Wireless Networks

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 247–265 | Cite as

Formal verification and validation of a movement control actor relocation algorithm for safety–critical applications

  • Muhammad Imran
  • Nazir Ahmad Zafar
  • Mohammed Abdullah Alnuem
  • Mehmet Sabih Aksoy
  • Athanasios V. Vasilakos


Wireless sensor and actor networks (WSAN) are captivating significant attention because of their suitability for safety–critical applications. Efficient actor placement in such applications is extremely desirable to perform effective and timely action across the deployment region. Nonetheless, harsh application environment inherently favors random placement of actors that leads to high concentration deployment and strangles coverage. Moreover, most of the published schemes lack rigorous validation and entirely rely on informal techniques (e.g., simulation) for evaluating nonfunctional properties of algorithms. This paper presents a localized movement control actor relocation (MCAR) algorithm that strives to improve connected coverage while minimizing movement overhead. MCAR pursues post-deployment actor repositioning in such a way that actors repel each other for better coverage while staying connected. We employ complementary formal and informal techniques for MCAR verification and validation. We model WSAN as a dynamic graph and transform MCAR to corresponding formal specification using Z notation. The resulting specification is analyzed and validated using Z eves tool. We simulate the specification to quantitatively demonstrate the efficiency of MCAR. Simulation results confirm the efficiency of MCAR in terms of movement overhead and connected coverage compared to contemporary schemes. The results show that MCAR can reduce distance movement up to 32 % while improving coverage up to 29 % compared to published schemes.


WSANs Movement control actor relocation Connected coverage Formal specification Z notation 



This work was supported by the Research Center of College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, through the Research Project No. RC131026.


  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I. F., & Kasimoglu, I. H. (2004). Wireless sensor and actor networks: Research challenges. Journal Ad Hoc Networks, 2(4), 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zeng, Y., Li, D., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2013). Real-time data report and task execution in wireless sensor and actuator networks using self-aware mobile actuators. Computer Communications, 36(9), 988–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yao,Y., Cao, Q., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2013). EDAL: An energy-efficient, delay-aware, and lifetime-balancing data collection protocol for wireless sensor networks. In 10th IEEE international conference on mobile ad-hoc and sensor systems (MASS) (pp. 182–190), Hangzhou, China.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Batalin, M. A., & Sukhatme, G. S. (2005). The analysis of an efficient algorithm for robot coverage and exploration based on sensor network deployment. In Presented at the proceedings of the 2005 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 2005), Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akkaya, K., & Younis, M. (2007). C2AP: Coverage-aware and connectivity-constrained actor positioning in wireless sensor and actor networks. In Presented at the IEEE international performance computing, and communications conference (IPCCC′ 07), 2007, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Akkaya, K., & Janapala, S. (2008). Maximizing connected coverage via controlled actor relocation in wireless sensor and actor networks. Journal Computer Networks, 52(14), 2779–2796.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Imran, M., Younis, M., Md Said, A., & Hasbullah, H. (2010). Volunteer-instigated connectivity restoration algorithm for wireless sensor and actor networks. In The proceedings of the 2010 IEEE international conference on wireless communications, networking and information security (WCNIS) (pp. 679–683), Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tamboli, N., & Younis, M. (2010). Coverage-aware connectivity restoration in mobile sensor networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 33(4), 363–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Imran, M., Younis, M., Haider, N., & Alnuem, M. A. (2012). Resource efficient connectivity restoration algorithm for mobile sensor/actor networks. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2012, 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Younis, M., Senturk, I. F., Akkaya, K., Lee, S., & Senel, F. (2014). Topology management techniques for tolerating node failures in wireless sensor networks: A survey. Computer Networks, 58(1), 254–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spivey, J. M. (1989). The Z notation: A reference manual. Englewood: Prentice-Hall Inc.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, X., Xing, G., Zhang, Y., Lu, C., Pless, R., & Gill, C. (2003). Integrated coverage and connectivity configuration in wireless sensor networks. In Presented at the proceedings of the 1st international conference on embedded networked sensor systems, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghosh, A., & Das, S. K. (2008). Coverage and connectivity issues in wireless sensor networks: A survey. Journal of Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 4, 303–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhu, C., Zheng, C., Shu, L., & Han, G. (2012). A survey on coverage and connectivity issues in wireless sensor networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 35, 619–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Younis, M., & Akkaya, K. (2008). Strategies and techniques for node placement in wireless sensor networks: A survey. Journal Ad Hoc Networks, 6(4), 621–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Batalin, M. A., & Sukhatme, G. S. (2002). Spreading out: A local approach to multi-robot coverage. In presented at the international symposium on distributed autonomous robotic systems, Fukuoka, Japan, 2002.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heo, N., & Varshney, P. K. (2003). A distributed self spreading algorithm for mobile wireless sensor networks. In Presented at the IEEE wireless communications and networking (WCNC’ 03), 2003, New Orleans, LA, USA.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, G., Cao, G., & Porta, T. L. (2004). Movement-assisted sensor deployment. In Presented at the 23rd international annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies (INFOCOM’04), Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, G., Cao, G., Porta, T. L., & Zhang, W. (2005). Sensor relocation in mobile sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE 24th annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies (INFOCOM 2005) (pp. 2302–2312), Miami, FL, USA 2005.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li, M., Li, Z., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2013). A Survey on topology control in wireless sensor networks: Taxonomy, comparative study, and open issues. Proceedings of the IEEE, 101(12), 2538–2557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Akkaya, K., & Younis, M. (2006). COLA: A coverage and latency aware actor placement for wireless sensor and actor networks. In Presented at the IEEE 64th vehicular technology conference (VTC-2006), 2006, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Imran, M., Said, A. M., Younis, M., & Hasbullah, H. (2013). Application-centric recovery algorithm for wireless sensor and actor networks. International Journal of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems, 10(4), 379–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Imran, M., Haider, N., & Alnuem, M. A. (2012). Efficient movement control actor relocation for honing connected coverage in wireless sensor and actor networks. In The proceedings of the 37th IEEE annual international conference on local computer networks ( pp. 710–717), Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alnuem, M., Zafar, N. A., Imran, M., Fayed, M., & Ullah, S. (2014). Formal specification and validation of a localized algorithm for segregation of critical/noncritical nodes in MAHSNs. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2014, 14. doi: 10.1155/2014/140973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Viana, A. C., Maag, S., & Zaidi, F. (2011). One step forward: Linking wireless self-organizing network validation techniques with formal testing approaches. ACM Computing Surveys, 43(2), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kurkowski, S., Camp, T., & Colagrosso, M. (2005). MANET simulation studies: the incredibles. SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 9, 50–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Andel, T. R., & Yasinsac, A. (2006). On the credibility of manet simulations. Computer, 39, 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zafar, N. A. (2006). Modeling and formal specification of automated train control system using Z notation. In Multitopic conference, 2006. INMIC ‘06. IEEE (pp. 438–443).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yousaf, S., Zafar, N. A., & Khan, S. A. (2010). Formal analysis of departure procedure of air traffic control system. In 2010 2nd international conference on software technology and engineering (ICSTE), 2010 (pp. V2-301–V2-305).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fehnker, A., Fruth, M., & Mciver, A. K. (2009). Graphical modelling for simulation and formal analysis of wireless network protocols. In B. Michael, J. Cliff, R. Alexander, & T. Elena (Eds.), Methods, models and tools for fault tolerance (pp. 1–24). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maag, S., Grepet, C., & Cavalli, A. (2008). A formal validation methodology for MANET routing protocols based on nodes’ self similarity. Computer Communications, 31, 827–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ölveczky, P. C., & Thorvaldsen, S. (2009). Formal modeling, performance estimation, and model checking of wireless sensor network algorithms in Real-Time Maude. Theoretical Computer Science, 410, 254–280.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Imran, M., & Zafar, N. A. (2012). Formal specification and validation of a hybrid connectivity restoration algorithm for wireless sensor and actor networks. Sensors, 12(9), 11754–11781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Efrat, S. H.-P., & Mitchell, J. S. B. (2005). Approximation algorithms for two optimal location problems in sensor networks. In 2nd international conference on broadband networks (pp. 714–723), Boston, USA.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Funke, S. (2005). Topological hole detection in wireless sensor networks and its applications. In Presented at the proceedings of the 2005 joint workshop on foundations of mobile computing, Cologne, Germany.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang, Y., Gao, J., & Mitchell, J. S. B. (2006). Boundary recognition in sensor networks by topological methods. In Presented at the proceedings of the 12th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking, Los Angeles, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saaltink, M. (1997). The Z/EVES system. In Presented at the proceedings of the 10th international conference of Z users on the Z formal specification notation.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jorgic, M., Stojmenovic, I., Hauspie, M., & Simplot-Ryl, D. (2004). Localized algorithms for detection of critical nodes and links for connectivity in ad hoc networks. In The proceedings of the 3rd annual ifip mediterranean ad hoc networking workshop (pp. 360–371), Bodrum, Turkey.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Imran
    • 1
  • Nazir Ahmad Zafar
    • 2
  • Mohammed Abdullah Alnuem
    • 1
  • Mehmet Sabih Aksoy
    • 1
  • Athanasios V. Vasilakos
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Computer and Information SciencesKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceCOMSATS Institute of Information TechnologySahiwalPakistan
  3. 3.University of Western MacedoniaKozaniGreece

Personalised recommendations