Configurable, Energy-Efficient, Application- and Channel-Aware Middleware Approaches for Cyber-Physical Systems

  • Khalid Nawaz
  • Ilia Petrov
  • Alejandro P. Buchmann
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 540)


The use of Wireless Sensor and Actuator Networks (WSAN) as an enabling technology for Cyber-Physical Systems has increased significantly in recent past. The challenges that arise in different application areas of Cyber-Physical Systems, in general, and in WSAN in particular, are getting the attention of academia and industry both. Since reliability issues for message delivery in wireless communication are of critical importance for certain safety related applications, it is one of the areas that has received significant focus in the research community. Additionally, the diverse needs of different applications put different demands on the lower layers in the protocol stack, thus necessitating such mechanisms in place in the lower layers which enable them to dynamically adapt. Another major issue in the realization of networked wirelessly communicating cyber-physical systems, in general, and WSAN, in particular, is the lack of approaches that tackle the reliability, configurability and application awareness issues together. One could consider tackling these issues in isolation. However, the interplay between these issues create such challenges that make the application developers spend more time on meeting these challenges, and that too not in very optimal ways, than spending their time on solving the problems related to the application being developed. Starting from some fundamental concepts, general issues and problems in cyber-physical systems, this chapter discusses such issues like energy-efficiency, application and channel-awareness for networked wirelessly communicating cyber-physical systems. Additionally, the chapter describes a middleware approach called CEACH, which is an acronym for Configurable, Energy-efficient, Application- and Channel-aware Clustering based middleware service for cyber-physical systems. The state-of-the art in the area of cyber-physical systems with a special focus on communication reliability, configurability, application- and channel-awareness is described in the chapter. The chapter also describes how these features have been considered in the CEACH approach. Important node level and network level characteristics and their significance vis-à-vis the design of applications for cyber physical systems is also discussed. The issue of adaptively controlling the impact of these factors vis-à-vis the application demands and network conditions is also discussed. The chapter also includes a description of Fuzzy-CEACH which is an extension of CEACH middleware service and which uses fuzzy logic principles. The fuzzy descriptors used in different stages of Fuzzy-CEACH have also been described. The fuzzy inference engine used in the Fuzzy-CEACH cluster head election process is described in detail. The Rule-Bases used by fuzzy inference engine in different stages of Fuzzy-CEACH is also included to show an insightful description of the protocol. The chapter also discusses in detail the experimental results validating the authenticity of the presented concepts in the CEACH approach. The applicability of the CEACH middleware service in different application scenarios in the domain of cyber-physical systems is also discussed. The chapter concludes by shedding light on the Publish-Subscribe mechanisms in distributed event-based systems and showing how they can make use of the CEACH middleware to reliably communicate detected events to the event-consumers or the actuators if the WSAN is modeled as a distributed event-based system.


  1. 1.
    I.F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam, E. Cayirci, Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Comput. Netw. 38, 393–422 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    AS-International Association e.V., Actuator-sensor interface (2013), Accessed 10 June 2013
  3. 3.
    D. Baker, A. Ephremides, The architectural organization of a mobile radio network via a distributed algorithm. IEEE Trans. Commun. 29, 1694–1701 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Buettner, G.V. Yee, E. Anderson, R. Han, X-MAC: a short preamble MAC protocol for duty-cycled wireless sensor networks. in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys ‘06). ACM, New York, USA, 2006, pp. 307–320Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    CAN in Automation e.V., Kontumazgarten 3. DE-90429 Nuremberg (2013), Accessed 09 June 2013
  6. 6.
    M. Chatterjee, S.K. Das, D. Turgut, WCA: a weighted clustering algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks. J. Cluster Comput. (Special Issue on Mobile Ad hoc Networks), 5, 193–204 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Cerpa, J.L. Wong, M. Potkonjak, D. Estrin, Temporal properties of low power wireless links: modeling and implications on multi-hop routing. in MobiHoc’05, Urbana-Champaign, IL, May 2005Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D.S.J. De Couto, D. Aguayo, J. Bicket, R. Morris, A high-throughput path metric for multi-hop wireless routing. in Proceedings of the 9th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking (MobiCom ‘03). ACM, New York, USA, 2003, pp. 134–146Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Dunkels, B. Grönvall, T. Voigt, Contiki—a light-weight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors, in First IEEE Workshop on Embedded Netwoked Sensors (Emnets-I), 2004Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Dunkels, F. Österlind, N. Tsiftes, Z. He, Software based online energy estimation for sensor nodes, in 4th IEEE Workshop on Embedded Netwoked Sensors (Emnets-IV), 2007Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Eriksson, F. Österlind, N. Finne, N. Tsiftes, A. Dunkels, T. Voigt, R. Sauter, P.J. Marrón, COOJA/MSPSim: interoperability testing for wireless sensor networks. in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques (Simutools ‘09). ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), Brussels, Belgium, 2009Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O. Gnawali, R. Fonseca, K. Jamieson, D. Moss, P. Levis, Collection tree protocol. in Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys ‘09). ACM, New York, USA, 2009, pp. 1–14Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Goldman, K. Shilton, J. Burke, D. Estrin, M. Hansen, N. Ramanathan, S. Reddy, V. Samanta, M. Srivastava, R. West, Participatory sensing: a citizen-powered approach to illuminating the patterns that shape our world Foresight & Governance Project, White paper, 2009Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W.R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, H. Balakrishnan, Energy-efficient communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks, in HICSS’00: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-Volume 8, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2000, p. 8020Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Jacobi, P.E. Guerrero, K. Nawaz, C. Seeger, A. Herzog, K. Van Laerhoven, I. Petrov I, Towards Declarative Query Scoping in Sensor Networks. ed. by K. Sachs, I. Petrov, P. Guerrero. From Active Data Management to Event-Based Systems and More, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6462, ISBN 978-3-642-17225-0, (Springer, 2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Johnson, M. Healy, P. van de Ven, M.J. Hayes, J. Nelson, T. Newe, E. Lewis, A comparative review of wireless sensor network mote technologies. in IEEE Sensors 2009, 2009, pp. 1439–1442Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    H. Kang, In-network processing of joins in wireless sensor networks. Sensors 13, 3358–3393 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    K. Katsalis, A. Xenakis, P. Kikiras, G. Stamoulis, Topology optimization in wireless sensor networks for precision agriculture applications. in Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications (SENSORCOMM ‘07). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2007, pp. 526–530Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. Kim, S. Pakzad, D. Culler, J. Demmel, G. Fenves, S. Glaser, M. Turon, Health monitoring of civil infrastructures using wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, IPSN’07, ACM, New York, USA, 2007, pp. 254–263Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Kovatsch, S. Duquennoy, A. Dunkels, A low-power CoAP for Contiki. in Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS ‘11). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2011, pp. 855–860Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Krishnamachari, D. Estrin, S. Wicker, The impact of data aggregation in wireless sensor networks. in Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCSW ‘02). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2002, pp. 575–578Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J.K.S Lau, C.K. Tham, T. Luo, Participatory cyber physical system in public transport application. in Fourth IEEE International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing, ucc, pp. 355–360Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    T. Liu, A. Kamthe, L. Jiang, A. Cerpa, Performance evaluation of link quality estimation metrics for static multihop wireless sensor networks, sensor, mesh and ad hoc communications and networks, 2009. SECON ‘09. in 6th Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on, pp. 1–9, 22–26Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    S.R. Madden, M.J. Franklin, J.M. Hellerstein, W. Hong, TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 30, 1 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Mainwaring, D. Culler, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, J. Anderson, Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. in Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (WSNA ‘02). ACM, New York, USA, 2002, pp. 88–97Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    E.H. Mamdani, Application of fuzzy algorithms for the control of a simple dynamic plant. in Proceedings of IEEE, 1974, pp. 121–159Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    B. McMillin, C. Gill, M.L. Crow, F. Liu, D. Niehaus, A. Potthast, D. Tauritz, Cyber-physical systems distributed control: the advanced electric power grid. in Beyond SCADA, Nov 2006Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Milenkovi′c, C. Otto, E. Jovanov, Wireless sensor networks for personal health monitoring: issues and an implementation. Comput. Commun. (Special issue: Wireless Sensor Networks: Performance, Reliability, Security, and Beyond) 29, 2521–2533 (2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. Nawaz, A. Buchmann, ACDMCP: an adaptive and completely distributed multi-hop clustering protocol for wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Wireless Mob. Networks. No. ISSN: 0975–3834, 2, 0975–4679 (2010) AIRCGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    K. Nawaz, A.P. Buchmann, Building a case for FIPA compliant multi- agent based approaches for wireless sensor networks. in Proceedings of 1st ICST International Conference on Ambient Media and Systems. Software Organization and Monitoring of Ambient Systems Workshop, ACMGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    K. Nawaz, P.E. Guerrero, A.P. Buchmann, Towards a FIPA compliant multiagent based middleware architecture for sensor networks. in Proceedings of 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Wireless Pervasive Computing (ISWPC 2008), IEEE, 2008Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Y. Sun, B. McMillin, X. Liu, D. Cape, Verifying noninterference in a cyber-physical system. The advanced electric power grid. in Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC ‘07). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2007, pp. 363–369Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    B. Sundararaman, U. Buy, A.D. Kshemkalyani, Clock synchronization for wireless sensor networks: a survey, ad-hoc networks. Elsevier 3, 281–323 (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    A.M. Tabar, A. Keshavarz, H. Aghajan, Smart home care network using sensor fusion and distributed vision-based reasoning. in VSSN’06: Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Workshop on Video Surveillance and Sensor Networks, ACM, New York, USA, pp. 145–154Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    The CeNSE Project, Central nervous system for the earth by Hewlett Packard Development Company, L.P. (2013), Accessed 27 March 2013
  36. 36.
    R. Virrankoski, A. Savvides, TASC: topology adaptive spatial clustering for sensor networks, in in IEEE International Conference on Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems MASS 2005, 2005, pp. 605–614Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    J. Wang, H. Abid, S. Lee, L. Shu, F. Xia, A secured health care application architecture for cyber-physical systems. Control Eng. Appl. Inform. 13(3), 101–108 (2011)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    D. Work, A. Bayen, Q. Jacobson, Automotive cyber physical systems in the context of human mobility. in Proceedings of the National Workshop on High-Confidence Automotive Cyber-Physical Systems Troy, MI, USA, 2008Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    F. Xia, A.V. Vinel, R. Gao, L. Wang, T. Qiu, Evaluating IEEE 802.15.4 for cyber-physical systems. EURASIP J. Wireless Comm. Networking, 2011Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Y. Yao, J. Gehrke, The cougar approach to in-network query processing in sensor networks. SIGMOD Rec. 31(3), 9–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    O. Younis, S. Fahmy, HEED: a hybrid, energy-efficient, distributed clustering approach for ad hoc sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 3, 366–379 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    L. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    N.M. Zarmehri, A. Aguiar, Supporting sensing application in vehicular networks. in ACM MobiCom Workshop on Challenged Networks, 2012Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Khalid Nawaz
    • 1
  • Ilia Petrov
    • 1
  • Alejandro P. Buchmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceTU DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations