# Highly Reliable Fuzzy-Logic-Assisted AODV Routing Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
## 4 Simulation and Results  
In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed FL-AODV algorithm, we compare the FL-AODV algorithm with the traditional AODV and fuzzy logic routing algorithm (FLRA). As an algorithm with common feature of fuzzy-logic-based routing algorithm in exiting work, FLRA algorithm, only uses fuzzy logic to find the route and select the neighbor node with the highest reliability value of fuzzy logic output as the relay node. Until the destination node is located in the neighbor node, the destination node with higher priority is selected to construct the optimal route, as shown by green path in Figure 1. Different from the traditional AODV algorithm which takes the path to the destination node first as the routing rule, i.e., the shortest path criterion and the FLRA algorithm that only relies on reliability to select the route, the FL-AODV algorithm selects the path with lower delay, higher stability, and more residual energy as the optimal path on the basis of AODV and fuzzy logic. The simulation environment parameters are set to a square area of 1000 m \(\times\) 1000 m, in which nodes are randomly distributed. The remaining energy of the nodes varies with time and energy consumption rate gradually decrease and the energy consumption rate of each node is evenly distributed. In this paper, we analyze and compare the performance of the appropriate path selected by the three algorithms in exactly the same scene. The performance indicators choose the average path reliability, end-to-end delay, hop count, link connectivity, and route life as the analysis objects. Detailed simulation parameter settings are given in Table 2.  
In Figure 9, the average reliability calculated mainly by stability and residual energy of the three algorithms are compared. It can be seen that, when the number of nodes is less than 30, the average reliability of the three algorithms is too low owing to the high probability of link interruption, and increases slowly when the number of nodes is greater than 80, because the reliability is less affected by the link interruption in dense networks. As \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Parameters** & **Value** \\ \hline Simulator & MATLAB \\ Number of nodes & 10–150 \\ Scope of broadcasting & 200 m \\ Simulation Area & 1000 m \(\times\) 1000 m \\ Speed of nodes & 0–10 m/s \\ Routing algorithm & FL-AODV, AODV, FLRA \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Parameter setup. the number of nodes increases, due to the relay node selection of the highest reliability, the average routing reliability of the FLRA algorithm is better than the other two algorithms, while AODV algorithm performs worse without considering the reliability. Compared with the traditional AODV routing algorithm, the proposed FL-AODV algorithm, which considers both routing reliability and the shortest path concurrently, is improved by about 18% when the number of nodes is greater than 70 in terms of average path reliability. In Figures 10 and 11, we compare the average end-to-end latency and path hops of the three algorithms. It can be seen that, with increases in node number, the average end-to-end latency and path hops of the FL-AODV and AODV gradually increase and approach a stable value when the number of nodes is more than 90, while the FLRA increases rapidly. This phenomenon occurs due to more relay nodes are selected in the path discovery process of the FLRA algorithm as the number of nodes gradually increases, the average number of hops increases sharply, resulting in a rapid increase in average end-to-end delay. However, since the shortest path characteristics of AODV, the FL-AODV algorithm similar to the AODV algorithm maintains lower latency and hops. Figure 10: Comparison of average end-to-end latency. Figure 9: Comparison of average reliability of paths.