# New Detection Paradigms to Improve Wireless Sensor Network Performance under Jamming Attacks
## 4 Analysis of Results
### Comparison among AODV, DSR, and MPH Routing Protocols  
As discussed above, energy is an important metric for studying the distribution of resources at network nodes. Figure 7 shows the energy per node when the network is under normal conditions and when the network is under attack and the attacking node is in the middle of the topology (Position 24 in Figure 1). Remember that we have 49 nodes in a square topology, and we want to know the total energy (in Joules) per node. When the network is under normal (stable) conditions, nodes 1, 7 and 8 present a normal increase in energy consumption because they are the closest nodes to the coordinator node and, because of the traffic distribution packets of the rest of the nodes in the network. Now, when the network is under jamming, the nodes that have the greatest impact on energy consumption should be 16, 17, 18, 23, 25, 30, 31, and 32, because it is the area of those directly connected with the jammer node. Indeed, this happens for the three studied protocols and the peaks that are observed in the graph just the levels corresponding to these mentioned nodes, including the jammer node, because this node is running under a reactive jamming where the energy consumption is higher. As shown, the total average energy for AODV is 0.1209, for DSR is 0.1105 and for MPH is 0.0397. Therefore, the MPH protocol is more energy efficient by 74% than AODV, and 69% than DSR considering the average energy of the nodes. In Figure 8, we compare the performance in terms of the persistence parameter of MPH and two others widely known protocols, AODV and DSR. Remember that the persistence parameter, \(p\), indicates the soft exit of the nodes from the neighbor tables of the other nodes, depending on the scenario (previously we mentioned Scenario1, 2, and 3). This exit of nodes from the tables is due to the distrust that this node has because its performance metrics have anomalous values. Another point worth noting is that the Figure 8 describes the location of the jammer node for three different positions (near, middle, and far from the collector node). Simulations were performed considering Scenario 3 and modifying AODV and DSR protocols by including the transmission of a control packet. This control packet is sent in Scenario 3 to inform a node that it must remove another from its neighbor table, to no longer have that route as a path in the network. The nodes deleted through this control packet seek to isolate the possible jammer node without it notices and, for this reason, will continue to carry out its attack. The disadvantage that could arise in this scheme is some network routes are lost, because we disconnect some nodes (the nodes directly connected to the possible jammer node);  
Figure 6: Network links with irregular traffic. however, the mitigation of the attack will not impact on the other nodes and the energy of the jammer node can be consumed more quickly. The results show that AODV and DSR can reduce the area of the location of the jammer node to approximately 15% of all the network while MPH can further reduce the area to 4%. This ensures that the attacker node may be better located under a possible jamming with a reduced zone. The smaller the area, the more precise the location of the jammer node and the fewer nodes in the network will be disconnected. Table 5 complements the analysis of Figure 8 under the Scenario 3. These performance metrics are well known in the WSN. This Table has a simulation time of 100 s and analyzes the reactive jamming of a jammer node located in the middle of the topology. The Table analyzes different performance metrics such as: retransmissions, CSMA retries, end-to-end delay, resilience, affected nodes, and energy. Retransmissions are the times that packets that are not received, and they are sent again. We observe that the MPH protocol has a 28% lower retransmissions with respect to AODV and DSR. For CSMA retries, MPH has 18% fewer attempts to listen to the channel than AODV and DSR, under a state of a jamming reactive.