diff options
| author | Loic Guegan <manzerbredes@mailbox.org> | 2019-07-19 10:19:21 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Loic Guegan <manzerbredes@mailbox.org> | 2019-07-19 10:19:21 +0200 |
| commit | 8291ba58641595f2ed132003b65b00e57aba198f (patch) | |
| tree | 04efb8ca7440d4703cf180a2e0e97f79c19d61a8 /2019-ICA3PP.org | |
| parent | 23a92c716b87e61cbf66943ee8a29dadb5c28fa1 (diff) | |
Run experiment again to correct ns-3 application delay
Diffstat (limited to '2019-ICA3PP.org')
| -rw-r--r-- | 2019-ICA3PP.org | 34 |
1 files changed, 17 insertions, 17 deletions
diff --git a/2019-ICA3PP.org b/2019-ICA3PP.org index 4bfdf5d..e92e43c 100644 --- a/2019-ICA3PP.org +++ b/2019-ICA3PP.org @@ -413,15 +413,15 @@ part and the cloud part, as displayed on Figure \ref{fig:parts}. In this section, we analyze the experimental results. ** IoT and Network Power Consumption - In a first place, we start by studying the impact of the sensors' - transmission frequency on their energy - consumption. To this end, we run several simulations in ns3 with 15 sensors using different transmission frequencies. The - results provided by Table \ref{tab:sensorsSendIntervalEffects} show - that the transmission frequency has a very low impact - on the energy consumption and on the cumulative end-to-end application delay. It has an impact of course, but it is very - limited. This due to the fact that in such a scenario with very small number of communications - spread over the time, sensors don't have to contend for accessing to the Wifi channel. - + In a first place, we start by studying the impact of the sensors' transmission frequency on their + energy consumption. To this end, we run several simulations in ns3 with 15 sensors using + different transmission frequencies. The results provided by Table + \ref{tab:sensorsSendIntervalEffects} show that the transmission frequency has a very low impact + on the energy consumption and on the average end-to-end application delay. It has an impact of + course, but it is very limited. This due to the fact that in such a scenario with very small + number of communications spread over the time, sensors don't have to contend for accessing to the + Wifi channel. + #+BEGIN_EXPORT latex % Please add the following required packages to your document preamble: % \usepackage{booktabs} @@ -431,10 +431,10 @@ In this section, we analyze the experimental results. \label{tab:sensorsSendIntervalEffects} \begin{tabular}{@{}lrrrrr@{}} \toprule - Sensors Send Interval & 10s & 30s & 50s & 70s & 90s \\ \midrule + Sensors Send Interval & 10s & 30s & 50s & 70s & 90s \\ \midrule Sensors Power Consumption & 13.517\hl{94}W & 13.517\hl{67}W & 13.51767W & 13.51767W & 13.517\hl{61}W \\ Network Power Consumption & 10.441\hl{78}W & 10.441\hl{67}W & 10.44161W & 10.44161W & 10.441\hl{61}W \\ - Cumulative Application Delay & 17.81360s & 5.91265s & 3.53509s & 2.55086s & 1.93848s \\ \bottomrule + End-to-end Application Delay & 0.09951s & 0.10021s & 0.10100s & 0.10203s & 0.10202s \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table*} #+END_EXPORT @@ -845,7 +845,7 @@ applicability of our model. - + *** Plot Scripts **** Random R Scripts @@ -864,11 +864,11 @@ applicability of our model. #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: - : [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] - : sensorsSendInterval 10.00000 30.00000 50.00000 70.00000 90.00000 - : sensorsEnergy 13.51794 13.51767 13.51767 13.51767 13.51761 - : networkEnergy 10.44178 10.44167 10.44161 10.44161 10.44161 - : avgDelay 17.81360 5.91265 3.53509 2.55086 1.93848 + : [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] + : sensorsSendInterval 10.0000000 30.000000 50.000000 70.000000 90.000000 + : sensorsEnergy 13.5179444 13.517667 13.517667 13.517667 13.517611 + : networkEnergy 10.4417825 10.441668 10.441612 10.441612 10.441612 + : avgDelay 0.0995173 0.100214 0.101002 0.102034 0.102025 |
