# A Comprehensive Evaluation Algorithm of Multi-Point Relay Based on Link-State Awareness for UANETs
## 4 Simulation and Results
### Analysis of Results

Table 2: Results of packet delivery rate (PDR) for comparison protocols at different speed stages. Figure 8: The comparison of average end-to-end delay. (**a**) Trends in average end-to-end delay for various protocols with changing speeds; (**b**) decrease amount of average end-to-end delay for various protocol compared to OLSR at different speeds. Figure 8 illustrates the reduction in average end-to-end delay achieved by CEL-OLSR, PM-OLSR, ML-OLSR, and LD-OLSR in comparison to OLSR. As shown in Table 3, detailed results of end-to-end average delay for each protocol at different speed stages are presented. It is evident that transmission delay increases with rising speed, and CEL-OLSR exhibits a relatively gradual trend of delay variation. When the node's mobility rate increases, the network's topology undergoes more frequent changes, leading to the breakage of established routing paths. This situation forces routing protocols to initiate a new round of route discovery processes, introducing additional time delays and thus prolonging the overall packet transmission time. In this dynamically changing network environment, data packets being transmitted may need to queue in relay nodes' buffers to await updated routing information, which also contributes to increased delays. Furthermore, due to link instability, packet loss and subsequent necessary retransmissions further contribute to delays. In summary, the increase in node speed results in more frequent changes to the network topology, not only increasing the time required for route discovery and maintenance but also leading to delays from factors such as link rebuilding, buffer queuing, and packet retransmission, collectively raising the overall transmission latency of the network. 3. Throughput  
As the node speed increases, the probability of link breakage and packet loss also both are increased, resulting in a significant decrease in throughput. As shown in Figure 9, compared with PM-OLSR, ML-OLSR, LD-OLSR, and the standard OLSR, the throughput of the CEL-OLSR protocol has increased by an average of 8.04%, 22.71%, 45.55%, and 93.19%, respectively. The results of throughput for comparison protocols at different speed stages are shown in Table 4.  
The rapid movement of nodes contributes to heightened instability in network links, resulting in frequent disconnections and complicating sustained communication. Such dynamic motion exacerbates link disruptions, posing challenges to stable communication, and diminishing the efficiency of data transmission. Furthermore, the frequent link changes lead to packet loss, necessitating repeated retransmissions. This not only consumes bandwidth that could be allocated to new data packets but also increases time overhead. Within this dynamically evolving network environment, competition for wireless channels may intensify, elevating the likelihood of MAC layer collisions and further diminishing data transmission speeds, thereby reducing overall network throughput. In summary, heightened node mobility gives rise to a range of issues including link instability, frequent routing modifications, packet retransmissions, channel contention, congestion, and buffering delays, all of which significantly diminish network throughput.