Changeset 2786

Timestamp:

10/30/09 15:37:52 (4 weeks ago)

Author:

wark

Message:

changes to conc

Location:

HydroWatch/Tim/doc/ipsn10

Files:

• sec_conc.tex (modified) (1 diff)
• sec_eval.tex (modified) (2 diffs)

HydroWatch/Tim/doc/ipsn10/sec_conc.tex

@@ -5 +5 @@
 Given this model of thinking we propose a means by which nodes can adapt and optimize their operating point in order to maximize network utility given some prediction of future energy resources. As such we are advocating moving away from the ``slow and steady'' approach to long-term sensing where a node adopts a fixed operating point and attempts to consume as little energy as possible. Given we have the ability to estimate future energy resources, we believe nodes should consume as \emph{much} energy as possible in order to fully utilize all available harvested energy and maximize both the data fidelity and network responsiveness. Using retrospective environmental data we have shown how our system performs over extended periods in being able to sustain long-term operation whilst maximizing network utility given energy constraints. Finally we compare our approach with other proposed methods for adapting node operating point, and show that we are able to achieve greater levels of network utility at the same levels of energy consumption.
 
-By moving away from the ``sample-listen-send'' paradigm which has dominated so much of sensor network protocols to date, we see a wealth of new research questions for the community. Moving forward we intend to further demonstrate the benefit of our proposed approaches via long-term field trials. Of particular interest will be cases where there is significant variation in the amount of energy nodes in the network harvest. Currently there is not an energy-aware component in the routing protocol, thus we believe the inclusion of such a parameter will useful in these scenarios. Finally, we believe many of the ideas presented in this paper will have broad applicability in the growing field of multimedia networks, where nodes can assume many operating points with high variations in power consumption and performance. Optimizing the operating point for these types of nodes will become crucial for long-term operation and will greatly change the ways these kinds of technologies can be used into the future.
+%By moving away from the ``sample-listen-send'' paradigm which has dominated so much of sensor network protocols to date, we see a wealth of new research questions for the community. 
+Moving forward we intend to further demonstrate the benefit of our proposed approaches via long-term field trials. Of particular interest will be cases where there is significant variation in the amount of energy nodes in the network harvest. Currently there is not an energy-aware component in the routing protocol, thus we believe the inclusion of such a parameter will useful in these scenarios. Finally, we believe many of the ideas presented in this paper will have broad applicability in the growing field of multimedia networks, where nodes can assume many operating points with high variations in power consumption and performance. Optimizing the operating point for these types of nodes will become crucial for long-term operation and will greatly change the ways these kinds of technologies can be used into the future.

HydroWatch/Tim/doc/ipsn10/sec_eval.tex

@@ -290 +290 @@
 
 
-\subsection{Implementation}
-
-\subsubsection{Hardware Platform}
+%\subsection{Implementation}
+
+%\subsubsection{Hardware Platform}
 
 %\begin{figure}[ht]
@@ -331 +331 @@
 %\end{figure}
 
-As a hardware platform to evaluate our work, we have used 
-the HydroWatch Rev2 node \cite{dutta08}. This platform has a similar 
-architecture as the previous version \cite{taneja08}, but it has a few 
-improvements. First, it uses the EPIC core module \cite{dutta08} as 
-a mote hardware. Compared to the TelosB mote \cite{polastre05}
-used in the earlier version, this allows us smaller form factor and 
-more reliable assembly while providing the same functionality.  
-Second, it uses the flexible solar panel as its solar panel.
-While the flexible solar panel has a drawback of lower energy
-per area than the polysilicon panel used in the earlier version,
-it has an advantage when the deployment site does not provide
-a clear view of the sky, which is true in many of sensor network 
-deployments for environmental studies. The cells of the flexible
-solar panel are connected in parallel and this allows the output
-of the solar panel gracefully decrease when the panel is partly
-covered by shadows. Whereas, the performance of the polysilicon 
-panel severely drops even under a small shadow.
+%As a hardware platform to evaluate our work, we have used 
+%the HydroWatch Rev2 node \cite{dutta08}. This platform has a similar 
+%architecture as the previous version \cite{taneja08}, but it has a few 
+%improvements. First, it uses the EPIC core module \cite{dutta08} as 
+%a mote hardware. Compared to the TelosB mote \cite{polastre05}
+%used in the earlier version, this allows us smaller form factor and 
+%more reliable assembly while providing the same functionality.  
+%Second, it uses the flexible solar panel as its solar panel.
+%While the flexible solar panel has a drawback of lower energy
+%per area than the polysilicon panel used in the earlier version,
+%it has an advantage when the deployment site does not provide
+%a clear view of the sky, which is true in many of sensor network 
+%deployments for environmental studies. The cells of the flexible
+%solar panel are connected in parallel and this allows the output
+%of the solar panel gracefully decrease when the panel is partly
+%covered by shadows. Whereas, the performance of the polysilicon 
+%panel severely drops even under a small shadow.
 %The details of the HydroWatch Rev2 node is listed in 
 %Table~\ref{table:characteristic_hydrowatch}.