The Influence Mobility Model: A Novel Hierarchical Mobility Modeling Framework

advertisement

The Influence Mobility Model: A Novel

Hierarchical Mobility Modeling Framework

Muhammad U. Ilyas and Hayder Radha

Michigan State University

Motivation

 Many mobility models used for design and testing of ad-hoc networks are random mobility models.

 Group mobility models bring some structure to completely random entity mobility models.

 Today’s mobility models seem to ignore one important characteristic of mobile nodes, i.e. different classes of nodes influence each other.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Previous Work

Based on the works of…

 Chalee Asavathiratham’s work on the “Influence

Model” presented in his doctoral dissertation.

 Jin Tiang et al. work on “Graph-based mobility models”.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Feature Wishlist for the

“Ideal” Mobility Model

 Task based movement

 Path selection

 Node classification

 Class transition

 Dependence/ Influence

(

)

 Scale invariance

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Current Work: Scope

 Obtain a graph-based representation of the simulated scenario based on paths on geographical map.

– Step 1: Determine the different types of nodes in the simulated scenario.

– Step 2: Build a graph-based transportation network

(transnet) for each node type/ mode of transportation.

– Step 3: Combine/ connect transnets.

 Determine network influence matrix D .

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Graph-based Representation of Simulation Plane

Determine number of node classes.

Cut up the map of the area being simulated into sites (vertices) in which mobility of nodes belonging to the same class is described by the same set of parameters.

Determine paths between sites

(edges) and obtain a transportation subnet.

Repeat for all node classes.

Interconnect vertices of different transportation subnets where nodes change over from one subnet to another.

Output: A set of interconnected transportation subnets.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Graph-based Representation of Simulation Plane

G

G

G

11 m 1

G

1 m

G mm

G: Connectivity Matrix

•Consists of submatrices G ij

•Basic elements of G are 1s and 0s

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Graph-based Representation of Simulation Plane

 This form of representation of the simulation area by means of the connectivity matrix G restricts the movement of nodes.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Markov Chains vs.

Influence Model

 Similarities

– Both Markov Chains (MC) and the Influence Model

(IM) can be defined by stochastic matrices and be graphically represented as weighted di-graphs.

 Differences

– A Markov Chain describes the state of a system and the transition probabilities to other states conditional on the current state.

– The Influence Model describes the states of a number of systems equal to the number of vertices in the graph.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Markov Chains vs.

Influence Model

 Differences (Cont’d):

– In MC the edge weights on outgoing edges represent the transition probabilities.

– In the IM the edge weights on incoming edges represent the magnitude of the influence from other nodes.

– MC and the IM differ in their evolution equations.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

0.3

0.3

0.2

A

0.7

0.8

0.5

0.1

C

B

0.2

0.1

Markov Chains vs.

Influence Model

A

B

C

A B C

0.3

0.7

0.1 0.2

0.1

0.2

0.8

0.5

0.1

0.1

0.2

A

0.6

0.7

0.5

0.1

C

B

0.4

0.1

A

B

C

0.1

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

A B C

0.3

0.2

0.5

0.6

0.1

0.4

0.1 0.7

0.1

[

  

Binary Influence Model

 Evolution Equations for Binary Influence Model

 D network influence matrix (nxn)

 r[k+1] probability vector (nx1)

 s[k] status vector (nx1)

 Bernoulli() coin flipping function

[

[ 1]

 

( [

1])

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Binary Influence Model

 The Binary Influence Model (BIM) restricts the states to be either 0 or 1.

 We are using the BIM in the Influence

Mobility Model to model states of sites as either free/ accessible or congested/ inaccessible.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Example: Pedestrian Crossing

5

11

6

3/4

12

7

13 14

8 9 10

 Note: We used a special form of the Binary

Influence Model, the “

Evil Rain Model

” for

this particular example.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Example: Pedestrian Crossing

6

Average number of congested sites vs. time

Average number of congested pedetrian sites

Average number of congested car sites

5

4

3

2

1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Time

60 70 80 90 100

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Example: Pedestrian Crossing

6

Average number of congested sites vs. time

Average number of congested pedetrian sites

Average number of congested car sites

5

4

3

2

1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50

Time

60 70 80 90 100

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Future Work

 Replacing the Binary Influence Model with the General Influence Model.

 Associating costs with the links on the connectivity matrix and allocating limited budgets to individual nodes.

 A routing algorithm that routes nodes through the transnets within budget constraints.

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Thank You

Q&A

Evil Rain Model

D e

 

1

0

0

1

0

0 e e D

1 2

 e

1

[ ]

0

 

D

1

0

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Example 2: Intra-state Travel

C1 11/12

3/4 C2

5/6

7/8

9/10

C3

13/14

C4

W ireless A nd V id e o Communication s ( WAVES ) Lab

ECE: Michigan State University

Time

Download