Meta-survey on medium access control surveys in wireless sensor networks

Waseem M Arain,Sayeed Ghani

doi:10.1177/1550147716662787

Abstract

Medium access control layer has been the hotbed of research in the field of wireless sensor networks since huge amount of research in wireless sensor networks has focused on saving energy and lately reducing latency. For the most part, medium access control layer solutions in wireless sensor networks are entrusted to save energy, to reduce latency, and at times to ensure reliability perhaps through cross-layer solutions. In this article, we review the surveys at medium access control layer and point to readers some of their strengths and relevancies to medium access control layer protocols. Furthermore, we classify the surveys subject-wise to show trend and usability. To cross compare, we devise a unified lexicon for the purpose and expose the coverage given to the wireless sensor networks’ medium access control protocols by different studies. We present medium access control solutions’ popularity on a known but hitherto unused metric: average citations/year from over 200 medium access control solutions. Our approach to assess the impact factor of protocols for ranking is validated prima facie from the coverage of these solutions by top ranking surveys. We believe it is the widest of such a study involving more than 30 survey papers and over 200 wireless sensor network medium access control protocols.

Highlights

Wireless sensor networks (WSN) consist of tiny nodes called motes installed with one or more sensors communicating their observations wirelessly to a single or multiple node(s) referred to as a sink which may possibly be connected to the Internet.[1,2]Figure 1 depicts such a scenario
Since all early solutions were energy-aware, the paper quite generically covers WSN medium access control (MAC); second, the taxonomy does not follow a particular theme as Scheduled and Unscheduled classes focus on access mechanisms of the solutions whereas Hybrid and Cross-layer classes are design-based segregations
In this methodology, recent publications may be at a disadvantage as number of citations increase over time for several years.[125]. We set aside this effect with our commentary and the use of timelines. For this purpose, we compiled a collection of over 200 reviewed MAC protocols with citation counts and computed the average citation count to gauge the impact of the protocols defined as IF = C=N, where IF is the impact factor of the paper, C is the total citation count as recorded by Google Scholar (We found Google Scholar to be most up-to-date publicly available source; Microsoft Academic Search is used wherever it records higher citation count) and N is the number of years since the work has been published.Figure 17 shows the top ranking protocols on a logarithmic scale

Summary

Introduction

Wireless sensor networks (WSN) consist of tiny nodes called motes installed with one or more sensors communicating their observations wirelessly to a single or multiple node(s) referred to as a sink which may possibly be connected to the Internet.[1,2]Figure 1 depicts such a scenario. The concept of duty cycling was first presented in a seminal work in sensor medium access control (SMAC) protocol.[39] Conceptually, the MAC layer would periodically turn the radio off to save energy for a certain amount of time.

Results

Conclusion