Difference between revisions of "CSE730x Research Seminar"

From Cyber-Physical Systems Laboratory
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 47: Line 47:
  
 
'''Abstract:'''
 
'''Abstract:'''
−
Accurate interference models are important for use in trans-mission scheduling algorithms in wireless networks. In this work, we perform extensive modeling and experimentation on two 20-node TelosB motes testbeds { one indoor and the other outdoor { to compare a suite of interference models for their modeling accuracies. We ¯rst empirically build and validate the physical interference model via a packet recep-
+
<pre>
−
tion rate vs. SINR relationship using a measurement driven method. We then similarly instantiate other simpler models,such as hop-based, range-based, protocol model, etc. The modeling accuracies are then evaluated on the two testbeds using transmission scheduling experiments. We observe that while the physical interference model is the most accurate, it is still far from perfect, providing a 90-percentile error about 20-25% (and 80 percentile error 7-12%), depending on the scenario. The accuracy of the other models is worse and scenario-speci¯c. The second best model trails the physical model by roughly 12-18 percentile points for similar accuracy targets. Somewhat similar throughput performance di®erential between models is also observed when used with greedy scheduling algorithms. Carrying on further, we look closely into the the two incarnations of the physical model {`thresholded' (conservative, but typically considered in lit-
+
Accurate interference models are important for use in trans-mission scheduling
−
erature) and `graded' (more realistic). We show via solving the one shot scheduling problem, that the graded version can improve `expected throughput' over the thresholded version by scheduling imperfect links.
+
algorithms in wireless networks.In this work, we perform extensive modeling and
−
 
+
experimentation on two 20-node TelosB motes testbeds { one indoor and the other  
 +
outdoor { to compare a suite of interference models for their modeling accuracies.  
 +
We first empirically build and validate the physical interference model via a  
 +
packet reception rate vs. SINR relationship using a measurement driven method. We  
 +
then similarly instantiate other simpler models,such as hop-based, range-based,  
 +
protocol model, etc. The modeling accuracies are then evaluated on the two  
 +
testbeds using transmission scheduling experiments. We observe that while the  
 +
physical interference model is the most accurate, it is still far from perfect,  
 +
providing a 90-percentile error about 20-25% (and 80 percentile error 7-12%),  
 +
depending on the scenario. The accuracy of the other models is worse and scenario-
 +
speci¯c. The second best model trails the physical model by roughly 12-18  
 +
percentile points for similar accuracy targets. Somewhat similar throughput  
 +
performance di®erential between models is also observed when used with greedy  
 +
scheduling algorithms. Carrying on further, we look closely into the the two  
 +
incarnations of the physical model {`thresholded' (conservative, but typically  
 +
considered in literature) and `graded' (more realistic). We show via solving the  
 +
one shot scheduling problem, that the graded version can improve `expected  
 +
throughput' over the thresholded version by scheduling imperfect links.
 +
</pre>
 
'''Links''':[http://www.wings.cs.sunysb.edu/~ritesh/Papers/Ritesh-Sensys08-Interference.pdf paper]
 
'''Links''':[http://www.wings.cs.sunysb.edu/~ritesh/Papers/Ritesh-Sensys08-Interference.pdf paper]
  

Revision as of 03:38, 26 September 2008

This seminar examines fundamental and emerging concepts in concurrency and distribution by studying seminal papers and recent research results. Broad topics of interest include models of concurrency, mobile computing, parallel architectures, sensor networks, distributed algorithms, and specialized protocols. Each semester, the seminar emphasizes different themes reflecting the current research interests of the participants.

The theme of this semester's seminar is Wireless Sensor Networks. We will read and discuss papers from recent major conferences on mobile, wireless, and sensor networks and systems. These conferences include:

When choosing a paper to present, you may look through the conferences mentioned above, or view the list of potential papers.

September 12, 2008 - Sangeeta Bhattacharya

September 19, 2008 - Greg Hackmann

A Measurement Study of Vehicular Internet Access Using In Situ Wi-Fi Networks.
Vladimir Bychkovsky, Bret Hull, Allen K. Miu, Hari Balakrishnan, Samuel Madden.
MobiCom 2006.

Links: Paper Slides

September 26, 2008 - Yong Fu

Gong Chen, Wenbo He, Jie Liu, Suman Nath, Leonidas Rigas, Lin Xiao, and Feng Zhao, 
"Energy-Aware Server Provisioning and Load Dispatching for Connection-Intensive Internet Services" 
5th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation(NSDI 2008), San Francisco, CA, April 2008.

Links: Paper Slides

October 3, 2008 - Weijun Guo

A Measurement Study of Interference Modeling and Scheduling in Low Power Wireless Networks. Ritesh Maheshwari (Stony Brook University, US); Shweta Jain (Staccato Communications, US); Samir Das (Stony Brook University, US). SenSys'08.

Abstract: 

Accurate interference models are important for use in trans-mission scheduling
algorithms in wireless networks.In this work, we perform extensive modeling and
experimentation on two 20-node TelosB motes testbeds { one indoor and the other 
outdoor { to compare a suite of interference models for their modeling accuracies. 
We first empirically build and validate the physical interference model via a 
packet reception rate vs. SINR relationship using a measurement driven method. We 
then similarly instantiate other simpler models,such as hop-based, range-based, 
protocol model, etc. The modeling accuracies are then evaluated on the two 
testbeds using transmission scheduling experiments. We observe that while the 
physical interference model is the most accurate, it is still far from perfect, 
providing a 90-percentile error about 20-25% (and 80 percentile error 7-12%), 
depending on the scenario. The accuracy of the other models is worse and scenario-
speci¯c. The second best model trails the physical model by roughly 12-18 
percentile points for similar accuracy targets. Somewhat similar throughput 
performance di®erential between models is also observed when used with greedy 
scheduling algorithms. Carrying on further, we look closely into the the two 
incarnations of the physical model {`thresholded' (conservative, but typically 
considered in literature) and `graded' (more realistic). We show via solving the 
one shot scheduling problem, that the graded version can improve `expected 
throughput' over the thresholded version by scheduling imperfect links.

Links:paper

October 10, 2008 - Chengjie Wu

October 17, 2008 - Justin Luner

Fall Break

October 24, 2008 - Chien-Liang Fok

October 31, 2008 - Octav Chipara

November 7, 2008 - Sangeeta Bhattacharya

November 14, 2008 - Greg Hackmann

November 21, 2008 - Yong Fu

November 28, 2008 - N/A

Thanksgiving

December 5, 2008 - Weijun Guo

December 12, 2008 - Chengjie Wu

December 19, 2008 - N/A

Winter Break

Previous Semesters

Retrieved from "http://wsn.cse.wustl.edu/index.php?title=CSE730x_Research_Seminar&oldid=1184"