From ab8ab627ad40d4966e7a06fc1280989817e6cc90 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Karine Deschinkel Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:55:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ok --- article.tex | 163 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+), 74 deletions(-) diff --git a/article.tex b/article.tex index 777d52e..29e8cb9 100644 --- a/article.tex +++ b/article.tex @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ during which sets of sensor nodes are scheduled to remain active for a number of rounds during the sensing phase, to ensure coverage so as to maximize the lifetime of WSN. \textcolor{green}{The decision process is carried out by a leader node, which solves an optimization problem to produce the best representative sets to be used -during the rounds of the sensing phase. The optimization problem formulated as an integer program is solved either to optimality through a branch-and-Bound method or to near-optimality using a genetic algorithm-based heuristic. } +during the rounds of the sensing phase. The optimization problem formulated as an integer program is solved to optimality through a branch-and-Bound method for small instances. For larger instances, the best feasible solution found by the solver after a given time limit threshold is considered. } %The decision process is carried out by a leader node, which %solves an integer program to produce the best representative sets to be used %during the rounds of the sensing phase. @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ possibility of dividing the sensing phase into multiple rounds and we also add an improved model of energy consumption to assess the efficiency of our approach. In fact, in this paper we make a multiround optimization, while it was a single round optimization in our previous work. \textcolor{green}{The idea is to take advantage of the pre-sensing phase - to plan the sensor's activity for several rounds instead of one, thus saving energy. In addition, as the optimization problem has become more complex, a GA-based heuristic is proposed to solve it}. + to plan the sensor's activity for several rounds instead of one, thus saving energy. In addition, when the optimization problem becomes more complex, its resolution is stopped after a given time threshold}. \iffalse @@ -658,70 +658,26 @@ consumption due to the communications. \subsection{Decision phase} -Each WSNL will \textcolor{red}{ execute an optimization algorithm (see section \ref{oa})} to select which cover sets will be +Each WSNL will \textcolor{green}{ solve an integer program to select which cover sets will be activated in the following sensing phase to cover the subregion to which it -belongs. The \textcolor{red}{optimization algorithm} will produce $T$ cover sets, one for each round. The WSNL will send an Active-Sleep packet to each sensor in the subregion based on the algorithm's results, indicating if the sensor should be active or not in -each round of the sensing phase. +belongs. $T$ cover sets will be produced, one for each round. The WSNL will send an Active-Sleep packet to each sensor in the subregion based on the algorithm's results, indicating if the sensor should be active or not in +each round of the sensing phase. } +%Each WSNL will \textcolor{red}{ execute an optimization algorithm (see section \ref{oa})} to select which cover sets will be +%activated in the following sensing phase to cover the subregion to which it +%belongs. The \textcolor{red}{optimization algorithm} will produce $T$ cover sets, one for each round. The WSNL will send an Active-Sleep packet to each sensor in the subregion based on the algorithm's results, indicating if the sensor should be active or not in +%each round of the sensing phase. -%solve an integer program - -\subsection{Sensing phase} - -The sensing phase consists of $T$ rounds. Each sensor node in the subregion will -receive an Active-Sleep packet from WSNL, informing it to stay awake or to go to -sleep for each round of the sensing phase. Algorithm~\ref{alg:MuDiLCO}, which -will be executed by each node at the beginning of a period, explains how the -Active-Sleep packet is obtained. - -% In each round during the sensing phase, there is a cover set of sensor nodes, in which the active sensors will execute their sensing task to preserve maximal coverage and lifetime in the subregion and this will continue until finishing the round $T$ and starting new period. -\begin{algorithm}[h!] - % \KwIn{all the parameters related to information exchange} -% \KwOut{$winer-node$ (: the id of the winner sensor node, which is the leader of current round)} - \BlankLine - %\emph{Initialize the sensor node and determine it's position and subregion} \; - - \If{ $RE_j \geq E_{R}$ }{ - \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMMUNICATION}\; - \emph{Send $INFO()$ packet to other nodes in the subregion}\; - \emph{Wait $INFO()$ packet from other nodes in the subregion}\; - %\emph{UPDATE $RE_j$ for every sent or received INFO Packet}\; - %\emph{ Collect information and construct the list L for all nodes in the subregion}\; - - %\If{ the received INFO Packet = No. of nodes in it's subregion -1 }{ - \emph{LeaderID = Leader election}\; - \If{$ s_j.ID = LeaderID $}{ - \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMPUTATION}\; - \emph{$\left\{\left(X_{1,k},\dots,X_{T,k}\right)\right\}_{k \in J}$ = - Execute \textcolor{red}{Optimization Algorithm}($T,J$)}\; - \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMMUNICATION}\; - \emph{Send $ActiveSleep()$ to each node $k$ in subregion a packet \\ - with vector of activity scheduling $(X_{1,k},\dots,X_{T,k})$}\; - \emph{Update $RE_j $}\; - } - \Else{ - \emph{$s_j.status$ = LISTENING}\; - \emph{Wait $ActiveSleep()$ packet from the Leader}\; - % \emph{After receiving Packet, Retrieve the schedule and the $T$ rounds}\; - \emph{Update $RE_j $}\; - } - % } - } - \Else { Exclude $s_j$ from entering in the current sensing phase} - - % \emph{return X} \; -\caption{MuDiLCO($s_j$)} -\label{alg:MuDiLCO} +%solve an integer program -\end{algorithm} -\section{\textcolor{red}{ Optimization Algorithm for Multiround Lifetime Coverage Optimization}} -\label{oa} +%\section{\textcolor{red}{ Optimization Algorithm for Multiround Lifetime Coverage Optimization}} +%\label{oa} As shown in Algorithm~\ref{alg:MuDiLCO}, the leader will execute an optimization algorithm based on an integer program. The integer program is based on the model proposed by \cite{pedraza2006} with some modifications, where the objective is to find a maximum number of disjoint cover sets. To fulfill this goal, the @@ -841,14 +797,66 @@ In our simulations priority is given to the coverage by choosing $W_{U}$ very large compared to $W_{\theta}$. %The Active-Sleep packet includes the schedule vector with the number of rounds that should be applied by the receiving sensor node during the sensing phase. + +\subsection{Sensing phase} + +The sensing phase consists of $T$ rounds. Each sensor node in the subregion will +receive an Active-Sleep packet from WSNL, informing it to stay awake or to go to +sleep for each round of the sensing phase. Algorithm~\ref{alg:MuDiLCO}, which +will be executed by each node at the beginning of a period, explains how the +Active-Sleep packet is obtained. + +% In each round during the sensing phase, there is a cover set of sensor nodes, in which the active sensors will execute their sensing task to preserve maximal coverage and lifetime in the subregion and this will continue until finishing the round $T$ and starting new period. + +\begin{algorithm}[h!] + % \KwIn{all the parameters related to information exchange} +% \KwOut{$winer-node$ (: the id of the winner sensor node, which is the leader of current round)} + \BlankLine + %\emph{Initialize the sensor node and determine it's position and subregion} \; + + \If{ $RE_j \geq E_{R}$ }{ + \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMMUNICATION}\; + \emph{Send $INFO()$ packet to other nodes in the subregion}\; + \emph{Wait $INFO()$ packet from other nodes in the subregion}\; + %\emph{UPDATE $RE_j$ for every sent or received INFO Packet}\; + %\emph{ Collect information and construct the list L for all nodes in the subregion}\; + + %\If{ the received INFO Packet = No. of nodes in it's subregion -1 }{ + \emph{LeaderID = Leader election}\; + \If{$ s_j.ID = LeaderID $}{ + \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMPUTATION}\; + \emph{$\left\{\left(X_{1,k},\dots,X_{T,k}\right)\right\}_{k \in J}$ = + Execute \textcolor{red}{Optimization Algorithm}($T,J$)}\; + \emph{$s_j.status$ = COMMUNICATION}\; + \emph{Send $ActiveSleep()$ to each node $k$ in subregion a packet \\ + with vector of activity scheduling $(X_{1,k},\dots,X_{T,k})$}\; + \emph{Update $RE_j $}\; + } + \Else{ + \emph{$s_j.status$ = LISTENING}\; + \emph{Wait $ActiveSleep()$ packet from the Leader}\; + % \emph{After receiving Packet, Retrieve the schedule and the $T$ rounds}\; + \emph{Update $RE_j $}\; + } + % } + } + \Else { Exclude $s_j$ from entering in the current sensing phase} + + % \emph{return X} \; +\caption{MuDiLCO($s_j$)} +\label{alg:MuDiLCO} + +\end{algorithm} + +\iffalse \textcolor{red}{This integer program can be solved using two approaches:} \subsection{\textcolor{red}{Optimization solver for Multiround Lifetime Coverage Optimization}} \label{glpk} \textcolor{red}{The modeling language for Mathematical Programming (AMPL)~\cite{AMPL} is employed to generate the integer program instance in a standard format, which is then read and solved by the optimization solver GLPK (GNU linear Programming Kit available in the public domain) \cite{glpk} through a Branch-and-Bound method. We named the protocol which is based on GLPK solver in the decision phase as MuDiLCO.} +\fi - - +\iffalse \subsection{\textcolor{red}{Genetic Algorithm for Multiround Lifetime Coverage Optimization}} \label{GA} @@ -1006,7 +1014,7 @@ The proposed GA-MuDiLCO stops when the stopping criteria is met. It stops after \end{enumerate} - +\fi \section{Experimental study} \label{exp} @@ -1059,9 +1067,9 @@ $W_{\theta}$ & 1 \\ % [1ex] adds vertical space %\hline $W_{U}$ & $|P|^2$ \\ -$P_c$ & 0.95 \\ -$P_m$ & 0.6 \\ -$S_{pop}$ & 50 +%$P_c$ & 0.95 \\ +%$P_m$ & 0.6 \\ +%$S_{pop}$ & 50 %inserts single line \end{tabular} \label{table3} @@ -1070,8 +1078,10 @@ $S_{pop}$ & 50 \textcolor{red}{Our first protocol based GLPK optimization solver is declined into four versions: MuDiLCO-1, MuDiLCO-3, MuDiLCO-5, and MuDiLCO-7, corresponding respectively to $T=1,3,5,7$ ($T$ the number of -rounds in one sensing period). The second protocol based GA is declined into four versions: GA-MuDiLCO-1, GA-MuDiLCO-3, GA-MuDiLCO-5, -and GA-MuDiLCO-7 for the same reason of the first protocol. After extensive experiments, we chose the dedicated values for the parameters $P_c$, $P_m$, and $S_{pop}$ because they gave the best results}. In the following, we will make comparisons with +rounds in one sensing period). } +%The second protocol based GA is declined into four versions: GA-MuDiLCO-1, GA-MuDiLCO-3, GA-MuDiLCO-5, +%and GA-MuDiLCO-7 for the same reason of the first protocol. After extensive experiments, we chose the dedicated values for the parameters $P_c$, $P_m$, and $S_{pop}$ because they gave the best results}. + In the following, we will make comparisons with two other methods. The first method, called DESK and proposed by \cite{ChinhVu}, is a full distributed coverage algorithm. The second method, called GAF~\cite{xu2001geography}, consists in dividing the region into fixed squares. @@ -1285,11 +1295,12 @@ rounds, and thus should extend the network lifetime. \label{fig3} \end{figure} +\iffalse \textcolor{red}{ We can see that for the first thirty nine rounds GA-MuDiLCO provides a little bit better coverage ratio than MuDiLCO. Both DESK and GAF provide a coverage which is a little bit better than the one of MuDiLCO and GA-MuDiLCO for the first thirty rounds because they activate a larger number of nodes during sensing phase. After that GA-MuDiLCO provides a coverage ratio near to the MuDiLCO and better than DESK and GAF. GA-MuDiLCO gives approximate solution with activation a larger number of nodes than MuDiLCO during sensing phase while it activates a less number of nodes in comparison with both DESK and GAF. MuDiLCO and GA-MuDiLCO clearly outperform DESK and GAF for a number of periods between 31 and 103. This is because they optimize the coverage and the lifetime in a wireless sensor network by selecting the best representative sensor nodes to take the responsibility of coverage during the sensing phase.} - +\fi \subsubsection{Active sensors ratio} @@ -1298,8 +1309,10 @@ It is crucial to have as few active nodes as possible in each round, in order to minimize the communication overhead and maximize the network lifetime. Figure~\ref{fig4} presents the active sensor ratio for 150 deployed nodes all along the network lifetime. It appears that up to round thirteen, DESK and GAF have respectively 37.6\% and 44.8\% of nodes in ACTIVE status, whereas -MuDiLCO clearly outperforms them with only 24.8\% of active nodes. \textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO activates a number of sensor nodes larger than MuDiLCO but lower than both DESK and GAF. GA-MuDiLCO-1, GA-MuDiLCO-3, and GA-MuDiLCO-5 continue in providing a larger number of active sensors until the forty-sixth round after that it provides less number of active nodes due to the died nodes. GA-MuDiLCO-7 provides a larger number of sensor nodes and maintains a better coverage ratio compared to MuDiLCO-7 until the fifty-seventh round. After the thirty-fifth round, MuDiLCO exhibits larger numbers of active nodes compared with DESK and GAF, which agrees with the dual observation of higher level of coverage made previously}. -Obviously, in that case DESK and GAF have less active nodes, since they have activated many nodes at the beginning. Anyway, MuDiLCO activates the available nodes in a more efficient manner. \textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO activates near optimal number of sensor nodes also in efficient manner compared with both DESK and GAF}. +MuDiLCO clearly outperforms them with only 24.8\% of active nodes. +%\textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO activates a number of sensor nodes larger than MuDiLCO but lower than both DESK and GAF. GA-MuDiLCO-1, GA-MuDiLCO-3, and GA-MuDiLCO-5 continue in providing a larger number of active sensors until the forty-sixth round after that it provides less number of active nodes due to the died nodes. GA-MuDiLCO-7 provides a larger number of sensor nodes and maintains a better coverage ratio compared to MuDiLCO-7 until the fifty-seventh round. After the thirty-fifth round, MuDiLCO exhibits larger numbers of active nodes compared with DESK and GAF, which agrees with the dual observation of higher level of coverage made previously}. +Obviously, in that case DESK and GAF have less active nodes, since they have activated many nodes at the beginning. Anyway, MuDiLCO activates the available nodes in a more efficient manner. +%\textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO activates near optimal number of sensor nodes also in efficient manner compared with both DESK and GAF}. \begin{figure}[ht!] \centering @@ -1318,8 +1331,9 @@ Obviously, in that case DESK and GAF have less active nodes, since they have a Figure~\ref{fig6} reports the cumulative percentage of stopped simulations runs per round for 150 deployed nodes. This figure gives the breakpoint for each method. DESK stops first, after approximately 45~rounds, because it consumes the more energy by turning on a large number of redundant nodes during the sensing -phase. GAF stops secondly for the same reason than DESK. \textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO stops thirdly for the same reason than DESK and GAF.} \textcolor{red}{MuDiLCO and GA-MuDiLCO overcome} -DESK and GAF because \textcolor{red}{they activate less number of sensor nodes, as well as }the optimization process distributed on several subregions leads to coverage preservation and so extends the network lifetime. +phase. GAF stops secondly for the same reason than DESK. +%\textcolor{red}{GA-MuDiLCO stops thirdly for the same reason than DESK and GAF.} \textcolor{red}{MuDiLCO and GA-MuDiLCO overcome} +%DESK and GAF because \textcolor{red}{they activate less number of sensor nodes, as well as }the optimization process distributed on several subregions leads to coverage preservation and so extends the network lifetime. Let us emphasize that the simulation continues as long as a network in a subregion is still connected. %%% The optimization effectively continues as long as a network in a subregion is still connected. A VOIR %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% @@ -1355,9 +1369,9 @@ The results show that MuDiLCO is the most competitive from the energy consumption point of view. The other approaches have a high energy consumption due to activating a larger number of redundant nodes as well as the energy consumed during the different status of the sensor node. Among the different versions of our protocol, the MuDiLCO-7 one consumes more energy than the other versions. This is easy to understand since the bigger the number of rounds and the number of sensors involved in the integer program are, the larger the time computation to solve the optimization problem is. To improve the performances of MuDiLCO-7, we should increase the number of subregions in order to have less sensors to consider in the integer program. -\textcolor{red}{As shown in Figure~\ref{fig7}, GA-MuDiLCO consumes less energy than both DESK and GAF, but a little bit higher than MuDiLCO because it provides a near optimal solution by activating a larger number of nodes during the sensing phase. GA-MuDiLCO consumes less energy in comparison with MuDiLCO-7 version, especially for the dense networks. However, MuDiLCO protocol and GA-MuDiLCO protocol are the most competitive from the energy -consumption point of view. The other approaches have a high energy consumption -due to activating a larger number of redundant nodes.} +%\textcolor{red}{As shown in Figure~\ref{fig7}, GA-MuDiLCO consumes less energy than both DESK and GAF, but a little bit higher than MuDiLCO because it provides a near optimal solution by activating a larger number of nodes during the sensing phase. GA-MuDiLCO consumes less energy in comparison with MuDiLCO-7 version, especially for the dense networks. However, MuDiLCO protocol and GA-MuDiLCO protocol are the most competitive from the energy +%consumption point of view. The other approaches have a high energy consumption +%due to activating a larger number of redundant nodes.} %In fact, a distributed optimization decision, which produces T rounds, on the subregions is greatly reduced the cost of communications and the time of listening as well as the energy needed for sensing phase and computation so thanks to the partitioning of the initial network into several independent subnetworks and producing T rounds for each subregion periodically. @@ -1409,8 +1423,9 @@ of $Lifetime_{95}$ with large wireless sensor networks results from the difficulty of the optimization problem to be solved by the integer program. This point was already noticed in subsection \ref{subsec:EC} devoted to the energy consumption, since network lifetime and energy consumption are directly -linked. \textcolor{red}{As can be seen in these figures, the lifetime increases with the size of the network, and it is clearly largest for the MuDiLCO -and the GA-MuDiLCO protocols. GA-MuDiLCO prolongs the network lifetime obviously in comparison with both DESK and GAF, as well as the MuDiLCO-7 version for $lifetime_{95}$. However, comparison shows that MuDiLCO protocol and GA-MuDiLCO protocol, which use distributed optimization over the subregions are the best ones because they are robust to network disconnection during the network lifetime as well as they consume less energy in comparison with other approaches.} +linked. +%\textcolor{red}{As can be seen in these figures, the lifetime increases with the size of the network, and it is clearly largest for the MuDiLCO +%and the GA-MuDiLCO protocols. GA-MuDiLCO prolongs the network lifetime obviously in comparison with both DESK and GAF, as well as the MuDiLCO-7 version for $lifetime_{95}$. However, comparison shows that MuDiLCO protocol and GA-MuDiLCO protocol, which use distributed optimization over the subregions are the best ones because they are robust to network disconnection during the network lifetime as well as they consume less energy in comparison with other approaches.} \begin{figure}[t!] \centering \begin{tabular}{cl} -- 2.39.5