2018
DOI: 10.3390/s18061969
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

UCMAC: A Cooperative MAC Protocol for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks

Abstract: This paper proposes a cooperative medium access control (MAC) protocol for underwater wireless sensor networks (UWSNs) named UCMAC, which fundamentally benefits from cooperative communication. In UCMAC, a source identifies cooperators and provides its destination with a list of the cooperators while also delineating their proximity to the destination. For erroneous reception of data packets, the destination then requests retransmission to the cooperators in a closest-one-first manner. A designated cooperator t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proposed protocol also supports multiple handshakes and concurrent transmissions as DSCT, except that the handshaking is implemented in a dedicated control channel by TDMA and the transmission rate of the data channel is reduced. The throughput, packet delivery rate, average end-to-end delay, average energy consumption and normalized offered load are defined as [29]:…”
Section: Simulations and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed protocol also supports multiple handshakes and concurrent transmissions as DSCT, except that the handshaking is implemented in a dedicated control channel by TDMA and the transmission rate of the data channel is reduced. The throughput, packet delivery rate, average end-to-end delay, average energy consumption and normalized offered load are defined as [29]:…”
Section: Simulations and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the simulations, the normalized throughput, packet delivery rate, average end-to-end delay, and average energy consumption of the proposed method are compared with underwater ALOHA (UWALOHA), underwater carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance (UW-CSMA/CA), slotted floor acquisition multiple access (SFAMA) and ROPA protocols with different network loads and node numbers. The normalized throughput, packet delivery rate, average end-to-end delay, average energy consumption and normalized offered load are defined as [23]: Normalized throughput: The ratio of the average number of data bits successfully received by the intended destinations per second to the transmission bit rate (dimensionless).Packet delivery rate: The ratio of the number of data packets successfully delivered at the intended destinations to the total number of data packets generated (dimensionless).Average end-to-end delay: The average time interval between generation and successful delivery of data packets at the intended destinations (in ms).Average energy consumption: The ratio of the total energy consumption to the number of data packets successfully received by the intended destinations (in Joule/packet or J/pkt).Normalized offered load: The ratio of the average number of data bits sent per second to the transmission bit rate (dimensionless).…”
Section: Simulations and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the case of IoUT, by the environmental specificity, onsurface wireless communication systems cannot be applied [13]- [17]. Therefore, many different IoUT models that fit the underwater characteristics have been suggested [24]- [29]. The method tuned to fit the underwater environment was suggested based on the IEEE 802.11 protocol used on the surfaces [6], [28].…”
Section: A Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%