Distributed Field Estimation with One–bit Sensors

  • Ye Wang
  • Nan Ma
  • Manqi Zhao
  • Prakash Ishwar
  • Venkatesh Saligrama

We study the problem of reconstructing a temporal sequence of unknown spatial data fields in a bounded geographical region of interest at a data fusion center from finite bit-rate messages generated by a dense noncooperative network of noisy low-resolution sensors (at known locations) that are statistically identical (exchangeable) with respect to the sensing operation. The interchangeability assumption reflects the property of an unsorted collection of inexpensive mass-produced sensors that behave in a statistically identical fashion. We view each data field as an unknown deterministic function over the geographical space of interest and make only the minimal assumption that they have a known bounded maximum dynamic range. The sensor observations are corrupted by bounded, zero-mean additive noise which is independent across sensors with arbitrary dependencies across field snapshots and has an arbitrary but unknown distribution but a known maximum dynamic range. The sensors are equipped with binary analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) (comparators) with random thresholds that are independent across sensors with arbitrary dependencies across snapshots and are uniformly distributed over a known dynamic range. These modeling assumptions partially account for certain real-world scenarios that include (i) the unavailability of good initial statistical models for data fields in yet to be well studied natural phenomena, (ii) unknown additive sensing/observation noise sources, (iii) additive model perturbation errors, (iv) substantial variation of preset comparator thresholds accompanying the mass-manufacture of low-precision sensors, (v) significant temperature fluctuations across snapshots affecting hardware characteristics, and (vi) the use of intentional dither signals for randomized scalar quantization.


Sensor Network Fusion Center Reconstruction Scheme Noisy Observation Sensor Observation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    J. Chou, D. Petrovic, and K. Ramchandran, “Tracking and exploiting correlations in dense sensor networks,” in Proc. Annual Asilomar Con-ference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2002.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. M. Kahn, R. H. Katz, and K. S. J. Pister, “Next century challenges: Mobile networking for “Smart Dust”,” in Proc. ACM International Con-ference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MOBICOM), Seattle, WA, Aug. 1999, pp. 271-278. [Online]. Available: { com/kahn99next.html}Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory, 1st ed. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience, 1991.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Gastpar and M. Vetterli, “Source-channel communication in sensor networks,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2634, pp. 162-177, Apr. 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Gastpar, B. Rimoldi, and M. Vetterli, “To Code, or not to code: Lossy source-channel communication revisited,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-49, pp. 1147-1158, May 2003.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    R. Nowak, U. Mitra, and R. Willet, “Estimating inhomogenous fields using wireless sensor networks,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 999-1006, Aug. 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    K. Liu, H. El-Gamal, and A. Sayeed, “On optimal parametric field esti-mation in sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE/SP 13th Workshop on Sta-tistical Signal Processing, Jul. 2005, pp. 1170-1175.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    W. Bajwa, A. Sayeed, and R. Nowak, “Matched source-channel commu-nication for field estimation in wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. Fourth Inttl. Symposium Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Apr. 2005, pp. 332-339.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    N. Liu and S. Ulukus, “Optimal distortion-power tradeoffs in Gaussian sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Informa-tion Theory, Seattle, WA, USA, Jul. 2006, pp. 1534-1538.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Q. Zhao, A. Swami, and L. Tong, “The interplay between signal process-ing and networking in sensor networks,” IEEE Signal Processing Maga-zine, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 84-93, Jul. 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    E. Masry and S. Cambanis, “Consistent estimation of continuous- time signals from nonlinear transformations of noisy samples,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-27, pp. 84-96, Jan. 1981.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    E. Masry, “The reconstruction of analog signals from the sign of their noisy samples,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-27, no. 6, pp. 735-745, Nov. 1981.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Z. Q. Luo, “Universal decentralized estimation in a bandwidth con- strained sensor network,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-51, pp. 2210-2219, Jun. 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    T. Berger, Z. Zhang, and H. Viswanathan, “The CEO problem [mul- titerminal source coding],” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-42, pp. 887-902, May. 1996.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    H. Viswanathan and T. Berger, “The quadratic Gaussian CEO problem,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, vol. IT-43, pp. 1549-1559, Sep. 1997.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    V. Prabhakaran, D. Tse, and K. Ramchandran, “Rate-region of the quadratic Gaussian CEO problem,” in Proc. IEEE International Sym-posium on Information Theory, Chicago, IL, Jun. 2004, p. 119.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Kashyap, L. A. Lastras-Montano, C. Xia, and Z. Liu, “Distributed source coding in dense sensor networks,” in Proc. Data Compression Con-ference, Snowbird, UT, Mar. 2005, pp. 13-22.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    D. L. Neuhoff and S. S. Pradhan, “An upper bound to the rate of ideal distributed lossy source coding of densely sampled data,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Toulouse, France, May 2006, pp. 1137-1140.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    D. Marco, E. J. Duarte-Melo, M. Liu, and D. Neuhoff, “On the many-to- one transport capacity of a dense wireless sensor network and the com-pressibility of its data,” in Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop, Palo Alto, CA, USA, April 22-23, 2003, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science edited by L. J. Guibas and F. Zhao, Springer, New York, 2003, Apr., pp. 1-16.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    P. Ishwar, A. Kumar, and K. Ramchandran, “Distributed sampling for dense sensor networks: A “bit-conservation” principle,” in Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop, Palo Alto, CA, USA, April 22-23, 2003, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science edited by L. J. Guibas and F. Zhao, Springer, New York, 2003, pp. 17-31.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    A. Kumar, P. Ishwar, and K. Ramchandran, “On distributed sampling of smooth non-bandlimited fields,” in Proc. Third Inttl. Symposium In- formation Processing in Sensor Networks. New York, NY: ACM Press, 2004, pp. 89-98.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    C. D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw, Principles of Real Analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1990.MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    S. M. Kay, Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing, Volume I: Es-timation Theory, 1st ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1993, vol. 1.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    R. Durret, Probability: Theory and Examples. Thomson Learning Col-lege, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ye Wang
    • 1
  • Nan Ma
    • 1
  • Manqi Zhao
    • 1
  • Prakash Ishwar
    • 1
  • Venkatesh Saligrama
    • 1
  1. 1.Boston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations