• DocumentCode
    84302
  • Title

    Performance Analysis of Fountain Codes in Multihop Relay Networks

  • Author

    James, Ashish ; Madhukumar, A.S. ; Kurniawan, Edi ; Adachi, Fumiyuki

  • Author_Institution
    Sch. of Comput. Eng., Nanyang Technol. Univ., Singapore, Singapore
  • Volume
    62
  • Issue
    9
  • fYear
    2013
  • fDate
    Nov. 2013
  • Firstpage
    4379
  • Lastpage
    4391
  • Abstract
    Fountain codes have been extensively employed in delay-tolerant networks (DTNs) due to their near-capacity performance with very low encoding/decoding complexity. A decode-and-forward-based relaying strategy is ideally suited for fountain codes in such networks due to its ability to recover the source message from any subset of encoded packets with sufficient mutual information. However, the unreliable nature of the channel may lead to the starvation of some subsequent nodes with good channel conditions. By cooperation among the forwarding nodes, the overall latency of such networks can be alleviated. This paper analytically quantifies the latency of both cooperative and conventional fountain-coded delay-tolerant multihop networks by deriving the exact closed-form equations for the channel usage. The overall latency suffered by such networks forces conservation of the end-to-end delay, particularly for real-time applications. However, by constraining the total delay (the number of encoded transmissions), the performance of fountain codes deteriorates due to the lack of encoded packets for retrieving the entire source message. This degradation can be gauged by the average packet loss experienced with partial decoding of fountain codes. The exact closed-form equation for the average packet loss based on the channel usage for such delay-constrained networks (DCNs) is derived in this paper. The tradeoff between average delay and the channel usage required for successful decoding is also analyzed. It is observed that the average packet loss can be minimized by optimizing the total delay based on the performance across each link. Finally, the pros and cons of using DCNs and DTNs employing fountain codes are evaluated, and theoretical grounding to the simulated results is provided.
  • Keywords
    decode and forward communication; decoding; delay tolerant networks; encoding; relay networks (telecommunication); average packet loss; channel usage; decode-and-forward-based relaying strategy; delay-constrained networks; delay-tolerant multihop networks; encoding-decoding complexity; end-to-end delay; forwarding nodes; fountain codes; multihop relay networks; partial decoding; performance analysis; Decoding; Delays; Encoding; Generators; Relays; Reliability; Spread spectrum communication; Conventional multihop networks; cooperative multihop networks; delay-constrained transmission; fountain/rateless codes;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Journal_Title
    Vehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • ISSN
    0018-9545
  • Type

    jour

  • DOI
    10.1109/TVT.2013.2265279
  • Filename
    6522481