4722 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 22, NO.

5, MARCH 1, 2022

An Energy Aware Intelligent Fault Detection

Scheme for IoT-Enabled WSNs
Gagandeep Kaur , Member, IEEE and Prasenjit Chanak , Member, IEEE

Abstract —Recent years have seen an explosion in the

demand for the Internet of Things (IoT). IoT makes any
physical object smart by providing sensing capability. The
physical objects are embedded with sensors that form
a network of sensors. However, sensors are vulnerable
to faults due to energy depletion, software failures, and
hardware failures. The existing fault detection schemes put
huge computational overhead on the battery-limited and low
computational capacity sensor nodes that are subject to the
premature death of the sensor nodes. Also, they suffer from
poor fault detection accuracy and huge false alarm rate that
significantly reduce the overall performance of the networks. In this paper, an energy-aware intelligent fault detection
scheme is proposed for IoT-enabled wireless sensor networks that significantly improve fault detection accuracy and
reduce false alarm rate. A novel 3-Tier hard fault detection mechanism is used for detecting hardware unit faults of
the sensor nodes. Furthermore, an optimized deep learning mechanism is used for various soft fault detection that
prevents premature death of sensor nodes. The paper mathematically analyses the proposed scheme in terms of energy
consumption, time complexity, and message complexity. Extensive simulations show the enhanced performance of the
proposed scheme compared with the state-of-the-art algorithms in terms of fault detection accuracy, false alarm rate,
false-positive rate, energy consumption, and network lifetime.
Index Terms — Wireless sensor networks (WSNs), Internet of Things (IoT), fault detection, energy, optimized deep
learning.

I. I NTRODUCTION applications, sensor modules are prone to failure due to

T HE Internet of Things (IoT) forms a network of physical
objects. These physical objects have sensors with sensing,
transmitting, and receiving capabilities. In IoT-based systems,
intelligent sensor nodes are used to collect and transmit
different physical parameters to the Base Station (BS) via
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) [1]. The BS analyses
this data with the help of sensor location information.
IoT-based systems need an intelligent WSN for real-time
decision-making. In this paper, intelligent WSN refer as IoT-
enabled WSN where sensor nodes act as multi-agents [2]–[4].
Nowadays, IoT finds wide range of application in different
fields such as Industrial IoT [5], precision agriculture [6],
home and office automation [7], and healthcare [8]. In such
Manuscript received November 6, 2021; accepted January 18, 2022.
Date of publication January 27, 2022; date of current version February 28,
2022. The associate editor coordinating the review of this article and
approving it for publication was Prof. Houbing Song. (Corresponding
author: Prasenjit Chanak.)
Gagandeep Kaur is with the School of Computer Science Engineering
and Technology, Bennett University, Greater Noida 201310, India, and
also with the Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Atal Bihari Vajpayee Indian Institute of Information Technology and
Management, Gwalior 474015, India (e-mail: gagan873@gmail.com).
Prasenjit Chanak is with the Department of Computer Science and
Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (BHU) Varanasi, Varanasi
221005, India (e-mail: prasenjit.chanak@gmail.com).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSEN.2022.3146853
battery drainage, environmental destruction, malfunctioning
of hardware components. These faulty sensor nodes lead to
poor functioning that degrades the performance of the IoT-
enabled WSNs [9]. However, existing fault detection schemes
suffer from poor fault detection accuracy and high false alarm
rate [10]. Furthermore, they consume huge amount of energy
to detect faulty sensor nodes that result in the premature
death of the sensor nodes [11]. These motivate us to propose
an intelligent fault detection scheme for IoT-enabled WSNs
that reduces energy consumption and improves fault detection
accuracy.
In IoT-enabled WSNs, faults can be classified into two
categories hard fault and soft fault. In hard fault, either
transmitter unit, battery unit, or receiver unit of sensor
module fails. In soft fault, sensor nodes generate erroneous
readings [12], [13]. Existing schemes are unable to accurately
diagnose the faults in a large amount of heterogeneous
time-series data coming from various sensors. In this
paper, an optimized deep learning-based fault detection
mechanism is proposed that significantly improves network
performance in faulty environment. Deep learning is becoming
popular as it gives better accuracy for heterogeneous and
voluminous data than other conventional machine learning
techniques [14], [15]. Deep learning also finds its application
in identification of IoT devices [16], [17], detection of

1558-1748 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KAUR AND CHANAK: ENERGY AWARE INTELLIGENT FAULT DETECTION SCHEME FOR IoT-ENABLED WSNs
drones [18], [19] and improving cloud services [20]. Long
Short-term memory (LSTM) is one of the most popular
deep learning models that can effectively manage a huge
volume of data which is generated by sensor nodes for
different IoT applications. However, the performance of LSTM
highly depends on the selection of optimal values of hyper-
parameters. Thus, LSTM requires an efficient technique for
selecting hyperparameters. Although, there are few existing
classic methods used like random search and grid search to
select the optimal value of hyper-parameters. These existing
classic methods suffer from the problem of trapping in
local optimum and slow convergence. Thus, in this paper,
a metaheuristic algorithm is used for optimizing the value
of hyper-parameters that promises better performance of the
fault detection process in IoT-enabled WSNs. Furthermore,
in the existing fault detection schemes, heavy computations are
performed by sensor nodes to diagnose the faults. This results
in the premature death of sensor nodes that significantly reduce
the performance of the network [10], [11]. This paper presents
an intelligent fault detection scheme for resource-constrained
IoT-enabled WSNs that reduces computational overhead in the
sensor node and increases the performance of the networks.
The major contributions of this paper are as follows:
• This paper presents a 3-Tier hard fault detection
mechanism where hard faults are detected and verified
at sensor nodes, cluster heads, and substations that
significantly increases fault detection accuracy and
reduces false alarm rate.
• Also, this paper proposes an optimized deep learning-
based soft fault detection mechanism that increases
network lifetime.
• In this paper, a detailed mathematical analysis is
presented that shows the sustainability of the proposed
scheme for intelligent IoT applications.
• The performance of the proposed scheme is evaluated
in terms of Fault Detection Accuracy (FDA), False
Alarm Rate (FAR), False-Positive Rate (FPR), energy
consumption, and network lifetime.
The paper is organized as follows: Section II describes
the literature review of the existing state-of-the-art schemes.
Section III present the proposed system model. The detailed
proposed scheme is described in Section IV. Theoretical
analysis is illustrated in Section V. Section VI describes
the performance analysis of the proposed work. Finally,
Section VII concludes the paper.
II. R ELATED W ORK
The existing approaches for fault detection in WSNs can be
classified into three categories namely centralized, distributed,
and hybrid fault detection mechanisms. The present literature
briefly describes these three categories:
A. Centralized Fault Detection Mechanism
In the centralized fault detection mechanism, the health
of each sensor node is monitored by one centralized high
Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4723
computing device like BS periodically. Lau et al. [21]
proposed a centralized fault detection approach for WSNs.
It classified faulty sensor nodes into two categories such as soft
faulty nodes and hard faulty nodes. The major drawback of this
approach is that it suffers from poor FDA and network lifetime.
Jin et al. [22] proposed Kuiper test-based fault detection
mechanism for WSNs. The Kuiper test is a statistical method
that has poor FDA in large size networks. Shial et al. [23]
proposed a centralized fault detection mechanism that uses
median and z-test for fault detection. The major drawback of
this scheme is that it significantly reduces network lifetime.
B. Distributed Fault Detection Mechanism
In the distributed fault detection approach, the health of
each sensor node is monitored by itself and the report is
sent to the BS. Panda et al. [24] proposed a Distributed
Self Fault detection (DSFD) approach for WSNs, that
diagnose sensor fault using a modified three-sigma edit
test. The three-sigma test has poor FDA in large size
networks. Gharamaleki et al. [25] proposed Distributed
Fault Detection (DFD) approach where node degrees are
used to diagnose faulty sensor nodes within the network.
In this approach, the sensor reading difference between the
neighboring nodes is used to make the final fault decision
of the sensor node. The major drawback of this approach is
that if the number of faulty sensor nodes increases within
the network then FDA drastically reduces. In this approach,
FDA is also affected by the node degree. Panda et al. [26]
proposed a distributed Neyman–Pearson testing method for
fault detection. In this approach, each sensor node first
collects data from its neighbor nodes and then applies
Neyman–Pearson test for fault diagnosis. It exchanges the
same data multiple times between the neighbor node for fault
diagnosis that significantly reduces network lifetime.
C. Hybrid Fault Detection Mechanism
The hybrid fault detection mechanism has emerged
to address the limitations of centralized and distributed
fault detection approaches. In the hybrid fault detection
method, the fault detection is performed locally and then
reported to BS that globally monitors the network that
improves FDA. Swain et al. [10] proposed the ANalysis
Of VAriance (ANOVA) technique for fault detection and
feed-forward Probabilistic Neural Network (PNN) for fault
classification. In this approach, the whole network is divided
into different clusters and CH executes PNN to classify faulty
sensor nodes within the network. Therefore, load on the cluster
head is significantly increased which reduces network lifetime.
Also, this approach suffers from poor FDA. Abo-Zahhad [27]
proposed a mobile sink-based fault detection mechanism for
WSNs. In this approach, first, a fault detection path is designed
for the mobile sink, and then mobile visit all sensor nodes
and diagnosis fault status of the deployed sensor nodes. The
major drawback of this approach is that it suffers from high
fault detection latency and false alarm rate. Swain et al. [11]
proposed a Feed-Forward Neural Network (FFNN) model with
a hybrid meta-heuristic algorithm for fault detection in WSNs.
 4724
TABLE I
S YMBOLS AND M EANING
In this approach, FFNN is used by the CHs to diagnosis the
fault status of the sensor node. This approach also suffers from
poor FDA and network lifetime.
The existing fault detection approaches consume a huge
amount of energy for fault detection that is subject to the
premature death of the networks [10]. Also, they suffer
from poor FDA in highly faulty environment [11]. In this
paper, a 3-Tier hard fault detection scheme is presented
where hardware faults are detected and verified at three
different levels that reduce the FAR and FPR. Furthermore,
an optimized deep learning-based soft fault detection scheme
is performed by substation that significantly improves the FDA
and network lifetime.
III. S YSTEM M ODEL
This section describes the energy and fault model followed
by assumptions that are considered in this paper. In the
energy model, first network topology and then communication
between the nodes are described. A radio model is also
developed to calculate the energy consumption of the nodes.
In the fault model, different types of fault have been described
that help to understand the behavior of different faulty nodes
in IoT-enabled WSNs. Furthermore, fault-free nodes and data
generated by the different sensor nodes are also briefly
described which gives a clear idea regarding node behavior
in faulty environment.
A. Assumptions and Energy Model
Let N number of sensor nodes are deployed randomly
in the M × M [m 2 ] monitoring area. The sensor nodes
s1 , s2 , . . . , sn are similar in terms of computational capability,
memory capacity and initial energy. Let λ number of Sub-
stations are deployed within the network which is superior
to normal sensor nodes in terms of computational capability,
memory capacity, and initial energy. The network model
Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 22, NO. 5, MARCH 1, 2022
is represented as an undirected graph G(V, E) where V
represents a set of sensor nodes and E represents a set of
edges. The communication link is established between two
sensor nodes only when the distance (di s) between two sensor
nodes is less than the transmission range R. BS has unlimited
energy and memory capacity with high computational power.
A radio model is used to evaluate the energy dissipation of
sensor nodes which is adopted from [28]. Any sensor node
consumes E t x amount of energy for transmitting ξ -bit data to
distance μ and it is calculated as follows:
 
E elc + e f s × μ2 ξi if μ < μ0
Et x =   (1)
E elc + amp × μ ξi if μ ≥ μ0
4
The Er x amount of energy is required to receive a ξ -bit
data which is calculated as follows:
Er x = ξ × E elc (2)

μo = e f s /amp (3)
Table.I represents the list of symbols used in this paper.
B. Proposed Fault Model
The proposed fault model describes the behavior of different
faulty nodes in IoT-enabled WSNs. In hard fault, the sensor
node si at time t1 sends the data but is not able to receive
the data at time t2 or the sensor node si at time t1 is not
able to send the data but receives the data at time t2 or does
not perform sending and receiving. The various soft faults
are described as a gain fault, offset fault, Stuck-at-fault, and
out-of-bounds. In gain fault, the received sensor reading is a
multiplication of original value R(old). The gain is represented
by Rg (new) and it is defined as follows:
Rg (new) = R(old) × α + ν (4)
where, R(old) is the original value and α, ν are constant.
In offset fault, inappropriate readings are received due to the
addition of some constant value ω. It is defined as follows:
Ro (new) = R(old) + ω + ν (5)
In stuck-at-fault, in-variance in the sensed data for a long
period indicates misbehavior of sensor node. Stuck-at-fault is
defined as follows:
Rs (new) = R(old)φt0 ,φt1 ,φt2 .....φtt (6)
where, φt0 , φt1 , φt2 . . . ..φtt is the constant sensing reading in
different instance of time.
In out-of-bounds fault, the sensor reading is varied across the
threshold [θ1 , θ2 ] limits. It is defined as follows:
Rob (new) > θ2 or Rob (new) < θ1 (7)
IV. P ROPOSED S CHEME
The proposed energy aware intelligent fault detection
scheme is divided into three phases such as clustering and
substations placement phase, 3-Tier hard fault detection phase,
and optimized deep learning soft fault detection phase.
 KAUR AND CHANAK: ENERGY AWARE INTELLIGENT FAULT DETECTION SCHEME FOR IoT-ENABLED WSNs
Fig. 1. Proposed 3-Tier green architecture.
A. Proposed Clustering and Sub-Stations Placement
Phase
In this proposed scheme, there are N sensor nodes in
the network. These sensor nodes s1 , s2 , . . . , s N are clustered
into k groups. These groups are formed on the basis of
relative distances among sensor nodes. Initially, the sensor
node present at the centroid of each cluster is selected as
a Cluster Head (CH). The CH communicates with a cluster
member nodes by a single-hop communication. Furthermore,
the CH also communicates with a substation via a single-hop
communication. Substations directly transmit their data to the
BS. Fig.1 shows the proposed 3-Tier Green architecture. The
energy balancing is performed through cluster head rotation to
avoid premature death of CHs. The CH rotation is performed
when the energy of the current CH drops to a threshold value
E t h . The new CH is selected among the member nodes based
on the residual energy and distance from the current CH.
Iec Iec
ch c = + (1 − )( D ), 0 ≤ ≤1
Rec
The sub-station performs the intelligent fault diagnosis in
IoT-based WSNs. The deployment of the sub-station is done
assuming the M× M [m 2 ] area divided into a virtual grid
structure. The sub-station is placed at the center of each grid
square. The x-coordinate and y-coordinate of sub-stations are
given as follows:
(2u − 1)M
Substati on x = ∀u ∈ (1, X)
2X
(2v − 1)M
Substati on y = ∀v ∈ (1, Y )
2Y
B. A 3-Tier Hard Fault Detection Phase
This phase presents the 3-Tier based hard fault detection
mechanism for IoT-enabled WSNs. In a 3-Tier based hard
fault detection mechanism, each CH maintains an error
counter for transmitter (transmitter-error-counter) and receiver
Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4725
(receiver-error-counter) for each cluster member node of its
own cluster. It also maintains a list of all transmitter faulty
nodes, receiver faulty nodes, and battery faulty nodes. Initially,
the C H j (Tier-1) sends an inquiry message to cluster members
j
(si ) (Tier-0) and set a timer (St p ). The inquiry message
contains CH ID and its x-coordinate, y-coordinate information.
j
If any si receives the inquiry message then it replies to the
C H j by sending its fitness status. The fitness status message
contains sensor node ID, reading, and battery status. If fitness
status does not reach the C H j within time St p , it increments
the transmitter-error-counter by 1. Again, C H j repeats the
process at each round till the counter reaches the predefined
threshold level. On reaching the threshold level it marks
j
the si transmitter as faulty. The C H j on receiving fitness
j
status replies to the si with an ACKnowledgment (ACK)
message. If ACK is not received within time St p then the
receiver-error-counter is increased by 1. Again, this process is
repeated at each round until the counter reaches the threshold
j
level. On reaching the threshold level it marks the si receiver
j
as faulty. The si battery status is marked faulty whenever
j
the residual energy of si drops down a particular threshold
level. The battery threshold limit is calculated depending
on the basis of the minimum energy required to transmit
a single data packet to the nearest CH. The C H j (Tier-1)
periodically sends transmitter fault status, receiver fault status,
j
and battery fault status of each si (Tier-0) to substation
(Tier-2). A similar procedure is performed by substation (Tier-
2) to detect hard faults at CHs (Tier-1). If any substation
diagnosis hard fault within the existing CH then the substation
shifts CH responsibility to a new CH. Algorithm.1 illustrates
the procedure for 3-Tier hard fault detection.
C. An Optimized Deep Learning Based Soft Fault
Detection Phase
The substation broadcasts a ANNouncement (ANN) mes-
sage in range 2Rmax . ANN message contains substation ID
and location information. If any CH receives the ANN message
then the CH sends a JOIN message to the closest substation.
(8)
The JOIN message contains CH ID and location information.
Upper clusters are formed between Tier-1 CHs and substations
where substations are acting as upper cluster heads referred
as Sub Station Heads (SS H s) and Tier-1 CHs acting as
upper cluster member nodes. Each CH gets the fitness status
message from its respective member nodes that consists of
sensor readings as explained in previous section. The sensor
readings collected by C H1 in time instant  t1 which is present 
in Tier-1 is represented by R1,t1 = r1,t1 , r2,t1 , . . . , r z,t1 .
Furthermore, the data collected by C H1 in time frame T =
(t1 , t2 , t3 , . . 
. . . . .tq ) which is present
(9)  in Tier-1 is represented 
by R1T = r1,t1 , r2,t1 , . . . , r z,t1 , .., r1 , tq , r2,tq , . . . , r z,tq .
Similarly, the  data collected by C H2 in time frame T is given
by R2T = r1,t  , r , . . . , r   
1 2,t1 z,t1 , . . . , r1,tq , r2,tq , .., r z,tq .
All CHs which is present in Tier-1 send their data to respective
f
substation which are present in Tier-2 (∀C He ∈ SS H f ).
Finally, the substation identifies soft fault nodes within the
network using Grey Wolf optimization based Long Short Term
Memory (GWO-LSTM).
 4726 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 22, NO. 5, MARCH 1, 2022

Algorithm 1 3-Tier Hard Fault Detection Phase Algorithm 2 An Optimized Deep Learning Based Soft
Input : S : s1 , s2 , . . . sn−1 , sn Sensor nodes (Tier-0) Fault Detection Phase
C H : C H1 , C H2 , . . . .C Hk−1 , C Hk Input : SS : SS1 , SS2 , . . . .SSλ−1 , SSλ
Cluster heads (Tier-1) Substation
SS : SS1 , SS2 , . . . .SSλ−1 , SSλ S : s1 , s2 , . . . .sn−1 , sn sensor nodes
substation (Tier-2) C H : C H1 , C H2 , . . . .C Hk−1 , C Hk
B S (Tier-3) Cluster heads
Output: Transmitter, Receiver and battery unit fault Output: Sensor unit fault (Soft Fault)
(Hard Fault) 1 CH broadcasts inquiry message
j 2 Timer starts
1 for each si do j
3 ∀ (s)i ∈ (C H j ) replies fitness status
2 CH broadcasts inquiry messages f
3 Timer (St p ) ON 4 C He ∈ SS H f substation collect readings from CH
j 5 Initialize the popsize
4 ∀ (si ) ∈ C H j replies fitness status
6 Set m numbers of hyper-parameters in LSTM as prey of
5 if receiving time fitness status ≥ St p then
GWO
6 error-transmitter-counter + 1
7 Initialize the lower and upper limits
7 else
j 8 Initialize location vector for each wolf
8 C H j sends ACK to (si ) 9 While(I < Imax )
9 if receiving time ACK ≥ St p then 10 Learn the training data
10 error-receiver-counter + 1 11 Test data using initialized LSTM
11 end if 12 Evaluate fitness value of the individual grey wolf
12 end if 13 Identify the location of α,β, and ω wolves
13 if error-transmitter-counter ≥ Threshold-limit then 14 Update the location of each wolf
j
14 si Transmitter is faulty 15 Evaluate the fitness value and compare fitness value
15 end if with the previous iteration
16 if error-receiver-counter ≥ Threshold-limit then 16 end while
j 17 Set the classification LSTM model using optimised
17 si Receiver is faulty
18 end if values of m hyper-parameters
19 if Battery ≤ Threshold-battery-limit then 18 return(fault status)
j 19 end procedure
20 si Faulty Battery Unit
21 end if
22 end for
23 The faulty list is reported to substation from CHs forget gate. Initially, the forget gate looks at the output of the
24 end procedure hidden state vector Bt −1 at time (t-1) and at some input Ct
to compute the output of forget gate at time t. The output of
forget gate f t at time t is given by:
 
f t = σ W f · Bt −1 , Ct + b f (10)
i t the input at state t is given as:
 
i t = σ Wi · Bt −1, Ct + bi (11)

Next, a tanh layer creates a vector of new candidate values Āt

given as:
 
Āt = tanh W A · Bt −1, Ct + b A (12)
Fig. 2. Architecture of LSTM cell.
Now, the old cell state, At −1 is updated into the new cell state
At :
The LSTM model of deep learning is used for soft fault
detection and its hyperparameters are optimized using Grey At = f t  At −1 + i t  Āt (13)
Wolf Optimization (GWO). The main task in a deep learning The output value of the gate is computed as:
model is done by the hidden layers which process the input  
data and find patterns and relations among them. LSTM ot = σ Wo · Ct Bt −1 , Ct + bo (14)
models are a special kind of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN)
used in deep learning. RNN has feedback connections that The final output value of cell is given as:
make it capable of processing a sequence of data, unlike Bt = ot  tanh (At ) (15)
Feed Forward Neural Network (FFNN). However, LSTM
overcomes the problem of vanishing gradient within traditional where Wi is weight of input, W A is weight of cell unit, W f
RNN [29]. The architecture of the LSTM cell is shown in is weight of forget and Wo is weight of output gates. The bi
Fig. 2. LSTM cell has an input gate, an output gate and a is bias of input, b A is bias of cell unit, b f is bias of forget

Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KAUR AND CHANAK: ENERGY AWARE INTELLIGENT FAULT DETECTION SCHEME FOR IoT-ENABLED WSNs 4727

and bo is bias of output gates. The symbol  represents the

Hadamard operation on two matrices.
In the proposed work, GWO is used for the optimization
of hyperparameters due to its global optimization strength and
ability to avoid local optima. It is very useful to identify faulty
sensor nodes within the whole network. Furthermore, GWO
gives better exploration and exploitation results, and better
computational efficiency. Also, it has efficient convergence
behavior for various benchmark functions [30]. GWO is
inspired by the grouping and hunting strategies of wolves.
The alpha (α) is the most effective solution. The second and
third best solutions are beta (β) and delta ( ) respectively.
Omega wolves (ω) are the followers of α, β, and . The grey
Fig. 3. Proposed flowchart for GWO-LSTM based soft fault detection.
wolves encircle the prey while hunting that is mathematically
modeled as:
  prey, and grey wolves search for the optimal hyperparameters.
 
δ =  Q · χ p (t) − χ(t)
  (16) The upper bound and lower bound of the hyperparameters
 + 1) = χ p (t) − P · δ
χ(t (17) are initialized. The hyperparameters of LSTM are substituted
respectively to the position of each grey wolf. The position
The P and Q
 are calculated as follows: of each wolf is updated according to Eq. 20, 21, 22. The
sigmoid function is used as the activation for the output
P = 2 p · r1 − p (18)
layer. The model is optimized using Adam optimizer and the
q = 2 · r2 (19) fitness is calculated using Mean Square Error. Then, iterations
where r1 , r2 are random vectors with limit [0, 1]. Also, the are performed to search prey and optimal values of hyper-
alpha, beta, and delta have better knowledge, therefore they parameters.
give the three best solutions for the location of the prey. The
omega and other search agents are binds to follow the best V. T HEORETICAL A NALYSIS
search agents. The updated position of α, β, and wolves This section examines the complexity of the proposed
are given by: energy-aware fault detection algorithm followed by theoretical
  analysis. This proves the effectiveness of the proposed solution
 
δα =  Q 1 ·χ
α − χ  (20) for real-world sustainable and intelligent IoT applications.
 
  Lemma 1: If any CH energy is less than the threshold value
δβ =  Q 2 ·χ
β − χ̄  (21)
  E t h then a current CH starts a new CH selection. E t h is
 
δ =  Q 3 ·χ
 − χ  (22) represented by the following equation: E th = ξ(E elec Nk +
E agg Nk + amp dtoSS 4 ).
The absolute position of wolves are calculated using following Proof: In the proposed scheme, the sensor nodes are form
equations: k number of clusters. The average number of sensor nodes in
a cluster are N/k. The energy consumedby a CH  to receive
χ1 = χα − P1 · δα , χ2 = χβ − P2 · δβ ,
message from cluster members is ξ E elec Nk − 1 . The energy
χ3 = χ − P3 · δ (23) consumed to aggregate and transmit data to the Substation is
ξ E agg Nk + ξ E elec + ξ amp dtoSS 4 . Therefore, if current energy
 
χ1 + χ2 + χ3
χ̄(t + 1) = (24) level of CH is less than E t h , where E th = ξ(E elec Nk +
3 E agg Nk + amp dtoSS 4 ) then new CH selection starts.
While hunting prey, the grey wolves first perform exploration Lemma 2: The total energy consumed by the network in
to search prey and then perform convergence (exploitation) to the proposed scheme is E total = ξ(E elec Nk + 1 + E agg Nk +
attack prey. Q varies between 0 to 2 that represents the random
amp dtoSS4 + e f s dt2oC H ).
behavior of prey. P is a random value in the interval [-2p, 2p], Proof: The energy consumed by a CH
where p decreases from 2 to 0 over the number of iterations.  to receive
 message
from cluster member nodes is ξ E elec Nk − 1 . The energy
If | P | < 1, wolves are moving towards prey to attack this consumed to aggregate and transmit data to the substation
represents the exploitation process. If | P | > 1 or | P | < -1, is ξ E agg Nk + ξ E elec + ξ amp dtoSS 4 . The energy consumed by
it force the search agent to diverge from prey which represents cluster member node to transmit ξ bit to the CH is ξ E elec +
the process of exploration. Therefore, the strength of both ξ e f s dt2oC H . Therefore,
the GWO and LSTM are combined to diagnose the fault  total  energy consumed by the network
is E total = ξ(E elec Nk + 1 + E agg Nk +amp dtoSS 4 + 2
e f s dt oC H ).
in the sensor nodes by sub-station. Algorithm. 2 shows the Lemma 3: The stipulated period St p is given by
procedure for GWO-LSTM based soft fault detection phase. ⎧ ⎫
j
Fig. 3 shows the proposed flowchart for GWO-LSTM based ⎨ dist C H j , (si ) ⎬
soft fault detection. The number of hidden layers, the number max 2 × + Pt
⎩ c ⎭
of neurons in layers, and the learning rate of LSTM represent

Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 4728 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 22, NO. 5, MARCH 1, 2022

Proof: The stipulated period St p starts when CH sends TABLE II

inquiry message to its cluster member and the detection S IMULATION PARAMETERS
process begins. The St p is the total round trip time which
includes the sum of transmission time required from the cluster
j
head C H j to inquire the respective cluster members si and
j
dist C H j ,si
fitness status coming back to it that is 2 × c , where
c is light speed, di st is the distance of cluster members to
respective CH. The St p also includes the processing time Pt.
Thus, the stipulated period St p is
⎧ j
⎫
⎨ dist C H j , (si ) ⎬
j
max 2 × + Pt ∀(si ) ∈ (C H j ).
⎩ c ⎭

Lemma 4: The message complexity of the proposed scheme

is ≈ O(r × di × deg × k + r  × d j × deg  × λ + λ × k + k).
Proof: In the proposed intelligent fault detection scheme,
each sensor node si is diagnosed by the intelligent substations.
If total k CHs are present in the network and deg is the average
CHs degree then total inquiry message complexity from CHs
at each round is ≈ O(deg × k). Each sensor node si sends
fitness status message to its corresponding CH. The cluster
members reply with message complexity ≈ O(di × deg × k)
where di is data send from sensor node to CH. The k CHs
on receiving fitness status reply to sensor nodes with ACK
messages with message complexity ≈ O(deg × k). Thus, the
total message complexity for r rounds by CHs and sensor
nodes is ≈ O(r × (deg × k + di × deg × k + deg × k)).
Let λ be the number of substations in the network. Then,
λ substations send ANN message to k CHs with message
complexity ≈ O(λ × k). The CHs that receives ANN message
joins a substation with message complexity ≈ O(k). Let the
average degree of substations be deg  . Therefore, the total
inquiry message complexity from substations at each round
is ≈ O(deg  × λ). Each C H j send fitness status message
to its corresponding substation. The cluster member reply
with message complexity ≈ O(d j × deg  × λ) where d j
is data send from CH to substation. The λ substations on
receiving fitness status reply to CHs with ACK messages with
message complexity ≈ O(deg  × λ). Thus, the total message
complexity for r rounds by substations and CHs is
≈ O (r ×(deg  × λ + d j × deg  × λ + deg  × λ + λ × k + k)).
Thus, the total message complexity of the proposed scheme is
≈ O(r × di × deg × k + r  × d j × deg  × λ + λ × k + k).
Lemma 5: The time complexity of the proposed optimized
deep learning based soft fault detection phase is ≈
O( popsize × hi ddn2 × hi ddlay)
Proof: Let input layer has i npn neurons, output layer
has outn neurons. The computational complexity of deep
learning model is O(W ) that is, the total number of edges
in the network. Thus, computational complexity is O(W ) =
O(i npn × hi ddn1 + hi ddn1 × hi ddn2 + · · · . + hi dd(n)(n-1) ×
hi ddnn + hi ddnn × outn ). If equal number of neurons hi ddn in
each hidden layer and total hi ddlay number of hidden layers
then the computation complexity is O(W ) = O(i npn × hi ddn
+ hi ddn2 × hi ddlay + hi ddn × outn ). So, considering initial
population of GWO popsize and i npn hi ddn ∼ outn the
Fig. 4. FDA.
computation complexity of the proposed deep learning model
is ≈ O( popsize × hi ddn2 × hi ddlay)
VI. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
In the proposed work, network simulation has been
performed in ns2.35. In this simulation, hard and soft faults
have been injected into the network at different rates with 5%,
10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30% of total 500 sensor nodes.
The soft faults of various types such as offset, gain, stuck-
at, and out of bounds have been injected within the deployed
sensor nodes. Initially, a sample of the faulty dataset (30%
of actual size) is considered to minimize the computation
overhead. It produced the optimal value of hyperparameters.
The dataset is divided into two parts where 80% data is used
training and 20% data is used for testing. The lower bound and
upper bound of the hyper-parameters are initialized as (1 to 10)
for the number of hidden layers, (1 to 200) for the number
of neurons in layers, and (0.0001 to 0.1) for learning rate
respectively. The above lower and upper bound are selected
based on [31], [32]. The LSTM model is trained with 100% of
the dataset using the optimal hyperparameters. The root mean
square is minimized that is used to measure the fitness. The
results are compared with the Heterogeneous fault Detection
scheme for Wireless Sensor Networks (HDWSN) [10] and
Multi-fault Detection scheme in WSN using a hybrid Meta-
heuristic trained Neural Network (MDNN) algorithm [11].
The performance of the proposed Intelligent fault detection
scheme is compared in terms of FDA, FAR, FPR, energy
consumption, and network lifetime. The parameter values
which are considered for simulations are listed in Table.II.
The Fault Detection Accuracy (FDA) is defined as the ratio
of faulty nodes detected as faulty to the total number of faulty
nodes. It is given as:
Faulty nodes detected as faulty
FDA = (25)
Total number of faulty nodes

Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KAUR AND CHANAK: ENERGY AWARE INTELLIGENT FAULT DETECTION SCHEME FOR IoT-ENABLED WSNs 4729

Fig. 5. FAR. Fig. 6. FPR.

Fig. 4 depicts FDA in different fault probabilities. Fig. 4(a)

shows that the soft FDA of the proposed scheme is increased
by 42.2% as compared with HDWSN, 36.4% as compared
with MDNN. Fig. 4(b) illustrates hard FDA of the proposed
scheme is increased by 31% as compared with HDWSN and
26% as compared with MDNN. From Fig. 4 we can see that
initially FDA of the proposed scheme is a little bit better
compared to other existing schemes. However, the proposed
scheme shows better performance in high fault probabilities
as compared to other fault detection schemes. The reason for Fig. 7. Energy consumption.
better FDA is due to the GWO-LSTM model of deep learning-
based soft fault detection and 3-Tier hard fault detection
mechanism. The node is marked hard faulty only when the
transmitter and receiver are not responding in stipulated time
and continue to do so for multiple rounds until it crosses the
predefined threshold limit. The FDA is calculated as correctly
predicting the actual faulty nodes as faulty. Therefore, we get
more correct predictions which improve the FDA for 3-Tier
hard fault detection mechanism. Also, soft fault detection
accuracy based on GWO-LSTM model outperforms in large-
scale networks with voluminous and heterogeneous data as Fig. 8. Network lifetime.
compared to the ANOVA test and FFNN which is used in
HDWSN and MDNN.
The Fault Alarm Rate (FAR) is defined as the ratio of fault Fig. 6 depicts FPR in different fault probabilities. Fig. 6 (a)
free nodes detected as faulty to the total number of fault free shows that the soft FPR of the proposed scheme is 27.5%
nodes. It is given as: less than HDWSN and 21.4% less than MDNN. Fig. 6(b)
indicates that the hard FPR of the proposed scheme is reduced
Fault free nodes detected as faulty
FAR = (26) by 25.6% as compared with HDWSN and 20.3% as compared
Total number of fault free nodes with MDNN. The reason for having a reduced FPR is due
Fig. 5 depicts FAR in different fault probabilities. Fig. 5 (a) to the efficiency of the proposed GWO-LSTM model of
shows that the soft FAR of the proposed scheme is 35% less deep learning to predict fault on continuous time-series and
than HDWSN and 31% less than MDNN. Fig. 5(b) indicates heterogeneous data. Also, the proposed 3-Tier hard fault
that the hard FAR of the proposed scheme is reduced by detection scheme that sets the threshold level to mark the
28.8% as compared with HDWSN and 23.4% as compared hardware units as faulty that results in the least hard FPR.
with MDNN. The reason for having a reduced FAR is due Energy consumption is defined as the energy consumed
to the efficiency of the GWO-LSTM model of deep learning in the detection process while transmitting and receiving
with optimal values of hyperparameters for fault detection. the messages from sensors to substations and finally to the
Also, the error counter help to reduce the hard FAR in the BS. Fig.7 illustrates the energy consumption of the networks
proposed scheme. in different network sizes. The energy consumption of the
The False Positive Rate (FPR) is defined as the ratio of proposed scheme is reduced by 55.4% than HDWSN and
faulty node detected as fault free to the total number of faulty 53.3% than MDNN. Fig.7 shows that the proposed scheme
nodes. It is given as: outperforms in terms of energy consumption. This is due to
the use of substations. Also, in the proposed scheme, when
Faulty node detected as fault free the energy of CH drops to the threshold limit CH rotation is
FPR = (27)
Total number of faulty nodes performed.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 4730
Fig. 9. Comparative analysis.
Fig.8 depicts the network lifetime in the different number
of nodes. The network lifetime is defined as the time duration
between when the network starts working and the last node
dies in the network. The network lifetime of the proposed
scheme is increased by 65.4% than HDWSN and 62.3%
than MDNN. The reason for the better network lifetime
of the proposed scheme is due to clustering that balances
the energy within the IoT-enabled WSNs. Also, CH rotation
avoids the premature death of sensor nodes. Furthermore, fault
detection computations are performed by substations that save
the energy of resource-constrained sensor nodes.
A. Comparative Analysis
This section presents the comparative analysis of GWO and
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) [33]. Fig. 9(a) shows the
convergence time in different number of iterations. The same
objective function is used for GWO and PSO to fairly analyse
the convergence behavior. From Fig. 9(a), we can see that
GWO has minimum convergence time than PSO. Fig. 9(b)
depicts the accuracy in different population sizes. The LSTM
is integrated with both the metaheuristic algorithms. However,
GWO shows better accuracy rate with an increase in the
population size. Fig. 9 (c) shows the accuracy in different
number of iterations. The GWO-LSTM shows better accuracy
as compared to PSO-LSTM as the number of iterations
increases.
B. Testbed Experiment
The proposed GWO-LSTM model for deep learning-
based fault diagnosis scheme is validated on the prepared
dataset derived from a publicly available database. The
original dataset was prepared at the University of North
Carolina at Greensboro [34]. In the experimentation, TelosB
motes were deployed to collect environmental data. In this
experimentation, a data sample for four time instances (t1 , t2 ,
Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 22, NO. 5, MARCH 1, 2022
Fig. 10. Testbed results for GWO-LSTM model of deep learning.
t3 , t4 ) is considered. The dataset is prepared by injecting
hard fault and various soft faults namely gain fault, offset
fault, stuck-at-fault, and out-of-bounds faults at various rates
such as 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30%. Keras is used
for implementing the proposed GWO-LSTM model of deep
learning for fault detection [35]. Fig. 10. presents the testbed
results. Fig. 10 (a) depicts detection accuracy of each soft
fault. GWO-LSTM model of deep learning outperforms in
offset fault and gain fault detection. As expected from the
simulation results Fig. 10(b) shows that the detection accuracy
of the proposed scheme is better than HDWSN and MDNN for
various faults. In high fault rates and large datasets, the FDA
of the deep learning-based GWO-LSTM model is much better
compared to HDWSN and MDNN. As per the simulation
result, Fig. 10 (c) shows that the proposed scheme has the
least false alarm rate than other HDWSN and MDNN schemes.
Also, various soft faults are injected simultaneously at various
fault rates to measure false positive rate. Fig. 10 (d) shows the
proposed scheme gives the least false positive rate as compared
to HDWSN and MDNN in the real dataset.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, an energy-aware intelligent fault detection
scheme for IoT-enabled WSNs has been proposed. In this
paper, the novel 3-Tier hard fault detection mechanism
is proposed that reduces the false positive rate and false
alarm rate. The proposed scheme used an optimized deep
learning mechanism for soft fault detection that significantly
improves FDA. Extensive simulations have been performed
to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed scheme in
terms of FDA, FAR, FPR, energy consumption, and network
lifetime. Also, the proposed scheme is compared with the
state-of-the-art fault detection algorithms. This paper presents
an analysis of the message complexity and time complexity of
the proposed scheme that proves the capability of the proposed
scheme for real-world applications. In future work, we plan
to extend the proposed work by taking into account mobile
 KAUR AND CHANAK: ENERGY AWARE INTELLIGENT FAULT DETECTION SCHEME FOR IoT-ENABLED WSNs
sink and mobile sensor nodes. The proposed scheme can be
applied in industrial monitoring, home automation, healthcare,
smart cities, and various other sustainable IoT applications.
R EFERENCES
[1] G. Kaur, P. Chanak, and M. Bhattacharya, “Memetic algorithm-based
data gathering scheme for IoT-enabled wireless sensor networks,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 20, no. 19, pp. 11725–11734, Oct. 2020.
[2] X. Li, Z. Yu, Z. Li, and N. Wu, “Group consensus via pinning control
for a class of heterogeneous multi-agent systems with input constraints,”
Inf. Sci., vol. 542, pp. 247–262, Jan. 2021.
[3] L. Yang, Z. Yu, M. A. El-Meligy, A. M. El-Sherbeeny, and N. Wu,
“On multiplexity-aware influence spread in social networks,” IEEE
Access, vol. 8, pp. 106705–106713, 2020.
[4] S. Zhou, Z. Yu, E. S. A. Nasr, H. A. Mahmoud, E. M. Awwad, and
N. Wu, “Homomorphic encryption of supervisory control systems using
automata,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 147185–147198, 2020.
[5] R. Marino, C. Wisultschew, A. Otero, J. M. Lanza-Gutierrez, J. Portilla,
and E. D. L. Torre, “A machine-learning-based distributed system for
fault diagnosis with scalable detection quality in industrial IoT,” IEEE
Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 4339–4352, Mar. 2021.
[6] A. Caruso, S. Chessa, S. Escolar, J. Barba, and J. C. Lopez, “Collection
of data with drones in precision agriculture: Analytical model and LoRa
case study,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 22, pp. 16692–16704,
Nov. 2021.
[7] C. S. Abella et al., “Autonomous energy-efficient wireless sensor
network platform for home/office automation,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 19,
no. 9, pp. 3501–3512, May 2019.
[8] D. Gupta, M. P. S. Bhatia, and A. Kumar, “Resolving data overload
and latency issues in multivariate time-series IoMT data for mental
health monitoring,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 21, no. 22, pp. 25421–25428,
Nov. 2021.
[9] J. Jiang, W. Li, Z. Wen, Y. Bie, H. Schwarz, and C. Zhang, “Series arc
fault detection based on random forest and deep neural network,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 21, no. 15, pp. 17171–17179, Aug. 2021.
[10] R. R. Swain, P. M. Khilar, and S. K. Bhoi, “Heterogeneous fault
diagnosis for wireless sensor networks,” Ad Hoc Netw., vol. 69,
pp. 15–37, Feb. 2018.
[11] R. R. Swain, P. M. Khilar, and T. Dash, “Multifault diagnosis in WSN
using a hybrid metaheuristic trained neural network,” Digit. Commun.
Netw., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 86–100, Feb. 2020.
[12] M. R. R. Khan, T. K. An, and H. S. Lee, “A battery-free, chipless, highly
sensitive LC pressure sensor tag using PEDOT: PSS and melamine
foam,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 2184–2193, Jan. 2021.
[13] S. Zidi, T. Moulahi, and B. Alaya, “Fault detection in wireless sensor
networks through SVM classifier,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 18, no. 1,
pp. 340–347, Jan. 2018.
[14] Z. Han, J. Zhao, H. Leung, K. F. Ma, and W. Wang, “A review of deep
learning models for time series prediction,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 21,
no. 6, pp. 7833–7848, Mar. 2021.
[15] G. Kaur, P. Chanak, and M. Bhattacharya, “Energy-efficient intelligent
routing scheme for IoT-enabled WSNs,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8,
no. 14, pp. 11440–11449, Jul. 2021.
[16] Y. Liu et al., “Zero-bias deep learning for accurate identification of
Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 4,
pp. 2627–2634, Feb. 2021.
[17] Y. Liu, J. Wang, J. Li, S. Niu, and H. Song, “Class-incremental learning
for wireless device identification in IoT,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8,
no. 23, pp. 17227–17235, Dec. 2021.
[18] J. Wang, Y. Liu, and H. Song, “Counter-unmanned aircraft system(s)
(C-UAS): State of the art, challenges, and future trends,” IEEE Aerosp.
Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 4–29, Mar. 2021.
[19] Y. Liu, J. Wang, S. Niu, and H. Song, “Deep learning enabled reliable
identity verification and spoofing detection,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Wireless
Algorithms, Syst., Appl. Nanjing, China: Springer, 2020, pp. 333–345.
[20] Y. Liu, L. L. Njilla, J. Wang, and H. Song, “An LSTM enabled
dynamic Stackelberg game theoretic method for resource allocation
in the cloud,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Comput., Netw. Commun. (ICNC),
Feb. 2019, pp. 797–801.
[21] B. C. P. Lau, E. W. M. Ma, and T. W. S. Chow, “Probabilistic fault
detector for wireless sensor network,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 41, no. 8,
pp. 3703–3711, Jun. 2014.
[22] X. Jin, T. W. S. Chow, Y. Sun, J. Shan, and B. C. P. Lau, “Kuiper test
and autoregressive model-based approach for wireless sensor network
fault diagnosis,” Wireless Netw., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 829–839, 2015.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Indian Institute Of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) Varanasi. Downloaded on May 30,2022 at 12:38:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4731
[23] R. K. Shial, B. S. Gouda, S. R. Pattanaik, and N. Sethi, “A centralized
faulty node detection algorithm based on statistical analysis in WSN,” in
Proc. Int. Conf. Comput. Sci., Eng. Appl. (ICCSEA), Mar. 2020, pp. 1–6.
[24] M. Panda and P. M. Khilar, “Distributed self fault diagnosis algorithm
for large scale wireless sensor networks using modified three sigma edit
test,” Ad Hoc Netw., vol. 25, pp. 170–184, Feb. 2015.
[25] M. M. Gharamaleki and S. Babaie, “A new distributed fault detection
method for wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 14, no. 4,
pp. 4883–4890, Dec. 2020.
[26] M. Panda and P. M. Khilar, “Distributed byzantine fault detection
technique in wireless sensor networks based on hypothesis testing,”
Comput. Electr. Eng., vol. 48, pp. 270–285, Nov. 2015.
[27] M. Abo-Zahhad, S. M. Ahmed, N. Sabor, and S. Sasaki, “Mobile
sink-based adaptive immune energy-efficient clustering protocol for
improving the lifetime and stability period of wireless sensor networks,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 4576–4586, Aug. 2015.
[28] T. Kaur and D. Kumar, “Particle swarm optimization-based unequal and
fault tolerant clustering protocol for wireless sensor networks,” IEEE
Sensors J., vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 4614–4622, Jun. 2018.
[29] S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long short-term memory,” Neural
Comput., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1735–1780, 1997.
[30] S. Mirjalili, S. M. Mirjalili, and A. Lewis, “Grey wolf optimizer,” Adv.
Eng. Softw., vol. 69, pp. 46–61, Mar. 2014.
[31] J. Pan, B. Jing, X. Jiao, and S. Wang, “Analysis and application of
grey wolf optimizer-long short-term memory,” IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 121460–121468, 2020.
[32] S. Prasanth, U. Singh, A. Kumar, V. A. Tikkiwal, and P. H. J. Chong,
“Forecasting spread of COVID-19 using Google trends: A hybrid GWO-
deep learning approach,” Chaos, Solitons Fractals, vol. 142, Jan. 2021,
Art. no. 110336.
[33] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” in Proc.
IEEE ICNN, vol. 4, Nov./Dec. 1995, pp. 1942–1948.
[34] S. Suthaharan, M. Alzahrani, S. Rajasegarar, C. Leckie, and
M. Palaniswami, “Labelled data collection for anomaly detection in
wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Intell. Sensors, Sensor
Netw. Inf. Process., Dec. 2010, pp. 269–274.
[35] N. K. Manaswi, “Understanding and working with Keras,” in Deep
Learning With Applications Using Python. Bengaluru, India: Springer,
2018, pp. 31–43.
Gagandeep Kaur (Member, IEEE) received
the B.Tech. and M.Tech. degrees in computer
science and engineering from Rajiv Gandhi
Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal, India, in
2009 and 2014, respectively. She is currently
working as an Assistant Professor at Bennett
University, Greater Noida, India. She is also
a Ph.D. Research Scholar with the Atal Bihari
Vajpayee Indian Institute of Information Technol-
ogy and Management, Gwalior, India. She has
published various research articles in reputed
international journals and conferences. Her research interests are in the
areas of wireless sensor networks, the Internet of Things, soft computing,
and machine learning.
Prasenjit Chanak (Member, IEEE) received the
M.Tech. and Ph.D. degrees in information tech-
nology from the Indian Institute of Engineering
Science and Technology (IIEST), Shibpur, India,
in 2011 and 2016. He is currently working as an
Assistant Professor with the Department of Com-
puter Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology (BHU) Varanasi, Varanasi. He also
worked as an Assistant Professor with the
Department of Information and Communications
Technology, Atal Bihari Vajpayee Indian Institute
of Information Technology and Management, Gwalior, from December
2016 to August 2020. He has executed various Government of India-
sponsored projects from DST, ICSSR, and SERB. He has received
several national and international awards, such as Chester Sall Award by
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONSUMER ELECTRONICS, NJ, USA, Best Ph.D.
thesis Award (First) by Computer Society of India, India, Young Scientist
Award by DST, 2017, Government of India, Best paper Award from
ICACC, Kochi, India, 2012, Best Paper Award from (TechSym 2014) IIT—
Kharagpur, India. His research interests are wireless sensor networks,
the Internet of Things (IoT), cyber-physical networks (cpn), machine
learning, and consumer electronics.