1 / 32

Worst-Case Optimal and Average-Case Efficient Geometric Ad-Hoc Routing

Worst-Case Optimal and Average-Case Efficient Geometric Ad-Hoc Routing. Fabian Kuhn Roger Wattenhofer Aaron Zollinger. s. Geometric Routing. ? ? ?. t. s. Greedy Routing. Each node forwards message to “best” neighbor. t. s. Greedy Routing.

Download Presentation

Worst-Case Optimal and Average-Case Efficient Geometric Ad-Hoc Routing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Worst-Case Optimal and Average-Case Efficient Geometric Ad-Hoc Routing Fabian Kuhn Roger Wattenhofer Aaron Zollinger

  2. s Geometric Routing ??? t s MobiHoc 2003

  3. Greedy Routing • Each node forwards message to “best” neighbor t s MobiHoc 2003

  4. Greedy Routing • Each node forwards message to “best” neighbor • But greedy routing may fail: message may get stuck in a “dead end” • Needed: Correct geometric routing algorithm t ? s MobiHoc 2003

  5. What is Geometric Routing? • A.k.a. location-based, position-based, geographic, etc. • Each node knows its own position and position of neighbors • Source knows the position of the destination • No routing tables stored in nodes! • Geometric routing is important: • GPS/Galileo, local positioning algorithm,overlay P2P network, Geocasting • Most importantly: Learn about general ad-hoc routing MobiHoc 2003

  6. Related Work in Geometric Routing MobiHoc 2003

  7. Overview • Introduction • What is Geometric Routing? • Greedy Routing • Correct Geometric Routing: Face Routing • Efficient Geometric Routing • Adaptively Bound Searchable Area • Lower Bound, Worst-Case Optimality • Average-Case Efficiency • Critical Density • GOAFR • Conclusions MobiHoc 2003

  8. Face Routing • Based on ideas by [Kranakis, Singh, Urrutia CCCG 1999] • Here simplified (and actually improved) MobiHoc 2003

  9. Face Routing • Remark: Planar graph can easily (and locally!) be computed with the Gabriel Graph, for example Planarity is NOT an assumption MobiHoc 2003

  10. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  11. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  12. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  13. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  14. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  15. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  16. Face Routing s t MobiHoc 2003

  17. “Right Hand Rule” Face Routing Properties • All necessary information is stored in the message • Source and destination positions • Point of transition to next face • Completely local: • Knowledge about direct neighbors‘ positions sufficient • Faces are implicit • Planarity of graph is computed locally (not an assumption) • Computation for instance with Gabriel Graph MobiHoc 2003

  18. Overview • Introduction • What is Geometric Routing? • Greedy Routing • Correct Geometric Routing: Face Routing • Efficient Geometric Routing • Adaptively Bound Searchable Area • Lower Bound, Worst-Case Optimality • Average-Case Efficiency • Critical Density • GOAFR • Conclusions MobiHoc 2003

  19. Face Routing • Theorem: Face Routing reaches destination in O(n) steps • But: Can be very bad compared to the optimal route MobiHoc 2003

  20. Bounding Searchable Area s t MobiHoc 2003

  21. Adaptively Bound Searchable Area What is the correct size of the bounding area? • Start with a small searchable area • Grow area each time you cannot reach the destination • In other words, adapt area size whenever it is too small → Adaptive Face Routing AFR Theorem: AFR Algorithm finds destination after O(c2) steps, where c is the cost of the optimal path from source to destination. Theorem: AFR Algorithm is asymptotically worst-case optimal. [Kuhn, Wattenhofer, Zollinger DIALM 2002] MobiHoc 2003

  22. Overview • Introduction • What is Geometric Routing? • Greedy Routing • Correct Geometric Routing: Face Routing • Efficient Geometric Routing • Adaptively Bound Searchable Area • Lower Bound, Worst-Case Optimality • Average-Case Efficiency • Critical Density • GOAFR • Conclusions MobiHoc 2003

  23. GOAFR – Greedy Other Adaptive Face Routing • AFR Algorithm is not very efficient (especially in dense graphs) • Combine Greedy and (Other Adaptive) Face Routing • Route greedily as long as possible • Overcome “dead ends” by use of face routing • Then route greedily again • Similar as GFG/GPSR, but adaptive MobiHoc 2003

  24. Early Fallback to Greedy Routing? • We could fall back to greedy routing as soon as we are closer to t than the local minimum • But: • “Maze” with (c2) edges is traversed (c) times  (c3) steps MobiHoc 2003

  25. GOAFR Is Worst-Case Optimal • GOAFR traverses complete face boundary: Theorem: GOAFR is asymptotically worst-case optimal. • Remark: GFG/GPSR is not • Searchable area not bounded • Immediate fallback to greedy routing • GOAFR’s average-case efficiency?  MobiHoc 2003

  26. Average Case • Not interesting when graph not dense enough • Not interesting when graph is too dense • Critical density range (“percolation”) • Shortest path is significantly longer than Euclidean distance too sparse critical density too dense MobiHoc 2003

  27. Critical Density: Shortest Path vs. Euclidean Distance • Shortest path is significantly longer than Euclidean distance • Critical density range mandatory for the simulation of any routing algorithm (not only geometric) MobiHoc 2003

  28. Randomly Generated Graphs: Critical Density Range 1.9 1 0.9 1.8 Connectivity 0.8 1.7 0.7 1.6 0.6 Greedy success 1.5 Shortest Path Span Frequency 0.5 1.4 0.4 Shortest Path Span 1.3 0.3 1.2 0.2 1.1 0.1 critical 1 0 10 15 0 5 Network Density [nodes per unit disk] MobiHoc 2003

  29. Average-Case Performance: Face vs. Greedy/Face 20 1 worse 18 0.9 16 0.8 14 0.7 12 0.6 Performance 10 0.5 Frequency 8 0.4 Face Routing 6 0.3 better 4 0.2 2 0.1 critical Greedy/FaceRouting 0 0 0 5 10 15 Network Density [nodes per unit disk] MobiHoc 2003

  30. Simulation on Randomly Generated Graphs 9 1 GFG/GPSR worse 0.9 8 0.8 7 0.7 6 0.6 Frequency 5 0.5 Performance 0.4 4 GOAFR+ 0.3 3 0.2 better 2 0.1 critical 1 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Network Density [nodes per unit disk] MobiHoc 2003

  31. CorrectRouting Worst-CaseOptimal Avg-CaseEfficient ComprehensiveSimulation Conclusion MobiHoc 2003

  32. ??? Questions?Comments?Demo?

More Related