ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
OLSR Performance Improvement Using Particle
Swarm Optimization Sigmoid Increasing Inertia
Weight (PSOSIIW)
Shallu Yadav1, Dr. Dinesh Kumar2
M. Tech. Student, Department of CSE, Shri Ram College of Engg. & Mgmt, Palwal, Haryana, India1
Head of Department, Department of CSE, Shri Ram College of Engg. & Mgmt, Palwal, Haryana, India2
ABSTRACT: The standard optimized link state routing (OLSR) proposes an interesting idea, the multipoint relays
(MPRs), to decrease message overhead during the broadcasting process. This paper introduces a novel algorithm for
MPRs selection to improve the OLSR performance utilizing particle swarm optimization sigmoid increasing inertia
weight (PSOSIIW). The sigmoid increasing inertia weight has important enhance the particle swarm optimization
(PSO) with respect to quick convergence and simplicity towards optimal solution. The new fitness PSOSIIW function,
packet delay of every node and degree of willingness are proposed to support MPRs selection in OLSR. The
throughput of the introduced method is analyzed utilizing Riverbed simulator. Entire results show that OLSRPSOSIIW has indicated good performance in comparison of the standard OLSR and OLSR-PSO. Basically the
introduced OLSR-PSOSIIW represents benefit of utilizing PSO for analyzing paths of routing in the MPRs selection
algorithm.
KEYWORDS: multipoint relays, particle swam optimization, OLSR, routing
I.
INTRODUCTION
At present, wireless sensor technology is turning a famous way to build wireless personal area network (WPAN)
because of its less cost, less power consumption applications, suitable for utilizing wireless signals in open regions i.e.
home or office space instead of setting up wires and scalability but energy-saving remains a serious design issue. [1] It
has applications in military operation, environment monitoring, medical and health, intelligent home and other
commercial areas. LR-WPAN (Low- range wireless personal area network) devices can be categorized as reduced
function devices (RFDs) and full function devices (FFDs). [5] One device is showed as the PAN coordinator (FFD)
which is used for managing the activities of the network and its devices, it leads and imparts the data flow over the
network; others are end nodes and routers (RFDs). A FFD manages the complete network through control packets and
manages security/failure cases. It has the ability of performing as a PAN coordinator or linking with an available PAN
coordinator. A RFD can only pass the data but cannot modify the task on its own allocated to it. IEEE 802.15.4 and
Zigbee are not the same. [6],[7] It is a standard based network protocol, broadly utilized for LR-WPAN and supported
only by Zigbee alliance utilizing the transported facilities of IEEE 802.15.4 network specifications. Zigbee protocol
stack has normally 4 layers- application, network and security, physical layer and MAC layer. IEEE defined only latter
two for LR-WPAN while previous two are offered by Zigbee Alliance. Security and network layer also involves the
application model essential for application processing. Zigbee networks can provide support to a high number of nodes;
about 64,000 with single coordinator and dynamic routing . Each node can be set up as a multitasking device with
maximum 240 applications executing at a time. [8]
II.
ZIGBEE ADDRESSING
The 802.15.4 protocol upon which the ZigBee protocol is made defines two address types:
16-bit Network Addresses: A 16-bit Network Address is allocated to a node when the node connects to a network. The
Network Address is unique to every network node. Since, Network Addresses are not stationary - it can change.
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11022
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
64-bit Addresses: Every node consist a unique 64-bit address. The 64-bit address uniquely detects a node and is
permanent. Every node has a singular IEEE and Network (ZigBee Network Layer) address that is allocated when a
node connect to the network. Endpoint no. unique within a node addresses each subunit and hence Application Object
in a node. An Application Object obtains commands from outside world related to pair: (node address, endpoint
number). Commands may be of two kinds: Generic Messages (MSG) and Key-Value Pair (KVP)[12].
III.
ZIGBEE DATA TRANSMISSION
All data packets are addressed utilizing both application layer and device addressing fields. Data can be forwarded as a
multicast, broadcast or unicast transmission.
3.1 Broadcast Transmission
Broadcast transmissions are intended for all PAN devices. When a device forwards a broadcast data packet, all devices
that obtain the packet will transmit the packet three times. Every node that performs broadcast transmission will also
generate an entry in a local broadcast transmission table. This entry is utilized to keep track of every obtained broadcast
packet to assure the packets are not continuously transmitted. Every entry remains for 8 seconds. The broadcast
transmission table has eight entries. However every network device retransmits broadcast transmissions, broadcast
messages should be utilized sparingly [19]. Broadcast transmissions within the ZigBee protocol are designed to be
travelled throughout the whole network such that all nodes obtain the transmission. This needs every broadcast
transmission be retransmitted by all Router nodes to assure all nodes obtain the transmission. Broadcast transmissions
utilize a passive acknowledgment mechanism. This implies that when a node transmits a broadcast transmission, it
listens to view if all of its neighboring nodes retransmit the message. If one or more neighboring nodes do not perform
data retransmission, the node will retransmit the broadcast message and hear again for the neighboring nodes to send
the broadcast transmission [19].
3.2 Multicast Transmissions
Multicast transmissions work same as broadcast transmissions. Data packets are broadcast over the network in a similar
way. Since, only devices that are part of the multicast ID will obtain the data packets [19].
3.3 Unicast Transmissions
Unicast ZigBee transmissions are always issued to the 16-bit address of the destination device. Since, only the 64-bit
address of a device is permanent; the 16-bit address can change. Thus, ZigBee devices may employ network address
detection to find the current 16-bit address that matches to a known 64-bit address. Once the 16-bit address is observed,
a path to the destination device must be found. ZigBee uses mesh routing utilizing the Ad-hoc On-demand Distance
Vector routing (AODV) protocol to demonstrate a path between the destination device and the source [19].
IV.
DATA ROUTING IN ZIGBEE
ZigBee mesh network utilizes AODV (Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector) Routing Algorithm. Routing under the
AODV protocol is achieved utilizing tables in every node that save in the next hop (intermediary node between
destination and source nodes) for a destination node. If an adjacent hop is not known, route discovery must occur for
finding a path. However only a restricted no. of routes can be saved on a Router, route discovery will occur more
generally on a huge network with communication between several different nodes. When a source node must find a
path to a destination node, it forwards a broadcast route request command. The route request command consists the
destination Network Address, the source Network Address and a Path Cost field (a metric for evaluating route quality).
As the route request command is forwarded over the network, every node that re-broadcasts the message manages the
Path Cost field and generates a local entry in its path discovery table. When the destination node obtains a route
request, it compares the ‘path cost’ field against prior obtained route request commands. If the path cost saved in the
route request is better as compared to any prior obtained, the destination node will transmit a route response packet to
the node that generated the route request. Intermediary nodes obtain and send the route response packet to the Source
Node (the node that generated route request) [19].
ZigBee-compliant products work in unlicensed bands worldwide, involving 902 to 928MHz (Americas), 2.4GHz
(global) and 868MHz (Europe). The transmission distance is required to range from 10 to 75m, based on environmental
features and power output. Same as Wi-Fi, Zigbee utilizes direct-sequence spread spectrum in the 2.4GHz band, with
offset-quadrature phase-shift keying modulation. Channel width is 2MHz with 5MHz channel spacing. The 900 and
868MHz bands also utilize direct sequence spread spectrum but with binary-phase-shift keying modulation [11]. Raw
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11023
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
data throughput rates of 40Kbps at 915MHz (10 channels), 250Kbps can be obtained at 2.4GHz (16 channels), and
20Kbps at 868MHz (1 channel) [11]. For any provided data quantity, transmitting at a higher data rate permits the
system to off the receiver and transmitter more frequently, saving important power. Higher data rates at a provided
power level imply there is less energy per transmitted bit, which normally implies decreases range [12]. The normal
802.15.4 node is basically effective with respect to battery performance. You can require battery lifetimes from a few
months to several years as a result of a battery-optimized network parameters and host of system’s power-saving modes
[12].ZigBee have three different techniques of routing data, every technique has its own benefits and drawbacks, which
are; many-to-one routing, Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) mesh routing and source routing.
4.1 AODV Mesh Routing
ZigBee mesh network uses routing methods to demonstrate a connection between a source node and the destination
node. In this kind of network, data packets travel through various hops (multi-hops) to their destined destinations. The
coordinators and end devices utilize a mechanism known as route discovery to discover a connection between source
device and destination device. This path discovery depends on AODV routing algorithm as illustrated in fig 7. In
AODV routing protocol, mesh routing is table driven, in this situation every node save the next hop for a connection to
the destination node. Normally, the network is silent until a route is needed to a specific destination. If a adjacent hop is
not known, route discovery is utilized to find the route to the node [11]. In this mechanism, a node requesting a link,
forwards a route request for link and other nodes on the same network send the message and save the sender
information there by demonstrating a path back to the sender. When any node obtains the message and have a path to
the required node, it forwards back a route response to the node requesting the path and this node choose the more
effective route to the destination node. In a more complicated application where a device requires to forward a message
to many remotes devices, AODV routing will require to perform a path discovery for every destination node to
demonstrated a route. If there are low routing table entries with more destination devices, the AODV routes already
demonstrated may be overwritten with new routes, which cause to regular route findings. This can causes to high delay
of data packets and poor network performance. In this type of situation, it is highly suggested to utilize source protocols
and many-to-one routing [11].
4.2 Many-to-One Routing
AODV mesh routing will require important overhead where many devices will have to route data to a central collector.
The network will be broadcasted with messages if every node had to find a route before forwarding data to the collector
[21]. Many-to-one routing will be for a network optimization of this kind [11]. A single many-to-one broadcast
transmission is forwarded from the data collectors for establishing a response routes on all devices. In the routing,
devices that obtain the route request message normally demonstrate a back many-to-one routing entry table to
demonstrate a path to the collector [21].
4.3 Source Routing
Source routing is employed in a network where many-to-one paths have been demonstrated from remote nodes to the
data collector Centre. This routing algorithm allows the collector to save and define routes for various remotes unlike in
many-to one routing that demonstrates routing paths from several devices to a single data collector [11]. Normally,
many-to-one routing is suggested in a network that have greater than 40 nodes in a single personal area network.
V.
OPTIMIZED LINK STATE ROUTING (OLSR)
OLSR is a link state type, proactive and table driven routing that utilizes the multipoint relays (MPRs) for sending the
network packet. OLSR has been formulated at INRIA [4] and has been standardized at IETF as Experimental RFC
3626 [4]. The services of MPRs are to decrease the routing messages overhead, limit the broadcasting impact of
flooding and offer shortest path in OLSR. This mechanism limits the group of nodes retransmitting a packet from all
nodes, to a subset of all nodes. The size of this subset is based on the network configuration.
In MPRs selection, each node computes its own collection of MPRs as a subset of its symmetric neighboring nodes
selected so that all 2 hop neighbors can be arrived via a MPR. The method indicates that for every node in the network
it can be arrived from the local node by minimum two symmetric hops and there must MPRs that has symmetric
connection to the node.
OLSR may optimize the reactivity to configuration changes by decreasing the highest time interval for periodic control
message transmission. Moreover, as OLSR continuously manages routes to all network destinations, the protocol is
advantageous for traffic patterns where a huge subset of nodes are interacting with another huge subset of nodes, and
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11024
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
where the (source, target) pairs are changing over time. The protocol is specifically suitable for huge and dense
networks, as the optimization performed utilizing MPRs works well in this regard. The dense and larger a network, the
more optimization can be obtained in comparison of the classical link state algorithm.
OLSR is implemented to operate in a completely distributed way and does not depend on any centralized entity. The
protocol does not need flexible transmission of control messages: every node forwards control messages periodically,
and can thus sustain a reasonable loss of some such messages. Such losses take place rapidly in radio networks because
of collisions or other transmission issues.
The OLSR does not need sequenced delivery of messages. Every control message has a sequence no. which is
incremented for every message. Hence the receiver of a control message can, if needed, easily determine which
information is more recent - even if messages have been re-scheduled while in transmission.
VI.
THE PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION SIGMOID INCREASING INERTIA WEIGHT
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is population based stochastic optimization method motivated by social behaviour
of bird flocking and fish schooling [15]. The PSO algorithm was first proposed by Erberhart and Kennedy in 1995 [1516]. A PSO algorithm manages a swarm of particles, where each shows a powerful solution. In analogy with emerging
computation paradigms, a swarm is same as a population, while a particle is same as an individual. Every particle
adjusts its trajectory towards the best its prior position achieved by any member of its neighbourhood or globally, the
entire swarm. The particles are flown via multidimensional search space, where the position of every particle adjusted
according to its own experience and that of its neighbouring nodes. The movement of every particle in search space
with adaptive velocity and record the best position of the search space it has ever travelled. The particles search for best
position until a comparatively unchanging state has been detected or until computational restriction exceeded.
The PSO efficiency is presented as the no. of iterations or generations to determine optimal solution with mentioned
accuracy. With less generation, the near optimal solution can be arrived with quick convergence capability by the
swarm. This paper shows alternative solution for quick convergence towards close optimal solution. The technique of
sigmoid increasing inertia weight (SIIW) is introduced exploiting sigmoid inertia weight function yielding to fast
towards the solution area. The schema tried to increase inertia weight by means of sigmoid function.
This work has been introduced in [24] as a novel PSO inertia weight modulated with sigmoid function for enhancing
the PSO performance. Depending on the detail analysis and observation, this mechanism has been motivated by the
excellence performance presented by linearly increasing and sigmoid reducing inertia weight. The idea of an inertia
weight was formulated is to control exploration and exploitation.
VII.
MPRS SELECTION USING OLSR-PSOSIIW
OLSR does a distributed selection of a group of multipoint distribution relays (MPRs) that play the role of targeted
routers. In OLSR, only nodes i.e. MPRs are responsible for sending control traffic, targeted for diffusion into the whole
network. MPRs offer an effective method for broadcasting control traffic by decreasing the no. of transmissions
needed. In this experiment, OLSR builds usage of "Hello" messages to discover its one hop neighbours and its two hop
neighbours by their responses. Since, when there are greater than 1-hop neighbours covering the same no. of uncovered
2-hop neighbours, the one with the least delay and high willingness degree to the current node is chosen as MPRs node.
The OLSR utilizes interchange HELLO messages to obtain information and compute delay. In OLSR, a node transmits
HELLO messages periodically. Changes in the neighbourhood are determined from the information in these messages.
A HELLO message has the emitting node’s own address and the list of neighbouring nodes known to the node,
involving the connection status to every neighbour (such as symmetric or asymmetric). A node thus reports its
neighbours with which neighbours, and in what direction, communication has been ensured.
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11025
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
Figure 1. The flowchart of OLSR-PSOSIIW in MPRs selection algorithm
Upon obtaining a HELLO message, a node can hence collect information explaining its neighbourhood and two-hop
neighbourhood, as well as determine the quality of the connections in its neighbourhood: the connection from node m
to neighbour n is symmetric if in the HELLO message from n the node m views its own address (with any connection
status)-else the connection is asymmetric. The procedure of MPRs selection in OLSR-PSOSIIW is illustrated in Fig 1.
Every node manages an information set, explaining the neighbours and two hop neighbours. Such information is
assumed valid for a specified period of time. HELLO message is interchanged among neighbours only and offers a
node with topological information explaining its neighbourhood and two hop neighbourhoods. The information from
the HELLO Message interchange together with its time forwarded and time obtained will be utilized to compute delay
among nodes which becomes one of our introduced routing metrics for OLSR-PSOSIIW. The other introduced routing
metric is willingness degree.
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11026
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
Table 1. Simulation Parameters
Simulation Parameters
OLSR
Examined Protocols
200
Number of Nodes
Mobile
Types of Nodes
60 x 60 km
Simulation Area
18 min
Simulation Time
50 m/s
Mobility
200 seconds
Pause Time
Throughput
Performance Parameters
Http
Traffic type
Random waypoint
Mobility model used
Constant Bit Rate (CBR)
Data Type
512 bytes
Packet Size
Auto Assigned
Wireless LAN MAC Address
IEEE 802.11g (OFDM)
Physical Characteristics
48 Mbps
Data Rates(bps)
100000
Buffer Size(bits)
VIII.
SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The results achieved for both FTP and voice applications are illustrated in Fig 2 and 3. Figures 2 and 3 explain the
average throughput of standard OLSR, OLSR-PSO and OLSR-PSOSIIW in FTP and voice applications with various
no. of nodes utilized. The results indicate that the throughput increases as the no. of nodes increases. The maximum
throughputs provided by OLSR-PSOSIIW in both FTP and voice applications are 5,586.37 and 1,719.34 kbps,
respectively which outperform the standard OLSR and OLSR-PSO. Depending on mean and standard deviation
analysis, the OLSR-PSOSIIW is capable to discover an optimum path in multi-hop routing for MPRs selection, better
as compared to the standard OLSR and OLSR-PSO.
Throughput (bits/sec)
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
OLSR
OLSRPCO
6 m
12 m
18 m
24 m
Figure 2: Throughput Comparison of OLSR and OLSRPCO
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11027
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
Throughput (bits/sec)
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
6 m
12 m
OLSRPCO
18 m
24 m
OLSR-PSOSIIW
Figure 3: Throughput Comparison of OLSRPSO and OLSRPCOSIIW
IX.
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
In this paper showed an improvement of MPRs selection in OLSR routing protocol utilizing particle swarm
optimization sigmoid increasing inertia weight (OLSR-PSOSIIW) with the delay and willingness degree are introduced
as fitness function. For examining our introduced technique, throughput evaluations are used to two different
applications; voice and ftp. In the MPRs selection process, the PSOSIIW algorithm and introduced routing metric are
appended to each node of wireless mesh networks. The results indicate that OLSR-PSOSIIW has better performance as
compared to the standard OLSR and OLSRPSO with respect throughput . The finding shows our introduced OLSRPSOSIIW has provided promising solution involving shortest path in WMNs. As future work, The OLSR-PSOSIIW
growth for implementation into wireless broadband router 802.11g and measure in experimental atmosphere.
REFERENCES
[1] I. S. Hammoodi, B. G. Stewart, A. Kocian1, S. G. McMeekin, “A Comprehensive Performance Study of QUALNET Modeler For ZigBee
Wireless Sensor Networks,” Third International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies, pp, 35-40, 2006.
[2] Mathioudakis, I et al, “Wireless Sensor Networks: A case study for Energy Efficient Environmental Monitoring", Proceedings of Eurosensors
conference, Dresden, Germany, September 2008.
[3] Sokullu, R.; Donertas, C, “Combined effects of mobility, congestion and contention on network performance for IEEE 802.15.4 based networks”,
Computer and Information Sciences, 2008. ISCIS '08. 23rd International Symposium on, Vol 3, pp. 1-5, 2008
[4] Harsh Dhaka, Atishay Jain, Karun Verma, “Impact of Coordinator Mobility on the throughput in a ZigBee Mesh Networks”, 2010 IEEE 2nd
International Advance Computing Conference, Thapar University, Patiala
[5]http://www.QUALNET.com/solutions/network_rd/modeler.html
[6] Jorjeta G. Jetcheva, Yih-Chun Hu, Amit Kumar Saha, and David B. Johnson. “Design and Evaluation of a Metropolitan Area Multitier
WirelessAd Hoc Network Architecture in Wireless Sensor Networks” In Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems &
Applications,Monterey, CA, pp 32-37,2004
[7] Patrick Kinney, ―ZigBee Technology: Wireless Control that Simply Worksǁ, Communications Design Conference, 2 October 2003
[8] ZigBee Alliance .ZigBee Specification. December 14th, 2004
[9] http://www.mobilenetx.com/zigbee-vs-bluetooth
[10] Jun Huang1; Guoliang Xing1; Gang Zhou2; Ruogu Zhou1, ―Beyond Co-existence: Exploiting WiFi White Space for ZigBee Performance
Assuranceǁ IEEE ICNP, Kyoto, Japan, 2010
[11] Petr Jur_ík, Anis Koubaa, Mário Alves, Eduardo Tovar, Zden_k Hanzálek, “A Simulation Model for the IEEE 802.15.4 Protocol:
Delay/Throughput Evaluation of the GTS Mechanism”, pp 32-37.
[12] Mikko Kohvakka, Mauri Kuorilehto, Marko Hännikäinen, Timo D. Hämäläinen, ―Performance analysis of IEEE 802.15.4 and ZigBee for
large-scale wireless sensor network applications,ǁ Energy Efficient algorithms, pp. 48 – 57,2006
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11028
ISSN(Online): 2320-9801
ISSN (Print) : 2320-9798
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer
and Communication Engineering
(An ISO 3297: 2007 Certified Organization)
Vol. 4, Issue 6, June 2016
[13] Tseng Y.C., Y.S. Chen, and J.P. Sheu, "The broadcast storm problem in a mobile ad hoc network(ZIGBEE)," In Proceeding of the 5th
ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, NY, USA, pp. 51-162, 2009.
[14] H. Safa, H. Artail, and R. Shibli, “An interoperability model for supporting reliability and power-efficient routing in Wireless Sensor
Networks,” International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 4, pp. 74-83, 2009
[15] ZigBee Alliance. ZigBee Overview. September 2003.
[16] A. Sikora and V. F. Groza, ”Coexistence of IEEE802.15.4 with other Systems in the 2.4GHz-ISM-Band”, in IEEE Instrument and Measurement
Technology Conference, vol. 3, pp. 1786-1791, May 2005.
[17] K. Shuaib, M. Boulmalf, F. Sallabi and A. Lakas, “Co-existence of ZigBee and WLAN”, A Performance Study, ǁ Wireless Telecommunications
Symposium, WTS '06, pp. 1 – 6, 2006
[18] T. Sawamura, K. Tanaka, M. Atajanov, N. Matsumoto, and N. Yoshida, “Adaptive router promotion and group forming in ad-hoc networks, “in
Proceedings of International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 3, pp. 217-223,2008.
Copyright to IJIRCCE
DOI: 10.15680/IJIRCCE.2016. 0406117
11029