The cat and the mouse the case of mobile sensors and targets
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 38

The Cat and The Mouse -- The Case of Mobile Sensors and Targets PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 70 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

The Cat and The Mouse -- The Case of Mobile Sensors and Targets. David K. Y. Yau Lab for Advanced Network Systems Dept of Computer Science Purdue University (Joint work with J. C. Chin, Y. Dong, and W. K. Hon). Project Background. Sensor-cyber project in national defense

Download Presentation

The Cat and The Mouse -- The Case of Mobile Sensors and Targets

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


The cat and the mouse the case of mobile sensors and targets

The Cat and The Mouse --The Case of Mobile Sensors and Targets

David K. Y. Yau

Lab for Advanced Network Systems

Dept of Computer Science

Purdue University

(Joint work with J. C. Chin, Y. Dong, and W. K. Hon)


Project background

Project Background

  • Sensor-cyber project in national defense

    • Near real-time detection, tracking, and analysis of plumes (nuclear, chemical, biological, …)

  • Multi-university partnership funded by Oak Ridge National Lab

    • Sensor testbed design and implementation

    • Research team: Purdue, UIUC, LSU, U of Florida, Syracuse

    • Personel

      • Purdue: Jren-Chit Chin, Yu Dong, David Yau, Wing-Kai Hon

      • Oak Ridge National Lab: Nageswara Rao

  • Partnership with SensorNet initiative


Sensornet initiative

Analysis, modeling and prediction

Biological

Radiation

Chemical

SensorNet Initiative

  • Building comprehensive incident management system

  • Coordinate knowledge and response effectively

  • Provide data highway for processing sensor data

  • Deliver near-real-time information for effective counter-measure


Why mobile

Why Mobile?

  • The mouse

    • Evasion of detection

    • Nature of “mission”

  • The cat

    • Improved coverage with fewer sensors

    • Robustness against contingencies

    • Planned or random movement (randomness useful)


Scenario uav surveillance

Scenario—UAV Surveillance

  • UAV detect radioactive plume

  • Estimate position of plume source

  • Control center predicts movement

  • Emergency response


Mobility model

Mobility Model

  • Four-tuple <N, M, T, R>

    • N: network area

    • M: accessibility constraints

      -- the “map”

    • T: trip selection

    • R: route selection

  • Random waypoint model is a special case

    • Null accessibility constraints

    • Uniform random trip selection

    • Cartesian straight line route selection


Problem formulation

Problem Formulation

  • Two player game

    • Payoff is time until detection (zero sum)

    • Cat plays detection strategy

      • Stochastic, characterized by per-cell presence probabilities

    • Mouse plays evasion strategy

      • Knows statistical process of cat’s movement, but not necessarily exact routes (exact positions at given times)


Best mouse play

Best Mouse Play

  • Cat’s presence matrix given

    • Network region divided into 2D cells

    • Pi,j gives probability for mouse to find cat in cell (i, j)

  • Expected detection time “long” compared with trip from point A to point B

  • Dynamic programming solution to maximize detection time

    • Local greedy strategy does not always work


Optimal escape path formulation

Optimal Escape Path Formulation

  • For each cell j, mouse decides whether to stay or to move to a neighbor cell (and which one)

    • If stay, expected max time until detection is Ej[Tstay]

    • If move to neighbor cell k, expected max time until detection is Ej[Tmove(k)]

  • For cell j, expected max time until detection, Ej[T], is largest of Ej[Tstay] and Ej[Tmove(k)] for each neighbor cell k of j

    • Ej[Tstay] determined by cat’s presence matrix and expected cat’s sojourn time in each cell

  • Optimal escape path is sequence of safest neighbors to move to, until mouse decides to stay

  • How to compute Ej[T] for each cell j?


Computing e j t

Computing Ej[T]

  • Initialize Ej[T] as Ej[Tstay]

  • Insert all the cells into heap sorted by decreasing Ej[T]

  • Delete root cell 0 from heap

    • For each neighbor cell k of 0, update Ek[T] as

      Ek[T] := max(Ek[T],Ek[Tmove(0)])

    • Reorder heap in decreasing Ej[T] order

  • Repeat until heap becomes empty


Example optimal paths

Example Optimal Paths

Path when mouse moves slowly

Path when mouse moves quickly


Comparison with local greedy strategy

Comparison with Local Greedy Strategy

  • Local greedy strategy: mouse will stay

  • Dynamic programming strategy: mouse moves to cell with small probability of cat’s presence (0.0075)

Current mouse position


If cat plays random waypoint strategy

If Cat Plays Random Waypoint Strategy

  • Highest presence probability at the center of the network area

  • Lowest presence probabilities at the corners and perimeters

    • Good “safe havens” for mouse to hide

  • Sum of presence probabilities is one

    • n cats  sum of probabilities  n

    • Equality for disjoint cats’ surveillance areas


Distribution of movement direction in 150 m by 150 m network area

Distribution of Movement Direction in 150 m by 150 m Network Area


Cat s presence matrix in 500 500 m network for random waypoint movement

Cat’s Presence Matrix in 500500 m Network for Random Waypoint Movement


Distribution of movement direction

Distribution of Movement Direction

(a) Calculated probabilities of sensor moving towards the center cell from different current cells

(b) Measured probabilities of sensor moving towards the center cell from different current cells


Analytical cell coverage statistics

Analytical Cell Coverage Statistics

(b) Expected time before covering a cell (average = 59.604 s, maximum = 97.353 s)

(a) Expected number of trips before covering a cell (average = 11.431, maximum = 18.667)


Measured cell coverage statistics

Measured Cell Coverage Statistics

(b) Expected number of trips before covering a cell (average = 10.301, maximum = 20.482)

(b) Expected time before covering a cell (average = 52.721 s, maximum = 105.169 s)


Optimal cat strategy

Optimal Cat Strategy

  • Maximize minimum presence probability among all the cells

    • Eliminate safe haven

    • Achieved by equal presence probabilities in each cell

  • Will lead to Nash Equilibrium

  • Zero sum game  Pareto optimality


Presence matrices

Presence Matrices

Random Waypoint Model

Bouncing


Seeing mouse strategy

Seeing Mouse Strategy


Blind mouse strategies compared

Blind Mouse Strategies Compared

Vc = 10 m/s, Vm = 10 m/s, Rc = 25 m, Rm = 0 m


Seeing mouse strategies compared

Seeing Mouse Strategies Compared

Vc = 10 m/s, Vm = 10 m/s, Rc = 5 m, Rm = 10 m


Effect of mouse sensing range

Effect of Mouse Sensing Range


Effect of mouse speed

Effect of Mouse Speed


Effect of number of cats

Effect of Number of Cats


Minimum sensing range for expected random waypoint coverage

Minimum Sensing Range for Expected Random Waypoint Coverage

  • Stationary mouse; cat in random waypoint movement

  • Expected coverage desired by given deadline

  • What is minimum sensing distance required?

    • Stochastic analysis of shortest distance between cat and mouse within deadline


Lower bound cat mouse distance

Lower Bound Cat-mouse Distance

  • Network divided into m by n cells; each has fixed size s by s

  • D(i, j): Euclidean distance between cell i and cell j

  • Nsets of cells sorted by set’s distance to mouse

    • Each set of cells denoted as Sj, 0 ≤ j ≤ N - 1

    • Each cell in Sj is equidistant from the mouse; distance is DSj

    • Distances sorted in increasing order; i.e., DSj < DSj+1


Example equidistant sets of cells

Example Equidistant Sets of Cells

Mouse located at center of network area


Correlation between cells visited

Correlation between Cells Visited

  • Pi: probability that cat may visit cell i

  • PSj: probability that cat may visit any cell in set Sj


Shortest distance probability matrix from cell i to cell j

Shortest Distance Probability Matrix from Cell i to Cell j

3-D probability matrix B

  • Each element bi,j

  • gives cat’s shortest distance distribution from mouse after trip from cell i to j

  • is a size N vector: bi,j[k] is the probability that the shortest distance during the trip is DS

k


Shortest distance probability matrix after l trips

Shortest Distance Probability Matrix after l Trips

  • Bl is the shortest distance probability matrix after l trips

  • Computed by * operator

  • Each element of Bl is calculated as:

  • Let denote , then is calculated as:

where is the probability that DS0 is shortest distance for trip l, and is probability that DSn is shortest distance for the trip, 1 ≤ n ≤ N - 1


Expected shortest distance

Expected shortest distance

  • The expected shortest distance between cat and mouse after l trips:


Approximate expected shortest distance

Approximate Expected Shortest Distance

  • Approximate expected shortest distance from mouse after cat has visited k cells:

  • PDj(k) is probability that after visiting k cells, a cell in Sj is visited, but no cell in Si, i< j, is visited


Lower bound cat mouse distance for random waypoint model

Lower Bound Cat-mouse Distance for Random Waypoint Model

(b) Expected speed = 10 m/s

(c) Expected speed = 25 m/s

(a) Expected speed = 5 m/s


Lower bound cat mouse distance for indiana map based model

Lower Bound Cat-mouse Distance for Indiana Map-based Model


Conclusions

Conclusions

  • Considered cat and mouse game between mobile sensors and mobile target

  • For random waypoint model, other coverage properties can be obtained analytically

    • Expected cell sojourn time, expected time to cover general AOI, number of sensors to achieve coverage by given deadline, …


Conclusions cont d

Conclusions (cont’d)

  • Many extensions possible

    • Explicit account for plume explosion / dispersion models

    • Model for sensor (un)reliability, interference, etc

    • Explicit quantification of sensing uncertainty and its reduction


  • Login