ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Delay and Energy Consumption of MQTT over QUIC: An Empirical Characterization Using Commercial-Off-The-Shelf Devices.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Toward QoS Monitoring in IoT Edge Devices Driven Healthcare-A Systematic Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Fluctuations of end-to-end delays in low-latency WebRTC-based UAV-borne internet of things operating in an urban environment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Web Real-Time Communications-Based Unmanned-Aerial-Vehicle-Borne Internet of Things and Stringent Time Sensitivity: A Case Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The QUIC protocol, which was originally proposed by Google, has recently gained a remarkable presence. Although it has been shown to outperform TCP over a wide range of scenarios, there exist some doubts on whether it might be an appropriate transport protocol for IoT. In this paper, we specifically tackle this question, by means of an evaluation carried out over a real platform. In particular, we conduct a thorough characterization of the performance of the MQTT protocol, when used over TCP and QUIC. We deploy a real testbed, using commercial off-the-shelf devices, and we analyze two of the most important key performance indicators for IoT: delay and energy consumption. The results evince that QUIC does not only yield a notable decrease in the delay and its variability, over various wireless technologies and channel conditions, but it does not hinder the energy consumption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.