Table 5.
Comparison of the results of each algorithm in the two scenarios when traffic is large 1.
| Beam Hopping Scheme | Traffic Distribution |
Throughput (Gbps) |
Access Success Rate |
Average Delay (ms) |
Delay Variance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polling-BH | even | 2.789 | 87.6% | 132.96 | 9543 |
| uneven | 1.739 | 54.5% | 157.10 | 15,643 | |
| Random-BH | even | 1.407 | 44.22% | 341.91 | 2930 |
| uneven | 1.185 | 37.1% | 259.35 | 6815 | |
| GAWIC-BH | even | 2.851 | 89.6% | 167.20 | 324 |
| uneven | 2.738 | 85.7% | 219.82 | 1527 | |
| Our Algorithm | even | 3.039 | 95.5% | 99.03 | 145 |
| uneven | 2.962 | 92.7% | 131.96 | 4326 |
1 Large traffic demand is defined as: Poisson arrival intensity is 700 packages under even distribution, 3100 in hotspots and 310 in non-hotspots under uneven distribution.