-This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.15 (TeX Live 2015/dev/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2015.1.24) 26 JUN 2015 16:36
+This is pdfTeX, Version 3.1415926-2.4-1.40.13 (TeX Live 2012/Debian) (format=pdflatex 2013.9.3) 29 JUN 2015 10:00
entering extended mode
restricted \write18 enabled.
%&-line parsing enabled.
**articleeo.tex
(./articleeo.tex
-LaTeX2e <2014/05/01>
-Babel <3.9l> and hyphenation patterns for 61 languages loaded.
+LaTeX2e <2011/06/27>
+Babel <v3.8m> and hyphenation patterns for english, dumylang, nohyphenation, lo
+aded.
(./gENO2e.cls
Document Class: gENO2e 2013/04/29 v4.1 Engineering Optimization LaTeX2e documen
t class
Package: graphicx 1999/02/16 v1.0f Enhanced LaTeX Graphics (DPC,SPQR)
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/graphics/keyval.sty
-Package: keyval 2014/05/08 v1.15 key=value parser (DPC)
+Package: keyval 1999/03/16 v1.13 key=value parser (DPC)
\KV@toks@=\toks20
)
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/graphics/graphics.sty
Package: rotating 1997/09/26, v2.13 Rotation package
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/ifthen.sty
-Package: ifthen 2014/09/29 v1.1c Standard LaTeX ifthen package (DPC)
+Package: ifthen 2001/05/26 v1.1c Standard LaTeX ifthen package (DPC)
)
\c@r@tfl@t=\count118
\rot@float@box=\box30
Package: algorithm2e 2008/00/00 v3.10 algorithms environments
\c@AlgoLine=\count123
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/tools/xspace.sty
-Package: xspace 2014/10/28 v1.13 Space after command names (DPC,MH)
+Package: xspace 2009/10/20 v1.13 Space after command names (DPC,MH)
)
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/relsize/relsize.sty
-Package: relsize 2013/03/29 ver 4.1
-)
+Package: relsize 2011/09/21 ver 4.0
+
+Examine \normalsize starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xipt.
+Examine \small starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xpt.
+Examine \footnotesize starts \@setfontsize size may be \@viiipt.
+Examine \large starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xipt.
+Examine \Large starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xviipt.
+Examine \LARGE starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xviiipt.
+Examine \scriptsize starts \@setfontsize size may be \@viipt.
+Examine \tiny starts \@setfontsize size may be \@vipt.
+Examine \huge starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xxpt.
+Examine \Huge starts \@setfontsize size may be \@xxvpt. )
********************************************************
Package `algorithm2e' Release 4.01 -- december 14 2009 --
- algorithm2e-announce@lirmm.fr mailing list for announcement about releases
LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for OML+cmr on input line 24.
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/omlcmr.fd
-File: omlcmr.fd 2014/09/29 v2.5h Standard LaTeX font definitions
+File: omlcmr.fd 1999/05/25 v2.5h Standard LaTeX font definitions
)
LaTeX Font Info: Font shape `OML/cmr/m/it' in size <10> not available
(Font) Font shape `OML/cmm/m/it' tried instead on input line 24.
LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for OMS+cmr on input line 24.
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/omscmr.fd
-File: omscmr.fd 2014/09/29 v2.5h Standard LaTeX font definitions
+File: omscmr.fd 1999/05/25 v2.5h Standard LaTeX font definitions
)
LaTeX Font Info: Font shape `OMS/cmr/m/n' in size <10> not available
(Font) Font shape `OMS/cmsy/m/n' tried instead on input line 24.
LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for U+msa on input line 24.
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/amsfonts/umsa.fd
-File: umsa.fd 2013/01/14 v3.01 AMS symbols A
+File: umsa.fd 2009/06/22 v3.00 AMS symbols A
)
LaTeX Font Info: Try loading font information for U+msb on input line 24.
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/amsfonts/umsb.fd
-File: umsb.fd 2013/01/14 v3.01 AMS symbols B
+File: umsb.fd 2009/06/22 v3.00 AMS symbols B
)
LaTeX Font Info: Font shape `OML/cmr/m/it' in size <8> not available
(Font) Font shape `OML/cmm/m/it' tried instead on input line 24.
(Font) using `OT1/cmr/bx/n' instead on input line 220.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure1a.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:43
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:11:12
(epstopdf) size: 358485 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure1a-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:45
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:43
(epstopdf) size: 78307 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure1a-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure1a.eps>
Package pdftex.def Info: figure1a-eps-converted-to.pdf used on input line 268.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 213.39566pt x 202.1362pt.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure1b.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:43
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:11:12
(epstopdf) size: 241675 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure1b-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:46
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:44
(epstopdf) size: 57181 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure1b-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure1b.eps>
[5 <./figure1a-eps-converted-to.pdf> <./figure1b-eps-converted-to.pdf>]
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure2.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:43
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:11:12
(epstopdf) size: 508784 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure2-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:46
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:44
(epstopdf) size: 138861 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure2-eps-converted-to.p
df figure2.eps>
Package pdftex.def Info: figure2-eps-converted-to.pdf used on input line 311.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 398.99872pt x 200.66864pt.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure3.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:43
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:11:12
(epstopdf) size: 196938 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure3-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:47
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:45
(epstopdf) size: 48639 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure3-eps-converted-to.p
df figure3.eps>
[6 <./figure2-eps-converted-to.pdf>]
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure4.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:43
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:11:12
(epstopdf) size: 428048 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure4-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:20:47
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:45
(epstopdf) size: 76496 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure4-eps-converted-to.p
df figure4.eps>
[12]
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure5.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:02
(epstopdf) size: 29526 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure5-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:32
-(epstopdf) size: 12679 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:46
+(epstopdf) size: 12638 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure5-eps-converted-to.p
df figure5.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 821.
[13 <./figure5-eps-converted-to.pdf>]
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure6.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:02
(epstopdf) size: 29515 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure6-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:32
-(epstopdf) size: 12739 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:46
+(epstopdf) size: 12695 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure6-eps-converted-to.p
df figure6.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 840.
Package pdftex.def Info: figure6-eps-converted-to.pdf used on input line 840.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 242.40503pt x 175.15395pt.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure7a.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:02
(epstopdf) size: 24136 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure7a-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:32
-(epstopdf) size: 8217 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:46
+(epstopdf) size: 8179 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure7a-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure7a.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 864.
Package pdftex.def Info: figure7a-eps-converted-to.pdf used on input line 864.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 246.92189pt x 175.15395pt.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure7b.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:02
(epstopdf) size: 24138 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure7b-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:33
-(epstopdf) size: 8218 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:47
+(epstopdf) size: 8180 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure7b-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure7b.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 865.
LaTeX Warning: `!h' float specifier changed to `!ht'.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure8a.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:03
(epstopdf) size: 24103 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure8a-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:33
-(epstopdf) size: 8390 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:47
+(epstopdf) size: 8351 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure8a-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure8a.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 888.
Package pdftex.def Info: figure8a-eps-converted-to.pdf used on input line 888.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 246.92189pt x 175.15395pt.
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure8b.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:03
(epstopdf) size: 24855 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure8b-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:33
-(epstopdf) size: 8505 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:47
+(epstopdf) size: 8466 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure8b-eps-converted-to.
pdf figure8b.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 889.
[14 <./figure6-eps-converted-to.pdf>]
Package epstopdf Info: Source file: <figure9.eps>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:16:57
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-06 11:42:03
(epstopdf) size: 27000 bytes
(epstopdf) Output file: <figure9-eps-converted-to.pdf>
-(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:17:33
-(epstopdf) size: 7971 bytes
+(epstopdf) date: 2015-02-20 10:12:48
+(epstopdf) size: 7927 bytes
(epstopdf) Command: <repstopdf --outfile=figure9-eps-converted-to.p
df figure9.eps>
(epstopdf) \includegraphics on input line 909.
)
Here is how much of TeX's memory you used:
- 4825 strings out of 493221
- 62834 string characters out of 6141266
- 154149 words of memory out of 5000000
- 8175 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
- 14560 words of font info for 56 fonts, out of 8000000 for 9000
- 1119 hyphenation exceptions out of 8191
- 41i,18n,27p,464b,369s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,80000s
+ 4818 strings out of 495059
+ 62762 string characters out of 3182031
+ 149121 words of memory out of 3000000
+ 7917 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+200000
+ 14560 words of font info for 56 fonts, out of 3000000 for 9000
+ 14 hyphenation exceptions out of 8191
+ 41i,18n,27p,464b,369s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,50000s
</usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmbx10.pfb></us
r/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmbx9.pfb></usr/share
/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmbxti10.pfb></usr/share/tex
/public/amsfonts/cm/cmti10.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/publi
c/amsfonts/cm/cmti8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfo
nts/symbols/msbm10.pfb>
-Output written on articleeo.pdf (19 pages, 746265 bytes).
+Output written on articleeo.pdf (19 pages, 746415 bytes).
PDF statistics:
213 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
145 compressed objects within 2 object streams
%\articletype{GUIDE}
-\title{{\itshape Perimeter-based Coverage Optimization to Improve Lifetime \\
- in Wireless Sensor Networks}}
+\title{{\itshape Perimeter-based Coverage Optimization \\
+ to Improve Lifetime in Wireless Sensor Networks}}
\author{Ali Kadhum Idrees$^{a,b}$, Karine Deschinkel$^{a}$$^{\ast}$\thanks{$^\ast$Corresponding author. Email: karine.deschinkel@univ-fcomte.fr}, Michel Salomon$^{a}$ and Rapha\"el Couturier $^{a}$
$^{a}${\em{FEMTO-ST Institute, UMR 6174 CNRS, \\
- University Bourgogne Franche-Comt\'e (UBFC), Belfort, France}} \\
+ University Bourgogne Franche-Comt\'e, Belfort, France}} \\
$^{b}${\em{Department of Computer Science, University of Babylon, Babylon, Iraq}}
}
A WSN consisting of $J$ stationary sensor nodes randomly and uniformly
distributed in a bounded sensor field is considered. The wireless sensors are
deployed in high density to ensure initially a high coverage ratio of the area
-of interest. We assume that all the sensor nodes are homogeneous in terms of
+of interest. All the sensor nodes are supposed to be homogeneous in terms of
communication, sensing, and processing capabilities and heterogeneous from the
energy provision point of view. The location information is available to a
sensor node either through hardware such as embedded GPS or location discovery
-algorithms. We consider a Boolean disk coverage model, which is the most widely
-used sensor coverage model in the literature, and all sensor nodes have a
+algorithms. A Boolean disk coverage model, which is the most widely used sensor
+coverage model in the literature, is considered and all sensor nodes have a
constant sensing range $R_s$. Thus, all the space points within a disk centered
at a sensor with a radius equal to the sensing range are said to be covered by
-this sensor. We also assume that the communication range $R_c$ satisfies $R_c
-\geq 2 \cdot R_s$. In fact, \citet{Zhang05} proved that if the transmission
+this sensor. We also assume that the communication range $R_c$ satisfies $R_c
+\geq 2 \cdot R_s$. In fact, \citet{Zhang05} proved that if the transmission
range fulfills the previous hypothesis, the complete coverage of a convex area
implies connectivity among active nodes.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
-\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{figure2.eps}
+\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figure2.eps}
\caption{Maximum coverage levels for perimeter of sensor node $0$.}
\label{figure2}
\end{figure*}
%\newpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
-\includegraphics[width=62.5mm]{figure3.eps}
+\includegraphics[width=57.5mm]{figure3.eps}
\caption{Sensing range outside the WSN's area of interest.}
\label{figure3}
\end{figure}
The WSN area of interest is, in a first step, divided into regular homogeneous
subregions using a divide-and-conquer algorithm. In a second step our protocol
will be executed in a distributed way in each subregion simultaneously to
-schedule nodes' activities for one sensing period. Node Sensors are assumed to
+schedule nodes' activities for one sensing period. Sensor nodes are assumed to
be deployed almost uniformly over the region. The regular subdivision is made
such that the number of hops between any pairs of sensors inside a subregion is
less than or equal to 3.
sensor~$j$.
\end{itemize}
$I_j$ refers to the set of coverage intervals which have been defined according
-to the method introduced in subsection~\ref{CI}. For a coverage interval $i$,
+to the method introduced in Subsection~\ref{CI}. For a coverage interval $i$,
let $a^j_{ik}$ denote the indicator function of whether sensor~$k$ is involved
in coverage interval~$i$ of sensor~$j$, that is:
\begin{equation}
obtained by multiplying the energy consumed in the active state (9.72 mW) with
the time in seconds for one period (3600 seconds), and adding the energy for the
pre-sensing phases. According to the interval of initial energy, a sensor may
-be active during at most 20 periods. Here information exchange is executed every hour but the length of the sensing period could be reduced and adapted dynamically. On the one hand a small sensing period would allow to be more reliable but would have higher communication costs. On the other hand the choice of a long duration may cause problems in case of nodes failure during the sensing period.
+be active during at most 20 periods. Information exchange to update the coverage
+is executed every hour, but the length of the sensing period could be reduced
+and adapted dynamically. On the one hand a small sensing period would allow to
+be more reliable but would have result in higher communication costs. On the
+other hand the choice of a long duration may cause problems in case of nodes
+failure during the sensing period.
The values of $\alpha^j_i$ and $\beta^j_i$ have been chosen to ensure a good
network coverage and a longer WSN lifetime. Higher priority is given to the
microcontroller (6~MHz) having a MIPS rate equal to 6, the original execution
time on the laptop is multiplied by 2944.2 $\left(\frac{35330}{2} \times
\frac{1}{6} \right)$. Energy consumption is calculated according to the power
-consumption values, in milliWatt per second, given in Table~\ref{tab:EC}
+consumption values, in milliWatt per second, given in Table~\ref{tab:EC}.
based on the energy model proposed in \citep{ChinhVu}.
-% Questions on energy consumption calculation
-% 1 - How did you compute the value for COMPUTATION status ?
-% 2 - I have checked the paper of Chinh T. Vu (2006) and I wonder
-% why you completely deleted the energy due to the sensing range ?
-% => You should have use a fixed value for the sensing rangge Rs (5 meter)
-% => for all the nodes to compute f(Ri), which would have lead to energy values
-
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
-\caption{Energy consumption}
+\caption{Power consumption values}
\label{tab:EC}
\begin{tabular}{|l||cccc|}
\hline
- {\bf Sensor status} & MCU & Radio & Sensor & {\it Power (mW)} \\
+ {\bf Sensor status} & MCU & Radio & Sensing & {\it Power (mW)} \\
\hline
LISTENING & On & On & On & 20.05 \\
ACTIVE & On & Off & On & 9.72 \\
The modeling language for Mathematical Programming (AMPL)~\citep{AMPL} is used
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) \citep{glpk} through a Branch-and-Bound method.
-
-% No discussion about the execution of GLPK on a sensor ?
+available in the public domain) \citep{glpk} through a Branch-and-Bound method.
+In practice, executing GLPK on a sensor node is obviously intractable due to the
+huge memory use. Fortunately, to solve the optimization problem we could use
+commercial solvers like CPLEX \citep{iamigo:cplex} which are less memory
+consuming and more efficient, or implement a lightweight heuristic. For example,
+for a WSN of 200 sensor nodes, a leader node has to deal with constraints
+induced by about 12 sensor nodes. In that case, to solve the optimization
+problem a memory consumption of more than 1~MB can be observed with GLPK,
+whereas less than 300~kB would be needed with CPLEX.
Besides PeCO, three other protocols will be evaluated for comparison
purposes. The first one, called DESK, is a fully distributed coverage algorithm
in~\citep{idrees2014coverage}. Let us notice that PeCO and DiLCO protocols are
based on the same framework. In particular, the choice for the simulations of a
partitioning in 16~subregions was made because it corresponds to the
-configuration producing the best results for DiLCO. Of course, this number of subregions sould be adapted according to the size of the area of interest and the number of sensors.
-
- The protocols are
-distinguished from one another by the formulation of the integer program
-providing the set of sensors which have to be activated in each sensing
-phase. DiLCO protocol tries to satisfy the coverage of a set of primary points,
-whereas PeCO protocol objective is to reach a desired level of coverage for each
-sensor perimeter. In our experimentations, we chose a level of coverage equal to
-one ($l=1$).
+configuration producing the best results for DiLCO. Of course, this number of
+subregions should be adapted according to the size of the area of interest and
+the number of sensors. The protocols are distinguished from one another by the
+formulation of the integer program providing the set of sensors which have to be
+activated in each sensing phase. DiLCO protocol tries to satisfy the coverage of
+a set of primary points, whereas PeCO protocol objective is to reach a desired
+level of coverage for each sensor perimeter. In our experimentations, we chose a
+level of coverage equal to one ($l=1$).
\subsubsection{Coverage Ratio}
obtained with the four protocols. DESK, GAF, and DiLCO provide a slightly better
coverage ratio with respectively 99.99\%, 99.91\%, and 99.02\%, compared to the
98.76\% produced by PeCO for the first periods. This is due to the fact that at
-the beginning PeCO protocol puts to sleep status more redundant sensors (which
-slightly decreases the coverage ratio), while the three other protocols activate
-more sensor nodes. Later, when the number of periods is beyond~70, it clearly
-appears that PeCO provides a better coverage ratio and keeps a coverage ratio
-greater than 50\% for longer periods (15 more compared to DiLCO, 40 more
-compared to DESK). The energy saved by PeCO in the early periods allows later a
-substantial increase of the coverage performance.
+the beginning DiLCO and PeCO protocols put to sleep status more redundant
+sensors (which slightly decreases the coverage ratio), while the two other
+protocols activate more sensor nodes. Later, when the number of periods is
+beyond~70, it clearly appears that PeCO provides a better coverage ratio and
+keeps a coverage ratio greater than 50\% for longer periods (15 more compared to
+DiLCO, 40 more compared to DESK). The energy saved by PeCO in the early periods
+allows later a substantial increase of the coverage performance.
\parskip 0pt
\begin{figure}[h!]
sensor-testbed to evaluate it in real world applications.
-\subsection{Acknowledgements}
-The authors are deeply grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive advice, which improved the technical quality of the paper. As a Ph.D. student, Ali Kadhum IDREES would like to gratefully acknowledge the University of Babylon - Iraq for financial support and Campus France for the received support. This work is also partially funded by the Labex ACTION program (contract ANR-11-LABX-01-01).
+\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
+The authors are deeply grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their
+constructive advice, which improved the technical quality of the paper. As a
+Ph.D. student, Ali Kadhum IDREES would like to gratefully acknowledge the
+University of Babylon - Iraq for financial support and Campus France for the
+received support. This work is also partially funded by the Labex ACTION program
+(contract ANR-11-LABX-01-01).
\bibliographystyle{gENO}
\bibliography{biblio} %articleeo
