Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison among k-TAS and other relevant studies

From: Adaptive collision resolution for efficient RFID tag identification

  Assumption & collision detection technique Collision resolution mechanism Performance comparison
    Identification delay* Communication overhead
k-TAS Transmission, synchronization & bit-by-bit collision detection k-splitting Low (log k (n)) Low
ETIP [38]   k-splitting Low (log k (n)) High
BS [16, 34]   2-splitting Medium (log2(n))** High
RN16QT [17] Additional tag Memory for randomly generated prefixes & bit-by-bit collision detection 2-splitting High (log2(n)) High
Query tree (QT) [13, 17, 21, 27, 32] Bit-by-bit collision detection 2-splitting High (log2(n)) High
  1. *n is the number of tags.
  2. **BS gains a better performance than QT-based methods by eliminating all idle cycles.