Open Access

Impact of Radio Link Unreliability on the Connectivity of Wireless Sensor Networks

EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking20072007:019196

DOI: 10.1155/2007/19196

Received: 30 October 2006

Accepted: 6 April 2007

Published: 21 June 2007


Many works have been devoted to connectivity of ad hoc networks. This is an important feature for wireless sensor networks (WSNs) to provide the nodes with the capability of communicating with one or several sinks. In most of these works, radio links are assumed ideal, that is, with no transmission errors. To fulfil this assumption, the reception threshold should be high enough to guarantee that radio links have a low transmission error probability. As a consequence, all unreliable links are dismissed. This approach is suboptimal concerning energy consumption because unreliable links should permit to reduce either the transmission power or the number of active nodes. The aim of this paper is to quantify the contribution of unreliable long hops to an increase of the connectivity of WSNs. In our model, each node is assumed to be connected to each other node in a probabilistic manner. Such a network is modeled as a complete random graph, that is, all edges exist. The instantaneous node degree is then defined as the number of simultaneous valid single-hop receptions of the same message, and finally the mean node degree is computed analytically in both AWGN and block-fading channels. We show the impact on connectivity of two MACs and routing parameters. The first one is the energy detection level such as the one used in carrier sense mechanisms. The second one is the reliability threshold used by the routing layer to select stable links only. Both analytic and simulation results show that using opportunistic protocols is challenging.


Authors’ Affiliations



  1. Simplot-Ryl D, Stojmenovic I, Wu J: Energy-efficient backbone construction, broadcasting, and area coverage in sensor networks. In Handbook of Sensor Networks. Edited by: Stojmenovic I. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2005:343-380.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Tian D, Georganas ND: A coverage-preserving node scheduling scheme for large wireless sensor networks. Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (WSNA '02), September 2002, Atlanta, Ga, USA 32-41.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Gallais A, Carle J, Simplot-Ryl D, Stojmenovic I: Localized sensor area coverage with low communication overhead. Proceedings of the 4th Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom '06), March 2006, Pisa, Italy 328-337.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Carle J, Gallais A, Simplot-Ryl D: Preserving area coverage in wireless sensor networks by using surface coverage relay dominating sets. Proceedings of the 10th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC '05), June 2005, Murcia, Cartagena, Spain 347-352.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Royer EM, Toh C-K: A review of current routing protocols for ad hoc mobile wireless networks. IEEE Personal Communications 1999,6(2):46-55. 10.1109/98.760423View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Dousse O, Thiran P: Connectivity vs capacity in dense ad hoc networks. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Joint Conference of IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM '04), March 2004, Hongkong 1: 476-486.Google Scholar
  7. Dousse O, Thiran P, Hasler M: Connectivity in ad-hoc and hybrid networks. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Joint Conference of IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM '02), June 2002, New York, NY, USA 2: 1079-1088.Google Scholar
  8. Gupta P, Kumar PR: The capacity of wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 2000,46(2):388-404. 10.1109/18.825799MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Gupta P, Kumar PR: Crtical power for asymptotic connectivity in wireless networks. In Stochastic Analysis Control Optimization and Applications. Edited by: McEneany WM, Yin G, Zhang Q. Birkhauser, Boston, Mass, USA; 1998:547-566.Google Scholar
  10. Cheng Y-C, Robertazzi TG: Critical connectivity phenomena in multihop radio models. IEEE Transactions on Communications 1989,37(7):770-777. 10.1109/26.31170View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Piret P: On the connectivity of radio networks. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 1991,37(5):1490-1492. 10.1109/18.133276View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Santi P: The critical transmitting range for connectivity in mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 2005,4(3):310-317.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Desai M, Manjunath D: On the connectivity in finite ad hoc networks. IEEE Communications Letters 2002,6(10):437-439. 10.1109/LCOMM.2002.804241View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Bettstetter C: On the minimum node degree and connectivity of a wireless multihop network. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MobiHoc '02), June 2002, Lausanne, Switzerland 80-91.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Bettstetter C: On the connectivity of ad hoc networks. The Computer Journal 2004,47(4):432-447. 10.1093/comjnl/47.4.432View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Jardosh AP, Belding-Royer EM, Almeroth KC, Suri S: Real-world environment models for mobile network evaluation. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 2005,23(3):622-632.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Sadagopan N, Bai F, Krishnamachari B, Helmy A: PATHS: analysis of PATH duration statistics and their impact on reactive MANET routing protocols. Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (MobiHoc '03), June 2003, Annapolis, Md, USA 245-256.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Takai M, Bagrodia R, Tang K, Gerla M: Efficient wireless network simulations with detailed propagation models. Wireless Networks 2001,7(3):297-305. 10.1023/A:1016682323833MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhou G, He T, Krishnamurthy S, Stankovic JA: Models and solutions for radio irregularity in wireless sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks 2006,2(2):221-262. 10.1145/1149283.1149287View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Stojmenovic I, Nayak A, Kuruvila J: Design guidelines for routing protocols in ad hoc and sensor networks with a realistic physical layer. IEEE Communications Magazine 2005,43(3):101-106.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Bettstetter C, Hartmann C: Connectivity of wireless multihop networks in a shadow fading environment. Wireless Networks 2005,11(5):571-579. 10.1007/s11276-005-3513-xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Hekmat R, van Mieghem P: Study of connectivity in wireless ad-hoc networks with an improved radio model. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks (WiOpt '04), March 2004, Cambridge, UK 1-10.Google Scholar
  23. Miorandi D, Altman E: Coverage and connectivity of ad hoc networks presence of channel randomness. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM '05), March 2005, Miami, Fla, USA 1: 491-502.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang J, Liew SC: Capacity improvement of wireless ad hoc networks with directional antennae. Proceedings of the 63rd IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC '06), May-July 2006, Melbourne, Australia 2: 911-915.Google Scholar
  25. Bettstetter C, Hartmann C, Moser C: How does randomized beamforming improve the connectivity of ad hoc networks? IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC '05), May 2005, Seoul, South Korea 5: 3380-3385.Google Scholar
  26. Dousse O, Baccelli F, Thiran P: Impact of interferences on connectivity in ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 2005,13(2):425-436.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Karvonen H, Shelby Z, Pomalaza-Raez C: Coding for energy efficient wireless embedded networks. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Wireless Ad-Hoc Networks (IWWAN '04), May-June 2004, Oulu, Finland 300-304.Google Scholar
  28. Sankarasubramaniam Y, Akyildiz IF, McLaughlin SW: Energy efficiency based packet size optimization in wireless sensor networks. Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Workshop on Sensor Network Protocols and Applications (SNPA '03), May 2003, Anchorage, Alaska, USA 1-8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Franceschetti M, Booth L, Cook M, Meester R, Bruck J: Continuum percolation with unreliable and spread-out connections. Journal of Statistical Physics 2005,118(3-4):721-734. 10.1007/s10955-004-8826-0MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Neskovic A, Neskovic N, Paunovic G: Modern approaches in modeling of mobile radio systems propagation environment. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 2000,3(3):2-12.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Saunders SR: Antennas and Propagation for Wireless Communication Systems. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1999.Google Scholar
  32. Wang Z, Giannakis GB: A simple and general parametrization quantifying performance in fading channels. IEEE Transactions on Communications 2003,51(8):1389-1398. 10.1109/TCOMM.2003.815053View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Ye F, Zhong G, Lu S, Zhang L: GRAdient broadcast: a robust data delivery protocol for large scale sensor networks. Wireless Networks 2005,11(3):285-298. 10.1007/s11276-005-6612-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Haenggi M, Puccinelli D: Routing in ad hoc networks: a case for long hops. IEEE Communications Magazine 2005,43(10):93-101.View ArticleGoogle Scholar


© Jean-Marie Gorce et al. 2007

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.