## 4 Experimental Results
### Performance Evaluation: Latency and Jitter for In-Vehicle Traffic  
This set of experiments evaluates the baseline scheduling algorithm's ability to achieve low-latency and low-jitter deterministic transmission for a realistic in-vehicle Time-Triggered (TT) traffic scenario. The TT stream data used in these simulations was based on specifications from an automotive manufacturer, representing typical critical data flows such as sensor readings and control commands. To simulate a more realistic mixed-criticality network environment, periodic best-effort (BE) background traffic with a low priority (PCP 0) was also transmitted concurrently with the TT streams. The specific characteristics and constraints of the TT streams are detailed in Table 3. The Gate Control Lists (GCLs) for this scenario were generated using our baseline scheduling algorithm (as described in Section 2.4) and subsequently deployed to the simulated TSN switches in OMNeT++. The deployment process involved setting the precise send offsets and time slice durations for each queue gate via the OMNeT++ configuration path: *switch.eth[*].macLayer.queue.transmissionGate[*]. To verify the correct execution of the generated GCL, Figure 4 presents a Gantt chart that overlays the planned schedule with the actual transmission events recorded during the simulation. The colored bars represent the \"Planned GCL Open-Gate Windows\", which are the time intervals during which the transmission gate for a specific priority queue is scheduled to be open. The black 'x' markers indicate the \"Actual Packet Transmission  
Figure 3: Network topology for the real-world TSN experiments. The diagram illustrates the interconnection of emulated CUC/CNC components, traffic senders, a central TSN switch, and a receiver node. Thick solid lines represent the primary control flow, while thin solid lines indicate the distribution of configuration data and the path of data plane traffic. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Data** & **Priority** & **Send** & **Cycle** & **Deadline** & **Inter-Cycle** & **E2E Latency** & **Jitter** \\
**Type** & **(PCP:0–7)** & **Delay (vs)** & **Period (vs)** & **(vs)** & **Send Offset (vs)** & **Target (vs)** & **Target (vs)** \\ \hline LeftFrontWheel & 6 & 10 & 500 & 11 & 0 & 11 & 0 \\ Lidar & 5 & 26 & 250 & 38 & 0 & 27 & 0 \\ FrontLeftCamera & 4 & 120 & 250 & 187 & 0 & 122 & 0 \\ OBU & 3 & 26 & 125 & 89 & 24 & 27 & 0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Time-triggered (TT) stream characteristics and constraints for the in-vehicle traffic scenario. Events\", showing the precise timestamps when packets were transmitted from the switch's egress port. As depicted in Figure 4, every actual packet transmission event falls perfectly within its corresponding planned open-gate window. This provides strong visual evidence that the GCL was correctly computed and deployed, and that the TSN switch adhered to the schedule with high fidelity, thus achieving deterministic transmission. The effect of this precise scheduling is further reflected in the switch's queue lengths, shown in Figure 5. The queue lengths for the TT streams remained minimal and exhibited stable, periodic behavior, confirming that queuing delay--the primary variable delay component in a switched network--was effectively eliminated by the pre-scheduled gate openings. Finally, the overall performance impact is quantified in Figure 6, which compares the total end-to-end latency of the TT streams when scheduled by our proposed algorithm versus a standard Strict Priority (SP) scheduling algorithm. With our algorithm, the portion  
Figure 4: Gantt chart illustrating the GCL schedule execution for the in-vehicle traffic scenario. The colored bars represent the planned open-gate windows for each priority queue, as computed by the scheduling algorithm. The black ‘x’ markers represent the actual packet transmission events recorded in the simulation, demonstrating perfect alignment between the schedule and its execution.