Cognitive Neurodynamics

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 249–256 | Cite as

An improved localization algorithm based on genetic algorithm in wireless sensor networks

  • Bo PengEmail author
  • Lei Li
Research Article


Wireless sensor network (WSN) are widely used in many applications. A WSN is a wireless decentralized structure network comprised of nodes, which autonomously set up a network. The node localization that is to be aware of position of the node in the network is an essential part of many sensor network operations and applications. The existing localization algorithms can be classified into two categories: range-based and range-free. The range-based localization algorithm has requirements on hardware, thus is expensive to be implemented in practice. The range-free localization algorithm reduces the hardware cost. Because of the hardware limitations of WSN devices, solutions in range-free localization are being pursued as a cost-effective alternative to more expensive range-based approaches. However, these techniques usually have higher localization error compared to the range-based algorithms. DV-Hop is a typical range-free localization algorithm utilizing hop-distance estimation. In this paper, we propose an improved DV-Hop algorithm based on genetic algorithm. Simulation results show that our proposed algorithm improves the localization accuracy compared with previous algorithms.


Wireless sensor network Localization DV-Hop Genetic algorithm 



The author would like to express gratitude to all those who have helped her during the writing of this paper. She deeply appreciates the contribution to this paper made in various ways by her friends and classmates.


  1. Akyildiz IF, Su W, Sankarasubramaniam Y, Cayirci E (2002) Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Comput Netw 38:393–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bulusu N, Heidemann J, Estrin D (2000) GPS-less low cost outdoor localization for very small devices. IEEE Pers Commun Mag 7(5):28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Doherty L, Pister K, Ghaoui LE (2001) Convex position estimation in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, Anchorage, pp 1478–1521Google Scholar
  4. Forrest S, Mitchell M (1993) Relative building-block fitness and the building-block hypothesis. In: Whitley LD (ed) Foundations of genetic algorithms 2. Morgan Kauffman, San MateoGoogle Scholar
  5. Gao Y, Zhuang Y, Ni T, Yin K, Xue T (2010) An improved genetic algorithm for wireless sensor networks localization. In: Proceedings of IEEE fifth international conference on bio-inspired computing: theories and applications (BIC-TA), pp 439–443Google Scholar
  6. Girod L, Estrin D (2001) Robust range estimation using acoustic and multimodal sensing. Proc IEEE/RSJ Int Conf Intell Robots Syst 3:1312–1320Google Scholar
  7. Girod L, Bychovskiy V, Elson J, et al (2002) Locating tiny sensors in time and space. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer design: VLSI in computers and Processors, pp 214–219Google Scholar
  8. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine learning, vol 432. Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  9. Gu MS, Yan YS, You L, Zuo Z (2013) An improvement of localization algorithm based on particle swarm optimization and simulated, annealing in wireless sensor networks. J Inf Comput Sci 10(5):1497–1505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. He T, Huang C, Blum B, Stankovic J, Abdelzaher T (2003) Range-free localization schemes in large scale sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking (MobiCom), pp 81–95Google Scholar
  11. Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. The University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  12. Kazarlis SA, Bakirtzis AG, Petridis V (1996) A genetic algorithm solution to the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 11(1):83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li WW, Zhou WN (2011) Genetic algorithm-base localization algorithm for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of seventh international conference on natural computation. IEEE, pp 2096–2099Google Scholar
  14. Liu DS (2010) Improved genetic algorithm based on simulated annealing and quantum computing strategy for mining association rules. J Softw 5(11):1243–1249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nagpal R (1999) Organizing a global coordinate system from local information on an amorphous computer, A.I. Memo1666, MIT A.I. LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  16. Nan GF, Li MQ, Li J (2007) Estimation of node localization with a real-code genetic algorithm in WSNs. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on machine learning and cybernetics, vol 2. IEEE, pp 873–878 Google Scholar
  17. Nicolescu D, Nath B (2003) DV baesd positioning in ad hoc networks. J Telecommun Syst 22(1–4):267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nicolescu D, Nath B (2001) Ad-hoc positioning system. In: Global telecommunications conference (GlobeCom). IEEE, vol 5, pp 2926–2931Google Scholar
  19. Niculescu D, Nath B (2003) Ad-hoc position systems (APS) using AOA. In: Proceedings of 22nd annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communication societies ( INFOCOM’ 2003), 3Google Scholar
  20. Parkinson BW, Spilker J (1996) Global positioning system: theory and applications. In: Progress in Aeronautics and Astronautics, 793. American Institute of Aeronautics and AstronauticsGoogle Scholar
  21. Savvides A, Han CC, Srivastava MB (2001) Dynamic fine-grained localization in ad-hoc networks of sensors. In: Proceeding of 7th annual intemational conference on mobile computing and networking, pp 166–199Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of EngineeringHosei UniversityKoganeiJapan
  2. 2.Faculty of Science and EngineeringHosei UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations