You are on page 1of 45

Algorithms For Clustering In Ad Hoc Networks

Presented For Your Enjoyment By Team 4 Jim Kile Don Little Samir Shah

What Is An Ad Hoc Network?
 Wireless

computer network  No central control  Computers talking to each other  Suitable for
Conference rooms  Classrooms  Battlefields  Wearable computing


What Is Clustering In Ad-hoc Networks?
 Partitioning

wireless device nodes

into groups
 Each

group has clusterhead

Oversee channel allocation  Message routing within cluster  Message routing between clusters

 Ordinary

nodes within the clusterhead's transmission range

What Are Benefits Of Clustering?
 Controlling

spatial reuse of shared

channel  Building/maintaining cluster-based virtual network architectures


What Are Benefits Of Clustering? Routing  Minimizing amount of data exchanged for routing  Lower cost – fewer routes  Simplify  routing tables/structure  Abstract network structure Higher level structure unaffected by local topology changes 5 .

What Are Goals Of Clustering? 1) At least 1 neighboring clusterhead Allows fast communications between nodes 2) Nodes connected to “best" clusterhead 3) Clusterheads well scattered throughout the network 6 .

Why Is Clustering Important? Infrastructure  Wired Well defined infrastructure  Network structure is static  Link failure is infrequent   Wireless Infrastructure-less  Rapid topology change  Frequent link failures   Routes calculated frequently 7 .

Why Is Clustering Important? Range  Wired   Transmission range is large Each node responsible for  Its own communications  Wireless   Transmission range is small relative to network size Each node responsible for:   Its own communications Forwarding communication from others (multihop) 8 .

Why Is Clustering Important? Power  Wired  Virtually unlimited power Very limited power  Wireless  9 .

Why Is Clustering Important? Routing Algorithm  Wired Pre-calculated routing algorithm  Designed for relatively stable networks   Wireless New algorithm  Designed for  Mobile units  Topology continuously changing  10 .

How are Clusters Represented?  Graph  G = (V E) Vertices (V) represent individual nodes  Edge (E) connection between two vertices within range 11 .

Abstracting Network Topology BLUE = network structure BLACK VERTICES = clusterheads BLACK EDGES = virtual connections between clusters 12 .

How Are Clusterheads Chosen? Approximating Minimum Size WeaklyConnected Dominating Sets For Clustering Mobil Ad Hoc Networks  Criterion: domination in graphs Distributed Clustering For Ad Hoc Networks  Criterion: generic weight 13 .

FIRST PAPER Approximating Minimum Size Weakly-Connected Dominating Sets For Clustering Mobil Ad Hoc Networks .

Paper’s Main Contribution “Finding a completely distributed algorithm for identifying small weakly connected dominating set’s” .

Algorithms Presented  Presented 5 algorithms  Analyzed 2 algorithms  Their most important algorithm covered here  Algorithm V Distributed Asynchronous Approach 16 .

Dominating Set Of A Graph A dominating set of a graph G  (V. such every that ex v  V vert is either in S or adjacent o averte of S t 17 . E) is avertex subset S  V .

Black Vertices Form Dominating Set 18 .

Black Vertices Form Dominating Set  Vertices of dominating set = clusterheads  Assign each vertex to cluster corresponding to dominating vertex  Optimize smallest dominating set Simplify the network structure  Finding a minimum size dominating set in a general graph is np-complete  19 .

Connected Dominating Set (CDS)  Dominating set whose induced subgraph is connected  Induced subgraph used for routing messages between clusters  Connectivity requirement causes large number of clusters  Finding minimum size connected dominating set is NP-complete 20 .

Connected Dominating Set BLUE = network structure BLACK VERTICES = clusterheads BLACK LINES = induced subgraph 21 .

Weakly-Connected Dominating Set (WCDS) Subgraph eakly induced by S ( S  w V ) is the gra    S   ( N S . E  ( N S xS )) . w S includes the vertices in S and w all of their neighbors as the vertex set 22 .

Weakly-Connected Dominating Set (WCDS)  Remove edges  Resulting in a sparser structure  Can yield fewer clusters than CDS 23 .

Desired Graph Properties  Goal is to find a small weakly-connected dominating set in order to abstract the network structure as much as possible  Smaller values are preferred  Improvement number of pieces that would be merged into a single cluster if that piece were clusterhead 24 .

Assumptions  We assume every node knows the role and piece ID information of all its neighbors  Each device has own internal decision mechanism to determine its own (local) best candidate  Multiple clusterheads are grown in parallel 25 .

How Are Node Roles Shown?  Algorithms uses color to display role of the vertex White – not assigned to any cluster  Grey – assigned to a cluster but not clusterhead  Black – clusterhead  26 .

Beginning  Each  node starts out NOT connected to any other node Initially white-not connected to cluster  Change color as the algorithm progresses 27 .Algorithm .

Algorithm .member of cluster  Merged into the cluster  28 .Each Iteration  Gray and white node calculate cluster size if they were the clusterhead  Node with largest improvement in its closed neighborhood is new clusterhead  Chosen candidate node colored black  Neighboring white vertices Colored gray .

Termination  Algorithm terminates when no piece shows improvement  Black vertices constitute a WeaklyConnected Dominating Set 29 .Algorithm .

Prior To First Iteration 30 .

After First Iteration 31 .

Author’s Evaluation Methodology  Generate random graphs repeatedly  Ran this algorithm against test algorithm from others  Compute dominating set size  Smallest dominating set is best 32 .

Author’s Evaluation Setup  Place vertices randomly in a rectangular area in 2D-plane   Two levels of density 40 to 200 vertices According to a normal distribution Centered at a predefined expected value  Assign each node a transmission range    When two nodes are placed within range of each other   An edge is added between the vertices Simulates a reliable link between them 33 .

Author’s Evaluation Conclusion  For  each randomly generated network Measure the dominating set size resulting from the algorithms  Authors believe demonstrated that their algorithm generated smaller dominating sets 34 .

Why They Are Wrong*  No  reason to believe that algorithm achieved optimum placement Could be local optima  No reason to believe that algorithm they tested against is ideal  Evaluated in 2D world  Does this generalize to 3D world? *terminology per Dr Cha 35 .

SECOND PAPER Distributed Clustering For Ad Hoc Networks .

Algorithm Presented  Presented 2 algorithms  Selected the Distributed Clustering Algorithm (DCA) 37 .

Clustering Based Upon Weight  Each node has arbitrary weight assigned  Allow designer to choose nodes that are better suited for clusterhead role  Hand carried devices would have a lower weight than vehicle carried devices  Clusterhead has largest generic weight in the neighborhood 38 .

Desired Graph Properties 1) Every ordinary node has at least a clusterhead as neighbor (dominance property) 2) Every ordinary node affiliates with the neighboring clusterhead that has the bigger weight 3) No two clusterheads can be neighbors (independence property) 39 .

Assumptions  Same as first paper  Author emphasis that sole knowledge of the topology local to each node 40 .

Algorithm  At startup each node announces its weight  Nodes with the highest weigh announce that they are clusterheads  Nodes with lower weights join clusters  Node decides which role to assume only when all its neighbors with bigger weights have decided their own roles 41 .

Author’s Evaluation  Easy  to implement  Time complexity Changing topology of the ad hoc network  Rather than size of the network 42 .

Why They Are Wrong*  Weights would be difficult to assign a priori  No reason to believe that algorithm achieved optimum placement  Could be local optima  No demonstration that algorithm worked *terminology per Dr Cha 43 .

Presenter’s Discussion Same  Node decides its own role (clusterhead or ordinary node)   Knowing its current one hop neighbors As opposed to the knowledge of one and two hop neighbors as required by previous algorithms  Both algorithms are executed at each node  Assumes nodes know identity of the one hop neighbors  Organizes network with same clustering structure 44 .

Presenter’s Discussion Different  Paper  1 Metric is smallest number of clusters  Evaluation based upon creating clusters with the largest possible number of nodes  Metric calculated by nodes  Paper  2 Uses arbitrary weight assigned to each node  Weight represents its ability to be a clusterhead 45 .