arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1105.6024

Optimum Sleep-Wake Scheduling of Sensors for Quickest Event Detection in Small Extent Wireless Sensor Networks

Premkumar Karumbu·Anurag Kumar
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We consider the problem of quickest event detection with sleep-wake scheduling in small extent wireless sensor networks in which, at each time slot, each sensor node in the awake state observes a sample and communicates the information to the fusion centre. The sensor nodes in the sleep state do not sample or communicate any information to the fusion centre (FC), thereby conserving energy. At each time slot, the FC, after having received the samples from the sensor nodes in the wake state, makes a decision to stop (and thus declare that the event has occurred) or to continue observing. If it decides to continue, the FC also makes the decision of choosing the number of sensor nodes to be in the wake state in the next time slot. We consider three alternative approaches to the problem of choosing the number of sensor nodes to be in the wake state in time slot k+1, based on the information available at time slot k, namely, 1. optimal control of M_{k+1}, the number of sensor nodes to be in the awake state in time slot k+1, 2. optimal control of q_{k+1}, the probability of a sensor node to be in the awake state in time slot k+1, and 3. optimal probability q that a sensor node is in the awake state in any time slot. In each case, we formulate the problem as a sequential decision process. We show that a sufficient statistic for the decision at time k is the a posteriori probability of change Pi_k. Also, we show that the optimal stopping rule is a threshold rule on Pi_k. The optimal policy for M_{k+1} can keep very few sensors wake during the prechange phase and then quickly increase the number of sensors in the wake state when a change is "suspected". Among the three sleep-wake algorithms described, we observe that the total cost is minimum for the optimum control of M_{k+1} and is maximum for the optimum control on q.

Explore related subjects

cs.NI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Premkumar Karumbu, Anurag Kumar. 2011-05-30. Optimum Sleep-Wake Scheduling of Sensors for Quickest Event Detection in Small Extent Wireless Sensor Networks. https://arxiv.org/abs/1105.6024

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Message-Level Scheduling for RLNC-Coded Multi-Source Traffic

This paper studies weighted decoding-delay minimization for multiple RLNC-coded message streams that compete for finite processing capacity at a destination. Packet arrivals are exogenous, while the scheduler only determines the processing order of packets already available at the destination. A trace-conditioned offline scheduling formulation shows that a batch-release subclass is strongly NP-hard even with a single processing unit. Message-Aware Innovation-Deficit Scheduling (MAIDS) is then developed to prioritize each serviceable message according to its weight and remaining decoding deficit. For a single processing unit, MAIDS is shown to be exactly optimal under nonblocking progressive arrivals with equal weights and under common activation with arbitrary positive weights, while the unrestricted weighted online problem admits no universal deterministic $O(1)$ competitive ratio. Simulation results on streaming and batch benchmarks show that MAIDS consistently reduces weighted decoding delay relative to the tested baselines, remains close to the offline optimum on average, and recovers the predicted exact performance boundaries.

cs.NI↗
arXiv2026

The Towers Were Standing: A Cause Decomposition of Cellular Outages During Hurricane Helene

Hurricane Helene produced the largest absolute cell-site outage in the public FCC record, peaking at 4562 sites. The conventional model is physical: towers destroyed. Helene did destroy over 1700 miles of fibre, but almost none of it was cell sites. We present the first cause-decomposed study of the FCC's Disaster Information Reporting System, reconstructing 80 state-days and 580 county-days from 24 daily filings by two reconciled independent extractions. Damage to cell sites is negligible: 1.1% of attributed cell-site-days across six states, at most 3.8% anywhere. The sites were standing. What took them out divides by terrain: pooled, power dominates at 63.2%, but in mountainous North Carolina severed transport (backhaul) reaches 52.2% against 47.3%, and in Tennessee 69.9%. North Carolina's transport share rises from 7.0% to 85.0% across the event (\r{ho} = 0.92). Seventeen days after landfall, on 15 October, 47 sites lost transport across six contiguous North Carolina counties with no rainfall, no power loss, no damage, and recovery by the next report. Independent active-probe measurement corroborates it: responsive /24s fall 1.02% for twelve hours while Tennessee stays flat. We release the dataset. Backup power is the standard resilience investment; here it addresses the smaller half of the problem.

cs.NI↗
arXiv2026

terms.txt: A Consent and Compensation Protocol for Agentic Web Access

The open web ran on an unwritten bargain: sites admitted crawlers, and search engines sent visitors back. Public measurements show that bargain breaking under AI crawlers and agents. Automated clients now make up most requests, training dominates Cloudflare-classified crawling, and the largest AI platforms fetch thousands of pages for each visitor they return. The web's common control, robots.txt, cannot express identity, purpose, terms, or price, can be circumvented, and newer alternatives are largely proprietary CDN features. We specify terms.txt, a robots.txt-style file for per-path, per-purpose machine-access terms, plus an origin-enforced exchange using Web Bot Auth signatures, signed intent, delegation tokens, HTTP 402 negotiation, and signed receipts. We define what the exchange can enforce, audit, and leave to contract. A dependency-free implementation adds 0.20 to 0.65 ms per request on one vCPU.

cs.NI↗