## 5 Simulations
### Analysis of the Experimental Result  
This section mainly performs a comparison and analysis between the five different algorithms. People's demand for data forwarding is increasing under the environment of big data and 5G. It is crucial to improve the delivery ratio to choose the appropriate relay node in opportunistic social networks. However, in process with a large amount of data forwarding, the node's cache space will also affect the node's delivery ratio. Consequently, in this experiment, we rationally set the cache space as a variable to study the forwarding performance of each algorithm. All in all, the nodes had a larger cache space, and all algorithms had a higher delivery ratio. This was because nodes could handle more complex computing tasks and stored more information in opportunistic social networks. Firstly, as Figure 9 shows, the delivery ratio of the EIMST algorithm was always lower than the ICMT and FCNS algorithms. This was because the EIMST algorithm did not establish a good cache management strategy and only considered the cooperation of nodes in the process of message forwarding. Consequently, no matter how the node's cache space changed, the average delivery ratio of EIMST was maintained at about 0.8. The delivery ratio of the traditional routing algorithm epidemic was generally lower than several other algorithms. This was because the epidemic routing algorithm did not select the appropriate next hop node. It sent the message of the source node to all nodes that had met the node like spreading a virus. Therefore, a large number of message copies were stored in the node, occupying the node's limited cache space and consuming a large amount of node resources. The ICMT and FCNS algorithms used data management and fuzzy control theory to make more accurate judgments during data forwarding. However, these algorithms still forwarded information to some unrelated nodes, occupying network resources and bandwidth. Compared with the other four algorithms, the MSFC algorithm had a transfer efficiency of 0.95 when the cache was 40 M. The main reason was that the MSFC algorithm comprehensively analyzed and divided the real human social scene into working hours and non-working hours. Additionally, the two scenarios had their own metrics. In the process of data packet forwarding, first select the one that is in the same state as the others. The nodes were then selected from the candidate node set as a node with a high state, making the selected node greatly suitable as the next hop node. Figure 9: Delivery ratio with various cache spaces. Secondly, the next figure exhibits the comparison results between the five different algorithms in terms of average end-to-end delay. As shown in Figure 10, the average end-to-end delay of every algorithm increased as the nodes' cache increased. To be specific, epidemic's maximum delay could reach 530 because the algorithm generated a large number of message copies in opportunistic social networks, and this method dramatically increased routing and message forwarding delays. The EMIST algorithm and the ICMT algorithm had lower delays than the epidemic algorithm, because both algorithms effectively controlled the number of message copies. In addition, the EIMST algorithm implemented community division and information management, while the ICMT algorithm effectively utilized the cooperation mechanism between nodes to utilize the cache space of the nodes reasonably in order to reduce the delay in the message forwarding process. The average end-to-end delay of the FCNS algorithm was also significantly lower than the traditional algorithm, because the algorithm took advantage of the similarity of nodes to make message forwarding decisions, and the forwarding preference played a crucial role in the message forwarding process. The average end-to-end delay of the MSFC algorithm was the lowest among different node caches compared to several other algorithms, which further showed that the fuzzy control theory of the MSFC algorithm was better than the FCNS algorithm.