4.4 Article

A Dempster-Shafer Based Tit-for-Tat Strategy to Regulate the Cooperation in VANET Using QoS-OLSR Protocol

期刊

WIRELESS PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
卷 75, 期 3, 页码 1635-1667

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11277-013-1443-y

关键词

Vehicular Ad hoc Network (VANET); QoS-OLSR; Packet collision; Tit-for-Tat; Game theory; Dempster-Shafer; Information dissemination

资金

  1. National Council for Scientific Research (CNRS)-Lebanon
  2. Lebanese American University (LAU)
  3. Khalifa University of Science, Technology & Research (KUSTAR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we address the problem of cooperation among vehicles in VANET using QoS-OLSR protocol in the presence of selfish nodes. QoS-OLSR is a proactive protocol that considers the Quality of Service (QoS) of the nodes while electing the cluster-heads and selecting the Multi-Point Relay (MPRs) nodes. Cluster-heads and MPRs might misbehave on the roads by over-speeding or under-speeding. Classical and generous Tit-for-Tats are proposed to analyze the interaction among vehicles. However, both strategies are not able to enforce the cooperation due the fact that they (1) count on individual watchdogs monitoring, (2) rely on the node-to-node cooperation decision, (3) and ignore the high mobility and packet collisions. Therefore, we propose a Dempster-Shafer based Tit-for-Tat strategy that is able to improve the decision and regulate the cooperation in the vehicular network. This is done by (1) launching a cooperative watchdogs monitoring, (2) correlating the observations of the different watchdogs using Dempster-Shafer theory, and (3) propagating the decisions among clusters. Thereafter, we compare the Dempster-Shafer based strategy with several strategies derived from the original Tit-for-Tat. Simulation results prove that the Dempster-Shafer based strategy is able to maintain the survivability of the vehicular network in the presence of high mobility and packet collisions with minimal time and overhead.

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

4.4
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