Cross-Layer Protocol Design and Optimization for Delay/Fault-Tolerant Mobile Sensor Networks IEEE Journal of Selected Areas in Communications, 2008 Yu.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A 2 -MAC: An Adaptive, Anycast MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Hwee-Xian TAN and Mun Choon CHAN Department of Computer Science, School of Computing.
Advertisements

CSLI 5350G - Pervasive and Mobile Computing Week 6 - Paper Presentation “Exploiting Beacons for Scalable Broadcast Data Dissemination in VANETs” Name:
An Adaptive Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Network
5/11/20151 Computer Networks COE 549 Random Access Tarek Sheltami KFUPM CCSE COE
KAIST Adaptive Triangular Deployment Algorithm for Unattended Mobile Sensor Networks Suho Yang (September 4, 2008) Ming Ma, Yuanyuan Yang IEEE Transactions.
NCKU CSIE CIAL1 Principles and Protocols for Power Control in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Authors: Vikas Kawadia and P. R. Kumar Publisher: IEEE JOURNAL ON.
Self Organization and Energy Efficient TDMA MAC Protocol by Wake Up For Wireless Sensor Networks Zhihui Chen; Ashfaq Khokhar ECE/CS Dept., University of.
1 University of Freiburg Computer Networks and Telematics Prof. Christian Schindelhauer Wireless Sensor Networks 9th Lecture Christian Schindelhauer.
Focused Beam Routing protocol for Underwater Acoustic Networks Josep Miquel Jornet Montana, Milica Stojanovic, Michele Zorzi, Proc. WuWNet 2008.
1 A Novel Mechanism for Flooding Based Route Discovery in Ad hoc Networks Jian Li and Prasant Mohapatra Networks Lab, UC Davis.
Hongyi Wu Center for Advanced Computer Studies University of Louisiana at Lafayette Delay/Fault-Tolerant Mobile Sensor Networks.
On the Energy Efficient Design of Wireless Sensor Networks Tariq M. Jadoon, PhD Department of Computer Science Lahore University of Management Sciences.
Efficient MAC Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks
MAC Layer Protocols for Sensor Networks Leonardo Leiria Fernandes.
1 Token Passing: IEEE802.5 standard  4 Mbps  maximum token holding time: 10 ms, limiting packet length  packet (token, data) format:  SD, ED mark start,
1 Power Control for Distributed MAC Protocols in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Wei Wang, Vikram Srinivasan, and Kee-Chaing Chua National University of Singapore.
Multimedia & Networking Lab
1 Adaptive QoS Framework for Wireless Sensor Networks Lucy He Honeywell Technology & Solutions Lab No. 430 Guo Li Bin Road, Pudong New Area, Shanghai,
Stochastic sleep scheduling (SSS) for large scale wireless sensor networks Yaxiong Zhao Jie Wu Computer and Information Sciences Temple University.
On-Demand Traffic-Embedded Clock Synchronization for Wireless Sensor Networks Sang Hoon Lee.
Power Save Mechanisms for Multi-Hop Wireless Networks Matthew J. Miller and Nitin H. Vaidya University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign BROADNETS October.
1 Core-PC: A Class of Correlative Power Control Algorithms for Single Channel Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Jun Zhang and Brahim Bensaou The Hong Kong University.
Token Passing: IEEE802.5 standard  4 Mbps  maximum token holding time: 10 ms, limiting packet length  packet (token, data) format:  SD, ED mark start,
Wireless Sensor Networks COE 499 Energy Aware Routing
AN ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANALYTIC MODEL FOR WIRELESS SENSOR MAC PROTOCOL ERIC MAKITA SEPTEMBRE
Prediction Assisted Single-copy Routing in Underwater Delay Tolerant Networks Zheng Guo, Bing Wang and Jun-Hong Cui Computer Science & Engineering Department,
MARCH : A Medium Access Control Protocol For Multihop Wireless Ad Hoc Networks 성 백 동
Maximum Network Lifetime in Wireless Sensor Networks with Adjustable Sensing Ranges Cardei, M.; Jie Wu; Mingming Lu; Pervaiz, M.O.; Wireless And Mobile.
Copyright: S.Krishnamurthy, UCR Power Controlled Medium Access Control in Wireless Networks – The story continues.
1 An Adaptive Energy-Efficient and Low-Latency MAC for Data Gathering in Wireless Sensor Network Gang Lu, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, and Cauligi Raghavendra.
ENERGY-EFFICIENT FORWARDING STRATEGIES FOR GEOGRAPHIC ROUTING in LOSSY WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS Presented by Prasad D. Karnik.
November 4, 2003APOC 2003 Wuhan, China 1/14 Demand Based Bandwidth Assignment MAC Protocol for Wireless LANs Presented by Ruibiao Qiu Department of Computer.
Presenter: Abhishek Gupta Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Presentation of Wireless sensor network A New Energy Aware Routing Protocol for Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks Supporting QoS 王 文 毅
Collision-free Time Slot Reuse in Multi-hop Wireless Sensor Networks
Minimizing Energy Consumption in Sensor Networks Using a Wakeup Radio Matthew J. Miller and Nitin H. Vaidya IEEE WCNC March 25, 2004.
An Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Qingchun Ren and Qilian Liang Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Texas at.
A SURVEY OF MAC PROTOCOLS FOR WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS
KAIS T Distributed cross-layer scheduling for In-network sensor query processing PERCOM (THU) Lee Cheol-Ki Network & Security Lab.
An Adaptive Energy-Efficient and Low- Latency MAC for Data Gathering in Wireless Sensor Networks Gang Lu, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, and Cauligi S. Raghavendra.
MMAC: A Mobility- Adaptive, Collision-Free MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Muneeb Ali, Tashfeen Suleman, and Zartash Afzal Uzmi IEEE Performance,
Chih-Min Chao and Yao-Zong Wang Department of Computer Science and Engineering National Taiwan Ocean University, Taiwan IEEE WCNC 2010 A Multiple Rendezvous.
Self Organization and Energy Efficient TDMA MAC Protocol by Wake Up for Wireless Sensor Networks Zhihui Chen and Ashfaq Khokhar ECE Department, University.
SNU Mobile Networks Lab. S-MAC (Sensor-MAC) T-MAC (Timeout-MAC) Kae Won, Choi Kyoung hoon, Kim.
KAIS T SIGF : A Family of Configurable, Secure Routing Protocols for WSNs Sep. 20, 2007 Presented by Kim, Chano Brian Blum, Tian He, Sang Son, Jack Stankovic.
Opportunistic Flooding in Low-Duty- Cycle Wireless Sensor Networks with Unreliable Links Shuo Goo, Yu Gu, Bo Jiang and Tian He University of Minnesota,
A Wakeup Scheme for Sensor Networks: Achieving Balance between Energy Saving and End-to-end Delay Xue Yang, Nitin H.Vaidya Department of Electrical and.
a/b/g Networks Routing Herbert Rubens Slides taken from UIUC Wireless Networking Group.
1 An Adaptive Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Tijs van Dam, Koen Langendoen In ACM SenSys /1/2005 Hong-Shi Wang.
A+MAC: A Streamlined Variable Duty-Cycle MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks 1 Sang Hoon Lee, 2 Byung Joon Park and 1 Lynn Choi 1 School of Electrical.
A Throughput-Adaptive MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Zuo Luo, Liu Danpu, Ma Yan, Wu Huarui Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications.
CSR: Cooperative Source Routing Using Virtual MISO in Wireless Ad hoc Networks IEEE WCNC 2011 Yang Guan, Yao Xiao, Chien-Chung Shen and Leonard Cimini.
Delivery ratio-maximized wakeup scheduling for ultra-low duty-cycled WSNs under real-time constraints Fei Yang, Isabelle Augé-Blum National Institute of.
Link Layer Support for Unified Radio Power Management in Wireless Sensor Networks IPSN 2007 Kevin Klues, Guoliang Xing and Chenyang Lu Database Lab.
Localized Low-Power Topology Control Algorithms in IEEE based Sensor Networks Jian Ma *, Min Gao *, Qian Zhang +, L. M. Ni *, and Wenwu Zhu +
Medium Access Control in Wireless networks
An Enhanced Cross-Layer Protocol for Energy Efficiency in Wireless Sensor Networks Jaehyun Kim, Dept. of Electrical & Electronic Eng., Yonsei University;
Adaptive Power Control Algorithm for Ad Hoc Networks with Short and Long Term Packet Correlations Jun Zhang, Zuyuan Fang, and Brahim Bensaou Dept. of Computer.
Energy-Efficient, Application-Aware Medium Access for Sensor Networks Venkatesh Rajenfran, J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, and Katia Obraczka Computer Engineering.
GholamHossein Ekbatanifard, Reza Monsefi, Mohammad H. Yaghmaee M., Seyed Amin Hosseini S. ELSEVIER Computer Networks 2012 Queen-MAC: A quorum-based energy-efficient.
Toward Reliable and Efficient Reporting in Wireless Sensor Networks Authors: Fatma Bouabdallah Nizar Bouabdallah Raouf Boutaba.
S-MAC Taekyoung Kwon. MAC in sensor network Energy-efficient Scalable –Size, density, topology change Fairness Latency Throughput/utilization.
SERENA: SchEduling RoutEr Nodes Activity in wireless ad hoc and sensor networks Pascale Minet and Saoucene Mahfoudh INRIA, Rocquencourt Le Chesnay.
On Mobile Sink Node for Target Tracking in Wireless Sensor Networks Thanh Hai Trinh and Hee Yong Youn Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops(PerComW'07)
Structure-Free Data Aggregation in Sensor Networks.
Oregon Graduate Institute1 Sensor and energy-efficient networking CSE 525: Advanced Networking Computer Science and Engineering Department Winter 2004.
Max do Val Machado Raquel A. F. Mini Antonio A. F. Loureiro DCC/UFMG DCC/PUC Minas DCC/UFMG IEEE ICC 2009 proceedings Advisor : Han-Chieh Chao Student.
Network System Lab. Sungkyunkwan Univ. Differentiated Access Mechanism in Cognitive Radio Networks with Energy-Harvesting Nodes Network System Lab. Yunmin.
-1/16- Maximum Battery Life Routing to Support Ubiquitous Mobile Computing in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks C.-K. Toh, Georgia Institute of Technology IEEE.
Ultra-Low Duty Cycle MAC with Scheduled Channel Polling
Presentation transcript:

Cross-Layer Protocol Design and Optimization for Delay/Fault-Tolerant Mobile Sensor Networks IEEE Journal of Selected Areas in Communications, 2008 Yu Wang, Hongyi Wu, Feng Lin, and Nian-Feng Tzeng Presented by Hanjin Park (September 16, 2008) Computer Network Lab. 1 / 22

Contents Introduction Problem definition Solution – Cross-Layer Data Delivery Protocol for DFT-MSN Protocol Parameters Asynchronous Phase Synchronous Phase – Protocol Optimization Performance Evaluation Conclusion 2 / 22

Introduction Delay/Fault-Tolerant Mobile Sensor Networks(DFT- MSN) – Extremely low and intermittent connectivity Sparse network density and dynamic mobility – Without end-to-end connection Convention routing for MSN do not work effectively – Always end-to-end connected – limited buffer Save messages temporally to relay Store and forward A B E D F C / 22

Introduction Applications of DFT-MSN – Air quality sensor – Military sensor – Wildlife tracking ZebraNet at Princeton Univ. 4 / 22

Introduction Problem of DFT-MSN – Work aggressively in order to catch every possible opportunity for data transmission – But, working aggressively means DFT-MSN has power consumption problem – More important power than conventional MSN – Because the conventional MSN has stable connectivity and channel bandwidth – Tradeoff between link utilization and energy efficiency 5 / 22

Problem definition How to make efficient use of the transmission opportunities whenever they are available, while keeping the energy consumption at the lowest possible level? Cross-Layer data delivery protocol – Asynchronous phase / Synchronous phase – Optimization Layer 2 Data Link Layer One hop transmission Layer 3 Network Layer Routing 6 / 22

Preliminary Protocol Parameters – Nodal Delivery Probability Probability that a sensor can deliver message to sink Decision on data transmission is based on delivery probability i Sink k If there is no transmission during a certain period, reduce the delivery probability When Whenever sensor i transmits a data message to another node k, delivery probability will be updated 7 / 22

Preliminary Protocol Parameters – Message Fault Tolerance Multiple copies of the messages  create/maintain by diff sensor  redundancy Fault tolerant degree(FTD), amount of redundancy Data queue management j Sort the messages based on FTD. The smaller FTD, the more importantWhen a new Message come to queue with already full, then drop the bottom message in the queue If FTD of a message is larger than threshold, then drop it to reduce transmission cost Threshold = 0.57 M1,M2,M3,M4,M5,M6,M7 New Message M8Drop M5, M6, M8 M1,M2,M3,M4,M5,M6,M / 22

Proposed Scheme Cross-Layer Data Delivery protocol for DFT-MSN – Asynchronous Phase Sensor A turns on its radio and listens for a period of If channel idle, Node A transmits a preamble pkt. Preamble pkt. to grasp channel and inform its neighbor to prepare for receiving of RTS pkt. Send RTS pkt. RTS pkt. contains nodal delivery probability, FTD of msg, and length of contention window(W) Receive RTS. Only qualified receiver send back CTS. Qualified receiver means which nodes with higher delivery probability than sender and available buffer space. Receive CTS. Sender makes a neighboring table to control central arrangement for data transmission Enter Synchronous phase Collision may happens in two situations 1)Multiple nodes may try to grasp the channel by sending preamble pkt. 2)Multiple qualified neighbor nodes may reply with CTS pkts. simultaneously A B C D E 9 / 22 A B C D E

Proposed Scheme Cross-Layer Data Delivery protocol for DFT-MSN – Synchronous Phase After obtaining information of qualified receivers, Node A decides which of them are to be selected (outgoing message M’s FTD and receiver’s delivery probability) Send SCHEDULE pkt. SCHEDULE pkt. includes list of receiver’s IDs and corresponding FTD of the message. Receive SCHEDULE pkt. If a receiver finds its ID in SCHED pkt. then accept the following message M, insert M to its queue with FTD. Qualified receivers reply with an ACK pkt. At a specific time slot which predefined in the SCHED pkt. Collision Free After receiving the ACK pkt. the node A recalculates the FTD of its local copy of message M. A B C D E 10 / 22 A B C D E

Proposed Scheme Protocol Optimization – Periodic Sleeping Due to sparse connectivity of DFT-MSN, sensor nodes want to be mostly in the listening state  power management problem S cycles period si transmission cycles # of Msg with FTD smaller than F at node i total # of Msg at node i Sleeping period of node iMinimum sleeping period Threshold 11 / 22

Proposed Scheme Protocol Optimization – Collision Avoidance During RTS Transmission Node i dynamically select a listening period between 1 to  reduce overall collision prob. node with a lower delivery probability to have a better chance to grasp the channel  high channel efficiency The larger (maximum listening period), the less likely collision will happen, but less link utilization(power efficiency problem) Find a minimum which keeps the collision prob.( ) under predefined threshold ( ) node i node j node i node j listen Send preamble pkt. simultaneously preambleRTS time slot 12 / 22

Proposed Scheme Protocol Optimization – Collision Avoidance During CTS Transmission RTS pkt. has CW for that receiver can select randomly from the CW No fixed CW, adaptively changes the size of CW for efficiency Two schemes to optimized CW 1.Minimizing overall collision probability 2.Minimizing collision probability for nodes with high delivery probabilities* (Appendix 2-A, 2-B) node j node i listen RTS contains common CW size (W) preambleRTS node k listen CW of node j CW of node k CTS time slot Send CTS pkt. simultaneously 13 / 22

Proposed Scheme Protocol Optimization – 1) Minimizing overall collision probability Node i send RTS to its neighbor( ) Every qualified neighbor randomly selected a time slot between 1 and Probability that every CTS pkt.s is transmitted in a collision-free Overall collision probability Find node i neighbor of node i ( ) 14 / 22

Proposed Scheme Protocol Optimization – Summary For channel efficiency, – Lower NDP is given a larger sleeping period because of lack of delivery probability – To get the channel easily, Lower NDP, smaller listening period To reduce collision probability – Higher NDP, more likely selected as relay node. Higher Delivery Prob.Lower Delivery Prob. Sleeping periodshorterlonger Listening period (preamble/RTS) longershorter Contention Window (CTS) longershorter 15 / 22

Performance Evaluation OPT – Proposed protocol that employs all optimization schemes – (sleeping period), (maximum listening period) – (contention window) NOOPT – Basic protocol without parameter optimization NOSLEEP – Similar to OPT, except that nodes do not perform periodic sleeping ZBR – Differs from OPT only in the message transmission scheme – ZebraNet’s history-based scheme 16 / 22

Performance Evaluation (# of sinks) More sink, fewer hops NOSLEEP – low delay, but highest energy consumption ZBR – low delay? 17 / 22

Performance Evaluation (# of nodes) More node  limited bandwidth, queue size  most msg are drop  lower delivery ratio ZBR’s transmission control is bad More node  delay decrease (better chance to meet nodes with HDP) 18 / 22

Performance Evaluation (Max queue size) Bigger queue size, increase delivery ratio Queue size does not affect the number of data transmission, and power consumption Because of waiting in queue, delay slightly increased 19 / 22

Performance Evaluation (Avg. speed) More speed, delivery ratio is increased? More speed, power consumption is decreased slightly due to less transmission More speed, delay is decreased (better chance to meet nodes with HDP) 20 / 22

Conclusion DFT-MSN – Low and intermittent connection – No guarantee end to end connection – Limited buffer / store and forward Cross-Layer data delivery protocol – Asynchronous phase, synchronous phase – Employ layer 2’s information for working related layer 3 Nodal delivery probability, Message fault tolerance Optimization – Sleeping period – Maximum Listening period – Contention window 21 / 22

Discussion The lack of mentions about – Definition of some notation No consideration about – Impact of threshold – Parameters’ sensitivity – Synchronization – Recursive transmission 22 / 22

Q & A Thank you 23 / 22

Reference [1] Y. Wang and H. Wu, “The Delay Fault Tolerant Mobile Sensor Network(DFT-MSN) : A New Paradigm for Pervasive Information Gathering,” IEEE Trans. Mobile Computing, vol. 6, no. 9, pp , [2] 24 / 22

Appendix 1 Message Transmission Process ij M M7 M M1 M 25 / 22

Appendix 2-A Protocol Optimization – 2) Minimizing overall probability for nodes with high delivery probability Node with high delivery probability(DP) are better candidates as dada relay nodes, so high collision prob. Reduce collision probability according to DP If sender is node i, RTS of sender(CW( ), maximum DP of neighbors( ), DP of sender( ) Qualified neighbor node j receive RTS, select a timeslot from 0 to to transmit CTS The larger (receiver DP), close to whole contention window W, otherwise if is small, it may have few choices. sink node i node j neighbor node 26 / 22

Appendix 2-B Protocol Optimization – 2) Minimizing overall probability for nodes with high delivery probability(cont.) :prob. that node k doesn’t choose slot s :prob. that no other node select slot s except node j  neighbor node j ‘s collision probability (delivery probability ) Find slot s 27 / 22