Advertisement

Wireless Networks

, Volume 25, Issue 8, pp 4479–4491 | Cite as

KEIP: a distributed k-connectivity estimation algorithm based on independent paths for wireless sensor networks

  • Orhan Dagdeviren
  • Vahid Khalilpour AkramEmail author
Article
  • 98 Downloads

Abstract

Maintaining the connectivity between all nodes is a challenging task in wireless sensor networks (WSNs) because failure of some nodes may divide the network to disconnected parts. A network is k-connected if we need to remove at least k nodes to disconnect it. There are at least k disjoint paths between each pair of nodes in a k-connected network which preserves the connectivity of the network after removing k-1 arbitrary nodes. Therefore, with high k values the network may tolerate more failures without losing its connectivity. Finding the k value of a given network can provide useful information about the robustness of the connectivity. The existing distributed k-connectivity estimation (detection) algorithms use local neighborhood information to find an approximated value for k. In this paper, we propose a new energy efficient distributed algorithm which finds the k value of the given WSN with more accuracy by detecting the minimum number of disjoint paths between the sink and all other nodes. We extend the definition of disjoint paths to independent paths, which are the disjoint paths with shared nodes, and use this concept to find the k value. The comprehensive simulation and testbed results show that the proposed algorithm is faster and has at least 20% higher correct detection ratio, lower mean square error ratio and also lower energy consumption than the existing algorithms.

Keywords

k-connectivity Wireless sensor networks Fault tolerance Reliability Distributed algorithms 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the TUBITAK (Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey) [Project Number 113E470].

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I. F., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., & Cayirci, E. (2002). A survey on sensor networks. IEEE Communications Magazine, 40(8), 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Memon, I., & Arain, Q. A. (2017). Dynamic path privacy protection framework for continuous query service over road networks. World Wide Web, 20(4), 639–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arain, Q. A., Uqaili, M. A., Deng, Z., Memon, I., Jiao, J., Shaikh, M. A., et al. (2017). Clustering based energy efficient and communication protocol for multiple mix-zones over road networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 95(2), 411–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Memon, I., Chen, L., Arain, Q.A., Memon, H., & Chen, G. (2018). Pseudonym changing strategy with multiple mix zones for trajectory privacy protection in road networks. International Journal of Communication Systems, 31(1).  https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.3437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ahmed, H. I., Wei, P., Memon, I., Du, Y., & Xie, W. (2013). Estimation of time difference of arrival (TDoA) for the source radiates BPSK signal. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 10(3), 164–171.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Akhtar, R., Leng, S., Memon, I., Ali, M., & Zhang, L. (2015). Architecture of hybrid mobile social networks for efficient content delivery. Wireless Personal Communications, 80(1), 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gustav, Y.H., Wang, Y., Domenic, M.K., Zhang, F., & Memon, I. (2013). Velocity similarity anonymization for continuous query location based services. In IEEE international conference on computational problem-solving (ICCP), 2013 (pp. 433–436).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arain, Q. A., Memon, H., Memon, I., Memon, M. H., Shaikh, R. A., & Mangi, F. A. (2017). Intelligent travel information platform based on location base services to predict user travel behavior from user-generated GPS traces. International Journal of Computers and Applications, 39(3), 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, S., Mao, X., Tang, S. J., Li, X., Zhao, J., & Dai, G. (2011). On movement-assisted connectivity restoration in wireless sensor and actor networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 22(4), 687–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yilmaz, O., Dagdeviren, O., & Erciyes, K. (2014). Localization-free and energy-efficient hole bypassing techniques for fault-tolerant sensor networks. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 40, 164–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moghadam, M. N., Taheri, H., & Karrari, M. (2014). Minimum cost load balanced multipath routing protocol for low power and lossy networks. Wireless networks, 20(8), 2469–2479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cornejo, A., & Lynch, N. (2010). Fault-tolerance through k-connectivity. In Workshop on network science and systems issues in multi-robot autonomy: ICRA (vol. 2).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Atay, N. & Bayazit, B. (2009). Mobile wireless sensor network connectivity repair with k-redundancy. Algorithmic Foundation of Robotics VIII (pp. 35–4).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Even, S., & Tarjan, R. E. (1975). Network flow and testing graph connectivity. SIAM Journal on Computing, 4(4), 507–518.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henzinger, M. R., Rao, S., & Gabow, H. N. (2000). Computing vertex connectivity: New bounds from old techniques. Journal of Algorithms, 34(2), 222–250.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jorgic, M., Goel, N., Kalaichevan, K., Nayak, A., & Stojmenovic, I. (2007). Localized detection of k-connectivity in wireless ad hoc, actuator and sensor networks. In IEEE international conference on computer communications and networks, ICCCN, (pp. 3–33).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Szczytowski, P., Khelil, A. & Suri, N. (2012). DKM: Distributed k-connectivity maintenance in wireless sensor networks. In IEEE annual conference on wireless on-demand network systems and services (WONS) (pp. 83–90).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Censor-Hillel, K., Ghaffari, M., & Kuhn, F. (2014). Distributed connectivity decomposition. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing (pp. 156–165). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gupta, B. & Gupta, A. (2013). On the k-connectivity of ad-hoc wireless networks. In IEEE 7th international symposium on service oriented system engineering (SOSE) (pp. 546–550).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nutov, Z. (2010). Approximating minimum-power k-connectivity. Ad Hoc & Sensor Wireless Networks, 9(1–2), 129–137.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li, N. & Hou, J. C. (2004) FLSS: A fault-tolerant topology control algorithm for wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking (pp. 275–286).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zeng, H., Zhang, J., & Dai, G. (2013). Construction of low weighted and fault-tolerant topology for wireless ad hoc and sensor network. International Journal of Sensor Networks, 14(4), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jia, X., Kim, D., Makki, S., Wan, P. J., & Yi, C. W. (2005). Power assignment for k-connectivity in wireless ad hoc networks. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 9(2), 213–222.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Guo, W., Xiong, N., Vasilakos, A. V., Chen, G., & Yu, C. (2012). Distributed k-connected fault-tolerant topology control algorithms with PSO in future autonomic sensor systems. International Journal of Sensor Networks, 12(1), 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ma, H., & Liu, Y. (2007). Some problems of directional sensor networks. International Journal of Sensor Networks, 2(1–2), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bagci, H., Korpeoglu, I., & Yazici, A. (2015). A distributed fault-tolerant topology control algorithm for heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 26(4), 914–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Saha, I., Sambasivan, L. K., Ghosh, S. K., & Patro, R. K. (2010). Distributed fault-tolerant topology control in wireless multi-hop networks. Wireless Networks, 16(6), 1511–1524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ahn, N., & Park, S. (2015). An optimization algorithm for the minimum k-connected m-dominating set problem in wireless sensor networks. Wireless Networks, 21(3), 783–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sharma, K. P., & Sharma, T. P. (2016). ZBFR: Zone based failure recovery in WSNs by utilizing mobility and coverage overlapping. Wireless Networks, 23, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang, L., Wang, X., & Dou, W. (2004). Design and analysis of a k-connected topology control algorithm for ad hoc networks. In International symposium on parallel and distributed processing and applications (pp. 178–187). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Younis, M., Senturk, I. F., Akkaya, K., Lee, S., & Senel, F. (2014). Topology management techniques for tolerating node failures in wireless sensor networks: A survey. Computer Networks, 58, 254–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Almasaeid, H.M. & Kamal, A.E. (2009). On the minimum k-connectivity repair in wireless sensor networks. IEEE international conference on communications (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yun, Z., Bai, X., Xuan, D., Lai, T. H., & Jia, W. (2010). Optimal deployment patterns for full coverage and k-connectivity (\(\text{ k }\le 6\)) wireless sensor networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), 18(3), 934–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Georgiou, O., Dettmann, C. P., & Coon, J. P. (2013). k-connectivity for confined random networks. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 103(2), 28006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Meghanathan, N., & Gorla, S. (2010). On the probability of k-connectivity in wireless ad hoc networks under different mobility models. International Journal on Applications of Graph Theory in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks and Sensor Networks, 2(3).  https://doi.org/10.5121/jgraphoc.2010.2301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pishro-Nik, H., Chan, K., & Fekri, F. (2009). Connectivity properties of large-scale sensor networks. Wireless Networks, 15(7), 945–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhao, J., Yagan, O., & Gligor, V. (2015). Exact analysis of k-connectivity in secure sensor networks with unreliable links. In 13th IEEE international symposium on modeling and optimization in mobile, ad hoc, and wireless networks (WiOpt), 2015.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Verma, V. K., Singh, S., & Pathak, N. P. (2014). Comprehensive event based estimation of sensor node distribution strategies using classical flooding routing protocol in wireless sensor networks. Wireless Networks, 20(8), 2349–2357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Erdos, P., Pach, J., Pollack, R., & Tuza, Z. (1989). Radius, diameter, and minimum degree. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 47(1), 73–79.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
  41. 41.
    Levis, P., Madden, S., Polastre, J., Szewczyk, R., Whitehouse, K., Woo, A., & Culler, D. (2005). Tinyos: An operating system for sensor networks. In W. Weber, J. M. Rabaey, & E. Aarts (Eds.), Ambient intelligence (pp. 115–148). Springer.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Levis, P., Lee, N., Welsh, M. & Culler, D. (2003). TOSSIM: Accurate and scalable simulation of entire TinyOS applications. In International conference on embedded networked sensor systems (pp. 126–137), ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Computer InstituteEge UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations