1 / 32

ASCENT: Adaptive Self-Configuring sEnsor Networks Topologies

ASCENT: Adaptive Self-Configuring sEnsor Networks Topologies. Authors: Alberto Cerpa, Deborah Estrin Presented by Suganthie Shanmugam. Presentation Topics. Introduction Assumptions and Contributions ASCENT Design Analytical Performance Analysis Experimental Simulation Simulation Results

gunnar
Download Presentation

ASCENT: Adaptive Self-Configuring sEnsor Networks Topologies

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. ASCENT: Adaptive Self-Configuring sEnsor Networks Topologies Authors: Alberto Cerpa, Deborah Estrin Presented by Suganthie Shanmugam

  2. Presentation Topics • Introduction • Assumptions and Contributions • ASCENT Design • Analytical Performance Analysis • Experimental Simulation • Simulation Results • Related Work • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Advances in micro-sensor and radio technology • Smart sensors deployed in wireless network • Nodes perform local processing • Reduce communications and energy costs • Low per-node cost → densely distributed network • Results in non-uniform communication density • ASCENT • Only a subset of nodes necessary to establish routing as node density increases • Each node assesses its connectivity and adaptively self-configures to underlying topology

  4. ASCENT Introduction • How It works • A node signals when it detects high packet loss • Requests other nodes to join the network • Reduces its load and does not join network till it is “helpful” to do so • Adaptive configuration cannot be done from a central node • Single node cannot sense conditions of nodes distributed in space • Other nodes will be required to communicate detailed information to central node

  5. Assumptions and Contributions • Distributed Sensor Network Scenario • Ex: A habitat monitoring sensor network • Sensors hand-placed or dropped from a plane • Conditions • Ad-hoc deployment • Sensor network cannot be deployed in regular fashion • Uniform deployment does not correspond to uniform connectivity • Energy Constraints • Expend minimal energy to maximize network lifetime • Unattended operation under dynamics • Preclude manual configuration and design-time pre-configuration

  6. Assumptions and Contributions • Easier to deploy large number of nodes initially • Too few nodes used • Distance between neighboring nodes – large • Packet loss rate increases • Energy required to transmit – prohibitive • All nodes used • Unnecessary energy expended • Nodes interfere with each other – channel congestion • Perfect platform for ASCENT design

  7. Assumptions and Contributions • Assumption – CSMA MAC protocol used in network • Resource contention when many nodes involved in routing • ASCENT • Does not detect or repair network partitions • Is not suitable when node density is low • All nodes required to form effective network • Two primary contributions • Use of adaptive techniques to configure the underlying network • Saves Energy, Extends Network lifetime • Use of self-configuring techniques • Reacts to operating conditions locally

  8. ASCENT Design • ASCENT adaptively elects “Active” nodes • Awake all the time and perform multi-hop packet routing • Passive nodes • Periodically check if they should become active

  9. ASCENT Design - State Transitions

  10. ASCENT Design - Parameters Tuning • NT (Neighbor Threshold) • Average degree of connectivity in the network - Set to 4 • LT (Loss Threshold) • Max. amount of data loss that an application can tolerate • Application dependent – Set to 20% • Tt, Tp – Test Timer, Passive Timer • Max. time a node remains in test and passive states • Tt = 2 minutes ; Tp = 4 minutes • Ts – Sleep Timer • Amount of time a node sleeps to conserve energy • Large Ts – Large energy savings but doesn’t react to dynamics

  11. Neighbor and Data Loss Determination • Number of active neighbors, Avg. data loss rate • Values measured locally by each node while in passive and test states • Definitions • Neighbor node - From which certain % of packets received • History Window CW – Keep track of packets received from each node • Each node increases the sequence number when each packet is transmitted • When a sequence number is skipped, loss is detected • Final packet loss: • Filter constant ρ set to 0.3

  12. Neighbor and Data Loss Determination • The number of active neighbors (N) • Number of neighbors with link packet loss smaller than the neighbor loss threshold (NLS) • NLS = 1- (1/N) • N : the number of neighbors calculated in the previous cycle • If neighbor packet loss > NLS, node deleted from list • As number of neighbors increase, NLS should be increased • Average data loss rate (DL) • Calculated based on application data packets • Detected using data sequence numbers • If message not received from any neighbor - data loss • Control messages are not considered • Help, neighbor announcement and routing control

  13. Interactions with Routing • ASCENT • runs above link and MAC layer below routing layer • is not a routing or data dissemination protocol • decides which nodes should join the routing infrastructure • Nodes become active or passive independent of routing protocol • Does not use state gathered by the routing protocol • Does not require changing the routing state • Test state (actively routing packets)  passive state (listen-only) • Cause some packet loss • Improvement : Traffic could be rerouted in advance by informing the routing protocol of ASCENT’s state changes

  14. Performance Analysis – Goals and Metrics • One-Hop Delivery Rate • Measures % of packets received by any node in network • Indicates effective one-hop bandwidth available to nodes • When all nodes are turned on –Active case – packet reception includes all nodes. • ASCENT case - includes all except nodes in sleep state. • End-to-End Delivery Rate • Ratio of Number of distinct packets received by destination to the Number originally sent by source • Provides an idea of quality of paths in the network and the effective multi-hop bandwidth

  15. Performance Analysis – Goals and Metrics • Energy Savings • Ratio of energy consumed by Active case to Energy consumed by the ASCENT case • Average Per-Hop Latency • Measures average delay in packet forwarding in a multi-hop network • Provides estimate of end-to-end delay in packet forwarding

  16. Analytical Performance Analysis • Assumptions • Nodes randomly distributed in an area A • Average degree of connectivity (n) • Packets propagated using flooding with random back-off • Probability of successfully transmitting a packet • P (success) = [(S – 1)/S]T • Node density increase → P (success) decreases • When all nodes can transmit and receive, T = n • Since every node in vicinity can transmit • Node density increase → P (collisions) increases

  17. Analytical Performance Analysis • Average latency per hop related to S and T • S = No. of slots • T = No. of active nodes • Each T node picks a random slot • S1, S2…ST • Mean = S / 2 • Uniform probability distribution

  18. Analytical Performance Analysis

  19. Analytical Performance Analysis • P(δ) distribution for different T and S =20 • T = n • When all nodes can transmit and receive • As n ↑, P(δ) ↓ • In ASCENT case • T = NT • Independent of n • P(δ) remains constant

  20. 1 2 3 Analytical Performance Analysis • Energy Savings • Numerator – Power consumed by all nodes without ASCENT • Denominator – Power consumed by all nodes running ASCENT • 1: Power consumed by NT nodes selected by ASCENT to have their radios on • 2: Energy of non-active nodes in passive state • 3: Energy consumed in sleep state

  21. Analytical Performance Analysis • Energy Savings • α = Ratio of passive timer to sleep timer • β = Ratio of sleep mode to idle mode power consumption • NT = fixed, β = small, as density ↑ power consumption is dominated by passive nodes • When α = small and Ts >>Tp, large energy savings • Large Ts → slow reaction of passive nodes

  22. Analytical Performance Analysis • Energy savings of ASCENT with Adaptive timers • No asymptotic behavior • Energy savings increase linearly with density • Slope of line primarily determined by Probability Threshold Pt

  23. Simulation & Experimental Methodology • Implementation • LinkStats module • Adds increasing sequence number to each packet • Monitors packets • Maintains packets statistics • Neighbor Discovery module • Sends and receives Heartbeat messages • Maintains list of active neighbors • Energy Manager module • Evaluate Energy Usage • Acts as simulated battery

  24. Simulation & Experimental Methodology • Simulator • Built-in simulator (emsim) of EmStar used • Provides channel simulator to model environment behavior • Statistical model • Experimental Test bed • Total of 55 nodes used, All nodes wall-powered • Routing • Flooding used as routing protocol for simplicity • On receiving a packet, flood module waits for a random time • Randomization interval = 5 seconds

  25. Simulation & Experimental Methodology • Scenarios and Environment • Experiments conducted with different densities ranging from 5 to 40 nodes • Density defined topologically • Defined by average degree of connectivity between all nodes not by physical location • Achieved by adjusting transmit power of the RF transceiver • Average number of hops = 3 • Traffic • One source sends approximately 200 messages • Data Rate = 3 messages / minute • Nodes do not experience congestion

  26. Simulation Results – Network Capacity • No major difference between analytical and simulated performance • Active case • All nodes join network and forward packets • Low delivery rate • As node density increases, P (collisions) increases • ASCENT case • Limits active nodes • Channel contention does not increase

  27. Simulation Results – Network Capacity • No. of hops = 3 • Experiments • No. of hops = 6 • Simulations • Increase in density • ASCENT performs better than ACTIVE case • Remains stable

  28. Simulation Results – Energy Savings • ASCENT provides significant Energy savings • As density increases • Fixed State Timers • Energy savings do not increase proportionally • Number of Active nodes remains stable • Adaptive State Timers • Energy savings increase proportionally • Passive nodes aggressive

  29. Simulation Results – Latency • ACTIVE case • As density ↑, average per-hop latency is reduced • Larger probability of a node picking a smaller random interval to forward the packet • ASCENT • As density ↑, average per-hop latency remains stable • Number of nodes able to forward packets remains constant

  30. Results – Reaction to Dynamics • Evaluate how ASCENT reacts to node failures • Let system run till stable topology reached • Manually kill set of active nodes • At high density, end-to-end delivery rate does not decrease • High probability of a passive node to fix communication hole • ASCENT with adaptive state timers – more stable

  31. Results – Sensitivity to Parameters • Larger randomization interval • average one-hop delivery rate increases • Increases end-to-end latency • ASCENT outperforms ACTIVE case

  32. Conclusions and Future Work • Paper describes design, implementation, analysis, simulation and experimental evaluation of ASCENT • ASCENT • Has potential to significantly reduce packet loss • Increases Energy efficiency • Was responsive & stable under varied conditions • Future Work • Evaluate interactions of ASCENT with MAC • Investigate use of load balancing techniques • Understand relationships between ASCENT and other routing strategies

More Related