Advertisement

Distributed Ontology-Based Monitoring on the IBBT WiLab.t Infrastructure

  • Stijn Verstichel
  • Eli De Poorter
  • Tim De Pauw
  • Pieter Becue
  • Bruno Volckaert
  • Filip De Turck
  • Ingrid Moerman
  • Piet Demeester
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 46)

Abstract

Testbeds as a means to evaluate protocol and software development are gaining importance, not least because of the oftentimes unpredictable influence of environmental behaviour. IBBT, the Interdisciplinary Institute for Broadband Technology, recognizes the importance of such testbeds and has therefore invested in WiLab.t, a wireless sensor and mesh testbed. It contains over 200 wireless and programmable nodes. The monitoring and management of such a testbed is very important so as to guarantee a proper functioning and stable environment to be used by researchers. This is however not a trivial task, even more so when in the future, the testbed is expanded with new devices and as such becomes a heterogeneous environment. Therefore, we have developed an ontology-based monitoring approach, which allows hiding the heterogeneity from the monitoring application and enables to process the data in a formal manner. Additionally, it allows adaptation according to characteristics of the local deployment, without the need to re-engineer the entire monitoring application every time alterations are made to the testbed.

Keywords

wsn wmn ontology semantics monitoring reasoning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Xu, N.: A survey of sensor network applications. IEEE Communications Magazine 40(8), 102 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murty, R.N., Mainland, G., Rose, I., Chowdhury, A.R., Gosain, A., Bers, J., Welsh, M.: CitySense - An Urban-Scale Wireless Sensor Network and Testbed. In: IEEE Conference on Technologies for Homeland Security, Waltham, MA, pp. 583–588 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ertin, E., Arora, A., Ramnath, R., Nesterenko, M., Naik, V., Bapat, S., Kulathumani, V., Sridharan, M., Zhang, H., Cao, H.: Kansei: a testbed for sensing at scale. In: The Fifth International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, IPSN 2006, Nashville, TN, pp. 399–406 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Werner-Allen, G., Swieskowski, P., Welsh, M.: MoteLab - a wireless sensor network testbed. In: Fourth International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, IPSN 2005, pp. 483–488 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    WISEBED - Wireless Sensor Network Testbeds. Part of the Seventh Framework Information Communication Technologies program from the European Commission under project number 224460, http://www.wisebed.eu/
  6. 6.
    Gruber, T.R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition (1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    da Rocha, A.R., Delicato, F.C., de Souza, J.N., Gomes, D.G., Pirmez, L.: A semantic middleware for autonomic wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Workshop on Middleware For Ubiquitous and Pervasive Systems, WMUPS 2009, Dublin, Ireland, June 16, vol. 389, pp. 19–25. ACM, New York (2009), doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1551693.1551697Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu, Y., Wu, Z., Guo, M.: Ontology driven adaptive data processing in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Scalable Information Systems, June 6-8. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 304 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Delicato, F.C., Pirmez, L., Pires, P.L., Ferreira de Rezende, J.: Exploiting Web Technologies to Build Autonomic Wireless Sensor Networks. In: Mobile and Wireless Communication Networks, vol. 211, pp. 99–114. Springer, Boston (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Verstichel, S., Ongenae, F., Volckaert, B., De Turck, F., Dhoedt, B., Dhaene, T., Demeester, P.: An autonomous service-platform to support distributed ontology-based context-aware agents, In: Special Issue of Expert Systems: The Journal of Knowledge Engineering on Engineering Semantic Agent Systems (2009) (accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sparql: Query Language for RDF, W3C Candidate Recommendation (2007), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
  15. 15.
    Gnawali, O., Fonseca, R., Jamieson, K., Moss, D., Levis, P.: Collection Tree Protocol. In: SenSys 2009, Berkeley, California, USA, November 4-6 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Parsia, B., Sirin, E.: Pellet: An OWL DL Reasoner. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics (2004), http://pellet.owldl.com/
  18. 18.
    Bizer, C., Cyganiak, R.: D2R Server, Publishing Relational Databases on the Semantic Web. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Semantic Web Conference. Athens, GA, USA (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Science, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stijn Verstichel
    • 1
  • Eli De Poorter
    • 1
  • Tim De Pauw
    • 1
  • Pieter Becue
    • 1
  • Bruno Volckaert
    • 1
  • Filip De Turck
    • 1
  • Ingrid Moerman
    • 1
  • Piet Demeester
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Information Technology - IBBTGhent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations