Wireless Sensor Networks

Living reference work entry
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Versatile and effective, Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) witness a continuous expansion of their application domains. Yet, their use is still hindered by issues such as reliability, lifetime, overall cost, design effort and multidisciplinary engineering knowledge, which often prove to be daunting for application domain experts. Several WSN design models, tools and techniques were proposed to solve these contrasting objectives, but no single comprehensive approach has emerged. With these criteria in mind we review several of the most representative ones, then we focus on two of the most effective hardware/software codesign flows. Both offer high-level design entry interfaces based on StateCharts. One allows manual module composition in a full application, and automates its mapping on a user-defined architecture for fast high-level design space exploration. The other flow automates module composition starting from the application specification and by reusing library modules. It can generate the hardware specification and the software to program and configure the WSN nodes. For these we show the typical use for the development of some representative applications, to evaluate their effectiveness.

Keywords

Sensor Node Wireless Sensor Network Controller Area Network Design Space Exploration General Packet Radio Service 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Abrach H, Bhatti S, Carlson J, Dai H, Rose J, Sheth A, Shucker B, Deng J, Han R (2003) MANTIS: system support for multimodAl NeTworks of In-situ Sensors. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on wireless sensor networks and applications, WSNA ’03. ACM, New York, pp 50–59. DOI 10.1145/941350.941358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antonopoulos C, Asimogloy K, Chiti S, D’Onofrio L, Gianfranceschi S, He D, Iodice A, Koubias S, Koulamas C, Lavagno L, Lazarescu MT, Mujica G, Papadopoulos G, Portilla J, Redondo L, Riccio D, Riesgo T, Rodriguez D, Ruello G, Samoladas V, Stoyanova T, Touliatos G, Valvo A, Vlahoy G (2016) Integrated toolset for WSN application planning, development, commissioning and maintenance: the WSN-DPCM ARTEMIS-JU project. Sensors 16(6):804. DOI 10.3390/ s16060804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashton K (2009) That ‘Internet of Things’ thing. Expert view RFID J http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/view/4986
  4. 4.
    Cao Q, Abdelzaher T, Stankovic J, He T (2008) The LiteOS operating system: towards Unix-like abstractions for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on information processing in sensor networks, IPSN ’08. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 233–244. DOI 10.1109/IPSN.2008.54Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cha H, Choi S, Jung I, Kim H, Shin H, Yoo J, Yoon C (2007) RETOS: resilient, expandable, and threaded operating system for wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on information processing in sensor networks, IPSN ’07. ACM, New York, pp 148–157. DOI 10.1145/1236360.1236381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Compton M, Henson C, Lefort L, Neuhaus H, Sheth A (2009) A survey of the semantic specification of sensors. In: 2nd international semantic sensor networks workshopGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Costa P, Mottola L, Murphy AL, Picco GP (2007) Programming wireless sensor networks with the TeenyLime middleware. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IFIP/USENIX 2007 international conference on middleware, middleware ’07. Springer, New York, pp 429–449.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doddapaneni K, Ever E, Gemikonakli O, Malavolta I, Mostarda L, Muccini H (2012) A model-driven engineering framework for architecting and analysing wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the third international workshop on software engineering for sensor network applications, SESENA ’12. IEEE Press, Piscataway, pp 1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dong W, Chen C, Liu X, Bu J (2010) Providing OS support for wireless sensor networks: challenges and approaches. Commun Surv Tuts 12(4):519–530. DOI 10.1109/SURV.2010.032610.00045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dunkels A, Gronvall B, Voigt T (2004) Contiki – a lightweight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors. In: Proceedings of the 29th annual IEEE international conference on local computer networks, LCN ’04. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 455–462. DOI 10.1109/LCN.2004.38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eswaran A, Rowe A, Rajkumar R (2005) Nano-RK: an energy-aware resource-centric RTOS for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE international real-time systems symposium, RTSS ’05. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 256–265. DOI 10.1109/RTSS. 2005.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gámez N, Cubo J, Fuentes L, Pimentel E (2012) Configuring a context-aware middleware for wireless sensor networks. Sensors 12(7):8544–8570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gay D, Levis P, von Behren R, Welsh M, Brewer E, Culler D (2003) The nesC language: a holistic approach to networked embedded systems. SIGPLAN Not 38(5):1–11. DOI 10.1145/780822.781133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greenstein B, Kohler E, Estrin D (2004) A sensor network application construction kit (SNACK). In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on embedded networked sensor systems, SenSys ’04. ACM, New York, pp 69–80. DOI 10.1145/1031495.1031505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gummadi R, Gnawali O, Govindan R (2005) Macro-programming wireless sensor networks using Kairos. In: Proceedings of the first IEEE international conference on distributed computing in sensor systems, DCOSS’05. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 126–140. DOI 10.1007/ 11502593∖_12Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Han CC, Kumar R, Shea R, Kohler E, Srivastava M (2005) A dynamic operating system for sensor nodes. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on mobile systems, applications, and services, MobiSys ’05. ACM, New York, pp 163–176. DOI 10.1145/1067170. 1067188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hill J, Szewczyk R, Woo A, Hollar S, Culler D, Pister K (2000) System architecture directions for networked sensors. SIGARCH Comput Archit News 28(5):93–104. DOI 10.1145/378995.379006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lazarescu MT (2013) Design of a WSN platform for long-term environmental monitoring for IoT applications. IEEE J Emerg Sel Top Circuits Syst 3(1):45–54. DOI 10.1109/JETCAS.2013.2243032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Madden SR, Franklin MJ, Hellerstein JM, Hong W (2005) TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks. ACM Trans Database Syst 30(1):122–173. DOI 10.1145/1061318.1061322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mathworks (2013) Generate C and C++ code from simulink and stateflow models. The MathWorks. https://it.mathworks.com/products/simulink-coder/
  21. 21.
    MATLAB and Simulink Release 2010a (2010) The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    MATLAB and Stateflow Release 2010a (2010) The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mohamed N, Al-Jaroodi J (2011) A survey on service-oriented middleware for wireless sensor networks. Serv Oriented Comput Appl 5(2):71–85. DOI 10.1007/s11761-011-0083-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mottola L, Picco GP (2011) Programming wireless sensor networks: fundamental concepts and state of the art. ACM Comput Surv 43(3):19:1–19:51. DOI 10.1145/1922649.1922656Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mottola L, Picco GP (2012) Middleware for wireless sensor networks: an outlook. J Internet Serv Appl 3(1):31–39. DOI 10.1007/ s13174-011-0046-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mülder A, Nyßen A (2011) TMF meets GMF. Eclipse Mag 3:74–78. https://svn.codespot.com/a/eclipselabs.org/yakindu/media/slides/TMF_meets_GMF_FINAL.pdf
  27. 27.
    OMG, XML (2007) Metadata Interchange (XMI) Specification. http://www.omg.org/spec/XMI/2.1.1/PDF/index.htm. (Accessed 4 June 2016)
  28. 28.
    Palermo G, Silvano C, Valsecchi S, Zaccaria V (2003) A system-level methodology for fast multi-objective design space exploration. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM great lakes symposium on VLSI, GLSVLSI ’03. ACM, New York, pp 92–95. DOI 10.1145/764808.764833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Paulon A, Fröhlich A, Becker L, Basso F (2013) Model-driven development of WSN applications. In: 2013 III Brazilian symposium on computing systems engineering (SBESC), pp 161–166. DOI 10.1109/ SBESC.2013.27Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ray A (2009) Planning and analysis tool for large scale deployment of wireless sensor network. Int J Next-Gener Netw (IJNGN) 1(1):29–36Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Romer K, Mattern F (2004) The design space of wireless sensor networks. IEEE Wirel Commun 11(6):54–61. DOI 10.1109/MWC.2004.1368897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shimizu R, Tei K, Fukazawa Y, Honiden S (2011) Model driven development for rapid prototyping and optimization of wireless sensor network applications. In: Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on software engineering for sensor network applications, SESENA ’11. ACM, New York, pp 31–36. DOI 10.1145/1988051.1988058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sirio G (2013) ChibiOS/RT. http://www.chibios.org/ (Accessed 4 June 2016)
  34. 34.
    Sugihara R, Gupta RK (2008) Programming models for sensor networks: a survey. ACM Trans Sen Netw 4(2):8:1–8:29. DOI 10.1145/1340771. 1340774Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Taherkordi A, Loiret F, Abdolrazaghi A, Rouvoy R, Le-Trung Q, Eliassen F (2010) Programming sensor networks using REMORA component model. In: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE international conference on distributed computing in sensor systems, DCOSS’10. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 45–62. DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-13651-1∖_4Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Varga A, Hornig R (2008) An overview of the OMNeT++ simulation environment. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on simulation tools and techniques for communications, networks and systems & workshops, Simutools ’08. ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering), ICST, Brussels, pp 60:1–60:10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Politecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations