Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

1

Energy Efficient Secure Trust based Clustering


Algorithm and QoS for Mobile Wireless Sensor
Network
Eid Rehman, Muhammad Sher,Syed Hussnain Abbas Naqvi, Khan Badar Khan,Kamran Ullah
Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering,
Department of Electrical Engineering
International Islamic University Islamabad,Pakistan
E-mail: eidrehmanktk@gmail.com,m.sher@iiu.edu.pk,husnain.naqvi@iiu.edu.pk
kb.khattak@gmail.com,kami123@gmail.com.

Abstract
The main benefit of selecting a suitable node as cluster head (CH) in clustering for wireless mobile sensor networks (MWSNs)
is to prolong the network lifetime. But the safe selection of CH is challenging task by taking security into account. Mostly CH
selection algorithms in MWSN does not consider security when selecting CH. We have proposed secure CH selection algorithm
by calculating weight of each node to deal with secure selection using minimum energy consumption. The weight of node is a
combination of different metrics including trust metric (behaviors of sensor node) which promotes a secure decision of a CH selection
in term of this node one will never be a malicious node.The trust metric is definitive and permits the proposed clustering algorithm
to keep away from any malignant node in the area to select as a CH,even if the rest of the parameters are in its favor. Other metrics
of node including waiting time,connectivity degree and distance among nodes.The selection of CHs is completed utilizing weights
of member nodes. The preparatory outcomes acquired through simulation exhibit the adequacy of our proposed scheme as far as
average rate of avoiding malicious node as a CH,energy efficiency and some other performance parameters are concern.

KeywordsTrust, Energy Efficiency, Cluster Head, MWSN base station for further processing . But due to mobility and
frequently change in nerwork topology,the selection of CH is
challenging task.This is because of the way that CHs complete
I. I NTRODUCTION
additional work and thus devour more energy contrasted with
With the rapid and historic advancement in communication member nodes during the system operations and this will
technologies over the last two decades, the Wireless Sensor prompt less than ideal demise causing network partition and
Networks are matured enough as a capable tool for monitoring in this way disappointment in communication [4].
the physical world [1]. These networks consist of hundreds or Similarly because of wireless nature, sensor nodes are
even thousands of autonomous micro devices called motes or more vulnerable to attacks. The typical attacks in MWSNs
simply sensor nodes with sensing,processing and communica- include Replay attack,Data-forwarding attack and sinkhole
tion capabilities. A typical wireless sensor network consists attcks.Unfortunately,the current complex security algorithms
of a collection of static,mobile or a mixture of static and are inadmissible for MWSN in view of the limited capacities
mobile sensor nodes which can communicate with each other of minimal power of node. Trust administration is central
for exchanging data efficiently. The wireless sensor networks to recognize danger,selsh and unauthorized nodes.. Trust in
whose all or some sensors have the capability of movement MWSN as the level of a conviction about the behavior of
around the deployed area are called Wireless Mobile Sensor different nodes. Nodes communication with each other i.e.Data
networks (W M SN ) [2]. and control data stream is the source of getting the proof of
The sensor networks are ideally used in commercial,civil trust in a large portion of trust management algorithms [4].
and military applications for continuous event detection and Numerous CH selection algorithms have been proposed for
location sensing. WMSN has vast variety of applications MWSN [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. Most of these CH selection
including environmental monitoring,observing industry pro- algo- rithms focus only on energy efcient CH selection. The
duction,oil exploration,acoustic information processing patient security aspect of CH nodes is not considered when designing
monitoring,monitoring of natural or man-made crises like CH selection algorithm. So these algorithms should be de-
severe weather,earthquakes,volcanic activities and battle field signed in such a way which safely chooses CHs by perceiving
monitoring [3]. The nodes are limited in the sense of compu- the bargained hubs and denying them of their CH candidacy
tational power,buffer storage space and most importantly the in MWSN.
energy resources. Grouping sensor into gathering of compar- This paper present energy efcient and secure CH selection
ative nature to shape a cluster and select one node as lead to algorithm based on member nodes trust and some other met-
oversee group called cluster head (CH). The CH is dependable ric.The trust metric is unequivocal and permits the proposed
to gather information from member nodes and send to the CH selection algorithm to maintain a strategic distance from
2

any danger or compromised nodes in the member node to consumption while keeping the network connectivity,but the
end up noticeably a CH, regardless of the possibility that the security of CH gain no attention. Andrey Koucheryavy [15]
rest of the parameters are to support its.. Through trust,nodes exhibited the Distributed Clustering Algorithm (DCA) calcu-
behavior can be monitored. Remaining metrics including wait- lation which utilizes satisfactory basis for CH determination
ing time,connectivity degree of node and Relative mobility in conjunction with heuristic indicators to create unfaltering
of nodes. The waiting time enables all nodes to hold up and adjusted cluster,but clustering the nodes without the trust
before the transmitting CH declaration messages to stay away of nodes.
from extreme impact and conflict among the nodes.. The Trust management system based on neighbor monitoring is
connectivity of node degree is the amount of nodes in their proposed [16] for MWNW. In the trust management frame-
communication range and relative mobility show the nodes work, the trust quality is computed by the neighbor monitoring
relative movement with CH. The CH is selected on the basis mechanism and the immediate trust esteem and the roundabout
of weights of member nodes nodes which are calculated based trust quality are consolidated to set up the appropriated trust
on these parameters. So this strategy ensures the selection of model to recognize the malevolent nodes. This scheme does
legitimate CHs with high weights. not focus on node clustering and CH selection.
We can enumerate the contributions of our paper as follow: Amine Dahane [17] presented an algorithm shortly called
Safely choosing CHs in cluster by perceiving the mali- TCM,which is completely decentralized and goes for making a
cious node and denying them of their CH nominationy virtual topology with the reason to minimize regular reelection
Energy efficient CH selection which maximizes the of the CH and evade by and large rebuilding of the whole
lifetime of the global network network. This scheme chooses the most powerful and safe
Selecting stable CH in cluster which decreases frequency CHs with the obligation of checking the node in their cluster
of CH role of Change and maintaining clusters locally. In spite of the fact that,the
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II CH selection algorithms utilizing diverse methodology permit
provides the literature review of some well-known Cluster to guarantee the determina- tion of a CHs construct just in
head selection algorithms for MWSNs. Section III describes light of their high weights registered from the distinctive
proposed scheme. Section IV presents the energy consumption metrics,but lamentably they doesnt guarantee that the chose
model and section V discuss mobility model of our scheme. CHs are legitimated node, which is to say if the decision
Section VI describes the simulation results of our proposed procedure of CHs is protected or not.The execution of this
scheme. scheme was discovered superior to the LEACH convention
concerning the measurements, for example,percentage of node
alive,load balancing,and lifetime of the system. The table 1
II. L ITERATURE R EVIEW
shows the comparative analysis of these described schemes.
Abbasi and Younis [11] exhibited scientic categorization
and order of common bunching plans, then outlined distinctive
group- ing calculations for WSNs in light of arrangement of TABLE I: Comparative Analysis of Different Schemes
variable converge time conventions and consistent converge
Scheme CH selection Parameter Trust Mobility CH Security
time and highlighted their objective,components,complexity LEACH-M[6] Random no and remoteness No Yes No
and so forth. LEACH-Mobile (Low energy adaptive clustering LEACH-TM[12] Random no and Trust value Yes No No
hierarchy for mobile) , in short LEACH-M [6] is a variation [13] Battery Awareness Yes No No
ALM[14] Weight No Yes No
of LEACH (Low energy adaptive clustering hierarchy),which DCA [15] Multi parameters Yes Yes No
support node mobility. In LEACH-M,clusters are progressively [16] No Yes Yes No
framed each time the sensor moves, offering ascend to risk TCM[17] Weight Yes Yes No
of overhead in the cluster upkeep, but does not consider the
trustworthiness of nodes when clustering. In this paper,our point is to build up a completely dis-
Weichao et al. [12] have proposed LEACH-TM (Low energy seminated clustering algorithm with a specic end goal to
adaptive clustering hierarchy trust transmission).The author enhance both the energy efciency,stability in cluster and safe
have formed LEACH-TM tradition by utilizing Trust diagrams CH selection in a versatile domain. The most important is
in which CH sets up multi-route with interchange CHs which the secure CH selection by observing the behavior of node
are going about as switches.The performance of this scheme using node trust management. The trust metric is decisive
was discovered superior to LEACH as for energy utilization and allows the proposed CH selection algorithm to avoid any
and number of node alive in the network,but has no concern malicious node in the neighborhood to become a CH,even if
about node mobility. Watfa et al.[13] have proposed Bat- the remaining metrics are in its favor.
tery Aware Reliable Clustering (BARC) protocol.This scheme
utilizes trust variable and battery recuperation plan for the
determination of CH which makes the system more reliable,but III. P ROPOSED S CHEME
does not consider the node mobility of node.
The author [14] proposed a distributed clustering algorithm The proposed scheme is based on different parameters.So
for mobile wireless sensor networks shortly we called ALM, the below following subsections describe these parameters
which improving the network stability and saving the energy denition and calculation.
3

A. Trust Evaluation 3) Rate of Data Forwarding (P Fi,j (t)): It is possible that


In order to detect misbehaving nodes, each node monitors node j forward a data packets of another nodes i.e k
one or more behavioral aspect of its neighbor nodes. Each and broadcast an 4ack. At that point node i can gather
behavioral aspect is mapped to a dened trust metric,while trust these ACK packets of node j to acquire the quantity of
metrics are combined into aggregated value called trust value. sending packets. The Equation no.3 [18] calculates the
The value which is based only on nodes self observations number of data transmission packets.
is called direct trust. Nodes may rely on recommendations Sfij (t) SFij (t 1)
provided by the neighbors to form an opinion on other nodes SFi,j (t) = (3)
SFij (t) + SFij (t 1)
trustworthiness,which is called indirect trust.Then, both direct
and indirect trust values are com- bined into the Total Trust The change rate of SFi,j (t) effectively protect from
Value. The trust calculation is done in specic time interval Sinkhole attack and additionally determine malicious
which is called rounds. Specically Node i will compute total activity of node.
trust of node j as follows in given Equation. 4) Factor of Availability(F AVi,j (t)):Node i transmit
The direct trust of node j is evaluated by node i at time t HELLO packet for the recognition whether this packet
if these nodes are one hope neighbor. The proposed cluster can be gotten by j. On the of chance that i get the
scheme is one hope,so node i uses its direct observation ACK-HELLO from j, it is demonstrated the j is acces-
toward node j during the periodic trust evaluation round. Below sible. The Equation no.4 calculates factor availability of
specific detection mechanism has been applied by node i to neighboring nodes. The Equation no.4 calculates factor
collect direct observation to evaluate node j while nodes i and availability of neighboring nodes.
j are one hop neighbor at time t.
A nodes trust worthiness can be evaluated by making P AVij (t)
F AVi,j (t) = (4)
qualitative and quantitative analysis of various factor which P AVij (t) + N F AVij (t)
effect direct trust values. In the proposed scheme sender is Where P AVij (t) is the quantity of packets that has
acknowledged (ack) for send packets. These factors include been acknowledged and N F AVij (t) show the number
the following of packets which has not been acknowledged.
1) Received Packet Rate (RPi,j ):If node i monitor node
Direct trust (DTi,j (t)) of node i for node j is calculated as
j, the ratio of received packets is the confirmation
in Equation no.5 by combining these trust factor.
of how many ACK are sent by node j is maintained
and does not have big difference then node j work
normally. According to the change of the ratio, we can DTi,j (t) = w1 (1|RPi,j (t)|)+w2 |SP Fi,j (t)|+w3 (1|P Fi,j (t)|)+w
know whether node j has response forging behavior. (5)
If the received packets ratio change in the consecutive After the trust calculation,node i classified the behavior of
time interval (ti , ti1 ) is maintained and does not have node jbased on the trust value. The Equation no.6 classified
big difference then node j work normally [18]. The the behavior level (BL) of node as normal and malicious node.
Equation no.1 calculate the received packet rate. When node behavior is greater or equal to .8, then node is
RPij (t) RPij (t 1) declared as malicious and does not take part in CH selection
RPi,j (t) = (1) process.
RPij (t) + RPij (t 1)
1
This factor protect form replay ack attack by monitor- Blj = (6)
ing receiving node acknowledge at specific time. DTi,j (t)
2) Sending Successfully Packets Rate (SP Fi,j (t)): Be- Normal Node if 0 Blj 0.7
cause of wireless nature it is possible that same packets Malicious Node if 0.8 Blj 1
are received from different sources i.e one time directly
from sender and same packet is also received from an-
other node for further forwarding. Its realized that each B. Waiting time of node
packet transmit by node contains a period stamp and All sensor nodes calculate the weighting time to decide
can be recognized efciently egardless of the possibility whether the node itself should be a cluster head or not for
that the packets have a similar substance. The Equation themselves. All nodes need to hold up before broadcasting
no.2 [18] calculates successful sending packet rate of CH declaration messages to evade extreme crash and conflict
node j by node i. among the nodes. The waiting time (WI) [19] for node is
SPij (t) calculated as follows in Equation no.7.
SP Fi,j (t) = (2)
SPij (t) + SFij (t) EResidual
] [ Avg(vik ) vn ] (7)

W T = W Tmax [1
Where SFij (t) is the requiring number of sent packets, Einitial
SFij (t) is the redundant number of sent packets. This where W Tmax is a predefined maximum waiting time.
factor effecting Data forward attack by observing the EResidual and Einitial mean the amount of residual energy of
packets of neighbor nodes. a node and the amount of initial energy, respectively. Avg(vik )
4

and vn indicate the average velocity of the surrounding nodes When node receive this message, it update the information
and the velocity of each node. A higher remaining energy node which include the value of its weight metric. Then receiving
with the littlest deviation is probably going to be a CH since node compares its metric with other,if its values as smaller
its waiting time is shorter. than its wait an INVITE message which is send by CH
inviting then to join its cluster.
C. The Degree of Connectivity Dv of Node i at Time(t) Every node is shown by a state of vector including (Ni d
Find the neighborhood of each node v (i.e., nodes commu- , Weight, Nstatus). Since the CH has performing different
nication range) which defines its [20] degree,as in equation tasks at same time such as, controlling cluster members, data
no.8 aggregation and transmission of this data to base station. So
ni CH selection should be periodical after each round because
Dv = [|Ni |] = [ < txrang ] (8)
dist(i, j) the CH rapidly exhaust their battery. At the beginning of each
round, every sensor calculates its weight and broadcast a hello
Where i 6= j, txrang is the communication rang of node and
message to its neighboring nodes. The hello messages consist
dist(i,j) shows the distance between node i and j.
of two parts weight, node ID,weight and NodeCH, where
NodeCH is set to zero. A node having greatest weight has
D. Relative mobility of Node been selected as CH for the current round. The selected CH
Relative mobility (Rm ) of nodes represents the relative broadcast an advertisement message(ADVC H) including its
mobility among sensor nodes and CH,not the sum of vector state vector to its neighboring nodes requesting them to join
of velocities. Main purpose is to form stable clusters. So we it. Each neighboring sensor node receive this message and if
have to select nodes with low relative mobility as CHs.Relative does not belong to any cluster than compares its weight to the
mobility can be calculated as [21] in Equation no.9 . CH weight. If weight is lesser than CH weight then this node
accept request as a CH. Algorithm 1 shows the CH selection
(9) process.
Where vck is the velocity of the CH, vni denote is the mov-
ing velocity of member sensor nodes,ni show the movement Proposed CH Selection Algorithm 1;
angle of sensor nodes and ck is the movement angle of the Output: CH is Selected with CH-ID;
CH. Data: Input: Node-id,Weight
Result: CH Selection
E. Cluster Head selection Algorithm Step 1 N Deploy all the nodes ;
Step 2 for i = 1 N do
This section focuses only the CH selection phase. In order
if Ei > 0 && r mod (1/p) 6= 0 then
to avoid malicious and frequent CH changes node as CH, it
Compute Behavior Level (Bl) //given by (6);
is necessary to select a CH that does not move very quickly
if(Bl 0.8)
and trusted.The cluster head selection is based on node weight
then
and weight consist of a number of parameters including trust
Declare as Malicious node and not allow then to
computation,waiting time, degree of connectivity and relative
take part in CH selection
mobility nodes. The Equation no.10 has been used for the
Else
calculation of node weight.
Compute Waiting Time // given by (7);
Compute Degree of Connectivity //given by (8) ;
Wi = Bl 1 + W T 2 + Dv 3 + Rv 4 (10) Compute Relative Mobility // given by (9)
end
Wher 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 1 The node with highest weight is end
selected as a CH in cluster for specific round. The benefit of Step 3 Compute Weight Wi for current round //given
such an algorithm is,to the point that the weight parameters (10);
(1 + 2 + 3 + 4 ) can be adjusted as per the network Step 4 for i = 1 N do
requirements. The estimations of coefficients i ought to be If ( weighti weighti+1 ) //if weight of i-th node is
picked relying upon the premise of the significance of ev- greater
ery metric in considered MWSNs applications.The computed CHi true ;
weight for every sensor depends on the above parameters else
(Bl, W T, Dv , RV ). For instance, it is conceivable to assign CHi f alse //node i-th not be a CH
a greater value to the metric BL contrasted to other metrics end
if we promote the safety aspect in the clustering mechanism. Step 5 if CHi true then
It is additionally conceivable to dole out the same worth for BC(ADV ) broadcast an advertisement message
every coefficient i for the situation where all metrics are //non-CH node i join into the closest CH;
considered as having the same significance. Initially, nodes end
are not associated to any clusters. In order to establish a
cluster,each sends Hello message to its neighboring nodes.
5

TABLE II: Simulation Parameters 0.45


LEACH-M ALM TCM Proposed

Avg Avoidance Rate of Malicious node Selection as a CH


Simulation Parameters 0.4
Mobility Model Random Way Point
No of Sensor Nodes 100 0.35
Length of Data Packet 512 Bytes
Length of Control Packet 50 Bytes 0.3
Initial Energy .1 joule
Interface Queue Types Drop tail 0.25
Communication Model Bi-direction
Simulation Area 100 * 100 0.2
Speed 1-10 m/s
0.15

0.1
IV. E NERGY C ONSUMPTION M ODEL
0.05
Transmission and receiving cost for a distance of d for k-bit
can be calculated as follows, Transmitting cost for k-bit as: 100 0 LEACH-M ALM TCM Proposed
0 20 40 60 80 100
90
2 Number of Nodes
Et = (CicEn NB ) + AmpEN + Dist (11) 80

Fig. 70
1: Avg Avoidance Rate of Malicious Node Selection as a

No of Dead Nodee
CH VS60 Number of Nodes
RE = (CicEn NB )n (12)
50
40

AgrEN = (CicEn NB n) (13) 30


against
20 compromised node that why the average rate of com-
Where Et is the transmitting cost and CirEn is the energy promised
10
node to become CH is to high.Figure 2 show how
consumption to run the transmitter circuit. AmpEN is the many0 compromised nodes become a CH when the number
energy dissipation for the transmission amplifier. The cost of of compromise
0 50 nodes100
increases. It is200clear 250
150 Time from the
300Figure
3502
Data aggregation is AgrEN and NB denote the number of that our scheme outperform ALM in spite of the fact that the
transmitted data bits segregation rate of compromised node is by all accounts too
small,its performance is fairly great in light of the fact that the
majority of bargained separators are detached.
V. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS
The proposed solution has been validated through simulation 0.45
using Table II parameters and comparing its performance with
Avg Rate of compromised node to become CH

LEACH-M ALM TCM Proposed


0.4
the LEACH-M, ALM, TCM algorithms. The proposed scheme
0.35
aims to preserve as less energy as possible by selecting secure
CH and consumes less energy. The result comparison among 0.3

proposed scheme and LEACH-M,ALM,TCM has been carried 0.25


out using the following simulation parameters shown in table 0.2
1. 0.15
The main objective of the proposed scheme is to secure the 0.1
CH selection process with minimum energy consumption, so
0.05
that to avoid malicious nodes selection as a CH. Because CH
0
carry the whole member data and the selection of malicious 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
node as a CH will definitely waste the network resources and Number of Compromised Node
data. The Figure 1 shows the avoidance rate of malicious nodes
selection as a CH. We have deployed 10 nodes as malicious
nodes in the whole network to see the avoidance rate of Fig. 2: Avg Rate of compromised node become CH VS
malicious nodes selection. It is clear from the Figure 1 that Number of compromised nodes
the proposed scheme avoiding the malicious node selection as
a CH more efficiently because of node behavior measurement
through trust management and also avoidance of unauthorized We dene one Failure as an anomaly node selected tobe CH;
node to join any cluster. Failure rate is to compute coordinate inuence of one mali-
Average rate that a compromised node turns into a CH is cious node, likewise called unsuccessful anomaly detection
figured by including the CH the entire cluster which were rate. Generally, when anomaly node rate is low (5),Failure
compromised node independent from anyone else at each run Rate is 0. As rate goes up, Failure Rate additionally goes
and averaging the. This metric represents how well a cluster higher. LEACH-M and TCM are schemes with no trust and
formation scheme expels compromised nodes. compromised authentication mechanism, so it performs worse than ALM
nodes. LEACH-M and ALM have no defense mechanism and proposed schemes. In contrast, Proposed scheme is a
0.15

Avg Avoidance Rat


0.1

0.05 6

0
converged 0model (trust
20 40
supervision) with60a strong defense
80 to 100 trust,less energy consumption ratio and high success factor.
anomaly nodes, so it shows theNumber of Nodes
highest robustness. The gure The slow node death rate of the proposed scheme reected in
3 shows the percentage of failure rate of anomaly nodes. gure is to secure,efcient and high stability among member and
CH.
1
LEACH-M TCM ALM Proposed
0.9 100 LEACH-M ALM TCM Proposed
0.8 90
0.7 80
Failure Rate (%)

0.6 70

No of Dead Nodee
0.5 60
0.4 50
0.3 40
0.2 30
0.1
20
0
10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Anomly Node (%) 0
0 50 100 150 Time 200 250 300 350

Fig. 3: Percentage of failure Rate VS Anomaly node in


parentage Fig. 5: Number of Dead Nodes and time

The network lifetime is the time interval from initial de- The average energy consumption ratio of the entire topology
ployment of the network until the death of all the alive nodes. is the average distinction between the initial energy and the
It can be, for instance the moment when the rst sensor die,a nal level of remaining energy of network. This metric is an
percentage of sensors die, the network partitions, or the loss important because the energy level of the network uses is
of coverage occurs. In the simulation the proposed scheme proportional to the networks lifetime. The lower the energy
measured the time span of the network in which no of nodes consumption ratio results the longer is the networks lifes-
can perform the designated tasks and compare these results pan. Figure 6 shows energy consumption ratio comparison
with the other approach. The Figure 4 shows the comparison of proposed scheme with other schemes. From this chart, it
of the proposed scheme with other schemes in number of nodes can be watched that the Average energy consumption ratio
that are alive in network in simulation time. As shown in of proposed scheme is less than LEACH-M,ALM and TCM.
Figure 4 that lift time of network increase in proposed scheme Because the proposed scheme rst select most stable and secure
because re-selection of CH cannot be occurred frequently in CH in cluster.
network and secure..
1.2
LEACH-M ALM TCM Propopsed
120
LEACH-M ALM TCM Propsed 1
Energy Consumption Ratio

100
0.8
No Of Alive Node

80
0.6

60
0.4

40
0.2

20 0
10 30 50 100 130 150 200 230 250 280 300
0 Time
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time
Fig. 6: Average energy consumption ratio and time
Fig. 4: Alive number of nodes VS Time
0.9
LEACH-M ALM TCM Proposed
% of Member nodes have similar

0.8 VI. C ONCLUSION


Figure 5 shows that nodes dead more slowly in the proposed
scheme0.7because of stable and trusted nodes selection as a CH. This paper presented secure CH selection algorithm for
mobility with CH

0.6
The proposed scheme extend the stability period by selecting minimizing the energy consumption ratio. Most of the CH
suitable0.5CH on the basis of calculated weight using relative selection algorithms in MWSN do not consider security when
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
10 15 20 25 30
Speed (m/S)
7

selecting CH. We have proposed secure CH selection algorithm [15] A. Koucheryavy and A. Salim, Prediction-based clustering algorithm
by calculating weight of each node to deal with secure selec- for mobile wireless sensor networks, in Proceedings, International
tion using minimum energy consumption. The weight of node Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, 2010.
is combination of different metrics including trust including [16] B. Liu and Y. Wu, A secure and energy-balanced routing scheme
for mobile wireless sensor network, Wireless Sensor Network, vol. 7,
trust metric (behaviors of sensor nodes) which allowed a secure no. 11, p. 137, 2015.
CH decision of a CH in the sense where this last node one [17] A. Dahane, N.-E. Berrached, and A. Loukil, Balanced and safe
will never be a malicious one. The trust metric is decisive, weighted clustering algorithm for mobile wireless sensor networks,
secure and allows the proposed clustering algorithm to avoid in IFIP International Conference on Computer Science and its Appli-
any danger malicious node in the neighborhood to become cations x000D . Springer, 2015, pp. 429441.
a CH, even if its the remaining metrics are in its favor. [18] R. Feng, X. Xu, X. Zhou, and J. Wan, A trust evaluation algorithm
Other metric including waiting time of node,node connectivity for wireless sensor networks based on node behaviors and ds evidence
theory, Sensors, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 13451360, 2011.
degree and distance among nodes . The simulation comes about
[19] H. Kim, Cluster head selection scheme for minimizing the changes of
demonstrates that proposed scheme is greatly improved when the cluster members considering mobility in mobile wireless sensor
contrasted with LEACH-M, ALM and TCM as far as various networks, in Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), 2013
measurements and energy consumption ratio of network.. 15th International Conference on. IEEE, 2013, pp. 285289.
[20] S. Weber and L. Cheng, A weighted clustering algorithm for mobile
ad hoc networks, Communications Magazine, IEEE, 2004.
R EFERENCES
[21] Y. Zhang, W. Chen, J. Liang, B. Zheng, and S. Jiang, A network
[1] J. Yick, B. Mukherjee, and D. Ghosal, Wireless sensor network topology control and identity authentication protocol with support for
survey, Computer networks, vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 22922330, 2008. movable sensor nodes, Sensors, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 29 95829 969,
2015.
[2] Q. Dong and W. Dargie, A survey on mobility and mobility-aware mac
protocols in wireless sensor networks, IEEE Communications Surveys
& Tutorials, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 88100, 2013.
[3] H. J. Visser and R. J. Vullers, Rf energy harvesting and transport
for wireless sensor network applications: Principles and requirements,
Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 101, no. 6, pp. 14101423, 2013.
[4] C. Zhu, L. Shu, T. Hara, L. Wang, S. Nishio, and L. T. Yang, A
survey on communication and data management issues in mobile sensor
networks, Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, vol. 14,
no. 1, pp. 1936, 2014.
[5] C.-M. Liu, C.-H. Lee, and L.-C. Wang, Distributed clustering algo-
rithms for data-gathering in wireless mobile sensor networks, Journal
of parallel and distributed computing, vol. 67, no. 11, pp. 11871200,
2007.
[6] K. Poulose Jacob, V. Paul, and G. Santhosh Kumar, Mobility metric
based leach-mobile protocol, 2008.
[7] M. Lehsaini, H. Guyennet, and M. Feham, Ces: Cluster-based energy-
efficient scheme for mobile wireless sensor networks, in Wireless
Sensor and Actor Networks II. Springer, 2008, pp. 1324.
[8] M. H. Anisi, A. H. Abdullah, and S. A. Razak, Efficient data gathering
in mobile wireless sensor networks, Life Science Journal, vol. 9, no. 4,
pp. 21522157, 2012.
[9] R. Anitha and P. Kamalakkannan, Energy efficient cluster head se-
lection algorithm in mobile wireless sensor networks, in Computer
Communication and Informatics (ICCCI), 2013 International Confer-
ence on. IEEE, 2013, pp. 15.
[10] A. Ahmed and S. Qazi, Cluster head selection algorithm for mobile
wireless sensor networks, in Open Source Systems and Technologies
(ICOSST), 2013 International Conference on. IEEE, 2013, pp. 120
125.
[11] A. A. Abbasi and M. Younis, A survey on clustering algorithms for
wireless sensor networks, Computer communications, vol. 30, no. 14,
pp. 28262841, 2007.
[12] W. Wang, F. Du, and Q. Xu, An improvement of leach routing
protocol based on trust for wireless sensor networks, in 2009 5th
International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and
Mobile Computing. IEEE, 2009, pp. 14.
[13] M. K. Watfa, O. Mirza, and J. Kawtharani, Barc: A battery aware
reliable clustering algorithm for sensor networks, Journal of Network
and Computer Applications, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 11831193, 2009.
[14] F. D. Tolba, W. Ajib, and A. Obaid, Distributed clustering algorithm
for mobile wireless sensors networks, in SENSORS, 2013 IEEE. IEEE,
2013, pp. 14.