This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

.

**Algorithmic Foundations of Sensor Networks Lecture 3: Data propagation algorithms part III
**

Sotiris Nikoletseas

Department of Computer Engineering and Informatics University of Patras, Greece

March 8, 2013

.

.

.

.

.

.

1 / 35

A “canonical” problem: Local Event Detection and . Data Propagation

A single sensor, p, senses a local event E . The general propagation problem is the following: “How can sensor p, via cooperation with the rest of the sensors in the network, propagate information about event E to the control center?”

.

.

.

.

.

.

2 / 35

. Representative data propagation protocols

• Directed Diffusion (DD): a tree-structure protocol (suitable

**for low dynamics)
**

• LEACH: clustering (suitable for small area networks) • Local Target Protocol (LTP): local optimization (best for

dense networks)

• Probabilistic Forwarding Protocol (PFR): redundant

**optimized transmissions (good efﬁciency / fault-tolerance trade-offs, best for sparse networks)
**

• Energy Balanced Protocol (EBP): guaranteeing same per

sensor energy (prolong network life-time)

.

.

.

.

.

.

3 / 35

However. d) The particles are spread in a two-dimensional area (plane). . The Local Target Protocol (LTP) – The model (I) We call network nodes “particles”. c) Particles do not move. . . . During sleeping periods particles cease any communication. a radio broadcast sufﬁces. b) Each particle may alternate between a sleeping and an awake mode. . . 4 / 35 . a) Each particle may have two communication modes: a broadcast (radio) beacon mode and a directed to a point transmission mode (laser beam)..

. . The model (II) e) A receiving wall W is a line in the plane. . g) No geolocation abilities assumed Deﬁnitions: Let d (in numbers of particles /m2 ) be the density of the cloud. 5 / 35 . . .. Let R be the maximum (beacon/laser) transmission range of each particle. . The wall represents the control center (multiple/mobile sinks). f) Each particle is aware of the direction toward W .

. . Each p′ receiving info(E ) does the following: • Search Phase: It uses a low energy broadcast of a beacon (angle α above and below the vertical line) to discover a particle closer to W (i. • Backtrack Phase: If repetitions of the search phase fail to discover a particle nearer to W . . 6 / 35 . W ) the (vertical) distance of pi from W . . .e.. Let info(E ) the info to be propagated. W ) < d (p′ . then p′ sends info(E ) to the particle it received the information from. a p′′ where d (p′′ . p ′ sends info(E ) to p ′′ via a direct line (laser) transmission. The Local Target Protocol (LTP) Let d (pi . . pj and d (pi . • Direct Transmission Phase: If found. pj ) the (vertical) distance of pi . W )).

. . . .Example of the Search Phase Example of Data Propagation p3 p2 p1 a0 a1 a2 p0 p' beacon circle W W . . 7 / 35 .

. The “hops” efﬁciency of the data propagation protocol is the ratio Ch = ⌈ where hopt = d (p. 8 / 35 . W ) R h hopt ⌉ . . . Let h the actual number of hops (transmissions) taken to reach W . . if particles always exist in pair-wise distances R towards W . Efﬁciency Deﬁnitions: Let hopt the (optimal) number of “hops" (vertical to W transmissions) needed to reach W . ..

c) Particles available may temporarily “sleep" to save energy. Why studying h. . Ch ? When a particle p “looks around" for a particle as close to W as possible to pass information. . . mainly because: a) There might never have been any particles in that direction. . . it may not get any particle in the perfect direction (on the line vertical to W passing from p). b) Particles of sufﬁcient remaining battery power may not be available anymore. 9 / 35 .. .

. . 10 / 35 . • Each target selection is stochastically independent of the others. Simplifying Assumptions for a Rigorous Analysis • The search phase always ﬁnds a p ′′ in the semicircle of center p′ and radius R towards W . • The position of p ′′ is random uniform in the arc of angle 2a. the protocol backtracks. . . . . R (c) if a search phase ultimately fails.. This assumption can be relaxed: (a) by repetitions of the search phase (b) we may consider a cyclic sector deﬁned by circles of radii R − ∆R.

pi ) ≤ d (p. Proof: A sequence of points is generated. Let αi be the (positive or negative) angle of pi w. p1 . for large hopt .. . Also. . pi ) . . p0 = p. W ) ≤ d (pi −1 . ph−1 .t. pi −1 ’s vertical line to W . . . (Ch ) ≃ sin α . . . . It is: h−1 ∑ i =1 h ∑ i =1 d (pi −1 . 1 ≤ E (Ch ) ≤ 2 ≃ 1. ph where ph−1 is the ﬁrst particle found within W ’s range and ph is beyond W . p2 .57.r. Lemma . 11 / 35 . . The expected “hops" efﬁciency of LTP in the α-uniform case is α π E .

. pi ) = R cos αi . . 12 / 35 . . We get: h −1 ∑ i =1 cos αi ≤ hopt ≤ h ∑ i =1 cos αi From Wald’s equation. .The (vertical) progress toward W is ∆i = d (pi −1 . then E (h − 1) · E (cos αi ) ≤ E (hopt ) ≤ E (h) · E (cos αi ) ⇒ E (h ) α α 1 ≤ = E (Ch ) ≤ + sin α hopt sin α hopt since E (cos αi ) = −α ∫ α cos x · 1 sin α · dx = 2α α π 2 Assuming large values for hopt and since for 0 ≤ α ≤ we get the result. . it is 1 ≤ α sin α ≤ π 2 .

α) and that the protocol selects the best. The “min-two uniform targets" (M2TP) Protocol We assume that the search returns two points p′′ . Let αi 1 . . the distribution function of αi . . αi 2 {the angles }of the particles found and let αi = min |αi 1 |. d 2 fαi (ϕ) = I P{αi ≤ ϕ} = dϕ α 2αϕ − ϕ2 α2 ( ϕ 1− α ) The expected local progress is: ∫ α 2(1 − cos α) E (cos αi ) = cos ϕ · fαi (ϕ) d ϕ = α2 0 . . p′′′ each uniform in (−α.. ( )2 { } α−ϕ I P{αi > ϕ} = I P |αi 1 | > ϕ ∩ |αi 2 | > ϕ = α Thus. . . |αi 2 | . 13 / 35 . Then. is Fαi (ϕ) = I P{αi ≤ ϕ} = and the probability density function is.

π for 0 ≤ α ≤ and for large h . . . 14 / 35 .24 2(1 − 0) 8 . We remark that α→0 lim E (Ch ) = lim α→0 2α =1 2 sin a and α→ 2 limπ E (Ch ) = (π/2)2 π2 = ≃ 1. The expected “hops” efﬁciency of the “min-two uniform targets” protocol in α2 the α-uniform case is E (Ch ) ≃ 2(1− cos α) . large h and for 0 ≤ α ≤ 2 . . .24 π for . Lemma . . . Lemma . 2 .. The expected “hops" efﬁciency of the min two uniform targets protocol is 2 1 ≤ E (Ch ) ≤ π 8 ≃ 1.

R m} ≥ p. where . .. α) and R. Tight upper bounds to the hops distribution Consider p at distance x from W . a particle p′ is returned in ⃗′ )d A. Deﬁnition: (Signiﬁcant progress) Let m > 0 be the least integer such that I P{∆x > 0 < p < 1 is a given constant. Assume each search returns such a p′ . 15 / 35 . . the sector with some probability density f (p Deﬁnition: (Horizontal progress) Let ∆x be the projection of the line segment (p. with independent and identical distribution f (). We assume that when p searches in the sector S deﬁned by (−α. . . . p′ ) on the line from p vertical to W .

. . ⌈ Now let t = x R/m ⌉ = ⌈ mx ⌉ R . . Ht be t random variables.d. .PP {# of hops is h} = I . H such that I P{H = i } = − q ) for any i ≥ 0. 16 / 35 . . Lemma: . Then H is geometrically distributed.i. Lemma . . Let H1 . . Clearly then: q i (1 . according to H . Let Q the actual process. i. . . .Deﬁnition: Let the stochastic process P where with probability p the horizontal progress is R/m and with probability q = 1 − p it is 0. I P{H1 + · · · + Ht = h} . . Then I PP {h ≤ h0 } ≤ I PQ {h ≤ h0 } (stochastic dominance). Consider the integer r.v.

Example: When for p = 0. Theorem . 17 / 35 . .5 we have m = 2 and the efﬁciency ratio is 3. . . .. the mean and variance of the number of hops are: tq tq E (h) = Var (h) = 2 p p The method above ﬁnds a distribution that upper bounds the x number of hops. . . the overestimate is 3 times the optimal number of hops. Since for all f () it is h ≥ R = hopt we get .PP {the number of hops is h} = h p (−q ) = (since h is negative binomial because it is the number of failures until the tth success) Corollary: For the process P . (− t ) t (t +h−1) t h h I pq h . The process P estimates the expected number of hops with a )(1−p) guaranteed ratio (m+1p at most. .e. Theorem . i.

. . . . Summary evaluation of LTP • local. . simple.. greedy protocol • no global structure (set of paths) maintained • good for dense networks • performance drops in sparse / faulty networks . 18 / 35 .

Note that GPS information is not needed for this protocol. there is no need to know the global structure of the network. iv) All particles have a common co-ordinates system. . iii) It knows the direction towards the sink S. . 19 / 35 . Also. . via estimation of the attenuation of the received signal).The Probabilistic Forwarding Protocol (PFR) – The . . where the sink broadcasts information about itself to all particles. . via the technology of direction-sensing antennae). This can be implemented during a set-up phase.g.g. Model We assume that each particle has the following abilities: i) It can estimate the direction of a received transmission (e. . ii) It can estimate the distance from a nearby particle that did the transmission (e.

• Efﬁciency. • Robustness. . . 20 / 35 . in cases when part of the network has become inoperative. . Thus r is an energy efﬁciency measure of Π. given that the network is operational. . Propagation Protocol Properties • Correctness. Protocol Π must guarantee that data arrives to the sink S . Π should have a small ratio of the number k of activated particles over the total number N of particles k r=N . .. . Π must guarantee that data arrives at enough points in a small interval around S .

. . Thin Zone of particles . . The basic idea of PFR PFR probabilistically favors redundant transmissions toward the sink within a thin zone of particles around the line connecting the particle sensing the event E and the sink. . 21 / 35 . . .

. The Forwarding Probability Data is propagated with a suitably chosen probability p. . . To favor near-optimal transmissions the following probability is used: Pfwd = E p2 p1 1 2 ϕ π S . while it is not propagated with probability 1 − p. 22 / 35 . .. .

ﬂooding) a sufﬁciently large “front" of particles is built. 23 / 35 . . in terms of rounds. Each particle p receiving info(ϵ). deterministically broadcasts it toward the sink.. . broadcasts it to all its neighbors with probability I Pfwd (or it does not propagate any data with probability 1 − I Pfwd ) deﬁned as follows: { 1 if ϕ ≥ ϕthreshold = 134o I Pfwd = ϕ otherwise π . to guarantee the survivability of the data propagation process. The two phases of PFR Phase 1: The “Front" Creation Phase. Initially (by using a limited. Phase 2: The Probabilistic Forwarding Phase. . Each particle having received the data. . .

The Correctness of PFR . we cover the network area by unit squares and show that there are always particles “close enough” to the optimal line. with ϕ > 134o . . 24 / 35 . In the proof. . .e. that deterministically broadcast). i. geometry is used (i. . . .e. Lemma .. PFR always succeeds in sending the information from E to S when the whole network is operational. .

.. The Energy Efﬁciency of PFR • We consider particles that are active but as far as possible from ES n0 E S The particles inside the LQ Area • We approximate w by the following random walk y x xo E xo x y’ . . . 0 S 25 / 35 . . .

The energy efﬁciency of the PFR protocol is Θ (( ) ) 2 n0 n where n0 = |ES | and the total number of particles in the network is N = n2 .By using stochastic dominance by a continuous time “discouraged arrivals” birth-death process. . For n0 = o(n). . Theorem . . . this is o(1). we prove: . 26 / 35 . . . .

. Lemma . . We study the case when some of these particles (at angles > 134o ) are not operating. . It is shown: . . The probability that none of them transmits is very small. . and of constant distance. PFR manages to propagate the crucial data across lines parallel to ES . with ﬁxed nonzero probability. . 27 / 35 . . The Robustness of PFR Particles very near the ES line are considered..

e.. .01 ≤ d ≤ 0. . 28 / 35 .3) • ﬁxed radio range R = 5m • search angle α = 90◦ • we repeated each experiment more than 5000 times to get good average results . . Experimental Comparison of LTP and PFR The simulation environment: • C++ • 2D geometry data types of LEDA • a variety of sensor ﬁelds in a 100m×100m square area: • we drop randomly n ∈ [100. . . 3000] particles (i. 0.

8 1.. while having a limiting behavior for α ≤ 40 1 0. 90] • α → 0 ⇒ Ch → 1 1. .4 • Ch initially decreases 1.6 .2 very fast. . 29 / 35 Hops Efficiency (assuming particles always exist) 1. LTP – The impact of angle α Ideal Hops Efﬁciency for angles α ∈ [5. .8 0. .6 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Maximum Angle Local Target Min-Two Targets . .

.8 1. .2 close to optimal 1 0. .6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Min-# Targets . 30 / 35 .6 Hops Efficiency • # targets ↑ ⇒ Ch → 1 • 4 targets ⇒ already very 1. .. LTP – The impact of sampling several targets Ideal Hops Efﬁciency for different number of targets 1.4 1. .8 0.

5 0.6 protocols almost always backtrack • for d ≥ 0. .2 the failure rate drops very fast to 0. . ..2 0. 31 / 35 .1 both Failure Rate 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 0.01.4 0.5] and α = 90 100% • for d ≤ 0.3 0.1 0. . 0. . LTP – Failure rate Failure rate for density d ∈ [0. Particle Density Local Target Min-Two Target .

5 0.01 0.09 0.05 0.13 0.17 0.07 0.4 0.3) for low densities (d ≤ 0.8 0.11 0. .19 0..21 0. .6 0.3 0.9 Ratio of Active Particles over Total Particles (r) 0.2 0. 32 / 35 . Ratio of activated particles over density 1 0.1 0 0.23 0. .25 0. .29 Particle Density (d) PFR LTPe LTPa LTPr • PFR behaves very well (r ≤ 0.27 0.07) • PFR’s energy dissipation increases with density • LTP performs best in dense networks .15 0.7 0.03 0. .

19 0. .12).23 0. the number of backtracks of LTP reduces fast and almost reaches zero.15 0. . 33 / 35 . .29 Particle Density (d) LTPe LTPa LTPr • For very low densities (i. d ≤ 0.17 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.e.25 0. .09 0.21 0. • As density increases.05 0.07 0. . Number of Backtracks 60 50 Number of Backtracks 40 30 20 10 0 0. ..27 0.11 0. LTP backtracks a lot.

PFR achieves this even for very low densities (≥ 0.17 0.03 0. .23 0. Average number of hops to the sink 160 140 Number of Hops to reach Sink 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.25 0.13 0.15 0. 34 / 35 .19 0.29 Particle Density (d) PFR LTPe LTPa LTPr • all protocols are near optimal (40 hops) even for low densities (≥ 0.05 0. . • LTP shows a pathological behavior for low densities (≤ 0. .12) due to many backtracks.07).07 0. .21 0. .11 0.27 0..17). .01 0.09 0.

Relevant References . . and P. Nikoletseas and P. Also. S. Elsevier. “A Comparative Study of Protocols for Efﬁcient Data Propagation in Smart Dust Networks”. T. . Nikoletseas. T. . 2005. Nikoletseas. . Also. in the Ad-Hoc Networks Journal. pp. Dimitriou. S. Distinguished Paper (4th out of 338 papers) in the European Symposium on Parallel Processing (EuroPar).I. 2003.I. Chatzigiannakis. Mavronicolas. Chatzigiannakis.. 615-627. .I. Volume 13. Spirakis and S. 35 / 35 . Dimitriou. pp. in the Proceedings of the 5th European Wireless Conference on Mobile and Wireless Systems beyond 3G (EW 2004). 2004. . . Chatzigiannakis. P. M. “Efﬁcient and Robust Protocols for Local Detection and Propagation in Smart Dust Networks”. Spirakis. 344-350. 2003. in the Parallel Processing Letters (PPL) Journal. in the ACM Principles of Mobile Computing (POMC) 2002. 4 (5): 621-635 (2006). in the Journal of Mobile Networks (MONET). Also. Spirakis. Number 4. “A Probabilistic Algorithm for Efﬁcient and Robust Data Propagation in Smart Dust Networks”. .

- Μάζες και συνδικαλισμός
- Μάζες και συνδικαλισμός
- Αριστερά και Εξουσία
- Τζον Ριντ Πώς Λειτουργούν Τα Σοβιέτ
- Η δίκαιο-πολιτική δομή
- 4ο ΜΕΡΟΣ Βασικες εννοιες του ιστορικου υλισμου-ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ
- 3ο ΜΕΡΟΣ Βασικες εννοιες του ιστορικου υλισμου
- 2ο ΜΕΡΟΣ Βασικες εννοιες του ιστορικου υλισμου
- 2ο ΜΕΡΟΣ Βασικες εννοιες του ιστορικου υλισμου
- 1ο ΜΕΡΟΣ Βασικες εννοιες του ιστορικου υλισμου
- Η κομμουνιστική στρατηγική για την εκπαίδευση
- Παρατηρησεις-Ειναι ο καπιταλισμος ηλιθιε-κειμενα μου (2)
- Η αναδιαρθρωση του ελληνικου πανεπιστημιου
- Εκπαιδευση και εξουσια
- Θεσεις Αλτουσερ
- τι-ειναι-πολιτικη-οικονομια-λουξεμπουργκ
- Luxemburg MazikiApergiaKomaSidikata
- Roza Louxempourgk Metarrithmisi i Epanastasi
- 1208_theseis_19o
- Florakis 1979
- H Τοπική Αυτοδιοίκηση καταλύτης ανάπτυξης της Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας για την Προγραμματική Περίοδο
- ΜΕΤΡΗΣΗ ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑΤΙΚΟΤΗΤΑΣ ΥΠΗΡΕΣΙΩΝ
- Ο τρόπος εκτέλεσης των Προμηθειών και Υπηρεσιών των ΟΤΑ Α΄ βαθμού
- Ολοκληρωμένη αξιοποίηση στην Τοπική Αυτοδιοίκηση των πληροφοριακών συστημάτων που υλοποιούνται από τον δημόσιο τομέα
- Προμήθεια και Εγκατάσταση Συστημάτων Μηχανογράφησης ΟΤΑ

- rfc1280
- Following the Dead
- Trial Stpm Ns Maths p2_2011
- algebra
- NEW ASSIGNMENT 2.doc
- Past Year Papers AIEEE 2007
- Research Inventy
- Cbse Math Paper2009
- ABKDA Mohammed Ali Akkounni
- Lesson Plan Trig Intro
- I Problems - SAT II Sheet 1-30
- Solutions CGCalculus01
- Loe Sungsu Eber Sich t
- es_20291208v010101p
- SCADA Data Gateway Fact Sheet
- Bansal Acne Xi Rt 1_1
- wap.docx
- Real World Application
- 10th 1040106_B2 Mathematics QP
- Unit 3 - Protocols
- chapt21(mathematics)
- SCADA Data Gateway Fact Sheet
- Chapter8.WAP.Concepts.pdf
- Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm Review_Peter Todd_May 2015
- Wap Wireless Communication
- rfc3002
- Sjzl20073811-ZXSS10 SS1b (V2.0.1.05.2) Softswitch Control Equipment Network Diagnose Operation Guide_180528
- TCS Hyd Open Requirements 22-Mar-12
- Osi Model2
- RTN 310 Security White Paper 01
- Lecture 3

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd