| Literature DB >> 31847300 |
Hamza Fahim1, Wei Li1, Shumaila Javaid2, Mian Muhammad Sadiq Fareed1, Gulnaz Ahmed3, Muhammad Kashif Khattak1.
Abstract
An intrabody nanonetwork (IBNN) is composed of nanoscale (NS) devices, implanted inside the human body for collecting diverse physiological information for diagnostic and treatment purposes. The unique constraints of these NS devices in terms of energy, storage and computational resources are the primary challenges in the effective designing of routing protocols in IBNNs. Our proposed work explicitly considers these limitations and introduces a novel energy-efficient routing scheme based on a fuzzy logic and bio-inspired firefly algorithm. Our proposed fuzzy logic-based correlation region selection and bio-inspired firefly algorithm based nano biosensors (NBSs) nomination jointly contribute to energy conservation by minimizing transmission of correlated spatial data. Our proposed fuzzy logic-based correlation region selection mechanism aims at selecting those correlated regions for data aggregation that are enriched in terms of energy and detected information. While, for the selection of NBSs, we proposed a new bio-inspired firefly algorithm fitness function. The fitness function considers the transmission history and residual energy of NBSs to avoid exhaustion of NBSs in transmitting invaluable information. We conduct extensive simulations using the Nano-SIM tool to validate the in-depth impact of our proposed scheme in saving energy resources, reducing end-to-end delay and improving packet delivery ratio. The detailed comparison of our proposed scheme with different scenarios and flooding scheme confirms the significance of the optimized selection of correlated regions and NBSs in improving network lifetime and packet delivery ratio while reducing the average end-to-end delay.Entities:
Keywords: electromagnetic communication in the terahertz band; energy-efficient routing protocol; firefly algorithm; fuzzy logic; intrabody nanonetworks
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31847300 PMCID: PMC6960842 DOI: 10.3390/s19245526
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
The impact of employing a Fuzzy Logic-Based Decision System (FLBDS) in improving performance of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs).
| Protocol Name | Purpose of Using FLBDS | Impact on Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Fuzzy-Logic-Based Energy Optimized Routing for WSNs [ | Optimize next-hop selection considering the energy of the next-hop and closeness to the shortest path and the sink. | Extended network lifetime, energy efficiency and energy balance. |
| Cluster-head Election using Fuzzy Logic for WSNs [ | Selection of cluster heads on the basis of energy and concentration. | A significant increase in network lifetime. |
| Multi-Sensor Data Fusion in Cluster-based WSNs Using Fuzzy Logic Method [ | Data processing and fusion is carried out using fuzzy rule-based system. Cluster heads process collected information using the fuzzy rule-based system. | Reduce false alarm rate by improving the reliability and accuracy of the sensed information. |
| A Fuzzy Logic-Based Clustering Algorithm for WSN to Extend the Network Lifetime [ | Appropriate cluster head selection based on residual energy, base station mobility and cluster centrality. | Improved network lifetime and stability. |
| Cluster Head Selection in WSNs under Fuzzy Environment [ | Cluster head selection on the basis of residual energy, neighbors density, and the distance. | Prolonged network lifetime. |
| Swarm intelligence based fuzzy routing protocol for clustered WSNs [ | Balanced clustering of nodes and efficient selection of cluster head based on residual energy, distance, and cluster centroid. | Support heterogeneous applications, improved network lifetime and balanced cluster generation. |
| Improving on LEACH Protocol of WSNs Using Fuzzy Logic [ | Sink calculates the chance of each node to become a cluster head. | Make a better selection of cluster head for energy saving. |
| CHEF: Cluster Head Election mechanism using Fuzzy logic in WSNs [ | Optimize cluster head selection based on the residual energy and local distance. | Prolonged network lifetime |
| Fuzzy-Logic-Based Clustering Approach for WSNs Using Energy Predication [ | Improved cluster head selection on the basis of its residual energy and expected energy for the next round. | Energy efficiency |
| Energy Efficient Cross-Layer Routing Protocol in WSNs Based on Fuzzy Logic [ | Fuzzy logic-based next-hop routing decision. | Maximize network lifetime |
| A clustering routing protocol for WSNs based on type-2 fuzzy logic and ACO [ | Fuzzy logic-based cluster head selection based on residual energy, neighbor nodes density and distance. | Improved load balancing and network lifetime |
| An energy-aware fuzzy approach to unequal clustering in WSNs [ | Using fuzzy logic approach to handle uncertainties in cluster-head radius estimation. | Energy-efficient data aggregation |
| MOFCA: Multi-objective fuzzy clustering algorithm for WSNs [ | Energy-based fuzzy competition is carried out for cluster head nomination. | Prolonged network lifetime |
Figure 1The impact of employing firefly algorithm in improving the performance of WSNs.
Figure 2The complete working of the routing scheme proposed in this work.
Figure 3The Mamdani rules used for fuzzy logic-based correlated region selection.
Figure 4Input variables for performing fuzzification. (a) Input variable “density” for fuzzification. (b) Input variable “messages” for fuzzification. (c) Input variable “energy” for fuzzification.
Figure 5Mamdani Rule evaluation process for crisp input values of x = 17, y = 19 and z = 55. (a) If x is 0.8 (medium), y is 0.14 (medium) and z is 0.75 (medium) then the output w is 0.75 (medium). (b) If x is 0.8 (medium), y is 0.79 (high) and z is 0.75 (medium) then the output w is 0.79 (high).
Figure 6Mamdani defuzzification process using the centroid (COG) method for the crisp inputs values; x = 16, y = 19 and z = 55.
The values of parameters selected for the simulations.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Number of NBSs | 100, 200 |
| Number of nanorouter | 1 |
| TTL value | 100 |
| Tx Range of NBS (mm) | 10 |
| Request packet interval | 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5 |
| Pulse energy (pJ) | 100 |
| Pulse duration (fs) | 100 |
| Pulse interval time (ps) | 10 |
| Packet size | 48 (bits) |
| Packet size | 176 (bits) |
| Simulation duration (s) | 3 |
| Total iteration | 10 |
Figure 7Residual energy comparison of our proposed scheme with flooding scheme and different scenarios (A and B) with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 100. (a) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.2. (b) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.3. (c) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.4. (d) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.5.
Figure 8Residual energy comparison of our proposed scheme with flooding scheme and different scenarios (A and B) with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 200. (a) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.2. (b) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.3. (c) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.4. (d) Residual energy comparison at request rate interval 0.5.
Figure 9Comparison of total number of alive NBSs in our proposed scheme with flooding scheme and different scenarios (A and B) with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 100. (a) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.2. (b) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.3. (c) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.4. (d) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.5.
Figure 10Comparison of total number of alive NBSs in our proposed scheme with flooding scheme and different scenarios (A and B) with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 200. (a) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.2. (b) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.3. (c) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.4. (d) Total number of alive NBSs at request rate interval 0.5.
Figure 11Total remaining energy in the network comparison of proposed scheme with flooding scheme and different scenarios (A and B) with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 100 and 200. (a) Total remaining energy in the network with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 100. (b) Total remaining energy in the network with respect to increasing request rate interval and NBSs density of 200.
Figure 12Average end-to-end delay comparison with flooding scheme with respect to increasing request rate intervals and NBSs density of 100 and 200.
Figure 13Packet delivery ratio comparison with flooding scheme with respect to increasing request rate intervals and NBSs density of 100 and 200.