# A Sigfox Energy Consumption Model
## 2 Related Work
Using this model in a confirmed uplink communication, the energy cost of delivering a 12-byte frame payload is estimated to be around 0.4 J. In another work, the objective of the analytical model presented is comparing the power consumption of GPS and Sigfox-based localization [14]. Power consumption states are identified empirically. Using the model for an uplink communication at a hypothetic 2-second transmission interval, the energy cost of delivering a frame with 1-byte and 12-byte payloads is estimated as 1.05 and 1.47 Joules, respectively. However, this model is limited to uplink communication, and it does not take in consideration errors or the impact of the uplink bit rate. Finally, [PERSON] et al. present an analytical model for estimating the current consumption of a device, based on empirical data [15]. However, crucial information, including the device model, the frame payload, the uplink bit rate, the states in the model and their associated duration and current consumption values, is missing. In addition, the analytical model considers neither downlink communication nor the impact of frame losses. Based on our literature review, we conclude that our paper is the first one that provides a detailed and comprehensive analytical model of Sigfox device current consumption, device lifetime and energy cost of data delivery, considering real Sigfox device hardware behavior, the different communication settings and mechanisms (uplink/downlink communication, payload size and uplink bit rate), and the impact of frame losses. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Reference**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Device Name**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Current Consumption: Uplink (left) and Downlink (right)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Source of** \\ **Values** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{3-6}  & & & **State Name** & **Value (mA)** & & **State Name** & **Value (mA)** & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{[9]} & \multirow{2}{*}{Not specified} & Transmission & 49 & \multirow{2}{*}{Reception} & \multirow{2}{*}{13} & \multirow{2}{*}{Not specified} \\  & & Sleep & 1.44 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-3}\) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{[10]} & \multirow{2}{*}{ONSEMI AX-Sigfox} & Tx (0 dBm) & 19 & \multirow{2}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{Datasheet [16]} \\  & & Tx (14 dBm) & 49 & & & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{[10]} & \multirow{2}{*}{ONSEMI AX-Sigfox} & Standby & 0.5 & & & \\  & & Sleep & 1.3 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-3}\) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[11]} & \multirow{6}{*}{Telit LE51-868/DIP} & Cond & 8.4 & \multirow{2}{*}{Cmd} & \multirow{2}{*}{8.4} & \multirow{6}{*}{Empirical} \\  & & Tx & 54 & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & Delay Tx & 12 & Delay Tx & 12 & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & Standby & \textless{}0.1 (a) & Standby & \textless{}0.1 & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & & RAW & 34 & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & & Delay Rx & 8.4 & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & & Rx & 34 & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{[12]} & TD1207R/08R & Transmission & 50 & Reception & 13 & Datasheet [17] \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{[13]} & \multirow{2}{*}{ONSEMI AXSFEU} & Transmission & 49 & Reception & 10 & Datasheet [18] \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{[14]} & \multirow{2}{*}{FiPy} & Wake up 1 & 80 & \multirow{6}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{Empirical} \\  & & Wake up 2 & 160 & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & idle & 280 & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & Tx & 0.32/0.42 & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{4-5}  & & Deep sleep & 25 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-3}\) & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Current consumption of Sigfox devices considered in the literature. For each referenced paper, the device and the current consumption states (names and values) are shown, indicating their source. The work by [PERSON] et al. is not included because current consumption states are not identified and their related values are not provided in that work [15].