Advertisement

Adaptive Distributed Resource Allocation for Sensor Networks

  • Hock Beng Lim
  • Di Ma
  • Cheng Fu
  • Bang Wang
  • Meng Joo Er
Chapter
Part of the Computer Communications and Networks book series (CCN)

Abstract

A major research challenge in the field of sensor networks is the distributed resource allocation problem, which concerns how the limited resources in a sensor network should be allocated or scheduled to minimize costs and maximize the network capability. We survey the existing work on the distributed resource allocation problem. To address the drawbacks in the existing work, we propose the adaptive distributed resource allocation (ADRA) scheme, which specifies relatively simple local actions to be performed by individual sensor nodes in a sensor network for mode management. Each node adapts its operation over time in response to the status and feedback of its neighboring nodes. Desirable global behavior results from the local interactions between nodes.

We study the effectiveness of the general ADRA scheme for a realistic application scenario, namely, the sensor mode management for an acoustic wireless sensor network (WSN) to track vehicle movement. An enhanced version of ADRA, ADRA with node density compensator, is also proposed to improve the performance of the algorithm for randomly distributed sensor fields. We evaluated these algorithms via simulations and also prototyped the acoustic WSN scenario using the Crossbow MICA2 motes. Our simulation and hardware implementation results indicate that the ADRA scheme and its enhanced variant provide good trade-off between performance objectives such as coverage area, power consumption, and network lifetime.

Keywords

Sensor Network Sensor Node Wireless Sensor Network Network Lifetime Constraint Satisfaction Problem 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Akyildiz I, Su W, Sankarasubramaniam Y, Cayirci E (2002). Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Computer Networks 38(4):393–422.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali S, Kim J, Siegel H, Maciejewski A, Yu Y, Gundala S, Gertphol S, Prasanna V (2002) Greedy heuristics for resource allocation in dynamic distributed real-time heterogeneous computing systems. Proc. of the 2002 Intl. Conf. on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications (PDPTA 02), Las Vegas, NV, 519–530.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Armstrong R, Hensgen D, Kidd T (1998). The relative performance of various mapping algorithms is independent of sizable variances in run-time predictions. Proc. of the Seventh IEEE Heterogeneous Computing Workshop, 79–87.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bejar R, Krishnamachari B, Gomes C, Selman B (2001). Distributed constraint satisfaction in a wireless sensor tracking system. Proc. of Workshop on Distributed Constraint Reasoning, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun TD, Siegel HJ, Beck N, Boloni LL, Maheswaran M, Reuther AI, Robertson JP, Theys MD, Yao B, Hensgen D, Freund RF (2001). A comparison of eleven static heuristics for mapping a class of independent tasks onto heterogeneous distributed computing systems. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 6:810–837.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davis R, Smith R (1983). Negotiation as a metaphor for distributed problem solving. Artificial Intelligence 20(1):63–109.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davis R, Smith R (2003). Negotiation as a metaphor for distributed problem solving. Communication in Multiagent Systems: Agent Communication Languages and Conversation Policies 20:63–109.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Durfee E (2001). Distributed problem solving and planning. The Ninth ECCAI Advanced Course on Multi-Agent Systems and Applications, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Estrin D, Govindan R, Heidemann J, Kumar S (1999). Next century challenges: scalable coordination in sensor networks. Proc of the Fifth ACM/IEEE Intl. Conf. on Mobile Computing and Networking 263–270.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Estrin D, Culler D, Pister K, Sukhatme G (2002). Connecting the physical world with pervasive networks. IEEE Pervasive Computing 1(1):59–69.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fernandez-Baca D (1989). Allocating modules to processors in a distributed system. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 11:1427–1436.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frank M, Bugacov A, Chen J, Dakin G, Szekely P, Neches B (2001). The marbles manifesto: a definition and comparison of cooperative negotiation schemes for distributed resource allocation. Proc. of the AAAI Fall Symp. on Negotation Methods for Autonomous Cooperative Systems, North Falmouth, MA, 36–45.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gay D, et al. (2003). The nesC language: a holistic approach to networked embedded systems. Proc. of ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), San Diego, CA, 1–11.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill J, et al. (2000). System architecture directions for networked sensors. Proc. of the Ninth Intl. Conf. on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS), Cambridge, MA, 93–104.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huang G (2003). Casting the wireless sensor net. Technology Review 106(6):50–56.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huh E, Welch LR, Shirazi BA, Tjaden B, Cavanaugh CD (2000). Accommodating QoS prediction in an adaptive resource management framework. In Parallel and Distributed Processing. Rolim J, et al. (eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1800:792–799.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ibarra OH, Kim CE (1997). Heuristic algorithms for scheduling independent tasks on nonidentical processors. Journal of the ACM 2:280–289.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Islam KMJ, Shirazi BA, Welch LR, Tjaden BC, Cavanaugh C, Anwar S (2000). Network load monitoring in distributed systems. In Parallel and Distributed Processing. Rolim J, et al. (eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 800–807.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jung H, Tambe M, Kulkarni S (2001). Argumentation as distributed constraint satisfaction: applications and results. Proc. of the Fifth Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents 324–331.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Krishnamachari B, Bejar R, Wicker S (2002). Distributed problem solving and the boundaries of self-configuration in multi-hop wireless networks. Proc. of the 35th Intl. Conf. on System Sciences 3856–3865.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mackworth A (1994). The logic of constraint satisfaction. Constraint-Based Reasoning 58: 3–20.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maheswaran M, Ali S, Siegel HJ, Hensgen D, Freund RF (1999). Dynamic mapping of a class of independent tasks onto heterogeneous computing systems. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 2:107–131.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mailler R, Lesser V, Horling B (2003). Cooperative negotiation for soft real-time distributed resource allocation. Proc. of the Second Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Melbourne, Australia 576–583.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mainland G, Kang L, Lahaie S, Parkes D, Welsh M (2004). Using virtual markets to program global behavior in sensor networks. Proc. of the 11th ACM SIGOPS European Workshop, Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Meisels A, Kaplansky E, Razgon I, Zivan R (2002). Comparing performance of distributed constraints processing algorithms. Proc. of AAMAS Workshop on Distributed Constraint Reasoning, Bolojna, Italy.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mica2 user’s manual. http://www.xbow.com/support/support_pdf_files/mts-mda_series_users_manual.pdf.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Modi P, Jung H, Shen WM, Tambe M, Kulkarni S (2001). A dynamic distributed constraint satisfaction approach to resource allocation. Proc. of the Seventh Intl. Conf. on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP 2001), Paphos, Cyprus, 685–700.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Modi P, Scerri P, Shen WM, Tambe M (2003). Distributed Resource Allocation: A Distributed Constraint Reasoning Approach. In Distributed Sensor Networks: A Multiagent Perspective. Kluwer Academic, New york.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nisan N (2000). Bidding and allocation in combinatorial auctions. Proc. of the Second ACM Conf. on Electronic Commerce, Minneapolis, MN 1–12.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ostwald J, Lesser V (2004). Combinatorial auctions for resource allocation in a distributed sensor network. Technical Report 04-72, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Repast 3.0 – Recursive Porous Agent Simulation Toolkit, http://repast.sourceforge.net.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Salido M, Barber F (2003). Distributed constraint satisfaction problems for resource allocation. Proc. of AAMAS Workshop on Decentralized Resource Allocation, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shehory O, Kraus S (1998). Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation. Artificial Intelligence 101(1–2):165–200.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stansfield RG (1947). Statistical theory of DF fixing. Journal of the IEE, Part IIIA 94(15): 762–770.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Welch LR, Shirazi BA, Ravindran B, Bruggeman C (1999). DeSiDeRaTa: QoS management technology for dynamic, scalable, dependable, real-time systems. In Distributed Computer Control Systems, De Paoli F, MacLeod IM(eds). Elsevier Science, Kidlington, UK, 7–12.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wellman M (1996). Market-oriented programming: some early lessons. In Market-Based Control: A Paradigm for Distributed Resource Allocation. World Scientific, River Edge, NJ.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yokoo M, Hirayama K (1997). Distributed breakout algorithm for solving distributed constraint satisfaction problems. Report of Research Institute for Marine Cargo Transportation 8:43–50.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yokoo M, Hirayama K (2000). Algorithms for distributed constraint satisfaction: a review. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 3(2):185–207.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yokoo M, Durfee E, Ishida T, Kuwabara K (1998). The distributed constraint satisfaction problem: formalization and algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 10(5):673–685.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hock Beng Lim
    • 1
  • Di Ma
  • Cheng Fu
  • Bang Wang
  • Meng Joo Er
  1. 1.Intelligent Systems CenterNanyang Technological University, Research Techno PlazaSingaporeRepublic of Singapore

Personalised recommendations