1 / 36

Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissermination in Wireless Sensor Networks

Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissermination in Wireless Sensor Networks. Authors : Joanna Kulik, Wendi Rabiner, Hari Balakrishnan. 2008. 6. 3 . Speaker Jaewan. Cho (ischool@knue.ac.kr) Supervisor Y.H. Han ( yhhan@kut.ac.kr ) Advanced Ubiquitous Computing. Contents.

yaholo
Download Presentation

Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissermination in Wireless Sensor Networks

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. Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissermination in Wireless Sensor Networks Authors : Joanna Kulik, Wendi Rabiner, Hari Balakrishnan 2008. 6. 3. Speaker Jaewan. Cho (ischool@knue.ac.kr) Supervisor Y.H. Han (yhhan@kut.ac.kr) Advanced Ubiquitous Computing

  2. Contents • Introduction • SPIN: Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation • Other Data Dissemination Algorithms • Sensor Network Simulations • Related Work • Conclusions 2008 Advanced Ubiquitous Computing

  3. Introduction • Wireless Networks of sensors are likely to be widely deployed in the future • Several obstacles need to be overcome • Energy • Computation • Communication • Three deficiencies of simple approach render inadequate as a protocol for sensor networks • Implosion • Overlap • Resource blindness Computer Network

  4. A (A) (A) B C (A) (A) D Introduction • Implosion The implosion problem. In this graph, node A starts by flooding its data to all of its neighbors. Two copies of the data eventually arrive at node D. The system energy waste energy and bandwidth in one unnecessary send and receive. Computer Network

  5. Introduction Overlap r q s A B (r,s) (q,r) C The overlap problem. Two sensors cover an overlapping geographic region. When these sensors flood their data to node C, C receives two copies of the data marked r. 5 Computer Network

  6. Introduction Resource blindness In classic flooding, nodes do not modify their activities based on the amount of energy available to them at a given time. A network of embedded sensors can be “resource-aware” and adapt its communication and computation to the state of its energy resource. • The SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation) family of protocols incorporates two key innovations that overcome these deficiencies : • negotiation • resource-adaptation 6 Computer Network

  7. Introduction A simulation-based study of five dissemination protocols • Experimental protocols • SPIN-1 • SPIN-2 • The other three protocols function as comparison protocols • flooding • gossiping • ideal 7 Computer Network

  8. SPIN: Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation • The SPIN family of protocols rests upon two basic ideas: • To operate efficiently and to conserve energy • Nodes in a network must monitor and adapt to changes in their own energy resources to extend the operating lifetime of the system. • Meta-Data • SPIN does not specify a format for meta-data • SPIN relies on each application to interpret and synthesize its own meta-data • SPIN Messages • ADV - new data advertisement • REQ - request for data • DATA - data message Computer Network

  9. SPIN: Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation • SPIN Resource Management • Can make informed decisions about using their resources effectively • Specifies an interface that applications can use to probe their available resources • SPIN Implementation • Implement the basis SPIN message types, message handling routines and, resource management functions • Sensor applications can then use these libraries to construct their own SPIN protocols • SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol • Simple handshake protocol for disseminating data through a lossless network • Work in three stages (ADV-REQ-DATA) 9 Computer Network

  10. SPIN: Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation • SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol Node A starts by advertising its data to node B (a). Node B responds by sending a request to node A (b). After receiving the requested data (c), node B then sends out advertisement to its neighbors (d), who in turn send requests back to B (e, f). 10 Computer Network

  11. SPIN: Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation • SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol • SPIN-1 can be run in a completely unconfigured network with a small, startup cost to determine nearest neighbors • If the topology of the network changes frequently, these change only have to travel one hop before the nodes can continue running the algorithm • SPIN-2 : SPIN-1 with a Low-Energy Threshold • Adds a simple energy-conservation heuristic to the SPIN-1 protocol • When energy is plentiful, SPIN-2 nodes communicate using the same 3-stage protocol as SPIN-1 node • When its energy is approaching a low-energy threshold, it adapts by reducing its participation in the protocol 11 Computer Network

  12. Other Data Dissemination Algorithms • Classic Flooding • Disseminate a piece of data across the network starts by sending a copy of this data to all of its neighbors • The amount of time it takes a group of nodes to received some data and then forward that data on to their neighbors is called a round • The algorithm finishes, or converges, when all the nodes in the network have received a copy of the data • Flooding converges in O (d) rounds, when d is the diameter of the network Although flooding exhibits the same appealing simplicity as SPIN-1, it does not solve either the implosion or the overlap problem 12 Computer Network

  13. A (a) 1 B (a) 4 (a) (a) 2 C 3 D Other Data Dissemination Algorithms • Gossiping • An alternative to the classic flooding approach that uses randomization to conserve energy Gossiping. At every step, each node only forwards data on to one neighbor, which it selects randomly. After node D receives the data, it must forward the data back to the sender (B), otherwise the data would never reach node C Although gossiping largely avoids implosion, it does not solve the overlap problem 13 Computer Network

  14. A (a,c) (a) 1 (a.c) 1 B C (c) (c) (a) 1 2 D Other Data Dissemination Algorithms • Ideal Dissemination • Every node sends observed data along a shortest-path route and every node receives each piece of distinct data only once • No energy is ever wasted transmitting and receiving useless data Ideal dissemination of observed data a and c. Potential implosion, caused by B and C’s common neighbor, and overlap, caused A and C’s overlapping data, do not occur 14 Computer Network

  15. Sensor Network Simulations • ns Implementation • ns is an event-driven network simulator with extensive support for simulation of TCP, routing, and multicast protocols • The ns Node class was extended to create a Resource-Adapting Node 15 Computer Network

  16. Sensor Network Simulations • Simulation Testbed • Assumes no network losses and no queuing delays Characteristic of the 25-node wireless test network Topology of the 25-node, wireless test network. The edges shown here signify communicating neighbors. 16 Computer Network

  17. Sensor Network Simulations • Unlimited Energy simulations • Data Acquired Over Time • Energy Dissipated Over Time • For the experiment • Gave all the nodes a virtually infinite supply of energy and ran each data distribution protocol until it converged. • Result • Since energy is not limited, SPIN-1 and SPIN-2 are identical protocols. Therefore, the results only compare SPIN-1 with flooding, gossiping, and the ideal data distribution protocol. 17 Computer Network

  18. Sensor Network Simulations • Data Acquired Over Time Percent of total data acquired in the system over time for each protocol A blow up Of the first 0.22 seconds The entire time scale until all the protocols converge 18 Computer Network

  19. Sensor Network Simulations • Energy Dissipated Over Time Total amount of energy dissipated in the system for each protocol A blow up Of the first 0.22 seconds The entire time scale until all the protocols converge 19 Computer Network

  20. Sensor Network Simulations • Energy Dissipated Over Time Message profiles for the simulations. SPIN-1 does not send any redundant data message 20 Computer Network

  21. Sensor Network Simulations • Energy Dissipated Over Time Energy dissipation versus node degree 21 Computer Network

  22. Sensor Network Simulations • Energy Dissipated Over Time Key results of the unlimited energy simulations for the SPIN-1, flooding, and gossiping protocols compared with the ideal data distribution protocol 22 Computer Network

  23. Sensor Network Simulations • Limited Energy Simulation Percent of total data acquired in the system for each protocol when the total system energy is limited to 1.6 Joules 23 Computer Network

  24. Sensor Network Simulations • Limited Energy Simulation Energy dissipated in the system for each protocol when the total system energy is limited to 1.6 Joules 24 Computer Network

  25. Sensor Network Simulations • Limited Energy Simulation Data acquired for a given amount of energy. SPIN-2 distributes 10% more data per unit energy than SPIN-1 and 60% more data per unit energy than flooding. 25 Computer Network

  26. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Convergence time as the link bandwidth is varied between 5 kbps and 1 Mbps. The fixed processing delay is set to 5 ms and the data size is set to 500 bytes. Each node begins with a single piece of unique data. Each node begins with 3 piece of non-unique data. 26 Computer Network

  27. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Convergence time as the fixed portion of the processing delay is varied between 1 ms and 9 ms. The link bandwidth is set to 1 Mbps and the data size is set to 500 bytes. Each node begins with a single piece of unique data. Each node begins with 3 piece of non-unique data. 27 Computer Network

  28. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Convergence time as the size of a piece of data is varied between 100 bytes and 4000 bytes. The link bandwidth is set to 1 Mbps and the fixed processing delay is set to 5 ms. Each node begins with a single piece of unique data. Each node begins with 3 piece of non-unique data. 28 Computer Network

  29. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Equations that predict the convergence time of each these protocols The convergence time for the ideal and flooding protocol are: Spin-1 has the convergence bound: 29 Computer Network

  30. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Equations that predict the convergence time of each these protocols The convergence bounds for flooding and ideal become: Similarly, the convergence bounds for SPIN-1 become: Network parameters used to calculate convergence bounds for flooding, SPIN-1, and ideal 30 Computer Network

  31. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Equations that predict the convergence time of each these protocols When there is a large amount of initial overlapping data, it is possible for SPIN-1 to converge before flooding since SPIN-1 will more often send smaller data message than flooding. Network parameters used to calculate convergence bounds for flooding, SPIN-1, and ideal 31 Computer Network

  32. Sensor Network Simulations • Best-Case Convergence Times Equations that predict the convergence time of each these protocols Plugging parameter into Eqns. 3 and 4 give the following convergence bounds for our network: • The experimental result show that, on average: • flooding converges in 135 ms • SPIN-1 converges in 215 ms • ideal converges in 125 ms 32 Computer Network

  33. Related Work • nodes in link-state protocols periodically disseminate their view of the network topology to their neighbors. • There are generally two types of topologies used in wireless networks: centralized control and peer to peer communication. • Recently, mobile ad hoc routing protocols have become an active area of research. • Routing protocols based on minimum-energy routing and other power-friendly algorithms have been proposed in the literature. • There has been a lot of recent interest in using IP multicast as the underlying infrastructure to efficiently and reliably disseminate data from a source to many receives on the internet 33 Computer Network

  34. Conclusions • SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation), a family of data dissemination protocols for wireless sensors networks • SPIN uses meta-data negotiation and resource-adaptation to overcome several deficiencies in traditional dissemination approaches. • Two specific SPIN protocols • SPIN-1 : a 3-stage handshake protocol for disseminating data • SPIN-2 : a version of SPIN-1 that backs off from communication at a low energy threshold. 34 Computer Network

  35. Conclusions Compare the SPIN-1 and SPIN-2 protocols to flooding, gossiping, and ideal dissemination protocols using the ns simulation tool. • Naming data using meta-data descriptors and negotiating data transmissions using meta-data successfully solve the implosion and overlap problem. • SPIN-1 and SPIN-2 are simple protocols that efficiently disseminate data, while maintaining no per neighbors state. • In term of time, SPIN-1 achieves comparable results to classic flooding protocols. In terms of energy, SPIN-1 uses only about 25% as much energy as a classic flooding protocol. SPIN-2 is able to distribute 60% more data per unit energy than flooding. • In all of experiments, SPIN-1 and SPIN-2 outperformed gossiping. They also come close to an ideal dissemination protocols in term of both time and energy under same conditions. 35 Computer Network

  36. Q & A • …

More Related