Cited by 70Wireless Networks and ProtocolsAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization

Sensitivity of wireless network simulations to a two-state markov model channel approximation

McDougall, J., Miller, S.·2004·GLOBECOM '03. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37489)

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the appropriateness of wireless network simulations that employ a two-state Markov model to approximate a flat Rayleigh fading channel. Our approach first analyzes the statistical similarities and differences between block error processes generated by 1) an 802.11b defined communication scheme in the presence of flat Rayleigh fading and 2) a representative two-state Markov model. It is shown that, at low SNR, the Markov model does not generate an adequate frame error process. Furthermore, we quantify the effects of said statistical deviations through ns2 network simulations. This work further advances the understanding of the appropriate, and inappropriate, environments under which the two-state Markov model is a suitable approximation of a fading channel.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/glocom.2003.1258328

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Gilbert-Elliot model is an appropriate choice for modeling the impact of errors within a noisy wireless channel.

    “This model is extensively simulated in research studies to find packet losses [52], frame losses [53], and bit losses [54], hence making it an appropriate choice for modeling the impact of errors within a noisy wireless channel [55].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 13 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. kumar, 1996, Comparative performance analysis of versions of TCP in a Local network with a lossy link, PartII: Rayleigh fading mobile radio link, Tech Rep WINLAB-TR-133

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDougall, J., & Miller, S.
Affiliations
Texas A&M University (US)
Venue
GLOBECOM '03. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37489)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2004-07-08
Volume
2
Pages
697-701
ISSN
1930-529X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2160212283
Cited by
70
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.01
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Globecom (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Wireless Networks and Protocols
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Wireless Communication Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Wireless Network Optimization
Keywords
two-state Markov model, flat Rayleigh fading, wireless network simulation, IEEE 802.11b, low signal-to-noise ratio, NS-2 simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review