Evolutionary Intelligence

, Volume 3, Issue 3–4, pp 137–153 | Cite as

A two-objective evolutionary approach to design lossy compression algorithms for tiny nodes of wireless sensor networks

Research Paper
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Since tiny nodes of a wireless sensor network (WSN) are typically powered by batteries with, due to miniaturization and costs, a limited capacity, with the aim of extending the lifetime of WSNs and making the exploitation of WSNs appealing, a lot of research has been devoted to save energy. Although a number of factors contribute to power consumption, radio communication has been generally considered its main cause and thus most of the techniques proposed for energy saving have mainly focused on limiting transmission/reception of data, for instance, through data compression. As sensor nodes are equipped with limited computational and storage resources, enabling compression requires to develop purposely-designed algorithms. To this aim, we propose an approach to generate lossy compressors to be deployed on single nodes based on a differential pulse code modulation scheme with quantization of the differences between consecutive samples. The quantization levels and thresholds, which allow achieving different trade-offs between compression performance and information loss, are determined by a two-objective evolutionary algorithm. We tested our approach on four datasets collected by real WSN deployments. We show that the lossy compressors generated by our approach can achieve significant compression ratios despite negligible reconstruction errors and outperform LTC, a lossy compression algorithm purposely designed to be embedded in sensor nodes.

Keywords

Wireless sensor networks Data compression Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms Energy efficiency Signal processing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Italian Ministry of University and Research (MIUR) under the FIRB project “Adaptive Infrastructure for Decentralized Organization (ArtDecO)”. We would like to thank Renzo Dani for several helpful discussions.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdelzaher T, Prabh S, Kiran R (2004) On real-time capacity limits of multihop wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE international teal-time systems symposium, pp 359–370Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai RG, Qu YG, Guo Y, Zhao BH (2007) An energy-efficient TDMA MAC for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Asia-Pacific service computing conference (APSCC ’07). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 69–74Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrenetxea G, Ingelrest F, Schaefer G, Vetterli M, Couach O, Parlange M (2008) SensorScope: out-of-the-box environmental monitoring. In: The 7th ACM/IEEE international conference on information processing in sensor networks, pp 332–343Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ciancio A, Ortega A (2005) A distributed wavelet compression algorithm for wireless multihop sensor networks using lifting. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing (ICASSP ’05), vol 4, pp 825–828Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Croce S, Marcelloni F, Vecchio M (2008) Reducing power consumption in wireless sensor networks using a novel approach to data aggregation. Comput J 51(2):227–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cutler CC (1952) Differential quantization of communication signals. Patent, 2 605 361Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donoho DL, Johnstone IM (1994) Ideal spatial adaptation by wavelet shrinkage. Biometrika 81(3):425–455MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Durillo JJ, Nebro AJ, Luna F, Dorronsoro B, Alba E (2006) jMetal: a java framework for developing multi-objective optimization metaheuristics. Technical Report, ITI-2006-10, Departamento de Lenguajes y Ciencias de la Computación, University of Málaga, E.T.S.I. Informática, Campus de TeatinosGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrière HD, Fabre L, Meier R, Metrailler P (2006) TinyNode: a comprehensive platform for wireless sensor network applications. In: IPSN ’06: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Information processing in sensor networks, pp 358–365Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fischione C, Johansson KH, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A, Ares BZ (2009) Minimum energy coding in CDMA wireless sensor networks. Trans Wireless Comm 8(2):985–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ganesan D, Estrin D, Heidemann J (2002) DIMENSIONS: why do we need a new data handling architecture for sensor networks? In: Proceedings of the ACM workshop on hot topics in networks, pp 143–148Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gray R, Neuhoff D (1998) Quantization. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 44(6):2325–2383MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guestrin C, Bodik P, Thibaux R, Paskin M, Madden S (2004) Distributed regression: an efficient framework for modeling sensor network data. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on information processing in sensor networks, (IPSN ’04), pp 1–10Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamida EB, Chelius G (2008) Strategies for data dissemination to mobile sinks in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Wireless Commun Mag 15(6):31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huffman D (1952) A method for the construction of minimum-redundancy codes. Proc IRE 40(9):1098–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Intanagonwiwat C, Govindan R, Estrin D, Heidemann J, Silva F (2003) Directed diffusion for wireless sensor networking. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 11(1):2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juang P, Oki H, Wang Y, Martonosi M, Peh L, Rubenstein D (2002) Energy-efficient computing for wildlife tracking: Design trade offs and early experiences with zebranet. In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on architectural support for programming languages and operating systems (ASPLOS), pp 96–107Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lane N, Campbel A (2006) The influence of microprocessor instructions on the energy consumption of wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of third workshop on embedded networked sensors, pp 359–370Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu BH, Chou CT, Lipman J, Jha S (2005) Using frequency division to reduce MAI in DS-CDMA wireless sensor networks. In: Wireless communications and networking conference, 2005 IEEE, vol 2, pp 657–663Google Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Marcelloni F, Vecchio M (2008) A simple algorithm for data compression in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett 12(6):411–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marcelloni F, Vecchio M (2009a) An efficient lossless compression algorithm for tiny nodes of monitoring wireless sensor networks. Comput J 52(8):969–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marcelloni F, Vecchio M (2009b) A multi-objective evolutionary approach to data compression in wireless sensor networks. In: The 9th international conference on intelligent systems design and applications, pp 402–407Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Massey F (1951) The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J Am Stat Assoc 46(253):68–78MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Michalewicz Z (1994) Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    O’Neal J (1976) Differential pulse-code modulation (PCM) with entropy coding. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 22(2):169–174MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pradhan S, Kusuma J, Ramchandran K (2002) Distributed compression in a dense microsensor network. IEEE Signal Process Mag 19(2):51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rebollo-Monedero D (2007) Quantization and transforms for distributed source coding. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CAGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sadler CM, Martonosi M (2006) Data compression algorithms for energy-constrained devices in delay tolerant networks. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys ’06), pp 265–278Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Salomon D (2007) Data compression: the complete reference, 4th edn. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schoellhammer T, Greenstein B, Osterweil E, Wimbrow M, Estrin D (2004) Lightweight temporal compression of microclimate datasets. In: 29th Annual IEEE international conference on local computer networks, pp 516–524Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sensirion (2010) Sensirion homepage. http://www.sensirion.com
  34. 34.
    Shah R, Roy S, Jain S, Brunette W (2003) Data MULEs: modeling a three-tier architecture for sparse sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 1st IEEE international workshop on sensor network protocols and applications, pp 30–41Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sim-IT (2010) SimIt-ARM homepage. http://simit-arm.sourceforge.net/
  36. 36.
    Slepian D, Wolf J (1973) Noiseless coding of correlated information sources. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 19(4):471–480MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Somasundara AA, Kansal A, Jea DD, Estrin D, Srivastava MB (2006) Controllably mobile infrastructure for low energy embedded networks. IEEE Trans Mobile Comput 5(8):958–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Srinivas N, Deb K (1994) Multiobjective optimization using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2(3):221–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Viana AC, Ziviani A, Friedman R (2009) Decoupling data dissemination from mobile sink’s trajectory in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett 13(3):178–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wagner R, Delouille V, Baraniuk R (2006a) Distributed wavelet de-noising for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 45th IEEE conference on decision and control, pp 373–379Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wagner RS, Baraniuk RG, Du S, Johnson DB, Cohen A (2006b) An architecture for distributed wavelet analysis and processing in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on information processing in sensor networks (IPSN ’06), pp 243–250Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wyner A, Ziv J (1976) The rate-distortion function for source coding with side information at the decoder. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 22(1):1–10MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Xiao JJ, Ribeiro A, Luo ZQ, Giannakis G (2006) Distributed compression-estimation using wireless sensor networks. IEEE Signal Process Mag 23(4):27–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xiong Z, Liveris A, Cheng S (2004) Distributed source coding for sensor networks. IEEE Signal Process Mag 21(5):80–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zitzler E, Thiele L (1998) Multiobjective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms—A Comparative Case Study. In: Conference on parallel problem solving from Nature, pp 292–301Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’InformazioneUniversity of PisaPisaItaly
  2. 2.Signal Theory and Communications DepartmentUniversity of VigoVigoSpain

Personalised recommendations