You are on page 1of 22

CLUSTERING IN WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

BY KALYAN SASIDHAR

RESEARCH PROBLEM

Understanding existing clustering algorithms and finding the problems stated and addressed Compare the pros and cons of each algorithm Simulate algorithms and compare performance with and without clustering mechanism

INTRODUCTION TO CLUSTERING

Grouping of similar objects or sensors in our context distance or proximity Logical organizing Topology control approach Load balancing, network scalability

Types of clustering Static: local topology control


Dynamic: changing network parameters

Single hop and multi hop Homogeneous and heterogeneous

HEED[1]

ADVANTAGES OF CLUSTERING
Transmit aggregated data to the data sink reducing number of nodes taking part in transmission Useful energy consumption Scalability for large number of nodes Reduces communication overhead for both single and multi hop

LITERATURE SURVEY OF CLUSTERING ALGORITHMS

HEED: A hybrid energy efficient distributed clustering approach for adhoc sensor networks MRECA: Mobility resistant efficient clustering approach for ad-hoc sensor networks

Energy efficient dynamic clustering algorithm for ad-hoc sensor networks


LEACH-Energy efficient communication protocol for WSN EEDC-Dynamic clustering and energy efficient routing technique for WSN

Problem statement

Set of nodes, identify set of CHs that cover the entire network Protocol distributed Local information One node-one cluster Node-cluster head: single hop CH-CH: multi hop using routing protocol

HEED
Assumptions

Sensor quasi-stationary Links are symmetric Energy consumption non-uniform for all nodes

Nodes-location unaware
Processing and communication capability-similar

Algorithm:
Cluster head selection
hybrid of residual energy (primary) and communication cost (secondary) such as node proximity

Number of rounds of iterations Tentative CHs formed Final CH until CHprob=1 Same or different power levels used for intra cluster communication

Pros:
Cons: Repeated iterations complex algorithm Balanced clusters Low message overhead Uniform & non-uniform node distribution Inter cluster communication explained Out performs generic clustering protocols on various factors

Decrease of residual energy smaller probability number of iterations increased Nodes with high residual energy one region of a network Future work: Only two level hierarchy provided but can be extended to multilevel hierarchy

MRECA
Assumptions:

Sensor quasi-stationary Nodes-location unaware Every node as source and server

Algorithm:

Mobility resistant clustering approach


Deterministic time without iterations Computed score value used to compute delay Delay used CH announcement

Node mobility

Local maintenance performed instead of re-clustering

Pros
Clusters generated as node speed increased Only one iteration against repeated iterations in HEED

Each node one message saving on message transmission


Robust against synchronization errors

better energy efficiency

Can be used for environmental monitoring and battlefield applications

Cons
Inter cluster communication not explained CH rotation mentioned but not explained how

Future work

Extensive simulations on large scale networks with elaborate power models, Extensions to k-hop clusters and integration of clustering with network applications

EEDC
Assumption:

Two tier hierarchy network

Routing limited to CHs

route set up cost minimized

Sensors clustered

Algorithm:

Active node estimation and optimum probability of becoming cluster head Received Signal power

Cluster formation

CH with a certain probability by wining a competition with neighbors

Data collection

Node-CH using MAC protocol-p-persistent CSMA

Data delivery

CH-BS-multi hop routing protocol

Pros
Number of clusters and CH-Dynamic Energy dissipation-even distribution Prolong network lifetime

most efficient for large-scale sensor network


Intra and inter cluster communication explained

Future work
Further investigating the applicability of the proposed clustering technique and routing algorithm to more general wireless sensor networks.

LEACH
Assumptions:

Fixed and remote base station Nodes homogeneous and energy constrained Radio channel is symmetric

EA-EB=EB-EA

Sensing rate for all sensors fixed

Algorithm

CH position rotated among the nodes

energy load distributed .

Number of active nodes in the network and the optimal number of clusters assumed a priori
Nodes join a target number of CHs Node-CH communication-TDMA

Pros

Incorporates data fusion into routing protocols Amount of information to base station reduced 4-8 times effective over direct communication in prolonging network lifetime Grid like area

Cons

Only single hop clusters formed Might lead to large number of clusters No discussion on optimal CH selection All CHs should directly transmit to the data sink

DYNAMIC CLUSTER

Energy efficiency distributed:

CH selection-both residual energy and PT

Number of nodes-network size and PT


CH -center of the cluster

Rotating CH to average power consumption


Breaking clusters and reforming compensate for differences of power consumption in different areas

Unique route Only CH with lowest ID and high residual energy

What is only one CH is present and that CH as low residual energy?

Pros

Reduce flooding in route discovery Avoid duplicate data transmission

Cons

Inter cluster communication not explained

Number of iterations needed for CH selection and cluster formation not mentioned

CONCLUSIONS

Problem statement seems to be unique Reduce energy consumption Prolong network lifetime Form set of clusters from a set of nodes Cluster the whole network with the selected CH Rotate CHs for energy distribution Algorithms differ in CH selection and cluster formation Some address intra and inter cluster communication Some address real world applications

REFERENCES
[1]. A hybrid energy efficient distributed clustering approach for ad-hoc sensor networks