Abstract

Clustering is an effective topology control method in wireless sensor networks (WSNs), since it can enhance the network lifetime and scalability. To prolong the network lifetime in clustered WSNs, an efficient cluster head (CH) optimization policy is essential to distribute the energy among sensor nodes. Recently, game theory has been introduced to model clustering. Each sensor node is considered as a rational and selfish player which will play a clustering game with an equilibrium strategy. Then it decides whether to act as the CH according to this strategy for a tradeoff between providing required services and energy conservation. However, how to get the equilibrium strategy while maximizing the payoff of sensor nodes has rarely been addressed to date. In this paper, we present a game theoretic approach for balancing energy consumption in clustered WSNs. With our novel payoff function, realistic sensor behaviors can be captured well. The energy heterogeneity of nodes is considered by incorporating a penalty mechanism in the payoff function, so the nodes with more energy will compete for CHs more actively. We have obtained the Nash equilibrium (NE) strategy of the clustering game through convex optimization. Specifically, each sensor node can achieve its own maximal payoff when it makes the decision according to this strategy. Through plenty of simulations, our proposed game theoretic clustering is proved to have a good energy balancing performance and consequently the network lifetime is greatly enhanced.

Highlights

  • A conventional wireless sensor network (WSN) [1] is composed of a mass of tiny, cheap and low-powered sensor nodes with limited sensing, processing and transmitting abilities

  • Each node makes its own decisions based on the result of this equilibrium solution to achieve a tradeoff between providing data forwarding services and saving energy, and its own payoff can be maximized; Considering the energy heterogeneity of sensor nodes in practical scenario, we introduce a penalty mechanism to compel the sensor nodes which hold more energy to compete for the cluster head (CH) more actively; Through extensive simulations under various conditions, we prove that the performance of our protocol outperforms the recent game theoretic clustering protocols CROSS and Localized Game theoretical Clustering Algorithm (LGCA)

  • Θ i where bi is a positive penalty term inflicted on node i; pi is the probability of being a CH for node i; vi is the payoff when node i chooses the strategy ND while there exists at least one CH; ei is the extra cost when node i chooses D and Θ is the multiple formative of probabilities not to be the CH for all sensor nodes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A conventional wireless sensor network (WSN) [1] is composed of a mass of tiny, cheap and low-powered sensor nodes with limited sensing, processing and transmitting abilities. Energy consumption must be balanced among sensor nodes to enhance the network lifetime for clustered WSNs. Game theory [16,17] is a powerful mathematical tool used to analyze and predict the decisions of intelligent rational individuals under conflict situations. Each node makes its own decisions based on the result of this equilibrium solution to achieve a tradeoff between providing data forwarding services and saving energy, and its own payoff can be maximized; Considering the energy heterogeneity of sensor nodes in practical scenario, we introduce a penalty mechanism to compel the sensor nodes which hold more energy to compete for the CHs more actively; Through extensive simulations under various conditions, we prove that the performance of our protocol outperforms the recent game theoretic clustering protocols CROSS and LGCA.

Related Works
System
Cluster
Achieving the Maximum Payoff
Then Θ is positive and we have the following inequality:
Searching for the Equilibrium Strategy
CHs Election
Clusters Formation
Performance Evaluations
Rounds until thethe last versusdifferent different network
Average number of of packets versusdifferent different network
Average number
Findings
Conclusions and Future Work
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call