Research Article
A dynamic Markov chain prediction model for delay-tolerant networks
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 2016, Vol. 12(9) Ó The Author(s) 2016 DOI: 10.1177/1550147716666662 ijdsn.sagepub.com
Il-kyu Jeon and Kang-whan Lee
Abstract In this study, prediction routing algorithms are proposed to select efficient relay nodes. While most prediction algorithms assume that nodes need additional information such as node’s schedule and connectivity between nodes, the network reliability is lowered when additional information is unknown. To solve this problem, this study proposes a context-aware Markov chain prediction based on the Markov chain that uses the node’s movement history information without requiring additional information. The evaluation results show that the proposed scheme has competitive delivery ratio but with less average latency. Keywords Delay-tolerant network, prediction, context-awareness, Markov chain
Date received: 22 April 2016; accepted: 25 July 2016 Academic Editor: Haigang Gong
Introduction A delay-tolerant network (DTN) is a network architecture that is designed to enable communication on unreliable networks such as those in wars or disasters, wherein it is difficult to apply the existing transmission control protocol (TCP)/internet protocol (IP).1 To address this problem, DTN enables communication using message forwarding methods based on storecarry-forward (SCF) paradigm.2 In DTNs, the selection of relay node has a significant impact on the overall network performance. To select efficient relay nodes, several research groups have proposed prediction routing models like PRoPHET (Probabilistic Routing Protocol using History of Encounters and Transitivity) and PER (Predict and Relay).3–9 The existing prediction models require additional information such as a node’s schedule and delivery predictability. However, network reliability is lowered when additional information is unknown. To address this problem, in this study, we propose a context-aware Markov chain prediction (CMCP) model based on node behaviour movement that can predict
the mobility without requiring additional information such as a node’s schedule or connectivity between nodes. The proposed model maps a given node’s movement behaviour onto the movement information history state each other. The next history information state is predicted by the transition probability matrix obtained using Markov chain to predict the mobility of nodes. In this study, the optimal behaviour nodes are predicted by the relay nodes that move towards the destination. Furthermore, a simulation study was conducted to confirm that this model approach improves the delivery ratio and lowers the average delay as compared to traditional DTN routing schemes such as PRoPHET or PER.
Korea University of Technology and Education, Cheonan-si, Republic of Korea Corresponding author: Kang-whan Lee, Korea University of Technology and Education, 1600, Chungjeol-ro, Cheonan-si, Chungcheongnam-do, ASI|KR|KS002|CHEONAN, Republic of Korea. Email:
[email protected]
Creative Commons CC-BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/ openaccess.htm).
2
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks
Related works A representative DTN routing model, epidemic, delivers the message to all nodes within the transmission range. In an ideal network, the delivery ratio of the epidemic is higher than the prediction model because source node selects many relay nodes. However, the rate of input traffic to the processing buffer of node is limited in real networks. Therefore, this could result in an increase in the network overhead as large area networks or increased number of nodes can result in the copying of the buffer register. To solve this problem, many prediction models have been proposed. PRoPHET is one such prediction model. In PRoPHET, a node can select a relay node using the delivery predictability. The delivery predictability is proportional to the probability of subsequent contact between nodes. In addition, the node behaves independently with characteristics like velocity and direction. We can analyse node behaviour in the Markov chain model. The results of this research, based on the analysis of the delivery ratio, show that low efficiency is obtained in a non-scheduled network. PER model is proposed in a network-configured landmark. A landmark is defined as a place where nodes can communicate directly at same time. PER utilizes a model based on a time-homogeneous semiMarkov process model to predict the probability distribution of the time of contact and the probability that two nodes will have a contact in the future. However, in PER, the network is configured by landmark and the nodes have mobility schedule. In this article, we propose a method that predicts the current and future states of the network using Markov chain.
Proposed algorithm Each node stores a multidimensional array that records a node’s movement history in each time domain. A node’s movement history comprises speed and direction information. Then, the general range of a node’s movement history can be predicted based on the previous history using Markov chain, and the highest utility value is assigned to the node holding the next movement path. During the spray phase, the message is forwarded to the node in the direction of the destination. Figure 1 shows the sequence diagram describing the proposed model. Figure 2 shows the message transmission procedure. The message is transmitted according to the following procedure:
Source node A transmits location information of destination to neighbour node B. Node B predicts movement path of itself and which can connect destination. If node B can
connect destination, node announces own condition with relay node to source node A. Else if node B announces neighbour node. If source node A receives node B with relay node, source node A transmits message to node B.
Set state and map node’s movement history We proposed a model wherein nodes have the mobility of a node with discrete-time Markov chain. In Markov chain, the states are usually discrete. Therefore, we need to map a node’s movement history onto states. States are values having even intervals between minimum movement history and maximum movement history. Figure 2 shows example of states for speed and direction. In Figure 3, there are eight states of direction and four states of speed. Each state has a mapped real value. For example, state 2 presents the real value p/2 in Figure 3(a) and state 1 presents the real value 0 m/s in Figure 3(b). We assign a random variable X as the node’s movement history. The sequence Xi forms a discrete-time and discrete-state Markov chain. Each node records the node’s movement history sequence Xi and maps Xi into one of states. To map the node’s movement history information to a state, the node’s movement behaviour history information compares the difference of value to each state dira (b) = jdira dirb j va (b) = jva vb j
ð1Þ
In equation (1), dira(b) is a difference between the direction value of node a and direction value of state b; dira is the direction value of node a and dirb is the direction value of state b; va(b) is the difference between the speed value of node a and speed value of state b; and va is the speed value of the node a and vb is the speed value of state b. Then, lowest difference is endowed to the mapped state. Mapped state is represented as follows Ia (dir) = index min dira (b) b2dir
Ia (v) = index min va (b)
ð2Þ
b2v
In equation (2), Ia(dir) is a mapped state of direction and Ia(v) is a mapped state of speed.
Create transition probability matrix A Markov chain is a sequence of random variables X1, X2, X3, ., Xn with Markov property. ai (i = 1, 2, ., n) is the real value accordance to time. The probability of moving to next state depends only on the present
Jeon and Lee
3
Figure 1. Sequence diagram describing the proposed model of CMCP.
Figure 2. Message transmission procedure.
state and not on the previous states if both conditional probabilities are defined by p(Xn = an jXn1 = an1 , Xn2 = an2 , . . . , X1 = a1 ) ð3Þ = p(Xn = an jXn1 = an1 )
When node A meets a random node Bi, node Bi predicts that node A moves in the direction of the destination. The transition probability matrix P is created based on the previous movement history sequence for Bi. The transition probability matrix P is defined by
Figure 3. Example of mapping states of direction between 0 and 2p and speed between 0 and vmax: (a) state for direction and (b) state for speed.
2
p1, 1 6 .. P=4 . pN , 1
pN=2, N =2
3 p1, N .. 7 . 5 pN , N
ð4Þ
4
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks 2
0 6 1=2 P=6 4 1=4 0
Table 1. Pseudo code for creating transition probability matrix. Procedure: CMCP model Input sequence set of X, X={X1, X2, ., XM + 1} M: length of analysis interval N: number of states Output transition probability matrix P Begin initialize P //numi :number of transitions from state i without considering the next state initialize numi //numij :number of transitions from state i to state j initialize numij // for i = 0 to M ++ numxi,xi + 1 ++ numxi end for j = 0 to N for k = 0 to N pij=numjk/numj end end generate transition matrix P using pij end output P
where N is the number of maximum states and pi,j is the probability that present state is i and next state is j. M is length of analysis interval. If M is shorter enough, M is affected by the newest movement history. However, if M is too longer, it is affected by average movement history. The transition probability matrix P is created by the process described in Table 1. The probability pi,j that a node’s property moves from state i to state j is defined by pi, j =
numij numi
ð5Þ
where numi stands for the number of transitions from state i without considering the next state and numij is the number of transitions from state i to state j. Each node could generate and refine its own P matrix over time. We predicted the next state according to the current state. Assuming that the current state is i, where i corresponds to ith row of matrix P, search for the column with the highest probability in the ith row in the transition probability matrix, and this column number is the next state. For example, assuming that the sequence of states in interval M is 2, 3, 4, 2, 1, 3, 3, 1, 3, 3, the transition probability matrix is calculated as follows
0 0 0 0
2=2 1=2 2=4 1
3 0 0 7 7 1=4 5 0
ð6Þ
Take matrix (6) for example. Supposing that the current state is 3, the highest probability in row 3 is 2/4, and it is located at column 3. Therefore, the next state is predicted as state 3.
Predict path of node and select relay nodes We predicted node’s next state in the previous step. In this step, we predict node’s movement path and select relay node. The movement path of the node is a set of location of node in every time. Therefore, the node predicts the next location of the node to predict the movement path of the node. The next location of the node is a location moved to current direction with current direction from current location of the node. Source node selects relay nodes that will contact destination in predicted movement path. Figure 4 shows the selection of relay node in the proposed model. Figure 5 shows the process of movement path prediction of the node using mapped node’s state in the time between nT 2 M and nT. A node predicts next state at time unit nT + 1 using mapped state from time unit nT 2 M to nT, and then the node predicts next location by aggregating next states. When the node is able to communicate to destination at next location, the node is selected as a relay node. However, when the node is not able to communicate to destination at next location, the node repeats above process up to sequence period M at time unit nT + 1. Table 2 shows the mapped state by Figure 4. At this time, the number of state N is 8.
Performance evaluation In this section, we describe the simulations performed to compare the prediction-based routing of the proposed algorithm and PRoPHET. Prior to the simulation, we assume the following:
Destination is the node fixed at the centre. Movement model is a random waypoint model.10 Message is randomly created. Message has time to live (TTL). Delivery ratio is represented as described in equation (7)11 Delivery ratio =
D G
ð7Þ
Jeon and Lee
5
Figure 4. Selection of relay node in the proposed model.
Figure 5. Model of selecting the intermediate node for the routing path.
Table 2. Mapped states of node over time. Time
nT 2 M
.
nT 2 1
nT
nT + 1
.
nT + ∂
Ia(dir) Ia(v)
1 4
. .
3 4
3 4
4 5
. .
3 2
G is the number of total created messages and D is the number of total messages that have reached the destination. Table 3 describes the simulation environment.
Average latency If transmission range is increased, the number of nodes present in the transmission range increases correspondingly. The average latency is lowered because the node efficiently selects the relay nodes. Figure 6 shows the
Table 3. Units for magnetic properties. Content
Value
Network area (m2) Number of nodes (EA) Transmission range (m) Maximum velocity (m/s) Measured time (s) Message TTL (s)
3000 m 3 1500 m 50, 100, 150 10, 25, 50, 100 2–20 100,000 1000
TTL: time to live.
6
Figure 6. Average latency for increasing transmission range.
International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks
Figure 8. Delivery ratio for increasing transmission range.
Figure 7. Average latency with increasing number of nodes.
Figure 9. Delivery ratio with increasing number of nodes.
comparison of the average latency of the existing routing model and the proposed routing model with increasing transmission range for 50 nodes. The figure indicates a 17% improvement in the average latency as compared to the existing routing model. This can be attributed to the fact that the routing protocol utilizes the proposed algorithm to select relay nodes more efficiently than the existing routing protocol. Figure 7 shows the comparison between the average latency of the existing routing model and the proposed routing model for increasing the number of nodes in network when the transmission range of node is 50 m. The figure indicates a 21% improvement in the average latency as compared to the existing routing model.
routing model and that of the proposed routing model for increasing transmission range when the number of nodes is 50. The figure indicates a 10% improvement in the delivery ratio as compared to the existing routing model. Figure 9 shows the comparison between the average latency of the existing routing model and the proposed routing model for increasing number of nodes in network when the transmission range of node is 50 m. The figure indicates a 12% improvement in the average latency as compared to that of the existing routing model. The results demonstrate that the proposed routing model is better than the existing routing model. The proposed model resolves the disadvantage of the existing prediction-based routing protocol using Markov chain.
Delivery ratio If transmission range is increased, the number of nodes increases correspondingly with the transmission range. The delivery ratio is increased because node selects the relay nodes more efficiently. Figure 8 shows that comparison between the delivery ratio of the existing
Conclusion In the DTNs, the existing prediction models require additional information such as node’s schedule and
Jeon and Lee connectivity nodes. However, the network reliability is low when additional information is unknown. To solve this problem, this study proposed a CMCP model based on the Markov chain, which utilized the node’s movement history without requiring additional information. The proposed model mapped the node’s movement history to state, and then predicted the subsequent state of node’s movement history using transition probability matrix created by Markov chain. The node’s mobility was applied in the simulation in a way that is different from the approach of the random waypoint model. Therefore, in the simulation, the network environment was more realistic, thereby significantly improving the prediction accuracy of the node’s movement and actual performance. Further studies on the prediction ratio that determine the relay node contact destination can produce a more reliable configuration of the routing protocols in DTNs. Declaration of conflicting interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (MSIP) (2014H1C1 A1066391), Republic of Korea, and partially supported by the Education and Research Promotion Program of KUT.
References 1.
Delay Tolerant Networking Research Group, http:// www.dtnrg.org 2. Vahdat A and Becker D. Epidemic routing for partiallyconnected ad hoc networks. Technical report CS-2000-06, July 2000. Durham, NC: Duke University.
7 3. Lindgren A, Doria A and Schelen O. Probabilistic routing in intermittently connected networks. In: Lindgren A, Doria A and Schelen O (eds) Service assurance with partial and intermittent resources. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2004, pp.239–254. 4. Wang E, Yang Y, Jia B, et al. The DTN routing algorithm based on Markov meeting time span prediction model. Int J Distrib Sens N 2013; 9: 736796. 5. Yuan Q, Cardei I and Wu J. Predict and relay: an efficient routing in disruption-tolerant networks. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing, USA, 18 May 2009, pp.95–104. New York, NY: ACM. 6. Guo XF and Chan MC. Plankton: an efficient DTN routing algorithm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on sensing, communications and networking (SECON), New Orleans, LA, 24–27 June 2013, pp.550–558. New York: IEEE. 7. Segundo F, Silva ES and Farines J-M. Predicting journeys for DTN routing in a public transportation system. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on wireless and mobile computing, networking and communications, Larnaca, 8–10 October 2014, pp.494–499. New York: IEEE. 8. Ganguly S, Basu S, Roy S, et al. A location based mobility prediction scheme for post disaster communication network using DTN. In: Proceedings of the applications and innovations in mobile computing (AIMoC 2015), Kolkata, India, 12–14 February 2015, pp.25–28. New York: IEEE. 9. Schurgot MR, Comaniciu C and Jaffres-Runser K. Beyond traditional DTN routing: social networks or opportunistic communication. IEEE Commun Mag 2012; 50: 155–162. 10. Camp T, Boleng J and Davies V. A survey of mobility models for ad hoc network research. Wirel Commun Mob Com 2002; 2(5): 483–502 (Special Issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research, Trends and Applications). 11. Mehto A and Chawla M. Modified different neighbor history spray and wait using PRoPHET in delay tolerant network. Int J Comput Appl 2014; 86: 30–35.
