Near-optimal sensor placements: maximizing information while minimizing communication cost

When monitoring spatial phenomena with wireless sensor networks, selecting the best sensor placements is a fundamental task. Not only should the sensors be informative, but they should also be able to communicate efficiently. In this paper, we present a data-driven approach that addresses the three central aspects of this problem: measuring the predictive quality of a set of sensor locations (regardless of whether sensors were ever placed at these locations), predicting the communication cost involved with these placements, and designing an algorithm with provable quality guarantees that optimizes the NP-hard tradeoff. Specifically, we use data from a pilot deployment to build non-parametric probabilistic models called Gaussian Processes (GPs) both for the spatial phenomena of interest and for the spatial variability of link qualities, which allows us to estimate predictive power and communication cost of un-sensed locations. Surprisingly, uncertainty in the representation of link qualities plays an important role in estimating communication costs. Using these models, we present a novel, polynomial-time, data-driven algorithm, pSPIEL, which selects Sensor Placements at Informative and cost-Effective Locations. Our approach exploits two important properties of this problem: submodularity, formalizing the intuition that adding a node to a small deployment can help more than adding a node to a large deployment; and locality, under which nodes that are far from each other provide almost independent information. Exploiting these properties, we prove strong approximation guarantees for our pSPlEL approach. We also provide extensive experimental validation of this practical approach on several real-world placement problems, and built a complete system implementation on 46 Tmote Sky motes, demonstrating significant advantages over existing methods

[1]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  Approximation Algorithms , 2001, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[2]  Suman Banerjee,et al.  Node Placement for Connected Coverage in Sensor Networks , 2003 .

[3]  Wei Hong,et al.  Model-Driven Data Acquisition in Sensor Networks , 2004, VLDB.

[4]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Near-optimal sensor placements in Gaussian processes , 2005, ICML.

[5]  Asaf Levin A better approximation algorithm for the budget prize collecting tree problem , 2004, Oper. Res. Lett..

[6]  Noel A Cressie,et al.  Statistics for Spatial Data. , 1992 .

[7]  Naveen Garg,et al.  Saving an epsilon: a 2-approximation for the k-MST problem in graphs , 2005, STOC '05.

[8]  Robert Krauthgamer,et al.  Bounded geometries, fractals, and low-distortion embeddings , 2003, 44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2003. Proceedings..

[9]  Himanshu Gupta,et al.  Connected sensor cover: self-organization of sensor networks for efficient query execution , 2003, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[10]  Deborah Estrin,et al.  Statistical model of lossy links in wireless sensor networks , 2005, IPSN 2005. Fourth International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, 2005..

[11]  David S. Johnson,et al.  The prize collecting Steiner tree problem: theory and practice , 2000, SODA '00.

[12]  Michael Segal,et al.  Improved approximation algorithms for connected sensor cover , 2004, ADHOC-NOW.

[13]  C. Guestrin,et al.  Distributed regression: an efficient framework for modeling sensor network data , 2004, Third International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, 2004. IPSN 2004.

[14]  W. Dunsmuir,et al.  Estimation of nonstationary spatial covariance structure , 2002 .

[15]  Santosh S. Vempala,et al.  New Approximation Guarantees for Minimum-Weight k-Trees and Prize-Collecting Salesmen , 1999, SIAM J. Comput..

[16]  M. L. Fisher,et al.  An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—I , 1978, Math. Program..

[17]  Ole Winther,et al.  Efficient Approaches to Gaussian Process Classification , 1999, NIPS.