Special Issue

International Journal of Distributed

Sensor Networks
2016, Vol. 12(9)
Data transmission optimization Ó The Author(s) 2016
DOI: 10.1177/1550147716670646
algorithm for network utility ijdsn.sagepub.com

maximization in wireless sensor

networks

Chengtie Li1,2, Jinkuan Wang1 and Mingwei Li1,2

Abstract
We provide a joint scheme for rate control, scheduling, routing, and power control protocol for wireless sensor net-
works based on compressive sensing. Using a network utility maximization formulation, we present cross-layer optimiza-
tion solutions using Lagrangian multipliers in the transport, network, media access control, and physical layers. Inspired
by compressive sensing, we focus on the construction of utility functions based on the constraints of the link capacity,
rate, routing, and power to decrease the computational cost, accelerate the convergence rate, and degrade the error
ratio. The optimization solutions are developed by solving the optimization model of network utility maximization. We
prove the effectiveness by the theory analysis at the stability of the transmission rate and error ratio. Finally, simulation
results demonstrate the performance in terms of stability of the error ratio of compressive sensing, energy consump-
tion, and transmission delay in wireless sensor networks.

Keywords
Wireless sensor networks, cross layer, optimization, network utility maximization, compressive sensing

Date received: 19 May 2016; accepted: 31 August 2016

Academic Editor: Pelegri-Sebastia

Introduction (MAC), scheduling, and routing through optimization

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have sensed the phys-
ical world and played an important role in the Internet
of Things. Data transmission is one of the most signifi-
cant properties of WSNs. Sensor nodes are responsible
for receiving and relaying data simultaneously. Because
of the relevance of the data, it is not necessary to trans-
mit all the data to the sink, as that expends too much
energy and reduces transmission efficiency. A substan-
tial amount of research has concentrated on methods
to improve data transmission effectiveness, such as
cross-layer designs1–4 and network utility maximization
(NUM).5–8
Khalek et al.,1 Cammarano et al.,2 and Chen et al.4
proposed the cross-layer transmission schemes and
derived joint algorithm for media access control
theory,3 and comprehensively studied the state of the
art for wireless communication at the application,
transport, network, MAC, and physical layers.
Yang et al.,5 Zhou et al.,6 He et al.,7 and Chen et al.8
formulated optimization solutions by NUM in WSNs
with the constraints of specific network topologies.
Ideal schemes were obtained at the expense of
1
School of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University,
Shenyang, China
2
Northeastern University, Qinhuangdao, China
Corresponding author:
Mingwei Li, School of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern
University, Shenyang, Liaoning 066004, China.
Email: neuqlmw@126.com

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
sacrificing network utility and rigorous network topol-
ogies,7 which showed that each node cannot transmit
and receive data simultaneously. Furthermore, no
excessive consumption was guaranteed, and the effec-
tive saving of energy consumption was not solved.
Dimension reduction of data has aroused more and
more concerns to network optimization,9 which proves
that the full-view area coverage can replace the full-
view point coverage which leads to a significant dimen-
sion reduction for the full-view area coverage problem.
To economize energy, Tapparello et al.10 proposed a
joint compression–transmission algorithm for energy-
harvesting multi-hop networks, where both compres-
sion and transmission activities were implemented using
the energy available in the energy buffer. Compressive
sensing (CS) is rapidly being developed in WSNs for
data compression with a low complexity and low
energy consumption. The features of CS for data trans-
mission in WSNs have been recently researched in vari-
ous studies.11–16 The protocols decrease transmission
delay and reduce the transmission power for less trans-
mitted data.
In order to achieve network optimization,1–8
improved data transmission strategies based on maxi-
mum utility or cross-layer ideas without full consider-
ation of the sparse feature of the original data and the
efficiency of the data transmission were used. In gen-
eral, the sensor node is responsible for harvesting
energy from the environment, sampling data, and
transmitting to the sink. It is worth mentioning that
data compression will greatly reduce the amount of
data transmitted after sampling.9,10,17 However, this
approach only reduced the amount of data transmitted,
and the sampling frequency was not reduced. Despite
data compression,11–16 the cross-layer collaboration
has not been fully considered. In this article, we
improve the bottleneck constraints of the aforemen-
tioned algorithms. The optimal transmission policy will
be implemented through NUM combined with CS in
transport, network, MAC, and physical layers, respec-
tively. The policy greatly reduces the data transmission
by reducing the sampling frequency, which fundamen-
tally constrains data process. Our major contributions
are summarized as follows:
1. Motivated by data transmission applications,
we propose a rate control for the transport
layer, scheduling for the network layer, routing
for the MAC layer, and a power control algo-
rithm for the physical layer. The proposed
scheme reduces the transmission flow through
CS, which can significantly reduce energy con-
sumption. In addition, the algorithm imple-
ments a trade-off between transmission rate and
energy consumption based on Lagrangian opti-
mization and dynamic programming. Logical
routing and appropriate link capacity allocation
are presented, which effectively relieve network
congestion.
2. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the
scheme through Lyapunov theory. Through
theoretical analysis, we find that the transmis-
sion rate is stochastically stable, which should
be attributed to the compression technique
and optimization method. Furthermore, we
also validate that the rate–distortion ratio is
less than 4/N (where N is the number of nodes
in the WSNs).
3. We conduct extensive simulations to validate
the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.
Simulation results demonstrate that the scheme
can significantly reduce transmission delay and
communication costs.
The article is organized as follows: section
‘‘Preliminaries and model statement’’ describes the
preliminaries and model statement; section ‘‘Problem
formulations’’ presents the problem formulation; sec-
tion ‘‘Joint control algorithms’’ proposes the joint
rate control, scheduling, routing, and power control
algorithm; section ‘‘Performance analysis’’ provides
the analysis of the performance of the proposed algo-
rithm; section ‘‘Simulation results’’ presents the simu-
lation results; and section ‘‘Conclusion’’ presents the
conclusions.
Preliminaries and model statement
CS theory
The unknown original signal v(t) 2 <n , where n is the
vector length, is projected into a low-dimensional space
through a sensing matrix, F 2 <m 3 n (m \\ n), that is,
y(t) = Fv(t), where a new data vector y(t) 2 <m is
obtained and transmitted, and processed in the net-
works. However, the signal is generally not sparse, and
there is an invertible basis matrix C 2 <n 3 n ,
y(t) = Fv(t) = FCu(t).
Since the lengths of y(t) and v(t) satisfy m \\ n, the
gathered data are less than the original data by the sen-
sing node. Thus, an exact reconstruction is difficult in
this situation at the sink node. The more rigorous con-
dition of restricted isometric property (RIP) should be
considered.18 A matrix F obeys RIP with parameters
(k, d) for d 2 (0, 1) if
ð1  dÞkv(t)k22  kFv(t)k22  ð1 + dÞkv(t)k22 ð1Þ
The original signal should be reconstructed when
the measurement vector is transmitted to the sink
node. The reconstruction of v(t) from y(t) is straight-
forward using the l1 -norm optimization19 as shown in
equation (2)
Li et al. 3

min ku(t)k1 s:t: y = FCu(t) ð2Þ

Model statement
In this study, we consider a WSN with N nodes that
are randomly distributed in the region. One sensor
node can receive sensory data from other N  1 sensors
and transmit the data to the sink node through a multi-
hop message relay. The WSN model can be denoted as
the directed graph G = (V , L), where V is the set includ-
ing N nodes, each of them transmitting and receiving
data simultaneously. Let L denote the directed link set,
where (i, j) 2 L denotes that node i transmits data to
node j. For simplification, (i, j) can be represented as
link l.
Special relationships exist between the transmission
rate and transmission vector. Suppose the transmission
Figure 1. Architecture of the proposed cross-layer framework.
rate xi (t) is the linear function of the transmission vec-
tor y(t) and the temporal entropy Hij (t)
which states that the sum of the created rate itself and
Vij (y(t), Hij (t))
xi (t) = ð3Þ the receiving rate is equal to the transmission rate for
T node i. Because the rate is associated with the link
where Vij (y), the linear function of y(t), is the transmis- capacity, we have the following constraint
sion aggregate at time t from node i to j. T denotes cycle X
duty. The temporal entropy Hij (t) at time t is calculated xi (t) + rji (t)  fil (t) ð6Þ
as follows20 j2Y(i)

X 1 where fil (t) is the link capacity associated to node i of

Hij (t) = Prji (t) ln ð4Þ link l at time t.
(i, j)2S Prji (t)

where Prji (t) = PrfWi (t) = jg denotes the transmission Power and routing constraints
probability at time t from node i to j. Let Wi (t) be the
next transmission The energy model in this study considered transmitting,
Pnode from node i at time t. For sim- receiving, and sensing energy consumption, which
plicity, Hi (t) = Nj =11 Hij (t). The temporal entropy is
smaller, and there is less unknown information, which accounts for the bulk of all energy consumption. Let
is better for a network environment. Eijtr (t), Eijre (t), Eisn (t), and Ei (t), respectively, denote the
transmitting, receiving, sensing energy consumption,
and the total amount of energy consumption for node i
Problem formulations at time t. The total amount of energy consumption can
be presented as follows
This section presents a cross-layer algorithm based on
CS. The architecture of the proposed cross-layer frame- X X
Ei (t) = Eijtr (t) + Eijre (t) + Eisn (t) ð7Þ
work is shown in Figure 1.
j2T(i) j2Y(i)

The main energy limitation of WSNs is the use of

Rate and capacity constraints battery supplies; therefore, we provide an upper bound
Let T(i) be the set of nodes to which node i can directly of energy consumption, that is
transmit data and Y(i) be the set of nodes from which
node i can directly receive data. Let rji (t) denote the rate X
N

Ei (t)  E(t) ð8Þ
from node j to node i at time t (receiving rate at node i)
i=1
and rij (t) denote the rate from node i to node j at time t
(transmitting rate at node i). The rate conservation law  is the upper bound of energy consumption at
where E(t)
implies that for rate xi (t) and node i time t in the network.
X X Channel allocation supports multiple transmissions
xi (t) + rji (t) = rij (t) , (i, j) 2 L ð5Þ and reduces interference.21,22 Let PIr (Hij (t)) denote the
j2Y(i) j2T(i) occupancy probability of link (i, j). If the entropy is
4 International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks

smaller, the channel performance is better. Therefore, Lagrangian multiplier decomposition

PIr (Hij (t)) can be formulated as The cross-layer optimization model (9) is approxi-
j mately convex7 if the entropy satisfies
PIr (Hij (t)) = eHi (t) ð9Þ e Hij (t)
’ 1  Hij (t). We form the Lagrangian problem
by relaxing constraints (5)2(9) as follows
Cross-layer optimization model  
L xi (t), fil (t), Iil (t), Ei (t), li , ai , bi , gi
Utility function U() reflects the ‘‘utility’’ when the
X
N  
impact factors play a role in maximizing utility.23 In = U xi (t), fil (t), Iil (t), Ei (t)
this study, we design the U() for the function of rate i=1
!
xi (t), link capacity fil (t), routing Il (t), and power pi (t) at X X
time t. We assume that U() is differentiable and non- + li (t) xi (t) + rji (t)  rij (t)
decreasing. In addition, all variables are functions of j2Y(i) j2T(i)
! ð12Þ
entropy Hij (t), that is, xi (t) , xi (Hij (t)). X
Combining equations (5)–(9) associated with each + ai (t) fil (t)  xi (t)  rji (t)
node in the network, a fair standard utility function for j2Y(i)
 
node i is given by + bi (t) PIr (Hij (t))  eHi (t)
!
  X
N
max U xi (t), fil (t), Iil (t), Ei (t) ð10Þ  
+ gi (t) E(t) E (t) i
 i=1
(5)  (9)
s:t:
xi (t)  0, fil (t)  0, Iil (t)  0, Ei (t)  0 where li (t), ai (t), bi (t), and gi (t) are Lagrangian mul-
tipliers with the conservation constraints. Because L()
Constraint (5) is the rate constraint for node i at time
is only piecewise differentiable, we use the distributed
t; constraint (6) expresses the relationship between rate
sub-gradient method. The implementation details are
and link capacity; constraints (7) and (8) denote the
as follows.
power constraint; and constraint (9) states the probabil-
ity of routing selection, which is inversely proportional
to entropy Hij (t). Rate control. Our goal is rate maximization under condi-
The NUM challenge of dynamic-routing WSNs with tions where link capacity, routing, and power allocation
the transmission rate, routing, link, and battery capac- are relatively satisfied
ity constraints is how to maximize the network utility
(10) under constraints (5)–(9) P1 max xi (t)
X
N   s:t:(5)  (9)
max U xi (t), fil (t), Iil (t), Ei (t) ð11Þ
i=1 Taking the derivative of L() with xi (t) and li (t), we

(5)  (9) obtain the solution as follows
s:t:
xi (t)  0, fil (t)  0, Iil (t)  0, Ei (t)  0
P
N
∂ Ui
The solution for maximizing the utility function ∂L i=1
involves the joint design of all nodes and links to (t) = (t) + li (t)  ai (t) ð13Þ
∂xi ∂xi
achieve reliable and secure communication for all users
while at the same time maintaining a stable stochastic ∂L X X
(t) = xi (t) + rji (t)  rij (t) ð14Þ
transmission rate. ∂li j2Y(i) j2T(i)

Since P1 is the approximately convex problem, it can

Joint control algorithms
be solved by
In order to achieve an efficient trade-off between energy
 +
consumption and quality of service, we present a cross- ∂L
layer algorithm for physical, MAC, network, and trans- xi (t + 1) = xi (t) + e (t) ð15Þ
∂xi
port layers. The proposed WSN algorithm is derived  +
from the solution of the NUM problem.24,25 We use the ∂L
li (t + 1) = li (t)  e (t) ð16Þ
Lagrangian multiplier method to solve the cross-layer ∂li
optimization problem and jointly achieve optimal rate
control, scheduling, routing, and power control. where ½x+ = max (0, x) and e is the step size.
Li et al. 5

 +
Scheduling. P2 is also approximately convex for the max- ∂L
Ei (t + 1) = Ei (t)  e (t) ð23Þ
imization link capacity fil (t), and the implementation ∂Ei
approach is similar to P1  +
∂L
g i (t + 1) = gi (t)  e (t) ð24Þ
P2 max fil (t) ∂gi
s:t:(5)  (9)
Taking the derivative of L() with fil (t) and ai (t), the Routing. Routing access strategy should be considered
solutions are obtained, respectively, as for solving channel competition resulting in network
congestion. In this study, we give the maximal prob-
P
N
ability link access at the next hop. Thus, we have
∂ Ui
∂L i=1  
(t) = (t) + ai (t) ð17Þ
∂fil ∂fil Iil (t) = arg max PIr (Hij (t)) ð25Þ
ði, jÞ
∂L X
(t) = fil (t)  xi (t)  rji (t) ð18Þ Note that routing access Iil (t) is updated in real time
∂ai j2Y(i)
through dynamic network environment, which achieves
The link capacity and Lagrangian multiplier can be routing access with least congestion ratio.
updated, respectively, as follows
 + Remark 1. The proposed algorithm accounts for the
l l ∂L
fi (t + 1) = fi (t)  e l (t) ð19Þ need to allocate rate, power, link capacity, and routing
∂fi
also for node i. It can be proven that this algorithm has
 + optimal properties as summarized in Theorems 1 and
∂L
ai (t + 1) = ai (t)  e (t) ð20Þ 2. We omit a formal statement of this result here since
∂ai
it is a straightforward extension of Theorems 1 and 2.
Link capacity is allocated according to the aggregate
flow and transmission rate. Transmitting with unneces-
sarily high link capacity reduces the lifetime of the net- Performance analysis
work and leads to excessive interference. Therefore,
In this section, we validate the effectiveness of the pro-
distribution according to one’s needs is the best alloca-
posed algorithm for rate stability and transmission
tion principle for link capacity.
accuracy. Obviously, xi (t)  xi and ∂x
∂L
i
(t) are opposite,
in addition, L() is convex and xi (t) is bounded. Thus,
Power control. The common transmission power used by we assume the following relationship between xi (t)  xi
each node should be large enough so that the bit error ∂L
and ∂x i
(t).
rate (BER) is within the toleration span; however, the
sensor node relies on limited battery power. The trade-
Assumption 1. For transmission rate xi (t), if xi denotes
off between power and transmission efficiency is one of
the desired rate at node i, xi (t) and xi satisfy
the most important issues in WSNs
xi (t)  xi  d2 ∂x
∂L
i
(t).
P3 min Ei (t)
s:t:(5)  (9) Stability analysis
Taking the derivative of L() with Ei (t) (21) and gi (t) Theorem 1. Let xi be the desired rate at node i, under
(22) Assumption 1, the transmission rate (11) is stochasti-
cally stable.
P
N
∂ Ui
∂L i=1
(t) = (t)  g i (t) ð21Þ Proof. In the proposed algorithm, the sensor node
∂Ei ∂Ei
can transmit and receive data simultaneously. To
∂L XN
achieve a balance between transmission and reception,
 
(t) = E(t) Ei (t) ð22Þ
∂gi the created rate should be adjusted according to
i=1
entropyPHij (t). Define the Lyapunov function as
Using the same technique to obtain pi (t) and g i (t), it V (t) = Ni= 1 (xi (t)  xi )2 .
can be shown that Based on formula (11), the sub-gradient vector is
6 International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks

DV (t + 1) = V (t + 1)  V (t) denote the rate–distortion ratio. Considering the utility

 + ! function
X N
∂L
= xi (t) + e (t)  xi (t)
i=1
∂xi ð26Þ 1 2
 + ! U (xi (t), fil (t), Iil (t), Ei (t)) = x (t) + xi (t)ðai (t)  li (t)Þ
∂L Ne i
xi (t) + e (t) 
+ xi (t)  2xi  2  2  2
∂xi + fil (t) + Iil (t) + Ei (t)
ð29Þ
Next, we discuss the positivity and negativity of
DV (t + 1) from two aspects. we discuss the transmission accuracy based on CS
and rate control (15).
∂L
1. If xi (t) + e ∂x (t).0, we have
i
Theorem 2. Considering the utility function (25) under
Assumption 1, the rate–distortion ratio is satisfied by
(x (t)x )2
XN   ri = i(x (t))2i  N4 .
∂L i
DV (t + 1) = xi (t) + e (t)  xi (t)
i=1
∂xi
  ∂L
Proof. When ∂x (t)  0, the rate–distortion ratio is
∂L  i
¼ xi (t) + e (t) + xi (t)  2xi
∂xi
2
 2 !  2 e ∂L
XN   xi (t)  xi 2 ∂xi (t) e2
S2xi (t) = x 1
 ∂L ∂L 4
= 2e xi (t)  xi (t) + e (t) ri = 2
  i
=
∂xi ∂xi ðxi (t)Þ ðxi Þ2 ðxi Þ2 N
i=1

ð27Þ P
N ð30Þ
∂ Ui
∂L
where S = i=1
∂xi (t) + li (t)  ai (t). If ∂x (t) . 0, then
According to Assumption 1, the inequality of i

DV (t + 1)\0 is obtained. Hence, the transmission rate

2
 2 ∂L
(15) is stochastically stable. xi (t)  xi e ∂x (t) 4
i
ri = 2
  ð31Þ
ðxi (t)Þ ðxi Þ2 N
∂L
2. If xi (t) + e ∂x (t)\0, then xi (t + 1) = 0, thus we
i
obtain Hence, Theorem 2 is proven.

Remark 3. The fact that (31) implies that the transmis-

X
N 
DV (t + 1) = x2i (t) + 2xi xi (t)
i=1
XN  
∂L
 x2i (t) + exi (t) (t)
i=1
∂xi
Obviously, we achieve the solution of Theorem 1.
Remark 2. In fact, bounded link capacity and energy
consumption efficiently facilitate rate stability. The
stable transmission rate (11) guarantees for effective
data transmission, which makes the compression maxi-
mization for the initial data and sampling frequency
minimization. This can significantly optimize data
transmission environment of WSNs.
Transmission accuracy
The transmitted data are incomplete because the data
are compressed before transmission, but they still con-
tain effective information. CS is efficient for reducing
energy consumption; however, the transmitted data
may not be completely accurate. Let ri =
 sion rate (15) satisfies the rate constraints (5) and (6) at
each time-slot since transmission vector, after compres-
ð28Þ sion, is relatively stable.
Simulation results
In this section, we present our results and analyses of
transmission delay, transmission rate, error ratio, and
energy consumption to demonstrate the performance of
the proposed algorithms (DTOCLD) and to compare
them with those of CLC_DD and CLC_OOD.6
Parameters used in Zhou et al.6 are selected. Considering
a 100-node network, the nodes are stochastically distrib-
uted. We set the utility function for formula (29), and the
timing of each simulation at 3 s. The sensing matrix F of
size 100 3 200 was generated with independent nor-
mally distributed entries N (0, s2 ), where s2 = 1=1000
(expected l2-norm of each column is unity).
Figure 2 shows the comparison of transmission
delays of CLC_DD and CLC_OOD. Despite the larger
delay of DTOCLD during the first second as a result of
the heavy upload based on CS, it descended quickly in
the next second because of the solutions from the
(xi (t)xi )2
(xi (t))2
Lagrangian method.
Li et al.
Figure 2. Comparison of transmission delays of CLC_DD,
CLC_OOD, and DTOCLD.
Figure 3. Comparison of transmission rates of CLC_DD,
CLC_OOD, and DTOCLD.
Figure 3 shows the transmission rate of DTOCLD
compared to CLC_DD and CLC_OOD. DTOCLD
has a much larger transmission rate than CLC_DD and
CLC_OOD. Data compression can depress the amount
of traffic, which effectively improves network condi-
tions and significantly enhances transmission efficiency.
Figure 4 presents the error ratio of DTOCLD.
According to Theorem 2, the error ratio is less than
0.04 in the 100-node network, which is in accordance
with the results of Figure 4. After 2 s, the error ratio is
stable and less than 0.04, which validates the lower
influence of loss compression.
In the DTOCLD algorithm, the energy consumption
in nodes is low in the key region of Figure 5. This
demonstrates that the DTOCLD algorithm consumes
less energy, which is attributed to decreased transmis-
sion data by the CS theory. This confirms that the
DTOCLD algorithm optimizes network utilization.
DTOCLD chooses a congestion-avoidance routing that
consumes the least energy based on the number of
7
Figure 4. Error ratio of DTOCLD.
Figure 5. Comparison of energy consumptions of CLC_DD,
CLC_OOD, and DTOCLD.
nodes. The CLC_DD and CLC_OOD algorithms con-
sume more energy because of the enormous amount of
data transmitted.
Conclusion
This article presents the implementation of a cross-
layer optimization design for data transmission in
WSNs consisting of rate control, scheduling, routing,
and power control. Unlike the existing cross-layer pro-
tocols, we focus on a joint optimization strategy based
on CS in physical, MAC, network, and transport
layers. Taking into account the relationships among
rate, routing, link capacity, and energy allocation,
NUM is proposed for efficient data transmission, and
we solve the optimal solutions with the Lagrangian
multiplier method. The performance of the proposed
algorithm, in theory and practice, perfectly achieves the
desired solutions.
8 International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks
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 sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: This work was supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China under grant no. 61374097,
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of
China (no. 142303013), Program of Science and Technology
Research of Hebei University (no. QN2014326), and School
Funds Project of Northeastern University at Qinhuangdao
(no. XNB2015004).
References
1. Khalek AA, Caramanis C and Heath RW.Delay-con-
strained video transmission: quality-driven resource allo-
cation and scheduling. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process
2015; 9(1): 60–75.
2. Cammarano A, Lo Presti F, Maselli G, et al. Through-
put-optimal cross-layer design for cognitive radio ad hoc
networks. IEEE Trans Ad Hoc Netw Parallel Distrib Syst
2015; 26(9): 2599–2609.
3. Pudlewski S, Cen N, Guan Z, et al. Video transmission
over lossy wireless networks: a cross-layer perspective.
IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process 2015; 9(1): 6–21.
4. Chen X, Hwang J-N, Lee C-N, et al. A near optimal
QoE-driven power allocation scheme for scalable video
transmissions over MIMO systems. IEEE J Sel Top Sig-
nal Process 2015; 9(1): 76–88.
5. Yang S, Sheng Z, McCann JA, et al. Distributed stochas-
tic cross-layer optimization for multi-hop wireless net-
works with cooperative communications. IEEE T Mobile
Comput 2014; 13(10): 2269–2282.
6. Zhou A, Liu M, Li Z, et al. Cross-layer design for pro-
portional delay differentiation and network utility maxi-
mization in multi-hop wireless networks. IEEE T Wirel
Commun 2012; 11(4): 1446–1455.
7. He Shibo, Chen Jiming, Yau DKY, et al. Cross-layer
optimization of correlated data gathering in wireless sen-
sor networks. IEEE T Mobile Comput 2012; 11(11):
1678–1691.
8. Chen J, Xu W, He S, et al. Utility-based asynchronous
flow control algorithm for wireless sensor networks.
IEEE J Sel Area Comm 2010; 28(7): 1116–1126.
9. He S, Shin D-H, Zhang J, et al. Full-view area coverage
in camera sensor networks: dimension reduction and
near-optimal solutions. IEEE T Veh Technol. Epub
ahead of print 5 November 2015. DOI: 10.1109/
TVT.2015.2498281.
10. Tapparello C, Simeone O and Rossi M.Dynamic
compression-transmission for energy-harvesting multihop
networks with correlated sources. IEEE/ACM T Network
2014; 22(6): 1729–1741.
11. Xiang S and Cai L.Transmission control for compressive
sensing video over wireless channel. IEEE T Wirel Com-
mun 2013; 12(3): 1429–1437.
12. Zheng H, Yang F, Tian X, et al. Data gathering with
compressive sensing in wireless sensor networks: a ran-
dom walk based approach. IEEE T Parall Distr 2015;
26(1): 35–44.
13. Zheng H, Xiao S, Wang X, et al. Capacity and delay
analysis for data gathering with compressive sensing in
wireless sensor networks. IEEE T Wirel Commun 2013;
12(2): 917–927.
14. Yi K, Wan J, Yao L, et al. Partial matrix completion
algorithm for efficient data gathering in wireless sensor
networks. IEEE Commun Lett 2015; 19(1): 54–57.
15. Pudlewski S, Prasanna A and Melodia T.Compressed
sensing enabled video streaming for wireless multimedia
sensor networks. IEEE T Mobile Comput 2012; 11(6):
1060–1072.
16. Cheng J, Ye Q, Jiang H, et al. STCDG: an efficient data
gathering algorithm based on matrix completion for wire-
less sensor networks. IEEE T Wirel Commun 2013; 12(2):
850–861.
17. Zordan D, Melodia T and Rossi M.On the design of tem-
poral compression strategies for energy harvesting sensor
networks. IEEE T Wirel Commun 2016; 15(2):
1336–1352.
18. Madni AM.A systems perspective on compressed sensing
and its use in reconstructing sparse networks. IEEE Syst
J 2014; 8(1): 23–27.
19. Zou Z, Bao Y, Hui Li, et al. Embedding compressive
sensing-based data loss recovery algorithm into wireless
smart sensors for structural health monitoring. IEEE
Sens J 2015; 15(2): 797–808.
20. Du R, Chen C, Yang B, et al. Effective urban traffic mon-
itoring by vehicular sensor networks. IEEE T Veh Tech-
nol 2015; 64(1): 273–286.
21. Chen J, Yu Q, Chai B, et al. Dynamic channel assignment
for wireless sensor networks: a regret matching based
approach. IEEE T Parall Distr 2015; 26(1): 95–106.
22. Zhang J, Ren F, Gao S, et al. Dynamic routing for data
integrity and delay differentiated services in wireless sen-
sor networks. IEEE T Mobile Comput 2015; 14(2):
328–343.
23. Stai E and Papavassiliou S.User optimal throughput-
delay trade-off in multihop networks under NUM frame-
work. IEEE Commun Lett 2014; 18(11): 1999–2002.
24. He S, Shin D-H, Zhang J, et al. Near-optimal allocation
algorithms for location-dependent tasks in crowdsensing.
IEEE T Veh Technol. Epub ahead of print 18 July 2016.
DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2016.2592541.
25. Ayatollahi H, Tapparello C and Heinzelman W.Trans-
mitter-receiver energy efficiency: a trade-off in MIMO
wireless sensor networks. In: 2015 IEEE wireless commu-
nications and networking conference (WCNC), New
Orleans, LA, 9–12 March 2015, pp.1476–1481. New
York: IEEE.