Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 18, Issue 5, pp 622–638 | Cite as

Distributed Online Algorithms for the Agent Migration Problem in WSNs

  • Nikos TziritasEmail author
  • Spyros Lalis
  • Samee Ullah Khan
  • Thanasis Loukopoulos
  • Cheng-Zhong Xu
  • Petros Lampsas


The mobile agent paradigm has been adopted by several systems in the area of wireless sensor networks as it enables a flexible distribution and placement of application components on nodes, at runtime. Most agent placement and migration algorithms proposed in the literature, assume that the communication rates between agents remain stable for a sufficiently long time to amortize the migration costs. Then, the problem is that frequent changes in the application-level communication may lead to several non-beneficial agent migrations, which may actually increase the total network cost, instead of decreasing it. To tackle this problem, we propose two distributed algorithms that take migration decisions in an online fashion, trying to deal with fluctuations in agent communication. The first algorithm is more of theoretical value, as it assumes infinite storage to keep information about the message exchange history of agents, while the second algorithm is a refined version that works with finite storage and limited information. We describe these algorithms in detail, and provide proofs for their competitive ratio vs. an optimal oracle. In addition, we evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms for different parameter settings through a series of simulated experiments, also comparing their results with those achieved by an optimal static placement that is computed with full (a posteriori) knowledge of the execution scenarios. Our theoretical and experimental results are a strong indication for the robustness and effectiveness of the proposed algorithms.


Distributed algorithms Online algorithms Optimizing network cost Wireless sensor and actuator networks Agent placement Agent migration Agent-based programming 


  1. 1.
    Aspenes J, Azar Y, Fiat A, Plotkin S, Waarts O (1993) On-line machine scheduling with application to load balancing and virtual circuit routing. ACM Symposium on Theory of ComputingGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arora D, Bienkowski M, Feldman A, Schaffrath G, Schmid S (2011) Online strategies for intra and inter provider service migration in virtual networks, Proc. IPTcommGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Azar Y et al. (1993) On-line load balancing of temporary tasks, Workshop on algorithms and data structuresGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bonifaci V, Korteweg P, Marchetti-Spaccamela A, Stougie L (2008) The distributed wireless gathering problem. Proc. ICAMWNGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boulis A, Han C-C, Shea R, Srivastava MB (2007) Sensorware: programming sensor networks beyond code update and querying. Pervasive Mob Comput JGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buchbinder N, Naor J (2009) The design of competitive online algorithms via a primal: dual approach. Found Trends Theoritical Comput SciGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caragiannis I, Flammini M, Kaklamanis C, Kanellopoulos P, Loscardelli L (2006) Tight Bounds for Selfish and Greedy Load Balancing. Proc. ICALPGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Caragiannis I (2009) Better bounds for online load balancing on unrelated machines. Proc. SODAGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen B, Liang W, Xu Yu J (2010) Online time interval top-k queries in wireless sensor networks. Proc. ICMDMGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chrobak M, Koutsoupias E, Noga J (2003) More on randomized on-line algorithms for caching. Theoritcal Comput SciGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Domaszewicz J, Roj M, Pruszkowski A, Golanski M, Kacperski K (2006) ROVERS: pervasive computing platform for heterogeneous sensor-actuator networks. Proc. WowMoMGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fok CL, Roman GC, Lu C (2005) Rapid development and flexible deployment of adaptive wireless sensor network applications. Proc. ICDCSGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fontanelli D, Palopoli L, Passerone R (2009) On the global convergence of a class of distributed algorithms for maximizing the coverage of a WSN. Proc. CDC/CCCGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grimm R, Davis J, Lemar E, Macbeth A, Swanson S, Anderson T, Bershad B, Borriello G, Gribble S, Wetherall D (2004) System support for pervasive applications. ACM Trans Comput SystGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harks T, Heinz S, Pfetsch ME (2009) Competitive online multicommodity routing. Theory Comput SystGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kompella RR, Shoeren AC (2003) Practical lazy scheduling in sensor networks. Proc. SenSysGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kothari N, Gummadi R, Millstein T, Govindan R (2007) Reliable and efficient programming abstractions for wireless sensor networks. Proc. ACM SIGPLAN PLDIGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee C-H, Shin KG (1997) Optimal task assignment in homogeneous networks. IEEE Trans on Parallel Distrib Syst 8:119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Levis P, Culler D (2002) Mate: a tiny virtual machine for sensor networks. Proc. ASPLOSGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liang W (2007) Online data gathering for maximizing network lifetime in sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob ComputGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu H, Roeder T, Walsh K, Barr R, Sirer EG (2005), Design and implementation of a single system image operating system for ad hoc networks. Proc. MOBISYSGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li Q, Aslam J, Rus D (2001) Online power-aware routing in wireless ad-hoc networks. Proc. MobiComGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Loo KK, Tong I, Kao B (2005) Online algorithms for mining inter-stream associations from large sensor neworks. Lect Notes in Comput SciGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mesarovic MD (1970) Multilevel systems and concepts in process control. Proc IEEE 58(1):111–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Minhas MR, Gopalakrishnan S, Leung VCM (2009) An online multipath routing algorithm for maximizing lifetime in wireless sensor networks. ITNGGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Network Simulator2 (ns2),
  27. 27.
    Ramachandran U et al. (2006) Dynamic data fusion for future sensor networks. ACM Trans Sens NetwGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ranganathan A, et al. (2005) Olympus: a high-level programming model for pervasive computing environments, PERCOMGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sleator DD, Tarjan RE (1985) Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules. ACM CommunGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sonnek J, Greensky J, Reutiman R (2010) Starling: minimizing communication overhead in virtualized computing platforms using decentralized affinity-aware migration, Proc. ICPPGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    STREP/FP7-ICT: Platform for Opportunistic Behaviour in Incompletely Specified, Heterogeneous Object Communities (POBICOS),
  32. 32.
    Tziritas N, Georgakoudis G, Lalis S, Paczesny T, Domaszewicz J, Lampsas P, Loukopoulos T (2012) Middleware mechanisms for agent mobility in wireless sensor and actuator networks, Proc. 3rd International Conference on Sensor Systems and Software (S-CUBE)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tziritas N, Lampsas P, Lalis S, Loukopoulos T, Khan SU, Xu C-Z (20012) Introducing agent evictions to improve application placement in wireless embedded systems. Proc. ICPPGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tziritas N, Loukopoulos T, Lalis S, Lampsas P (2011) GRAL: a grouping algorithm to optimize application placement in wireless embedded systems. Proc. IPDPSGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tziritas N, Khan SU, Xu C-Z, Hong J (2012) An optimal fully distributed algorithm to minimize the resource consumption of cloud applications, Proc. ICPADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikos Tziritas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Spyros Lalis
    • 2
  • Samee Ullah Khan
    • 1
    • 3
  • Thanasis Loukopoulos
    • 4
  • Cheng-Zhong Xu
    • 1
    • 5
  • Petros Lampsas
    • 4
  1. 1.Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.University of Thessaly & IRETETH/CERTHThessalyGreece
  3. 3.North Dakota State UniversityFargoUSA
  4. 4.Technological Educational Institute of LamiaLamiaGreece
  5. 5.Wayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations