360 likes | 621 Views
19 th Intl. Conf. on Computer Communication Networks August, 2010, Zurich, Switzerland. Chien -Chun Hung et al. On Enhancing Network-Lifetime Using Opportunistic Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks.
E N D
19th Intl. Conf. on Computer Communication Networks August, 2010, Zurich, Switzerland Chien-Chun Hung et al. On Enhancing Network-Lifetime UsingOpportunistic Routing in Wireless SensorNetworks Author: Chien-Chun Hung†§, Kate Ching-Ju Lin§, Chih-Cheng Hsu†, Cheng-Fu Chou† and Chang-Jen Tu* Presenter: Chien-Chun Hung (August 3, 2010) §Network and Mobile System Group(NMSGroup) Research Center for Innovation Technology Information (CITI) Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan †Communication and Multimedia Laboratory (CMLab) Dept. of Computer Science & Information Engineering (CSIE) National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan * Institute for Information Industry, Taipei, Taiwan
Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) • Measuring data collection: • Sensors propagate measuring data toward sinks • Numerous data transmissions dominate energy expenditure • Challenging characteristic: • Sensors with limited energy resource • The duration of network availability is restricted • WSNs demand energy-efficient routing design • Network-lifetime: the amount of data gathered by the sinks before the first sensor depletes its energy
Routing in WSNs • Specific routing • Pre-determined route for each origin-destination pair before actual transmission • Easy and simple, but lack of path diversity • Fixed-path routing • Dynamic-path routing • Opportunistic routing • A group of possible forwarders are chosen • Adaptively select the best route at each intermediate hop • Sophisticated and demand an effective metric
Specific routing • Fixed-path routing • Construct the constant route for a transmission pair • E.g., geographic routing scheme • Minimize the hop stretch of the routing path • Hop-stretch: The ratio of the hop counts of a given route to the hoop counts of the shortest path • Utilize the same route at anytime • Sensors traversed by the selected route are likely to deplete their energy quickly • Ex: GPSR1、GFG2 • 1 B. Karp, “GPSR: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks”, MobiCOM’2000 • 2 F. Kuhn, “Geometric ad-hoc routing: of theory and practice”, PODC’ 2003
Specific routing (cont.) • Dynamic-path routing • Assess different energy capability for each sensor • Distribute traffic load over the sensors with higher residual energy to prolong network lifetime • Avoid the energy depletion on critical sensors • Detour a long way in order to utilize the sensors with more energy • The additional overhead is harmful for future transmission • Route is static after data transmission starts • Cannot adapt to per-hop dynamics, • e.g., packet loss, residual energy • Ex: OML3、BLM4 • 3 J. Park, “An Online Heuristic for Maximum Lifetime Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Computer 2006 • 4 C. Wu, “A Novel Load Balanced and Lifetime Maximization Routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks”, VTC’2008
Opportunistic routing (OR) • Utilize the characteristics of wireless channel • Broadcast nature、spatial diversity • Multiple forwarders are involved • Improve transmission reliability • Reduce retransmissions, as well as energy cost F1 0.8 The probability of at least one forwarder receives the packet: 1 – 0.3 × 0.2 × 0.4 = 0.976, which is larger than any link. 0.7 F2 D S F3 0.6 • S. Biswas, “ExOR: Opportunistic Multi-Hop Routing for Wireless Networks”, SIGCOM’2005
OR (cont.) • Different ORs require different metrics • Forwarder selection • Forwarder prioritization • Can we directly apply OR to WSNs? • Most ORs target on reducing retransmissions • Energy cost reduction ≠ lifetime-enhancement • OR demands more sophisticated design for WSNs
Summary for previous works • Fixed-path routing • Constantly utilize the same route for a transmission • Dynamic-path routing • Dynamically adjusts path each time • Not adapt to per-hop dynamics • Overly detour a long path • Opportunistic routing • Reduce energy cost • Merely reducing total energy consumption is not enough for lifetime enhancement
EFFORTEnergy-Efficient Opportunistic Routing • A lifetime-enhancing OR • Reduce energy consumption • Minimize number of retransmissions and reduce energy cost • Prolong network-lifetime • Assess different energy capabilities of sensors • Determine the best route at each hop • Design issues • An index for the impact of energy cost on lifetime • A metric served as the criteria of OR operation • OR framework operates on the proposed metric
EFFORT components • SE-Cost index • Scarcity Energy Cost • Indicate the sustainability of each sensor • OEC metric • Opportunistic Energy Cost • Represent the end-to-end SE-Cost from each sensor to sink • EFFORT framework • Network initialization • Routing decision • Data forwarding • Routing update
Scarcity energy costthe impact of energy consumption -100% -20% -25% -33% -50% • Definition: the ratio of energy cost to residual energy • The impact of the energy consumption to its residual energy • The less SE-Cost, the less damage to the network-lifetime. • Reducing total SE-Cost is to mitigate the damage to network-lifetime • SE-Cost is an effective index for lifetime enhancement S5 S1 S2 S3 S4
Opportunistic energy costthe operation metric of OR f1 • OEC: end-to-end SE-Cost from sensor to sinks • Comprehensively model the utilization of multiple forwarders • Recursively integrate the end-to-end information s f2 d … fj Multi-forwarder utilization End-to-end integration
OEC formulation ECRx:fwds f1 ECTx:sfwd: Tx / Res ECRx:fwds: Σ [Rx / Ref] OECfwdd: Σ [OECj × Pj] Ecfwdd s f2 d … • Intuitively, OECs,d is composed of: • The transmit energy cost consumed by the sender s • The receiving energy cost consumed by all the forwarders • The OEC consumed from the forwarders to d • OECs,d = ECTx:sfwd + ECRx:fwds + OECfwdd ECTx:sfwd fj ECTx:sfwd: Tx / Res ECRx:fwds: Σ [Rx / Ref] OECfwdd: Σ [OECj × Pj]
Network initializationcompletion rule 1.1 1.1 ∞ 4.2 4.5 4.2 ∞ 0 Sink 2.0 2.0 2.4 ∞ 3.1 3.1 ∞ 1.5 ∞ 1.5 1.7
Routing decisionforwarder selection 2.5 3.2 8.3 7.9 ∞ 7.8 7.4 7.2 7.6 5.0 4.6 4.8 4.6 ∞ 4.0 3.3 7.4 2.4 1.9 All neighbors Extraction stage Candidate forwarders Forwarding set Inclusion stage
Data forwarding & routing updateprioritization rule F5 {2.3} F1 {3.2} F1 {3.2} F4 {1.6} S {8.0} F2 {4.1} F2 {4.1} F3 {4.5} F3 {4.5} F6 {3.2}
NS2 simulation setting • Testing field: 250000 square meters (500m × 500m) • 150 - 350 sensor nodes randomly scattered over the field • Each node sequentially starts a transmission every 1000 seconds • Parameters setting based onMICAz • 4 sinks randomly distributed over the field • Assume that sink nodes are re-chargeable and have unlimited energy S 500 m 500 m S S S
Compared protocols • OML † • Minimize the weighted cost based on residual energy • Dynamically adjust each end-to-end routing path before transmission • GCF ‡ • Maximize packet advancementat each intermediate hop • Select forwarders based on fixed geographic metric • EFFORT • Minimize the OEC metric based on Scarcity Energy Cost • Instantly adapt routing at each intermediate hop during transmission † J. Park, “An Online Heuristic for Maximum Lifetime Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE Tran. on Computer 2006 ‡ K. Zeng, “On Geographic Collaborative Forwarding in Wireless Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks“, WASA 2007
Lifetime EnhancementThe amount of data gathered by the sinks before the first sensor drains out its energy
Conclusion • An energy-efficient opportunistic routing scheme: • End-to-end integration • Per-hop adaptation • Distributed computation • An effective framework • Improve transmission reliability • Reduce energy consumption • Enhance network-lifetime
Thank you for your attendance! Chien-Chun Hung shinglee@citi.sinica.edu.tw §Network and Mobile System Group(NMSGroup) Research Center for Innovation Technology Information (CITI) Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan †Communication and Multimedia Laboratory (CMLab) Dept. of Computer Science & Information Engineering (CSIE) National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan
Data forwardingprioritization rule F5 {2.3} F1 {3.2} F1 {3.2} F4 {1.6} S {8.0} F2 {4.1} F2 {4.1} F3 {4.5} F3 {4.5} F6 {3.2}
Prioritization rule • Importance • Ensure all packets are sent by any forwarder • Ensure each packet is sent by only one forwarder • Implementation • A record is maintained at each hop • Record the status of each packet • Apply ACK and notification mechanism • Notify each forwarder the status of the packets
Update eliminationcandidate exclusion 1.3 4.0 F1 F4 S 3.5 4.5 2.1 F2 3.0 F3
Geographic Collaborative Forwarding (GCF) • Multiple forwarders are involved based on EPA • Packet advancement • Link reliability • Number of forwarders • Residual energy is not taken into account • The static routing decision drains out the energy on bottleneck • One-hop information is limited • May not reflect the end-to-end condition • Reduce the number of retransmission • Reduce the total energy cost • K. Zeng, “On Geographic Collaborative Forwarding in Wireless Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks“, WASA’ 2007
MICAz • Tiny wireless measurement system • Designed specifically for deeply embedded sensor networks • High data rate • Low power • Specification • IEEE 802.15.4 compliant • Frequency band: 2.4 GHz • Transmit data rate: 250 Kbps • RF power: -24 dBm ~ 0.0 dBm • Transmission range: up to 90 m • http://www.xbow.com/Products/productdetails.aspx?sid=164 • http://www.xbow.com/Products/Product_pdf_files/Wireless_pdf/MICAz_Datasheet.pdf
Mathematical property of OEC • Prioritization rule • Determine the relay sequence • Avoid repetition • Monotonic property • OEC values of forwarders are smaller than sender • Candidate extraction • Candidate exclusion
The characteristics of OEC • 1. Prioritization Rule • Assign priority based on OEC value in ascending order. • 2. Monotonic Property (Candidate Extraction) • The OEC value of the sender is definitely larger than all the ones of the forwarders. • Otherwise, extracting the forwarder with higher or equal OEC value than the sender would obtain a better OEC value. • 3. Candidate Exclusion • Exclude the node with higher OEC from the forwarding set.
1. Prioritization rule 1.3 F1 2.1 S F2 3.0 F3
2. Monotonic Property 1.3 F1 2.1 S 3.5 F2 3.0 F3
2.1 Candidate Extraction 1.3 F1 2.1 S 2.8 2.5 F2 3.0 F3
3. Candidate Exclusion 1.3 4.0 F1 F4 S 3.5 4.5 2.1 F2 3.0 F3