Topology Control in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks: Problem and Solution

Ning Li and Jennifer C.Hou Department of Computer Science University of Illinous at Urbana-Champaign

08.03.29 System Software Laboratory Myung-Ho Kim Team Dae-Woong JO

Contents

Introduction Network Model Related Work and Why They Cannot Be Directly
Applied To Heterogeneous Networks DRNG and DLMST Properties Of DRNG and DLMST Simulation Study Conclusions References

System Software Laboratory

Introduction

Energy efficiency and Network capacity

Reducing Energy consumption and improving network capacity

Two localized topology control algorithms

DRNG
Directed Relative Neighborhood Graph

DLMST
Directed Local Minimum Spanning Tree

Be able to prove
1) Derived under both DRNG and DLMST 2) DLMST is bounded, DRNG may be unbounded. 3) DRNG and DLMST preservers network bi-directionality
System Software Laboratory 3

Introduction (cont.)

Simulation results indicate

Compared with the other known topology control algorithms
Have smaller average node degree (both logical and physical) Have smaller average link length.

In Section 2
Network model Summarize previous work on topology control DRNG and DLMST algorithms Prove several of their useful properties Evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms conclude

In Section 3

In Section 4
In Section 5

In Section 6
In Section 7

System Software Laboratory

Network Model
V = {v1, v2, . . . , vn}, random distrivuted in the 2-D
plane.

Let rvi
Maximal transmission range of vi

Heterogeneous network
All nodes may not be the same. rmin = minvV {rv} rmax = maxvV {rv}

d(u,v) is distance between node u and node v

System Software Laboratory 5

Network Model (cont.)

Simple directed graph G = (V(G),E(G))
V(G) = randomly distributed in the 2-D plane E(G) = {(u,v) : d(u,v) <= ru, u,v V(G)}

Definition 1
Reachable Neighborhood

Definition 2 (weight function)

w(u1, v1) > w(u2, v2) d(u1, v1) > d(u2, v2) or (d(u1, v1) = d(u2, v2) &&max{id(u1), id(v1)} > max{id(u2), id(v2)})

or (d(u1, v1) = d(u2, v2) &&max{id(u1), id(v1)} = max{id(u2), id(v2)} &&min{id(u1), id(v1)} > min{id(u2), id(v2)}).

Definition 3u (Neighbor Set ) Algorithm A, denoted v

A

NA(u) = {v V (G) : u

v }. System Software Laboratory 6

Network Model (cont.)

Definition 4
Topology

Directed graph GA = (E(GA),V(GA))

Where V (GA) = V (G), E(GA) = {(u, v) : u

v , u, v V (GA)}.

Definition 5
Radius
The radius, ru, of node u is defined

Definition 6
Connectivity

If there exists a path(p0 = u, p1,,pm-1,pm = v) It follows that u => v if u = > p and p = > v for some p V(GA)

Topology generated by an algorithm A Node u is connected to node v (denoted u v)

Definition 7

Bi-Directionality

Any two nodes u,v V (GA), u NA(v) implies v NA(u).

System Software Laboratory

Network Model (cont.)

Definition 8
Bi-Directional Connectivity
Bi-directionally connected to node v (denoted u v ) If there exists a path p0 = u, p1,pm-1, pm = v) It follows that u u if u p and p v for some p V(GA)

Definition 9
Addition and Removal
Addition operation
extra edge (v, u) E(GA)

Removal operation
delete any edge (u, v) E(GA)

System Software Laboratory

RELATED WORK AND WHY THEY CANNOT BE DIRECTLY APPLIED TO HETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS

Ramanathan et al. [5]

Two distrubuted heuristics for mobile networks
Require global information Cannot be directly deployed

Borbash and Jennings [8]

Proposed to use RNG (Relative Neighborhood Graph)
Topology initialization of wireless networks Good overall performance Low interference, and reliablity

System Software Laboratory

RELATED WORK AND WHY THEY CANNOT BE DIRECTLY APPLIED TO HETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS

Definition 10 ( Neighbor Relation in RNG)

u v if and only if there does not exist a third node p such that w(u, p) < w(u, v) and w(p, v) < w(u, v). Or equivalently, there is no node inside the shaded area
RNG

System Software Laboratory

10

RELATED WORK AND WHY THEY CANNOT BE DIRECTLY APPLIED TO HETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS (cont.)

CBTC() [6]
Proved to preserve network connectivity

In [10]
Proposed LMST(Local Minimum Spanning Tree)
Topology control in homogeneous wireless multihop- networks

Proved that
LMST preserves the network connectivity The node degree of any node Can be transformed into one with bi-directional links

System Software Laboratory

11

RELATED WORK AND WHY THEY CANNOT BE DIRECTLY APPLIED TO HETEROGENEOUS NETWORKS (cont.)

System Software Laboratory

12

DRNG and DLMST

Propose two localized topology control algorithms

DRNG (Directed Relative Neighborhood Grpah) DLMST (Directed Local Minimum Spanning Tree)

Both algorithms are composed of three pahses

Information Collection Topology Construction Construction of Topology with only Bi-Directional Links

System Software Laboratory

13

DRNG and DLMST (cont.)

Definition 12
Neighbor Relation in DRNG
u v if and only if d(u, v) ru and there does not exist a third node p such that w(u, p) < w(u, v) and w(p, v) < w(u, v), d(p, v) rp
DRNG

System Software Laboratory

14

DRNG and DLMST (cont.)

Definition 13
Neighbor Relation in DLMST Directed Local Minimum Spanning Tree Graph (DLMST)
u v if and only if (u, v) E(Tu), where Tu is the directed local MST R rooted at u that spans N .
u
DLMST

each node u computes a directed MST that spans N nodes that are one hop away as its neighbors

and takes on-tree

System Software Laboratory

15

Properties of DRNG and DLMST

Discuss the connectivity, bi-directionality and

degree bound of DLMST and DRNG

Connectivity
Theorem 1 (Connectivity of DLMST)
If G is strongly connected, then G DLMST is also strongly connected.

Proof
For any two nodes u, v V (G), there exists a unique global MST T rooted at u since G is strongly connected. Since E(T) E(GDLMST ) by Lemma 2, there is a path from u to v in GDLMST .
Lemma 2 : Let T be the global directed MST of G rooted at any node w V(G) ,then E(T) E(Gdlmst)

System Software Laboratory

16

Properties of DRNG and DLMST

Theorem 2 (Connectivity of DRNG)

If G is strongly connected, then G DRNG is also strongly connected.

Proof
For any two nodes u, v V (G), since G is strongly connected, there exists a path (p0 = u, p1, p2, . . . , pm1, pm = v) from u to v, such that (pi, pi+1) E(G), i = 0, 1, . . .,m 1. Thus pi pi+1 in GDRNG by Lemma 3. Therefore, u v in GDRNG. Hence we can conclude that GDRNG is strongly connected. Lemma 3: For any edge (u,v) E(G), we have u => v in Gdrng

System Software Laboratory

17

Properties of DRNG and DLMST (Cont.)

Bi-directionality
Theorem 3
If the original topology G is strongly connected and bi-directional, then G DLMST and G DRNG are also strongly connected and bidirectional

Proof
For any two nodes u, v V (G), there exists at least one path p = (w0 = u,w1, w2, , wm1, wm = v) from u to v, where (wi, wi+1) E(G), i = 0, 1, ,m 1. Since wi wi+1 in GDLMST by Lemma 5, we have u v in GDLMST . Therefore, wi wi+1 in GDRNG, which means u v in GDRNG. The same results still hold after Addition or Removal
Lemma 5 : If the original topology G is strongly connected and bidirectional, then any edge (u,v) E(G) satisfies that u v in Gdlmst

System Software Laboratory

18

Properties of DRNG and DLMST

(Cont.)

Degree Bound
Theorem 4
For any node u V (GDLMST ), the number of neighbors in GDLMST that are inside Disk(u, rmin) is at most 6.

Theorem 5
The out degree of node in GDLMST is bounded by a constant that depends only on rmax and rmin.

System Software Laboratory

19

Simulation Study

Evaluate the performance

R&M, DRNG and DLMST by simulations. Preserve network connectvity in heterogeneous networks

First simulation
50 nodes are uniformly distributed 1000m x 1000m region R&M, DRNG and LMST all reduce
Average node degree, while maintaining network connectivity

DRNG and DLMST outperforms R&M

System Software Laboratory 20

Simulation Study (cont.)

System Software Laboratory

21

Simulation Study

(cont.)

Second simulation
Vary the number of nodes in the region
80 to 300

Average of 100 simulation runs

Each data point

Nodes are uniformly distributed in [10m,250m] Average radius and the average edge length
NONE(no topology control) R&M, DRNG, and DLMST

DLMST outperforms the others Better spatial reuse and use less energy
System Software Laboratory 22

Simulation Study (cont.)

Compare the out degree

The topologies by different algorithms The result of NONE is not shown
Langer than under R&M, DRNG, DLMST Out degrees increase linearly

Shows the average logical/physical

Derived by R&M, DRNG, DLMST Under R&M and DRNG increase Under DLMST actually decrease
System Software Laboratory 23

Simulation Study (cont.)

System Software Laboratory

24

Conclusions

Proposed two local topology control algorithms

DRNG, DLMST

Heterogeneous wireless multi-hop networks Have different transmission ranges

Show that
Most existing topology control algorithms
Have different transmission ranges Disconnected network topology
Directly applied to heterogeneous networks.

System Software Laboratory

25

Conclusions

(cont.)

DRNG and DLMST prove

1) Preserve network connectivity 2) Preserve network bi-directionality 3) Bounded in the topology under DLMST ,Unbounded under DRNG

Future research

Different maximal transmission power

Density of nodes, distribution of the transmission ranges

MAC-level interference affect network

Connectivity and bi-directionality

System Software Laboratory

26

References

[3] S. Narayanaswamy, V. Kawadia, R. S. Sreenivas, and P. R. Kumar, Power control in ad-hoc networks: Theory, architecture, algorithm and implementation of the COMPOW protocol, in Proc. of European Wireless 2002, Next Generation Wireless Networks: Technologies, Protocols, Services and Applications, Florence, Italy, Feb. 2002, pp. 156162. [4] V. Rodoplu and T. H. Meng, Minimum energy mobile wireless networks, IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 13331344, Aug. 1999. [5] R. Ramanathan and R. Rosales-Hain, Topology control of multihop wireless networks using transmit power adjustment, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2000, Tel Aviv, Israel, Mar. 2000, pp. 404413. [6] L. Li, J. Y. Halpern, P. Bahl, Y.-M. Wang, and R. Wattenhofer, Analysis of a cone-based distributed topology control algorithm for wireless multi-hop networks, in Proc. ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, Newport, Rhode Island, US, Aug. 2001, pp. 264273. [7] V. Kawadia and P. Kumar, Power control and clustering in ad hoc networks, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2003, San Francisco, California, US, Apr. 2003.

System Software Laboratory

27

References (cont.)

[8] S. A. Borbash and E. H. Jennings, Distributed topology control algorithm for multihop wireless networks, in Proc. 2002 World Congress on Computational Intelligence (WCCI 2002), Honolulu, Hawaii, US, May 2002. [9] X.-Y. Li, G. Calinescu, and P.-J. Wan, Distributed construction of planar spanner and routing for ad hoc networks, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2002, New York, New York, US, June 2002. [10] N. Li, J. C. Hou, and L. Sha, Design and analysis of an MSTbased topology control algorithm, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2003, San Francisco, California, US, Apr. 2003.

System Software Laboratory

28