First, cooperation probability and successful helper node selection probability are derived.
We begin the analysis of the proposed protocol with the derivation of the cooperation probability.
In this paper, two probabilities, the cooperation probability and the probability that a helper node is successfully selected, were derived based on a geometric analysis.
Compared to the fixed time slot case where is confined to be in the set, we can certainly find better with larger cooperation probability than.
In this eBT-COMAC protocol, cooperation probability is calculated based on a geometric analysis, and a Markov chain-based model is used to derive steady-state probabilities for backoff-related parameters.
The cooperation probability p h can be approximately expressed as the weighted sum of various ratios of the overlapped area to the transmission area of the sender node when the direct transmission rate is 1, 2, and 5.5 Mbps, respectively.
These analysis show that the joint partitioning of time slot and power has larger cooperation probability than the partitioning of individual resource only, thus contributes to the throughput enhancement.
For example, in a Markovian setting without fictitious play,b Ma et al. [13] introduce a cooperation parameter (a probability to stop transmitting) and then follows a detection and punishment methodology regarding selfish behavior.
The fixation of cooperation has higher probability than that of on static graphs, and this effect is more prevalent at high benefit to cost ratios.
This pattern results from the fact that after a defective move the probability of cooperating was high, and after a cooperative move the probability of cooperating was the same as that of defecting (probability of cooperating after defection: p(C0|P−1) = 0.84 and p(C0|T−1) = 0.73; probability of cooperating after cooperation: p(C0|R−1) = 0.42 and p(C0|S−1) = 0.49, Figure 1c).
