4.7 Article

Geometry-Based Vehicle-to-Vehicle Channel Modeling for Large-Scale Simulation

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY
卷 63, 期 9, 页码 4146-4164

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2014.2317803

关键词

Channel model; large-scale simulation; propagation model; vehicular ad hoc network (VANET); vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication

资金

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology [SFRH/BD/33771/2009, CMU-PT/NGN/0052/2008]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/33771/2009, CMU-PT/NGN/0052/2008] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to the dynamic nature of vehicular traffic and the road surroundings, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) propagation characteristics vary greatly on both small and large scale. Recent measurements have shown that both large static objects (e. g., buildings and foliage) and mobile objects (surrounding vehicles) have a profound impact on V2V communication. At the same time, system-level vehicular ad hoc network (VANET) simulators by and large employ simple statistical propagation models, which do not account for surrounding objects explicitly. We designed Geometry-based Efficient propagation Model for V2V communication (GEMV(2)), which uses outlines of vehicles, buildings, and foliage to distinguish the following three types of links: line of sight (LOS), non-LOS (NLOS) due to vehicles, and NLOS due to static objects. For each link, GEMV(2) calculates the large-scale signal variations deterministically, whereas the small-scale signal variations are calculated stochastically based on the number and size of surrounding objects. We implement GEMV(2) in MATLAB and show that it scales well by using it to simulate radio propagation for city-wide networks with tens of thousands of vehicles on commodity hardware. We make the source code of GEMV(2) freely available. Finally, we validate GEMV(2) against extensive measurements performed in urban, suburban, highway, and open-space environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据