Q026201030106

International Journal of Engineering Science Invention
ISSN (Online): 2319 – 6734, ISSN (Print): 2319 – 6726
www.ijesi.org Volume 2 Issue 6 ǁ June. 2013 ǁ PP.103-106
www.ijesi.org 103 | Page
Distributed Localization in Wireless Sensor Networks
Mrs.P.D.Patil1
, Dr(Smt).R.S.Patil2
1
(Department of Electronics and Telecommunication, DYPatil college of Engg& Technology, India)
ABSTRACT : Due to the success of the emerging wireless sensor network (WSN) technology, localization has
newly received research interest. This interest is expected to grow further with the proliferation of wireless
sensor network applications such as medicine, military, transport. In this context routing, protocols and
technologies of communication on those wireless area are enormously applied to sensor networks in order to
improve the quality of service and communication. Related to this work, we present a distributed algorithm for
localization of nodes in a discrete model of a random ad hoc communication network.
KEYWORDS: Distributed Algorithm, Localization, WSN
I. INTRODUCTION
Recent advances in micro-electro-mechanical system(MEMS), computing, and communication
technology have fomented the emergence of massively distributed, wireless sensor networks consisting of
hundreds or thousands of nodes. Each node is able to sense the environment, perform simple computations, and
communicate with its peers or to an external observer. The challenges these networks present are far beyond the
reach of the current theory and algorithms[1]. One way of deploying a sensor network is to scatter the nodes
throughout some region of interest. This makes the network topology random. Since there is no a priori
communication protocol, the network is ad hoc. The first task that has to be solved is to localize the nodes i.e.,
to compute their positions in some fixed coordinate system. Since most applications (such as tracking an object
moving through the network, environmental monitoring, etc.) depend on a successful localization, it is of great
importance to design scalable localization algorithms and provide error estimates that will enable us to choose
optimal network parameters before deployment.
1.1. COMPARISON CENTRALIZED AND DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS
Centralized and distributed distance-based localization algorithms can be compared from perspectives of
location estimation accuracy, implementation and computation issues, and energy consumption. It is worth
noting that decentralized localization is strictly harder than centralized, i.e., any algorithm for decentralized
localization can always be applied to centralized problems, but not the reverse. From the perspective of location
estimation accuracy, centralized algorithms are likely to provide more accurate location estimates than
distributed algorithms. However centralized algorithms suffer from the scalability problem and generally are not
feasible to be implemented for large scale sensor networks. Other disadvantages of centralized algorithms, as
compared to distributed algorithms, are their requirement of higher computational complexity and lower
reliability due to accumulated information inaccuracies/losses caused by multi-hop transmission over a wireless
network[2].On the other hand, distributed algorithms are more difficult to design because of the potentially
complicated relationship between local behavior and global behavior, e.g., algorithms that are locally optimal
may not perform well in a global sense. Optimal distribution of the computation of a centralized algorithm in a
distributed implementation in general is an unsolved research problem. Error propagation is another potential
problem in distributed algorithms. Moreover, distributed algorithms generally require multiple iterations to
arrive a stable solution which may cause the localization process to take longer time than the acceptable in some
cases. To compare the centralized and distributed distance-based localization algorithms from the
communication energy consumption perspective, one needs to consider the individual amounts of energy
required for each type of operation in the localization algorithm in the specific hardware and the transmission
range setting. Depending on the setting, the energy required for transmitting a single bit could be used to
execute 1,000 to 2,000 instructions [3]. Centralized algorithms in large networks require each sensor’s
measurements to be sent over multiple hops to a central processor, while distributed algorithms require only
local information exchange between neighboring nodes but many such local exchanges may be required,
depending on the number of iterations needed to arrive at a stable solution.

Distributed Localization In Wireless Sensor Networks
1.2. BENEFITS OF DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS
Due to high long range communication costs and low battery power, it is natural to seek decentralized,
distributed algorithms for sensor networks. This means that instead of relaying data to a central location which
does all the computing, the nodes process information in a collaborative, distributed way. For instance, they can
form computational clusters, based on their distance from each other. The outcome of these distributed, local
computations is stored in local memory and can then be, when necessary, relayed to a centralized computing
unit. Robustness to node failures is another reason to seek distributed rather than centralized algorithms. This
paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we establish the setting and introduce the basic terminology and
notation. In Section 3, we discuss the basic localization algorithm which described in Section 4, and provide
error estimates and simulation results.
II. PRIMARY WORKS
In this section we introduce the basic framework, terminology, and notation.We assume that in a square
region Q = [0, s] × [0, s], called the region of operations, we randomly scatter N nodes, each of which
is equipped with an RF transceiver with communication range r > 0. In other words, a node Si can communicate
with every node which lies in its communication region, which is the disk with radius r centered at Si. Each
node has a unique ID which is a number between 1 and N. The nodes form an ad hoc network N in which there
is an edge between and ,when their distance is less than r. We will call this the continuous model. Even
though it is a rather simplified model of how the network is formed, we adopt it because it leads to an easier
analytical treatment. However, instead of a disk of radius r, the communication range of a node could instead be
an annulus (in case a node is able to decide when a nearby node is at a distance greater than some threshold,
based, e.g., on signal strength), an angular sector (if a node is equipped, say, with laser transmitters and
receivers that can scan through some angle) or an intersection of an annulus and an angular sector. More
information on these types of constraints is available in [4].We assume that a certain positive number K of nodes
know their location in Q, i.e., they are able to compute their position relative to some fixed coordinate system in
Q.In practice this can be achieved by equipping K motes with GPS or a priori (meaning before deploying the ad
hoc network) placing in Q .A certain number of beacons which can serve to compute the position of the nodes
which are within certain distance from them. We call nodes that know their position as known nodes or beacon
nodes and all other ones, unknown nodes. Furthermore, each node has communication as well as sensing
capabilities [5].
The problems we address in this paper are:
 Design a distributed algorithm for localization of nodes in.N.
 Estimate the complexity and error of the above algorithm.
 Find an optimal number of known nodes depending on Q, N and r, which minimizes the error of the
algorithm.
Centralized algorithms for localization were studied in [1, 2]. The reason we are interested in a
distributed rather than a centralized solution is that we envision a massively distributed network in which
communication with a centralized computer is expensive both because the power supply of each node is very
limited and long-range multi-hop data transmission is costly and often inefficient. However, one quickly
discovers that obtaining analytical estimates even in this simple setting can be rather challenging. Furthermore,
in the design of a decentralized algorithm relying on node-based data processing, one must take into account
that nodes have very limited computational power. This motivates the following discrete approach to the above
problems. Let n > 0 be an integer. Partition Q into congruent squares called cells of area and suppose that
for every known node S, we are only interested in finding the cell which contains S. To make this problem
tractable, we make a simplifying assumption that the communication range is ρ cells in the max metric, distance
denoted by . It is defined by
((i, j), (i` , j` )) = max(|i–i` |, |j – j`|)
Where (i, j) is initial distance vector, (i`, j`) is final distance vector. It is possible for several nodes to lie
inthe same cell. We call this the discretemodel of the network. For example, we can take
Each node S can communicate with every node lying in the square centered at S and containing
cells. Since all our results are independent of the choice of ρ as a function of r and n, we can clearly
select a different value for it. The situation where r is fixed and s, n → ∞ corresponds to increasing the size of

the region of operations, while the situation where r/n and s stay constant while n → ∞ corresponds to refining
the position estimate. We usually think of n as large and r as much smaller than n. In particular, 2ρ + 1 < n.
Figure 1: Discrete model. Filled circles denote unknown nodes. The dashed line bounds thecommunication
range of the node at its center, with ρ = 3.
III. DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHM FOR LOCALIZATION
In this section we present a simple distributed algorithm for localization, based on the ideas in the
previous section.Let S be an arbitrary unknown node in N. The localization algorithm LOCS at S then goes as
follows –
Step 1. INITIALIZE the estimate: .
Step 2.SEND “Hello, can you hear me?”
Each known neighbor sends back (1, a, b), where (a, b) is its grid position, while each unknown neighbor sends
(0, 0, 0).
Step 3.For each response (1, a, b), UPDATE the estimate by
Step 4.STOP when all responses have been received. The position estimate is
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
To analyze performance of algorithm, we have taken three scenarios by varying number of nodes, n and
number of beacon nodes, K in the network, where –
n = Unknown nodes + K;
Scenario 1: Chose No. of beacon nodes, K= 5.
Case 1: Chose unknown nodes=45 and calculated their positions.
Then we have calculated the performance of algorithm as shown in Fig. 2.
Figure 2: Performance of Network for K=5 and n=50,100 and 150.

Case 3: Chose unknown nodes=140 and calculated their positions.Then we have calculated the performance of
algorithm as shown in Fig. 3.
Then we have calculated the performance of algorithm as shown in Fig. 4
Observe that the error of the algorithm steadily increases as total no. of nodes (n) increases. However, the
error does not change considerably for K>=10.
V. CONCLUSION
The main contributions of this paper are a distributed algorithm for localization of nodes in a wireless ad
hoc communication network and estimates of its error. There are many possible improvements of the algorithm.
REFERENCES
[1] AmitangshuPal,“Localization Algorithms in Wireless Sensor. Networks: Current Approaches and Future Challenges”,
macrothink, 2010, Vol. 2, No. 1
[2] Zhetao Li, Renfa Li, Yehua Wei and Tingrui Pei, 2010.” Survey of Localization Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks”.
Information Technology Journal, 9: 1754-1757.
[3] J. Chen, K. Yao, and R. Hudson, “Source localization and beamforming,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 19, no. 2, pp.
30–39, 2002.
[4] L. Doherty. Algorithms for position and data recovery in wireless sensor networks. Master’s thesis, UC Berkeley, 2000.
[5] J.M. Kahn, R.H. Katzand, and K.S.J. Pister. Mobile networking for Smart Dust. In ACM/IEEE Intl. Conf. on Mobile Computing
and Networking, Seattle, WA, August 1999
[6]

Q026201030106

More Related Content

What's hot (16)

Similar to Q026201030106 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Q026201030106