Next Article in Journal
eWoT: A Semantic Interoperability Approach for Heterogeneous IoT Ecosystems Based on the Web of Things
Previous Article in Journal
Fluorescence Sensing of Caffeine in Tea Beverages with 3,5-diaminobenzoic Acid
Article

Routing Protocol for Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks Based on a Modified Grey Wolf Optimizer

by 1,2, 1,2,*, 1,2 and 3
1
School of Communication and Information Engineering, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710121, China
2
Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Information Communication Network and Security, Xi’an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi’an 710121, China
3
College of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, Yangling 712100, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(3), 820; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030820
Received: 16 October 2019 / Revised: 29 January 2020 / Accepted: 31 January 2020 / Published: 4 February 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Sensor Networks)
Wireless sensor network (WSN) nodes are devices with limited power, and rational utilization of node energy and prolonging the network lifetime are the main objectives of the WSN’s routing protocol. However, irrational considerations of heterogeneity of node energy will lead to an energy imbalance between nodes in heterogeneous WSNs (HWSNs). Therefore, in this paper, a routing protocol for HWSNs based on the modified grey wolf optimizer (HMGWO) is proposed. First, the protocol selects the appropriate initial clusters by defining different fitness functions for heterogeneous energy nodes; the nodes’ fitness values are then calculated and treated as initial weights in the GWO. At the same time, the weights are dynamically updated according to the distance between the wolves and their prey and coefficient vectors to improve the GWO’s optimization ability and ensure the selection of the optimal cluster heads (CHs). The experimental results indicate that the network lifecycle of the HMGWO protocol improves by 55.7%, 31.9%, 46.3%, and 27.0%, respectively, compared with the stable election protocol (SEP), distributed energy-efficient clustering algorithm (DEEC), modified SEP (M-SEP), and fitness-value-based improved GWO (FIGWO) protocols. In terms of the power consumption and network throughput, the HMGWO is also superior to other protocols. View Full-Text
Keywords: heterogeneous wireless sensor networks; grey wolf optimizer; network lifecycle; energy consumption heterogeneous wireless sensor networks; grey wolf optimizer; network lifecycle; energy consumption
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhao, X.; Ren, S.; Quan, H.; Gao, Q. Routing Protocol for Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks Based on a Modified Grey Wolf Optimizer. Sensors 2020, 20, 820. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030820

AMA Style

Zhao X, Ren S, Quan H, Gao Q. Routing Protocol for Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks Based on a Modified Grey Wolf Optimizer. Sensors. 2020; 20(3):820. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030820

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhao, Xiaoqiang, Shaoya Ren, Heng Quan, and Qiang Gao. 2020. "Routing Protocol for Heterogeneous Wireless Sensor Networks Based on a Modified Grey Wolf Optimizer" Sensors 20, no. 3: 820. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030820

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop