Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Abstract- In this paper we consider a wireless sensor anchor density to work well. The APS proposed by
network consisting of a single sink node at the center of a Niculescu and Nath [5] uses both distance-free and
field of randomly distributed sensors. An anchor-free node distance-aware approaches to obtain distance estimates
localization algorithm is proposed in which the sink node to anchors: in their DV-hop method each node finds its
imparts radial location information through the phased- distance estimate to an anchor based on the hop-counts of
array transmission of a series of beacons. The individual
sensors use knowledge of received beacons and information the shortest connecting path; in their DV-distance method
from nearest neighbors to identify the sub-sectors in each node sets its distance estimate to an anchor as the
which they reside. This location information can then be total length of all the links in its shortest connecting path.
used as the basis for an emergent routing algorithm. We DV-hop is less sensitive to measurement noise, but has
present the localization algorithm, deduce the partition poorer performance compared with DV-distance under
error analytically, and then provide simulation results. The moderate measurement noise.
results indicate that the localization performance improves Unlike the above, our proposed algorithm is anchor-
with node density, and is robust against RSS measurement free. In this paper we present a low-cost localization
noise.
algorithm for randomly distributed sensors with a single,
I. INTRODUCTION centrally-located data sink (variations on this topology
are easily accommodated, but are not considered here
Sensor location is an important element in habitat due to length limitations). The proposed algorithm uses
monitoring, battle-field surveillance, search and rescue, a series of beacons generated by the data sink as well
and target tracking, but such knowledge often comes at as localized peer-to-peer transmissions as the basis for
the cost of pre-deployment planning or the use of GPS or sensor localization.
similar relatively expensive technologies. We also note Section II of this paper lists network assumptions
that location awareness plays a significant role in many made in this project. Section III describes our localiza-
energy-preserving routing protocols designed for sensor tion algorithm in detail. Section IV provides an error
networks, such as GEDIR [1], GeoCast [2], and LAR analysis for this algorithm, while section V presents
[3], etc. simulation results.
Several localization methods have been proposed,
most of which assume the existence of several location- II. NETWORK ASSUMPTIONS
aware nodes, or "anchors". These techniques can be Consider a circular coverage area with radius R and
divided into two different categories: distance-free and a data sink (base station, BS) at its center. During
distance-aware. An example for the former is the sys- deployment, N sensor nodes are randomly distributed
tem proposed by Buluse [4], which uses connectivity in the circular area (without prior planning), creating a
information, employs a grid of anchors with known 2-D uniform distribution of sensor nodes.
locations, and lets each unknown node set its location to The BS uses phased array antennas to broadcast M
the centroid of its neighboring anchors. The localization beacons with limited beamwidth, each beacon associated
accuracy is about one-third of the separation distance with an angular range in the coverage area. The beacons
between anchors, and therefore this method needs high thus divide the roughly circular coverage area into M
k A Fj
.
I.
. |!
When a node first receives a MSG from its one-hop
neighbor, it will make an entry for this neighbor in its
neighbor list. The entry is simply the received MSG
of that neighbor, combined with the distance from that
neighbor estimated using RSS. The entries are updated
as new MSG messages are received, and therefore kept
up to date.
The flow chart in Fig.1 is the detailed description
of our anchor-free localization method carried out at
each node i. As is shown in the flow chart, during
14
1.
,,1
f
-Cs .
t gS10
_E
.X
;
_00?g
it
_.r
-
I
I
nodes at startup. The estimated angle is set as fo = further partitioning process. Then it traverses its neighbor
(mi + 0.5) M4 at the beginning, and it is used only when list, applying the checking conditions on each entry and
fi is set to 0. The energy level indicator 1i is the ratio of increasing its number of left neighbors (nL) or number of
the available energy over the full available energy, and right neighbors (nR) accordingly. After checking all the
is designed for energy aware routing. entries, it determines itself to be in the left (larger angle)
2. Each node carries out the localization algorithm and sub-sector if nL > nR, or in the right (smaller angle) sub-
updates its own sub-sector number mi, total number of sector if nL < nR. In addition, if nL = nR, it announces
sectors Mi, flag fi, estimated angle fo, and energy level itself to be on the common edge of these two sub-
1j, as well as uses full transmission power to broadcast sectors (middle line of the parent-sector) and terminates
a new MSG if its content does change whenever a localization by setting fi to 0. Otherwise, if it finds itself
partition round ends. The localization process of the in a sub-sector with maximal location inaccuracy no
whole network terminates when all the nodes have their larger than the preset threshold F, it announces itself to
flags set to 0. be on the middle line of current sub-sector and terminates
628
localization by setting fi to 0. Define
It is clear that our localization algorithm does not rLR = min(rtrans,ri * sin("IT))
depend on the exact distances between neighbors, and
therefore we claim it to be partial-distance-aware. As it dL ri- sin(47 (mi+ 1)- Oi)
is a localized algorithm, it scales well. dR ri sin(Qi - * mi)
nR=o t0 : no mistake
nR
X, CN- 0f1 pP(1 _ PL)N 1nR-nL (3) (i is a random variable determined by NL and NR, as
well as node i's location xi, therefore, we can denote (i
nL =nR
as i (xi, NL, NR). Then for 2-D uniform distribution, we
NL and NR are random variables denoting the number have:
of neighbors in the left and right regions being con-
sidered, while nL and nR are the values they take in ENL,NR [i (xi, NL I NR)] = ei(oi)
a particular realization. PL and PR are the probabilities P2 + P3 : node i in region I
that there is a node in the left and right regions con- P2 : node i in region II
sidered separately. According to our algorithm, they are P+ P3 : node i in region III (4)
determined in the following way: PI + P3 : node i in region IV
629
Denote the angle of the middle line as oj, and region I, Case 3: It made a mistake and determined itself to be
II, III and IV are defined as: in sub-sector 2. Then in the second partition round, it
checks all the nodes in the circle of radius rLR as shown
region I 2ri * sin0ii
2> F
in Fig.2, and counts the number of left neighbors nL
region II o<2ri sin 0i2 i < F and the number of right neighbors nR. Since it assumes
region III o < 2ri sin ',2 < F its current sub-sector number is 2, it will regard nodes
region IV : 2ri .sin 'i20i > F with sub-sector number 3 as left neighbors, and nodes
In a 2-D uniform distribution, a node i's location is with sub-sector number 1 as right neighbors. Since node
also a random variable, we denote it by Xi, and all the i's actual location is in sub-sector 3, and we have set
nodes in the network are identical. Therefore, we can rLR to be no greater than ri sin( 27 ), this circle will not
generate the error probability of first partition for any cover nodes out of sub-sector 2,3,4. Therefore we would
node by taking average of ei(Xi) over Xi: definitely have nR = 0, and have nL > 0 with high
probability. As a result, node i would probably determine
P{first partition error of any node} itself to be in the left part of sub-sector 2 after the second
= Exj[e(i (Xi)] partition round, and in this way, the error in its estimated
rR r2- location decreases.
= X y ~ei (ri,Ii) ri dOidri (5) Similar discussions apply for the subsequent
partitions. Actually, in the case of last partition having
The second partition is based on the results of the first made mistakes, our localization
algorithm manages
partition which have an error probability, therefore its to decrease the location estimation errors as partition
performance needs to be analyzed in different cases. To rounds increase, which will be shown in the simulation
make it clear, we give a concrete example as follows: section.
Assume M=12, as in Fig. 2, node i received the BS's
630
1 20 (
0.15f rI.
i (8 + ) M (7)
Therefore w e Ad2 0.5. Similar explanation
-0 0.11
applies for the subsequent partitions. Fig.4 plots the
a)
X0.0 15
V-
o the first partition
O the second partition
the third partition
+ the fourth partition
0
E~~~~~~
10
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
number of nodes E 0
631
indicator. We increase N from 100 to 1000 with step size 100
100 with other parameters fixed. For each value that N
takes, we run simulation 30 times and take the average 50
of Perror, the results are plotted in Fig.5 as red stars. As
0
0.4r
( = 0
0.35T c= 0.1 -50
( = 0.2
0.3 = 0.3
0.25 -100_
-100 -50 0 50 100
X (m)
2 02
=
0.15 Fig. 6. Localization Result of One Simulation (N = 900, F=5m)
01
0.05
0
VI. CONCLUSIONS
200 400 600 800 1000
number of nodes In this paper, we proposed an anchor-free localization
algorithm for rapidly-deployed wireless sensor networks.
Fig. 5. Localization Performance of the Anchor-Free Algorithm Our localization algorithm scales well with the size
(F=5m)
of network. During the localization process, each node
broadcasts messages of a preset format and collects one-
expected, the localization error rate decreases as node hop neighbors' messages to keep its neighbor list up
density increases, therefore our localization algorithm to date. The BS originally divides the circular network
works better for high density networks. We also notice area into M beacon sectors, and then each node keeps
that the decrease becomes slower when node density is partitioning its current sector and locating itself in a
larger, and after N approaches 500, the localization error smaller sub-sector with the help of its neighbor list till
rate is kept below 10%. the localization termination condition is satisfied. Both
Simulations are used to study the effect of RSS analytical and experimental results confirmed that our
measurement noise. For any node, we assume its distance localization algorithm's performance improves with node
from the BS estimated using RSS measurement rmeasured density, and it works well for high-density networks. It
has the following relationship with the actual distance was also shown that our algorithm is robust against RSS
ractual: rmeasured = ractual (1 + 6), where E is a Gaussian measurement noise.
random variable with zero mean and standard deviation
(X. Again we increase N from 100 to 1000 with step size REFERENCES
100, for each value N takes, we try different values of u-, [1] I. Stojmenovic and X. Lin, "GEDIR: Loop-free location based
and for each value of u-, we run simulation 30 times and routing in wireless networks", in Proc. IASTED Int. Conf on
record the average of Perror, the results are also plotted Parallel and Distributed Computing and Systems, November 3-
6, 1999, Boston, MA, USA, pp. 1025-1028.
in Fig.5. [2] J. C. Navas and Tomasz Imielinski, "GeoCast Geographic -
The results show that our localization algorithm is addressing and routing", in Proc. MobiCom'97, September 26-
robust against RSS measurement noise. Even when the 30, 1997, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 66-76.
[3] Y B. Ko and N. H. Vaidya, "Location-aided routing(LAR) in
standard deviation u- is 0.2, the performance degradation mobile ad hoc networks", in Proc. Mobicom'98, October 1998,
is negligible. Larger u- would result in larger performance Dallas, TX, USA, pp. 66-75.
degradation, but as far as the node density is high, our [4] N.Bulusu, J.Heidemann, and D.Estrin, "GPS-less low cost out-
localization algorithm still gives acceptable performance. door localization for very small devices", IEEE Personal Com-
munications Magazine, October 2000, 7(5):pp. 28-34.
It should also be noted that most of the nodes that [5] D. Niculescu and B. Nath, "Ad Hoc Positioning Systems", in
make errors are at the periphery of the coverage area, as Proc. GlobeCom, November 2001.
shown in Fig.6. This is actually an advantage, because
in the location-based routing scheme designed for our
single sink network, these boundary nodes will not be
used as relay nodes, and therefore their localization
errors are less detrimental.
632