Wireless Networks and Communication: A Comparative Analysis Report

This report provides a comparative analysis of two research papers on wireless networks and communication. The report delves into various protocols like ARQ, MCARQ, and MARQ, evaluating their performance concerning waiting time, energy efficiency, and packet loss. The methodologies employed, including Markov chain models and MATLAB simulations, are discussed, along with the advantages and disadvantages of each paper. The analysis highlights the impact of different factors, such as packet length and arrival rate, on network performance. Furthermore, the report explores the use of network state estimation techniques and their role in detecting packet loss in both access and core networks. Finally, the report suggests potential future research directions, including further comparisons of protocols, the use of hypothesis testing, and in-depth analysis of wireless network mechanisms.

Wireless Networks &
Communication
1

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
Introduction of papers..................................................................................................................3
Description of methodologies......................................................................................................4
Comparison of results..................................................................................................................4
Advantage/disadvantage of papers..............................................................................................5
Future direction............................................................................................................................6
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7
2

INTRODUCTION
` In present times wireless technologies are been highly used in network. It has
transformed the overall communication process. There are several tools and devices used in
network to improve its bandwidth and increase range. Also, it has expanded scope of connecting
devices by sending wireless signals. Basically, there are two types of connection used in this that
is packet and circuit switching. In packet, message is broken and then transmitted through
different routes but in circuit two nodes are connected together. It is a technique which enables in
sending of data from one computer to another in a network. Moreover, many advance
technologies are also available in network. The data is broken into packets more frequently and
sent to destination quickly. This report will compare two research papers and analyse it.
Introduction of papers
In wireless communication there are several protocols exits which are useful in reducing
system waiting time. Similarly, the use of ARQ in wireless network reduces system waiting time
and energy. In this transmission process is modulated by Markov chain. The main error that
occurs in data transmission is automatic repeat request (ARQ). Cooperative communication is
emerging as new technology. It increases diversity gains and reduced PER of wireless system. It
uses ARQ protocol. There is another technique that is used which is CARQ. Recently CARQ
protocol is used in communication (Li, Zhou and Zhou, 2014). The wireless sensor network is
a technology used to control errors. In MARQ average waiting time and energy efficiency is
obtained. There are two destination nodes in MCARQ. The transmission process is divided into
three state Markov chain that is 0, 1 and 2. In that packets entering in buffer are independent and
random variables. ARQ protocol is used to improve user throughput. It is important to reduce
energy consumption in wireless network as it supports in improving efficiency and performance
of network. The Geom model is based on first come first service. Here, l denotes packet length
and Tr time of transmission. So, packet service rate is calculated by ρ = λ/μ. In this S denote total
time taken by packet to transmit from sender to receiver.
In a network there are many multimedia applications are used. It enables in end to end
encryption of data. VOiP application is generally used which reduced packet loss. It works on
standard algorithm. E2E delay indicates degradation of performance in both AN and wired CN.
In most of wired technology error recovery mechanism is used. This enables in preventing
impact into higher layer (Liberal, Taboada and Fajardo, 2014). In e2e performance plays a vital
3

role wireless network as any degradation lead to change in network status. Every network works
on specific algorithm. Hence, changing scalability of network impact on its status. Generally,
there are two status defined that is access and core network. SDA enables in distinguishing
random loss and congestion loss. With the help of VOiP application congestion and random loss
can be differentiated. However, in random loss no high variability is observed as compared to
congestion one. It can be observed in many video chat app such as Skype, Live messenger, etc.
Description of methodologies
There are various research methods which are used in conducting a research. It is used in
selecting sample, analysing data, etc. In this research paper a three state Markov chain model
method was used to generate outcomes. Also, the test results were generated through probability.
Beside this, various theorems were used to analyze data. Also, MARQ solution method was
applied in calculation. Apart from it, MATLAB was used to interpret outcomes and comparing
MARQ and MCARQ protocol results.
In order to carry out study there are different types of methods which is used. Here, a
lightweight method was used for grain estimation. In that mathematical statistics was used to
predict method error ratio of wireless link. Furthermore, a simplified heuristics method was used
to analyze capabilities and parameters. At last an algorithm was used for testing.
Comparison of results
By analysing results of papers it is interpreted that first research paper system average
waiting time decreases with increase in value of L. Also, average waiting time of MCARQ is less
than MARQ in similar length of packets. Moreover, it is analysed that performance of MCARQ
is better than MARQ. In this waiting time rises with rise in arrival time. Moreover, rise in arrival
time increasing waiting time of MARQ but there is no effect on arrival rate on system average
waiting time of MCARQ. However, by comparing system energy with packet length it is state
that system energy efficiency increases with packet length. The MCARQ protocol performance
is superior in stable state than MARQ one. In addition to it, energy efficiency of system
decreases if there is increase in value of power amplifier. Therefore, MARQ works in effective
way without impacting on system waiting time. So, it enables in reducing delay and saving
energy in network.
On other hand, second paper state that AN is more accurate method for assessing. In E2E
delay method errors are effectively identified. So, in many cases there is no need to use this
4

method. It is analyzed that CN congestion starts there is additional delay in routers appear before
packet drops. In both delays there is constant component due to propagation. In CN mean delay
increases due to waiting time. Alongside, by comparing experimental results of VOiP and video
users mean range is between 200-400 bytes. It is been stated that Skype maintain same buffer
size in spite of network delay, loss rate, etc. whereas MSN size grows as delay increases. Apart
from it, Google talk buffer is adjusted with average network delay and jitter. AN and CN does
not require any complex algo to detect delay. By detecting delay that occurred in retransmission
AN was removed from CN. It showed change in delay time and how packets are transmitted on
in CN and AN.
Therefore, in paper one discussion is entirely based on performance of protocol in
wireless network. The waiting time is increases with packet length whereas in other it decreases.
On contrary in retransmission delay is maintained through buffer in VOiP applications. Here, it
does not uses any protocol. Thus, delays are effectively identified and removed in CN but not in
AN.
Advantage/disadvantage of papers
It can be analyzed that both papers are having certain advantage and disadvantage which
are defined below :-
The paper one advantage is it has effectively investigated performance of MCARQ with
help of various theorems. So, in each one particular value is obtained. Another advantage is
simulation tool MATLAB is used for analysis. This has provided with clear results of
comparison between both protocols. In addition, figures are drawn on basis of simulation results
which provide clear understanding of performance of protocols.
Its weakness there is no specific sample selected in doing analysis. Also, no comparison
table is been made between both protocols. So, it is difficult to identify and evaluate their
features. Moreover, calculation done in paper is complex and difficult to understand. Beside this,
there is no in depth discussion or analysis is done after generating outcomes. Apart from it, the
theorems mentioned in it are not having any theory described.
The strength of second paper is it has briefly described theoretical part on different
topics. Also, structure is been clearly described that what is contained in which section.
Furthermore, analysis is been done in proper way and outcomes are explained in tabular format.
There are various diagrams drawn which depicts errors and its ratio.
5

Its weakness is there is no particular methods discussed or sample size described. Also, no
chapter wise headings are included in it. The paper consists of calculation in appendix which is
complex and difficult to understand. There are many methods used in order to evaluate data so it
requires brief knowledge to understand it. These all weakness of paper makes it difficult to
analyze it.
Future direction
By analysing above papers it can be stated that there require some improvements in those. In
first one both protocols can be compared in future by gathering data from testing network
packets. This will make it easy to find out in which one packet loss is higher. Also, hypothesis
can be used to evaluate performance of both and identifying relationship of it with system energy
efficiency. Alongside it, the theorems could not be used which can be easier to understand
overall analysis of ARQ. In future research can be done on multiple relay in MCARQ protocol
and using Markov chain. The use of hypothesis will generate outcomes to determine relationship.
In that different test can be used such as regression, co relation, etc. by finding out dependent and
independent factors.
However, in second paper research can be done in more depth which will make it easy to
understand mechanism of ARQ based in wireless network. Also, rather than analysing through
graphs and tables, it can be explained in better way theoretically. In addition study can be
divided into different sections. In that different wireless network can be taken such as Skype,
MSN, etc. with its data and information. Then, analysis can be done which makes it easy to
compare them. There should not be any use of theorems or mathematics formula. From that it
will focus on specific area.
CONCLUSION
From above it can be concluded that multimedia mobile applications uses network status
estimation technique to detect source of packet loss. For this there are many techniques available
in both AN and CN. The E2E delay method is used in it. Also, ARQ based AN and CN include
some formulas to detect errors. It has been summarised that ARQ is protocol used in network
which enables in reducing waiting time. The MCARQ protocol performs in better way than
MARQ. In both CN and AN delay there is constant component due to propagation. In CN mean
delay increases due to waiting time.
6

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Li, S.P., Zhou, Y.Q. and Zhou, Y., 2014. Delay and energy efficiency analysis of multicast
cooperative ARQ over wireless networks. Acta informatica. 51(1). pp.51-60.
Liberal, F., Taboada, I. and Fajardo, J.O., 2014. A lightweight network state estimation
mechanism in ARQ-based wireless networks. Telecommunication Systems. 57(2). pp.137-
157.
7