Efficient traffic control and lifetime maximization in mobile ad hoc network by using PSO–BAT optimization

  • N. SrideviEmail author
  • V. Nagarajan
  • K. Sakthidasan @ Sankaran


Recent developments in dynamic mobile ad-hoc network enhance the network speed and reliability. The nodes in the dynamic ad-hoc network are moving in nature. Due to the increased subscribers in this network, the network traffic has increased to manifold which in turn creating the challenge of maintaining the energy level. In path optimization process in mobile ad-hoc network consumes more energy and the draining of the energy is dependent on network reliability and connectivity. Further, the network also suffers by harmful attacks such as denial of service attack, black hole attack and warm hole attack. The primary focus of this paper is to prevent these attacks with the help of dynamic mobile ad-hoc network on demand protocol and hybrid meta-heuristics methodologies, and also to reduce the energy drain rate. This is achieved by estimating the velocity and fitness value of the nodes. Finally, the empirical simulation results of hybrid particle swarm optimization with bat algorithm (PSO–BAT) shows that the energy drain rate level is reduced 90% as 1 mJ/s than ad-hoc on demand vector. The end-to-end delay minimized to 50% than existing Ad hoc on-demand distance vector routing. The performance metrics routing overhead and execution time has been reduced and throughput is gradually increased in PSO–BAT optimization in dynamic mobile ad hoc network scenario.


Ad hoc on-demand distance vector Dynamic MANET on demand Mobile ad hoc network Particle swarm optimization 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    Femila, B. (2019). Optimizing transmission power and energy efficient routing protocol in MANETs. Wireless Personal Communications, 5(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Majd, N. (2019). Evaluation of parameters affecting the performance of routing protocols in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) with a focus on energy efficiency. In Future of information and communication conference (pp. 1210–1219). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Malhotra, T. (2019). Authentication, KDC, and key pre-distribution techniques-based model for securing AODV routing protocol in MANET. In Smart innovations in communication and computational sciences (pp. 175–186). Singapore.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xu, L., & Huang, T. (2019). An energy-aware computation offloading method for smart edge computing in wireless metropolitan area networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 9(2), 31–41.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wali, U. (2019). A comprehensive study on reactive and proactive routing protocols under different performance metric. Journal of Emerging Technologies, 1(2), 39–51.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harrag, R. (2019). PSO-IZRP: New enhanced zone routing protocol based on PSO independent zone radius estimation. International Journal of Numerical Modelling: Electronic Networks, Devices and Fields, 32(1), 24–61.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang, C. (2019). Mobility modelling and data-driven closed-loop prediction in bike-sharing systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 21(1), 45–55.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Papathanasopoulou, A. (2019). Data-driven traffic simulation models: Mobility patterns using machine learning techniques. Mobility Patterns, Big Data and Transport Analytics, 12(5), 263–295.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, Z. (2019). A realistic mobility model with irregular obstacle constraints for mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Networks, 25(2), 487–506.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anandakumar, H., & Umamaheswari, K. (2017). Supervised machine learning techniques in cognitive radio networks during cooperative spectrum handovers. Cluster Computing, 20(2), 1505–1515.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shah, J. L. (2019). Secure neighbor discovery protocol: Review and recommendations. International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking (IJBDCN), 15(1), 71–87.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, S. (2019). IoT-NUMS: Evaluating NUMS elliptic curve cryptography for IoT platforms. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 14(3), 720–729.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, Z. (2019). Digital twin-based process reuse and evaluation approach for smart process planning. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 100(8), 1619–1634.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guleria, V. (2019). Meta-heuristic ant colony optimization based unequal clustering for wireless sensor network. Wireless Personal Communications, 12(3), 1–21.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Femila, B. (2019). Optimizing transmission power and energy efficient routing protocol in MANETs. Wireless Personal Communications, 10(5), 1–16.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anandakumar, H., & Umamaheswari, K. (2018). A bio-inspired swarm intelligence technique for social aware cognitive radio handovers. Computers and Electrical Engineering, 71, 925–937. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gandotra, J. (2016). Device-to-device communication in cellular networks: A survey. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 7(1), 99–117.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kyriazis, G., & Rouskas, A. (2017). Joint access and backhaul power consumption optimization in heterogeneous mobile broadband networks. Journal of Green Engineering, 6(4), 337–368.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Sridevi
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • V. Nagarajan
    • 1
    • 2
  • K. Sakthidasan @ Sankaran
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringMelmaruvathurIndia
  2. 2.Adhiparasakthi College of EngineeringMelmaruvathurIndia
  3. 3.Hindustan Institute of Technology and ScienceChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations