methods demarcating into two parts to present, one is the method of location update, the other is...

Download Methods Demarcating into two parts to present, one is the method of location update, the other is method of data communication, namely ILSR. Location Update

If you can't read please download the document

Upload: theodora-marshall

Post on 27-Dec-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Slide 1
  • Methods Demarcating into two parts to present, one is the method of location update, the other is method of data communication, namely ILSR. Location Update Existing two methods to update location; they be mixed up in ILSR for different situations. Flooding-type Updating within necessary area, where nodes experie- nce change. Routing-type Updating some particular destinations to prevent rout- ing failure Introduction We propose a novel localized Integrated Location Service and Routing (ILSR) scheme, based on the geographic rout- ing protocol GFG, for data communications from sensors to a mobile sink in wireless sensor networks. In many WSN applications, a event is meaningful and can be responded to mobile sink only if its position is known. Therefore, considering both unpredictable and controllable sink mobility, we present two versions, i.e. ILSR-UM, ILSR- CM, to guarantee delivery. ILSR generates routes close to shortest paths at dramatically lower (90% lower) message cost compared to an existing competing algorithm through simulation. Model and Assumption Demarcating into two parts to introduce; namely a sensor node and mobile sink. Sensor Node Modeling as unit disk graph (UDG) and realizing own geographic position to form a Homogeneous network. Mobile Sink According to sink mobility Unpredictable Moving at random; having no knowledge of own mobility, e.g. Animal. Controllable Moving step by step; knowing current step end-point and the time needed to reach that point, e.g. Robot. Acknowledgments This work is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 61272151 and 61272496, in part by ISTCP grant 2013DFB10070, in part by the China Hunan Provincial Science & Technology Program under Grant Number 2012GK4106, and in part by the Mobile Health Ministry of Education-China Mobile Joint Laboratory (MOE-DST No. [2012]311). Conclusions In ILSR, sink updates location to neighboring sensors after or before a link breaks and whenever a link creation is observed. Location update relies on flooding, restricted within necessary area, where sensors experience (next hop) change in GFG routing to the sink. Considering both unpredictable and controllable sink mobil- ity, we present two versions. We prove that both of them guarantee delivery in a connected network modeled as unit disk graph. ILSR is the first localized protocol that has this property. We further propose to reduce message cost, without jeopardizing this property, by dynamically controlling the level of location update. We compare ILSR with an existing competing algorithm through simulation. It is observed that ILSR generates routes close to shortest paths at dramatically lower (90% lower) message cost. Xu Li, Jiulin Yang, Amiya Nayak Senior Member, IEEE, and Ivan Stojmenovic, Fellow, IEEE, 2012 Literature cited K.N. Amouris, S. Papavassiliou, and M. Li, A position based multi-zone routing protocol for wide area mobile ad- hoc networks, Proc. IEEE VTC, pp. 1365-1369, 1999. J. Carle and D. Simplot-Ryl, Energy efficient area monitoring by sensor networks, IEEE Computer, vol. 37, no. 2, 40-46, 2004. X. Li, N. Mitton, I. Simplot-Ryl, and D. Simplot-Ryl, Mobile-Beacon Assisted Sensor Localization with Dynamic Beacon Mobility Scheduling, Proc. IEEE MASS, 2011. To appear. Localized Geographic Routing to a Mobile Sink with Guaranteed Delivery in Sensor Networks HW #7 602410021 602410055 Figure 1. Controllable Sink Mobility The move is predictable and controllable which included the destination and speed. Figure 2. Two versions of ILSR, i.e. ILSR-UM, LSR-CM. Results We report our simulation results below. As we will see, ILSR-UM with any LC setting and ILSR-CM with LC = are superior to DC in all test cases, achieving similar average dilation at much lower, possibly 90% lower message cost. And we control average dilation by using location update level control to reduce cost. Figure 3. ILSR v.s. DC in relation with D ( N = 300, V = 1, P = 0. 3) Figure 4. ILSR v.s. DC in relation with N ( D = 14, V = 1, P = 0. 3) Figure 5. ILSR v.s. DC in relation with P and V ( D = 14 and N = 300)