430 likes | 618 Views
Using local geometry for Topology Construction in Wireless Sensor Networks . Sameera Poduri Robotic Embedded Systems Lab(RESL) http://robotics.usc.edu/resl University of Southern California Joint work with Prof. Gaurav Sukhatme (RESL, USC),
E N D
Using local geometry for Topology Construction in Wireless Sensor Networks Sameera Poduri Robotic Embedded Systems Lab(RESL) http://robotics.usc.edu/resl University of Southern California Joint work with Prof. Gaurav Sukhatme (RESL, USC), Sundeep Pattem & Prof. Bhaskar Krishnamachari (ANRG, USC)
Motivation Different Coverage & Connectivity requirements local control, global requirements 2/42
Problem • Given a set of nodes, construct an efficient topology • Control instruments • Power control • Sleep scheduling • Position control Local conditions that influence global network properties 3/42
Approach • What are the desirable properties? (global/local?) • What topologies have these properties? • Can they be constructed with local rules? • How can we design deployment algorithms to implement these rules? 4/42
Talk Outline • Network properties • Proximity graphs • Local rules for construction • Neighbor-Every-Theta graphs • Connectivity Properties • Coverage optimization • Deployment Algorithms • Results • Related Work • Summary & Future directions 5/42
Construction Rules Model • Communication • binary disk • Different communication ranges • Coverage • binary disk • Nodes can sense the angle and distance of neighbors • Very large network • No localization/GPS 6/42
Network Properties • Connectivity • Coverage • Sparseness • Degree • Spanner Ratio 7/42
Network Properties - 1 Connectivity • 0/1 : Path between any two given nodes • “degree” of connectivity (k-connectivity) • Path Connectivity = minimum (vertex disjoint) paths between any two given nodes • Vertex Connectivity = minimum vertices to disconnect the network • Edge Connectivity = minimum edges to disconnect the network Menger’s Thm 8/42
Network Properties - 2 Coverage • Net area “sensed” Degree • # neighbors Sparseness • #edges = O(#nodes) • Spanner • efficiency of paths • , c = spanner ratio 9/42
Proximity Graphs • Encode spatial arrangement of nodes. • Can model network communication graph • Popular graphs • Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) • Relative Neighborhood Graph (RNG) • Gabriel Graph (GG) • Delaunay Graph (DG) • Yao Graph (YG) 10/42
Proximity Graphs Properties • All are connected and sparse • RNG: low power consumption, low degree and good connectivity • GG & DG: optimal power spanners • GPSR derives it’s scalability from the RNG and GG (routing decisions based on local state only) • YG: low spanner 11/42
Proximity Graphs Definitions RNG: No node closer to both X and Y GG: No node in the circle of minimum radius passing through X and Y DG: No node in the circumcircle of X, Y, Z θ YG(θ): No node closer than Y in θ sector 12/42
Proximity Graphs Hierarchical Relationship Average degree, Connectivity 13/42
Construction Rules Model • Communication • binary disk • Different communication ranges • Coverage • binary disk • Nodes can sense the angle and distance of neighbors • Very large network • No localization/GPS 14/42
Construction Rules GOAL: Communication graph = Proximity graph • Problem: Comm Graph is Disk graph • (Only edges < Rc) RNG Comm. Graph 15/42
Construction Rules Relative Neighborhood Graph Theorem1: If each node has at least one neighbor in every 2/3 sector around it, the communication graph is a super-graph of RNG. Y Y X 16/42
Construction Rules RNG… 2/3 result - • Sufficient but not necessary • Best you can do with no global knowledge • “tight” bound 17/42
Construction Rules Gabriel Graph Theorem 2: If each node has at least one neighbor in every θ = arccos(r/R)sector around it, the communication graph is a super-graph of GG. 18/42
Construction Rules Delaunay Graph • Corollary : If each node has at least one neighbor in every θ = arccos(r/R)sector around it, the communication graph is a super-graph of DG. 19/42
Neighbor-Every-Theta Condition NET Graph: A graph in which every node satisfies NET condition 20/42
NET Graphs Connectivity of NET graph Theorem3: An infinite NET graph is at least 2/ connected for < #nodes > 2 Every polygon has at least 3 exterior angles > #Edges cut 3 / 2/ #nodes = 2 #Edges cut 2 2/ - 1 k #nodes = 1 #Edges cut 2/ 21/42
NET Graphs Connectivity of NET graph.. For = , NET graph is guaranteed to be 1-connected Result by D’Souza et al. *, If each node has at least one neighbor in every sector around it, then the graph is guaranteed to be connected. * R. M. D'Souza, D. Galvin, C. Moore, D. Randall. A local topology control algorithm guaranteeing global connectivity and greedy routing. (Working paper) 22/42
NET Graphs NET graphs • Each node has at least one neighbor in every sector • Single parameter family of graphs • Connectivity ≥ 2/ • = 2/3 RNG 23/42
NET Graphs Coverage Optimization • Suppose that a node needs k neighbors to satisfy the sector conditions for the proximity graphs • To maximize coverage from the node’s local perspective: - All neighbors must lie on the perimeter of the communication range - They should be placed symmetrically around the node 24/42
NET Graphs Theorem 3 For , the area coverage is maximized when the nodes are placed at the edges of disjoint sectors of . 25/42
NET Graphs Tiling Graphs • When k = 3, 4, 6, the locally optimal symmetric placement can be replicated globally • This results in Tiling graphs 26/42
NET Graphs Tiling Graph properties • Globally optimal in terms of coverage • A number of other global properties: • While the RNG and GG have spanning ratios of and in general, the spatial arrangement of nodes in the tilings result in constant spanning ratios. 27/42
NET Graphs Significance Traditional approaches - • Sleep Scheduling - • network is deployed with high density • Nodes decide locally whether to stay awake • Power Control - • Static & mobile ad-hoc networks • Smallest transmission power Deployment • Incremental deployment • Static nodes by a mobile agent • Distributed deployment • Self-deployment of mobile nodes 28/42
Deployment Algo Incremental Deployment • Deploy nodes one at a time • Pick new position based on geometry of existing nodes, cost of travel, etc • Can be implemented for mobile nodes too • Works best when the topology is known a priori 29/42
Deployment Algo Incremental Deployment - topologies Gaussian error 3o and 15% range No Error Tiling angle (/3) Non- tiling angle(2/5) 30/42
Deployment Algo Distributed Deployment • Nodes make decisions independently • Potential Field Approach Algorithm • Start state • all constraints satisfied • all edges are preserved • Spread out and trim unnecessary edges 31/42
Deployment Algo otherwise If edge is not required 0 (m=1) Distributed Deployment 32/42
Deployment Algo Simulation • Fast • No negotiations • Conservative 33/42
Deployment Algo Distributed Deployment - topologies Distributed Incremental No Error Tiling angle (/3) Non- tiling angle(2/5) 34/42
Deployment Results Coverage 35/42
Deployment Results Connectivity 36/42
Deployment Results Degree 14 12 10 8 6 4 37/42
Deployment Results Constraint Satisfaction 38/42
Deployment Results Comparison with RNG Comm. graph Difference RNG 39/42
Related Work • Topology Control: • X. Li’05, Santi’03 (surveys) • Power Control: • Wattenhofer’05, Brendin’05, Jennings’02, Borbash’02 • Sleep scheduling: • Zhang’05, Wang’03 • Deployment of static network by mobile agent: • Batalin’04, Corke’04 • Deployment of mobile network: • Howard’02, Cortes’04, Poduri’03 40/42
Summary • NET graphs • based on purely local geometric conditions • single parameter • range of coverage-connectivity trade-offs • Applications • Power control, Sleep scheduling (dense networks) • Controlled deployment • Assumptions: • Disk model for communication (but ranges could be different) • Directional information about neighbors 41/42
Extensions Relax assumptions: • Irregular communication range • Vary Rs/Rc • Formalize notion of boundary Deployment Algorithm: • Improve Sparseness • Negotiations? - Coloring • Rendezvous problem 42/42