exploiting constructive interference for scalable flooding in wireless networks

19
Exploiting Constructive Interference for Scalable Flooding in Wireless Networks InfoCom 2012 Yin Wang, Yuan He, Xufei Mao, Yunhao Liu, Zhiyu Huang, Xiangyang Li NSLab study group 2013/1/21 Presented by: Yu-Ting 1

Upload: ava-bradshaw

Post on 02-Jan-2016

26 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Exploiting Constructive Interference for Scalable Flooding in Wireless Networks. InfoCom 2012 Yin Wang, Yuan He, Xufei Mao, Yunhao Liu, Zhiyu Huang, Xiangyang Li NSLab study group 2013/1/21 Presented by: Yu-Ting. Outline. Theoretical Analysis Scalability Problem Lower Bound of PRR - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

1

Exploiting Constructive Interference for Scalable Flooding in Wireless Networks

InfoCom 2012Yin Wang, Yuan He, Xufei Mao, Yunhao Liu, Zhiyu Huang, Xiangyang Li

NSLab study group 2013/1/21Presented by: Yu-Ting

2

Outline

• Theoretical Analysis• Scalability Problem• Lower Bound of PRR• SCIF

Modulation & Demodulation• Symbol (4bits) period: 16us (4bit/250kbps)• Chip period Ts: 16(us/symbol) ÷ 32(chip/symbol) = 0.5us

bits(MSB)…0101…(LSB)

bit → symbol

symbol…5…

symbol→PN series

O-QPSK Mod.

PN series (LSB)…00110101001000101110110110011100…(MSB)

modulating wave

noise

O-QPSK Demod.

PN series→symbol(find the highest correlation)

PN series (with 1 bit error) (LSB)…10110101001000101110110110011100…(MSB)

symbol…5…

(correctly Demod.)

symbol → bit

bits(MSB)…0101…(LSB)

3

4

Modulation of QPSK & O-QPSK(from Wiki)

• QPSK

• O-QPSK

5

Threshold ofMaximum Temporal Displacement ∆

• Tc = 0.5us

6

Theoretical Analysis

Interference Gain Factor (IGF)

7

Simulation of Theoretical Analysis

• Amplitudes: [1 , 1 , 0.5 , 1.5 ]• Phase offsets: [0 , 0.25 , 0.5 , 0.75]

8

Outline

• Theoretical Analysis• Scalability Problem• Lower Bound of PRR• SCIF

9

Scalability Problem

• To be simple, there's time uncertainty τe during transmission in each hop

• For a path of h hops, the PMF of accumulated τe is:

• For m independent paths, each of which consists h hops originated at the sink node:∆ = max( τh

e) − min(τhe)

• ∆ increases as m & h increase• PRR decreases as ∆ increases

10

• m = 5

11

Outline

• Theoretical Analysis• Scalability Problem• Lower Bound of PRR• SCIF

12

Lower Bound of PRR

• Assume in grid networks• Γh

m(∆ ≤ t): CDF of ∆ of a common ancestor node propagates a packet

• CDF of ∆ ≤ 0.5µs between nodeN8 and N9:

N5 → {N8,N9}N2 → {N4,N5} → {N8,N9}N0 → {N1,N2} → {N4,N5} → {N8,N9}

• (Skip proof)For 32 bytes packet length,Γh

m(∆ ≤ 0.5) between parent and childs >= 95.4%

13

Outline

• Theoretical Analysis• Scalability Problem• Lower Bound of PRR• SCIF

14

SCIF

• Spine Constructive Interference based Flooding

• Key:– Decrease the # of m– Length of a grid cell=0.5

of communication range=> guarantee connection

15

Simulation Result

16

Comments

• Decent mathematical analysis• Good introduction to related work• No implementation• With capture effect (strong capture), Glossy is

actually not so vulnerable• With noise, SCIF is probably not so good

17

Q&A

18

BACKUP SLIDES

19

Scalability Problem

• Time uncertainty τe during transmission in each hop

• In Glossy: τe = τsw + τd + τtx + τp

τsw: software delayτd: radio processingτtx: clock uncertainty due to clock frequency driftsτp: propagation delay