Enhancing Data Rate And Network Reliability Through Multi-Stage Cluster Head Delegation

Arun Kumar Marandi; Ashutosh Parida; Bhabani Sankar Gouda; Amaresh Kumar Mohanty; Maheswar Mishra; Harish Prajapati

doi:10.29284/vaymrf88

Authors

Arun Kumar Marandi Professor Department of CSE AI & DS, Parul University, INDIA
Ashutosh Parida Assistant professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, NIST University, Palur Hills, Berhampur, Odisha
Bhabani Sankar Gouda Assistant professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, NIST University, Palur Hills, Berhampur, Odisha
Amaresh Kumar Mohanty Assistant professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, NIST University, Palur Hills, Berhampur, Odisha
Maheswar Mishra Assistant Professor Dept of CSE, School of Engineering and Technology, DRIEMS University Cuttack
Harish Prajapati Assistant Professor Department of CSE AI & DS, Parul University, INDIA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29284/vaymrf88

Keywords:

Sensor node, Routing protocols, Residual energy, Homogeneous Network, Cluster-Based Architecture, Cluster Head Rotation, LEACH.

Abstract

In wireless sensor networks (WSNs), the reliance on irreplaceable sensor nodes (SNs) and limited power sources restricts network lifetime, reliability, and sustainable throughput. This paper presents an algorithm for cluster routing that focuses on sensible bunching and cluster head (CH) variety for different numbers of SNs. The proposed routing model incorporates multipath propagation to reduce residual energy and compares its performance with existing clustering approaches regarding network lifetime, energy efficiency, and throughput sustainability. Moreover, a multi-hop-multi-hop network routing protocol (MMNRP) is proposed for statistics communication between SNs, CHs, and the base station (BS). The energy usage of MMNRP is compared with other existing techniques. This work provides insights into selecting an optimal approach to lessen energy consumption in WSNs through simulation studies. The proposed model is evaluated in different deployment scenarios considering other numbers of SNs and other base station locations. The consequences of the proposed model exhibit superior performance in relation to network endurance, power ingesting, and system throughput compared to conventional approaches.

References

1. Abadi, D. J. (2012). Consistency tradeoffs in modern distributed database system design. IEEE Computer, 45(2), 37–42.

2. Abadi, D. J., Boncz, P. A., &Harizopoulos, S. (2009). Column-oriented database systems. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 2(2), 1664–1665.

3. Cattell, R. (2011). Scalable SQL and NoSQL data stores. ACM SIGMOD Record, 39(4), 12–27.

4. Dean, J., & Ghemawat, S. (2008). MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. Communications of the ACM, 51(1), 107–113.

5. Hellerstein, J. M., Stonebraker, M., & Hamilton, J. (2007). Architecture of a database system. Foundations and Trends® in Databases, 1(2), 141–259.

6. Kleppmann, M. (2017). Designing Data-Intensive Applications. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.

7. Pavlo, A., & Aslett, M. (2016). What’s really new with NewSQL? ACM SIGMOD Record, 45(2), 45–55.

8. Sadalage, P. J., & Fowler, M. (2013). NoSQL Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Emerging World of Polyglot Persistence. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

9. Stonebraker, M., Abadi, D. J., DeWitt, D. J., Madden, S., Paulson, E., Pavlo, A., & Rasin, A. (2010). MapReduce and parallel DBMSs: Friends or foes? Communications of the ACM, 53(1), 64–71.

10. Zhang, C., Li, M., Zhao, Y., & Chen, J. (2020). Cloud database systems: Architecture, challenges, and opportunities. Future Generation Computer Systems, 108, 742–755.