Enhancing the Lifetime and Energy Efficiency of Wireless Sensor Networks Using Aquila Optimizer Algorithm

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The Abstract need to rewrite for a better understanding of the work.

2. In the Introduction, the contribution of the manuscript needs to be highlighted.

3. For most of the figures/illustrative images in this paper, I think authors should spend time redrawing or provide with high-resolution versions, most of the figures are blurred and unclear for the readers to capture their represented information in them.

4. Previous studies are weak. Compare this study with previous studies in a table.

5.      The manner in which the methodology was presented is not clear. The methodology should be systematic and logical in its layout and presentation.

6. Add one paragraph before the conclusion section to discuss the findings.

Author Response

Dear Editor/Reviewers,

Many thanks for all your valuable and constructive comments, which improved the quality of the paper. Our major revisions are summarized as:

Kindly find below our detailed replies to the reviewers’ comments.

1. The Abstract need to rewrite for a better understanding of the work.

Many thanks to the reviewer for pointing this out. We revised the abstract to make it clear.

2. In the Introduction, the contribution of the manuscript needs to be highlighted.

The paper's main contributions are: 

• The clustering (AO) algorithm is presented to locate the optimal cluster heads and the network clustering efficiently and stably, resulting in reduced energy consumption and increased network lifespan.
• The Aquila Optimizer is implemented in two phases. In the 1^st phase, the AO simulation code is run with an optimal distribution for sensors to initially elect proper clustering heads (CHs) which are assigned in an optimal distributed way based on three input factors: residual energy(RE), distance from nodes to BS, and the number of surrounded nodes to gather the data from the environment to the cloud through gateway devices. In the second phase, the AO is used to improve system performance with less energy consumption and a high network lifespan.
• The performance of the proposed (AO) algorithm is compared with the well-known algorithms LEACH, COA, HHO, and GA. The results of the experiment prove that the AO algorithm has better performance than other algorithms in all applied scenarios.

3. For most of the figures/illustrative images in this paper, I think authors should spend time redrawing or provide with high-resolution versions, most of the figures are blurred and unclear for the readers to capture their represented information in them.

The figures/illustrative images have been defined. Thank you.

4. Previous studies are weak. Compare this study with previous studies.

I reconstruct the related work and added additional references

5. The manner in which the methodology was presented is not clear. The methodology should be systematic and logical in its layout and presentation.

We rewrote the methodology and made it more clarified

6. Add one paragraph before the conclusion section to discuss the findings.

Many thanks to the reviewer for pointing this out.  We add this paragraph before the conclusion

 

According to three BS locations scenarios (0,0), (50,50), and (100,100), the proposed AO algorithm has achieved a maximum number of alive nodes and high energy compared to other algorithms. The mean of the alive nodes realized by the proposed AO algorithm in three scenarios are 1250, 1800, and 1200 rounds respectively outperforming the LEACH, COA, HHO, and GA algorithms. In this case, the presented AO algorithm has the best loss rate at 1800 rounds with BS location (50,50). Also, the mean of the normalized energy of the proposed AO algorithm in three scenarios are 450, 800, and 400 rounds respectively outperforming the LEACH, COA, HHO, and GA algorithms. In this case, the presented AO algorithm has the best energy loss rate at 800 rounds with a BS location (50,50). Concluding that AO has a positive effect on system stability.

Reviewer 2 Report

The research topic is interesting and suitable for the Future Internet.

1. Some figure (like figure 1) are not clear, and need to be replotted.

2. some equations, e.g., 11, are not clearly defined. There are lots of mistakes, e.g., the variables are not consistent, not in italic. This influence the review process.

3. energy is a big issue for sensors. The suitable power supply from renewable energies provides another approach, following related papers should be cited.

A high-efficiency wave-powered marine observation buoy: Design, analysis, and experimental tests. Energy Conversion and Management, 2022,270:116154.

Towards realistic power performance and techno-economic performance of wave power farms: the impact of control strategies and wave climates. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 248:110754.

4. The literature review (section 2) should be restructured.

5. there are lots of language mistakes. The authors should have a thoughtful check.

Author Response

Dear Editor/Reviewers,

Many thanks for all your valuable and constructive comments, which improved the quality of the paper. Our major revisions are summarized as:

Kindly find below our detailed replies to the reviewers’ comments.

1. Some figures (like figure 1) are not clear and need to be replotted.

It has been fixed. Thank you.

2. some equations, e.g., 11, are not clearly defined. There are lots of mistakes, e.g., the variables are not consistent, not in italic. This influence the review process.

We rewrote the methodology and made it more clarified

3. Energy is a big issue for sensors. The suitable power supply from renewable energies provides another approach, the following related papers should be cited.

A high-efficiency wave-powered marine observation buoy: Design, analysis, and experimental tests. Energy Conversion and Management, 2022,270:116154.

This valuable paper is cited in the paper and added to the references

Towards realistic power performance and techno-economic performance of wave power farms: the impact of control strategies and wave climates. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 248:110754.

This valuable paper is cited in the paper and added to the references

4. The literature review (section 2) should be restructured.

We reconstructed the literature review and added new references.

5. there are lots of language mistakes. The authors should have a thoughtful check.

Many thanks to the reviewer for pointing this out. Thank you.

Reviewer 3 Report

 

In this paper, authors proposed an Aquila Optimizer algorithm to enhance the energy balancing in clusters across sensor nodes during network communications to extend the network lifetime and reduce power consumption.

Limitations of the paper are as follows:

1.       From the paper it’s not clear why Aquila optimization algorithm is better for WSN or how to fit Aquila optimization for the WSN environment, authors need to clarify it.

2.       Figures are blurry, need to revise.

3.       Type setting of the paper is not good to check page number 9.

4.       It will be better if you define all symbols used in the paper by a table.

5.       As authors used metaheuristic algorithms then authors need to show the time complexity of the algorithm.

You can check the below paper for complexity analysis

10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3053605

10.1109/JSEN.2021.3124922

 

Author Response

Dear Editor/Reviewers,

Many thanks for all your valuable and constructive comments, which improved the quality of the paper. Our major revisions are summarized as:

Kindly find below our detailed replies to the reviewers’ comments.

In this paper, authors proposed an Aquila Optimizer algorithm to enhance the energy balancing in clusters across sensor nodes during network communications to extend the network lifetime and reduce power consumption.

Limitations of the paper are as follows:

1. From the paper it’s not clear why Aquila optimization algorithm is better for WSN or how to fit Aquila optimization for the WSN environment, authors need to clarify it.

We clarified this issue and added addition paragraph before the conclusion and at the end of section 4 (Evaluation of the proposed algorithm)

2. Figures are blurry, need to revise.

These have been defined. Thank you.

3. Type setting of the paper is not good to check page number 9.

We changed the type setting of the paper and rewrote page 9.

4. It will be better if you define all symbols used in the paper by a table.

The reviewer is correct to point this out. Table 2 contains all symbols which are used in the manuscript.

5. As authors used metaheuristic algorithms then authors need to show the time complexity of the algorithm.

You can check the below paper for complexity analysis

10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3053605

10.1109/JSEN.2021.3124922

It is a good point and we will work on it in future work.

Thank you for pointing this out. The table in the attachment shows the worst-case time complexity of the mentioned algorithms

Please open the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

All figures/pictures are not clear. Please improve them.

LEACH is a very old protocol to compare with. Please describe or include computational efficiency/complexity of your approach.

 

Author Response

Dear Editor/Reviewers,

Many thanks for all your valuable and constructive comments, which improved the quality of the paper. Our major revisions are summarized as:

Kindly find below our detailed replies to the reviewers’ comments.

All figures/pictures are not clear. Please improve them.

These have been defined. Thank you.

LEACH is a very old protocol to compare with. Please describe or include the computational efficiency/complexity of your approach.

 It is a good point and we will work on it in future work.

Thank you for pointing this out. The table in the attachment shows the worst-case time complexity of the mentioned algorithms

Please open the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

In this paper, the authors look into energy efficiency and network optimization of wireless sensor networks towards the internet of things. 

Few comments

1) Figure 1 is unclear and needs to be redrawn as the syntax is not visible. Figures 3 till 8 index is not clear.

2) The introduction misses the connection of energy efficiency with WSNs. A paragraph emphasizing the importance of energy efficiency and WSN is required in the introduction part. The following papers and references in them may help to solidify the concepts

a) Aljanabi, A., Alluhaibi, O., Ahmed, Q.Z. et al. Low Complexity Single Carrier Frequency Domain Detectors for Internet of Underwater Things (IoUT)s. Wireless Pers Commun 125, 2443–2461 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-022-09667-1

b)M. N. Khan et al., "Improving Energy Efficiency With Content-Based Adaptive and Dynamic Scheduling in Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 176495-176520, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3026939.

c) A. S. Nagdive and P. K. Ingole, "An implementation of energy efficient data compression & security mechanism in clustered wireless sensor network," 2015 International Conference on Advances in Computer Engineering and Applications, 2015, pp. 375-380, doi: 10.1109/ICACEA.2015.7164733.

d) Q. Z. Ahmed, K. -H. Park, M. -S. Alouini and S. Aïssa, "Compression and Combining Based on Channel Shortening and Reduced-Rank Techniques for Cooperative Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 72-81, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2013.2272061.

3) A paragraph of methods for improving lifetime of the WSNs should be added 

a) D. Guo, W. Wang, Q. Chen, N. Zhao and Z. Zhang, "Queue-Stable Dynamic Compression and Transmission with Mobile Edge Computing," ICC 2019 - 2019 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2019, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/ICC.2019.8761667.

b) Muhammad Nawaz Khan, Haseeb Ur Rahman, Muhammad Zahid Khan, Gulzar Mehmood, Adel Sulaiman, Asadullah Shaikh, Abdulmajeed Alqhatani, "Energy-Efficient Dynamic and Adaptive State-Based Scheduling (EDASS) Scheme for Wireless Sensor Networks", IEEE Sensors Journal, vol.22, no.12, pp.12386-12403, 2022.

c) Muhammad A. Imran; Sajjad Hussain; Qammer H. Abbasi, "Life‐span Extension for Sensor Networks in the Industry," in Wireless Automation as an Enabler for the Next Industrial Revolution , IEEE, 2020, pp.19-45, doi: 10.1002/9781119552635.ch2.

4) In section 2, literature review the authors need to show a timing diagram. The energy efficiency perceptive is only based on network side. I suggest to add a section of physical layer communications on energy efficiency. Part 2) and references therein might help to extend it.

5) Please check line 371-386, During the expl needs to be removed.

6) Maybe PSO should be added in the paper as it is also an optimization algorithm.

7) A table should be drawn to show the comparison of these techniques for a given no. of alive nodes and the number of rounds.

8) No. of rounds are a number of iterations that needs to be updated.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Editor/Reviewers,

Many thanks for all your valuable and constructive comments, which improved the quality of the paper. Our major revisions are summarized as:

Kindly find below our detailed replies to the reviewers’ comments.

In this paper, the authors look into energy efficiency and network optimization of wireless sensor networks towards the internet of things. 

Few comments

1) Figure 1 is unclear and needs to be redrawn as the syntax is not visible. Figures 3 till 8 index is not clear.

The figures have been defined. Thank you.

2) The introduction misses the connection of energy efficiency with WSNs. A paragraph emphasizing the importance of energy efficiency and WSN is required in the introduction part. The following papers and references in them may help to solidify the concepts

We cited the following paper to clarify the concepts of energy efficiency with WSNs.

M. N. Khan et al., "Improving Energy Efficiency With Content-Based Adaptive and Dynamic Scheduling in Wireless Sensor Networks," in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 176495-176520, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3026939.

 

3) A paragraph of methods for improving lifetime of the WSNs should be added 

We cited the following paper to clarify the concepts of energy efficiency with WSNs.

Aljanabi, A., Alluhaibi, O., Ahmed, Q.Z. et al.Low Complexity Single Carrier Frequency Domain Detectors for Internet of Underwater Things (IoUT)s. Wireless Pers Commun125, 2443–2461 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-022-09667-1

4) In section 2, literature review the authors need to show a timing diagram. The energy efficiency perceptive is only based on network side. I suggest to add a section of physical layer communications on energy efficiency. Part 2) and references therein might help to extend it.

5) Please check line 371-386, During the expl needs to be removed.

We checked the lines and corrected the error. Thank you

6) Maybe PSO should be added in the paper as it is also an optimization algorithm.

The paper.

We used several optimization algorithms in WSN to compare with the new optimization algorithm AO. There are many optimization algorithms so we will add PSO with others in future papers.

7) A table should be drawn to show the comparison of these techniques for a given no. of alive nodes and the number of rounds.

8) No. of rounds are a number of iterations that needs to be updated.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Tha authors have revised their manuscript according to my previous comments. I am agree to accept this manuscript in its present form.

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors address my concerns. Paper can be accepted.

Reviewer 5 Report

All my comments have been addressed