Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Congestion avoidance in cognitive wireless sensor networks using TOPSIS and response surface methodology

  • Published:
Telecommunication Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Congestion in wireless sensor networks degrades the quality of the channel and network throughput. This leads to packet loss and energy dissipation. To cope with this problem, a two-stage cognitive network congestion control approach is presented in this paper. In the first stage of the proposed strategy, initially downstream nodes calculate their buffer occupancy ratio and estimate congestion degree in the MAC layer. Then, they send the estimated value to both network and transport layers of their upstream nodes. The network layer of the upstream node uses TOPSIS in order to rank all neighbors to select the best one as the next relay node. In the second stage, transport layer of the given node adjusts the transmission rate using an optimized regression analysis by RSM. Extensive simulations demonstrated that the proposed method not only decreases packet loss, but also significantly improves throughput and energy efficiency under different traffic conditions, especially in heavy traffic areas. Also, Tukey test is used to compare performance of algorithms as well as to demonstrate that the proposed method is significantly better than other methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdul-Salaam, G., et al. (2016). A comparative analysis of energy conservation approaches in hybrid wireless sensor networks data collection protocols. Telecommunication Systems, 16.1, 159–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gholipour, M., & Meybodi, M. R. (2008). LA-mobicast: A learning automata based mobicast routing protocol for wireless sensor networks. Sensor Letters, 6(2), 305–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jingjing, W., et al. (2016). Aggressive congestion control mechanism for space systems. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 31.3, 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kaur, J., Grewal, R., & Saini, K. S. (2015). A survey on recent congestion control schemes in wireless sensor network. Advance computing conference (IACC), 2015 IEEE international. IEEE, 2015.

  5. Wan, C.-Y., Eisenman, S. B., & Campbell, A. T. (2003). CODA: congestion detection and avoidance in sensor networks. Proceedings of the 1st international conference on embedded networked sensor systems (pp. 266–279). ACM.

  6. Deshpande, V. S. et al. (2012). Control, congestion, in wireless sensor networks by using differed reporting rate. Information and communication technologies (WICT), World Congress on IEEE (pp. 209–213).

  7. Gholipour, M., Haghighat, A. T., & Meybodi, M. R. (2017). Hop-by-Hop congestion avoidance in wireless sensor networks based on genetic support vector machine. Neurocomputing, 223, 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yoo, H., et al. (2010). GLOBAL: A gradient-based routing protocol for load-balancing in large-scale wireless sensor networks with multiple sinks. Computers and communications (ISCC), 2010 symposium on IEEE (pp. 556–562). IEEE.

  9. Tan, D. D., Dinh, N. Q., & Kim, D.-S. (2013). GRATA: Gradient-based traffic-aware routing for wireless sensor networks. Wireless Sensor Systems, IET, 3.2, 104–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Majid, G., Haghighat, A. T., & Meybodi, M. R. (2015). Hop-by-hop traffic-aware routing to congestion control in wireless sensor networks. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2015(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pussente, R. M., & Barbosa, V. C. (2009). An algorithm for clock synchronization with the gradient property in sensor networks. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 69(3), 261–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Thomas, R. W., DaSilva, L, A., MacKenzie, Allen B. (2005). Cognitive networks. New frontiers in dynamic spectrum access networks. DySPAN 2005. 2005 First IEEE international symposium on IEEE (pp. 5–12).

  13. Mitola III, J. (2006). Cognitive radio architecture. Cooperation in wireless networks: Principles and applications (pp. 243–311). Dordrecht: Springer.

  14. Shankar, P. M. (2016). Performance of cognitive radio in N* Nakagami cascaded channels. Wireless Personal Communications, 88, 657–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Srivastava, V., & Motani, M. (2005). Cross-layer design: a survey and the road ahead. Communications Magazine, IEEE, 43(12), 112–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Clark, D. D., et al. (2003). A knowledge plane for the internet. In Proceedings of the 2003 conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications (pp. 3–10). ACM.

  17. Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kleijnen, J. P. C. (2015). Response surface methodology. Handbook of simulation optimization. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Georgiou, S. D., Stylianou, S., & Aggarwal, M. (2014). A class of composite designs for response surface methodology. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 71, 1124–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vibha, G., & Anuja, S. (2011). Identifying an appropriate requirements prioritization methodology using fuzzy decision-making. computer networks and intelligent computing. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Stat-Ease, Inc. Design Expert software, Educational Version 7.0. 3. (2007).

  22. Issariyakul, T., & Hossain, E. (2011). Introduction to network simulator NS2. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yazdi, E. T., Willig, A., & Pawlikowski, K. (2014). Frequency adaptation for interference mitigation in IEEE 802.15. 4-based mobile body sensor networks. Computer Communications, 53, 102–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Spector, L., & Helmuth, T. (2014). Uniform linear transformation with repair and alteration in genetic programming. Genetic Programming Theory and Practice XI. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tukey, J. W. (1949). Comparing individual means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics, 9, 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Engineering and Information Technology Department, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

    M. Gholipour & A. T. Haghighat

  2. Computer Engineering and Information Technology Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

    M. R. Meybodi

Authors
  1. M. Gholipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. T. Haghighat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. R. Meybodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Gholipour.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gholipour, M., Haghighat, A.T. & Meybodi, M.R. Congestion avoidance in cognitive wireless sensor networks using TOPSIS and response surface methodology. Telecommun Syst 67, 519–537 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-017-0356-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-017-0356-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation