## 4 Performance Analysis
In Figure 16, the delivery ratio of the proposed protocol increases as the number of nodes increases from 40 to 80 since more pedestrians can act as message forwarders and more messages can be delivered successfully. However, the delivery ratio of the proposed protocol slightly decreases when the number of nodes is higher than 80 since the effect of more message forwarding and the resulting message drop due to buffer overflow restricts the successful message delivery since the buffer size of the pedestrian is not sufficient. The delivery ratios of other protocols decrease significantly due to more message dropping in the buffer. We note that the proposed protocol has the highest delivery ratio for all the considered buffer sizes since the proposed protocol efficiently restricts message forwarding by considering preP and, thus, the delivery ratio is the highest. Figure 17 shows the overhead ratio. Overhead ratios of all the protocols increase as the number of nodes increases since more messages are relayed due to more message forwarders and the rate of increase is more significant as the number of pedestrians is higher because the number of delivered messages decreases for a high number of pedestrians. The overhead ratio of the proposed protocol has the smallest out of all the considered protocols since the proposed protocol restricts the forwarded messages efficiently and has a smaller number of forwarded messages, and also has a higher delivery ratio. Figure 18 shows the delivery latency. Delivery latencies of all the protocols decrease as the number of pedestrians increases since messages can be forwarded quickly with the help of more message forwarders and delivered to destination nodes more quickly. The proposed protocol has the smallest delivery latency since the proposed protocol restricts the forwarded messages efficiently and, thus, has a smaller number of messages in the buffer, which results in the faster message delivery to the final destination nodes. Figure 15: The delivery latency for different numbers of terms. Figures 19-21 show the delivery ratio, overhead ratio, and delivery latency for varying the number of cars from 40 to 360, where the number of terms is 6 and the number of pedestrians is 80, which is the default setting in the ONE simulator. In Figure 19, the delivery ratio of the proposed protocol increases as the number of nodes increases from 40 to 120 since more cars can act as message forwarders and more messages can be delivered successfully. However, the delivery ratio of the proposed protocol slightly decreases when the number of nodes is higher than 120 since the effect of more message forwarding and the resulting message drop due to buffer overflow restricts successful message delivery since the buffer size of the car is not sufficient. The delivery ratios of other protocols decrease significantly due to more messages dropping in the buffer. We note that the proposed protocol has the highest delivery ratio for all the considered buffer sizes since the proposed protocol efficiently increases the number of pedestrians. Figure 16: The delivery ratio for different numbers of pedestrians. Figure 7:0 The overhead ratio for different numbers of pedestrians. restricts message forwarding by considering preP and, thus, the delivery ratio is the highest. The shape of delivery ratios of all the protocols is similar to that of Figure 16, instead of that of Figure 14, since the buffer size of the car is the same as that of the pedestrian, which is significantly smaller than that of the tram. Figure 7:1 The delivery ratio for different numbers of cars. Figure 7:2 The delivery latency for different numbers of pedestrians. Figure 20 shows the overhead ratio. Overhead ratios of all the protocols increase as the number of nodes increases since more messages are relayed due to more message forwarders and the rate of increase is more significant as the number of cars is higher because the number of delivered messages decreases for a high number of cars.