1 / 34

A Counter-Based RFID Anti-Collision Protocol Using Parallel Splitting

A Counter-Based RFID Anti-Collision Protocol Using Parallel Splitting. Ming-Kuei Yeh and Jehn-Ruey Jiang Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering National Central University. Outline. Introduction Anti-collision protocols Proposed protocol Evaluation Conclusion.

teal
Download Presentation

A Counter-Based RFID Anti-Collision Protocol Using Parallel Splitting

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. A Counter-Based RFID Anti-Collision Protocol Using Parallel Splitting Ming-Kuei Yeh and Jehn-Ruey Jiang Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering National Central University

  2. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion

  3. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion • Introduction

  4. Introduction RFID system • RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification) system • Reader • Tag (Transponder) • Application

  5. Introduction Application

  6. Introduction Interrogation zone Tag 1 Tag 3 reader Interrogation zone Tag 2

  7. Introduction Tag-to-tag interference tag reader Interrogation zone Tag collision problem: collision occurs when multiple tags respond to the same reader simultaneously

  8. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion • Anti-collision protocols

  9. Anti-collision protocols category • Anti-collision protocols • For solving the tag collision problem • Two classes • ALOHA based • Tree based • deterministic tree-based • probabilistic counter-based

  10. Tag10 Tag9 Tag8 Collision ! Tag7 Tag6 Tag5 Tag4 Collision ! Tag3 Tag2 Tag1 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 Anti-collision protocols ALOHA based S: time slot An example of slotted ALOHA protocol

  11. Anti-collision protocols Tree based 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Tag1 Tag2 Tag3 Tag4 Tag5 Tag6 ID:0010 An example of bit-by-bit tree protocol

  12. Anti-collision protocols Counter based C = 0 C= counter C = 0 C = 0 C =3 C =4 C = 0 C = 0 C =2 C =3 C = 0 C = 0 C = 0 C =1 C = 0 C =1 C =2 C = 0 C =2 C = 0 C = 0 C = 0 C = 0 C = 0 C =1 C =0 C = 0 C =1 Tag1 Tag1 An example of a counter-based protocol: ISO/IEC18000-6B

  13. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Simulation • Conclusion • Proposed protocol

  14. Proposed protocol • Parallel Splitting (PS) forRFID Tag Anti-Collision • Counter based anti-collision protocol • Using two schemes • Parallel Splitting • Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment

  15. Proposed protocol Parallel Splitting C = 0 C =0 C = 0 C = 0 C =1 C = 0 C =1 C =0 C =1 C = 0 C = 0 C = 2 C =1 C =3 C =0 C =1 C =2 C =3 Just left-shift their counters one bit and add one or zero randomly to the counters. C =1 C =3 C =5 C =7 C =0 C =2 C =4 C =6 Tag1 C =5 C =7 C =10 C =12 C =0 C =2 C =6 C =8 C =9 C =11 C =13 C =1 C =3 C =4 C =14 C= counter

  16. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment • Why do we need to adjust the • identification-tree height? • May not be so lucky to split the tags perfectly(to be a full tree)

  17. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’) • Analyzing the ratio of the numbers of • leaf nodes that including zero tag, one tag • and multiple tags p(S): the probability that there are S tags residing at a leaf node N:The number of tags in the interrogation zone L:The number of leaf nodes; ;

  18. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’)

  19. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’)

  20. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’)

  21. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’)

  22. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’) Let the expected numbers of leaf nodes containing none, one and multiple tags be e(0), e(1) and e(m), respectively.

  23. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’) It is reasonable to assume L>>1 and N>>1, and to take L–1as L, and N–1, N–2 as N. We have

  24. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’) • Analyzing the ratio of the numbers of • leaf nodes that including zero tag, one tag • and multiple tags • The result of analysis Rule1 Rule2 L :The number of leaf nodes N:The number of tags in the interrogation zone

  25. Proposed protocol Adaptive Identification-Tree Height Adjustment (cont’) • The Actions of Adjustment • Rule 1: If N0 > 2*N1 and N1 > 3.4*Nm, • =>all unidentified tags right-shift their counters one bit to divide L by 2. • Rule 2: If 2*N0 < N1 and 1.7*N1 < Nm • => all unidentified tags left-shift their counters one bit to multiply L by 2, and subsequently add one or zero randomly to the counters.

  26. Proposed protocol Two Phases of PS Protocol • In phase I • All tags are split in parallel until the first tag is identified successfully. • In phase II • Tags are identified one by one according to • The normal identification procedure of ISO/IEC 18000-6B protocol. • The reader applies Rule1 or Rule2for adjusting the number of leaf nodes to approach the actual number N of tags (N is unknown) • In phase II

  27. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion • Evaluation

  28. Evaluation • The simulations are programmed in Java language • Each simulation is performed 1,000 times and then calculates the average value

  29. Evaluation -The relation between the height of the identification tree and the number of iterations needed An iteration is defined as a reader sends a command and tags perform corresponding actions N is the number of tags in the interrogation zone is the “perfect” height of the identification-tree The comparison of the number of iterations for 1,025~2,025 tags.

  30. Evaluation-the number of iterations The comparison of the number of iterations between ISO18000-6B and the PS protocol for 512~2,012 tags.

  31. Evaluation-System Efficiency System efficiency is defined as the ratio of the number N of tags to the number S of slots (iterations) required to identify all the tags The comparison of PS, query tree (QT), ISO/IEC 18000-6B, and frame slotted ALOHA protocols in terms of system efficiency for 100~1,000 tags

  32. Outline • Introduction • Anti-collision protocols • Proposed protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion • Conclusion

  33. Conclusion • We have proposed a newcounter based anti-collision protocol (PS) for RFID systems • Two schemes are used in this protocol • parallel splitting • adaptive identification-tree height adjustment • PS has better performance than ISO-18000 6B

  34. Thanks for Your Listening!

More Related