## 1 Introduction  
Mobile devices have acquired greater capacity for computing, storage, and connectivity to heterogeneous networks. Nevertheless, a critical point of mobility is the network physical change, and the problems inherent to the loss of continuity of services, as well as the decision to change, that is, select the future network to be connected [1]. The handover or handoff in IP networks is the physical transition from one network to another. The handover is typified by two types of transition: (A) horizontal handover and (B) vertical handover [2]. When a mobile node (MN) changes network in the same technology, it performs a horizontal handoff. However, if the change of network is to a different kind of technology, then it is called a vertical handoff. The general procedure of change is classified into three stages according to [3; 4]:  
1. Measurement of handover and initialization. 2. Decision of handover. 3. Execution of handover. In the first stage, the mobile node (MN) takes measurements of the metrics of the nearby networks. In the second stage, algorithms decide when and which networks to change. Finally, in the third stage, the necessary procedures are made to connect to the new network and reestablish services. Regarding problems related to the execution of the handover, IP establishes that for all equipment that operates within a network, its address must be derived from this network. Under this scheme, if a computer moves from its original network to a new network, then it will experience the following problems:  
1. All communication becomes impossible because its IP address is not valid in the new network. 2. Communications in progress are lost. 3. Mobile nodes disappear from the global network. The problems related to the handover decision arise in the design of an algorithm that determines the right moment to change networks, because it is possible that the decision-making algorithm is forced by the MN to switch successively between adjacent networks. Although the MN is not in movement, this is because the change of network algorithm is based on a measurement of the received signal strength (RSS) and the MN has a very similar received signal strength indicator (RSSI) between both adjacent networks. This is known as the ping-pong effect [5]. This is mainly generated when the decision-making algorithm is based on selecting the network with the highest received signal strength (RSSI). Thus, there are two networks that have a similar power, and the algorithm makes the change to the strongest signal recurrently. This ping-pong effect is a very common phenomenon that causes degradation in the quality of services. Besides, the ping-pong effect is very common not only in network exchange, but it occurs in various areas, and a very common strategy to combat it is to establish limits by ranges. For example, if the frontier is 6, it does not go to the next level until it has a power of 6.5 or higher, and it does not return to the lower level until it is 5.5 or lower. In this way, this border around 6 is blurred, and it reduces that ping pong effect. Another wall is through algorithms such as fuzzy logic [6; 7; 8; 9], where the idea is very similar. In other words, they use these policies to make change decisions and at the same time try to balance the load of the networks efficiently, using input parameters such as RSSI, latency, and data rate. Generally speaking, the decision-making algorithm is maintained with the data provided by the network and after processing the data, and it decides which network to switch to. They are usually changing between the wireless local area network (WLAN), universal mobile telecommunications system (UMTS), long term evolution (LTE), among others. Multiple proposals use artificial intelligence techniques, such as artificial neural networks (ANN), fuzzy logic (FL), genetic algorithms (GA), decision trees (DT), among others [10; 11; 12; 13].