Almost tight bounds for &egr;-nets
Discrete & Computational Geometry
Computational geometry: algorithms and applications
Computational geometry: algorithms and applications
Primal-Dual RNC Approximation Algorithms for Set Cover and Covering Integer Programs
SIAM Journal on Computing
A randomized art-gallery algorithm for sensor placement
SCG '01 Proceedings of the seventeenth annual symposium on Computational geometry
Exposure in wireless Ad-Hoc sensor networks
Proceedings of the 7th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking
Robot Motion Planning
A coverage-preserving node scheduling scheme for large wireless sensor networks
WSNA '02 Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Wireless sensor networks and applications
Grid Coverage for Surveillance and Target Location in Distributed Sensor Networks
IEEE Transactions on Computers
Guarding Galleries and Terrains
TCS '02 Proceedings of the IFIP 17th World Computer Congress - TC1 Stream / 2nd IFIP International Conference on Theoretical Computer Science: Foundations of Information Technology in the Era of Networking and Mobile Computing
Translating a Planar Object to Maximize Point Containment
ESA '02 Proceedings of the 10th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms
Heuristics for the Generation of Random Polygons
Proceedings of the 8th Canadian Conference on Computational Geometry
Combinatorial Geometry
The coverage problem in a wireless sensor network
WSNA '03 Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on Wireless sensor networks and applications
Wireless Sensor Networks: An Information Processing Approach
Wireless Sensor Networks: An Information Processing Approach
Low-coordination topologies for redundancy in sensor networks
Proceedings of the 6th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing
On approximating the depth and related problems
SODA '05 Proceedings of the sixteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms
The holes problem in wireless sensor networks: a survey
ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review
Efficient Deployment Algorithms for Ensuring Coverage and Connectivity ofWireless Sensor Networks
WICON '05 Proceedings of the First International Conference on Wireless Internet
Near-optimal sensor placements in Gaussian processes
ICML '05 Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning
Deploying wireless sensors to achieve both coverage and connectivity
Proceedings of the 7th ACM international symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing
Finding a Guard that Sees Most and a Shop that Sells Most
Discrete & Computational Geometry
Stabbing Convex Polygons with a Segment or a Polygon
ESA '08 Proceedings of the 16th annual European symposium on Algorithms
Improved Approximation Algorithms for Relay Placement
ESA '08 Proceedings of the 16th annual European symposium on Algorithms
A probability density function for energy-balanced lifetime-enhancing node deployment in WSN
ICCSA'11 Proceedings of the 2011 international conference on Computational science and its applications - Volume Part IV
Hi-index | 0.00 |
We study the problem of covering a two-dimensional spatial region P , cluttered with occluders, by sensors. A sensor placed at a location p covers a point x in P if x lies within sensing radius r from p and x is visible from p , i.e., the segment px does not intersect any occluder. The goal is to compute a placement of the minimum number of sensors that cover P . We propose a landmark-based approach for covering P . Suppose P has *** holes, and it can be covered by h sensors. Given a small parameter *** 0, let *** : = *** (h ,*** ) = (h /*** )(1 + ln (1 + *** )). We prove that one can compute a set L of O (*** log*** log(1/*** )) landmarks so that if a set S of sensors covers L , then S covers at least (1 *** *** )-fraction of P . It is surprising that so few landmarks are needed, and that the number of landmarks depends only on h , and does not directly depend on the number of vertices in P . We then present efficient randomized algorithms, based on the greedy approach, that, with high probability, compute $O(\tilde{h}\log \lambda)$ sensor locations to cover L ; here $\tilde{h} \le h$ is the number sensors needed to cover L . We propose various extensions of our approach, including: (i) a weight function over P is given and S should cover at least (1 *** *** ) of the weighted area of P , and (ii) each point of P is covered by at least t sensors, for a given parameter t *** 1.