Frugal Sensor Assignment

  • Matthew P. Johnson
  • Hosam Rowaihy
  • Diego Pizzocaro
  • Amotz Bar-Noy
  • Stuart Chalmers
  • Thomas La Porta
  • Alun Preece
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5067)

Abstract

When a sensor network is deployed in the field it is typically required to support multiple simultaneous missions, which may start and finish at different times. Schemes that match sensor resources to mission demands thus become necessary. In this paper, we consider new sensor-assignment problems motivated by frugality, i.e., the conservation of resources, for both static and dynamic settings. In general, the problems we study are NP-hard even to approximate, and so we focus on heuristic algorithms that perform well in practice. In the static setting, we propose a greedy centralized solution and a more sophisticated solution that uses the Generalized Assignment Problem model and can be implemented in a distributed fashion. In the dynamic setting, we give heuristic algorithms in which available sensors propose to nearby missions as they arrive. We find that the overall performance can be significantly improved if available sensors sometimes refuse to offer utility to missions they could help based on the value of the mission, the sensor’s remaining energy, and (if known) the remaining target lifetime of the network. Finally, we evaluate our solutions through simulations.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bar-Noy, A., Brown, T., Johnson, M., La Porta, T., Liu, O., Rowaihy, H.: Assigning sensors to missions with demands. In: ALGOSENSORS 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Byers, J., Nasser, G.: Utility-based decision-making in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of MOBIHOC 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cohen, R., Katzir, L., Raz, D.: An efficient approximation for the generalized assignment problem. Inf. Process. Lett. 100(4), 162–166 (2006)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan, L.: Global node selection for localization in a distributed sensor network. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 42(1), 113–135 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karp, B., Kung, H.: Greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In: Proceedings of MobiCom 2000, Boston, MA, August 2000, pp. 243–254 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lu, J., Bao, L., Suda, T.: Coverage-Aware Sensor Engagement in Dense Sensor Networks. In: Yang, L.T., Amamiya, M., Liu, Z., Guo, M., Rammig, F.J. (eds.) EUC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3824, pp. 639–650. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mullen, T., Avasarala, V., Hall, D.L.: Customer-driven sensor management. IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(2), 41–49 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perillo, M., Heinzelman, W.: Optimal sensor management under energy and reliability constraints. In: WCNC 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rowaihy, H., Eswaran, S., Johnson, M., Verma, D., Bar-Noy, A., Brown, T., La Porta, T.: A survey of sensor selection schemes in wireless sensor networks. In: SPIE Defense and Security Symposium (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rowaihy, H., Johnson, M., Brown, T., Bar-Noy, A., La Porta, T.: Assigning Sensors to Competing Missions. Technical Report NAS-TR-0080-2007, Network and Security Research Center, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA (October 2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shih, K., Chen, Y., Chiang, C., Liu, B.: A distributed active sensor selection scheme for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (June 2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vazirani, V.V.: Approximation Algorithms. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhao, F., Shin, J., Reich, J.: Information-driven dynamic sensor collaboration. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine 19(2), 61–72 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew P. Johnson
    • 1
  • Hosam Rowaihy
    • 2
  • Diego Pizzocaro
    • 3
  • Amotz Bar-Noy
    • 1
  • Stuart Chalmers
    • 4
  • Thomas La Porta
    • 2
  • Alun Preece
    • 3
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer Science, Graduate CenterCity University of New YorkUSA
  2. 2.Dept. of Computer Science and EngineeringPennsylvania State UniversityUSA
  3. 3.School of Computer ScienceCardiff UniversityUK
  4. 4.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations