Topology-Aware Low-Cost Video Streaming for Video Data Over Heterogeneous Network

  • Garv Modwel
  • Anu Mehra
  • Nitin Rakesh
  • K. K. Mishra
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1097)


The wireless security surveillance system is one of the widely implemented applications of the Internet of things technology. These systems, enabled with security cameras, are connected to the Internet and provide complete security access to critical infrastructure. Recently, the usage of unmanned aerial vehicles for surveillance, especially in defense setups and areas beyond physical reach, is on the rise. These systems feed the base station with continuous video stream content and therefore need strong network support for meeting the set performance requirements. It can be achieved by offering better network streaming capabilities to the base station. In this paper, we address the problem of streaming over a network of UAV systems that are designed to handle video stream content by providing a cost-effective path to base station. Contrary to a lot of existing works in this direction, we do not rely on GPS information to select streaming routes. We use topology information and a graph-theoretic approach to select paths. The proposed streaming route selection mechanism is shown to be more stable, preserves the quality of video data, and is energy efficient compared to other related schemes.


Object detection Image processing Object comparison Image extraction elementary streaming 


  1. 1.
    Flushing, E.F., L.M. Gambardella, and G.A. Di Caro. 2016. On using mobile robotic relays for adaptive communication in search and rescue missions. In 2016 IEEE international symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), October 2016, 370–377.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oubbati, Omar Sami, Abderrahmane Lakas, Fen Zhou, Mesut Güneş, and Mohamed Bachir Yagoubi. 2017. A survey on position-based streaming protocols for Flying Ad hoc Networks (FANETs), Vehicular Communications 10: 29–56.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alshbatat, Abdel Ilah, and Liang Dong. 2010. Adaptive MAC protocol for UAV communication networks using directional antennas. In 2010 International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC). IEEE.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Temel, S., and I. Bekmezci. 2013. On the performance of Flying Ad Hoc Networks (FANETs) utilizing near space high altitude platforms (HAPs). In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Recent Advances in Space Technologies (RAST’ 13), vol. 10, 461–465.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Costa, R., D. Rosario, E. Cerqueira, and A. Santos. 2014. Enhanced connectivity for robust videostream transmission in UAV networks. In 2014 IFIP Wireless Days (WD), 1–6.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pimentel, Larissa, Denis Rosario, Marcos Seruffo, Zhongliang Zhao, and Torsten Braun. 2015. Adaptive beaconless opportunistic streaming for multimedia distribution. In 13th international conference on Wired/Wireless Internet Communication (WWIC), May 2015, Malaga, Spain.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhao, W., W. Xin, X. Zheng, and T. Hara. 2018. Comparison study on UAV movement for adapting to videostream burst in post-disaster networks. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP), 339–343.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raushan, A., and R. Matam. 2018. Fast localization and topology discovery scheme to handle topology changes in industrial IoT networks. In 2018 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI), September 2018, 179–184, Bangalore, India.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zaouche, Lotfi, Natalizio Enrico, and Bouabdallah Abdelmadjid. 2015. ETTAF: Efficient target tracking and filming with a flying ad hoc network. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on experiences with the design and implementation of smart objects, 49–54, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ho, D., and H. Song 2013. networking cost effective video streaming system over heterogeneous wireless networks. In 2013 IEEE 24th annual international symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC), London, 3589–3593.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Broyles, Dan, Abdul Jabbar, and James P.G. Sterbenz. 2010. Design and analysis of a 3-D gauss-markov mobility model for highly dynamic airborne networks.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karp, Brad, and H.T. Kung. 2000. GPSR: Greedy perimeter stateless streaming for wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 6th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking, 243–254, Boston, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Garv Modwel
    • 1
  • Anu Mehra
    • 1
  • Nitin Rakesh
    • 2
  • K. K. Mishra
    • 3
  1. 1.Amity UniversityNoidaIndia
  2. 2.Sharda UniversityGreater NoidaIndia
  3. 3.MNNITPrayagrajIndia

Personalised recommendations