VANET,” International
Conference on Communication, Networks and Computing, Springer,
Singapore, 2018.
[15] Deshmukh, Atul R., and Sanjay S. Dorle, “Bio-inspired optimization
algorithms for improvement of vehicle routing problems,” 2015 7th
International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering &
Technology (ICETET), IEEE, 2015.
[16] M. Fahad, F. Aadil, S. Ejaz and A. Ali, “Implementation of evolutionary
algorithms in vehicular ad-hoc network for cluster optimization,” 2017
Intelligent Systems Conference (IntelliSys), London, pp. 137-141, 2017.
[17] Han Huang and Zhifeng Hao, “Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm
for Transportation Problems,” Particle Swarm Optimization, Aleksandar
Lazinica (Ed.), pp. 275-290, 2009.
[18] S. A. Ben Mussa, M. Manaf, K. Z. Ghafoor and Z. Doukha, “Simulation
tools for vehicular ad hoc networks: A comparison study and future
perspectives,” 2015 International Conference on Wireless Networks and
Mobile Communications (WINCOM), Marrakech, pp. 1-8, 2015.
[19] Harri, Jerome, Fethi Filali, and Christian Bonnet, “Mobility models for
vehicular ad hoc networks: a survey and taxonomy,” IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 19-41, 2009.
[20] https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3626 last accessed in Jan. 2020.
[21] Mobile Ad-hoc Networking group- https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3561.txt
accessed in Jan. 2020.