In wireless sensor and actuator networks, none of the existed events ordering algorithms addressed the network delay and failure link jointly. In ordering by double confirmation (OBDC), the process of events ordering cannot be completed, if the failure link existed in network. In temporal event ordering with fault tolerance (TEOFT), the rate of correct events ordering decreased dramatically if the network delay existed. However, both the network delay and failure link were all prone to happen over the wireless communication medium. Network delay usually varied over time in wireless network. To address this issue, the authors proposed a fault tolerance events ordering by aging learning (FTEOAL), in this study. FTEOAL defined the non-determined aging waiting time (AW) and aging learning time to order events without broadcasting any confirmation message. Thus FTEOAL could work while the network delay and failure link existed jointly. By aging learning, the AW and aging learning time were adjusted dynamically. The rate of correct events ordering (R) in FTEOAL thus could be converged to the expected R system required. The simulation results demonstrated that R in FTEOAL could be up to the expected R being 90% but R in TEOFT and OBDC was 10% and 0%.

References

1. 1)
  - 19. Boukerche, A.F., Araujo, R.B., Silva, F.H.S.: ‘An efficient event ordering algorithm that extends the lifetime of wireless actor and sensor networks’, Perform. Eval., 2007, 64, (5), pp. 480–494.
2. 2)
  - 15. Tuan, C.-C., Wu, Y.-C.: ‘Event ordering by double confirmation in wireless sensor and actor networks’, IEEE Sens. J., 2011, 11, (3), pp. 829–836.
3. 3)
  - 9. Lai, Y.-L., Jiang, J.-R.: ‘Optimal path planning for fault-tolerant and energy-efficient target surveillance in wireless sensor and actor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Mobile Data Management: Systems, Services and Middleware, Taipei, Taiwan, May 2009, pp. 531–535.
4. 4)
  - 1. Rashid, B., Rehmani, M.H.: ‘Applications of wireless sensor networks for urban areas: a survey’, J. Netw. Comput. Appl., 2016, 60, pp. 192–219.
5. 5)
  - 17. Boukerche, A.F., Martirosyan, A.: ‘An efficient algorithm for preserving events’ temporal relationships in wireless sensor actor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Local Computer Networks, Dublin, Republic of Ireland, October 2007, pp. 771–780.
6. 6)
  - 13. Kakarla, J., Majhi, B., Battula, R.B.: ‘Comparative analysis of routing protocols in wireless sensor–actor networks: a review’, Int. J. Wirel. Inf. Netw., 2015, 22, (3), pp. 220–239.
7. 7)
  - 3. Ghobakhlou, A., Zandi, S., Sallis, P.: ‘Development of environmental monitoring system with wireless sensor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Modelling and Simulation, Perth, Australia, December 2011, pp. 1125–1131.
8. 8)
  - 22. Boukerche, A., Pazzi, R.N., Araujo, R.B.: ‘A fast and reliable protocol for wireless sensor networks in critical conditions monitoring applications’. Proc. Int. Conf. Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile System, Venice, Italy, October 2004, pp. 157–164.
9. 9)
  - 10. Cao, X., Chen, J., Gao, C., et al: ‘An optimal control method for applications using wireless sensor/actuator networks’, Comput. Electr. Eng., 2009, 35, (5), pp. 748–756.
10. 10)
  - 7. Rezgui, A., Eltoweissy, M.: ‘Service-oriented sensor-actuator networks: promises, challenges, and the road ahead’, Comput. Commun., 2007, 30, (13), pp. 2627–2648.
11. 11)
  - 16. Boukerche, A.F., Araujo, R.B., Silva, F.H.S., et al: ‘Wireless sensor and actor networks context interpretation for the emergency preparedness class of applications’, Comput. Commun., 2007, 30, (13), pp. 2593–2602.
12. 12)
  - 12. Vedantham, R., Zhuang, Z., Sivakumar, R.: ‘Mutual exclusion in wireless sensor and actor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks, Reston, VA, September 2006, pp. 346–355.
13. 13)
  - 4. Kamali, M., Laibinis, L., Petre, L., et al: ‘Formal development of wireless sensor–actor networks’, Sci. Comput. Program., 2014, 80, (Part A), pp. 25–49.
14. 14)
  - 18. Boukerche, A.F., Silva, F.H.S., Araujo, R.B., et al: ‘A low latency and energy aware event ordering for wireless actor and sensor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Modeling Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems, Montreal, Canada, October 2005, pp. 111–117.
15. 15)
  - 21. Tuan, C.-C., Wu, Y.-C.: ‘Temporal event ordering with fault tolerance for wireless sensor and actuator networks’, Wirel. Pers. Commun., 2013, 68, (3), pp. 679–695.
16. 16)
  - 20. Tuan, C.-C., Wu, Y.-C.: ‘Partial messages ordering by double confirmation in wireless sensor and actuator networks’, IET Netw., 2012, 1, (4), pp. 257–268.
17. 17)
  - 11. Boukerche, A.F., Araujo, R.B., Silva, F.H.S.: ‘WSN03-2: context interpretation in wireless actor and sensor networks’. Proc. Int. Conf. Global Telecommunications, San Francisco, CA, November 2006, pp. 1–5.
18. 18)
  - 5. Munir, M.F., Eurecom, I.: ‘Wireless sensor and sensor-actuator networks research trends, protocols, and applications’. Proc. Int. Conf. Networking and Communications, Lahore, Pakistan, May 2008, pp. 6–6.
19. 19)
  - 6. Sikka, P., Corke, P., Valencia, P., et al: ‘Wireless ad hoc sensor and actuator networks on the farm’. Proc. Int. Conf. Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Tennessee, USA, April 2006, pp. 492–499.
20. 20)
  - 2. Oliveira, L.M.L., Rodrigues, J.P.C.: ‘Wireless sensor networks: a survey on environmental monitoring’, J. Commun., 2011, 6, (20), pp. 143–151.
21. 21)
  - 8. Cañete, E., Chen, J., Díaz, M., et al: ‘A service-oriented approach to facilitate WSAN application development’, Ad Hoc Netw., 2011, 9, (3), pp. 430–452.
22. 22)
  - 14. Inoue, M., Ohnishi, M., Peng, C., et al: ‘NerveNet: a regional platform network for context-aware services with sensors and actuators’, IEICE Trans. Commun., 2011, E94.B, (3), pp. 618–629.

Fault tolerance events ordering by aging learning in wireless sensor and actuator networks

References

Related content