Optimum Sleep-Wake Scheduling of Sensors for Quickest Event Detection in Small Extent Wireless Sensor Networks

We consider the problem of quickest event detection with sleep-wake scheduling in small extent wireless sensor networks in which, at each time slot, each sensor node in the awake state observes a sample and communicates the information to the fusion centre. The sensor nodes in the sleep state do not sample or communicate any information to the fusion centre (FC), thereby conserving energy. At each time slot, the FC, after having received the samples from the sensor nodes in the wake state, makes a decision to stop (and thus declare that the event has occurred) or to continue observing. If it decides to continue, the FC also makes the decision of choosing the number of sensor nodes to be in the wake state in the next time slot. We consider three alternative approaches to the problem of choosing the number of sensor nodes to be in the wake state in time slot k+1, based on the information available at time slot k, namely, 1. optimal control of M_{k+1}, the number of sensor nodes to be in the awake state in time slot k+1, 2. optimal control of q_{k+1}, the probability of a sensor node to be in the awake state in time slot k+1, and 3. optimal probability q that a sensor node is in the awake state in any time slot. In each case, we formulate the problem as a sequential decision process. We show that a sufficient statistic for the decision at time k is the a posteriori probability of change Pi_k. Also, we show that the optimal stopping rule is a threshold rule on Pi_k. The optimal policy for M_{k+1} can keep very few sensors wake during the prechange phase and then quickly increase the number of sensors in the wake state when a change is "suspected". Among the three sleep-wake algorithms described, we observe that the total cost is minimum for the optimum control of M_{k+1} and is maximum for the optimum control on q.

[1]  Douglas L. Jones,et al.  Energy-efficient detection in sensor networks , 2005, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[2]  Albert N. Shiryaev,et al.  Optimal Stopping Rules , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[3]  Venugopal V. Veeravalli Decentralized quickest change detection , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[4]  Y. Bar-Shalom,et al.  Censoring sensors: a low-communication-rate scheme for distributed detection , 1996, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[5]  丸山 徹 Convex Analysisの二,三の進展について , 1977 .

[6]  Vivek S. Borkar,et al.  A New Distributed Time Synchronization Protocol for Multihop Wireless Networks , 2006, Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[7]  Anurag Kumar,et al.  Optimizing Delay in Sequential Change Detection on Ad Hoc Wireless Sensor Networks , 2006, 2006 3rd Annual IEEE Communications Society on Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks.

[8]  Rajesh Sundaresan,et al.  Decentralized sequential change detection using physical layer fusion , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.

[9]  E. L. Lehmann,et al.  Theory of point estimation , 1950 .

[10]  Anurag Kumar,et al.  Delay optimal event detection on ad hoc wireless sensor networks , 2010, 2010 48th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton).

[11]  A. Shiryaev On Optimum Methods in Quickest Detection Problems , 1963 .

[12]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Dynamic Programming and Optimal Control, Two Volume Set , 1995 .

[13]  Alʹbert Nikolaevich Shiri︠a︡ev,et al.  Optimal stopping rules , 1977 .

[14]  Rajesh Sundaresan,et al.  Decentralized Sequential Change Detection Using Physical Layer Fusion , 2007, ISIT.

[15]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Energy Efficient Sleep/Wake Scheduling for Multi-Hop Sensor Networks: Non-Convexity and Approximation Algorithm , 2007, IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.