# Cooperative Admission Control with Network Coding in 5G Underlying D2D-Satellite Communication
## 4 Simulation Results
### Cooperative Admission Control with Network Coding (JAMANC)  
Now, the JAMANC algorithm's comparison is made with standalone techniques (ATSPSN/MANC) and standalone modes (cellular/D2D/satellite). MANC is an extended version of the NCMI (Network coding multiple interfaces) proposed in [5] with satellite included apart from D2D-cellular communication. The quantitative performance is compared with theoretical bounds derived during problem formulation section in terms of packet completion time. ATSPSN-NoNC is defined as the algorithm with joint admission control optimization, and without network coding, i.e., the missing packets send based on channel conditions on multiple interfaces. JAMANC defines algorithms with cooperative admission control with multiple interface network coding. MANC is defined as an algorithm that consists of multiple interface codes, but the selection of interfaces does not consider optimum admission control. Figure 8: Energy Efficiency. Figure 7: Capacity: Mode Analysis. First, we evaluate the strength of the network code by considering the lossless second stage. Figure 9 shows the results for the lossless second stage with requisite upper bounds. MANC batch has better performance as compared to MANC-instant. MANC batch transmits all the missing packets and the devices required to wait for all the combinations for decodability, leading to less packet completion time. On the other hand, the MANC instant transmits the data with the aim of instant decodability, so it requires more re-transmission. However, our proposed algorithm acquires the performance close to lower bounds and better as compared to NoNC. It is also to note that JAMANC has the same performance as MANC. So the joint optimization of admission control with network coding does not improve performance because all the channels are considered lossless, and using random channels for transmission does not affect the performance of the network. In terms of the number of devices Figure 10, initially, MANC-instant performance is better than NoNC, but after a specific number of active devices, the performance becomes the same. The reason is due to each packet lost at least by one device. MANC-batch has better performance as compared to NoNC/instant and independent on the increase in the number of devices. The network code designed for multiple interfaces lowers the packet completion time, especially at higher admitted users. It is concluded that our RLNC algorithms designed for multiple interfaces lower packet completion time regardless of the increase in packets or active devices. Figures 9 and 10 showed that the optimum NC with multiple interfaces designed based on RLNC increases the performance of the network. However, the second stage lossless, is not the realistic depiction of communication and represents the idealistic channel condition. Now moving towards the lossy second stage, the channel conditions also play a vital role. Figure 11 shows the comparison of packet completion time of different techniques and modes with the number of the packets in the second stage lossy network. JAMANC-batch, having cooperative admission with batch network coding, has better performance than JAMANC-stream and MANC standalone. It shows that if the right channel conditions send prioritized RLNC codes under optimized interfaces, it increases the network's performance in real-time. The subfigures show that the JAMANC batch and stream have lesser packet completion time than upper bounds. JAMANC batch packet completion time is closer to lower bounds despite adverse channel conditions in second stage, which indicates that joint optimized admission control under cooperative network coding with multiple interfaces improves performance, which is the strength of this article. Figure 11: _Cont._  
Figure 10: No. of devices vs. completion time (lossless second stage). Figure 12 shows a comparison of the JAMANC algorithm with other techniques and modes with the number of devices in the network.