Advertisement

Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 64, Issue 3, pp 549–579 | Cite as

Exploiting the sensing relevancies of source nodes for optimizations in visual sensor networks

  • Daniel G. Costa
  • Luiz Affonso Guedes
Article

Abstract

Wireless ad-hoc networks composed of resource-constrained camera-enabled sensors can provide visual information for a series of monitoring applications, enriching the understanding of the physical world. In many cases, source nodes may have different sensing relevancies for the monitoring functions of the applications, according to the importance of the visual information retrieved from the monitored field. As a direct result, high quality is only required for the most relevant information and, as it is expected that many visual monitoring applications can tolerate some quality loss in the data received from the least relevant source nodes, the network operation can be optimized exploiting this innovative concept. As a novel global QoS parameter, we envisage that the sensing relevancies of source nodes can be considered for a series of optimizations in different aspects of the wireless sensor network operation, achieving energy saving or assuring high quality transmission for the most relevant data. In this paper we discuss some approaches for the establishment of the sensing relevancies of the nodes and propose a protocol to support them. Moreover, we present two practical examples of optimizations based on the sensing relevancies of source nodes that transmit still images of the monitored field, addressing issues as energy-efficient data transmission and packet prioritization in intermediate nodes.

Keywords

Visual sensor networks Sensing relevance Network optimization Energy-efficiency Packet prioritization 

References

  1. 1.
    Ai J, Abouzeid A (2006) Coverage by directional sensors in randomly deployed wireless sensors networks. J Comb Optim 11(1):21–41MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akyildiz I, Melodia T, Chowdhury K (2007) A survey on wireless multimedia sensor networks. Comput Netw 51(4):921–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akyildiz I, Su W, Sankarasubramaniam Y, Cayirci E (2002) Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Comput Netw 38(4):393–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Almalkawi I, Zapata M, Al-Karaki J, Morillo-Pozo J (2010) Wireless multimedia sensor networks: current trends and future directions. Sens 10(7):6662–6717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bai Y, Qi H (2009) Redundancy removal through semantic neighbor selection in visual sensor networks. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Distributed Smart Cameras, pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baronti P, Pillai P, Chook V, Chessa S, Gotta A, Hu Y (2006) Wireless sensor networks: a survey on the state of the art and the 802.15.4 and ZigBee standards. Comput Commun 30(7):1655–1695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Charfi Y, Canada B, Wakamiya N, Murata M (2009) Challenging issues in visual sensor networks. IEEE Wirel Commun 16(2):44–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen B, Jamieson K, Balakrishnan H, Morris R (2002) SPAN: An energy efficient coordination algorithm for topology maintenance in ad hoc wireless networks. Wirel Netw 8(5):481–494MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chow K-Y, Lui K-S, Lam Y (2007) Achieving 360o angle coverage with minimum transmission cost in visual sensor networks. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, pp. 4112–4116Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Costa D, Guedes L (2010) The coverage problem in video-based wireless sensor networks: a survey. Sens 10(9):8215–8247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Costa D, Guedes L (2011) A survey on multimedia-based cross-layer optimization in visual sensor networks. Sens 11(5):5439–5468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Costa D, Guedes L (2011) Coverage-aware node-disjoint multipath selection in wireless multimedia sensor networks. IFIP/IEEE International Conference on New Technologies, Mobility and Security, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Devarajan D, Radke R (2004) Distributed metric calibration of large camera networks. Workshop on Broadband Advanced Sensor Networks, pp. 1–10Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Feng W-C, Kaiser E, Feng C, Baillif L (2005) Panoptes: scalable low-power video sensor networking technologies. ACM Trans Multimed Comput Commun Appl 1(2):151–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fuiorea D, Guia V, Pescaru D, Toma C (2007) Using registration algorithms for wireless sensor network node localization. IEEE International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics, pp. 209–214Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Funiak S, Paskin M, Guestrin C, Sukthankar R (2006) Distributed localization of networked cameras. International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 34–42Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Han B, Lee S (2007) Efficient packet error rate estimation in wireless networks. Conference on Testbeds and Research Infrastructure for the Development of Networks and Communities, pp. 1–9Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Korhonen J, Wang Y (2005) Effect of packet size on loss rate and delay in wireless links. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, pp. 1608–1613Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kulkarni P, Ganesan D, Shenoy P, Lu Q (2005) SensEye: A multi-tier camera sensor network. ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pp. 229–238Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lecuire V, Duran-Faundez C, Krommenacker N (2007) Energy-efficient transmission of wavelet-based images in wireless sensor networks. EURASIP J Image Video Process: 1–11Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lecuire V, Duran-Faundez C, Krommenacker N (2008) Energy-efficient image transmission in sensor networks. Int J of Sens Netw 4:37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee H, Aghajan H (2006) Vision-enabled node localization in wireless sensor networks. Conference on Cognitive Systems with Interactive Sensors, pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee J-H, Jun I-B (2010) Adaptive-compression based congestion control technique for wireless sensor networks. Sensors 10(4):2919–2945MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liang Y, Peng W (2010) Minimizing energy consumptions in wireless sensor networks via two-modal transmission. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 40(1):12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mantzel E (2005) Linear distributed localization of omini-directional camera networks. Workshop on Ominidirectional Vision, Camera Networks and Non-classical Cameras, pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marengoni M, Draper B, Handson A, Sitaraman R (1996) A system to place observers on a polyhedral terrain in polynomial time. Image Vis Comput 18(10):773–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Osais E, St-Hilaire M, Riu R (2010) Directional sensor placement with optimal sensing ranging, field of view and orientation. Mob Netw Appl 15(2):216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pescaru D, Istin C, Curiac D, Doboli A (2008) Energy saving strategy for video-based wireless sensor networks under field coverage preservation. IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics, pp. 289–294Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Politis I, Tsagkaropoulos M, Dagiuklas T, Kotsopoulos S (2008) Power efficient video multipath transmission over wireless multimedia sensor networks. Mob Netw Appl 13(3–4):274–284Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rahimi M, Estrin D, Baer R, Uyeno H, Warrior J (2004) Cyclops: image sensing and interpretation in wireless networks. International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 311Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sayed H, Tarighat A, Khajehnouri N (2005) Network-based wireless location: challenges faced in developing techniques for accurate wireless location information. IEEE Signal Process Mag 22(4):24–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shafique K, Hakeem A, Javed O, Haering N (2008) Self calibrating visual sensor networks. IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shon T, Choi H (2008) Towards the implementation of reliable data transmission for 802.15.4-based wireless sensor networks. LNCS 5061:363–372Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Soro S, Heinzelman W (2005) On the coverage problem in video-based wireless sensor networks. International Conference on Broadband Networks, pp. 932–939Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Soro S, Heinzelman W (2007) Camera selection in visual sensor networks. IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, pp. 81–86Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Soro S, Heinzelman W (2009) A survey of visual sensor networks. Adv Multimed:1–21Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wu H, Abouzeid A (2006) Error resilient image transport in wireless sensor networks. Comput Netw 50(15):2873–2887MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yick J, Mukherjee B, Ghosal D (2008) Wireless sensor network survey. Comput Netw 52(12):2292–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yu C, Sharma G (2006) Plane-based calibration of cameras with zoom variation. SPIE Visual Communication and Image Processing, pp. 1–9Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhang L, Hauswirth M, Shu L, Zhou Z, Reynolds V, Han G (2008) Multi-priority multi-path selection for video streaming in wireless multimedia sensor networks. International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing, pp. 439–452Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zhao J, Cheung S, Nguyen T (2008) Optimal camera network configurations for visual tagging. IEEE J Select Top Signal Process 2(4):464–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computing and AutomationFederal University of Rio Grande do NorteNatalBrazil
  2. 2.Department of TechnologyState University of Feira de SantanaFeira de SantanaBrazil

Personalised recommendations