Studying the effect of human mobility on

MANET topology and routing: friend or foe?

Authors:
Ad
an G. Medrano-Ch
avez
Elizabeth P
erez-Cort
es
Miguel Lopez-Guerrero
Department of Electrical Engineering
Graduate school of Science and Information Technologies

MOBIWac 2015 Cancun - Mexico, Nov 26

MANET context

Research question

Presentation outline

1 MANET context
2 Research question
3 Experimental methodology
4 Results
5 Conclusion

2/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

MANET paradigm

3/25

Collection of mobile terminals that establish a network

infrastructure on-demand and in a self-organized manner
MANET features
Theres no fixed
communication
infrastructure
Theres no centralized
management
Terminals act as hosts and
routers
Support for distributed
applications

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

MANET paradigm

3/25

Collection of mobile terminals that establish a network

infrastructure on-demand and in a self-organized manner
MANET features
Theres no fixed
communication
infrastructure
Theres no centralized
management
Terminals act as hosts and
routers
Support for distributed
applications

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

MANET paradigm

3/25

Collection of mobile terminals that establish a network

infrastructure on-demand and in a self-organized manner
MANET features
Theres no fixed
communication
infrastructure
Theres no centralized
management
Terminals act as hosts and
routers
Support for distributed
applications

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

MANET paradigm

3/25

Collection of mobile terminals that establish a network

infrastructure on-demand and in a self-organized manner
MANET features
Theres no fixed
communication
infrastructure
Theres no centralized
management
Terminals act as hosts and
routers
Support for distributed
applications

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

MANET paradigm

3/25

Collection of mobile terminals that establish a network

infrastructure on-demand and in a self-organized manner
MANET features
Theres no fixed
communication
infrastructure
Theres no centralized
management
Terminals act as hosts and
routers
Support for distributed
applications

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Why is the design of MANET protocols hard?

4/25

MANET challenges
Low per-node capacity
Dynamical topology

Per-node capacity

(1/sqrt(n*log(n)))

Network size

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Why is the design of MANET protocols hard?

4/25

MANET challenges
Low per-node capacity
Dynamical topology

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Why is the design of MANET protocols hard?

4/25

MANET challenges
Low per-node capacity
Dynamical topology

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Whats the problem with node motion?

5/25

It invalidates routes established by routing protocols

MANET context

Research question

How is node motion?

6/25

We know . . .
MANETs are integrated by
portable devices
Humans carry such devices

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

How is node motion?

We know . . .
MANETs are integrated by
portable devices
Humans carry such devices

6/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

How is human motion?

Features
1 Humans mainly move within
confined areas1
2 Humans are attracted to popular
areas2
3 Pause time is well-modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions3
4 Flight lengths are also modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions4
5 Speed is normally distributed5

7/25

Gonzalez, et al. Understanding individual human mobility patterns, Nature, 2008

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Chandra, et al. Speed Distribution Curves for Pedestrians During Walking and Crossing, Procedia, 2013

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

How is human motion?

Features
1 Humans mainly move within
confined areas1
2 Humans are attracted to popular
areas2
3 Pause time is well-modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions3
4 Flight lengths are also modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions4
5 Speed is normally distributed5

7/25

Gonzalez, et al. Understanding individual human mobility patterns, Nature, 2008

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Chandra, et al. Speed Distribution Curves for Pedestrians During Walking and Crossing, Procedia, 2013

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

How is human motion?

Features
1 Humans mainly move within
confined areas1
2 Humans are attracted to popular
areas2
3 Pause time is well-modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions3
4 Flight lengths are also modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions4
5 Speed is normally distributed5

7/25

Gonzalez, et al. Understanding individual human mobility patterns, Nature, 2008

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Chandra, et al. Speed Distribution Curves for Pedestrians During Walking and Crossing, Procedia, 2013

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

How is human motion?

Features
1 Humans mainly move within
confined areas1
2 Humans are attracted to popular
areas2
3 Pause time is well-modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions3
4 Flight lengths are also modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions4
5 Speed is normally distributed5

7/25

Gonzalez, et al. Understanding individual human mobility patterns, Nature, 2008

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Chandra, et al. Speed Distribution Curves for Pedestrians During Walking and Crossing, Procedia, 2013

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

How is human motion?

Features
1 Humans mainly move within
confined areas1
2 Humans are attracted to popular
areas2
3 Pause time is well-modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions3
4 Flight lengths are also modeled by
heavy-tailed distributions4
5 Speed is normally distributed5

7/25

Gonzalez, et al. Understanding individual human mobility patterns, Nature, 2008

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Rhee, et al. On the Levy-Walk Nature of Human Mobility, TON, 2011

Chandra, et al. Speed Distribution Curves for Pedestrians During Walking and Crossing, Procedia, 2013

MANET context

Research question

Presentation outline

1 MANET context
2 Research question
3 Experimental methodology
4 Results
5 Conclusion

8/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Research question
How does human motion affect the performance of MANET
protocols?

9/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Presentation outline

1 MANET context
2 Research question
3 Experimental methodology
4 Results
5 Conclusion

10/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Scenario of study
A MANET where nodes roam according to . . .
X [m]
0

200

400

600

800

Mobility models

11/25

Self-similar least-action
walk7

400

Y [m]

Random Waypoint6

200

600

800

1000

6
Broch, et al. A Performance Comparison of Multi-hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols,
Mobicom 98, 1998
7

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Scenario of study
A MANET where nodes roam according to . . .
X [m]
0

200

400

600

800

Mobility models

11/25

Self-similar least-action
walk7

400

Y [m]

Random Waypoint6

200

600

800

1000

6
Broch, et al. A Performance Comparison of Multi-hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols,
Mobicom 98, 1998
7

Lee, et al. SLAW: Self-similar least-action human walk, TON, 2012

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E1: Analysis of MANET topology
Purpose: To investigate the connectivity features of the d-hop
neighborhood of every node

Procedure
1 Compute the d-hop neighborhood
of a node
2 Count the size of the d-hop
neighborhood

12/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E1: Analysis of MANET topology
Purpose: To investigate the connectivity features of the d-hop
neighborhood of every node

Procedure
1 Compute the d-hop neighborhood
of a node
2 Count the size of the d-hop
neighborhood

blue nodes 2-hop neighborhood

12/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Experiments
E1: Analysis of MANET topology
Purpose: To investigate the connectivity features of the d-hop
neighborhood of every node

Procedure
1 Compute the d-hop neighborhood
of a node

2
7

2 Count the size of the d-hop

neighborhood

3
6

2-hop neighborhood size equals 8 nodes

12/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Sources procedure
1 Select a reachable destination at d
hops away randomly
2 Send a query to the destination
3 If a reply is received, send a query
to the destination again after t s
4 Else, select a new reachable
destination at random

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Sources procedure
1 Select a reachable destination at d
hops away randomly
2 Send a query to the destination
3 If a reply is received, send a query
to the destination again after t s
4 Else, select a new reachable
destination at random

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Sources procedure
1 Select a reachable destination at d
hops away randomly
2 Send a query to the destination
3 If a reply is received, send a query
to the destination again after t s
4 Else, select a new reachable
destination at random

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Destinations procedure
If a query is received, send a reply to the
sender

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Sources procedure
1 Select a reachable destination at d
hops away randomly
2 Send a query to the destination
3 If a reply is received, send a query
to the destination again after t s
4 Else, select a new reachable
destination at random

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Experiments
E2: Routing performance evaluation
Purpose: To analyze the performance of the routing protocol
AODV

Sources procedure
1 Select a reachable destination at d
hops away randomly
2 Send a query to the destination
3 If a reply is received, send a query
to the destination again after t s
4 Else, select a new reachable
destination at random

13/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Simulation settings

Components

14/25

Simulation area
Mobile terminals
Reachability application
Lookup application

University campus 1000 1000 m2

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Simulation settings

Components

14/25

Simulation area
Mobile terminals
Reachability application
Lookup application

Radius = 50 m

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Simulation settings

Components

14/25

Simulation area
Mobile terminals
Reachability application
Lookup application

Routing protocol AODV

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Simulation settings

Components

14/25

Mobile terminals

Simulation area

2
7
3

Reachability application
Lookup application

Time between observations t = 60 s

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

Simulation settings

Components
Simulation area
Mobile terminals
Reachability application
Lookup application

Time between queries t = N (60, 36)

14/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings
X [m]
0

Parameters

15/25

200

400

600

Number of waypoints

200

Hurst parameter
Areas per walker
Planning degree

400

Y [m]

Confined area radius

600

800

Node speed
Pause time

1000

2000 waypoints

800

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings
X [m]
0

Parameters

15/25

200

400

Number of waypoints

200

Hurst parameter
Areas per walker

400

Y [m]

Confined area radius

600

Planning degree
Node speed
Pause time

800

1000

H = 0.75

600

800

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings
X [m]
0

Parameters

15/25

200

400

600

Number of waypoints

200

Hurst parameter
Areas per walker
Planning degree

400

Y [m]

Confined area radius

600

800

Node speed
Pause time

1000

area 1

radius equals 40 m

800

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings
X [m]
0

Parameters

15/25

200

400

600

800

Number of waypoints

200

Hurst parameter
Areas per walker
Planning degree

400

Y [m]

Confined area radius

600

800

Node speed
Pause time

1000

area 1
area 5
area 7

U(3, 5) areas per walker

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings
X [m]
500
100

Parameters

15/25

Number of waypoints

520

540

560

580
trip

120

Hurst parameter
Areas per walker
Planning degree

140

Y [m]

Confined area radius

160

180

Node speed
Pause time

200

planning degree equals 3

600

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings

Parameters

15/25

0.8

Hurst parameter
Confined area radius

P(S s)

Number of waypoints

0.6

0.4

Areas per walker

Planning degree
Node speed
Pause time

0.2
N(1.36,0.0361)

0
0

0.5

1.5

Speed (s) [m/s]

2.5

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

SLAW settings

Parameters

15/25

0.8

Confined area radius

P(T > t)

Number of waypoints
Hurst parameter

Paretob(1.36;30,9504)

0.6

0.4

Areas per walker

Planning degree
Node speed
Pause time

0.2

0
100

Time (t) [s]

1000

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

RWP settings

Configurations

16/25

Pure random
speed
pause time

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Human RWP
speed
pause time

U(0.1,20)
0
2

8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Speed (s) [m/s]

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

RWP settings

Configurations

16/25

Pure random
speed
pause time

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Human RWP
speed
pause time

U(0,20)
0
0

10

15

Pausetime () [s]

20

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

RWP settings

Configurations

16/25

speed
pause time

Human RWP
speed
pause time

P(S s)

Pure random

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
N(1.36,0.0361)

0
0

0.5

1.5

Speed (s) [m/s]

2.5

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

RWP settings

Configurations

16/25

speed
pause time

Human RWP
speed
pause time

0.8

P(T > t)

Pure random

Paretob(1.36;30,9504)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
100

Time (t) [s]

1000

MANET context

Research question

Presentation outline

1 MANET context
2 Research question
3 Experimental methodology
4 Results
5 Conclusion

17/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Connectivity ratio
]times a node has neighbors
]observations

18/25

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
The network shows a similar
performance w/RWP
configurations
One-hop connectivity of RWP is
similar to the two-hop connectivity
of SLAW
RWP connectivity ratio is higher
than SLAWs when routes are
larger than five hops

Connectivity ratio

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

0
0

Route lenght [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

18/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
The network shows a similar
performance w/RWP
configurations
One-hop connectivity of RWP is
similar to the two-hop connectivity
of SLAW
RWP connectivity ratio is higher
than SLAWs when routes are
larger than five hops

Connectivity ratio

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

0
0

Route lenght [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

18/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
The network shows a similar
performance w/RWP
configurations
One-hop connectivity of RWP is
similar to the two-hop connectivity
of SLAW
RWP connectivity ratio is higher
than SLAWs when routes are
larger than five hops

Connectivity ratio

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

0
0

Route lenght [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

18/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Isolation ratio
]times a node is isolated
]observations

19/25

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

1
RWP
HRWP
SLAW

Results
With SLAW, the network exhibits
the lowest isolation ratio
When using a RWP configuration,
the network needs 150 nodes to
reach the isolation ratio that is
exhibited by SLAW with only 25
nodes

Isolation ratio

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350

Network size

19/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

1
RWP
HRWP
SLAW

Results
With SLAW, the network exhibits
the lowest isolation ratio
When using a RWP configuration,
the network needs 150 nodes to
reach the isolation ratio that is
exhibited by SLAW with only 25
nodes

Isolation ratio

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350

Network size

19/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Number of neighbors
The number of neighbors a node has at d-hops away

20/25

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
Nodes have the largest number of
neighbors w/SLAW
The number of neighbors is almost
constant w/RWP
The number of neighbors increases
when distance increases for the
RWP configurations

Mean number of neighbors

2.5

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1.5

0.5

0
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 25 nodes

20/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
Nodes have the largest number of
neighbors w/SLAW
The number of neighbors is almost
constant w/RWP
The number of neighbors increases
when distance increases for the
RWP configurations

Mean number of neighbors

2.5

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1.5

0.5

0
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 25 nodes

20/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
Nodes have the largest number of
neighbors w/SLAW
The number of neighbors is almost
constant w/RWP
The number of neighbors increases
when distance increases for the
RWP configurations

Mean number of neighbors

18

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

20/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E1: Analysis of MANET topology

Results
Nodes have the largest number of
neighbors w/SLAW
The number of neighbors is almost
constant w/RWP
The number of neighbors increases
when distance increases for the
RWP configurations

6-hop neighborhood of node 299

20/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

E2: Routing performance evaluation

Successful lookup ratio

]replied queries
]sent queries

21/25

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

0.9

One hop paths have a probability

of success close to one
HRWP and SLAW exhibit a similar
SLR

0.8

SLR

Results

0.7

0.6

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

0.5
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

21/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

0.9

One hop paths have a probability

of success close to one
HRWP and SLAW exhibit a similar
SLR

0.8

SLR

Results

0.7

0.6

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

0.5
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

21/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

E2: Routing performance evaluation

Round-trip time
The time interval measured from the instant a query is sent to a
node to the instant in which the corresponding reply is received

22/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

1.2

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

Results
The mobility model does not create
significant differences

RTT [s]

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

Route length [hops]

22/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

E2: Routing performance evaluation

Route lifetime
The duration of a path between a pair nodes

23/25

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

1400

Path lifetime is almost constant

with RWP configurations
Path lifetime decreases almost
exponentially with SLAW
In the worst case, lifetime under
SLAW is three times greater than
RWPs

1000
Lifetime [s]

Path lifetime exhibits the highest

performance with SLAW

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1200

Results

800
600
400
200
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 25 nodes

23/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

1400

Path lifetime is almost constant

with RWP configurations
Path lifetime decreases almost
exponentially with SLAW
In the worst case, lifetime under
SLAW is three times greater than
RWPs

1000
Lifetime [s]

Path lifetime exhibits the highest

performance with SLAW

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1200

Results

800
600
400
200
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

23/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

1400

Path lifetime is almost constant

with RWP configurations
Path lifetime decreases almost
exponentially with SLAW
In the worst case, lifetime under
SLAW is three times greater than
RWPs

1000
Lifetime [s]

Path lifetime exhibits the highest

performance with SLAW

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1200

Results

800
600
400
200
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

23/25

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

E2: Routing performance evaluation

1400

Path lifetime is almost constant

with RWP configurations
Path lifetime decreases almost
exponentially with SLAW
In the worst case, lifetime under
SLAW is three times greater than
RWPs

1000
Lifetime [s]

Path lifetime exhibits the highest

performance with SLAW

RWP
HRWP
SLAW

1200

Results

800
600
400
200
0

Route length [hops]

Network size = 300 nodes

23/25

MANET context

Research question

Presentation outline

1 MANET context
2 Research question
3 Experimental methodology
4 Results
5 Conclusion

24/25

Experimental methodology

Results

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Final remarks

When human motion is considered . . .

MANETs show a high connectivity level
Node motion is not so harsh to network routing
Route lifetime suggests that building overlays is possible

25/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Final remarks

When human motion is considered . . .

MANETs show a high connectivity level
Node motion is not so harsh to network routing
Route lifetime suggests that building overlays is possible

25/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Final remarks

When human motion is considered . . .

MANETs show a high connectivity level
Node motion is not so harsh to network routing
Route lifetime suggests that building overlays is possible

25/25

Conclusion

MANET context

Research question

Experimental methodology

Results

Final remarks
Conclusion

Human motion could be a

friend!

25/25

Conclusion