# New Detection Paradigms to Improve Wireless Sensor Network Performance under Jamming Attacks
## 4 Analysis of Results
### Comparison among AODV, DSR, and MPH Routing Protocols
Regarding end-to-end delay, packets under the MPH protocol arrive at the coordinator node 0.51 s faster than packets in AODV and DSR. These three metrics indicate that the MPH protocol has better reactivity to isolate the attack of a jammer node against AODV and DSR. Valid routes of MPH are faster than those of AODV and DSR. However, AODV is still that presents the metrics with the lowest performance. The resilience is the ability of the network to recover from an abnormal state, in this case we run the simulation for the same 100 s and the jammer node is activated in second 30, for 10 more seconds, and then disappears. We want to observe how the network is recovered under each of the protocols and we note that MPH has better resilience in 18% with respect to AODV and DSR. The metric of affected nodes is measured in nodes that change their values of metrics: energy, retransmissions, and CSMA retries, in an anomalous way. This metric is closely related to false positives, because they are collateral effects that are generated according to each protocol under jamming. Finally, the MPH protocol has a lower energy consumption of 58% with respect to AODV and DSR. This represents that MPH has a very good recovery reactivity when the network is under attack, specifically, an attack in a focused area at almost the same distance from all nodes in the network (including the coordinator node). In other words, because of the hierarchical and proactive nature of MPH protocol, it presents a rapid recovery from a reconfiguration of the topology, the lost packets are less, and the delay is smaller compared with AODV and DSR protocols. Moreover, the delimitation of the affected area presents fewer nodes, i.e., it is more accurate for finding the jammer node in it. Figure 7: Comparison of energy per node under stable and attacked conditions. The advantage that Scenario 3 presents, which is the best scenario chosen and tested in most simulations, is that routes of possibly affected nodes are not eliminated immediately, but that the nodes present a smooth exit from the routing tables of other nodes. These consequences of route isolation are analyzed when we study the resilience in each of the protocols. The recovery capacity of the network shows how you can get to re-establish routes that had been isolated and how it impacts the fact of isolating them in the performance of the network. Then, the proposed detection mechanisms (Connected and Extended) do not completely eliminate the affected nodes (or what is the same, the affected routes), but it locates these routes as less secure. The above is clearly observed in that none of the protocols completely loses their route redundancy (for example, we have a small network of 49 nodes) and the network resilience capacity in none of the protocols decreases by 75%. Figure 9 shows a direct comparison between the three protocols under the two proposed jamming techniques, based on the total energy for each of the three protocols. This Figure is very interesting because it shows the energy performance of each node in each of the three protocols studied. The simulation was made for 100 s, under Scenario 3 and the jammer node is in the middle of the topology emitting a reactive jamming. Again, we note that nodes 1, 7 and 8 are the nodes that forward all network traffic to the coordinator node, and because of the topology, these nodes have a high traffic load and their performance metric values increase more than in the other nodes in the network. Nodes 16, 17, 18, 23, 25, 30, 31, and 32 are those that directly limit the jammer node. These nodes present different behavior than the rest of the nodes of the network and, therefore, their energy increases in a noticeable way. First of all, it is easy to note how MPH has a better performance than DSR and AODV with a value of 0.0390 on the Extended Mechanism and 0.0306 on the Connected Mechanism since DSR has a value of 0.0758 and 0.1062 and AODV has a value of 0.0984 and 0.1147 on the Extended and Connected mechanisms respectively.