FGAF-CDG: fuzzy geographic routing protocol based on compressive data gathering in wireless sensor networks

  • Mohammad Reza Ghaderi
  • Vahid Tabataba VakiliEmail author
  • Mansour Sheikhan
Original Research


In the wireless sensor networks (WSNs), energy consumption is one of the significant factors. Most of the energy in a WSN is consumed by communication between nodes. To minimize energy consumption, routing protocols can be merged with data aggregation techniques. The geographic adaptive fidelity (GAF) protocol is one of the prominent geographic routing protocols which is proposed in order to reduce energy consumption in WSNs. Moreover, compressive sensing (CS) theory presented as an alternative method for data gathering in WSNs, known as compressive data gathering (CDG). CDG reduces the cost of communications and balances the energy load in the network without imposing heavy computation or transmission overhead. With CDG, instead of receiving all readings from the sensors, the sink may receive few weighted sums of all the readings by which original data can be recovered by the sink. In this paper, we propose a GAF-based routing protocol based on CDG technique named fuzzy GAF based on CDG (FGAF-CDG). In this work, we partition the sensors area into virtual hexagonal grid cells firstly and then we lay the cells according to their geographic locations. In each sampling round, cluster head (CH) sensor in each grid cell is selected based on a fuzzy logic-based algorithm. Then, CH readings will be forwarded to the sink in a multi-hop path based on a fuzzy-based routing algorithm in the CDG form. Simulation results show that the proposed method results in superior efficiency as compared to other competitive GAF-based methods. For example, the proposed model offers about 50% reduction in energy consumption as compared to FTGAF-HEX method depending on the dimensions of the sensors area.


Compressive sensing Compressive data gathering Fuzzy based routing Wireless sensor networks 



  1. Akyildiz IF, Su W, Sankarasubramaniam Y, Cayirci E (2002) Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Comput Netw 38(14):393–422Google Scholar
  2. Bajwa W, Haupt A, Sayeed A, Nowak R (2006) Compressive wireless sensing. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on information processing in sensor networks (IPSN), Nashville, Tennessee, USA, 19–21 Apr 2006, pp 134–142Google Scholar
  3. Bandyopadhyay S, Coyle EJ (2003) An energy efficient hierarchical clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks. Proc IEEE INFOCOM 2003:1713–1723Google Scholar
  4. Bhattacharyya D, Kim TH, Pal S (2010) A comparative study of wireless sensor networks and their routing protocols. Sensors 10(12):10506–10523Google Scholar
  5. Bhuiyan M, Wang G, Vasilakos A (2015) Local area prediction-based mobile target tracking in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Comput 64(7):1968–1982MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Candes E, Wakin M (2008) An introduction to compressive sampling. IEEE Signal Process Mag 25(2):21–30Google Scholar
  7. Candes E, Romberg J, Tao T (2006) Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(2):489–509MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Cao G, Yu F, Zhang B (2011) Improving network lifetime for wireless sensor network using compressive sensing. In: Proc. IEEE 13th international conference on high performance computing and communications (HPCC), Banff, Canada, 2–4 Apr 2011, pp 448–454Google Scholar
  9. Chiang SY, Wang JL (2008) Routing analysis using fuzzy logic systems in wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. international conference on knowledge-based and intelligent information and engineering systems, Zagreb, Croatia, 3–5 Sep 2008, pp 966–973Google Scholar
  10. Cuevas-Martinez JC, Yuste-Delgado AJ, Triviño-Cabrera A (2017) Cluster head enhanced election Type-2 fuzzy algorithm for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett 21(9):2069–2072Google Scholar
  11. Donoho DL (2006) Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52(4):1289–1306MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Ebrahimi D, Assi C (2014) A distributed method for compressive data gathering in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun Lett 18(4):624–627Google Scholar
  13. Ebrahimi D, Assi C (2016) On the interaction between scheduling and compressive data gathering in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun 15(4):2845–2858Google Scholar
  14. Erman A, Dilo A, Havinga P (2012) A virtual infrastructure based on honeycomb tessellation for data dissemination in multi-sink mobile wireless sensor networks. EURASIP J on Wireless Commun Netw 1:1–17Google Scholar
  15. Estrin D, Culler D, Pister K, Sukhatme G (2002) Connecting the physical world with pervasive networks. IEEE Pervasive Comput 1(1):59–69Google Scholar
  16. Grover J, Shikha, Sharma M (2014) Optimized GAF in wireless sensor network. In: Proc. 3rd international conference on reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (ICRITO) (trends and future directions).
  17. Haupt J, Bajwa W, Rabbat M, Nowak R (2008) Compressed sensing for networked data. IEEE Signal Process Mag 25(2):92–101Google Scholar
  18. Heinzelman W, Chandrakasan A, Balakrishnan H (2002) An application-specific protocol architecture for wireless microsensor networks. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun 1(4):660–670Google Scholar
  19. Inagaki T, Ishihara S (2009) HGAF: a power saving scheme for wireless sensor networks. Inform Process Soc Jpn J 50(10):2520–2531Google Scholar
  20. Ji S, Beyah R, Cai Z (2014) Snapshot and continuous data collection in probabilistic wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 13(3):626–637Google Scholar
  21. Lan KC, Wei MZ (2017) A compressibility-based clustering algorithm for hierarchical compressive data gathering. IEEE Sens J 17(8):2550–2562Google Scholar
  22. Lee JS, Cheng WL (2012) Fuzzy-logic-based clustering approach for wireless sensor networks using energy predication. IEEE Sens J 12(9):2891–2897Google Scholar
  23. Liu G, Wen W (2010) A improved GAF clustering algorithm for three-dimensional underwater acoustic networks. In: Proc. international symposium on computer communication control and automation (3CA).
  24. Liu RP, Rogers G, Zhou S (2006) Honeycomb architecture for energy conservation in wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. ieee global telecommunications conference (GLOBECOM).
  25. Luo C, Wu F, Sun J, Chen CW (2009) Compressive data gathering for large-scale wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. 15th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking, Beijing, China, 20–25 Sep 2009, pp 145–156Google Scholar
  26. Luo C, Wu F, Sun J, Chen CW (2010) Efficient measurement generation and pervasive sparsity for compressive data gathering. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun 9(12):3728–3738Google Scholar
  27. Nayak P, Anurag D (2015) A fuzzy logic based clustering algorithm for WSN to extend the network lifetime. IEEE Sens J 16(1):137–144Google Scholar
  28. Nayak P, Vathasavai B (2017) Energy efficient clustering algorithm for multi-hop wireless sensor network using type-2 fuzzy logic. IEEE Sens J 17(14):4492–4499Google Scholar
  29. Neamatollahi P, Naghibzadeh M, Abrishami S (2017) Fuzzy-based clustering-task scheduling for lifetime enhancement in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sensor J 17(20):6837–6844Google Scholar
  30. Nejad AE, Arbabi M, Romouzi M (2014) A survey on fuzzy based clustering routing protocols in wireless sensor networks: a new viewpoint. Int J Mechatronics Electr Comput Technol 4(10):1186–1199Google Scholar
  31. Ni Q, Pan Q, Du H, Cao C, Zhai Y (2017) A novel cluster head selection algorithm based on fuzzy clustering and particle swarm optimization. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinf 14(1):76–84Google Scholar
  32. Pantazis NA, Vergados DD (2007) A survey on power control issues in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 9(4):86–107Google Scholar
  33. Qiao J, Zhang X (2018) Compressive data gathering based on even clustering for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Access 6:24391–24410Google Scholar
  34. Shah B, Iqbal F, Abbas A, Kim KI (2015) Fuzzy logic-based guaranteed lifetime protocol for real-time wireless sensor networks. Sensors 15(8):20373–20391Google Scholar
  35. Shang F, Liu J (2012) Multi-hop topology control algorithm for wireless sensor networks. J Netw 9(7):1407–1414Google Scholar
  36. Sharieh A, Mohammad Q, Almobaideen W, Sliet A (2008) Hex-Cell: modeling, topological properties and routing algorithm. Eur J Sci Res 22(2):457–468Google Scholar
  37. Soni V, Mallick DJ (2015) A novel scheme to minimize hop count for GAF in wireless sensor networks: two-level GAF. J Comput Netw Commun. Google Scholar
  38. Soni V, Mallick DK (2016) An optimal geographic routing protocol based on honeycomb architecture in wireless sensor networks. In: IEEE international conference on electrical, electronics, and optimization techniques (ICEEOT).
  39. Soni V, Mallick DK (2017) FTGAF-HEX: fuzzy logic based two-level geographic routing protocol in wireless sensor networks. Microsyst Technol 23(8):3443–3455Google Scholar
  40. Soro S, Heinzelman WB (2009) Cluster head selection techniques for coverage preservation in wireless sensor networks. Ad Hoc Netw 7(5):955–972Google Scholar
  41. Vempaty A, Ozdemir O, Agrawal K, Chen H, Varshney PK (2013) Localization in wireless sensor networks: byzantines and mitigation techniques. IEEE Trans Signal Process 61(6):1495–1508MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang S, Chen Z (2013) LCM: a link-aware clustering mechanism for energy-efficient routing in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sens J 13(2):728–736Google Scholar
  43. Wu X, Tavildar S, Shakkottai S, Richardson T, Li J, Laroia R, Jovicic A (2013) FlashLinQ: a synchronous distributed scheduler for peer-topeer ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 21(4):1215–1228Google Scholar
  44. Xiang L, Luo J, Rosenberg C (2013) Compressed data aggregation: energy-efficient and high-fidelity data collection. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 21(6):1722–1735Google Scholar
  45. Xie R, Jia X (2014) Transmission-efficient clustering method for wireless sensor networks using compressive sensing. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 25(3):806–815Google Scholar
  46. Xiong Z, Liveris A, Cheng S (2004) Distributed source coding for sensor networks. IEEE Signal Process Mag 21(5):80–94Google Scholar
  47. Xu Y, Heidemann J, Estrin D (2001) Geography-informed energy conservation for ad hoc routing. In: Proc. 7th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking (MobiCOM), Rome, Italy, 16–21 July 2001, pp 70–84Google Scholar
  48. Xu E, Ding Z, Dasgupta S (2013) Target tracking and mobile sensor navigation in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 12(1):177–186Google Scholar
  49. Younis O, Fahmy S (2004) HEED: a hybrid, energy-efficient, distributed clustering approach for ad hoc sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 3(4):366–379Google Scholar
  50. Younis O, Krunz M, Ramasubramanian S (2006) Node clustering in wireless sensor networks: recent developments and deployment challenges. IEEE Netw 20(3):20–25Google Scholar
  51. Yousef R, Ahmad R, Hassib A (2017) Fuzzy power allocation for opportunistic relay in energy harvesting wireless sensor networks. IEEE Access 5:17165–17176Google Scholar
  52. Youssef M, Youssef A, Younis M (2009) Overlapping multi-hop clustering for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 20(12):1844–1856Google Scholar
  53. Zheng H, Xiao S, Wang X, Tian X, Guizani M (2013) Capacity and delay analysis for data gathering with compressive sensing in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun 12(2):917–927Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Electrical EngineeringIran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations