ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
On k-coverage in a mostly sleeping sensor network
Full text PdfPdf (331 KB)
Source International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking archive
Proceedings of the 10th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking table of contents
Philadelphia, PA, USA
SESSION: Sensor networks table of contents
Pages: 144 - 158  
Year of Publication: 2004
ISBN:1-58113-868-7
Authors
Santosh Kumar  Ohio State University
Ten H. Lai  Ohio State University
József Balogh  Ohio State University
Sponsors
SIGMOBILE: ACM Special Interest Group on Mobility of Systems, Users, Data and Computing
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 6,   Downloads (12 Months): 63,   Citation Count: 48
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1023720.1023735
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Sensor networks are often desired to last many times longer than the active lifetime of individual sensors. This is usually achieved by putting sensors to sleep for most of their lifetime. On the other hand, surveillance kind of applications require guaranteed k-coverage of the protected region at all times. As a result, determining the appropriate number of sensors to deploy that achieves both goals simultaneously becomes a challenging problem. In this paper, we consider three kinds of deployments for a sensor network on a unit square - a √n x √n grid, random uniform (for all n points), and Poisson (with density n). In all three deployments, each sensor is active with probability p, independently from the others. Then, we claim that the critical value of the function npπr2/log(np) is 1 for the event of k-coverage of every point. We also provide an upper bound on the window of this phase transition. Although the conditions for the three deployments are similar, we obtain sharper bounds for the random deployments than the grid deployment, which occurs due to the boundary condition. In this paper, we also provide corrections to previously published results for the grid deployment model. Finally, we use simulation to show the usefulness of our analysis in real deployment scenarios.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
N. Alon and J. H. Spencer. The Probabilistic Method. John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
 
2
A. Arora and et al. Line in the sand: A wireless sensor network for target detection, classification, and tracking. Technical report, OSU-CISRC-12/03-TR71, Ohio State University, 2003.
3
 
4
B. Bollobas. Random Graphs. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
 
5
Crossbow. Power management and batteries. Application Notes, Available at http://www.xbow.com/Support/appnotes.htm, 2004.
6
7
 
8
P. Gupta and P. R. Kumar. Critical power for asymptotic connectivity in wireless networks. In IEEE 37th Conference on Decision and Control, pages 1106--1110, Tampa, FL, 1998.
 
9
D. L. Hall and J. Llinas. Handbook of Multisensor Data Fusion. CRC Press, 2001.
 
10
P. Hall. Introduction to the Theory of Coverage Processes. John Wiley & Sons, 1988.
11
 
12
M. Horton, D. E. Culler, K. Pister, J. Hill, R. Szewczyk, and A. Woo. The commercialization of microsensor motes, In Sensors, volume 19, no. 4, pages 40--48, April 2002.
13
 
14
J. Hui, Z. Ren, and B. H. Krogh. Sentry-based power management in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of IPSN, pages 458--472, Palo Alto, CA, 2003.
15
 
16
R. Meester and R. Roy. Continuum Percolation. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
 
17
S. M. Ross. Introduction to Probability Models. Academic Press, 2000.
 
18
S. Shakkottai, R. Srikant, and N. B. Shroff. Unreliable sensor grids: Coverage, connectivity and diameter. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, volume 2, pages 1073--1083, San Francisco, CA, 2003.
 
19
R. Szewczyk, J. Polastre, A. M. Mainwaring, and D. E. Culler. Lessons from a sensor network expedition. In EWSN, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
20
21
22

CITED BY  48

Collaborative Colleagues:
Santosh Kumar: colleagues
Ten H. Lai: colleagues
József Balogh: colleagues