Hybridization of Branch and Bound Algorithm with Metaheuristics for Designing Reliable Wireless Multimedia Sensor Network

  • Omer OzkanEmail author
  • Murat Ermis
  • Ilker Bekmezci
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 62)


Reliability is a key topic for Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks (WMSNs) design which involves connectivity and coverage issues with node placement. The main contribution of this chapter is to deploy sensor nodes to maximize the WMSN reliability under a given budget constraint by considering terrain and device specifications. The reliable WMSN design with deployment, connectivity and coverage has NP-hard complexity, therefore a new hybridization of an exact algorithm with metaheuristics is proposed. A Branch&Bound (B&B) approach is embedded into Hybrid Simulated Annealing (HSA) and Hybrid Genetic Algorithm (HGA) to orient the cameras exactly. Since the complexity of the network reliability problem is NP-complete, a Monte Carlo (MC) simulation is used to estimate the network reliability . Experimental study is done on synthetically generated terrains with different scenarios. The results show that HGA outperforms the other approaches especially in large-sized sets.


Wireless multimedia sensor network Network reliability Reliable network design Hybrid metaheuristics Branch and bound Simulated annealing Genetic algorithm 


  1. 1.
    I.F. Akyildiz, T. Melodia, K.R. Chowdhury, A survey on wireless multimedia sensor networks. Comput. Netw. 51(4), 921–960 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A.L. Bajuelos, S. Canales, G. Hernández, A.M. Martins, Optimizing the minimum vertex guard set on simple polygons via a genetic algorithm. WSEAS Trans. Inf. Sci. Appl. 5(11), 1584–1596 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M.O. Ball, Complexity of network reliability computations. Networks 10(2), 153–165 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W.W. Bein, D. Bein, S. Malladi, Reliability and fault tolerance of coverage models for sensor networks. Int. J. Sensor Netw. 5(4), 199–209 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Efrat, S. Har-Peled, Guarding galleries and terrains. Inf. Process. Lett. 100(6), 238–245 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    X. Han, X. Cao, E.L. Lloyd, C.C. Shen, Deploying directional sensor networks with guaranteed connectivity and coverage, in 5th Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON’08), 2008, pp. 153–160Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Marengoni, B. Draper, A. Hanson, R. Sitaraman, A system to place observers on a polyhedral terrain in polynomial time. Image Vis. Comput. 18(10), 773–780 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Shrestha, L. Xing, H. Liu, Infrastructure communication reliability of wireless sensor networks, in 2nd International Symposium on Dependable Autonomic and Secure Computing (DASC 2006), 2006, pp. 250–257Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Shrestha, L. Xing, H. Liu, Modeling and evaluating the reliability of wireless sensor networks, in Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS’07), 2007, pp. 186–191Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Topcuoglu, M. Ermis, I. Bekmezci, M. Sifyan, A new three-dimensional wireless multimedia sensor network simulation environment for connected coverage problems. Simulation 88(1), 110–122 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Zhao, S.-C. Cheung, T. Nguyen, Optimal camera network configurations for visual tagging. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Sign. Process. 2(4), 464–479 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Industrial Engineering DepartmentTurkish Air Force AcademyIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Computer Engineering DepartmentTurkish Air Force AcademyIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations