Adaptive protocols for information dissemination in wireless sensor networks
01 Aug 1999-pp 174-185
TL;DR: It is found that the SPIN protocols can deliver 60% more data for a given amount of energy than conventional approaches, and that, in terms of dissemination rate and energy usage, the SPlN protocols perform close to the theoretical optimum.
Abstract: In this paper, we present a family of adaptive protocols, called SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation), that efficiently disseminates information among sensors in an energy-constrained wireless sensor network. Nodes running a SPIN communication protocol name their data using high-level data descriptors, called meta-data. They use meta-data negotiations to eliminate the transmission of redundant data throughout the network. In addition, SPIN nodes can base their communication decisions both upon application-specific knowledge of the data and upon knowledge of the resources that are available to them. This allows the sensors to efficiently distribute data given a limited energy supply. We simulate and analyze the performance of two specific SPIN protocols, comparing them to other possible approaches and a theoretically optimal protocol. We find that the SPIN protocols can deliver 60% more data for a given amount of energy than conventional approaches. We also find that, in terms of dissemination rate and energy usage, the SPlN protocols perform close to the theoretical optimum.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This paper discusses how topology management and network application influence the performance of cluster-based and chain-based hierarchical networks, and it is shown that the chain- based HRPs guarantee a longer network lifetime compared to Cluster-based HRPs by three to five times.
Abstract: The routing protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) is defined as the manner of data dissemination from the network field (source) to the base station (destination). Based on the network topology, there are two types of routing protocols in WSNs, they are namely flat routing protocols and hierarchical routing protocols. Hierarchical routing protocols (HRPs) are more energy efficient and scalable compared to flat routing protocols. This paper discusses how topology management and network application influence the performance of cluster-based and chain-based hierarchical networks. It reviews the basic features of sensor connectivity issues such as power control in topology set-up, sleep/idle pairing and data transmission control that are used in five common HRPs, and it also examines their impact on the protocol performance. A good picture of their respective performances give an indication how network applications, i.e whether reactive or proactive, and topology management i.e. whether centralized or distributed would determine the network performance. Finally, from the ensuring discussion, it is shown that the chain-based HRPs guarantee a longer network lifetime compared to cluster-based HRPs by three to five times.
71 citations
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: Efficient design and implementation of wireless sensor networks has become a hot area of research in recent years, due to the vast potential of sensor networks to enable applications that connect the physical world to the virtual world.
Abstract: Efficient design and implementation of wireless sensor networks has become a hot area of research in recent years, due to the vast potential of sensor networks to enable applications that connect the physical world to the virtual world By networking large numbers of tiny sensor nodes, it is possible to obtain data about physical phenomena that was difficult or impossible to obtain in more conventional ways In the coming years, as advances in micro-fabrication technology allow the cost of manufacturing sensor nodes to continue to drop, increasing deployments of wireless sensor networks are expected, with the networks eventually growing to large numbers of nodes (eg, thousands) Potential applications for such large-scale wireless sensor networks exist in a variety of fields, including medical monitoring [1, 2, 3], environmental monitoring [4, 5], surveillance, home security, military operations, and industrial machine monitoring To understand the variety of applications that can be supported by wireless sensor networks, consider the following two examples Surveillance Suppose multiple networked sensors (eg, acoustic, seismic, video) are distributed throughout an area such as a battlefield A surveillance application can be designed on top of this sensor network to provide information to an end-user about the environment In such a sensor network, traffic patterns are many-to-one, where the traffic can range from raw sensor data to a high level description of what is occurring in the environment, if data processing is done locally The application will have some quality of service (QoS) requirements from the sensor network, such as requiring a minimum percentage sensor coverage in an area where a phenomenon is expected to occur, or requiring a maximum probability of missed detection of an event At the same time, the network is expected to provide this quality of service for a long time (months or even years) using the limited resources of the network (eg, sensor energy and channel bandwidth) while requiring little to no outside intervention Meeting these goals requires careful design of both the sensor hardware and the network protocols Medical Monitoring A different application domain that can make use of wireless sensor network technology can be found in the area of medical monitoring This field ranges from monitoring patients in the hospital using wireless sensors to remove the constraints of tethering patients to big, bulky, wired monitoring devices, to monitoring patients in mass casualty situations [6], to monitoring people in their everyday lives to provide early detection and intervention for various types of disease [7] In these scenarios, the sensors vary from miniature, body-worn sensors to external sensors such as video cameras or positioning devices This is a challenging environment in which dependable, flexible, applications must be designed using sensor data as input Consider a personal health monitor application running on a PDA that receives and analyzes data from a number of sensors (eg, ECG, EMG, blood pressure, blood flow, pulse oxymeter) The monitor reacts to potential health risks and records health information in a local database Considering that most sensors used by the personal health monitor will be battery-operated and use wireless
70 citations
Cites background from "Adaptive protocols for information ..."
...Figure 2: Illustration of message exchange in the SPIN protocol [24]....
[...]
...1 Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation (SPIN) SPIN is a protocol that was designed to enable data-centric information dissemination in sensor networks [24]....
[...]
01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: A survey of state-of-the-art routing techniques with a focus on geographic routing, a paradigm that enables a reactive message-efficient routing without prior route discovery or knowledge of the network topology.
Abstract: Wireless sensor networks are formed by small sensor nodes communicating over wireless links without using a fixed network infrastructure. Sensor nodes have a limited transmission range, and their processing and storage capabilities as well as their energy resources are also limited. Routing protocols for wireless sensor networks have to ensure reliable multi-hop communication under these conditions. We describe design challenges for routing protocols in sensor networks and illustrate the key techniques to achieve desired characteristics, such as energy efficiency and delivery guarantees. We give a survey of state-of-the-art routing techniques with a focus on geographic routing, a paradigm that enables a reactive message-efficient routing without prior route discovery or knowledge of the network topology. Different geographic routing strategies are described as well as beaconless routing techniques. We also show the physical layer impact on routing and outline further research directions.
70 citations
28 Jun 2004
TL;DR: This work proposes a protocol called shortest path minded SPIN (SPMS), in which every node has a zone defined by its maximum transmission radius, and shows that SPMS outperforms SPIN by energy gains between 5% and 21%.
Abstract: In this paper we present a data dissemination protocol for efficiently distributing data through a sensor network in the face of node and link failures. Our work is motivated by the SPIN protocol which uses metadata negotiation to minimize data transmissions. We propose a protocol called shortest path minded SPIN (SPMS) in which every node has a zone defined by its maximum transmission radius. A data source node advertises the availability of data to all the nodes in its zone. Any interested node requests the data and gets sent the data using multi-hop communication via the shortest path. The failure of any node in the path is detected and recovered using backup routes. We build simulation models to compare SPMS against SPIN. The simulation results show that SPMS reduces the delay over 10 times and consumes 30% less energy in the static failure free scenario. Even with the addition of mobility, SPMS outperforms SPIN by energy gains between 5% and 21%. An analytical model is also constructed to compare the two protocols under a simplified topology.
70 citations
Cites background or methods from "Adaptive protocols for information ..."
...The protocol called SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation) [5][10] grew out of the idea that a sensor node should handshake with its neighbors and decide on the data that it already has and the data that it needs to obtain before initiating the operation to get the data....
[...]
...[5] have proposed a class of protocols called Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN) that is motivated by two problems with existing wireless sensor network data distribution protocols – Implosion, i....
[...]
...[5] have proposed a class of protocols called Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN) that is motivated by two problems with existing wireless sensor network data distribution protocols – Implosion, i.e. a node always sends data to its neighbor irrespective of whether it already has it or needs it, and Overlap, i.e. nodes often transmit redundant information because of overlap in their sensing regions....
[...]
26 Sep 2004
TL;DR: A new gradient flooding protocol is proposed in which only hop count information is utilized as a cost metric for gradient forwarding and each sensor is able to self-adjust this metric with the minimum overhead whenever its movement occurs.
Abstract: In a wireless sensor network, a majority of packet transmissions are delivered in the direction of a sink from scattered sensors. Thus, each sensor node can be implicitly provided with the direction in which to forward sensing data towards the sink. Most existing gradient approaches are based on this observation. However, these approaches do not consider the mobility problem. We propose a new gradient flooding protocol in which only hop count information is utilized as a cost metric for gradient forwarding and each sensor is able to self-adjust this metric with the minimum overhead whenever its movement occurs.
70 citations
References
More filters
01 Oct 1994
TL;DR: The modifications address some of the previous objections to the use of Bellman-Ford, related to the poor looping properties of such algorithms in the face of broken links and the resulting time dependent nature of the interconnection topology describing the links between the Mobile hosts.
Abstract: An ad-hoc network is the cooperative engagement of a collection of Mobile Hosts without the required intervention of any centralized Access Point. In this paper we present an innovative design for the operation of such ad-hoc networks. The basic idea of the design is to operate each Mobile Host as a specialized router, which periodically advertises its view of the interconnection topology with other Mobile Hosts within the network. This amounts to a new sort of routing protocol. We have investigated modifications to the basic Bellman-Ford routing mechanisms, as specified by RIP [5], to make it suitable for a dynamic and self-starting network mechanism as is required by users wishing to utilize ad hoc networks. Our modifications address some of the previous objections to the use of Bellman-Ford, related to the poor looping properties of such algorithms in the face of broken links and the resulting time dependent nature of the interconnection topology describing the links between the Mobile Hosts. Finally, we describe the ways in which the basic network-layer routing can be modified to provide MAC-layer support for ad-hoc networks.
6,877 citations
25 Oct 1998
TL;DR: The results of a derailed packet-levelsimulationcomparing fourmulti-hopwirelessad hoc networkroutingprotocols, which cover a range of designchoices: DSDV,TORA, DSR and AODV are presented.
Abstract: An ad hoc networkis a collwtion of wirelessmobilenodes dynamically forminga temporarynetworkwithouttheuseof anyexistingnetworkirrfrastructureor centralizedadministration.Dueto the limitedtransmissionrange of ~vlrelessnenvorkinterfaces,multiplenetwork“hops”maybe neededfor onenodeto exchangedata ivithanotheracrox thenetwork.Inrecentyears, a ttiery of nelvroutingprotocols~geted specificallyat this environment havebeen developed.but little pcrfomrartwinformationon mch protocol and no ralistic performancecomparisonbehvwrrthem ISavailable. ~Is paper presentsthe results of a derailedpacket-levelsimulationcomparing fourmulti-hopwirelessad hoc networkroutingprotocolsthatcovera range of designchoices: DSDV,TORA, DSR and AODV. \Vehave extended the /~r-2networksimulatorto accuratelymodelthe MACandphysical-layer behaviorof the IEEE 802.1I wirelessLANstandard,includinga realistic wtrelesstransmissionchannelmodel, and present the resultsof simulations of net(vorksof 50 mobilenodes.
5,147 citations
"Adaptive protocols for information ..." refers background in this paper
...Recently, mobile ad hoc routing protocols have become an active area of research [3, 10, 16, 18, 22]....
[...]
09 Apr 1997
TL;DR: The proposed protocol is a new distributed routing protocol for mobile, multihop, wireless networks that is highly adaptive, efficient and scalable; being best-suited for use in large, dense, mobile networks.
Abstract: We present a new distributed routing protocol for mobile, multihop, wireless networks. The protocol is one of a family of protocols which we term "link reversal" algorithms. The protocol's reaction is structured as a temporally-ordered sequence of diffusing computations; each computation consisting of a sequence of directed link reversals. The protocol is highly adaptive, efficient and scalable; being best-suited for use in large, dense, mobile networks. In these networks, the protocol's reaction to link failures typically involves only a localized "single pass" of the distributed algorithm. This capability is unique among protocols which are stable in the face of network partitions, and results in the protocol's high degree of adaptivity. This desirable behavior is achieved through the novel use of a "physical or logical clock" to establish the "temporal order" of topological change events which is used to structure (or order) the algorithm's reaction to topological changes. We refer to the protocol as the temporally-ordered routing algorithm (TORA).
2,211 citations
"Adaptive protocols for information ..." refers background in this paper
...Recently, mobile ad hoc routing protocols have become an active area of research [3, 10, 16, 18, 22]....
[...]
PARC1
TL;DR: This paper descrikrs several randomized algorit, hms for dist,rihut.ing updates and driving t,he replicas toward consist,c>nc,y.
Abstract: Whru a dilt~lhSC is replicated at, many sites2 maintaining mutual consistrnry among t,he sites iu the fac:e of updat,es is a signitirant problem. This paper descrikrs several randomized algorit,hms for dist,rihut.ing updates and driving t,he replicas toward consist,c>nc,y. The algorit Inns are very simple and require few guarant,ees from the underlying conllllunicat.ioll system, yc+ they rnsutc t.hat. the off(~c~t, of (‘very update is evcnt,uwlly rf+irt-ted in a11 rq1ica.s. The cost, and parformancc of t,hr algorithms arc tuned I>? c%oosing appropriat,c dist,rilMions in t,hc randoinizat,ioii step. TIN> idgoritlmls ilr(’ c*los~*ly analogoIls t,o epidemics, and t,he epidcWliolog)litc\ratiirc, ilitlh iii Illld~~rsti4lldill~ tlicir bc*liavior. One of tlW i$,oritlims 11&S brc>n implrmcWrd in the Clraringhousr sprv(brs of thr Xerox C’orporat~c~ Iiitcrnc4, solviiig long-standing prol>lf~lns of high traffic and tlatirl>ilsr inconsistcllcp.
1,958 citations
"Adaptive protocols for information ..." refers background or methods in this paper
...Using gossiping and broadcasting algorithms to disseminate information in distributed systems has been extensively explored in the literature, often as epidemic algorithms [6]....
[...]
...In [1, 6], gossiping is used to maintain database consistency, while in [18], gossiping is used as a mechanism to achieve fault tolerance....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors specify extensions to two common internetwork routing algorithms (distancevector routing and link-state routing) to support low-delay datagram multicasting beyond a single LAN, and discuss how the use of multicast scope control and hierarchical multicast routing allows the multicast service to scale up to large internetworks.
Abstract: Multicasting, the transmission of a packet to a group of hosts, is an important service for improving the efficiency and robustness of distributed systems and applications. Although multicast capability is available and widely used in local area networks, when those LANs are interconnected by store-and-forward routers, the multicast service is usually not offered across the resulting internetwork. To address this limitation, we specify extensions to two common internetwork routing algorithms—distance-vector routing and link-state routing—to support low-delay datagram multicasting beyond a single LAN. We also describe modifications to the single-spanning-tree routing algorithm commonly used by link-layer bridges, to reduce the costs of multicasting in large extended LANs. Finally, we discuss how the use of multicast scope control and hierarchical multicast routing allows the multicast service to scale up to large internetworks.
1,365 citations