The efficacy of path loss models for fixed rural wireless links

Authors:
Caleb Phillips;Scott Raynel;Jamie Curtis;Sam Bartels;Douglas Sicker;Dirk Grunwald;Tony McGregor
Affiliations:
Computer Science Department, University of Colorado, Boulder;Computer Science Department, University of Waikato, New Zealand;Computer Science Department, University of Waikato, New Zealand;Computer Science Department, University of Waikato, New Zealand;Computer Science Department, University of Colorado, Boulder;Computer Science Department, University of Colorado, Boulder;Computer Science Department, University of Waikato, New Zealand
Venue:
PAM'11 Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Passive and active measurement
Year:
2011

Citing 3
Cited 2

Realistic propagation simulation of urban mesh networks

Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking
Assessment of urban-scale wireless networks with a small number of measurements

Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Mobile computing and networking
Modeling environmental effects on directionality in wireless networks

WiOPT'09 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks

In-kernel passive measurement of the performance impact of hidden terminals in 802.11 wireless networks

Proceedings of the 8th ACM Symposium on Performance evaluation of wireless ad hoc, sensor, and ubiquitous networks
Multi-hop Multi-band Intelligent Relay-Based Architecture for LTE-Advanced Multi-hop Wireless Cellular Networks

Wireless Personal Communications: An International Journal

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we make use of a large set of measurements from a production wireless network in rural New Zealand to analyze the performance of 28 path loss prediction models, published over the course of 60 years. We propose five metrics to determine the performance of each model. We show that the state of the art, even for the "simple" case of rural environments, is surprisingly ill-equipped to make accurate predictions. After combining the best elements of the best models and hand-tuning their parameters, we are unable to achieve an accuracy of better than 12 dB root mean squared error (RMSE)--four orders of magnitude away from ground truth.