skip to main content
research-article

Dynamic profiling and fuzzy-logic-based optimization of sensor network platforms

Published:24 December 2013Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The commercialization of sensor-based platforms is facilitating the realization of numerous sensor network applications with diverse application requirements. However, sensor network platforms are becoming increasingly complex to design and optimize due to the multitude of interdependent parameters that must be considered. To further complicate matters, application experts oftentimes are not trained engineers, but rather biologists, teachers, or agriculturists who wish to utilize the sensor-based platforms for various domain-specific tasks. To assist both platform developers and application experts, we present a centralized dynamic profiling and optimization platform for sensor-based systems that enables application experts to rapidly optimize a sensor network for a particular application without requiring extensive knowledge of, and experience with, the underlying physical hardware platform. In this article, we present an optimization framework that allows developers to characterize application requirements through high-level design metrics and fuzzy-logic-based optimization. We further analyze the benefits of utilizing dynamic profiling information to eliminate the guesswork of creating a “good” benchmark, present several reoptimization evaluation algorithms used to detect if re-optimization is necessary, and highlight the benefits of the proposed dynamic optimization framework compared to static optimization alternatives.

References

  1. Adlakha, S., Ganeriwal, S., Schurgers, C., and Srivastava, M. 2003. Density, accuracy, latency and lifetime tradeoffs in wireless sensor networks -- A multidimensional design perspective. Embed. Netw. Sensor Syst. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Al-Karaki, J. N. and Kamal, A. E. 2004. Routing techniques in wireless sensor networks: A survey. IEEE Wirel. Commun. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Alippi, C. and Vanini, G. 2006. Application-based routing optimization in static/semi-static wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 4th Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PERCOM). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bai, L., Dick, R., and Dinda, P. 2009. Archetype-based design: Sensor network programming for application experts, not just programming experts. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN). 85--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Changlei, L. and Guohong, C. 2011. Spatial-temporal coverage optimization in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chantrapornchai, C., Sha, E., and Hu, X. 2000. Efficient design exploration based on module utility selection. IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aid. Design Integr. Circuits Syst. 19, 1, 19--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Crossbow Technology, Inc. 2010. http://www.xbow.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Dam, T. V., Langendoen, K. 2003. An adaptive energy-efficient MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dutta, P. and Culler, D. 2005. System software techniques for low-power operation in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Felemban, E., Lee, C.-G., and Ekici, E. 2006. MMSPEED: Multipath Multi-SPEED protocol for QoS guarantee of reliability and timeliness in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Gabr, W. and Dorrah, H. 2009. Development of fuzzy logic-based arithmetic and visual representations for systems' modelling and optimization of interconnected networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Biometrics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Ganesan, D., Krishnamachari, B., Woo, A., Culler, D., Estrin, D., and Wicker, S. 2001. Large-scale network discovery: Design tradeoffs in wireless sensor systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Heinzelman, W., Chandrakasan, A., and Balakrishnan, H. 2000. Energy-efficient communication protocols for wireless microsensor networks. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Hill, J. and Culler, D. 2002. MICA: A wireless platform for deeply embedded networks. IEEE Micro 22, 6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hoffman, T. 2003. Smart dust. Mighty motes for medicine, manufacturing, the military and more. Computer World.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Holland, M. 2007. Optimizing physical layer parameters for wireless sensor networks. Master's Thesis, Dept. Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Kadayif, I. and Kandemir, M. 2004. Tuning in-sensor data filtering to reduce energy consumption in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Design Automation and Test in Europe (DATE). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kogekar, S., Neema, S., Eames, B., Koutsoukos, X., Ledeczi, A., and Maroti, M. 2004. Constraint-guided dynamic reconfiguration in sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Kogekar, S., Neema, S., and Koutsoukos, X. 2005. Dynamic software reconfiguration in sensor networks. Syst. Commun. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Kurtkoti, A. and Patel, B. 2008. Evaluation metrics of MAC layer in wireless sensor network. In Proceedings of the Ist International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology (ICETET). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Levis, P., Lee, N., Welsh, M., and Culler, D. 2003. TOSSIM: Accurate and scalable simulation of entire TinyOS applications. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Lopez-Vallejo, M. L., Grajal, J., and Lopez, J. C. 2000. Constraint-driven system partitioning. In Proceedings of the Design Automation and Test in Europe (DATE). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Liu, J., Felipe Perrone, L., Nicol, D., Liljenstam, M., Elliott, C., and Pearson, D. 2001. Simulation modeling of large-scale ad-hoc sensor networks. In Proceedings of the European Simulation Interoperability Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Mann, S. 1997. Wearable computing: A first step toward personal imaging. IEEE Computer 30, 2, 25--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Martin, T., Jones, M., Edmison, J., and Shenoy, R. 2003. Towards a design framework for wearable electronic textiles. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Wearable Computers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Mathelin, M., Perneel, C., and Acheroy, M. 1993. Bayesian estimation vs fuzzy logic for heuristic reasoning. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Munir, A., Gordon-Ross, A., Lysecky, S., and Lysecky, R. 2010a. A lightweight dynamic optimization methodology for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob). 129--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Munir, A., Gordon-Ross, A., Lysecky, S., and Lysecky, R. 2010b. A one-shot dynamic optimization methodology for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Mobile Ubiquitous Computing, Systems, Services (UBICOMM).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Oltean, G., Miron, S., and Gordan, M. 2000. A fuzzy optimization method for CMOS operational amplifier design. In Proceedings of the 5th Seminar on Neural Network Applications in Electrical Engineering.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Perrone, F. and Nicol, D. 2002. A scalable simulator for TinyOS applications. In Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Polley, J., Blazakis, D., Mcgee, J., Rusk, D., Baras, J., and Karir, M. 2004. ATEMU: A fine-grained sensor network simulator. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Sensor, Mesh and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Schurgers, C., Tsiatsis, V., Ganeriwal, S., and Srivastava, M. 2002. Optimizing sensor networks in the energy-latency-density design Space. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Sharagowitz, E., Lee, J., and Kang, E. 1998. Application of fuzzy logic in computer-aided VLSI design. IEEE Tran. Fuzzy Syst. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Shenoy, A., Hiner, J., Lysecky, S., Lysecky, R., and Gordon-Ross, A. 2010. Evaluation of dynamic profiling methodologies for optimization of sensor networks. IEEE Embed. Syst. Lett. 2, 1, 10--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Shih, E., Cho, S., Ickes, N., Min, R., Sinha, A., Wang, A., and Chandrakasan, A. 2001a. Physical layer driven protocol and algorithm design for energy-efficient wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Shih, E., Calhoun, B., Cho, S., and Chandrakasan, A. 2001b. Energy-efficient link-layer for wireless microsensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Annual Workshop on VLSI (WVLSI). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Shnayder, V., Hempstead, M., Chen, B., Allen, G., and Welsh, M. 2004. Simulating the power consumption of large-scale sensor network applications. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Sinha, A. and Chandrakasan, A. 2001. Dynamic-power management in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Design and Test Comput. 18, 2, 62--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Sundresh, S., Kim, W., and Agha, G. 2004. SENS: A sensor, environment and network simulator. In Proceedings of the Simulation Symposium. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Tilak, S., Abu-Ghazaleh, N., and Heinzelman, W. 2002. Infrastructure tradeoffs for sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (WNSA). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Warneke, B. and Pister, K. 2004. An ultra-low energy microcontroller for smart dust wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Solid State Circuits Conference (ISSCC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Warneke, B., Last, M., Liebowitz, B., and Pister, K. 2001. Smart dust: Communicating with a cubic-millimeter computer. Comput. Mag. 34, 1, 44--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Yu, Y., Ganesan, D., Girod, L., Estrin, D., and Govindan, R. 2003. Synthetic data generation to support irregular sampling in sensor networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Geosensor Networks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Yuan, L. and Qu, G. 2002. Design space exploration for energy-efficient secure sensor network. In Proceedings of the Conference on Application-Specific Systems, Architectures, and Processors (ASAP). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Zhang, H. and Hou, J. Maintaining sensing coverage and connectivity in large sensor networks. Ad Hoc and Sensor Wirel. Netw. 1, 1--2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Zimmerling, M. 2009. Automatic parameter optimization of sensor network MAC protocols. Master's Thesis, Institute of Systems Architecture, Technische Universitat Dresden.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Dynamic profiling and fuzzy-logic-based optimization of sensor network platforms

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!