1/24
Passive Interference Measurement in Wireless Sensor Networks
Shucheng Liu1,2, Guoliang Xing3, Hongwei Zhang4,
Jianping Wang2, Jun Huang3, Mo Sha5, Liusheng Huang1
1University of Science and Technology of China,2City University of Hong Kong, 3Michigan State University,
4Wayne State University, 5Washington University in St. Louis
2/24
Outline• Motivation
• Understanding the PRR-SINR interference model
• Passive Interference Measurement (PIM) protocol
• Testbed evaluation
3/24
Data-intensive Sensing Applications
• Real-time target detection & tracking, earthquake monitoring, structural monitoring etc.– Ex: accelerometers must sample a structure at 100 Hz
100 seismometers in UCLA campus [Estrin 02] acoustic sensors detecting AAV http://www.ece.wisc.edu/~sensit/
4/24
Challenges
• Wireless sensors have limited bandwidth
• Excessive packet collisions in high-rate apps– Energy waste and poor communication quality
• Interference mitigation schemes– TDMA, link scheduling, channel assignments…– Rely on accurate interference models
5/24
Interference Models
• Protocol model– Perfect comm. range– Binary packet reception
• PRR-SINR model– Packet reception ratio vs. signal
to interference plus noise ratio
PRR=100%
noise ceinterferenpower signal~PRR
Ganesan 2002
6/24
Empirical Study on PRR-SINR Model
Measurement in different times Measurement at different locations
Significant spatial and temporal variation
Real-time interference model measurement is necessary
7/24
A State-of-the-Art Measurement Method
TimeSend event Receive/measure event
Sender
Receiver
Interferer
Synchronization
Noise Level Measurement
SINR measurement Received?
Measuring multiple (PRR,SINR) pairs for many nodes
Prohibitively high overhead!
8/24
Outline• Motivation
• Understanding PRR-SINR model
• Passive Interference Measurement (PIM) protocol
• Performance evaluation
9/24
Key Observations
• Data traffic generates many packet collisions
• Spatial diversity leads to different SINRs
SINR=1dB
SINR=2dB
SINR=5dB
10/24
Overview of PIM
base station
M-node
Measure M-node’s PRR-SINR model
• R-node selection
• Information collection
• Interference detection
• Model generation
R-node 1 R-node 2
Interference linkData link
Information Collection
node id pkt id timestamp RSS
Aggregator
M-node
R1 p1 t1 TX
R2 p2 t2 TX
• RSS measurements of collision-free packets
p1p1 p2p2
M p1 t1 RSS(p1)
M p2 t2 RSS(p2)
R-node 1 R-node 2
Received Signal Strength
Information Collection
node id pkt id timestamp RSS
Aggregator
m-node
R1 r11 t1
R2 p2 t2 TX
• TX/RX statistics of colliding packets
p3 p4R1 p1 t1 TX
R1 p3 t3 TX
M p1 t1 RSS(p1)
M p2 t2 RSS(p2)
M p4 t3 RSS(p3+p4)
R2 p4 t3 TX
Receive with collision
r-node 1 r-node 2
Information Collection
node id pkt id timestamp RSS
Aggregator
m-node
R1 r11 t1
R2 p2 t2 TX
• Colliding packets for TX/RX statistics
p5 p6
R1 r11 t1
R1 p1 t1 TX
R1 p3 t3 TX
M p1 t1 RSS(p1)
M p2 t2 RSS(p2)
M p4 t3 RSS(p3+p4)
R2 p4 t3 TX
Lost due to collision
R1 p5 t4 TX
R2 p6 t4 TX
r-node 1 r-node 2
Interference Detection1. Detect interferer with
collected timestamps
2. Remove fake collisions• Packets may overlap
without interference!• Remove using measured
RSS information
node id pkt id timestamp RSS
R1 r11 t1R1 p1 t1 TX
M p1 t1 RSS(p1)
R2 p2 t2 TX
M p2 t2 RSS(p2)
R1 r11 t1R1 p3 t3 TX
R2 p4 t3 TX
M p4 t3 RSS(p3+p4)
R1 p5 t4 TX
R2 p6 t4 TX
p4 collides with p3, but received by M
p6 collides with p5, lost at M
Model Generation
1. Derive SINR for collision of p3, p4
SINR(p3+p4) = RSS(p4) – RSS(p3) – Noise
= RSS(p2) – RSS(p1) – Noisenode id pkt id timestamp RSS
R1 r11 t1R1 p3 t3 TXR2 p4 t3 TX
M p4 t3 RSS(p3+p4)
R1 p5 t4 TX
R2 p6 t4 TX
p4 collides with p3, but received by M
p6 collides with p5, lost at M
2. Compute PRR
PRR = 50%
M p1 t1 RSS(p1)
M p2 t2 RSS(p2)
16/24
R-Node Selection• Minimize the number of r-nodes used to measure the
(PRR,SINR) pairs of all M-nodes
• Proved to be NP-hard
• Designed a efficient greedy algorithm
M-node SINR Interfering R-node set
M1 1 dB {R1, R2}, {R4, R5}
M1 2 dB {R1, R3}, {R2, R3}, {R3, R4, R5}
M2 1 dB {R2, R3}, {R3, R4}, {R1, R4, R5}
M2 2 dB {R1, R3}, {R1, R5}, {R3, R5}
R-Nodes Set {R1, R2, R3}
17/24
Experimental Setup
• Implemented on TelosB with TinyOS-2.0.2
• Both a 13-node portable testbed and a 40-node static testbed
• Compared with the ACTIVE method
18/24
Accuracy of PIM
• Create a model using 5 min statistics
• Predict the throughput of from another sender
• Baseline methods
• Active method w/ 256 and 1024 control packets
• Analytical model in Tinyos2.1
19/24
Overhead of PIM
20/24
Conclusions
• Empirical study of PRR-SINR interference model
• Passive interference measurement– Significantly lower overhead– High accuracy of PRR-SINR modeling– Real time interference modeling
• Performance evaluation on real testbeds
21/24
Accuracy of PIM
22/24
Thanks!
23/24
Remove Fake Interfering Packets
• Rule 1: If a interfering packet set of node v maintains the same SINR when removing packet w, then the forwarder/sender of w is a fake r-node of node v.
• Rule 2: If node u is a fake r-node of node v, then any packet sent by u does not interfere with any packet received by v.
24/24
Example
• Fake r-node of N4:– N7– N5
m-node SINR Interfering r-node set
N4 1 {N1, N2}, {N1, N2, N5}, {N1, N2, N5, N7}
N4 2 …
… … …
25/24
Average Errors Over Time
26/24
Average Errors with Duty Cycles
27/24
Overview
The system architecture of PIM
records the time when an r-node forwards each packet
records the time when an m-node receives each packet
chosen to help measure the PRR-SINR model of the m-node
whose PRR-SINR models are to be measured
records the RSS values of the received packets.
collects information and generates the PRR-SINR models of m-nodes
28/24
Overview
The system architecture of PIM
detects interferer using collected information
generates PRR-SINR models of m-nodes
decreases overhead by identifies interferers of m-nodes
29/24
Information Collection• Timestamping
– Record the time of forwarding/sending and receiving packet
• RSS measurement– Record the RSS value of received packet
• All the recorded informations are then transmitted to the aggregator
30/24
Why PRR-SINR Model?
• Packet-level physical interference model • Easy to estimated based on packet statistics • Directly describes the impact of dynamics
– Environmental noise – Concurrent transmissions
( )( ) ( )( )r
rr
RSSp fRSS I n
average power ofambient noise
probability of receiving packet
received signal power of packet
received signal power of interfering transmissions
collisions
s1
r
s2