See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/220505159

Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks

Article in International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks · December 2006

DOI: 10.1080/15501320600719151 · Source: DBLP

CITATIONS READS

54 373

2 authors:

Sesh Commuri Mohamed K. Watfa

University of Oklahoma 80 PUBLICATIONS 879 CITATIONS
82 PUBLICATIONS 1,324 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sesh Commuri on 08 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2: 333–353, 2006
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1550-1329 print/1550-1477 online
DOI: 10.1080/15501320600719151

Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks

1550-1477 Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks,
1550-1329
UDSN
International Networks Vol. 2, No. 4, October 2006: pp. 1–35

SESH COMMURI and MOHAMED K. WATFA

Coverage
S. Commuri
Strategies
and M. K.
in Wireless
Watfa Sensor Networks

School of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Oklahoma, Norman,

Oklahoma, 73019, USA

An energy efficient cover of a region using Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) is addressed in this
paper. Sensor nodes in a WSN are characterized by limited power and computational capabilities,
and are expected to function for extended periods of time with minimal human intervention. The life
span of such networks depends on the efficient use of the available power for sensing and communi-
cation. In this paper, the coverage problem in a three dimensional space is rigorously analyzed and
the minimum number of sensor nodes and their placement for complete coverage is determined.
Also, given a random distribution of sensor nodes, the problem of selecting a minimum subset of
sensor nodes for complete coverage is addressed. A computationally efficient algorithm is devel-
oped and implemented in a distributed fashion.
Numerical simulations show that the optimized sensor network has better energy efficiency
compared to the standard random deployment of sensor nodes. It is demonstrated that the optimized
WSN continues to offer better coverage of the region even when the sensor nodes start to fail over
time. A localized “self healing” algorithm is implemented that wakes up the inactive neighbors of a
failing sensor node. Using the “flooding algorithm” for querying the network, it is shown that the
optimized WSN with integrated self healing far outweighs the performance that is obtained by stan-
dard random deployment. For the first time, a “measure of optimality” is defined that will enable
the comparison of different implementations of a WSN from an energy efficiency stand point.

Keywords Sensor Networks; 3D Coverage; 3D Deployment; Optimality; Ad-hoc Networks;

Energy Efficiency

1. Introduction
Advances in wireless communication and low-cost sensors have made possible the design
and deployment of large-scale wireless sensor systems. These Wireless Sensor Networks
(WSNs) have found applications in target classification and tracking [1]–[3]; health appli-
cations [4]; and in environmental and ecological monitoring [5]–[6]. Such networks are
increasingly deployed in buildings, underwater, on roads or bridges, and in planetary
exploration. Most existing results focus on planar networks [14]–[24]; however, a three-
dimensional modeling of the sensor network would reflect more accurately the real-life
situations. Some applications of the results presented in this paper are:
1. Disaster Recovery: Natural disasters (floods, hurricanes, and fires) require sensing
in different planes and thus 3-dimensional coverage techniques are required.
Three-dimensional networks also arise in building networks where nodes are
located on different floors.
2. Mapping Topographical Properties: Random dense sensor deployment on irregular
terrains like mountains and hills leaves three dimensional coverage holes that indicate

Address correspondence to Sesh Commuri, Associate Professor, School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, 202 W. Boyd Street, #219, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, Tel: 405-325-4302; Fax:
405-325-7066; Mobile: 405-590-7376. E-mail: scommuri@ou.edu

333
334 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

the topographical properties of the terrain. Understanding the topography of an area

enables the understanding of watershed boundaries, drainage characteristics, water
movement, impacts on water quality, and soil conservation. The detecting of the cover-
age holes is also a critical military application because it determines the ability of
armed forces to take and hold areas, and to move troops and material into and through
areas. Topographical properties can also be useful in determining weather patterns.
3. Space Exploration [7]–[8]: Wireless sensor networks will play an important role in
planetary explorations. A rover functioning as a base station collects measure-
ments and relays aggregated results to an orbiter.
4. Undersea Monitoring [9]–[11]: Underwater sensor deployment enables the real
time monitoring of selected ocean areas. Under Water Acoustic Sensor Networks
(UW-ASN) can consist of a number of sensors and submersible vehicles that are
deployed to perform collaborative monitoring tasks over a given area.
A very limited number of the applications mentioned afford the flexibility in placing
sensor nodes at desired locations for optimum coverage. In a majority of the applications,
the nodes are randomly distributed, for example dropped from an airplane, onto the region
to be monitored. The sensing needs in each of these applications are fundamentally differ-
ent and require the use of different types of sensors, each with a different sensing range
and sensitivity. A sensor node typically has numerous sensors and can be configured to
monitor the region and transmit the information back to a sink. The number of sensor
nodes required depends on the size of the region to be covered, the sensing radius of the
node, and the type of coverage desired. The information is transmitted to a sink typically
through multi-hop communications in the WSN. The impact of the number of nodes on
the capacity of multi-hop wireless networks was analyzed for deployments in two dimen-
sions [12] and three dimensions [13]. Under a protocol model of non-interference, if n
nodes, each with a transmission rate of W bits/second, are randomly distributed in a disc
of area A sq. meters (m2), then the throughput obtained by each node for transmission to a
⎛ W ⎞
randomly chosen sink is given by Θ ⎜ ⎟ bits / sec [12]. Similarly in the three
⎝ n log n ⎠
dimensional deployment of wireless nodes, the throughput achieved when n nodes are
⎛ ⎞
located in a sphere of volume V is given by Θ ⎜ W ⎟ [13]. Since the
⎜ ⎟ bits / sec
( )
1 / 3
⎜ n log2 n ⎟
⎝ ⎠
number of active nodes depends on the type of sensing required and the region of cover-
age, the overall communication and energy efficiency of the WSN can be significantly
improved by optimizing the number of nodes while guaranteeing the coverage of a region.
The coverage of a two dimensional surface by planar WSNs was studied in the past.
Gupta and Das [14] introduced the notion of a “connected sensor cover” and the energy
efficiency was addressed through the construction of a near-optimal connected sensor
cover. The problem of selecting a subset of randomly deployed nodes for energy effi-
ciency and coverage of an area was also addressed by Cardei [15] and Slijepcevic [16].
Energy efficiency is improved by selecting those sensor nodes having the largest area of
coverage and then placing the remaining nodes in a low energy state. Marengoni [17] and
de Berg [18] address the placement of sensor nodes in the context of an “art gallery” prob-
lem where every point in the region of interest is covered by at least one sensor node.
Sensor placement for surveillance and target location was also addressed by Chakrabarty
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 335

[19] and Dhillon [20]. Approximate algorithms for coverage were proposed in [21] and results
from computational geometry were used to determine completeness of coverage of a region by
the WSN [22]–[24]. The problem of selecting a minimum number of nodes such that each
node in the network is either selected or is a neighbor of a selected node was formulated as the
minimum dominating connected set (MDCS) problem [25]. In [26], Chen and Liestman pro-
posed an algorithm for finding small weakly-connected dominating sets in a WSN. Shakkottai
[27] derived the necessary and sufficient conditions for the connectivity and coverage in terms
of the sensing radius, transmission radius, and the failure rates of the nodes. The connectivity
issue was also addressed as the problem of selecting k-basestations out of a given set of n bas-
estations [28]. Voronoi diagrams and graph search techniques were utilized in [29]–[31] to
design robust, efficient, and scalable algorithms to be used in the integration of WSNs.
In recent years, sensor systems deployed on mobile robots have seen increased usage.
The coverage issues in such systems were first addressed by Gage [32]. Here three types
of coverage that arise in mobile WSNs (blanket, barrier, and sweep coverage) were
defined. Three dimensional deployments of sensor nodes were also studied in the context
of underwater Maximization of the swept coverage [33], while the problem of adequate
coverage and connectivity in mobile WSNs was addressed in [34]. Zhang and Hou [34]
show that if the communication range is at least twice the sensing range, then a complete
coverage of a convex area implies connectivity among the nodes. A Coverage Configura-
tion Protocol (CCP) that can provide different degrees of connected coverage is presented
in [35]. The energy consumption issue in WSNs has primarily been approached from a
communication standpoint [36–38]. Here, the focus has been the determination of opti-
mum sleep and wake times for the sensing nodes.
In this paper, the energy efficiency of a WSN is studied in the context of the coverage of
a region using wireless sensor nodes. First, the minimum number of sensor nodes required to
cover a three-dimensional region is determined and an algorithm for testing the coverage of
a sensor network is proposed. A computationally simple method for selecting a minimum
subset of a random distribution of sensor nodes for coverage is then developed. This method
is implemented in a distributed fashion across the WSN and the saving obtained is analyzed.
Using the standard flooding algorithm [39]–[41], the performance of the optimized network
is shown to be superior to the performance of the original deployment. A localized “self
healing” algorithm is also implemented that wakes up the inactive neighbors of a failing sen-
sor node. It is shown that the performance of the optimized WSN with integrated self healing
far outweighs the performance that is obtained by standard random deployment. For the first
time, a “measure of optimality” is defined that will enable the comparison of different imple-
mentations of a WSN from an energy efficiency stand point.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The coverage problem in WSNs is for-
mulated in Section 2. The minimum number of sensor nodes needed to cover a 3D region
is determined in Section 3. In Section 4, an algorithm for the selection of a minimum set of
sensor nodes to guarantee coverage is developed. The connectivity and power efficiency
issues are addressed in Section 5. In Section 6, an algorithm for checking the extent of
coverage for a known deployment is presented. Numerical simulation results that validate
the proposed algorithms are presented in Section 7 and the conclusions and future work
are summarized in Section 8.

2. Problem Analysis
A wireless sensor network consists of a large number of wireless sensor nodes either
placed at specific locations or distributed randomly in a region. The first step in imple-
menting such a sensor network is to determine the coverage of the sensor nodes. To
336 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

accomplish this, the notions of sensing region and coverage are first defined and the cov-
erage and optimization problems are then formulated. Since in practice, a large number of
sensor nodes are distributed randomly in the region to be monitored, the sensing and com-
munication regions of all the nodes are assumed to be identical. It is also assumed that the
region to be monitored is large in comparison to the sensing region of an individual node
and that the locations of all the nodes are known. The discussion in this paper assumes the
ability of each node to detect the phenomenon of interest. The actual sensed value, sensor
fusion, and routing of the information to a sink, while of enormous importance, are
beyond the scope of the present work.

2.1 Mathematical Preliminaries

Let O be the output of a sensor node S that is capable of sensing a phenomenon P. Let S
have a sensing radius Rs and a communication radius Rc.

Definition 2.1. The phenomenon P located at Y ∈ R3 is said to be detectable by sensor S

located at X ∈ R3 if and only if there exists a constant threshold δ > 0 such that O(Y) > δ if
the phenomenon ‘P’ is present. The quantity ‘δ’ is the signal threshold and is specific to
the type of sensor used. 䊐
The sensing region of sensor node S located at X(x,y,z) is the collection of all points
where the phenomenon P is detectable by the sensor node S, i.e. A = {y ∈ R3 | P is detectable
by S}. While the sensing region of an individual node can depend on the sensor and the envi-
ronment it is deployed in, it is necessary to have a simplified representation of the sensing
region to reduce the computational complexity in determining the coverage of a WSN. In
this paper, we will restrict the sensing region of S to be an open ball centered at X ∈ R3.

Definition 2.2. Let Y = {y ∈ R3 | O(y) > d}. The sensing region of sensor node S located
at X ∈ R3 is defined as A = {y ∈ Y || y – X || ≤ Rs}, where ||.|| is the Euclidean distance
between y and X. 䊐
⎛ ⎞
Rs ⎜ = min Y − X ⎟
⎝ |O ( y )>δ
Y ⎠ in this definition is the radius of the open ball representing the
sensing region and is called the sensing radius of S.

2.2 Problem Formulation

Consider a network comprising of sensor nodes S1,…,Sn, each with a sensing radius equal
to Rs. Let Ai be the sensing region of node Si and ‘R’ the region to be monitored. Then,
given the collection of nodes Cn ={S1,…,Sn}, the sensing region of this collection can be
n
expressed as Cn = U Ai .
i =1

Definition 2.3. A collection of sensor nodes Cn ={S1,…,Sn} is said to cover the region R if
and only if R ⊆ Cn . 䊐
If Cn covers R, then p ∈ R ⇒ p ∈ Ai for some Si ∈ Cn. This is commonly referred to
in literature as the 1-cover of the region R. A natural extension of 1-cover is k-cover where
any point in the region belongs to the sensing regions of at-least k nodes. In this paper, a
cover is interpreted as the 1-cover of the region.
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 337

The coverage and deployment problems in WSNs can be addressed by studying the
following two sub-problems:
• Problem 1(Optimal Deployment): Find the minimum number of sensor nodes and
their locations to cover a given region R.
• Problem 2(Reduced Coverage): Given a dense deployment of sensor nodes, find a
reduced subset of active nodes that guarantee coverage of R.

3. Optimal Deployment
The concept of an optimum cover is introduced in this section. In a deployment of sensor
nodes, if the number of the sensor nodes and their locations can be specified, then it is pos-
sible to find the exact location for each sensor node in order to cover the region using the
smallest number of nodes. Such a deployment is optimal. On the other hand, given a ran-
dom distribution of the sensor nodes, it is possible to activate only a subset of the nodes
and still maintain cover of the region. A reduced cover is a set of sensor nodes that com-
pletely cover the region and removal of any node in this set leads to loss of coverage. In
this section, the problem of determining the optimum cover is addressed by solving the
related problem of packing a volume with equal overlapping spheres. In order to achieve
this, the notion of “thickness” of a cover is first defined along the lines in Conway [43].
When flexibility in deployment exists, it is advantageous to find an optimum deployment
of the sensors so that complete coverage can be achieved using a minimum number of sen-
sors. The deployment strategy proposed in this section achieves optimum coverage by
modeling the coverage region of each sensor by a sphere and then determining the opti-
mum way to cover the desired region with equal overlapping spheres. In order to achieve
this, the notion of “thickness” of a cover is first defined.

Definition 3.1. The thickness q of a cover is defined as the averages number of

spheres that contain a point of the space i.e.
1 n
Volume of one sphere
∑ Vi nV
n i =l
θ = = = where ‘n’ is the number of active
Volume of fundamental region 1 Vtotal
Vtotal
n
sensor nodes; Vi is the volume of sensing region of sensor node Si; and Vtotal is the total
volume of the sensed region R.

Definition 3.2. The covering radius, Rcover, of spheres centered at X1, X2,…,Xn is the
minimum sensing radius that will cover the region R. 䊐
The deployment problem in WSNs can now be addressed as the problem of determin-
ing the thinnest cover of a region R by sensor nodes S0, S1….,Sk. In a 3-dimensional space
the best (thinnest) covering of spheres known [42, 43] is when the centers of the spheres
are at the vertices of a body centered cubic lattice (bcc lattice). Given the sensing radius Rs
of each sensor, the optimal spacing between the centers of each sphere forming a new lat-
tice Λ′ is constructed in the following manner.
• Define Λ′ as the bcc lattice covering the region R. For this Lattice, let Rcover be the
covering radius.
Sensing Radius of each node Rs
• Define α = −
Covering Radius Rcover
338 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

FIGURE 1 Deployment strategy in 3D using bcc Lattice arrangement of 128 nodes. The
coverage region is 10 units × 10 units × 10 units and the sensing radius is 1.5 units.

• The new lattice Λ′ is obtained as α.Λ

This implies that arranging the sensor nodes with their centers coincided with the vertices
of this lattice, Λ′, will guarantee an optimal covering of the region spanned by this lattice.
The minimum number of sensor nodes required to cover the region R is the minimum
number of vertices of the Lattice that cover the region R. The spacing of the lattice is a
function of the sensing radius of the sensor node. The covering radius of a bcc lattice is.

5 5π 5
Rcover = = 1.1180 . Moreover, the thickness of such a cover is θ = = 1.4635.
2 24
The optimal deployment of sensor nodes for coverage of a 3D region is shown in Fig. 1.

4. Reduced Coverage
In practice, given an existing distribution of sensors, it is often necessary to minimize the
number of sensor nodes that remain active while still achieving complete coverage of the
entire region. In this section, an algorithm is developed where the nodes make local deci-
sions on whether to sleep, or join the set of active sensors. If the sensing region of a sensor
node is completely covered by its neighbors, then the sensor can be disabled without
affecting the overall coverage. Thus, by iteratively disabling sensors that are covered by
other sensors, one can arrive at a reduced set of sensors that guarantee a 1-cover of the
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 339

FIGURE 2 Intersection of two sensing regions.

desired region. Since the approach is iterative in nature, the solution that is arrived at
is not necessarily an optimum one. Thus, for the algorithm to be truly useful, it is
necessary to also have a means to compare it to the optimal solution in order to ascer-
tain the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm. In this section, a rigorous mathe-
matical proof of the proposed technique is provided along with a metric to compare
the performance of the reduced network with the optimum coverage obtained in
Section 3.
The central point of the algorithm is that the nodes make local decisions on whether to
sleep, or join the set of active nodes. If the sensing region of a node is completely covered
by its neighbors, then the node can be disabled without affecting the overall coverage.
Let Cn = {S0, S1, S2,…,Sn} be the set of all the sensor nodes that cover the region R.
Let the intersection of sphere S0 and sphere Si be given by the circle Ci, i.e. Ci = A0 ∩ Ai
(Fig. 2). The interior of the circle Ci is said to be the disc bounded by the circle Ci, i.e.
Di = interior (Ci). A circle Ci is completely covered if the disc bounded by the circle is
n
completely covered, i.e. ∀p ∈ Di , p ∈ U A j .
j =1
j ≠i

Theorem 4.1. Let the sensor node S0 be adjacent to sensor nodes S1, S2,…, Sn and Ck =
A0 ∩ Ak, k – 1..n be the circles of intersection. S0 is completely covered if and only if all
Ck ′ s, k = 1..n are covered.
Proof. If S0 is completely covered, then every disc Dk in S0 is covered. The definition
of complete coverage of a disk ensures that the “if” part of the theorem holds.
Conversely, suppose every disc Dk in S0 is covered. Then, ∀ p ∈ Dk, p ∈ Dl where l ∈
[l,…,k–I, k+l,…n]. Now, if S0 is not covered, then there is a point q ∈ S0 ∋ q ∉ Dk, k –
1,..,n. This implies that the point ‘q’ is exterior to the circle segments that bound each Dk.
Since ‘q’ is not covered, there is at least one circle segment that is not covered. This con-
tradicts the assumption that all the circles of intersection are covered. Therefore, if all the
circles of the intersection are covered, then S0 is covered. 䊐
The utility of Theorem 4.1 is in reducing the coverage of sensor node S0 to a simpler
problem of checking if all the circles of the intersection between S0 and the adjacent nodes are
covered. This still is a complex task that is difficult to achieve in real time. The following
340 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

theorem demonstrates a technique where such coverage can be determined by a few

straightforward computations.

Theorem 4.2. A circle C0 is completely covered by spheres if all the intersection points
Ci ∩ Cj ∈ D0, ∀i, j = 1…n are covered by one or more adjacent spheres.
Proof. Consider an uncovered point ‘p’ in D0. Since some parts of D0 are covered by
adjacent sensor nodes, these spheres are going to partition D0 into regions bounded by arcs
from the boundary of C0 and/or arcs from circles. Ck ′ s, k = 1..., n Suppose ‘p’ belongs to
a region Rx in D0. Since ‘p’ is not covered, it is easy to see that Rs has to be bounded only
by the exterior arcs of the circles. Also, the entire boundary of Rx, including the intersec-
tion points of the arcs, must have the same coverage status as ‘p’, i.e. all the intersection
points on the boundary of Rx in D0 must not be covered. This contradicts the assumption
that all the intersection points Ci ∩ Cj ∈ D0, ∀i, j = 1…n are covered. Therefore, if all the
intersection points Ci ∩ Cj ∈ D0 are covered by one or more adjacent spheres, then D0 is
covered. Consequently, C0 is covered. 䊐

4.1 Algorithm for Obtaining Reduced Coverage

Theorem 4.1 and 4.2 indicate that a sensor node is completely covered if all the intersec-
tion points Ci ∩ Cj ∈ Dk are covered by some sensor Sl, l ≠ i, j, k = 1..n. Therefore, to
check if S0 is completely covered, one has to first find all the circles obtained by the inter-
section of S0 ∩ Sk, k = 1..n. For each Ck, find all the intersection points that lie within Dk.
If all these intersection points are covered, then the circles Ck are covered. Then, by the
theorems 4.1–4.2, S0 is covered and can be deactivated. The following definitions aid in
this process.

Definition 4.1. A sensor Si is said to be a neighbor of sensor Sj if and only if d(Xi, Xj) ≤
2Rc, where Rc is the communication radius of sensors Si and Sj. 䊐

Definition 4.2. The neighbor set N(i) of sensor Si is the set of all the neighbors of sensor Si
and is defined as N(i) = {Sj ∈ C | d(Xi, Xj) ≤ 2Rc; j = 1,..,n, j ≠ i}. |N(i)| is the cardinality of
set N(i) i.e. the number of neighbors of sensor Si. 䊐

Selection Algorithm for Complete Coverage

Step 1. For each node Si, form the set of neighbors. N(i). For each element ‘Sk’ in N(i)
compute the volume of overlap, Vik, between sensor node Si and Sk. If the total overlap
between Si and its neighbors is less than the volume of Si, then Si is not completely cov-
n
ered by its neighbors and must remain active. That is Voverlap = ∑ Vik ≤ 4 π Rs3 ⇒ Si
k =1 3
remains active.
4
Step 2. Voverlap ≥ π Rs3 does not necessarily mean that Si is covered. To check if Si is
3
covered, for every pair of nodes Sj, Sk in N(i) do the following:
a. Find Cij the circle got by the intersection of the coverage surface of Si, Sj.
b. Find Cik the intersection circle of Si, Sk.
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 341

c. Find the intersection points Cij ∩ Cik.

d. If the intersection points are all covered, i.e. Cij ∩ Cik ∈ Al, Sl ∈ N (i), l ≠ i,j,k, then
deactivate Si.
It is well known that the coverage problem in WSNs is NP-hard [17]. The computational

⎛ n ⎞
complexity of the algorithm developed in this section is O(N3) where N = ⎜ max N (i ) ⎟
⎝ i -1 ⎠
is the maximum number of nodes in the neighbor set of any sensor in the network.

Definition 4.3. The measure of optimality of a WSN is the ratio of the number of active
sensors in the network to the minimum number of sensors that can completely cover the
same region. 䊐
The results in Section 3 show that the optimum deployment of sensors in 3D would
result in sensors located at the vertices of a bcc lattice. Therefore, given the region to be
monitored, one could easily find the number of sensors required and their location for
complete coverage. However, if the sensors are already deployed and a subset of these
sensors selected to keep active, then the measure of optimality is a measure of excess
energy spent in monitoring the region as compared to an optimum deployment of the sen-
sors. A network with a lower “measure of optimality” would result in lesser expenditure of
energy in monitoring the region.
The main advantage of this algorithm is that it is low in computational complexity
and is executed in a distributed manner. The algorithm requires that each sensor node
knows the locations of all its neighbors. The neighbor list can be easily compiled by the
nodes based on the “HELLO” messages exchanged at start up. When a network is
deployed, all nodes are initially active. As the algorithm progresses, redundant nodes will
switch to the inactive mode until no more nodes can be turned off without causing a hole
in the coverage. To avoid neighbor nodes running the algorithm simultaneously and caus-
ing a “blind spot,” each node announces to its neighbors that it is currently running the
coverage algorithm. If the node is redundant and is eligible for turning off without affect-
ing the overall coverage, it will broadcast a “GOODBYE” message to its neighboring
nodes. Neighboring nodes receiving such a message will delete the sender's information
from their neighbor lists.

5. Connectivity in 3D Wireless Sensor Networks

Consider a WSN comprising of sensor nodes S1…..Sn with sensing radius Rs, and commu-
nication radius Rc, respectively. Let R be the region to be monitored. Denote the sensing
and communication regions of a sensor node Si as Ais and Aic respectively.
i=m i=m
Let C = U Ais and C = U Aic be the sensing space and communication
i =1 i =1
space of a set of nodes C={S1, S2,…Sm} respectively.

Definition 5.1. A set of nodes Ca ={Sa1,..,Sam} is said to be connected if for every

a, b ∈ C a there exists a continuous function f : [0,1] → C a such that, f (0) = a; f (1) = b,

and ∀t ∈ (0,1), f (t ) ∈ C i . 䊐
342 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

Connectivity implies that the location of any active sensor node is within the commu-
nication range of one or more active nodes such that all the active nodes form a connected
communication backbone, while coverage requires all locations in the coverage region to
be within the sensing range of at least one active node. Obviously, the relationship
between coverage and connectivity depends on the ratio of sensing radius to communica-
tion radius. In the two dimensional case, it was shown that coverage implies connectivity
whenever the radius of communication is twice the radius of coverage [34]–[35]. This
result can be trivially extended for coverage and connectivity in three dimensions. 䊐

Lemma 5.1. A necessary and sufficient condition to ensure that coverage implies connec-
tivity in 3D is that the radius of communication be at least twice the sensing radius.
If the condition of Lemma 5.1 holds, then complete coverage automatically implies
connectivity. Therefore, the connectivity problem is not explicitly addressed in this
paper.

6. Checking for Coverage in a WSN

This section presents a simple algorithm for testing the coverage obtained in a wireless
sensor network. This algorithm tests for coverage by generating an occupancy grid and
checking if each cell in this grid is covered by at least one node. The entire region is cov-
ered if all the cells in the grid are covered. This test will also help determine the degree of
the cover and, in the case of incomplete coverage, the “size” of the holes. The degree of
the cover is the least number of sensor nodes that cover any point in the region and is a
measure of redundancy in the WSN. Redundant active nodes are indicative of the excess
energy expended in a WSN. The information on the size and location of the holes in the
coverage helps determine the number of additional nodes required and their placement to
guarantee complete coverage.
The coverage problem in this paper is initially posed as a problem of covering a 2D
region with equal, overlapping disks. The region of interest is first partitioned into a grid
with a spacing of 0.5Rs. An origin is arbitrarily assigned and successive cells are num-
bered. An occupancy matrix (column vector) is then formed and initialized to zero. Every
cell in the region is referenced by one entry in the occupancy matrix. For each node in the
network, the covered cells are determined and the cells in the occupancy matrix corre-
sponding to the covered cells are indexed by ‘1’. A zero entry in the occupancy matrix
indicates an uncovered cell in the region. The number of uncovered cells and their loca-
tions can then be used to determine the size and locations of the uncovered regions. Fur-
ther, since the cell entries in the occupancy matrix are indexed, an entry ‘k’ indicates that
the cell is covered by ‘k’ sensor nodes. Thus the smallest entry in the occupancy matrix
gives the degree of the cover.
The grid generated is the smallest grid entirely covering the region R. If R is smaller
than the grid, then only the relevant cells in the grid can be chosen for testing the cover-
age. This is done by assigning ‘X’, i.e. do not care, to cells that are outside the desired
region of coverage. In the three dimensional case, the region is divided into cubes of side
0.5Rs and the coverage of each cube is verified by checking the distance between the node
and the center of the cube.
A grid spacing of 0.5Rs implies that a sensor node can cover a maximum of 25 cells in
two-dimensional space and 125 cubes in a three-dimensional space (Fig. 3). Therefore, for
a network containing ‘n’ sensor nodes, this algorithm requires O(n) steps to verify if the
region is completely covered. The algorithm presented is simple and easy to implement. It
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 343

2 Rs

Rs
2

Rs
2

FIGURE 3 The coverage region of a sensor node.

not only determines the extent of coverage but also identifies the size and location of the
holes in the coverage.

7. Numerical Results
The theoretical developments in Sections 2–6 are validated through numerical examples
in this section. First the case of random deployment of sensor nodes is studied and com-
pared to the optimum deployment. In the second case, given a deployment of sensor
nodes, a reduced cover is obtained.

Example 1
In this example, the number of sensor nodes required to cover a 3D region of size 10 × 10
× 10 units is considered. Table 1 shows the comparison of the number of nodes required
for coverage using random deployment and deployment using a bcc lattice. In Fig. 4, the
required number of nodes with different sensing radii using random deployment and bcc
lattice deployment are compared. Since low cost, low power sensor nodes typically have a
small sensing radius, the random deployment of such nodes requires the use of a very
large number of nodes. Therefore, efficient deployment of such sensor nodes requires a

TABLE 1 Number of sensor nodes required for coverage of a 10 × 10 × 10 region under

different deployment strategies
Sensing Radius Random Deployment bcc lattice Deployment
2 182 54
1.5 325 128
1 773 396
0.6 2228 1421
0.3 24551 10952
344 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

2500

Random Deployment
N u m b e r o f S e n s o rs 2000

1500

1000

500

bcc Deployment

0
0.5 1 1.5 2
Sensing Radius

FIGURE 4 Number of sensor nodes required (with different sensing radii) for coverage
of a 10 × 10 × 10 region under different deployment strategies: Random Deployment and
bcc lattice deployment with different sensing radii.

technique for determining a reduced subset of sensor nodes from a randomly deployed set
of nodes.
The sensor nodes were distributed randomly using a uniform distribution over the
entire region of interest. The structure obtained under bcc lattice deployment is shown in
Fig. 2. Figure 2 gives some insight into the placement of sensor nodes in three dimen-
sional deployment of WSN, especially in buildings [45] and in underwater applications
[9]–[10].

Example 2
In this example, the optimum coverage algorithm described in Section 4 is used to find the
reduced cover of region 10×10×10 units when sensor nodes are randomly deployed. The
nodes have a sensing radius of 1 unit and initially 2000 nodes are randomly deployed in
this region using a uniform distribution. Figure 5(a) shows the initial deployment of the
nodes and Fig. 5(b) shows the reduced cover obtained by the algorithm in Section 4. It can
be seen that 422 nodes were active in the reduced cover resulting in savings of 78.9%. If a
bcc lattice deployment was used, then the minimum number of sensor nodes required
would be 396. Therefore, the reduced cover has a measure of optimality equal to 1.06,
which indicates that the algorithm has resulted in a solution very close to the optimum
cover that is obtained by bcc lattice deployment.

Example 3
The goal of this example is to compare the occupancy matrix before and after running the
coverage algorithm. In this example, the optimum coverage algorithm described in
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 345

10

0
10
8 10
6 8
4 6
4
2 2
0 0

FIGURE 5a Random distribution of 2000 sensor nodes over a region 10 × 10 × 10 units.

10

0
10
8 10
6 8
4 6
4
2
2
0 0

FIGURE 5b Reduced cover of the region 10 × 10 × 10 units. Initial Deployment = 2000;

Number of active nodes = 422.

Section 4 is used to find the reduced cover of region 10×10×10 units when sensor nodes
are randomly deployed. The nodes have a sensing radius of 2 units and initially 2000
nodes are randomly deployed in this region using a uniform distribution. A 3D grid (grid
size=one unit) is generated and 1000 grid points are tested for coverage. Figure 6 shows
the occupancy matrix of each grid point in the initial deployment of the sensor nodes com-
pared to that after running the coverage algorithm. Table 2 displays the minimum and
maximum number of sensor nodes covering a cell in the grid before and after running the
coverage algorithm. It can be seen that after running the algorithm a maximum of 5 sensor
nodes cover any cell in the grid. The degree of cover after running the algorithm is 1,
which guarantees that the region is completely covered.
346 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

100

90
Before Running the Coverage Algorithm
Number Of S ens ors Cov ering Eac h Grid Point 80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10
After Running the Coverage Algorithm

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Grid Points

FIGURE 6 1000 Grid points were tested, Sensor Radius = 2, Grid Size = 1, Occupancy
Matrix – Initial Deployment (top) and after running the algorithm (bottom).

TABLE 2 Comparing the minimum and maximum

cover before and after running the algorithm
Min. Cover Max. Cover
Before 8 89
After 1 5

Example 4
In this example, the minimum number of nodes that are required for random deployment
is studied. In Example 3, 2000 nodes, each with a sensing radius of 1 unit, were randomly
deployed to cover a region of 10×10×10 units. The optimum cover of this region required
396 nodes resulting in 1,604 inactive nodes. In order to determine the number of sensor
nodes required to cover the region, a number of trials were conducted and the resulting
coverage was analyzed. The number of holes in the coverage for 10 trials is shown in Fig. 7.
It is seen that at least 800 nodes are required to adequately cover the region when random
deployment is used. The reduced cover algorithm therefore results in a saving of 48%.

Example 5
The reduced cover of a deployment is obtained by first establishing communications
between nodes to establish the list of neighbors and then iteratively executing the algo-
rithm at each node. Therefore, the communication overhead increases as the number of
deployed nodes increase. Figure 8 shows the average number of messages over 10 trials
for the different number of deployed nodes. From this figure, it can be seen that the com-
munications overhead for the initialization of the network increases exponentially with
the increase in deployed nodes. The advantage of using a reduced cover is further
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 347

FIGURE 7 10 different trials of a random 3D deployment of sensor nodes on a 10 × 10 ×

10 region and the resulting holes in the coverage.

FIGURE 8 Effect of the number of deployed nodes on the number of messages between
the nodes.

demonstrated by comparison of the performance of the flooding algorithm both in the

original deployment, as well as in the reduced WSN. The number of messages for differ-
ent queries is shown in Fig. 9. It can be seen that the flooding algorithm results in a fewer
number of messages in the reduced network.
The performance of the over time was also studied to determine the benefits of using
a reduced cover. This is done by assuming that each sensor node has a limited energy
348 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

FIGURE 9 Number of queries vs. number of messages in a WSN - (i) Initial deployment
(Flooding Algorithm); (ii) Reduced deployment (Coverage Algorithm).

supply of 300 Joules and is deactivated when the available energy is used up. The perfor-
mance is evaluated in terms of coverage lifetime. The coverage lifetime is the continuous
operational time of the system before the coverage drops below a specified threshold (for
example 0.8). The nodes are assumed to consume 1400mW for each transmission and
1000mW for each reception. Further, the nodes are assumed to consume 830mW, 130mW in
the idle and sleep states respectively. Figures 10a and 10b show the overall coverage obtained
over time as the WSN processes a series of queries. In these figures, two different initial

FIGURE 10a The effect of number of queries on the coverage lifetime of the WSN with
800 nodes – (i) Initial deployment (Original); (ii) Reduced deployment (Algorithm).
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 349

FIGURE 10b The effect of number of queries on the coverage lifetime of the WSN with
1600 nodes – (i) Initial deployment (Original); (ii) Reduced deployment (Algorithm).

deployments of 800 and 1600 nodes are considered. It can be seen in both the cases that
the overall coverage drops over time as the available energy is used in processing the
queries. Using the reduced network, it is seen that the resultant cover over time is signifi-
cantly better. This is because each node in the reduced network has fewer neighbors and as
a result has more efficient communications and less energy expenditure per query. This
improvement in the coverage lifetime comes at a cost. The algorithm for obtaining the
reduced network requires the communication between a node and its neighbors and as a
result a portion of the energy is used up during the initialization stage of the network. This
causes early onset of degradation and loss of cover. This, however, can be addressed by
incorporating self healing in the WSN.
To demonstrate the effect of self healing, a simple mechanism is implemented where
a failing node in a reduced network alerts its neighbors about the impending failure. Inac-
tive nodes in the neighborhood of the failing node are then activated. Since the inactive
nodes and the failing node have overlapping cover, activating all the neighbors improves
the coverage and results in better lifetime coverage for the WSN. The performance of the
WSN for initial deployments of 800 and 1600 nodes with self healing is shown in Figs.
11a and 11b. Two different simulations are depicted in these figures, and in both the
experiments the reduced network with self healing can be seen to outperform the original
network. The self-healing algorithm presented is a simple extension of the results presented in
this paper. A more elaborate self-healing algorithm is a topic of our future work [46].

8. Conclusions and Future Work

Energy efficient coverage of a region using Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) was
addressed in this paper. The main contribution of this paper is a technique for obtaining a
reduced cover of a wireless sensor network. The technique is shown to be computationally
simple and suitable for distributed implementation. Numerical simulations show that the
reduced sensor network has better energy efficiency compared to the random deployment of
sensor nodes. It was demonstrated that the reduced WSN continues to offer better coverage
350 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

FIGURE 11a The effect of number of queries on the coverage lifetime of a self healing
WSN with 800 nodes – (i) Initial deployment (Original); (ii) Reduced deployment
(Algorithm).

FIGURE 11b The effect of number of queries on the coverage lifetime of a self healing
WSN with 1600 nodes – (i) Initial deployment (Original); (ii) Reduced deployment
(Algorithm).

of the region even when the sensor nodes start to fail over time. A localized “self healing”
algorithm is implemented that wakes up the inactive neighbors of a failing sensor node.
Using the “flooding algorithm” for querying the network, it is shown that the reduced
cover of the WSN with integrated self healing offers superior performance over time. For
the first time, a “measure of optimality” has been defined that enables the comparison of
different implementations of a WSN from an energy efficiency stand point.
The proposed algorithm is computationally simple and will result in lower communi-
cation overhead. The 3D coverage algorithm can be easily extended to obtain application
specific reduced cover, border coverage for intrusion detection, to determine the mobility
of sensor nodes to cover sensing holes, and to incorporate self-healing in sensor networks.
Practical ways of 3D deployment for tracking applications is part of our ongoing and
future research. In this paper, the sensing region of each sensor node was assumed to be a
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 351

disk (2D) or an open ball (3D). This model is a simplification motivated by the need for
analysis. This model, while useful, is still simplistic and does not address the realities in
practical implementations. Signal to Noise ratio (SNR) in sensing, multi-path, and fading
issues in communications between the nodes, and data fusion are all important aspects that
affect the functioning of a WSN and will be investigated in our future work. Our future
work also evaluates the performance of our algorithms based on different sensing models
and the design of hybrid coverage protocols capable of delivering accurate spatio-tempo-
ral profile of different kinds of sensing measurements.

Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the U.S. Department of Defense,
Army Research Office, in supporting this work through grant # DAAD 19-03-1-0142. The
authors would also like to thank Prof. Sridhar Radhakrishnan, School of Computer
Science, University of Oklahoma, for his valuable comments and suggestions. The authors
would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions in improving the
quality of the presentation.

About the Authors

Sesh Commuri is an Associate Professor in the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. He received his Masters in Elec-
trical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India in May 1989
and Ph. D in Electrical Engineering from the University of Texas at Arlington in May
2006. Prior to 2002, Dr. Commuri worked in the industry in the development of embed-
ded controllers and WCDMA cellular phones. His research interests include Wireless
Sensor Networks, Intelligent Systems, Real-Time Systems, Mechatronics, Embedded
Controls and Robotics.
Mohamed K. Watfa is currently a Ph.D. student in the School of Electrical and Com-
puter Engineering at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, OK. He obtained his BS in
Computer Science from American University of Beirut in 2002 and his Masters in Engi-
neering Science from the University of Toledo, OH in 2003. His research interests include
Sensor Networks, Wireless Networking, Software Engineering, Resource Management,
Energy Issues, Tracking, Routing, and Performance Measures. He is also a member of the
ACM and IEEE.

References
1. J. Aslem, Z. Butler, F. Constantin, V. Crespi, G. Cybenko, and D. Rus, “Tracking a mov-
ing object with a binary sensor network,” in Proceedings of the 1 st International Confer-
ence on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, Los Angeles, California, November 2003,
pp. 150–161.
2. Q. Fang, F. Zhao, and L. Guibas, “Lightweight sensing and communication protocols for target
enumeration and aggregation,” in Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Symposium on
Mobile Ad Hoc Networking & Computing (MobiHoc), 2003, pp. 165–176.
3. A. Galstyan, B. Krishnamachari, K. Lerman, S. Pattem, “Distributed online localization in sen-
sor networks using a moving target,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on
Information Processing in Sensor Networks, Berkeley, California, USA, 2004, pp. 61–70.
4. L. Schwiebert, S. K. S. Gupta, and J. Weinmann, “Research challenges in wireless networks of
biomedical sensors,” in Proceedings of Mobile Computing and Networking Conference, Rome,
Italy, July 2001, pp. 151–165.
352 S. Commuri and M. K. Watfa

5. M. Bhardwaj, T. Garnett, and A.P. Chandrakasan, “Upper bounds on the lifetime of sensor net-
works,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications ICC’01, Hels-
inki, Finland, vol. 3, June 2001, pp. 785–790.
6. N. Bulusu, D. Estrin, L. Girod, and J. Heidemann, “Self-configuring localization systems:
Design and Experimental Evaluation,” ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems
(TECS), vol. 3, (1) Feb. 2004, pp. 24–60.
7. X. Hong, M. Gerla, R. Bagrodia, P. Estabrook, T. Kwon, and G. Pei, “The mars sensor network:
Efficient, power aware communications,” in Proceedings of IEEE Military Communications
Conferences (MILCOM 2001), McLean, VA, October 2001.
8. NASA/JPL Sensor Webs Project, http://sensorwebs.jpl.nasa.gov/.
9. F. Akyildiz, D. Pompili, and T. Melodia, “Underwater acoustic sensor networks: Research chal-
lenges,” Ad Hoc Networks (Elsevier), vol. 3, pp. 257–279, May 2005.
10. D. Pompili and T. Melodia, “Three-Dimensional routing in underwater acoustic sensor net-
works,” in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on Performance Evaluation of
Wireless Ad Hoc, Sensor, and Ubiquitous Networks, October 2005, pp. 214–221.
11. J. G. Proakis, E. M. Sozer, J. A. Rice, and M. Stojanovic, “Shallow water acoustic networks,”
IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 39, pp. 114–119, 2001.
12. P. Gupta and P. R. Kumar, “The capacity of wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on
Information Theory, vol. 46, pp. 388–404, March 2000.
13. P. Gupta and P. R. Kumar, “Internet in the sky: The capacity of three dimensional wireless net-
works,” Communications in Information and Systems, vol. 1, pp. 33–49, January 2001.
14. H. Gupta, S. R. Das, and Q. Gu, “Connected sensor cover: Self-Organization of sensor networks
for efficient query execution,” in Proceedings of MobiHoc 03, Annapolis, Maryland, USA, June
2003, pp. 189–200.
15. M. Cardei, D. MacCallum, X. Cheng, M. Min, X. Jia, D. Li, and D.-Z. Du, “Wireless sensor net-
works with energy efficient organization,” Journal of Interconnection Networks, vol. 3, pp.
213–229, March 2000.
16. S. Slijepcevic and M. Potkonjak, “Power efficient organization of wireless sensor net-
works,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications, vol. 2,
2001, pp. 472–476.
17. M. Marengoni, B. Draper, A. Hanson, and R. Sitaraman, “System to place observers on a poly-
hedral terrain in polynomial time,” Image & Vision Computing Journal, vol. 18, pp.773–780,
2000.
18. M. de Berg, M. van Kreveld, M. Overmans, and O. Schwarzkopf, “Computational Geometry:
Algorithms and Applications,” Springer-Verlag, 2000.
19. K. Chakrabarty, S. S. Iyengar, H. Qi and E. Cho, “Grid coverage for surveillance and target
location in distributed sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 51(12), Decem-
ber 2002, pp. 1448–1453.
20. S. S. Dhillon and K. Chakrabarty, “Sensor placement for effective coverage and surveillance in
distributed sensor networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Wireless Communications and Network-
ing Conference, 2003, pp. 1609–1614.
21. K. Kar and S. Banerjee, “Node placement for connected coverage in sensor networks,” in Pro-
ceedings of WiOpt: Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad hoc and Wireless Networks,
Sophia-Antipolis, France, March 2003.
22. H. Bonnimann and M. Goodrich, “Almost optimal set covers in finite vc-dimension,” Discrete
& Computational Geometry, vol. 14, (4), pp. 463–479, 1995.
23. V. S. A. Kumar, S. Arya, and H. Ramesh, “Hardness of set cover with intersection,” in Proceed-
ings of the 27th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, 2000, pp.
624–635.
24. V. S. A. Kumar and H. Ramesh, “Covering rectilinear polygons with axis-parallel rectangles,”
in Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Atlanta, Georgia,
1999, pp. 445 – 454.
25. S. Guha and S. Khuller, “Approximation algorithms for connected dominating sets,” in Pro-
ceedings of the Fourth Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, 1996, pp. 179–193.
 Coverage Strategies in Wireless Sensor Networks 353

26. Y. Chen and A. Liestman, “Approximating minimum size weakly-connected dominating sets
for clustering mobile ad-hoc networks,” in Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Sympo-
sium on Mobile Ad hoc Networking & Computing, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2002, pp. 165–172.
27. S. Shakkottai, R. Srikant, and N. Shro, “Unreliable sensor grids: coverage, connectivity and
diameter,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, San Francisco, CA, vol. 2, 2003, pp. 1073–
1083.
28. K. Lieska, E. Laitinen, and J. Lahteenmaki, “Radio coverage optimization with genetic algo-
rithms,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile
Radio Communications (PIMRC), vol.1, 1998, pp. 318–322.
29. H. Huang, A. Richa, and M. Segal, “Dynamic coverage and related problems in ad-hoc sensor
networks,” ACM Mobile Networks and Applications, vol. 10, pp. 9–17, 2005.
30. X. Li, P. Wan, and O. Frieder, “Coverage in wireless ad-hoc sensor networks,” IEEE Transac-
tions on Computers, vol. 52, pp. 753–763, June 2003.
31. S. Meguerdichian, F. Koushanfar, M. Potkonjak, and M. B. Srivastava, “Coverage problems in
wireless ad-hoc sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 20th IEEE INFOCOM, 2001, pp. 1380–
1387.
32. D. W. Gage, “Command control for many-robot systems,” in Proceedings of the 19th Annual
AUVS Technical Symposium, pp. 22–24, 2002.
33. A. Howard, M. J Mataric, and G. S Sukhatme, “Mobile sensor network deployment using poten-
tial fields: A distributed, scalable solution to the area coverage problem,” in Proceedings of the
6th International Symposium on Distributed Autonomous Robotics Systems, 2002, pp. 299–308.
34. H. Zhang and J. C. Hou, “Maintaining sensing coverage and connectivity in large sensor net-
works,” Ad Hoc & Sensor Wireless Networks, an International Journal, vol. 1, UIUCDCS-R-
2003–2351, June 2003.
35. X. Wang, G. Xing, Y. Zhang, C. Lu, R. Pless, and C. D. Gill, “Integrated coverage and connec-
tivity configuration in wireless sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Confer-
ence on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2003, pp. 28–39.
36. Cerpa and D. Estrin, “Ascent: Adaptive Self-configuring Sensor Networks Topologies,” IEEE
Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 3, pp. 272–285, July 2004.
37. W. R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, “Energy-efficient communication
protocol for wireless microsensor networks,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on
System Sciences (HICSS), 2000.
38. Tao Zheng, Sridhar Radhakrishnan, and Venkatesh Sarangan, “PMAC: An adaptive energy-effi-
cient MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks,” IEEE IPDPS, vol. 13, (13), pp. 65–72, April
2005.
39. S. Ni, Y. Tseng, Y. Chen, and J. Chen, “The broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc net-
work,” Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking,
Seattle, Washington, USA, Aug. 1999, pp. 151–162.
40. H. Lim and C. Kim, “Multicast tree construction and flooding in wireless ad-hoc networks,” in
Proceedings of ACM Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems, Bos-
ton, Massachusetts, USA 2000, pp. 61–68.
41. S. Basagni, I. Chlamtac, and D. Bruschi, “A mobility-transparent deterministic broadcast mech-
anism for ad hoc networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), vol.7, pp.799–807,
December 1999.
42. G. Fejes Toth, G. Kuperberg, and W. Kuperberg, “Highly saturated packings and reduced cover-
ings,” Monatsh Math., vol. 125, (2) pp.127–145, 1998.
43. J. H. Conway and N. J. A. Sloane, “Sphere Packings, Lattices and Groups,” Springer-Verlag,
New York, 2nd ed., 1993.
44. N. Megudio and A. Tamir, “On the complexity of locating linear facilities in the plane,” Opera-
tions Research Letters, pp.194–197, 1982.
45. Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society (CITRIS) program, http:/
/www.coe.berkeley.edu/labnotes/1101smartbuildings.html.
46. S.Commuri and M.Watfa, “Self healing sensor cover in wireless sensor networks,” ACM Trans-
actions on Sensor Networks (TOSN), submitted, September 2005.

View publication stats