Empirical Analysis of the Minkowski Distance Order in Geographical

Routing Protocols for VANETs

13th International Conference on Wired & Wireless Internet Communications
Luis Urquiza-Aguiar1

Carolina Tripp-Barba2 Jos Estrada-Jimnez3

Mnica Aguilar Igartua1

Department of Network Engineering, Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

Email: [ luis.urquiza, monica.aguilar]@entel.upc.edu
2
Faculty of Informatics, Autonomic University of Sinaloa, Mazatlan, Mexico
Email: ctripp@uas.edu.mx
3
Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Escuela Politcnica Naciona, Quito, Ecuador
Email: jose.estrada@epn.edu.ec
Mlaga, Spain, May 25-27th.

Agenda

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Introduction
Minkowski distance in geographical distance routing metric
Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Conclusions and Future work

14

Introduction
2

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs)

VANETs are seen as a special case of mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs), where
nodes are vehicles.
I

Faster topology changes.

Short link lifetime.

Greater number of nodes. (Non-uniformly distributed)

Nodes (vehicles) follow roads and respect traffic signals

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Geographical routing protocols

A routing paradigm based only on local information.
I

Typically based on distance between nodes.

Position of destination and neighbors have to be known .

14

Introduction
3

Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

(a) Greedy forwarding.

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

(b) Perimeter mode.

Greedy Buffer Stateless Routing (GBSR)

It uses a buffer instead of perimeter mode. (Delay Tolerant applications)

It uses more information to improve the position estimation. (e.g. speed, time)

GBSR improves packet delivery ratio but introduces delay.

14

Introduction
4

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Objective
To test if the Euclidean distance is the most suitable function for VANET routing
purposes.
Why not using other distances?

(a) Manhattan distance

d = x + y.

(b) Euclidean
distance.
p
d = x2 + y2

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

(c) Dominant distance.

d = max(x, y )

All these cases are particular case from Minkowski distance function.

14

Minkowski Distance in Geographical VANET routing

I
5

Distance function
A distance function (x, y ) for two n-dimensional points x and y satisfies:
(x, y ) = (y , x)

(1a)

(x, y ) 0

(1b)

(x, x) = 0

(1c)

Minkowski distance
The Minkowski distance [1] of order r between the points x and y is:
!1/r
n
X
r
r (x, y ) =
|xi yi |

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

(2)

i=1

When r < 0, the Minkowski distance function (2) can be seen as a similarity
measure
14

Minkowski Distance in Geographical VANET routing

Minkowski circles of radius = 1

I
6

r=1

r = 1.5

1.0

1.0

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.0

0.5

0.0

1.0

r = 0.5

0.5

1.0
0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.0

r=2

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

1.0
1.0

0.5

1.0
1.0

0.0

0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

r=4

r = infinite

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.5

0.5

0.5

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

0.5

0.0

0.5

R
0.0

0.0

0.5
14

Minkowski Distance in Geographical VANET routing

Effects of Minkowski order r in routing decision

I
7

1. The size and form of the searching area to find a the next forwarding node.
2. The decision of which neighbor is the closest to destination.

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

14

Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r in VANET geo routing

Simulation Settings
I
I
I
I
I

The mobility of vehicles was obtained with SUMO [4]/C4R [3]

100 and 150 vehicles, 1 Access Point
IEEE 802.11p. Estinet simulator [2].
GBSR [5] in the routing layer.
Inter-packet time T U(2,6) s E(T ) = 4 s. Packets of 1000 bytes

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r
8

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

14

Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r in VANET geo routing

Percentage of packet losses vs r

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r
9

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Packet losses increase when r < 2 and almost constant with r > 2.
14

Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r in VANET geo routing

Average end-to-end packet delay vs r

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r
10

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Notice that average delay for r < 2 is similar to the obtained r = 2, but the
percentage of packet losses are different.

14

Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r in VANET geo routing

Average number of hops vs r

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r
11

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Manhattan distance (r = 1) has the worst performance.

When r > 2 the number of hops decrease.

14

Empirical Analysis of Minkowski order r in VANET geo routing

Statistical test results

Vehicle
Density

Pairwise
(r,2)

Standardized
Test Statistic

p-Value
1 Side

Is the Difference
Significant
(p-Value < 0.025)?

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Median of
Differences

Percentage packet losses

150

2.5
+

2.091
2.24

2.5
3
4
+

2.427
2.763
2.203
1.269

2.5
+
3
4
+

2.837
3.173
2.165
1.979
3.323

0.018
0.012

Yes
Yes

2.549%
3.096 %

Yes
Yes
Yes
No

0.500 s
0.584 s
0.409 s
0.186 s

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

0.367 hops
0.515 hops
0.0136 hops
0.66 hops
0.11 hops

Average end-to-end delay

150

0.007
0.002
0.013
0.108

12

Average number of hops

100

150

0.002
0.0005
0.015
0.024
0.0005

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

Table: p-values of Wilcoxon signed rank test for a pairwise comparison of the effect of the
Minkowski distance order r
14

Conclusions and Future work

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Conclusions
Our results in a realistic grid urban scenario, indicate:
I

The use of the Minkowski order (r < 2) is not a good idea. (higher packet
losses)

The use of the dominant distance (r +) in the routing decision leads to

better performance than the one obtained Euclidean distance (r = 2). (shorter
paths, lower packet losses, same delay)

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

The performance differences between euclidean distance are not far from the
best ones obtained by other Minkowski r value. Euclidean distance is always a
good choice.
13

14

Conclusions and Future work

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

Future work include:

I
I

To this same comparison in other city topologies

To develop a geographical routing protocol that combines some Minkowski
distances.
I

A distance function to select candidates nodes and other distance function to

compute the best forwarding node.
A linear combination of distances in the selection of next forwarding nodes.

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

14

14

Thanks for your attention

if Questions then
if Time WWIC15_limit then

Please ask
else

email to: luis.urquiza@entel.upc.edu

return Answer & Thanks

Luis Urquiza Aguiar

www.lfurquiza.com

References

M
d
t
i
g
o
g
i
c
d
t
r
i
m
r

[1] Borg, I., Groenen, P.: Modern Multidimensional Scaling - Theory and
Applications. Springer New York, New York, second edn. (2005)
[2] Estinet-Technologies: EstiNet 7 Network Simulator and Emulator (2015),
http://www.estinet.com/products.php?lv1=13&sn=15
[3] Fogue, M., Garrido, P., Martinez, F.J., Cano, J.C., Calafate, C.T., Manzoni, P.: A
realistic simulation framework for vehicular networks. In: 5th International ICST
Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques. pp. 3746. ACM, Brussels,
Belgium (2012), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2263019.2263025

E
A
y
s
o
M
o
d

[4] Krajzewicz, D., Erdmann, J., Behrisch, M., Bieker, L.: Recent development and
applications of SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility. International Journal On
Advances in Systems and Measurements 5(3&4), 128138 (2012)
[5] Tripp Barba, C., Urquiza Aguiar, L., Aguilar Igartua, M.: Design and evaluation
of GBSR-B, an improvement of GPSR for VANETs. IEEE Latin America
Transactions 11(4), 1083 1089 (2013)

C
14

14