Formato IEEE para presentar artículos
Luis Alonso Alvarez Pacheco, Alexander Fabricio Romero Anconeira
EPIMMEM, Catholic University of Santa María
Arequipa, Perú
luis_alonsoap@hotmail.com
alexanderromero969@gmail.com
Abstract—
Wireless sensor networks are one of the fastest-developing
information technologies and promise to have a variety of
applications in next-generation networks, thus ensuring efficient
and reliable data transport in energy in wireless sensor networks
(WSN) with limited resources is one of the main concerns to
achieve a high degree of efficiency in monitoring and control
systems. Reliability is one of the most important attributes in
sensors. The two techniques that are commonly used in WSNs to
achieve reliability are retransmission or redundancy. The
retransmission is where the reliable transmission of data packets
is assured in terms of recovering the lost packets by
retransmitting them. This could result in an additional
transmission overhead that not only wastes the limited energy
resources of the sensors but also causes the network to become
congested and, in turn, affects reliable data transmission. On the
other hand, the use of redundancy is to achieve reliability in non-
experimental social networks. In redundancy-based reliability
mechanisms, a loss of bits within a packet can be recovered using
some kind of coding schemes. This ability to correct lost or
damaged bits within a packet would significantly reduce the
transmission overhead caused by the retransmission of the entire
packet
Both retransmission and redundancy can be performed hop-by-
hop or end-to-end. The hop-by-hop method allows intermediate
nodes to perform retransmission or redundancy. On the other
hand, in the end-to-end approach, retransmission or redundancy
is performed only at the origin and destination nodes. However, a
hybrid mechanism with an efficient combination of these
retransmission and redundancy techniques to achieve reliability
has until now been neglected by companies.
Depending on the nature of the application, it is also important to
de fi ne the amount of data needed to ensure reliability. This
introduces the concept of reliability at the package or event level.
The reliability of the packet requires that all packets from all
relevant sensor nodes reach the sink, while the reliability of the
event ensures that the sink only gets enough information about a
given event. Therefore, the techniques of retransmission or
redundancy that use hop-by-hop or end-to-end mechanisms aim
to achieve reliability at the packet or event level.
In this article, we present a survey on reliability protocols in
WSNs. We reviewed several reliability schemes based on relay
and redundancy techniques that use different combinations of
packet or event reliability in terms of recovering lost data using
jump-to-jump or end-to-end mechanisms. In addition, we
analyze these schemes by investigating the most appropriate
combination of these techniques, methods and the level of
reliability required to provide an efficient energy reliability
mechanism for WSN with limited resources. This document also
proposes a 3D reference model to classify WSN's reliability
research, which will be used to perform an in-depth analysis of
unexplored areas.
I. INTRODUCTION
Wireless sensor networks (WSN) have been the preferred
choice for the design and deployment of next-generation
monitoring and control systems. It is now possible to
implement a large number of low-cost sensors to monitor
large regions above the ground surface , under water or in the
atmosphere. The most important benefit of sensor networks is
that they extend the calculation capacity to the physical
environment where human beings can not reach. They can
operate for prolonged periods in hostile, challenging or
ecologically too sensitive habitats for human visit. In addition,
they have the potential to provide a large amount of data about
the environment in which they are deployed and to deliver
data through the network to end users.
At the heart of the WSN are the sensor nodes. A sensor
node is a device that has detection, computing and
communication capabilities. Depending on their detection
components and the requirements of the application, the
sensor nodes can be used to monitor different phenomena
such as temperature, light, movement, pressure and humidity.
The processing module of the sensor node is capable of
making a compilation of the detected data and also of the data
received from other sensors. The communication module in
the sensor nodes is used to send and receive data packets to
and from neighboring nodes. Since a single sensor provides
only limited information, a network of these sensors is used to
provide coverage in large environments
WSNs are spatially distributed systems consisting of
dozens, hundreds or even thousands of sensor nodes,
interconnected through the wireless connection channel and
forming the only network. Figure 1 represents an example of a
WSN.
Here we can see a WSN consisting of twelve sensor nodes
and a network receiver, which also functions as a gateway.
Each sensor node is a device that has a transceiver, a
microcontroller and a sensitive element (see Fig. 2). Generally
the sensor node is a stand-alone device. The receiver receives
all the detected data from these sensor nodes, processes them
and sends them to the end user.
.

Fig. 1. An example of a WSN [2].
Fig. 2. Sensor node inner structure [2].
The reliability and integrity of the data is an important
attribute of CPS. For some fields of applications, which have
high demands in terms of reliability, it is particularly
important to guarantee the reliability of the network.
Currently, most researchers study the reliability of the wireless
sensor network based on the network topology, the reliable
protocol and the correction of faults in the application layer.
The sensor nodes of the network send their detected data to
the sink, the area around the sink becomes more congested
with all the traffic flowing into the sink. In addition to losing
packets due to congestion, packets are also lost due to
transmission errors, packet collision, interference, node failure
(due to power depletion) or other unpredictable reasons. In
addition, due to the short range of the sensor nodes, the data
may have to traverse a large number of hops which, in turn,
introduce many entry points for errors that may also become
the cause of packet loss. Therefore, for a successful
monitoring of an environment, the critical data collected by
the sensor nodes must be reliably delivered to the sink, which
requires the recovery of the lost data.
Several protocols have been proposed using different
techniques to face the challenge of achieving reliability in
wireless sensor networks. Investigating and proposing our
proposed improvement, we introduce a three-dimensional
(3D) reference model to categorize the work done to provide
reliability in WSN, as shown in Fig. 3. The 3D Reliability
Reference Model is intended to serve a In-depth analysis,
pointing to the unexplored and efficient combination of
techniques to face the challenge of achieving reliability in
WSN. The existing data transmission reliability protocols
belong to the techniques that are retransmission or
redundancy, ensuring reliability when recovering lost data
using a jump-hop or end-to-end method, while adopting
reliability at the level of package or event based on the
requirements of the application.
1.1. Relay vs. redundancy
The retransmission is where the sending node, after
transmitting its packet, waits for acknowledgment of its
packet sent from the node of the next hop on the route to the
sink. However, in case the sender does not receive any
acknowledgment, it considers that the sent package has been
lost. Therefore, to guarantee reliability, the lost packet must be
retransmitted. On the other hand, instead of retransmitting the
whole packet, the redundancy approach aims to correct only
the lost or damaged bits within the packet. The sensor adds
additional information to the packet that the receiver can use
to rebuild the packet if some bits are lost or corrupted. This
additional information consists of a set of additional
redundant fragments that are encoded using a certain form of
coding mechanism, such as deletion encoding
1.2. From end to end (oriented to the connection)
Versus jump to jump (oriented to links) both retransmission
and reliability techniques based on redundancy can be
performed using a hop-by-hop or end-to-end method. We refer
to jump-by-jump as a mechanism oriented to a link, since
reliability must be maintained in all links. In other words, in
the hop-by-hop method, each individual hop from the source
to the destination is responsible for ensuring the reliable
transmission of the detected data. Similarly, the end-to-end
method can be called a connection-oriented mechanism,
where only the two endpoints (that is, only the nodes of origin
and destination) are responsible for guaranteeing reliability,
while the intermediate nodes simply they retransmit packets
between the source and the destination.
1.3. Reliability at package level vs. event
In a WSN, an event of interest can be described as a
significant change in the state of the environment that users of
the application are interested in and require that the sensors
observe it. This introduces the concept of reliability at the
packet and event level, which refers to the amount of detected
data that must be sent to the sink on the occurrence of an
event of interest in the environment as shown in Fig. 3. The
Packet-level reliability aims to ensure that all packets carrying
detected data from all related sensor nodes are transported
reliably to the sink. On the other hand, event level reliability
aims to ensure that the receiver only obtains enough
information about a particular event that occurs in the network
instead of all detected packets
The article is organized as follows. In Section 2 an analysis is
performed based on the categorization of the reliability
represented in the proposal of the 3D-reliability reference
model and the need to have a hybrid mechanism to further
enhance the reliable transmission of data in WSNs is
discussed where we will compare the schemes proposed
qualitatively. Section 3 presents the tables, opinions of the
protocols presented in the article, where a model of reliability
of the sensor nodes in WSN of Cyber Physical Systems is
proposed. Section 4 presents the mathematical model based on
the markov theory and section 5 the conclusions.
2. Reliability based on retransmission
In a wireless network, retransmission is the most used
technique to achieve the reliability of data transmission.
Retransmission is also widely used in a WSN with limited
resources to recover lost data. Reliability based on
retransmission can be done through an end-to-end or hop-by-
hop method. The end-to-end relay requires only the source
node that generated the packet to retransmit the lost packet,
while the hop-by-hop relay allows the intermediate nodes to
retransmit lost packets. WSN in a multi-hop relay based on
reliability can be achieved through acknowledgments, where
the sender node requires an acknowledgment of the data
packets sent from the neighboring recipient on the route to the
sump.
In general, there are two types of recognition mechanisms,
namely explicit recognition (eACK), which includes negative
recognition (NACK) and implicit recognition (iACK) as
shown in Fig. 4. The eACK mechanism is based in a special
control message that the receiver receives The node, after
receiving a successful packet, sends the sender as a receipt of
the received packet as shown in Fig. 4 (a). Like eACK,
NACK also corresponds to a special control message that
allows the receiver to notify the sender to retransmit a
particular sequence of the missing packet. Special control
messages transmitted on the eACK and NACK mechanisms
result in additional transmission overhead and power
consumption that may not be feasible for most WSN
applications
In the iACK mechanism, the sender, after transmitting the
packet, listens to the channel and interprets the forwarding of
its packet sent by the next hop node as an acknowledgment
receipt. In this way, iACK exploits the transmission nature of
the wireless channel, avoiding the additional overload of
transmission and the use of energy caused by the transmission
of special control messages (eACK / NACK). The following
is a brief overview along with the deficiencies of the main
reliability protocols based on retransmission in terms of event
provision or packet reliability.
2.1. Reliability of the package
We have divided the reliability protocols into two main
categories based on the amount of data that needs to be
transmitted to maintain reliability. Packet level reliability is
one of the categories where the application requires all
packets to contain relevant sensor event information
The nodes must be delivered reliably to the recipient. This can
be achieved using an end-to-end method or a jump-hop
method, as described in the following subsections.
2.1.1. From end to end (connection oriented)
This section investigates the schemes under the category of
relay-based packet reliability using the connection-oriented
approach to ensure reliable data transmission. propose the
sensor transmission control protocol (STCP), an end-to-end
reliability protocol centered in the sink with a congestion
control mechanism. One of the key features of STCP is the
controlled variable reliability mechanism. This allows the data
flow to be controlled dynamically by the sink, while adjusting
the performance according to the type of flow (that is,
continuous or event-controlled) adapted by the application.
The general reliability is maintained through the use of end-
to-end retransmission mechanisms based on ACK / NACK,
where each source node keeps the packets in its cache, until it
receives an acknowledgment from the recipient. On the other
hand, the congestion control is carried out in such a way that
the sink, after receiving the information about the congested
routes, directs the congested nodes downstream to opt for the
alternative routes. The key issue in STCP related to reliability
is the use of explicit connection-oriented acknowledgments
(ACK / NACK), which involves only the end nodes (that is,
the source and sink nodes). While the STCP is a scalable
approach involving a large number of nodes with a high
number of hops from a source node to the sink, it is very
likely that a source node encounters a long waiting time for an
acknowledgment from the source node. sink. This can result
in high latency and cache overflow, which is not suitable for
WSN with power restrictions
Marchi proposes distributed transport for sensor networks
(DTSN), an end-to-end, non-sink, energy-efficient packet
reliability protocol that provides a differential and complete
reliability mechanism. Total reliability is compatible with an
explicit recognition mechanism based on retransmission;
however, the differential reliability is performed
independently using the improvement flow strategy. In the
total reliability mechanism, the originating node continues to
transmit the packets until the number of transmitted packets is
equal to the size of the Recognition Window (AW), after
which the originating node sends an explicit acknowledgment
request ( EAR) to the destination for con fi rmation of
message delivery (ACK or NACK). An ACK is sent if the
sequence of the packets is in order and these packets in
sequence are removed from the output buffer of the source
node. However, if a NACK is received, retransmission of the
sequence of missing packets is required. The key
contributions of DTSN are the integration of the mechanisms
involved in the achievement of reliability, such as partial
buffering in the originating and intermediate nodes and the
deletion encoding. Caching at intermediate nodes minimizes
the high communication cost of performing end-to-end
retransmissions and acknowledgments, which in turn reduces
power consumption
2.1.2. Jump to jump (oriented to links)
This section describes the schemas that are included in the
relay-based packet reliability category using the hop-by-hop
approach. Maróti [14] proposes the directed flood routing
framework (DFRF) that uses the implicit acknowledgment of
stop and wait (SWIA) as a reliable packet recovery
mechanism in WSN. SWIA uses the notion of implicit
acknowledgment in the WSN, where a sending node, after
resending a packet, listens to the channel to verify if the
receiver has sent the packet to the destination.
Zhou et al. [12] propose a reliable transport with consideration
of memory (RTMC), a jump jump packet reliability protocol
that addresses the challenges of memory and unreliable links
in WSN. The originating node transmits data segments until
the memory of the retransmission node is full. To avoid this
memory overflow problem, packet headers are loaded with
memory information that is shared between neighbors.
Reliability is maintained by keeping the segments forwarded
to the sender until an acknowledgment is received.
Zhang et al. [15,16] propose the reliable burst burst protocol
(RBC) for difficult situations in which a large burst of packets
from different locations must be transported reliably to the
sink. The main benefits and design considerations for RBC are
the need to improve the use of the channel and alleviate the
retransmission in the containment of the channel, which is
ignored in SWIA [14]. RBC uses a blockless block
acknowledgment scheme to improve channel utilization and
implements an adaptive timer mechanism for retransmission
timeouts to control channel contention caused by
retransmissions. However, the use of priority schemes to
schedule the transmission could cause the packages that have
lower priority to wait forever in the queue
Shaikh et al. [18] propose tunable reliability with congestion
control for information transport (TRCCIT), with the aim of
providing reliable data transmission in different network
conditions and application requirements. This is achieved by
using a localized hybrid recognition mechanism (HACK) and
a timer management system, where HACK is a combination
of implicit and explicit recognition. The implicit recognitions
are used as the main source of recognition; however, the next
hop neighbor, after receiving the sender's information, can
send an eACK to the sender to stop unnecessary
retransmissions. On the other hand, the adaptive
retransmission timeout mechanism is based on buffer
occupancy and the balance of the number of incoming and
outgoing messages in each node. In addition to providing
greater reliability compared to the RBC [16], TRCCIT also
addresses some of the related key issues, such as punctuality,
adaptive timer, hybrid acknowledgments and energy
efficiency in dynamic network conditions.
The multi-segment transport (RMST) of Stann and
Heidemann [19] is a packet-oriented reliability scheme linked
to the receiver based on NACK. It has a cached and non-
cached mode that decides whether data segments should be
stored or not for retransmission purposes. Unlike windowless
block recognitions and the iACK mechanism in RBC, one of
the key features of RMST is that it performs loss detection
using collectively NACK together with timer-based
mechanisms. RMST is suitable for WSN that deal with the
transfer of large data, such as image, performing
fragmentation / assembly only at the origin and destination
without guaranteeing the delivery of fragments in the same
order.
Park et al. [21] propose GARUDA, another top-down
reliability protocol aims to reliably deliver query metadata and
control codes to descending nodes. GAR-UDA designates the
nodes in the network as central nodes for the retransmission of
lost packets using an availability map (A-map) to avoid
unnecessary retransmission requests; this requires an
additional core construction stage for GARUDA, where loss
recovery and core creation can cause high latency in the case
of large sensor networks and the reliability guarantee is
provided only for the transfer of the first packet . If GARUDA
is used to fulfill the main functions of environmental
detection, it would be an exaggeration, the reason is similar to
that of PSFQ.
He presented some of the schemes that aim to achieve
reliability at the packet level using a link-oriented method to
recover the lost packet. It has been shown that these link-
oriented schemes are more reliable and efficient in time and
energy than the connection-oriented schemes, since loss
recovery is performed on each hop instead of the final nodes.
Each scheme has fulfilled the requirement in its unique form
depending on what the application requires. However, most, if
not all, WSN applications have the tolerance to support some
degree of packet loss instead of restricting the nodes to
reliably deliver each individual packet. This would not only
save limited sensor power, but also improve reliability.
2.2. Reliability of the event
In addition to the reliability of the packet, the reliability of the
event is the other category that is based on the amount of data
required to guarantee reliable transmission using the
retransmission technique. In WSN, the reliability of the event,
as opposed to the reliability of the packet, should be sufficient
for most applications controlled by the event. The reliability
of this mode is intended to ensure that at least one of the many
packets of the sensors that detected an event is delivered to the
receiver, instead of all the packets of all the sensors, The
following discussion covers the main reliability schemes of
events that fall within the category of event reliability based
on end-to-end or hop-by-hop relay.
2.2.1. From end to end (connection oriented)
This section covers the reliability schemes of retransmission-
based events that achieve reliable data transmission using the
connection-oriented approach. Akan et al. [22,23] are the first
to introduce the concept of event reliability when proposing
the event-to-sink reliability protocol (ESRT), where reliability
is measured by the number of packages that contain
information about a particular event that is delivery to the
sink. ESRT is a sink-centered protocol, where the data flow is
controlled centrally by the sink in such a way that when the
required reliability is not reached, the sink will increase the
frequency of event reporting, f, of the nodes. On the contrary,
it will reduce f when there is congestion to restore the required
reliability in the sink. A key assumption of ESRT is that the
receiver has a high power radio that can transmit the last value
of f to all sensor nodes in a single broadcast message, and
each node will adjust its f accordingly
2.3. Open problems
In a WSN, the sensor nodes collectively detect the
environment and deliver the data through wireless channels.
Limited limitations of sensor nodes, such as low power (ie
limited batteries), short transmission range and small memory,
make reliable data delivery one of the biggest challenges in
the WSN area . In view of this, several reliability protocols
(for example, [23,26,25]) have been proposed in the existing
literature
The relay-based reliability protocols discussed in Sections 2.1
and 2.2 aim to ensure reliable data transfer. Each protocol is
discussed on the basis of different loss recovery methods, such
as hop-by-hop or end-to-end reliability and packet or event
reliability (see the 3D Reliability Reference Model in Section
2).
One of the key challenges that most schemes face is the need
to be energy efficient and at the same time achieve reliability.
This requires the use of a distributed approach to achieve
reliability compared to traditional centralized approaches (ie,
a focus on subsidence).
Given the short transmission range of the sensor nodes, it is
possible that the data has to travel several jumps before it
reaches the destination. Each hop introduces entry points for
errors that result in the loss of data that must be recovered to
maintain the required reliability. The adoption of the most
efficient method (for example, the type of acknowledgment)
to recover lost data is another key issue. For the nature of the
multiple jump in the WSN, it is beneficial to perform jump-
by-hop recovery as compared to end-to-end. In addition, it is
also required to choose intelligently the correct recognition
mechanism. Most schemes use an explicit recognition
mechanism, which requires additional communication and
memory. Alternatively, it is much better to use implicit
acknowledgments when exploiting the transmission nature of
the wireless channel. This reduces the extra message overload
caused by the transmission of confirmation messages, which
in turn reduces channel contention and network congestion.
Some of the applications require guaranteed delivery of each
and every packet from source to destination, while others can
tolerate some degree of packet loss. A WSN is considered to
work well as long as the sensor nodes in a given area return
the data reliably to the sink
2.4. Reliability based on redundancy
In relay-based reliability, a loss of bits within a packet is
treated as a loss of the entire packet and requires
retransmission of that packet to achieve reliable data
transmission. This motivates the concept of reliability based
on redundancy where lost or damaged bits within the packet
can be recovered through the use of coding techniques
[30,31]. This significantly reduces the transmission overhead
caused by the retransmission of the entire packet [32]. Taking
into account the nature of WSN's limited resources, the use of
redundancy techniques will not only enhance overall
reliability, but also conserve the limited energy resources of
the sensing nodes.
2.5. Reliability of the package
The reliability of the packet refers to the process of ensuring
the delivery of each data packet that contains the information
of the event observed by the relevant sensor nodes to the sink.
In redundancy-based reliability schemes, this is achieved by
performing the encoding / decoding at the origin and at the
destination node (end-to-end) or each pair of communicating
sensor nodes (ie, each hop) from the origin to the destiny.
(jump by jump).
2.5.1 End-to-end (connection oriented)
The schemas explained in this section are within the reliability
category of redundancy-based packages that use the
connection-oriented approach to ensure reliable data
transmission from source to destination. Ali et al. [36] propose
the optimal erase encoding of Reed-Solomon (OREC) to
achieve the reliability of packets based on connection-oriented
redundancy in a WSN. The originating node creates and
transmits the fragments of a packet using Reed-Solomon
codes, a class of deletion codes, along multiple routes to the
sink where they are rebuilt. The cost of transmitting these
fragments in different network conditions is calculated and the
genetic algorithms (GA) are used to determine the optimized
number of fragments that will be transmitted accordingly. This
scheme assumed a WSN based on the query where the
receiver sends the query to the "Tips", which are nodes to a
sink hop. The tips further spread the queries across the
network and the relay nodes track the route through which
they received the queries. This helps the relay nodes to
forward the query response to the sink through the teeth, while
selecting the route with short hop counts or high reliability.
2.5.2 Jump to jump (oriented to links)
This section investigates redundancy-based packet reliability
schemes, where coding / decoding is done using the link-
oriented approach. Wen et al. [38] propose transmission
reliability in sensor networks (TRSN), a packet reliability
mechanism based on efficient link-oriented redundancy.
TRSN evaluates the reliable transmission of data in terms of
probability of arrival of packages when compared with the
required reliability, while energy efficiency is evaluated in
terms of energy consumed in the successful delivery of a
package
2.6. Reliability of the event
In a WSN, achieving event-level reliability instead of packet-
level reliability should be sufficient for most event-driven
applications. This requires efficient utilization of the event
reliability approach in a technique based on redundancy using
end-to-end or hop-by-jump methods. In this way, the
reliability of the event based on redundancy aims to perform
the encoding / decoding of at least one of the many packets
containing information about the same event, instead of all the
packets of the related sensor nodes. This not only reduces
communication between the sensor nodes, but also reduces the
processing cost at the sensor nodes
2.7. Hybrid mechanism.
So far we have investigated several protocols in wireless
sensor networks that aim to achieve reliable data transmission.
The most common techniques involved in achieving reliability
in WSNs are retransmission and redundancy. To our
knowledge, no existing research has so far considered the use
of a hybrid approach that involves an efficient combination of
both retransmission and redundancy techniques to achieve
reliability, and therefore provides a motivation to investigate a
hybrid mechanism.
A hybrid mechanism combines the characteristics of
retransmission and redundancy techniques. One of the
limitations of redundancy techniques is that rebuilding the
original packet at the receiving node will only succeed when
the number of received fragments is equal to or greater than
the original set of fragments, otherwise the packet is
considered lost. . This introduces the need for a hybrid
mechanism, where the retransmission technique can be
applied when the receiver can not receive the minimum
number of fragments needed to rebuild the packet. In this
scenario, the hybrid mechanism will only retransmit enough
missing fragments to complete the minimum number of
fragments needed to rebuild the original package. This would
not only minimize unnecessary retransmissions of the packets,
but also reduce the overall load of the network by requiring
only the retransmission of the small fragments instead of the
entire packet. This results in the conservation of the limited
energy of the sensors and improves the overall reliability.
However, such an approach would introduce the latency due
to processing on the node at each hop in the sensor network
3. Analysis
Now we present the detailed analysis of the reliability
schemes discussed in Section 2. We have divided the general
analysis into characteristics analysis and qualitative analysis.
The feature analysis compares and evaluates the schemes
based on the common taxonomy proposed in the 3D reference
model (see Fig. 2),
3.1. Reliability schemes based on retransmission
Table 1 presents the relay-based reliability schemes discussed
in Sections 2. It can be seen that most of the research focuses
on achieving reliable data transmission from the sensor nodes
to the sink node (ie, upstream traffic). ) as compared to the
downstream traffic.
Table 1
Comparison of retransmission-based reliability schemes.
The document presents the existing data transport reliability
protocols in wireless sensor networks (WSN). The authors
review various reliability schemes based on retransmission
and redundancy techniques using different combinations of
packet or event reliability in terms of recovering lost data by
using jump-hop or end-to-end mechanisms.
Most WSN reliability evaluations are based on graph theory
and probability theory. The reliability of connectivity
investigates the probability that the network is still connected
for a certain period of time in case some nodes or links fail. Fig. 5. Time diagram of sensor node operation and it testing.
Performance reliability analyzes end-to-end delay, packet
delivery rate, and other network parameters.
The reliability of the WSN is influenced by many factors,
such as the failure of the components, environmental
influences, changes in tasks and the updating of the network.
These factors and the behavior of the network are difficult to
describe or calculate using mathematical models. Network
simulation becomes an important method to analyze the
reliability of the network. Monte Carlo, Petri nets, Bayesian
networks and other simulation methods have been used. To
provide a more efficient and accurate assessment of
transmission reliability in WSNs, the document analyzes
transmission from two directions (uplink and downlink) and
proposes a dynamic evaluation framework. Fig. 6. Markov Chain state transition diagram.

4. Proposed model based on the concept of markow
For WSN of the cybernetic system with critical missions or
security relevance, it is important to know that the sensor
nodes are in operation at any time. During operation, some of
the WSN sensors operate in cyclic mode.
The duration of operation of the sensors can be many times
less than the duration of the pause. In this case, the periodic
test can be used to detect potential faults in the pause of the
sensor operation. We are going to develop a reliability model
for this category of sensors.
The following symbols have been used to develop
equations for the models:
� - Failure Rate
µ - Repair Rate
A - Availability
- Mean time between failures,
The behaviour of the examined system is described by the
Markov Chain state transition diagram (see Fig. 6), where:
– completely good state of the sensor node; – test of the
sensor node without failure; – hidden failure of the sensor
node; – detection of the failure state.
On the base of the state transition diagram for a Markov’s
process shown in Fig. 3, we can write the system of
Chapman–Kolmogorov’s equations [19]:
P1' (t ) = j P0 (t ) - (y + l ) P1 (t )
P1' (t ) = j P0 (t ) - (y + l ) P1 (t )
P2' (t ) = l P0 (t ) - j P2 (t )
P3' (t ) = l P1 (t ) + j P2 (t ) - m P3 (t )
In this system (1) of equations is the probability of

- Mean time to repair finding the system in the state , .

The normalizing condition is:
- Probability of being in state

�
3
- Periodicity of test operations with parameter of
i =0 i
P (t ) = 1
Poisson’s flow
The availability of sensor node and it unavailability
- Time of test operations
may be defined by solution of the
- Parameter of exponential distribution of Kolmogorov’s above mentioned system of equations, where
– stationary probability values of . For high
reliable systems with the equation for unavailability is

U = P1 + P2 P3 = j / (y + l ) + l / j + l / m + lj / m (l +y )

The analysis of the shows that it is an unimodal
function with the extremes in point. The expression for
the definition of optimal value of the periodicity of control
is possible to find out from the condition
dU/d =0:
T0 + tr
Tmopt = T0tm
T0 + tm
At the Fig. 7 the function of the optimal value of the
control periodicity Tm opt =f(tm) is shown for typical reliability
parameters of WSN sensors.
Fig. 7. The function the optimal value of the periodicity of
control.
IV. CONCLUSION
The WSNs promise many new applications in the field of
monitoring and control systems. With the advent of small and
inexpensive sensors, monitoring systems can make use of
them to monitor numerous environmental features. All of
these applications are designed for specific purposes, where
maintaining reliable data transmission from source to
destination is one of the most important challenges.
Retransmission and redundancy are classified as the two
main approaches to achieve the reliability of data transmission
in the WSN. Retransmission is the traditional way of
guaranteeing the reliability that is performed well in high loss
environments at the expense of high communication expenses,
energy consumption and memory occupancy. Comparatively,
the mechanisms based on redundancy achieve a high
reliability with lower communication, energy and memory
requirements, but they require a great overload of processing
Reliability at the packet or event level is related to the
amount of detected data required by the WSN application to
be delivered to the sink to achieve the required reliability
Both relay and redundancy techniques that seek to achieve
packet or event level reliability work best when using the hop-
by-hop method compared to the end-to-end method. Large-
scale WSN high-count counts introduce more entry points for
errors that become the cause of packet loss, which affects
reliability. This can be avoided to some extent by using a hop-
by-hop method, since it guarantees the reliability of each
intermediate hop from the source to the destination. However,
this introduces a processing overload in the node and incurs a
high general latency in the event information report to the sink
We believe that the introduction of a hybrid mechanism would
play an important role in further strengthening the reliability
of data transmission. In addition, it would also address the
challenge of minimizing the total energy consumption in a
WSN with limited resources.
In the Markov paper model for reliability analyzes of the
sensor node in wireless sensor networks is proposed. It is
shown that the reliability of the sensor node depends on the
monitoring strategy and is a unimodal function of the test
period. For the passive part of the sensor node, the optimum
period for the functionality test is defined.
The optimal test period increases with the increase in MTBF
and the duration of the test. In a future perspective, more
artificial intelligence will be implemented in the sensor node
for the early evaluation of data based on CPS self-learning
ontology models.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that in the previous article we
added concepts, protocols, tables and a 3D model that
establishes a common taxonomy to evaluate WSN reliability
research in order to present a broader work that was the slogan
of this improved article mentioning, In the previous article we
present a mathematical model based on the concept of markov
that proposes to optimize to optimize the reliability of sensor
nodes in networks of wireless sensors of cybernetic systems
RECONOCIMIENTOS
This work was supported by Latvian state research project
“The Next Generation of Information and Communication
Technologies (Next IT)” (2014-2017).
REFERENCIAS
[1] P. GJ., «Wireless integrated network sensors (WINS): the
web gets physical.,» Frontiers of Engineering: Reports on
Leading-Edge Engineering from the 2001 NAE Symposium
on Frontiers of Engineering. National Academies Press, p.
78, 2002.
[2] T. S. S. o. ITU, «Applications of Wireless Sensor Networks
in Next Generation Networks,» Technical Paper. Series
Y.2000: Next Generation Networks. ITU-T, 2014.
[3] A. A., «Energy-Efficient and Reliable Transport Protocols
for Wireless Sensor Networks: State-of-Art,» Wireless
Sensor Network, vol. Vol. 3, nº 3, pp. 106-113, 2011.
[4] P. R. S. H. Sharma KK, «A Reliable and Energy Efficient Corporation International Journal of Distributed Sensor
Transport Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks,» Networks, p. 10, 2016. .
International Journal of Computer Networks & [19] S. B. Rubino G, «Markov Chains and Dependability
Communications, vol. Vol. 2, nº 5, pp. 92-103, 2010. Theory,» Cambridge University Press, p. 284, 2014.
[5] S. R. A. I. e. a. Park SJ, «GARUDA: Achieving Effective
Reliability for Downstream Communication in Wireless
Sensor Networks,» IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, vol. 7, nº 2, pp. 214-230, 2008.
[6] W. K. W. S. Mahmood MA, «Reliability in wireless sensor En esta sección se especifican temas detallados que forman
networks: A survey and challenges ahead,» Computer parte de un titulo principal, como el de “Desarrollo de
Networks, vol. Vol. 79, p. 166–187, 2015. Contenidos”.
[7] S. H. G. D. Katiyar M, «On Reliability Modelling in B. Especificación del Papel
Wireless Sensor Networks: A Review,» International El papel debe ser el correspondiente a una hoja carta estilo
Journal of Computer Science Issues, vol. Vol. 9, nº 6, pp. US, es decir 215.9mm (8.5") ancho y 279.4mm (11") largo.
99-105, 2012.
Los márgenes deben ser los siguientes:
[8] R. N. M. P. D'amaso A, «Reliability of wireless sensor Superior = 19mm (0.75")
networks,» Sensors, vol. Vol. 14, nº 9, p. 15760–15785, Inferior = 25.4mm (1")
2014. Izquierdo – Derecho = 17.3mm (0.68")
[9] X. LD, «An efficient binary-decision-diagram-based La hoja debe estar dividida en dos columnas, con un
approach for network reliability and sensitivity analysis,» espacio de 4.22mm (0.17") entre columnas.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Part Si requiere utilizar viñetas, refiérase a la lista de márgenes
A: Systems and Humans, vol. Vol. 38 , nº 1, p. 105–115, anterior para ver el estilo.
2008. ESTILO DE PÁGINA
III.
[10] R. G. Laranjeira LA, «Border effect analysis for reliability Todos los párrafos deben tener intentado o tabulaciones en
assurance and continuous connectivity of wireless sensor la primera línea. También, todos los párrafos deben estar
networks in the presence of sensor failures,» IEEE alineados de forma justificada y hacia la izquierda.
Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. Vol. 13, nº
8, p. 4232–4246, 2014.
[11] X. L. V. V. S. Y. Wang CN, «A phased-mission framework
for communication reliability in WSN,» Proceedings of
the 60th Annual Reliability and Maintainability
Symposium (RAMS ’14), p. 1–7, 2014.
[12] J. C. V. J. Tripathi J, « Proactive versus reactive routing in
low power and lossy networks: performance analysis and
scalability improvements,» Ad Hoc Networks, vol. Vol. 23,
p. 121–144, 2014.
[13] L. K. H. S. e. a. Yan M, «Hypergraph-based data link layer
scheduling for reliable packet delivery in wireless sensing
and control networks with end-to-end delay constraints,»
Information Sciences, vol. Vol. 278, p. 34–55, 2014.
[14] R.-M. J. Cook JL, «Reliability analysis of cluster-based ad-
hoc networks,» Reliability Engineering & System Safety,
vol. Vol. 93, nº 10, p. 1512–1522, 2008.
[15] D. S., «Evaluating reliability of WSN with sleep/wake-up
interfering nodes,» International Journal of Systems
Science, vol. Vol. 44, nº 10, p. 1793–1806, 2013.
[16] R. R. Mahadevan S, «Validation of reliability
computational models using Bayes networks,» Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, vol. Vol. 87, nº 2, p. 223–
232, 2005.
[17] C. T. J. M. F. Y. Z. X. Song Y, «Design and Analysis for
Reliability of Wireless Sensor Network,» Journal of
Networks, vol. Vol. 7 , nº 12, pp. 2003-2012, 2012.
[18] L. Y. H. J. S. L. Zhu X, «Transmission Reliability Evaluation
for Wireless Sensor Networks.,» Hindawi Publishing
 Tam Apariencia (en Time New Roman ó Times)
año Regular Negrita Cursiva
8 Contenidos de tablas Negrita Cursiva
Título de figures
Referencias a objetos
9 Direcciones de Negrita Cursiva
correo electrónico Cuerpo del
(usar fuente Courier) abstract
Cuerpo del articulo
10 Subtítulos Negrita Cursiva
11 Nombre del Negrita Cursiva
autor
24 Título del artículo

El título, autores, departamento y correos deben estar en el

encabezado de la primera página, en una sola columna que
abarca las dos columnas inferiores. Todo este texto debe estar
centrado.
Cada palabra en un título debe iniciar con mayúscula,
excepto palabras menores como: “a”, “de”, “y” , “desde” entre
otras.
Los detalles de los autores no deben mostrar ningún título
profesional como PhD, MSc, Dr.
Para evitar confusiones, el apellido de cada autor debe ser
escrito siempre.
La descripción del departamento debe incluir al menos el
nombre de la universidad, la escuela y el país.
C. Encabezados de Sección
Cada sección deberá dividirse como máximo en 3 niveles
de sub-secciones. Todo subtitulo deberá tener letra de tamaño
10 puntos y cada palabra en el título deberá iniciar con
mayúscula excepto las palabras menores como se indicó en la
sección III.B.
Observe en la línea anterior cómo se hace una referencia a
otra sección del documento, usando el número de título III y el
de subtitulo B.
Cuando necesite crear varios niveles de sección en el
documento (título, subtitulo, etc.) utilice estas normas:
1) Primer Nivel: El primer nivel corresponde al de título,
por tanto debe estar centrado, indexado con números romanos Fig. 1 El ejemplo de un gráfico con colores sólidos que resaltan sobre el fondo
y todas las letras en mayúscula con la primera letra de las blanco.
palabras mayores en mayor tamaño.
2) Segundo Nivel: Un segundo nivel corresponde al sub- Fig. 2 es un ejemplo de una imagen importada al
título. Deben estar numerados usando letras seguidas por un documento. En estos casos, asegúrese de utilizar la resolución
punto y alineados a la izquierda. El tipo de letra es de 10 adecuada, de manera que la figura se pueda apreciar con
claridad en el documento.
puntos y en cursiva.
No utilice figuras de resolución pobre porque empobrece la
3) Tercer nivel: Un tercer nivel es como este que está calidad del artículo.
leyendo. Utiliza letra cursiva de 10 puntos enlistados con Cuando inserte una figura, asegúrese de verificar lo
números arábigos seguidos por un paréntesis. El cuerpo del siguiente:
ítem debe estar inmediatamente después del encabezado, sin los colores contrastan adecuadamente,
saltos de línea. la imagen es clara,
D. Figuras y Tablas cualquier texto en la imagen se puede leer claramente.
Las figuras y tablas deben estar centradas en la columna. Si Fig. 2 muestra un caso donde la resolución no es adecuada,
la figura es muy larga, se puede extender hasta ocupar el mientras que Fig. 3 muestra una mejor adaptación de la misma
espacio de las dos columnas. Cualquier figura o tabla que se figura.
extienda más de una columna, pero no ocupe el espacio de las
dos columnas, se deberá mostrar centrada en la página y
deberá estar siempre en la parte superior o inferior de la
página.
Los gráficos deben estar en color, de preferencia utilice
colores estándar de manera que puedan ser reproducidos en
cualquier sistema. Por colores estándar se entienden rojo, azul,
verde, amarillo. Trate de evitar colores complejos como azul
claro combinado con azul mas fuerte porque podrían
confundirse.
Utilice colores sólidos que resalten sobre el fondo de la
figura para mejorar el contraste.
Toda figura debe acompañarse de un título en letra de
tamaño de 8 puntos, que inicia con la abreviatura “Fig.” para
indicar “Figura” y un número de secuencia.
El nombre de la figura debe tener mayúscula solamente en
la primera palabra, independientemente de si se trata de una Fig. 2 Ejemplo de figura con baja resolución
palabra mayor o menor.
El nombre de la figura se utiliza centrado en la columna, o
página si la figura se extiende fuera de la columna. Si la
descripción se extiende más de una línea, se debe mostrar de
forma justificada, como en Fig. 1.

Fig. 3 Ejemplo de figura con buena resolución
E. Títulos de Tablas
Las tablas deben tener un título con letra mayúscula de 8
puntos, centrado en la columna y con letra más grande en el
inicio de cada palabra mayor. Antes de la línea del título, se
incluye una línea centrada donde se usa la palabra “Tabla”
seguida de la numeración de la tabla usando números romanos.
F. Números de Página, Encabezados y Pie de Página
Estos tres elementos no deben ser utilizados.
G. Hiper-Vínculos y Accesos Directos
Cualquier hiper-vínculo o referencia a Internet debe
escribirse por completo. Es decir, escribir el URL complete de
la ubicación del recurso en lugar de dejar accesos directos.
Las referencias se escriben usando fuente regular igual que
el resto del artículo.
H. Referencias bibliográficas
El encabezado de la sección de referencias debe seguir las
normas del nivel “título” sin embargo, no debe tener
numeración.
Todas las referencias se hacen en letra de 8 puntos.
Utilice cursiva para distinguir los diferentes campos de la
referencia. Utilice los ejemplos adjuntos en este documento.
Todas las referencias están numeradas con números
arábigos consecutivos que inician en 1 y siempre están
encerrados en paréntesis cuadrados (p.e. [1]).
Si en el cuerpo del artículo hace referencia a alguna de
estas referencias, utilice solamente los paréntesis cuadrados y
el número correspondiente. Nunca use términos como “ver
referencia [4]”, en su lugar use “ver [4]”.
Si son varias referencias juntas, sepárelas con comas.
Las referencias cambian según el tipo de fuente.
Los ejemplos enumerados en la sección de referencias de
este documento incluyen:
ejemplo de un libro [1]
ejemplo de un libro parte de una serie [2]
ejemplo de otro artículo de revista [3]
ejemplo de un artículo de conferencia [4]
ejemplo de una patente [5]
ejemplo de un sitio web [6]
ejemplo de una página de un sitio web [7]
ejemplo de un manual [8]
ejemplo de una hoja de datos [9]
ejemplo de una tesis [10]
ejemplo de un reporte técnico [11]
ejemplo de un estándar [12]
IV. CONCLUSIONES
El propósito de esta sección es resumir los principales
resultados discutidos a lo largo del paper. Recuerde manejar
las conclusiones como enunciados cortos fundamentados en la
teoría y los objetivos planteados.
Esta sección no tiene requisitos especiales de formato.
RECONOCIMIENTOS
Esta sección sigue el formato regular del resto del
documento. La única observación es notar que el título no está
numerado.
En esta sección se agregan agradecimientos a personas que
colaboraron en el proyecto pero que no figuran como autores
del paper.
REFERENCIAS
[1] S. M. Metev and V. P. Veiko, Laser Assisted Microtechnology, 2nd ed.,
R. M. Osgood, Jr., Ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1998.
[2] J. Breckling, Ed., The Analysis of Directional Time Series:
Applications to Wind Speed and Direction, ser. Lecture Notes in
Statistics. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1989, vol. 61.
[3] S. Zhang, C. Zhu, J. K. O. Sin, and P. K. T. Mok, “A novel ultrathin
elevated channel low-temperature poly-Si TFT,” IEEE Electron Device
Lett., vol. 20, pp. 569–571, Nov. 1999.
[4] M. Wegmuller, J. P. von der Weid, P. Oberson, and N. Gisin, “High
resolution fiber distributed measurements with coherent OFDR,” in
Proc. ECOC’00, 2000, paper 11.3.4, p. 109.
[5] R. E. Sorace, V. S. Reinhardt, and S. A. Vaughn, “High-speed digital-
to-RF converter,” U.S. Patent 5 668 842, Sept. 16, 1997.
[6] (2002) The IEEE website. [Online]. Available: http://www.ieee.org/
[7] M. Shell. (2002) IEEEtran homepage on CTAN. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ctan.org/tex-
archive/macros/latex/contrib/supported/IEEEtran/
[8] FLEXChip Signal Processor (MC68175/D), Motorola, 1996.
[9] “PDCA12-70 data sheet,” Opto Speed SA, Mezzovico, Switzerland.
[10] A. Karnik, “Performance of TCP congestion control with rate feedback:
TCP/ABR and rate adaptive TCP/IP,” M. Eng. thesis, Indian Institute of
Science, Bangalore, India, Jan. 1999.
[11] J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, and D. Towsley, “A stochastic model of TCP Reno
congestion avoidance and control,” Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst,
MA, CMPSCI Tech. Rep. 99-02, 1999.
[12] Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer
(PHY) Specification, IEEE Std. 802.11, 1997.