skip to main content
research-article

DC4CD: A Platform for Distributed Computing on Constrained Devices

Published:06 December 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this article, we present Distributed Computing for Constrained Devices (DC4CD), a novel software architecture that supports symbolic distributed computing on wireless sensor networks. DC4CD integrates the functionalities of a high-level symbolic interpreter, a compiler, and an operating system, and includes networking abstractions to exchange high-level symbolic code among peer devices. Contrarily to other architectures proposed in the literature, DC4CD allows for changes at runtime, even on deployed nodes of both application and system code. Experimental results show that DC4CD is more efficient in terms of memory usage than existing architectures, with which it also compares well in terms of execution efficiency.

References

  1. Daniele Alessandrelli, Matteo Petracca, and Paolo Pagano. 2013. T-res: Enabling reconfigurable in-network processing in IoT-based WSNs. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS’13). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 337--344. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Cesare Alippi, Romolo Camplani, Manuel Roveri, and Luca Vaccaro. 2011. REEL: A real-time, computationally-efficient, reprogrammable framework for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Sensors Conference. 1193--1196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Anna Maria Antola, Lorenzo Mezzalira, and Manuel Roveri. 2014. GINGER: A minimizing-effects reprogramming paradigm for distributed sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Robotic and Sensors Environments (ROSE’14). 88--93.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Faisal Aslam, Luminous Fennell, Christian Schindelhauer, Peter Thiemann, Gidon Ernst, Elmar Haussmann, Stefan Rührup, and Zastash A. Uzmi. 2010. Optimized Java binary and virtual machine for tiny motes. In Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6131. Springer, 15--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Stefano Bocchino, Szymon Fedor, and Matteo Petracca. 2015. PyFUNS: A Python framework for ubiquitous networked sensors. In Wireless Sensor Networks. Springer, 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Niels Brouwers, Koen Langendoen, and Peter Corke. 2009. Darjeeling, A feature-rich VM for the resource poor. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 169--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Doina Bucur, Giovanni Iacca, Giovanni Squillero, and Alberto Tonda. 2014. The tradeoffs between data delivery ratio and energy costs in wireless sensor networks: A multi-objective evolutionary framework for protocol analysis. In Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO’14). ACM, New York, NY, 1071--1078. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. José Cecilio and Pedro Furtado. 2014. Architecture for uniform (re)configuration and processing over embedded sensor and actuator networks. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 10, 1, 53--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Andrea Vitaletti, and Apostolos Pyrgelis. 2016. A privacy-preserving smart parking system using an IoT elliptic curve based security platform. Computer Communications 89, C, 165--177. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Rui Chu, Lin Gu, Yunhao Liu, Mo Li, and Xicheng Lu. 2013. SenSmart: Adaptive stack management for multitasking sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers 62, 1, 137--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Xi Deng and Yuanyuan Yang. 2012. Online adaptive compression in delay sensitive wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers 61, 10, 1429--1442. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Wei Dong, Chun Chen, Xue Liu, Yunhao Liu, Jiajun Bu, and Kougen Zheng. 2011. SenSpire OS: A predictable, flexible, and efficient operating system for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers 60, 12, 1788--1801. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Wei Dong, Yunhao Liu, Chun Chen, Jiajun Bu, Chao Huang, and Zhiwei Zhao. 2013. R2: Incremental reprogramming using relocatable code in networked embedded systems. IEEE Transactions on Computers 62, 9, 1837--1849. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Wei Dong, Yunhao Liu, Chun Chen, Lin Gu, and Xiaofan Wu. 2014. Elon: Enabling efficient and long-term reprogramming for wireless sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems 13, 4, 77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Adam Dunkels. 2006. A Low-Overhead Script Language for Tiny Networked Embedded Systems. Technical Report. Swedish Institute of Computer Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Adam Dunkels, Joakim Eriksson, Niclas Finne, and Nicolas Tsiftes. 2011. Powertrace: Network-Level Power Profiling for Low-Power Wireless Networks. Technical Report. Swedish Institute of Computer Science.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Anton Ertl. 2001. Threaded code variations and optimizations. In Proceedings of the 2001 EuroForth Conference (EuroForth’01). 49--55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Anton Ertl. 2011. Ways to reduce the stack depth. In Proceedings of the 27th EuroForth Conference (EuroForth’11). 36--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Anton Ertl. 2013. PAF: A portable assembly language. In Proceedings of the 29th EuroForth Conference (EuroForth’13). 30--38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Orestis Evangelatos, Kasun Samarasinghe, and José D. P. Rolim. 2012. Evaluating design approaches for smart building systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 9th International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS’12). 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Leon Evers, Paul Havinga, and Jan Kuper. 2007. Dynamic sensor network reprogramming using SensorScheme. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE 18th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. L. Evers, P. Havinga, J. Kuper, M. E. M. Lijding, and N. Meratnia. 2007. SensorScheme: Supply chain management automation using wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA’07). 448--455.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Muhammad Omer Farooq and Thomas Kunz. 2011. Operating systems for wireless sensor networks: A survey. Sensors 11, 6, 5900--5930.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Carolina Fortuna and Mihael Mohorcic. 2014. A framework for dynamic composition of communication services. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks 11, 2, Article 32, 43 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Salvatore Gaglio, Giuseppe Lo Re, Gloria Martorella, and Daniele Peri. 2014. A fast and interactive approach to application development on wireless sensor and actuator networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Conference on Emerging Technology and Factory Automation (ETFA’14). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Omprakash Gnawali, Rodrigo Fonseca, Kyle Jamieson, Maria Kazandjieva, David Moss, and Philip Levis. 2013. CTP: An efficient, robust, and reliable collection tree protocol for wireless sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks 10, 1, Article 16, 49 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Gerd Kortuem, Fahim Kawsar, Daniel Fitton, and Vasughi Sundramoorthy. 2010. Smart objects as building blocks for the Internet of Things. IEEE Internet Computing 14, 1, 44--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Matthias Kovatsch, Simon Duquennoy, and Adam Dunkels. 2011. A low-power CoAP for Contiki. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 8th International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS’11). 855--860. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Matthias Kovatsch, Simon Mayer, and Benedikt Ostermaier. 2012. Moving application logic from the firmware to the cloud: Towards the thin server architecture for the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2012 6th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing (IMIS’12). 751--756. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Helen C. Leligou, Christos Massouros, Eleftherios Tsampasis, Theodore Zahariadis, Dimitrios Bargiotas, Konstantinos Papadopoulos, and Stamatis Voliotis. 2011. Reprogramming wireless sensor nodes. International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology 7, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Philip Levis and David Culler. 2002. Maté: A tiny virtual machine for sensor networks. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 37, 10, 85--95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Philip Levis, David Gay, and David Culler. 2005. Active sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation—Volume 2 (NSDI’05). 343--356. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251203.1251228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Yu-Cheng Norm Lien and Wen-Jong Wu. 2014. NTUPreter: High-level structured programming platform for wireless sensor networks. International Journal of Electronics and Electrical Engineering 2, 2, 138--142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Mihai Marin-Perianu and Paul Havinga. 2007. D-FLER—a distributed fuzzy logic engine for rule-based wireless sensor networks. In Ubiquitous Computing Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4836. Springer, 86--101. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Chris Miller and Christian Poellabauer. 2010. Reliable and efficient reprogramming in sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks 7, 1, Article 6, 32 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Kevin L. Mills. 2007. A brief survey of self-organization in wireless sensor networks. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing 7, 7, 823--834. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Waqaas Munawar, Muhammad Hamad Alizai, Olaf Landsiedel, and Klaus Wehrle. 2010. Dynamic tinyOS: Modular and transparent incremental code-updates for sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC’10). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Richard Oliver, Adriana Wilde, and Ed Zaluska. 2014. Reprogramming embedded systems at run-time. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Sensing Technology. 124--129.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Priyanka Rawat, KamalDeep Singh, Hakima Chaouchi, and JeanMarie Bonnin. 2014. Wireless sensor networks: A survey on recent developments and potential synergies. Journal of Supercomputing 68, 1, 1--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Andrew Read. 2014. Concept and implementation of an extended return stack to enhance subroutine and exception handling in FORTH. In Proceedings of the 30th EuroForth Conference (EuroForth’14). 5--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Mark-Oliver Stehr and Carolyn L Talcott. 2004. Plan in Maude specifying an active network programming language. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 71 (2004), 240--260.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Bill Stoddart, Campbell Ritchie, and Steve Dunne. 2012. Forth semantics for compiler verification. In Proceedings of the 28th EuroForth Conference (EuroForth’12). 45--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Matthias Trute. 2013. AmForth Documentation: Release 6.6. Retrieved October 19, 2017, from Available online at http://amforth.sourceforge.net/amforth.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Li Da Xu, Wu He, and Shancang Li. 2014. Internet of Things in industries: A survey. IIEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 10, 4, 2233--2243.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Yan Zuo, Guodong Sun, Chao Ouyang, and Gaoxiang Yang. 2015. Evaluating CTP in energy-harvesting wireless sensor networks: An experimental study. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Network and Information Systems for Computers (ICNISC’15). 26--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. DC4CD: A Platform for Distributed Computing on Constrained Devices

          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!