Energy cost and error performance of range-aware, anchor-free localization algorithms

  • Authors:

  • Gustav J. Jordt;Rusty O. Baldwin;John F. Raquet;Barry E. Mullins

  • Affiliations:

  • Sensors Directorate, Air Force Research Laboratory, 2241 Avionics Circle, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7333, United States;Department of Electrical Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, AFIT/ENG, 2950 Hobson Way, WPAFB, OH 45433, United States;Department of Electrical Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, AFIT/ENG, 2950 Hobson Way, WPAFB, OH 45433, United States;Department of Electrical Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, AFIT/ENG, 2950 Hobson Way, WPAFB, OH 45433, United States

  • Venue:
  • Ad Hoc Networks
  • Year:
  • 2008

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Many applications that use sensor data from a wireless sensor network (WSN) require corresponding node position information as well. Therefore, it is not surprising that a common figure of merit for localization algorithms is the accuracy of the position estimate produced. Similarly, the amount of communication required by a localization algorithm is often of paramount interest as well since it is common knowledge that communication expends the most energy in a WSN. However, localization algorithms seldom characterize their communication cost. Furthermore, when they do it is often merely qualitative and is typically described as ''expensive''. For two types of range-aware, anchor-free localization algorithms we found the opposite to be true. Rather than being expensive, the communication costs were quite modest. So much so that we maintain range-aware, anchor-free localization algorithms should be chosen on the basis of the accuracy required by the intended application independent of the communication cost. In this paper, we examine the effect of node degree, node distribution, range error and network size on distance error and communication cost for both incremental and concurrent versions of range-aware, anchor-free algorithms. The concurrent algorithm is twice as accurate as the incremental, but less efficient. Furthermore, node degree influences the energy cost of the algorithms the most, but neither algorithm uses more than a surprisingly small 0.8% of a 560mAh battery. This result indicates less energy efficient localization algorithms can be tolerated, especially if they provide better accuracy. Furthermore, if energy does need to be conserved, there is not much savings available within the localization algorithm and savings must be found in other areas such as the MAC protocol or routing algorithm.