Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial interpolation in wireless sensor networks: localized algorithms for variogram modeling and Kriging

  • Published:
GeoInformatica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are rapidly emerging as the prominent technology for monitoring physical phenomena. However, large scale WSNs are known to suffer from coverage holes, i.e., large regions of deployment area where no sensing coverage can be provided. Such holes are the result of hardware failures, extensive costs for redeployment or the hostility of deployment areas. Coverage holes can adversely affect the accurate representation of natural phenomena that are monitored by a WSN. In this work, we propose to exploit the spatial correlation of physical phenomena to make monitoring systems more resilient to coverage holes. We show that a phenomenon can be interpolated inside a coverage hole with a high level of accuracy from the available nodal data given a model of its spatial correlation. However, due to energy limitations of sensor nodes it is imperative to perform this interpolation in an energy efficient manner that minimizes communication among nodes. In this paper, we present highly energy efficient methods for spatial interpolation in WSNs. First, we build a correlation model of the phenomenon being monitored in a distributed manner. Then, a purely localized and distributed spatial interpolation scheme based on Kriging interpolates the phenomenon inside coverage holes. We test the cost and accuracy of our scheme with extensive simulations and show that it is significantly more energy efficient than global interpolations and remarkably more accurate than simple averaging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In practice, a tolerance of ±t units in the lag is expected since real-world datasets are generally not uniformly spaced.

  2. A routing strategy used in WSNs and Mobil Adhoc Networks (MANETs) that delivers data to all nodes located inside a specific region.

References

  1. Ahmed N, Kanhere SS, Jha S (2005) The holes problem in wireless sensor networks: a survey. Mob Comput Commun Rev 9(2):4–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Biswas R, Thrun S, Guibas LJ (2004) A probabilistic approach to inference with limited information in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of IPSN, Berkeley, 26–27 April 2004, pp 269–276

  3. Bonfils BJ, Bonnet P (2003) Adaptive and decentralized operator placement for in-network query processing. In: Proceedings of IPSN, Palo Alto, 22–23 April 2003, pp 47–62

  4. Chu D, Deshpande A, Hellerstein J, Hong W (2006) Approximate data collection in sensor networks using probabilistic models. In: Proceedings of ICDE, Atlanta, 3–7 April 2006, p 48

  5. Coman A, Nascimento MA (2007) A distributed algorithm for joins in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SSDBM, Banff, 9–11 July 2007, p 27

  6. Cressie NA (1993) Statistics for spatial data. Wiley, New York (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Crossbow Technologies (2007) Crossbow Technologies homepage. http://www.xbow.com

  8. Curran PJ, Atkinson PM (1998) Geostatistics and remote sensing. Prog Phys Geogr 22(1):61–78

    Google Scholar 

  9. Deshpande A, Guestrin C, Madden SR, Hellerstein JM, Hong, W (2004) Model-driven data acquisition in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of VLDB, Toronto, August 2004, pp 588–599

  10. Gambino F, Kopp VC, Costa JFCL, Kopp JC, Fallon G, Davies N (2004) Incorporating uncertainty in coal seam depth determination via seismic reflection and Geostatistics. In: Proceedings of 7th international geostatistics congress, Banff, 26 September–1 October 2004, pp 537–542

  11. Gnawali O, Yarvis M, Heidemann J, Govindan R (2004) Interaction of retransmission, blacklisting, and routing metrics for reliability in sensor network routing. In: Proceedings of IEEE SECON, Santa Clara, 4–7 October 2004, pp 34–43

  12. Guestrin C, Bodik P, Thibaux R, Paskin M, Madden S (2004) Distributed regression: an efficient framework for modeling sensor network data. In: Proceedings of IPSN, Berkeley, 26–27 April 2004, pp 1–10

  13. Guestrin C, Krause A, Singh AP (2005) Near-optimal sensor placements in Gaussian processes. In: Proceedings of ICML, Bonn, 7–11 August 2005, pp 265–272

  14. Gupta H, Chowdhary V (2007) Communication-efficient implementation of join in sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw 5(6):929–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang CF, Tseng YC (2005) The coverage problem in a wireless sensor network. Mob Netw Appl 10(4):519–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hull B, Bychkovsky V, Zhang Y, Chen K, Goraczko M, Miu A, Shih E, Balakrishnan H, Madden S (2006) Cartel: a distributed mobile sensor computing system. In: Proceedings of SenSys, Boulder, November 2006, pp 125–138

  17. Isaaks E, Srivatava RM (1989) An introduction to applied geostatistics. Oxford, New York

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jin G, Nittel S (2008) Towards spatial window queries over continuous phenomena in sensor networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 19(4):559–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Krause A, Guestrin C, Gupta A, Kleinberg J (2006) Near-optimal sensor placements: maximizing information while minimizing communication cost. In: Proceedings of IPSN, Nashville, 19–21 April 2006, pp 2–10

  20. Kröller A, Fekete SP, Pfisterer D, Fischer S (2006) Deterministic boundary recognition and topology extraction for large sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SODA, pp 1000–1009. ACM, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Madden SR, Franklin MJ, Hellerstein JM, Hong W (2005) TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks. ACM Trans Database Syst 30(1):122–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Morrison JL (1974) Observed statistical trends in various interpolation algorithms useful for first stage interpolation. Can Cartogr 11(2):142–159

    Google Scholar 

  23. NASA Volcano Sensorweb (2007) Volcano sensorweb homepage. http://sensorwebs.jpl.nasa.gov/

  24. Nath S, Gibbons PB, Seshan S, Anderson ZR (2004) Synopsis diffusion for robust aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SenSys, Baltimore, 3–5 November 2004, pp 250–262

  25. Network Simulator (2006) Network simulator homepage. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/doc

  26. Pattem S, Krishnamachari B, Govindan R (2004) The impact of spatial correlation on routing with compression in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of IPSN, Berkeley, 26–27 April 2004, pp 28–35

  27. Pottie GJ, Kaiser WJ (2000) Wireless integrated network sensors. Commun ACM 43(5):51–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Secure CITI (2006) Exploratory research on sensor-based infrastructure for early Tsunami detection. http://www.cs.pitt.edu/s-citi/tsunami/

  29. Sharaf MA, Beaver J, Labrinidis A, Chrysanthis PK (2004) Balancing energy efficiency and quality of aggregate data in sensor networks. VLDB J 13(4):384–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sharifzadeh M, Shahabi C (2006) Utilizing Voronoi cells of location data streams for accurate computation of aggregate functions in sensor networks. GeoInformatica 10(1):9–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shrivastava N, Buragohain C, Agrawal D, Suri S (2004) Medians and beyond: new aggregation techniques for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SenSys, Baltimore, 3–5 November 2004, pp 239–249

  32. Silberstein A, Braynard R, Yang J (2006) Constraint chaining: on energy-efficient continuous monitoring in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SIGMOD, Chicago, 26–29 June 2006, pp 157–168

  33. Somasundara AA, Jea DD, Estrin D, Srivastava MB (2006) Controllably mobile infrastructure for low energy embedded networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 5(8):958–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Strangeways I (2003) Measuring the natural environment. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tolle G, Polastre J, Szewczyk R, Culler D, Turner N, Tu K, Burgess S, Dawson T, Buonadonna P, Gay D, Hong W, Hong W (2005) A macroscope in the Redwoods. In: Proceedings of SenSys, San Diego, 2–4 November 2005, pp 51–63

  36. Umer M, Kulik L, Tanin E (2008) Kriging for localized spatial interpolation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SSDBM, Hong Kong, 9–11 July 2008, pp 525–532

  37. USGS Digital Elevation Models (2007) USGS digital elevation models homepage. http://data.geocomm.com/dem/

  38. Wang Y, Gao J, Mitchell JS (2006) Boundary recognition in sensor networks by topological methods. In: Proceedings of MobiCom, Los Angeles, 23–29 September 2006, pp 122–133

  39. Yang X, Lim HB, Özsu TM, Tan KL (2007) In-network execution of monitoring queries in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of SIGMOD, Beijing, 12–14 June 2007, pp 521–532

  40. Yiu ML, Mamoulis N, Bakiras S (2009) Retrieval of spatial join pattern instances from sensor networks. GeoInformatica 13(1):57–84

    Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang H, Moura JMF, Krogh B (2005) Estimation in sensor networks: a graph approach. In: Proceedings of IPSN. IEEE, Piscataway, p. 27

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zimmerman D, Pavlik C, Ruggles A, Armstrong M (199) An experimental comparison of ordinary and universal Kriging and inverse distance weighting. Math Geol 31:375–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National ICT Australia, Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia

    Muhammad Umer, Lars Kulik & Egemen Tanin

Authors
  1. Muhammad Umer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lars Kulik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Egemen Tanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Umer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Umer, M., Kulik, L. & Tanin, E. Spatial interpolation in wireless sensor networks: localized algorithms for variogram modeling and Kriging. Geoinformatica 14, 101–134 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-009-0078-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-009-0078-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation