Approximating Barrier Resilience in Wireless Sensor Networks

  • Sergey Bereg
  • David Kirkpatrick
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5804)

Abstract

Barrier coverage in a sensor network has the goal of ensuring that all paths through the surveillance domain joining points in some start region S to some target region T will intersect the coverage region associated with at least one sensor. In this paper, we revisit a notion of redundant barrier coverage known as k-barrier coverage.

We describe two different notions of width, or impermeability, of the barrier provided by the sensors in \(\cal A\) to paths joining two arbitrary regions S to T. The first, what we refer to as the thickness of the barrier, counts the minimum number of sensor region intersections, over all paths from S to T. The second, what we refer to as the resilience of the barrier, counts the minimum number of sensors whose removal permits a path from S to T with no sensor region intersections. Of course, a configuration of sensors with resilience k has thickness at least k and constitutes a k-barrier for S and T.

Our result demonstrates that any (Euclidean) shortest path from S to T that intersects a fixed number of distinct sensors, never intersects any one sensor more than three times. It follows that the resilience of \(\cal A\) (with respect to S and T) is at least one-third the thickness of \(\cal A\) (with respect to S and T). (Furthermore, if points in S and T are moderately separated (relative to the radius of individual sensor coverage) then no shortest path intersects any one sensor more than two times, and hence the resilience of \(\cal A\) is at least one-half the thickness of \(\cal A\).)

A second result, which we are only able to sketch here, shows that the approximation bounds can be tightened (to 1.666 in the case of moderately separated S and T) by exploiting topological properties of simple paths that make double visits to a collection of disks.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cardei, M., Wu, J.: Coverage in wireless sensor networks. In: Ilyas, M., Mahgoub, I. (eds.) Handbook of Sensor Networks: Compact Wireless and Wired Sensing Systems, ch. 19, pp. 432–446. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carr, R.D., Doddi, S., Konjevod, G., Marathe, M.: On the red-blue set cover problem. In: Proc. 11th ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discr. Algor., pp. 345–353 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, A., Kumar, S., Lai, T.H.: Designing localized algorithms for barrier coverage. In: Proc. of the 13th Annual ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom 2007), pp. 63–74 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, A., Lai, T.H., Xuan, D.: Measuring and guaranteeing quality of barrier-coverage in wireless sensor networks. In: MobiHoc 2008: Proceedings of the 9th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing, pp. 421–430. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feige, U.: A threshold of ln n for approximating set cover. J. ACM 45(4), 634–652 (1998)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gage, D.W.: Command control for many-robot systems. In: Proc. 19th Annu. AUVS Tech. Symp., AUVS 1992, Hunstville AL, pp. 28–34 (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacob, R., Koniedov, G., Krumke, S., Marathe, M., Ravi, R., Wirth, H.: The minimum label path problem. In: Unpublished manuscript, Los Alamos National Laboratory (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jiang, C.-D., Chen, G.-L.: Double barrier coverage in dense sensor networks. J. Comput. Sci. and Tech. 23(1), 154–165 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kloder, S., Hutchinson, S.: Barrier coverage for variable bounded-range line-of-sight guards. In: Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2007), pp. 391–396 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar, S.: Foundations of coverage in wireless sensor networks. PhD thesis, Columbus, OH, USA, Adviser-Lai, Ten H (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kumar, S., Lai, T.H., Arora, A.: Barrier coverage with wireless sensors. In: Proc. of the 11th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom 2005), pp. 284–298 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kumar, S., Lai, T.H., Arora, A.: Barrier coverage with wireless sensors. Wireless Networks 13(6) (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lazos, L., Poovendran, R., Ritcey, J.A.: Probabilistic detection of mobile targets in heterogeneous sensor networks. In: IPSN 2007: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Information processing in sensor networks, pp. 519–528. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, B., Dousse, O., Wang, J., Saipulla, A.: Strong barrier coverage of wireless sensor networks. In: MobiHoc 2008: Proceedings of the 9th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing, pp. 411–420. ACM, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meguerdichian, A., Koushanfar, F., Qu, G., Potkonjak, N.: Exposure in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks. In: Proc. of the 7th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom 2001), pp. 139–150 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meguerdichian, S., Koushanfar, F., Potkonjak, M., Srivastava, M.: Coverage problems in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks. In: Proc. of the 20th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Conference on Computer and Communications (INFOCOM 2001), vol. 3, pp. 1380–1387 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yuan, S., Vannat, S., Juex, J.P.: Minimum-color path problems for reliability in mesh networks. In: Proc. 24th Annu. Joint Conf. of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 2005), vol. 4, pp. 2658–2669 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergey Bereg
    • 1
  • David Kirkpatrick
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Texas at DallasUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada

Personalised recommendations