See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283824268

Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks

Chapter · January 2015

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2468-4_1

CITATIONS READS
8 5,195

2 authors, including:

Mohammad Salahuddin
University of Waterloo
43 PUBLICATIONS   896 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

On the Evolution of Content Delivery Networks View project

Machine Learning for Network Operations and Management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Salahuddin on 09 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Book Title:

Wireless Sensor and Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks: Vehicular and Space

Applications

D. BenHaddou and A. Al-Fuqaha (Eds.), pp. 3-32, Springer, New York, 2015.

Chapter Title:

Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks

Zille Huma Kamal and Mohammad Ali Salahuddin

 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) ................................................................................... 4
1.1 Wireless Sensor Network Nodes and Their Characteristics ............................................................... 5
1.2 Characteristics of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) ......................................................................... 7
2.0 Communication Patterns and Protocols in WSN .................................................................................. 10
2.1 Communication Patterns ................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.1 Data Delivery Models ................................................................................................................ 11
2.2 Network Architecture of Wireless Sensor Networks ........................................................................ 13
2.2.1 Transport layer protocols ........................................................................................................... 14
2.2.2 Routing in Network Layer ......................................................................................................... 15
2.2.3 Medium Access Control (MAC) protocols at Data Link Layer ................................................. 18
3.0 Wireless Sensor Network Applications and Problem Space................................................................. 20
4.0 Programming WSNs ............................................................................................................................. 22
4.1 TinyOS: An Operating System for WSN Motes ............................................................................... 23
5.0 Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 25
References and Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 27

Page 2 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Abstract

Wireless Sensor Networks enjoy great benefits due to their low-cost, small-scale factor, smart
sensor nodes. Not only can they be employed in cumbersome and dangerous areas of interest, for
monitoring or controlling the region, but they can also be deployed to automate mundane tasks. Early
sensory units were expensive and lacked the computational and communicational capabilities of current
smart sensor nodes, which can now sense, process, store and forward data, all being powered by a battery.
Myriad applications exist that leverage Wireless Sensor Networks as low-cost solutions for
observing the habitat and environment, from military and civilian surveillance and target detection and
tracking applications, to precision farming and agriculture, patient monitoring in health care, residential
applications like energy management, for safety and efficiency in vehicular networks to outer space
explorations.
The diversity of the applications of Wireless Sensor Networks imposes varying design,
implementation and performance requirements on the Wireless Sensor Networks. Therefore, for a
thorough understanding of the different design and implementation techniques, we must understand the
inherent characteristics of Wireless Sensor Networks and their smart sensor nodes. This intrinsic nature of
the application specific Wireless Sensor Networks makes classification and taxonomy delineation
difficult and cumbersome.
In this chapter, we will delineate the inherent characteristics of the Wireless Sensor Networks and
their smart sensor nodes. Then, we will discuss the data delivery models and traffic patterns that instigate
the design and development of novel network architecture protocols for WSN and distinguish them from
its peers in other infrastructureless computing paradigms.
We compare WSN with its peers, with respect to, the problem space of WSN applications,
followed by a brief overview of the challenges in programming WSN motes. Then, we present an
overview of TinyOS, an operating system for WSN motes, and conclude with an overview of the
challenges and limitations of WSNs.

Page 3 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

1. Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN)

Originally, sensors were electromechanical detectors for measuring physical quantities. Their first
use can be traced back to 1933, in the first room thermostats [1]. Early microelectromechanical
systems (MEMS) consisted of a multi-chip, where a sensor and its electronics and mechanics were housed
on separate chips and packages. This resulted in larger size, more cost and lower yield of the sensor [2].
Recent advances in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and integrated circuits (IC) have enabled
the development of small-scale sensors and the integration of its actuators and electronics into one
cost-effective high-performance chip. Over the past decade, these sensors have evolved into smart
sensors, which now include an on-board processor, memory and transceiver, all in a small-scale factor,
powered by a battery source. These smart sensors constitute a node in the Wireless Sensor Network.
The benefit of the small-scale node is two-fold, first, the low production cost and second, the easy
and low installation cost. Currently, the price of a Wireless Sensor Network node ranges in hundreds to
thousands of dollars, however, it is envisioned to reduce to a couple of dollars with advances in
technology and mass production [3]. The small size and low cost of the node allows an ease in the
installation process, where nodes can be randomly air-dropped or precisely placed, based on the
application.
These low cost nodes with processing, storage and sensing capabilities, coupled with the
attractive infrastructureless networking capabilities of the transceiver, market the Wireless Sensor
Network as a powerful, low cost solution for numerous problems in diverse areas of research. They offer
collaboration in a distributed environment for sensing and processing information. Vital information is
routed through a multi-hop ad hoc network to a Wireless Sensor Network sink, a collector of data or to a
base station, which acts as a gateway to a fixed infrastructure. Variations of Wireless Sensor Networks
(WSN) include nodes with actuators that comprise a Wireless Sensor and Actuator Network (WSAN) (
[4], [5]), mobile nodes in Wireless Sensor Networks [3], or nodes capable of handling multimedia content
like audio and video streaming or still images in a Wireless Multimedia Sensor Network (WMSN) [6].
Myriad applications exist that leverage Wireless Sensor Networks as low-cost solutions for
observing the environment, for example, in military and civilian surveillance and target detection and
tracking applications (e.g. [7], [8], [9], [10]), for monitoring and controlling industrial processes [11], for
precision farming and agriculture [12], environment and habitat monitoring ( [13], [14]) patient
monitoring in health care ( [15], [16]), residential applications like energy management [17], in vehicular
networks for safety [18] and efficiency [19] and even for outer space explorations [20].
In the following sections, we will discuss the various characteristics of WSN nodes and the
intrinsic nature of WSN, followed by a discussion of the traffic patterns and network architecture

Page 4 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

protocols for WSN and their taxonomy. We will conclude with a summary of the challenges and
limitations of WSN.

1.1 Wireless Sensor Network Nodes and Their Characteristics

Technological advances in MEMS and Integrated Circuits (IC) instigate the widespread
availability of low-cost, small-scale sensors, which evolved into smart, battery powered sensors, with
processing and communicating capabilities. These smart sensors constitute the Wireless Sensor Network
node, referred to as motes, hereafter, in honor of the first Wireless Sensor Network nodes, which were
University of Berkley’s Rene and Mica Motes [21]. Figure 1, illustrates a typical WSN mote with its
fundamental units. Minimally, a mote consists of a battery-operated unit with single or multiple sensors, a
processing unit with storage and a transceiver. Typically, expansion slots exist or can be attached to
expand the mote to include other application specific units, such as, global positioning system (GPS) for
localization, or power harvesting units from solar or wind energy, or complementary metal-oxide
semiconductor (CMOS) chips for multimedia capabilities, etc.
These motes are placed on programming boards, interfaced with a computer, so that the WSN
application and its operating system can be flushed into the memory of the mote. At this time, the motes
can also be programmed with a specific identification number and, or group identification number.
Various motes can also be programmed without a physical connection to the computer, known as Over
The Air (OTA) programming.

Localization Mobilizer Actuator Multimedia Power

Unit(s) Unit(s) Unit(s) Unit(s) Generator

Processing Unit
Sensing Unit(s) Radio Unit(s)
Storage

Power Unit

Figure 1. A typical WSN Mote with its fundamental units

WSN motes can vary greatly, with respect to the size, their cost, processing power,
communication range, protocols and operating systems. WSN motes can be as large as a shoebox, e.g.
Sensoria Wireless Integrated Network Sensors (WINS) Next Generation (NG) 2.0 [22], or as miniature as
a coin, like Moteiv Corporation’s Tmote Mini [23], but typical WSN mote dimensions are in the order of
a couple of centimeters [24].
WSN motes are typically equipped with multiple sensors for sensitivity to various environmental
factors, e.g. mechanical, thermal, biological, chemical, optical, and magnetic, etc. Often motes have

Page 5 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

expansion slots that enable them to be equipped with mechanical actuators, wheels for mobility or CMOS
chips or microphone for multimedia capabilities. The processors used in these motes can range from ultra-
low-power 8 bit processors to more powerful 32 bit processors, similarly, memory space can vary from a
couple of kilobytes to the order of megabytes [25].
Motes are equipped with short-range radio frequency (RF) transceivers to enable WSN
applications [25] and to ease the query and retrieval of data from the WSN [26]. The use of a short range
radio directly influences the antenna size, since short range radio waves have higher frequencies and
shorter wavelengths they can be received and transmitted by small compact antennas. Through the high
frequencies of 800-1000 MHz, IEEE 802.15.4 or the 2.4GHz Bluetooth, the low-power radios offer
varying bandwidths [25]. The low transmission range of the motes instigates a multi-hop WSN. Though
current WSN motes are equipped with RF radios, communication via infrared, ultrasound and inductive
fields [27] has also been explored [25].
WSN motes can also be equipped with power generation units, that harvest power ambient energy
sources such as solar [28], mechanical and thermal [29]. Table I presents a comparison of some WSN
motes used in academia and industry w.r.t to these characteristics ( [25], [24], [30]).
We will now consider the characteristics of Wireless Sensor Networks, with respect to the various
application and environmental aspects.
Table I. Comparison of some WSN Motes
Clock RAM/Flash/ BW Freq.
Platform CPU Radio Transceiver OS
(MHz) EEPROM (kbps) (MHz)
Intel StrongARM
AWAIRS 1 59-206 1M/4M Conexant RDSSS9M 100 900 MicroC/OS
SA1100
Intel StrongARM
µAMPS 59-206 1M/4M National LMX3162 1000 2400 µOS
SA1100
Dot Atmel Atmega 163 8 1K/16K/32K RFM TR1000 10 916.5 TinyOS
Atmel Atmega
BT Node 8 4K/128K/4K ZV4002 BT/CC1000 1000 2400 TinyOS
128L
Smart-its PIC 18F252 8 3K/48K/64K Radiometrix 64 433 Smart-its
Atmel Atmega
Mica2 8 4K/128K/512K Chipcon CC1000 38.4 900 TinyOS
128L
Atmel Atmega
Mica2Dot 4 4K/128K/512K Chipcon CC1000 38.4 900 TinyOS
128L
Atmel Atmega Ericsson ROK101007
iBadge 8 4K/128K 1000 2400 Palos
128L BT
Atmel Atmega
CENS Medusa
128L/Atmel 4/40 4K/32K/136K/1M RFM TR1000 10 916 Palos
MK2
AT91FR4081
Zeevo ZV4002
iMote 12-48 64K/512K Zeevo BT 720 2400 TinyOS
(ARM)
U3 PIC 18F452 0.031-8 1K/32K/256 CDC-TR-02B 100 315 Pavenet
Chipcon CC1010 0.3- RFRAIN
RFRAIN 3-24 2K/32K Chipcon CC1010 76.8
(8051) 1000 Libraries
Atmel Atmega
Nymph 4 4K/128K/512K Chipcon CC1000 38.4 900 Mantis
128L
Telos TI MSP430F149 8 2K/60K/512K Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 TinyOS
Atmel Atmega
MicaZ 8 4K/128K Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 TinyOS
128L
Particle2/29 PIC 18F6720 20 4K/128K/512K RFM TR1001 125 868.35 Smart-its
eyesIFXv2 TI MSP430F1611 8 10K/48K Infineon TDA 5250 64 868 TinyOS
iMote2 Intel PXA 271 13-104 256K/32M Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 TinyOS

Page 6 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Clock RAM/Flash/ BW Freq.

Platform CPU Radio Transceiver OS
(MHz) EEPROM (kbps) (MHz)
TelosB/Tmote
TI MSP430F1611 8 10K/48K/1M Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 TinyOS
Sky
Ember RF Atmel Atmega
8 4K/128K Ember 250 250 2400 EmberNet
Module 128L
XYZ Sensor OKI ML67Q500x
1.8-57.6 4K/256K/512K Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 SOS
node (ARM/THUMB)
Ant TI MSP430F1232 8 256/8K Nordic nRF24AP1 1000 2400 Ant
Cypress
ProSpeckz II 12 256/16K Chipcon CC2420 250 2400 Speckle net
CY8C2764
Atmel Atmega 902-
Fleck 8 4K/128K/512K Nordic nRF903 76.8 TinyOS
128L 928
Atmel Squawk VM
Sun Spot 75 256K/2M Chipcon CC2420 250 2400
AT91FR40162S (Java)
ECO nRF24E1 (8051) 16 4K/512/32K Nordic nRF24E1 1000 2400 -
WML-C46A
SHIMMER TI MSP430F1611 4/8 10K/2G 250 2400 TinyOS
BT/CC2420
Atmel Atmega
IRIS 8 8K/640K/4K Atmel ATRF230 250 2400 TinyOS
1281
eUnistone 31308/2 2400
2400/
Zig Bee 868 /
900
Atmel Atmega
WaspMote 8 8K/128K/4K WiFi – 802.11 b/g 38.4 2400 -
1281
850/
GSM - SIM900 900/
(SIMCom) 1800/
1900
ATmega8 /
SquidBee 16 1K/8or16K/512K MaxStream 250 2400 -
ATmega168

1.2 Characteristics of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN)

Wireless Sensor Networks are deployed in a region of interest over a period of time. Since the
motes have a short-range radio and a small coverage area, Wireless Sensor Networks typically contain a
large number of motes. These motes form multi-hop networks and collaborate with each other to maintain
connectivity and coverage. Apart from the traditional concerns on collaboration and communication in an
ad hoc environment, WSN are also plagued with power and energy management concerns, due to the
battery operated motes. In this section, we will delineate the various design criteria of application specific
WSNs.
Region of Interest – The region of interest in WSN applications can be divided into those that are
dangerous or isolated versus those that are mundane and cumbersome. In both scenarios, there is little or
no infrastructure ( [3], [26]). For example, volcano monitoring [13] a dangerous task for humans can be
accomplished using low-cost motes that are deployed in the region. These motes are not only expendable
but also provide critical data analysis and lifesaving information. However, a WSN used in life rhythm
analysis for the elderly [31], can automate the mundane process of gathering vital signs and provides
continuous statistics, rather than at fixed intervals.
Modes of Deployment – There are two distinct mote deployment strategies, random and precise.
In random deployment, motes are randomly distributed like nodes in wireless ad hoc networks. This

Page 7 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

deployment could be rocket ejected or aircraft sown [32], e.g. in the aerial spread of motes for volcano
monitoring [13]. Precise deployment usually consists of manual or pre-planned placement of motes, e.g.
habitat monitoring on Skomer Island [33]. The deployment strategies used affects the structure of WSN
and can have an impact on coverage of the region and cost of deployment [26].
Organization and Architecture –WSN can be organized into two typical structures, flat or
hierarchical. Figure 2 illustrates the flat and hierarchical WSN. In a flat network, all motes in the network
have the same role and importance, whereas, in a hierarchical organization, motes are clustered or
organized into groups with different motes playing different roles, such as general purpose sensing motes
or data aggregators or forwarders, etc. As we climb up the hierarchy, the mote’s functionality increases
with respect to its cost, size, processing power, storage size, etc.

Infrastructure Infrastructure

Base Stations
Increasing cost, size and functionality

High Performance
Custer Head Motes

General Purpose
Sink Motes

Special Purpose
Motes

Figure 2. WSN Architecture, hierarchical (left) and flat (right)

For best results, WSN deployment should consist of a hierarchical organization of heterogeneous
motes, integrating a larger number of low-power general purpose motes with smaller number of
specialized or high-performance motes [24]. Furthermore, these motes can be equipped with actuators [4]
or consist of mobile motes [3].
In WSN architectures, single or multiple base stations preside over the entire WSN. These base
stations act as a gateway between the WSN and other fixed infrastructure, e.g. Internet. The base stations
are typically, high-performance, human operated devices with rechargeable power source, e.g. laptops
interfaced with a mote. Lower down the hierarchy, would be specialized motes with slightly better

Page 8 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

configurations than the low-cost, low-power general purpose motes at the bottom of the hierarchy or
pyramid. The special purpose motes offer data aggregation, or fusion, and more complex computational
and communicational power, making them ideal sink nodes in the WSN. The general purpose motes at the
bottom of the hierarchy typically act as data collectors and forwarders, as illustrated in Figure 2.
Multiple WSN can be interconnected to form a global WSN, referred to as global sensing
infrastructure [34], as illustrated in Figure 3.

motes

BS
Infrastructure
sink BS WSN

motes
WSN

Figure 3. Global WSN Infrastructure

Lifetime of the WSN – WSN are deployed with the intention of providing long-term data
collection at previously unimaginable, scales and resolutions [35]. Typical WSN habitat monitoring
applications benefit from long-term data that help decipher data trends and are necessary to detect
significant change in habitat [36]. Thus, the lifetime of a WSN is a fundamental characteristic. It is
bounded by the finite power source of the battery operated motes and the nature of the deployed region,
and infeasible or cumbersome task of replacing and disposing these batteries. This necessitates power
management in hardware and software components of the motes ( [37], [3]) and in WSN protocols [38].
Reinforcement strategies are also being explored in WSN through power harvesting techniques, from
solar [28], mechanical and thermal [29] sources.
Ad hoc Communication – The lack of infrastructure in WSN is an intrinsic property of other
communication systems like Bluetooth and mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) [3]. Bluetooth employs
discovery protocols and MANETs use robust and dynamic configuration protocols to establish and
maintain the network infrastructure. Though these systems are the closest peers of WSN, there are
fundamental differences that distinguish WSN from its peers [3]. First, WSN has larger number of motes
with smaller transmission power and radio range, whereas Bluetooth and MANETs have smaller number
of nodes with larger transmission power and longer radio ranges. Second, WSN and MANETs suffer
from dynamic topology changes due to mote/node mobility and drop-out, but rate of mobility and drop-
out is slower in WSN. Lastly, WSN motes have a finite, non-rechargeable power source, whereas,
Bluetooth and MANET nodes can be recharged. The critical power management in WSN imposes
challenging requirements in WSN protocols and inhibits the direct use of existing Bluetooth and MANET
protocols in WSN [3]. Therefore, WSN needs power-aware protocols for a large-scale, autonomous and

Page 9 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

heterogeneous network of low-processing power and low-transmission rate motes. These protocols are
needed for establishing and maintaining a secure network infrastructure through self-discovery,
configuration, and healing, routing and inherent fault-tolerance.
Self-configuration and organization – Various types of self-discovery algorithms exist for use in
WSN, some are adaptations from Bluetooth discovery mechanism and others developed specially for
WSN. Algorithms delineated in [39], [40], [41] and their like consist of a suite of protocols responsible
for discovering motes and organizing the wireless infrastructure, despite topology changes and mote
failures.
Connectivity and coverage – Establishing and maintaining connectivity and coverage is an
essential step in the deployment of a WSN. It is important to determine the initial number of motes
required to maintain connectivity and coverage in the region of interest, in face of mote failure and
dropout. It is generally assumed that mote communication and sensing range are uniform and
unidirectional, usually depicted as circular regions (cf. Section 2.1.1 Figure 4).
Furthermore, it is imperative for the configuration algorithms to maintain connectivity in the face
of dynamic topology changes. Berman et al [42] propose dominating k-connectivity, such that in the face
of upto k mote failures, connectivity to a WSN sink is still maintained. Abbasi et al [43] present a
recovery technique for preserving connectivity in the face of mote failure. Others ( [44], [45], [46], [47],
etc) have also studied the matter of connectivity and coverage in WSN in great detail.

2.0 Communication Patterns and Protocols in WSN

After the WSN configuration and organization algorithms have setup the WSN infrastructure for
routing and communication. WSN motes can collaboratively perform the application-specific distributed
tasks across the WSN. Over the lifetime of the WSN, human operated base stations, which are
essentially gateways to fixed infrastructure, e.g. Internet backbone, are used to query and retrieve data
from the WSN.

2.1 Communication Patterns

There are two different approaches in sampling and retrieving data from the WSN, namely, the
push and pull approach. In a push approach, WSN motes are programmed to autonomously sample the
environment at fixed intervals and push their data into the network. They push data towards data
collectors like the base station or sink. On the other hand, in the pull approach, motes wait for an explicit
command from the base station or sink to start sampling [48]. Both approaches have their own advantages
and drawbacks. Obviously, push approach suffers from continuous sampling, bottleneck at sink or base
station but enjoys low latency query response [48]. Whereas, in the pull approach, there is an increase in

Page 10 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

the number of messages required for querying and there is a longer delay in query response, but conserves
power by explicit sampling rather than continuous sampling [48].
WSN applications typically utilized the push approach to conserve energy, when radio
communication was more expensive than sensing on a mote [48], however, advances in radio
technologies have significant improvements in the power consumption, resulting in ultra-low power
radios, e.g. ZigBee radio [48]. Bose and Abdelsalam [48] propose a hybrid push-pull approach to
sampling and retrieving data from a WSN to leverage the benefits of both techniques. The push, pull or
hybrid approach yields three distinct network traffic patterns in WSN. The push approach causes a
many-to-one communication pattern, where motes are pushing data towards the sink or base station. In
the pull approach, before motes-to-sink communication occurs, the sink or base station sends the explicit
command to start sensing, which is one-to-many communication. When motes are collaboratively
communicating, to self-configure, localize, or for data fusion at multiple sinks, many-to-many
communication occurs [49].
Apart from these traffic patterns in WSN, Tilak et al [50] decompose communication paradigms
in WSN into two categories, that is, application-based and infrastructure-based communication.
Application-based communication refers to getting the sensed data from nodes to application user,
whereas, infrastructure-based protocols are those that are used to provide the underlying primitives to
achieve the application-based communication.
We will discuss data delivery models from the application and infrastructure based
communication perspectives, followed by a discussion of the network architecture in WSN.

2.1.1 Data Delivery Models

From the aspect of infrastructure based communication protocols the flow of data packets are
based on four distinct data delivery models unicast, broadcast, multicast [50], or many-to-many. Unicast
is one-to-one communication between two motes, versus, the one-to-many (i.e. all motes in the
communication range of a mote) communication of broadcast. The motes within the communication
range of a mote are often referred to as one-hop neighbor or simply neighbors. In multi-hop
communication, data is routed between motes, using unicast communication.
Multicast pertains to communication of motes in a group. Motes are categorized into groups by
the application and only process those packets that contain a group identification number that matches the
motes group identification number. These WSN groups can form a connected or disconnected
sub-network. In a disconnected group, multi-hop communication would be used to enable multicast data
delivery models. If there is a geographic overlay on the multicast WSN and packets are transmitted to
motes based on their specific geographical location [51], then this specialized form of multicast data

Page 11 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

delivery is known as Geocasting. Multicast data delivery model can also be specialized to behave in a
many-to-one data delivery manner.
Finally, many-to-many data delivery models results in the presence of multiple sinks or gateways
accessing the WSN for data and information [49]. These data delivery models in WSN are illustrated in
Figure 4.

Communication
Range

Unicast Broadcast

Same group Sink

BS

Multicast Many-to-Many

Figure 4. WSN infrastructure based data delivery models, unicast, broadcast, multicast and many-to-many
From the perspective of the application based communication protocols, the data delivery models
consist of continuous, event-driven, query-driven or a hybrid approach of these ( [50], [52] ), as illustrated
in Figure 5. In continuous, also known as periodic, data delivery models, data is transmitted from the
motes to the sink or gateways at periodic intervals. In event-driven models, the motes are sensitive to one
or more physical factors of the environment, when the sensed value (sensor readings) meets or exceeds a
predetermined threshold, an event is triggered. The triggered motes propagate their sensor readings back
to the sink(s) or gateways. In query-driven data delivery models, user initiates a query and network motes
which meet the query criteria transmit their sensor readings. In the hybrid approach, one or more of the
data delivery models are used together. For example, in a volcano monitoring application, the motes
would be primarily event-driven. However, occasionally the user may want to poll or query the WSN for
current seismic or temperature readings.

Page 12 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Query-driven (sensor reading meets or exceeds Q0) transmission

Transmits as
Sensor reading ≥ Q0

Query (Q0)

Event-driven (sensor reading ≥ θ) transmission

Transmits as
Sensor reading ≥ θ

Threshold (θ)

Sensor Reading Periodic sensor reading transmission

Time

t0 t0
Transmits sensor reading every t0 Transmitting motes

Figure 5. WSN application based data delivery models in WSN, periodic, event-driven and query-driven

2.2 Network Architecture of Wireless Sensor Networks

The inherent characteristics of the motes in a WSN, such as limited processing, memory and
communication capabilities, impose design and performance criteria on the routing and communication
protocols in WSN. Communication protocols are used to dictate, manage and control all aspects of
communication, from the lowest layer of accessing the physical medium to higher layers responsible for
end-to-end transmission of packets and routing of data, to the top most application layer for data and
packet formation. Figure 6, depicts an overview of the network architecture in WSN.
This is essentially different from typical network models due to the need for power management
across all layers of the model. Furthermore, due to the constrained nature of motes and the application-
specific nature of WSN, there is no clear demarcation in the network architecture layers, as in traditional

Page 13 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

network architecture. Often, fundamental WSN communication protocols for querying, routing and data
delivery are integrated under data dissemination and aggregation techniques in WSN [53]. These
limitations instigate the use of a cross layer approach in developing network protocols for wireless sensor
networks.
In the following sections, we will discuss the various concepts of the transport, network and data
link layers with respect to wireless sensor networks.
Application Layer

Transport Layer
(End-to-End Transmission) Power
Management
Cross-Layer Network Layer &
Design (Routing Protocols) Security
Protocols
Data Link Layer
(Medium Access Control)

Physical Layer

Figure 6. Network Architecture in WSN

2.2.1 Transport layer protocols

Transport layer protocols are responsible for end-to-end transmission of data packets. These
protocols include provisions for reliable or unreliable data delivery and for centralized or distributed
congestion control. It is imperative that these protocols be designed carefully, since they can quickly
overwhelm the constrained WSN. As WSN applications mature, it is important to design and implement
efficient protocols for the network architecture to ensure reliability in a data driven network.
Primitives are built into transport layer protocols for reliable data delivery that prompt
retransmission of packet(s) in the event of packet drop. This can be achieved by using packet sequence
numbers, a series of acknowledgements to confirm delivery of packets, or time-out or round-trip intervals
to access packet loss. These primitives allow senders and receivers to account for packets received and
packets missed. Such primitives are crucial in WSN applications, which are essentially data driven
networks.
Furthermore, transport layer protocols are also responsible for congestion controlled. This is
achieved by installing primitives that control transmission rate of motes, to ensure that the rate at which
data packets are being transmitted does not overwhelm the underlying network or create a bottleneck at

Page 14 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

the base station. Table II classifies some of the transport layer protocols developed for WSN with respect
to these primitives ( [54], [55], [56]).
Table II. Classification of some Transport Layer Protocols for WSN
Congestion Control
WSN Transport Layer Protocols Reliable Unreliable
Distributed Centralized None
Flush × ×
STCP × ×
Hop × ×
RCRT × ×
Wisden × ×
Tenet × ×
RMST × ×
WRCP × ×
IFRC × ×
Fusion × ×
CODA × ×
QCRA × ×
ESRT × ×
Surge (TinyOS) × ×
CTP × ×
RBC × ×
CentRoute × ×
Koala × ×
XLP × ×
CRRT × ×
CTCP × ×
ERTP × ×
GARUDA × ×
DTSN × ×
PHTCCP × ×

2.2.2 Routing in Network Layer

As in Wireless Computing, routing protocols can be decomposed into reactive, proactive,
cooperative [57] or hybrid protocols. Proactive routing protocols are also known as table-driven protocols
since each node maintains a route table for all destinations at all times. Reactive protocols are on-demand
routing protocols, which only discover routes to a destination when it is required, outdated or invalid. The
obvious tradeoffs include data delivery latency, routing protocol traffic overhead and storage
requirements. Data delivery latency is low in networks using proactive routing protocols, since path
information is readily available. However, there is overhead incurred by the motes in the WSN, to
discover and maintain paths to all destinations, even those that may never be used in the WSN. Routing
protocol traffic overhead is minimized in reactive networks, when there is light network traffic and little
changes to the network topology. Moreover, storage requirements of proactive routing protocols increase
proportionally to the size of the network. In cooperative routing protocols, data is sent to a central entity
that can further process the data and disseminate it accordingly [57].
Routing protocols can also be distinguished based on the communication entities involved in the
routing protocol. In this perspective, there is node-centric and data-centric routing. In node-centric
routing, data is routed between nodes, based on the node addresses. However, in data-centric routing,

Page 15 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

attribute based addressing is used, where nodes query for an attribute and only those nodes respond that
can satisfy the query. For example, a mote can query for temperature greater than 72°C, and those motes
that have temperature readings more than 72°C will respond.
Routing protocols are also designed for specific WSN topologies, classified as flat and
hierarchical topologies, as illustrated in Figure 2. On top of these WSN topologies, routing can also be
geographical in nature, where packets are routed to motes closest to destination
WSN routing protocols can also be based on different application defined criteria or operation
based attributes [57]. These operation based attributes can include, multipath, negotiation-based, query-
based, QoS parameters (reliability, data integrity, energy efficiency), coherent [57] based routing
techniques to increase reliability, security, etc attributes.
Figure 7 depicts the various characteristics of WSN routing protocols, which can be integrated to
design an efficient application specific routing protocol for a WSN.

Flat Reactive

Hierarchical Proactive

Geographical
Network
Cooperative
Structure

Mobility MANET based

routing Hybrid
Energy efficient techniques

Negotiation based
Operation-based
Attributes Data centric
Multipath

Communication
Query based Mote address centric
Entities

QoS based
Data sampling
Security and retrieving

Coherent
Push

Location based
Pull
Data aggregation

Heterogeneous Hybrid

Figure 7. WSN routing protocol characteristics

Page 16 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Multipath features in routing protocols can have a two-fold benefit for WSN. Multipath routing
can reduce frequency of updating routes, balance traffic load, increase rate of data delivery [58]. This
consequentially increases the lifetime and reliability of WSN. Earlier researchers proposed to use
suboptimal routing paths with low energy consumption [59], or select a routing path based on the residual
energy of the motes on the path [60]. The authors in [61] study the tradeoff between traffic overhead and
reliability using multipath routing in WSN. More recently, [58] use multipath routing to increase lifetime
of WSN and reduce collisions for transmission. Furthermore, researchers are utilizing ant colonization
optimization, a swarm intelligence optimization technique, due to their proven success [62] in routing
protocols for WSN. In [63], ant colonization is used to discover optimal routes to increase network
lifetime and reliability, whereas [62] uses multipath routing to reduce congestion at the mote and link
level. Authors in [64] survey swarm intelligence based routing protocols in WSN.
Routing protocols that are built on the pull approach, where queries can be propagated, are known
as query based routing protocols. Routing algorithms such as Directed Diffusion and Rumor routing [57]
are specifically implemented for query-driven data delivery models, where motes that meet the query
requirements setup interest gradients or paths along which the data is routed to the sink. Negotiation
based routing algorithms suppress redundant data and use negotiation messages to ensure non-redundant
data before transmission, for e.g. Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN) [65].
QoS-based routing ( [66], [67] [68], [69], etc.) ensure that routing in WSN meets application defined QoS
metrics, of delay, energy, bandwidth, reliability, fault-tolerance, data integrity, etc. Data aggregation is
also an important aspect of WSN and their applications, and is often accounted for when designing and
developing routing protocols, to ensure efficient performance.
Not only is it important to secure the data and the motes in the WSN, but also the network traffic
patterns. Since malicious motes can redirect traffic, inject false data or drop packets and cause havoc in
the WSN. Typical uses of asymmetric key cryptography or complicated symmetric key cryptography are
infeasible for resource constraint WSN [70]. While there are techniques for implementing security on the
data link layer in WSN, researchers are designing novel techniques for securing routing protocols( [71],
[72], [73]), to increase reliability of WSN.
Table III classifies some WSN routing protocols based on the routing protocol characteristics
illustrated in Figure 7( [52], [57], [74], [75], [76], [71], [77], [78], [79]).
Table III. Classification of some WSN routing protocols
WSN Routing Network MANET Operation-based Communication Data sampling
Protocol Structure technique attribute entities and retrieving
Data aggregation,
SPIN Flat Proactive negotiation-based, Data-centric Pull
query-based, multipath
Data aggregation,
Directed Diffusion Flat Reactive Data-centric Pull
negotiation-based,

Page 17 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

WSN Routing Network MANET Operation-based Communication Data sampling

Protocol Structure technique attribute entities and retrieving
query-based, multipath,
localization, coherent
Rumor Routing Flat Reactive Query-based Data-centric Hybrid
Data aggregation,
TEEN and
Hierarchical Reactive localization, energy Data-centric Push
APTEEN
efficient
Data aggregation, Mote address-
LEACH Hierarchical Proactive Push
localization centric
Data aggregation,
ACQUIRE Flat Reactive Data-centric -
query-based
Data aggregation,
COUGAR Flat Reactive Data-centric Hybrid
query-based
Data aggregation,
Mote address-
PEGASIS Hierarchical Proactive localization, energy Push
centric
efficient
Mote address-
GAF Geographical Proactive Energy efficient -
centric
Mobility, energy Mote address-
SEAD Geographical Proactive -
efficient centric
Mote address-
SPEED (SNFG) Geographical Proactive QoS, energy efficient -
centric
Data aggregation, Mote address-
CHR Geographical Proactive -
heterogeneous centric
Mote address-
APR Geographical Proactive Security -
centric

2.2.3 Medium Access Control (MAC) protocols at Data Link Layer

The medium access control (MAC) protocols at the data link layer manage how motes access the
shared wireless medium and the backoff approach they employ in the event of a collision. In typical
Wireless Networks, the radio channel is decomposed into multiple channels using techniques like time
division multiple access (TDMA), frequency division multiple access (FDMA) or code division multiple
access (CDMA) to allow collision free transmission of multiple message, simultaneously. Traditional
WSN motes used a simple single channel radio to conserve energy, which is required to maintain the
complex multiple channel radios [80]. However, recent advances in research have given rise to multi-
channel radios for WSN motes.
WSN MAC protocols can be broadly classified into schedule based or contention based medium
access protocols. Schedule or reservation based MAC protocols devise an assignment that motes can
follow for accessing the physical medium to avoid collision. Contention based MAC protocols, do not
require an assignment, they define a backoff algorithm for motes to follow, when there is a collision in
accessing the physical medium. Schedule based protocols can be further decomposed into synchronous,
asynchronous and hybrid protocols.
Since the MAC protocol directly controls the radio on a mote, an important technique used by
motes is called duty cycling, where active motes periodically turn their radio off and go to sleep [81].
Synchronous schedule based MAC protocols require time synchronization and topology information to
ensure that neighboring motes are active at the same time to communicate. However, asynchronous

Page 18 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

protocols do not require such synchronization or topology information and instigate communication
between motes in different active cycles.
Contention based MAC protocols, eliminate the overhead of synchronization or network topology
from schedule based MAC protocols. Motes can transmit packets immediately and retransmit in the event
of a collision. A refined approach is to sense the physical medium for transmission, and when the medium
is idle then access the medium and transmit the packet. This is the general concept in Carrier Sense
Multiple Access (CSMA), which is one of the canonical contention based MAC protocols.
Ye et al [82] have identified four significant aspects of wasteful energy consumption, namely,
collision, overhearing, control packet overhead and idle listening at the data link layer. When two or more
motes transmit at the same time, their respective packets are corrupted and require retransmissions
increasing energy consumption and latency. Energy consumed in overhearing, is energy spent listening
for packets destined for other motes. Sending and receiving control packets without useful data is also
wasteful with respect to energy consumed. Listening to the channel even when there are no radio
transmissions is considered idle listening, which is an energy consumption overhead [81].
Contention based protocols include techniques like Carrier Sense Multiple Access (CSMA), and
offer multiple benefits like low implementation complexity, flexibility in face of mobility and varying
traffic patterns [80]. However, schedule based MAC protocols like TDMA have intrinsic energy
conserving features since there are no collisions, overhearing and idle listening. Due to the energy
conservation necessary in resource constraint WSN, it is important for MAC protocols for WSN to
incorporate primitives for conserving energy by reducing collisions, overhearing, reduced control packet
overhead and idle listening, without the need for expensive time synchronization.
These MAC protocols require different degrees of collaboration and cooperation amongst the
motes to achieve medium control access. Motes in the network could work completely independently in a
random manner like those in contention-based MAC protocols, to slightly organized slotted MAC
protocols and then to the very organized synchronous schedule based protocols like TDMA [80].
Various MAC protocols have been designed and implemented including synchronous duty
cycling MAC protocols such as S-MAC [82], T-MAC, TRAMA, SCP, DW-MAC, etc and asynchronous
duty cycling MAC protocols such as X-MAC [83], B-MAC, WiseMAC, PW-MAC [81], ASCEMAC
[84], etc. An exhaustive MAC protocols survey is presented in [85]. MAC protocols are also being
designed to include important features like security [86], power management [87] and QoS [88]. Table IV
delineates some of these protocols and their classification ( [80], [89]).
Table IV. Classification of some WSN MAC protocols
WSN MAC Protocol Organization Channel
SMACS Frames FDMA
T-MAC Slots Single

Page 19 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

WSN MAC Protocol Organization Channel

TRAMA Frames Single
BuzzBuzz Random Single
DW-MAC Slots Single
X-MAC Random Single
B-MAC Random Single
WiseMAC Random Single
PW-MAC Hybrid Single
S-MAC Slots Single
PicoRadio Random CDMA

3.0 Wireless Sensor Network Applications and Problem Space

Numerous intrinsic WSN characteristics distinguish it from its peers in other infrastructure-less
communication systems [3] and distributed computing environments [90], where their nodes are more
powerful (w.r.t. processor and radio) and reliable than WSN motes. Figure 8 [90], illustrates the
difference in the problem space of WSN with other computing paradigms, with respect to, functionality of
the network nodes, size of the network and spatial-temporal awareness of the nodes in the network.
Spatial-temporal Spatial and Temporal Awareness
awareness

WSN VANET

Outer space Applications

Temporal Awareness
Embedded
Systems

MANET/
Cellular WAN
Ad hoc
PAN

Network Size

Distributed
LAN
Computing
Super
Computing

Node
Functionality

Figure 8. Comparison of problem space of WSN with other computing paradigms

Page 20 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

WSN are distinguishable from real-time embedded systems primarily due to the lack of spatial
awareness in embedded system nodes. Real-time embedded systems can include various other computing
paradigms, especially, infrastructureless mobile environments like Bluetooth personal area networks
(PAN), MANET, cellular networks, and ad hoc networks.
WSN are significantly different from traditional distributed and supercomputing paradigms.
Distributed computing includes paradigms such as, peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, grid and
high-performance computing. Apart from the lack of spatial and temporal awareness of the network
nodes, another fundamental difference lies in the functionality of the network nodes. Typically,
distributed and supercomputing paradigms consist of high performance powerful nodes, as illustrated in
Figure 8.
WSN applications are sensitive to spatial and temporal parameters and can be classified into
spatially and temporally related paradigms as follows. Firstly, in the spatial domain, WSN applications
can be broadly classified into local and global WSN applications based on the size and coverage of the
region of interest of the application. Similarly, WSN applications can also be temporally categorized into
continuous, event-driven, query-driven or hybrid applications (cf. Section 2.1.1, Figure 5). This imposes a
constraint on when the motes transmit data, either motes transmit data at periodic intervals, or transmit
only the data that exceeds application defined triggers or threshold levels, or only those motes transmit
data that meets a query criterion or a hybrid approach of these techniques. Figure 9 [49] broadly classifies
some WSN applications into these domains.
Spatial

Global

Environmental Monitoring
Military Surveillance
Industrial Monitoring and Control

Energy Intrusion Patient Vitals

Local Management Detection Monitoring

Temporal
Periodic Event-Triggered Query

Figure 9. Classification of WSN applications

WSN application operations cannot be discretely categorized into the different temporal domains,
since these networks are fundamentally data-driven networks. This implies, events could be triggered in

Page 21 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

an otherwise periodic sampling WSN application like environmental monitoring. Furthermore, periodic
sampling WSN applications like patient vitals health monitoring could quickly become query-based, if the
WSN for patient vitals monitoring is polled for specific vital reading. Therefore, WSN applications are
usually designed to operate in multiple temporal domains. Figure 9, illustrates these characteristics of
WSN applications and delineates some WSN application examples that accurately fit the domains.
Figure 10 [49] delineates the various design characteristics that form the intrinsic nature and
behavior of WSN applications and their motes. This directly influences the design for the components of
the network architecture of the WSN. The figure also summarizes the various WSN characteristics we
have discussed in this chapter.
WSN
Applications

Goal Data Delivery Mobility Space Time

Model

Periodic
Sense-only Unicast Static Global

Event-triggered
Sense-and-respond Broadcast Mobile motes Local

Query
Multicast Mobile sinks

Many-to-many Hybrid

Figure 10. WSN Application Design Criteria

4.0 Programming WSNs

WSNs can only be fully utilized, if WSN programmers have adequate software platforms [49] for efficient
and reliable programming of large number of motes. However, due to the lack of programming, debugging, and
development environment platforms, WSN programmers are forced to implement application-logic intertwined with
low-level WSN implementation issues ( [49], [90]). This makes the application code complex, harder to debug and
non-scalable for complex application development due to the interdependencies between performance and function
[90]. Furthermore, this sort of programming falls out of the expertise of WSN application domain experts [49].
Mottola and Picco [49] discuss various other design criteria and components of WSN programming languages and
their affect on the design and development of WSN applications.
Myriad WSN motes exist that differ in functionality as delineated in Table I. Manufacturers often ship an
operating system with the motes to ease in the handling of hardware and software components. Most WSN operating

Page 22 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

systems (OS) are either event-driven or multithreaded [91]. Multithreaded OS are similar to traditional OS, therefore
easier for programmers to manage, however, infeasible for resource constrained WSN. Therefore, lightweight
multithreaded OS have been designed and implemented for WSN motes. Event-driven OS do not tax the resources
of the WSN motes but pose a learning curve for programmers of WSN applications. Farooq and Kunz [92] survey
and classify operating systems such as TinyOS, Contiki, and MANTIS, in WSN.
In the following section, we will discuss TinyOS, an operating system for WSN, and consider a
component-based approach to programming applications for WSNs using TinyOS.

4.1 TinyOS: An Operating System for WSN Motes

Operating systems (OS) are programs that coordinate all other programs, such as process scheduling and
memory access. in a computer. The typical size of operating systems for embedded devices ranges in the order of
megabytes; however, TinyOS is a much smaller operating system for WSN motes, approximately 400 bytes [93]. It
is implemented in nesC [92], a variant of C. TinyOS is different from traditional OS, since it provides a framework
and a set of component for programming motes to build application-specific operating system for a WSN
application. Therefore, there is an operating system for each application. Typical TinyOS applications can range
from approximately 15 Kbytes to more complex applications in the range of 64 Kbytes, of these the core operating
system is about 400 bytes [93]. The networking architecture is encapsulated in Active Message interfaces, which are
also implemented in nesC and offer fundamental communication primitives to TinyOS applications ( [49], [93]).
Surge is the transport layer protocol implemented in TinyOS, which is unreliable and offers no primitives for
congestion control [54]. Berkley MAC (B-MAC) is the asynchronous schedule based MAC protocol implemented in
TinyOS [94], with interfaces available to change or adapt the MAC protocol.
TinyOS is a component-based programming model, where components are software abstractions of
hardware components [93]. Therefore, a TinyOS application, which is really an application-specific operating
system, is built on top of these reusable components, [93], wiring them together to provide or use services.
Components use interfaces to encapsulate a set of services [93]. For example, turning an LED on is a service that
can be modeled by using the LED interface. Components use commands and events for inter-component
communication. Commands to a component are requests to start a service, whereas events are signaled to mark the
completion of the service at the component [93].
Programming in nesC consists of a configuration and module file. The configuration file connects
components together, whereas the module file contains the implementation, by providing or using interfaces. Figures
11 and 12 illustrate a “hello world” TinyOS application, called Blink [95], where the red LEDS on a mote are
toggled every 1,000 ms.

Page 23 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Figure 11. Blink.nc configuration file

The Blink.nc configuration file shows how the components are wired together. A TinyOS application
starts by executing the init command of the StdControl interface of the Main component. Blink
configuration file wires the Main component’s StdControl to SingleTimer and Blink component
StdControl. This binds the implementation of Main.StdControl to SingleTimer.StdControl and
BlinkM.StdControl. The BlinkM.StdControl interface is implemented in the module file, BlinkM.nc.
Similarly, the Timer and Leds interfaces used in Blink actually invoke the Timer interface provided by
component SingleTimer, and Leds interface of component LedsC, respectively. Note, SingleTimer and
Leds provide software abstraction of the hardware components for the clock and LEDS.
The configuration file delineates how control of execution is passed amongst components. The module file
(BlinkM.nc) provides the application-specific implementation by providing and using interfaces.
BlinkM.StdControl. init() initializes the application and BlinkM.StdControl.start() starts the
component. When Blink starts, it sets the timer to repeat every 1,000 ms. In the event-driven operating system,
since, there is no other code to execute, Blink waits until event Timer.fired() is triggered. When the event
is triggered, Blink toggles the red LEDS.
The application is compiled for the target platform, any TinyOS compatible device, e.g. micaz motes, and
flushed on the mote hardware using a programming board, which interfaces a mote with the development
environment on a computer or laptop.

Page 24 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Figure 12. BlinkM.nc module file

5.0 Summary
Wireless Sensor Networks typically consist of large number of heterogeneous motes organized in
a hierarchical manner, to monitor and, or control a region of interest, based on ambient environment
factors. Generally, the number of motes deployed in the region increases and the resources decrease as
you move down the hierarchy. The mobile, infrastructure-less WSN are able to truly achieve untethered
communications in dangerous or mundane regions for autonomous data collection, analysis and response
via actuators. However, the greatest resource limitation of WSN is the power source, which must be
optimally used or alternatively harnessed to ensure network lifetime.
There is a lack of standards for traditional network concepts, like architecture, topology, routing
and security, since WSN are application specific in nature. Due to the different types of motes and
wireless sensor networks, there are interoperability issues amongst the heterogeneous hardware units [96].
Further limitations of WSN are attributed to the lack of software for programming and debugging motes
and WSN ( [49] and [90]).

Page 25 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Energy conservation and power management in the radio and network communications are the
underlying design criteria for protocols and primitives in WSN. However, Bose and Helal [48], show that
advances in technology have allowed low-power radios, like the Atmel Zlink RCB [48] for effective use
in WSN and now attention needs to be on the sensor sampling technique, which consumes significantly
more energy than network and application costs. Anastasi et al [94] present a survey of energy
conservation techniques in WSN.
Furthermore, apart from energy conservation, security challenges in WSN are a make it or break
it criteria in the wide-spread use of WSN in all envisioned domains. Boyle and Newe [97] compare some
security protocols in use today in WSN, like SPIN [98], consisting of SNEP (Secure Network Encryption
Protocol) and µTESLA (micro version of Timed Efficient Stream Loss-tolerant Authentication), LEAP
[99] and TinySec [100], which aim at building security features into network protocols.
As recent routing protocols have gained from swarm intelligence, Kulkarni et al [101] discuss the
use of other computational intelligence paradigms like neural networks, fuzzy logic, evolutionary
algorithms, reinforcement learning and artificial immune system in designing and implementing effective
and efficient protocols and primitives for WSN operations like routing, deployment, localization, security,
scheduling, data aggregation and QoS management.
To summarize, in this chapter we considered the characteristics and features of Wireless Sensor
Networks and their motes. Furthermore, we reviewed the fundamental concepts in wireless sensor
networks pertaining to architecture, topology, data delivery models, transport, routing and data link layer
protocols. We also presented a classification of some of the protocols for transport, routing and data link
layers. We concluded with a discussion of TinyOS, an operating system for WSN motes, and exemplified
programming WSN motes in nesC.

Page 26 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

References and Bibliography

[1] "History of Innovation," 1995-2012. [Online]. Available:

http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/company/history/sensortimelinelowbandwidth.shtml. [Accessed 6 january
2012].

[2] H. Weinberg, "How They Work: MEMS (Micro Electro-Mechanical Systems) Technology," Sensorland,
[Online]. Available: http://www.sensorland.com/HowPage023.html. [Accessed 6 January 2012].

[3] I. F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramainiam and E. Cayirci, "A Survey on Sensor Networks," IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 102-114, 2002.

[4] I. F. Akyildiz and I. H. Kasimoglu, "Wireless sensor and actor networks: research challenges," Ad Hoc
Networks, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 351-367, 2004.

[5] F. Xia, "QoS Challenges and Opportunities in Wireless Sensor/Actuator Networks," Sensors, vol. 8, no. 2, pp.
1099-1110, 2008.

[6] I. F. Akyildiz, T. Melodia and K. Chowdury, "A survey on wireless multimedia sensor networks," Computer
Networks, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 921-960, 2007.

[7] L. Lamont, M. Toulgoat, M. Deziel and G. Patterson, "Tiered Wireless Sensor Network Architecture for
Military Surveillance Applications," in International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications
(SENSORCOMM), Nice/Saint Laurent du Var, France, 2011.

[8] M. A. Antepli, S. Z. Gurbuz and E. Uysal-Biyikoglu, "Ferromagnetic target detection and localization with a
wireless sensor network," in Military Communications Conference (MILCOM), San Jose, CA, 2010.

[9] J. Teng, H. Snoussi and C. Richard, "Decentralized Variational Filtering for Target Tracking in Binary Sensor
Networks," IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 1465-1477, 2010.

[10] P. Medagliani, G. Ferrari, V. Gay and J. Leguay, "Cross-layer design and analysis of WSN-based mobile
target detection systems," Ad Hoc Networks, In Press, vol. July, 2011.

[11] L. Krishnamurty, R. Adler, P. Buonadonna, J. Chhabra, M. Flanigan, N. Kushalnagar, L. Nachman and M.

Yarvis, "Design and deployment of industrial sensor networks: experiences from a semiconductor plant and
the north sea," in 3rd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys 05), San
Diego, CA, 2005.

[12] P. Sikka, P. Corke, P. Valencia, C. Crossman, D. Swain and G. Bishop-Hurley, "Wireless adhoc sensor and
actuator networks on the farm," in International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks,
Nashville, TN, 2006.

[13] W.-Z. Song, R. Huang, M. Xu, A. Ma, B. Shirazi and R. LaHusen, "Air-dropped sensor network for real-time
high-fidelity volcano monitoring," in International Conference on Mobile System, Applications and Services
(MobiSys 09), Krakow, Poland, 2009.

[14] M. Ceriotti, L. Mottola, G. P. Picco, A. L. Murphy, M. Corra, M. Pozzi, D. Zonta and P. Zanon, "Monitoring
heritage buildings with wireless sensor networks: The Torre Aquila deployment," in International Conference
on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN), San Francisco, CA, 2009.

[15] J. Ko, J. H. Lim, R. Muvaloiu-E, A. Terzis, G. M. Masson, T. Gao, W. Destler, L. Selavo and R. P. Dutton,
"MEDiSN: Medical emergency detection in sensor networks," ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing
Systems (TECS), vol. 10, no. 1, 2010.

[16] Y. Chen, W. Shen, H. Huo and Y. Xu, "A Smart Gateway for Health Care System Using Wireless Sensor
Network," in International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications (SENSORCOMM 10),

Page 27 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Venice, Italy, 2010.

[17] N. Ota, S. Ahrens, A. Redfern, P. Wright and X. Yang, "An Application-Driven Architecture for Residential
Energy Management with Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE International Conference on Mobile Adhoc
and Sensor Systems, Vancouver, Canada, 2006.

[18] H. Song, S. Zhu and G. Cao, "SVATS: A Sensor-Network-Based Vehicle Anti-Theft System," in IEEE
Conference on Computer Communications, Phoenix, AZ, 2008.

[19] M. Tubaishat, P. Zhuang, Q. Qi and Y. Shang, "Wireless sensor networks in intelligent transportation
systems," Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, Special Issue: Distributed Systems of Sensors
and Actuators, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 287-302, 2009.

[20] T. Vladimirova, C. P. Bridges, J. R. Paul, S. A. Malik and M. N. Sweeting, "Space-based wireless sensor
networks: Design issues," in IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, 2010.

[21] D. Culler, J. Hill, M. Horton, K. Pister, R. Szewczyk and A. Woo, "MICA: The Commercialization of
Microsensor Motes," Sensors Magazine, 1 April 2002. [Online]. Available:
http://www.sensorsmag.com/networking-communications/mica-the-commercialization-microsensor-motes-
1070. [Accessed 1 February 2012].

[22] W. Merrill and W. Kaiser, "Wireless Integrated Network Sensors (WINS) Next Generation," Airforce
Research Laboratory, Rome, New York, 2004.

[23] "Wireless Applications - Moteiv launches wireless mote with interface to mobile devices," Sensors, 11 May
2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.sensorsmag.com/wireless-applications/news/moteiv-launches-
wireless-mote-with-interface-mobile-devices-2523. [Accessed 7 January 2012].

[24] J. Hill, M. Horton, R. Kling and L. Krishnamurthy, "The platforms enabling wireless sensor networks,"
Communications of the ACM , vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 41-46, 2004.

[25] M. Healy, T. Newe and E. Lewis, "Wireless Sensor Node hardware: A review," in IEEE Sensors , Lecce,
Italy, 2008.

[26] J. Yick, B. Mukherjee and D. Ghosal, "Wireless sensor network survey," Computer Networks(Elsevier), vol.
52, no. 12, pp. 2292-2330, 2008.

[27] Z. Sun and I. F. Akyildiz, "Magnetic Induction Communications for Wireless Underground Sensor
Networks," IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 58, no. 7, pp. 2426-2435, 2010.

[28] P. Bhuvaneswari, R. Balakumar, V. Vaidehi and P. Balamuralidhar, "Solar Energy Harvesting for Wireless
Sensor Networks," in International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Communication Systems and
Networks (CICSYN), Indore, India, 2009.

[29] W. K. Seah, Z. A. Eu and H.-P. Tan, "Wireless sensor networks powered by ambient energy harvesting
(WSN-HEAP) - Survey and challenges," in International Conference on Wireless Communication, Vehicular
Technology, Information Theory and Aerospace & Electronic Systems Technology (Wireless VITAE),
Aalborg, Denmark, 2009.

[30] T. Bokareva, "Mini Hardware Survey," [Online]. Available:

http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~sensar/hardware/hardware_survey.html. [Accessed 7 January 2012].

[31] T. Uchiyama, Y. Uehara, M. Mori, Saito, Hiroki and Y. Tobe, "A System for Analyzing Life Rhythm Using
Wireless Sensors on Mules," in International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM), Nara, Japan,
2006.

[32] K. Romer and F. Mattern, "The Design Space of Wireless Sensor Networks," IEEE Wireless

Page 28 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Communications, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 54-61, 2004.

[33] T. Naumowicz, R. Freeman, H. Kirk, B. Dean, M. Calsyn, A. Liers, A. Braendle, T. Guilford and J. Schiller,
"Wireless Sensor Network for habitat monitoring on Skomer Island," in IEEE Conference on Local Computer
Networks (LCN), Denver, CO, 2010.

[34] C.-L. Fok, G.-C. Roman and C. Lu, "Towards a flexible global sensing infrastructure," Special issue on the
workshop on wireless sensor network architecture, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1-6, 2007.

[35] J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, A. Mainwaring, D. Culler and J. Anderson, "Analysis of wireless sensor networks
for habitat monitoring," in Wireless Sensor Networks, Norwell, MA, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, pp.
399-423.

[36] P. Schoonmaker and W. Luscombe, "Habitat Monitoring: An Approach for Reporting Status and Trends For
State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies," 22 March 2005. [Online]. Available:
http://www.defenders.org/resources/publications/programs_and_policy/biodiversity_partners/habitat_monitor
ing.pdf. [Accessed 8 January 2012].

[37] R. Agarwal, R. Martinez-Catala, S. Harte, C. Segard and B. O'Flynn, "Modeling Power in Multi-functionality
Sensor Network Applications," in International Conference on Sensor Technologies and Applications
(SENSORCOMM), Cap Esterel, France, 2008.

[38] W. Dargie, "Dynamic Power Management in Wireless Sensor Networks: State-of-the-Art," IEEE Journal on
Sensors, vol. PP, no. 99, 2011.

[39] K. Sohrabi, J. Gao, V. Ailawadhi and G. J. Pottie, "Protocols for self-organization of a wireless sensor
network," IEEE Personal Communications, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 16-27, 2000.

[40] O. Saglam and M. E. Dalkili, "A Self Organizing Multihop Clustering Protocol for Wireless Sensor
Networks," in International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Networks (MSN), Fujian, China, 2009.

[41] R. Kacimi, R. Dhaou and A. Beylot, "Energy-Aware Self-Organization Algorithms for Wireless Sensor
Networks," in IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM), New Orleans, Louisiana, 2008.

[42] K. Berman, F. Annexstein and A. Ranganathan, "Dominating connectivity and reliability of heterogeneous
sensor networks," in IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications
Workshop (PerCom), Pisa, Italy, 2006.

[43] A. Abbasi, M. Younis and U. Baroudi, "Restoring Connectivity in Wireless Sensor-Actor Networks with
Minimal Topology Changes," in International Conference on Communications (ICC), Cape Town, South
Africa, 2010.

[44] A. Ghosh and S. K. Das, "Coverage and connectivity issues in wireless sensor networks: A survey,"
Pervasive and Mobile Computing, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 303-334, 2008.

[45] P. Wang, Z. Sun, M. Vuran, M. A. Al-Rodhaan, A. Al-Dhelaan and I. F. Akyildiz, "On network connectivity
of wireless sensor networks for sandstorm monitoring," Computer Networks, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 1150-1157,
2011.

[46] M. Lu, J. Wu, M. Cardei and M. Li, "Energy-efficient connected coverage of discrete targets in wireless
sensor networks," International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 4, no. 3-4, pp. 137-147,
2009.

[47] X. Wang, G. Xing, Y. Zhang, C. Lu, R. Pless and C. Gill, "Integrated coverage and connectivity
configuration in wireless sensor networks," in International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor
Systems (SenSys), Los Angeles, CA, 2003.

Page 29 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

[48] R. Bose and A. Helal, "Sensor-Aware Adaptive Push-Pull Query Processing in Wireless Sensor Networks,"
in International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2010.

[49] L. Mottola and G. P. Picco, "Programming wireless sensor networks: Fundamental concepts and state of the
art," ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 43, no. 3, 2011.

[50] S. Tilak, N. B. Abu-Ghazaleh and W. Heinzelman, "A taxonomy of wireless micro-sensor network models,"
ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 28-36, 2002.

[51] L. Villalba, O. A, A. Cabrera and C. Abbas, "Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks," Sensors, vol.
9, no. 11, pp. 8399-8421, 2009.

[52] K. Akkaya and M. Younis, "A survey on routing protocols for wireless sensor networks," Elsevier Ad Hoc
Networks, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 325-349, 2005.

[53] D. Niculescu, "Communication paradigms for sensor networks," Communications Magazine, vol. 43, no. 3,
pp. 116-122, 2005.

[54] J. Paek and R. Govindan, "RCRT: rate-controlled reliable transport for wireless sensor networks," in
Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys '07),
Sydney, Australia, 2007.

[55] A. J. D. Rathnayaka and V. M. Potdar, "Wireless Sensor Network transport protocol: A critical review,"
Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2011.

[56] M. Vuran and I. Akyildiz, "XLP: A Cross-Layer Protocol for Efficient Communication in Wireless Sensor
Networks," IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 1578-1591, November 2010.

[57] J. N. Al-Karaki and A. E. Kamal, "Routing techniques in wireless sensor networks: a survey," IEEE Wirless
Communications, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 6-28, 2004.

[58] Z. Wang, E. Bulut and B. K. Szymanski, "Energy Efficient Collision Aware Multipath Routing for Wireless
Sensor Networks," in IEEE International Conference on Communications , Dresden, Germany, 2009.

[59] R. C. Shah and J. M. Rabaey, "Energy aware routing for low energy ad hoc sensor networks," in IEEE
Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, Orlando, Florida, 2002.

[60] J. H. Chang and L. Tassiulas, "Maximum lifetime routing in wireless sensor networks," IEEE/ACM
Transactions on Networking , vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 609-619, 2004.

[61] S. Dulman, T. Nieberg, J. Wu and P. Havinga, "Trade-off between traffic overhead and reliability in
multipath routing for wireless sensor networks," in IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking, New
Orleans, LA, 2003.

[62] K. Saleem, N. Fisal, S. Hafizah, S. Kamilah and R. Rashid, "A Self-Optimized Multipath Routing Protocol
for Wireless Sensor Networks," International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering (IJRTE), vol. 2, no. 1,
pp. 93-97, 2009.

[63] S. Okdem and D. Karaboga, "Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks Using an Ant Colony Optimization
(ACO) Router Chip," Sensors, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 909-921, 2009.

[64] M. Saleem, G. A. Di Caro and M. Farooq, "Swarm intelligence based routing protocol for wireless sensor
networks: Survey and future directions," Elsevier Information Sciences, vol. 181, no. 20, pp. 4597-4624,
2011.

[65] J. Kulik, W. Heinzelman and H. Balakrishnan, "Negotiation-based protocols for disseminating information in
wireless sensor networks," Wireless Networks, vol. 8, no. 2/3, pp. 169-185, 2002.

Page 30 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

[66] X. Huang and Y. Fang, "Multiconstrained QoS multipath routing in wireless sensor networks," Wireless
Networks, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 465-478, 2008.

[67] B. Kusy, H. J. Lee, M. Wicke, N. Milosavljevic and L. Guibas, "Predictive QoS routing to mobile sinks in
wireless sensor networks," in International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks
(IPSN), San Francisco, CA, 2009.

[68] J. Ben-Othman and B. Yahya, "Energy efficient and QoS based routing protocol for wireless sensor
networks," Elsevier Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 849-857, 2010.

[69] Y. Chen, N. Nasser, T. El Salti and H. Zhang, "A multipath QoS routing protocol in wireless sensor
networks," International Journal of Sensor Networks, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 207-216, 2010.

[70] Y. Zhou, Y. Fang and Y. Zhang, "Securing wireless sensor networks: a survey," IEEE Communications
Suveys & Tutorials, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 6-28, 2008.

[71] J.-P. Sheu, J.-R. Jiang and C. Tu, "Anonymous Path Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE
International Conference on Communications (ICC), Beijing, China, 2008.

[72] Z. Zhang, C. Jiang and J. Deng, "A secure anonymous path routing protocol for wireless sensor networks," in
IEEE International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Information Security
(WCNIS), Beijing, China, 2010.

[73] T. Zahariadis, H. Leligou, S. Voliotis, S. Maniatis, P. Trakadas and P. Karkazis, "Energy-aware secure
routing for large wireless sensor networks," World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS)
Transactions on Communications, vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 981-991, 2009.

[74] S. Singh, M. Singh and D. Singh, "Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks-A Survey," International
Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Survey (IJCSES), vol. 1, no. 2, 2010.

[75] A. Koliousis and J. Sventek, "Proactive vs reactive routing for wireless sensor networks," Department of
Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, 2007.

[76] X. Du and F. Lin, "Improving routing in sensor networks with heterogeneous sensor nodes," in Vehicular
Technology Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 2005.

[77] H. Kim, T. Abdelzaher and W. Kwon, "Minimum-energy asynchronous dissemination to mobile sinks in
wireless sensor networks," in 1st international conference on Embedded networked sensor systems (SenSys
'03), Los Angeles, CA, 2003.

[78] Y. Yao and J. Gehrke, "The cougar approach to in-network query processing in sensor networks," ACM
SIGMOD Records, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 9-18, 2002.

[79] S. Lindsey and C. Raghavendra, "PEGASIS: Power-efficient gathering in sensor information systems," in
IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, 2002.

[80] K. Langendoen and G. Halkes, "Energy Efficient Medium Access Control," in Embedded Systems Handbook,
CRC Press, 2005, pp. 34.1-34.29.

[81] L. Tang, S. Yanjun, O. Gurewitz and D. B. Johnson, "PW-MAC: An energy-efficient predictive-wakeup

MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks," in IEEE INFOCOM, Shanghai, China, 2011.

[82] W. Ye, J. Heidemann and D. Estrin, "An energy-efficient MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks," in
INFOCOM 2002, 21st Annual Joint Conference of IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, New
York , 2002.

[83] M. Buettner, G. V. Yee, E. Anderson and R. Han, "X-MAC: a short preamble MAC protocol for duty-cycled
wireless sensor networks," in Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor

Page 31 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

Systems (SenSys), Boulder, CO, 2006.

[84] Q. Ren and Q. Liang, "An Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE
Globecom, St. Louis, MO, 2005.

[85] A. Bachir, M. Dohler, T. Watteyne and K. Leung, "MAC Essentials for Wireless Sensor Networks," IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 222-248, 2010.

[86] P. Rao, R. Rani, S. Sankar, K. Pradeep, N. Kumar and V. Kumar, "Secure MAC for Wireless Sensor
Networks through RBFNN," International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, vol. 2, no. 8, pp.
3510-3514, 2010.

[87] Q. Hu and Z. Tang, "ATPM: An Energy Efficient MAC Protocol with Adaptive Transmit Power Scheme for
Wireless Sensor Networks," Journal of Multimedia, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 122-128, 2011.

[88] M. Yigitel, O. Incel and C. Ersoy, "QoS-aware MAC protocols for wireless sensor networks: A survey,"
Elsevier Computer Networks, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1982-2004, 2011.

[89] K. Langendoen, "The MAC Alphabet Soup served in Wireless Sensor Networks - Taxonomy," Delft
University of Technology, 16 March 2011. [Online]. Available:
http://www.st.ewi.tudelft.nl/~koen/MACsoup/taxonomy.php. [Accessed 12 July 2012].

[90] R. Sugihara and R. K. Gupta, "Programming models for sensor networks: A survey," ACM Transactions on
Sensor Networks (TOSN), vol. 4, no. 2, 2008.

[91] M. Farooq and T. Kunz, "Operating Systems for Wireless Sensor Networks: A Aurvey," Sensors, vol. 11, no.
6, pp. 5900-5930, 2011.

[92] D. Gay, P. Levis, R. von Behren, M. Welsh, E. Brewer and D. Culler, "The nesC language: A holistic
approach to networked embedded systems," in In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2003 conference on
Programming language design and implementation (PLDI '03), New York, 2003.

[93] P. Levis, S. Madden, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, K. Whitehouse, A. Woo, D. Gay, J. Hill, M. Welsh, E. Brewer
and D. Culler, "TinyOS: An Operating System for Sensor Networks," in Ambient Intelligence, New York,
Springer, 2005, pp. 115-148.

[94] G. Anastasi, M. Conti, M. Di Francesco and A. Passarella, "Energy conservation in wireless sensor networks:
A survey," Elsevier Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 537-568, 2009.

[95] TinyOS, "TinyOS Tutorial Lesson 1: Getting Started with TinyOS and nesC," 9 September 2003. [Online].
Available: http://www.tinyos.net/tinyos-1.x/doc/tutorial/lesson1.html. [Accessed 8 Jan 2012].

[96] R. Thusu, "Wireless Sensor Use Is Expanding in Industrial Applications," Sensors, 1 June 2010. [Online].
Available: http://www.sensorsmag.com/networking-communications/wireless-sensor/wireless-sensor-use-is-
expanding-industrial-applications-7212. [Accessed 8 January 2012].

[97] D. Boyle and T. Newe, "Security Protocols for Use with Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey of Security
Architectures," in International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications (ICWMC),
Guadeloupe, French Caribbean, 2007.

[98] A. Perrig, R. Szewczyk, J. D. Tygar, V. Wen and D. Culler, "SPINS: security protocols for sensor networks,"
Wireless Networks, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 521-534, 2002.

[99] S. Zhu, S. Setia and S. Jajodia, "LEAP: efficient security mechanisms for large-scale distributed sensor
networks," in ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Washington D.C., 2003.

[100] C. Karlof, N. Sastry and D. Wagner, "TinySec: a link layer security architecture for wireless sensor
networks," in International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys), Baltimore, MD,

Page 32 of 33
 This is a pre-print version for educational purpose only. The respective copyrights are with the publisher.

2004.

[101] "Computational Intelligence in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey," IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 68-96, 2011.

Page 33 of 33

View publication stats