| Literature DB >> 35458850 |
Durairaj Anuradha1, Neelakandan Subramani2, Osamah Ibrahim Khalaf3, Youseef Alotaibi4, Saleh Alghamdi5, Manjula Rajagopal6.
Abstract
Underwater wireless sensor networks (UWSNs) have applications in several fields, such as disaster management, underwater navigation, and environment monitoring. Since the nodes in UWSNs are restricted to inbuilt batteries, the effective utilization of available energy becomes essential. Clustering and routing approaches can be employed as energy-efficient solutions for UWSNs. However, the cluster-based routing techniques developed for conventional wireless networks cannot be employed for a UWSN because of the low bandwidth, spread stay, underwater current, and error probability. To resolve these issues, this article introduces a novel chaotic search-and-rescue-optimization-based multi-hop data transmission (CSRO-MHDT) protocol for UWSNs. When using the CSRO-MHDT technique, cluster headers (CHs) are selected and clusters are prearranged, rendering a range of features, including remaining energy, intracluster distance, and intercluster detachment. Additionally, the chaotic search and rescue optimization (CSRO) algorithm is discussed, which is created by incorporating chaotic notions into the classic search and rescue optimization (SRO) algorithm. In addition, the CSRO-MHDT approach calculates a fitness function that takes residual energy, distance, and node degree into account, among other factors. A distinctive aspect of the paper is demonstrated by the development of the CSRO algorithm for route optimization, which was developed in-house. To validate the success of the CSRO-MHDT method, a sequence of tests were carried out, and the results showed the CSRO-MHDT method to have a packet delivery ratio (PDR) of 88%, whereas the energy-efficient clustering routing protocol (EECRP), the fuzzy C-means and moth-flame optimization (FCMMFO), the fuzzy scheme and particle swarm optimization (FBCPSO), the energy-efficient grid routing based on 3D cubes (EGRC), and the low-energy adaptive clustering hierarchy based on expected residual energy (LEACH-ERE) methods have reached lesser PDRs of 83%, 81%, 78%, 77%, and 75%, respectively, for 1000 rounds. The CSRO-MHDT technique resulted in higher values of number of packets received (NPR) under all rounds. For instance, with 50 rounds, the CSRO-MHDT technique attained a higher NPR of 3792%.Entities:
Keywords: chaotic concept; data transmission; fitness function; routing; search and rescue optimization; underwater wireless sensor network
Year: 2022 PMID: 35458850 PMCID: PMC9028294 DOI: 10.3390/s22082867
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Summary of existing approaches.
| Reference No. | Published Year | Approach | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 2019 | Adaptive node clustering | Throughput and reliability are high in clustering process | Network life time |
| [ | 2020 | LOCAN methodology | Energy consumption | Packet loss |
| [ | 2020 | Bee algorithm | Reliable transmission | Not suitable for deep UWSNs |
| [ | 2021 | Grey wolf optimization algorithm | Reducing packet loss and traffic systems | Sensor failure |
| [ | 2019 | Threshold and energy level partition | Reducing delay and high throughput | Maximizing energy |
| [ | 2021 | Path selection strategy | High throughput | Time delay |
| [ | 2020 | Fuzzy C means and moth–flame optimization method | Reducing energy | Time delay |
| Proposed Approach | 2022 | Chaotic search and rescue optimization | Reliable transmission, Reducing time delay and high throughput | Packet loss in high level nodes |
Figure 1Overall process of the CSRO-MHDT technique.
Figure 2Flowchart of SRO.
NAN study of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing methods analyzed under different rounds.
| No. of Alive Nodes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Rounds | CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FCMMFO | FBCPSO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE |
| 0 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 40 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 80 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 120 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 160 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 200 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 240 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 |
| 280 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 299 |
| 320 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 299 | 297 |
| 360 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 297 | 298 | 295 |
| 400 | 300 | 300 | 298 | 298 | 297 | 290 |
| 440 | 300 | 296 | 290 | 299 | 298 | 287 |
| 480 | 296 | 294 | 287 | 290 | 290 | 285 |
| 520 | 294 | 288 | 279 | 284 | 281 | 271 |
| 560 | 287 | 276 | 268 | 262 | 264 | 254 |
| 600 | 279 | 264 | 253 | 240 | 243 | 238 |
| 640 | 269 | 234 | 230 | 202 | 228 | 218 |
| 680 | 253 | 217 | 211 | 188 | 187 | 179 |
| 720 | 226 | 183 | 172 | 169 | 160 | 152 |
| 760 | 214 | 142 | 132 | 130 | 140 | 50 |
| 800 | 183 | 113 | 121 | 89 | 95 | 3 |
| 840 | 139 | 72 | 94 | 56 | 20 | 0 |
| 880 | 116 | 28 | 37 | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| 920 | 68 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 960 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 3NAN analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
Network lifetime analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
| No. of Rounds | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FCMMFO | FBCPSO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE | |
| FND | 476 | 440 | 403 | 361 | 323 | 280 |
| HND | 838 | 754 | 749 | 730 | 753 | 722 |
| LND | 998 | 940 | 921 | 903 | 874 | 840 |
Figure 4Network lifetime analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
TEC analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches with different rounds.
| Total Energy Consumption (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Rounds | CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FBCPSO | FCMMFO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE |
| 0 | 0.51 | 0.76 | 0.76 | 1.49 | 1.49 | 2.71 |
| 25 | 1.49 | 1.00 | 1.25 | 2.22 | 3.44 | 5.88 |
| 50 | 2.22 | 2.46 | 2.71 | 5.39 | 5.15 | 7.59 |
| 75 | 3.20 | 3.68 | 4.42 | 6.61 | 6.37 | 12.22 |
| 100 | 4.43 | 4.66 | 5.88 | 8.32 | 8.07 | 14.66 |
| 125 | 4.42 | 6.12 | 7.10 | 11.49 | 9.78 | 15.88 |
| 150 | 7.14 | 7.34 | 9.29 | 12.22 | 11.49 | 19.29 |
| 175 | 8.27 | 9.54 | 10.51 | 13.93 | 13.68 | 22.46 |
| 200 | 9.97 | 11.00 | 12.95 | 16.61 | 17.83 | 24.90 |
| 225 | 10.41 | 12.95 | 14.90 | 19.05 | 19.29 | 28.56 |
| 250 | 12.39 | 15.14 | 16.85 | 21.73 | 20.27 | 31.73 |
| 275 | 14.34 | 17.10 | 18.80 | 23.44 | 22.46 | 35.38 |
| 300 | 16.80 | 18.56 | 21.97 | 25.87 | 24.90 | 39.53 |
| 325 | 17.02 | 19.78 | 22.22 | 29.04 | 29.29 | 41.24 |
| 350 | 20.48 | 22.46 | 23.92 | 33.19 | 29.29 | 47.82 |
| 375 | 23.14 | 24.41 | 25.63 | 37.33 | 33.92 | 50.99 |
| 400 | 25.61 | 26.36 | 27.09 | 40.50 | 35.14 | 58.31 |
| 425 | 28.80 | 29.29 | 29.53 | 46.60 | 40.75 | 57.57 |
| 450 | 30.02 | 31.48 | 31.73 | 50.26 | 44.16 | 60.99 |
| 475 | 31.97 | 35.38 | 34.41 | 52.45 | 45.38 | 63.43 |
| 500 | 34.16 | 39.29 | 39.29 | 56.84 | 46.60 | 65.87 |
| 525 | 35.63 | 39.53 | 40.99 | 61.96 | 50.26 | 70.74 |
| 550 | 37.09 | 45.38 | 45.14 | 64.65 | 55.38 | 73.18 |
| 575 | 40.50 | 47.09 | 49.04 | 69.52 | 57.09 | 77.81 |
| 600 | 41.72 | 50.50 | 52.45 | 75.38 | 62.45 | 80.74 |
| 625 | 45.63 | 54.40 | 57.82 | 79.76 | 65.87 | 87.57 |
| 650 | 50.99 | 58.55 | 60.50 | 84.64 | 70.25 | 90.25 |
| 675 | 52.94 | 61.23 | 63.67 | 88.54 | 78.79 | 93.42 |
| 700 | 58.06 | 65.62 | 69.28 | 91.71 | 81.72 | 95.37 |
| 725 | 60.26 | 70.50 | 73.67 | 95.61 | 87.57 | 98.05 |
| 750 | 67.08 | 75.62 | 76.84 | 95.61 | 88.54 | 99.52 |
| 775 | 70.50 | 78.55 | 82.93 | 98.61 | 93.66 | 100.00 |
| 800 | 73.42 | 85.37 | 87.57 | 98.61 | 96.59 | 100.00 |
| 825 | 76.84 | 88.30 | 91.47 | 98.61 | 98.05 | 100.00 |
| 850 | 81.23 | 93.42 | 94.15 | 98.61 | 98.78 | 100.00 |
| 875 | 86.84 | 96.83 | 97.81 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| 900 | 89.27 | 97.57 | 99.27 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| 925 | 92.69 | 99.03 | 99.34 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| 950 | 95.86 | 98.78 | 99.43 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| 975 | 98.05 | 99.52 | 99.45 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| 1000 | 99.00 | 99.55 | 99.52 | 99.61 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
Figure 5TEC analysis of the CSRO-MHDT method in comparison with current tactics.
PLR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
| Packet Loss Ratio (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Rounds | CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FBCPSO | FCMMFO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 50 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 100 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 150 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 |
| 200 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 |
| 250 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| 300 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| 350 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| 400 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| 450 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 500 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 550 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 600 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 650 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 14 |
| 700 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 14 | 15 |
| 750 | 7 | 9 | 12 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 800 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 15 | 18 | 17 |
| 850 | 8 | 12 | 15 | 17 | 19 | 19 |
| 900 | 9 | 13 | 16 | 17 | 20 | 21 |
| 950 | 10 | 15 | 18 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 1000 | 12 | 17 | 19 | 22 | 23 | 25 |
Figure 6PLR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
NPR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
| No. of Packets Received (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Rounds | CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FBCPSO | FCMMFO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 50 | 3792 | 3400 | 2549 | 2876 | 2026 | 1554 |
| 100 | 7391 | 5755 | 4970 | 6736 | 3334 | 3054 |
| 150 | 10,073 | 8503 | 7587 | 8568 | 4970 | 4751 |
| 200 | 11,251 | 10,335 | 9550 | 9419 | 6736 | 6521 |
| 250 | 13,279 | 11,970 | 10,858 | 10,138 | 7718 | 7310 |
| 300 | 14,522 | 13,213 | 12,363 | 11,185 | 8830 | 8336 |
| 350 | 15,503 | 14,457 | 14,064 | 12,167 | 10,008 | 9679 |
| 400 | 16,746 | 15,176 | 14,718 | 13,410 | 11,054 | 10,595 |
| 450 | 17,074 | 16,877 | 15,503 | 13,933 | 11,709 | 11,442 |
| 500 | 17,924 | 17,401 | 16,027 | 14,784 | 12,167 | 11,837 |
| 550 | 18,709 | 18,120 | 17,204 | 15,045 | 13,148 | 12,789 |
| 600 | 19,887 | 18,775 | 17,532 | 15,700 | 13,737 | 13,521 |
| 650 | 20,410 | 20,018 | 18,055 | 16,485 | 14,391 | 14,034 |
| 700 | 21,523 | 20,410 | 18,317 | 17,204 | 14,653 | 14,276 |
| 750 | 21,850 | 20,868 | 19,102 | 17,597 | 15,111 | 14,642 |
| 800 | 22,046 | 20,999 | 19,756 | 18,186 | 14,980 | 14,623 |
| 850 | 22,569 | 21,195 | 20,214 | 18,513 | 14,849 | 14,445 |
| 900 | 22,766 | 21,457 | 20,214 | 18,578 | 14,849 | 14,570 |
| 950 | 23,027 | 21,457 | 20,083 | 18,775 | 14,784 | 14,358 |
| 1000 | 23,093 | 21,457 | 19,887 | 18,775 | 14,849 | 14,427 |
Figure 7NPR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
PDR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.
| Packet Delivery Ratio (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Rounds | CSRO-MHDT | EECRP | FBCPSO | FCMMFO | EGRC | LEACH-ERE |
| 0 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| 50 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 |
| 100 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 98 |
| 150 | 99 | 99 | 99 | 98 | 97 | 97 |
| 200 | 99 | 99 | 98 | 97 | 96 | 97 |
| 250 | 99 | 98 | 97 | 97 | 96 | 96 |
| 300 | 99 | 98 | 97 | 96 | 95 | 95 |
| 350 | 98 | 97 | 96 | 95 | 94 | 94 |
| 400 | 98 | 97 | 95 | 94 | 93 | 93 |
| 450 | 98 | 96 | 94 | 93 | 92 | 91 |
| 500 | 98 | 95 | 93 | 92 | 91 | 90 |
| 550 | 97 | 94 | 92 | 91 | 90 | 89 |
| 600 | 96 | 93 | 91 | 90 | 89 | 88 |
| 650 | 95 | 92 | 90 | 89 | 88 | 86 |
| 700 | 94 | 92 | 89 | 89 | 86 | 85 |
| 750 | 93 | 91 | 88 | 86 | 85 | 84 |
| 800 | 93 | 90 | 87 | 85 | 82 | 83 |
| 850 | 92 | 88 | 85 | 83 | 81 | 81 |
| 900 | 91 | 87 | 84 | 83 | 80 | 79 |
| 950 | 90 | 85 | 82 | 79 | 78 | 77 |
| 1000 | 88 | 83 | 81 | 78 | 77 | 75 |
Figure 8PDR analysis of the CSRO-MHDT technique in comparison with existing approaches.