Advertisement

Online Packet Admission and Oblivious Routing in Sensor Networks

  • Mohamed Aly
  • John Augustine
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4288)

Abstract

The concept of Oblivious Routing for general undirected networks was introduced by Räcke [12] when he showed that there exists an oblivious routing algorithm with polylogarithmic competitive ratio (w.r.t. edge congestion) for any undirected graph. In a following result, Räcke and Rosén [13] presented admission control algorithms achieving a polylogarithmic fraction (in the size of the network) of the optimal number of accepted messages. Both these results assume that the network incurs a cost only after it is accepted and the message is routed. Admission control and routing algorithms for sensor networks under energy constraints, however, need to account for the energy spent in checking for feasible routes prior to the acceptance of a message and hence, it is unclear if these algorithms achieve polylogarithmic bounds under this condition. In this paper, we address this problem and prove that such algorithms do not exist when messages are generated by an adversary. Furthermore, we show that an oblivious routing algorithm cannot have a polylogarithmic competitive ratio without a packet-admission protocol. We present a deterministic O(ρlogn)-competitive algorithm for tree networks where the capacity of any node is in [k,ρk]. For grids, we present an O(logn)-competitive algorithm when nodes have capacities in Θ(logn) under the assumption that each message is drawn uniformly at random from all pairs of nodes in the grid.

Keywords

Sensor Network Sensor Node Wireless Sensor Network Leaf Node Competitive Ratio 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I.F., Weilian, S., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Cayirci, E.: A survey on sensor networks. IEEE Communications Magazine 40, 102–114 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Awerbuch, B., Bartal, Y., Fiat, A., Rosén, A.: Competitive non-preemptive call control. In: Proc. of the ACM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonnet, P., Gehrke, J., Seshadri, P.: Towards sensor database systems. In: Tan, K.-L., Franklin, M.J., Lui, J.C.-S. (eds.) MDM 2001. LNCS, vol. 1987, pp. 3–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakrabarty, K., Iyengar, S.S., Qi, H., Cho, E.: Grid coverage for surveillance and target location in distributed sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dhillon, S.S., Chakrabarty, K., Iyengar, S.S.: Sensor placement for grid coverage under imprecise detections. In: Proc. International Conference on Information Fusion (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta, H., Navda, V., Das, S.R., Chowdhary, V.: Efficient gathering of correlated data in sensor networks. In: Proc. of MobiHoc (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hajiaghayi, M.T., Kleinberg, R.D., Leighton, T., Raecke, H.: Oblivious routing on node-capacitated and directed graphs. In: Proc. of the ACM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hajiaghayi, M., Kim, J.H., Leighton, T., Räcke, H.: Oblivious routing in directed graphs with random demands. In: Proc. of the ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (STOC) (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Madden, S., Franklin, M.J., Hellerstein, J.M., Hong, W.: Tag: a tiny aggregation service for ad-hoc sensor networks, vol. 36, pp. 131–146. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Park, S.-J., Vedantham, R., Sivakumar, R., Akyildiz, I.F.: A scalable approach for reliable downstream data delivery in wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. of MobiHoc (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pham, T., Kim, E.J., Moh, W.M.: On data aggregation quality and energy efficiency of wireless sensor network protocols. In: Proc. of BROADNETS (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Räcke, H.: Minimizing congestion in general networks. In: Proc. of the ACM Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Räcke, H., Rosén, A.: Distributed online call control on general networks. In: SODA 2005: Proceedings of the sixteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms, pp. 791–800. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stoleru, R., Stankovic, J.: Probability grid: A location estimation scheme for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yao, Y., Gehrke, J.: Query processing for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the First Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR 2003) (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohamed Aly
    • 1
  • John Augustine
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Donald Bren School of Information and Computer SciencesUniversity of California at IrvineIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations