1

Models, Algorithms and Techniques for dealing with

Dynamic Networks: A Survey
Muhammad Nohman Javed, Manan Saif, Sikandar Afridi and Junaid Qadir
School Of Electrical Engineering And Computer Science, NUST
AbstractDynamic Networks involve frequent changes in its
network state such as topology changes, link breakages, nodes
faults or recoveries, addition or deletion of network components,
changes in load on network, variations in packets ows etc. In
recent years challenges in dynamic networks grab the attention of
research communities to study their behavior, formulate problems
and proposed algorithms and techniques to cope these challenges.
There is a huge diversity of dynamic networks and research
communities are engaged in research in different areas such as ad-
hoc networks, social networks, delay tolerant networks, etc. The
main contribution of this survey paper is to give comprehensive
overview of common issues among different areas of dynamic
networks and those specic to particular areas of them. It
integrates the modeling techniques, algorithmic techniques and
analysis techniques proposed by research communities working
in different areas in a unied framework. At rst, we discuss
some main models that are used by research communities to
study and analyze the problems due to dynamic characteristics of
networks, and their use to evaluate the performance of proposed
algorithms and techniques for these problems. Then, we discuss
some common and illustrative problem domains among different
areas of dynamic networks and their proposed solutions in
terms of state of the art algorithms and analysis techniques.
Finally, the paper ends with concluding remarks and some future
considerations.
KeywordsDynamic Networks, Adversarial Models, Stochastic
Models, Game Theoretic Models.
I. INTRODUCTION
Dynamic networks are those networks which involve fre-
quent changes in their states or characteristics. For example,
changes in network topology overtime due to movement of
nodes or edges, link breakages, node faults or recoveries, ad-
dition or deletion of network components, changes in load on
network, addition or deletion of objects in network applications
and variations in ow of packets etc. These networks are
represented as time evolving graphs and variations are mapped
with respect to time. If dynamics occur for short duration and
after which network becomes static over extended period of
time, then it is said to be in transient dynamic. However, if
changes in the network are occurring constantly and network
keeps on adapting to these changes then network is said to
be in continuous dynamics. Usually, researchers focus on the
latter one.
Dynamic behaviors of networks were rst studied in dis-
tributed computer literature. Since initial work in network
theory was done with assumption that networks are static
and they do not change over the time. Therefore, most of
the algorithms and techniques were developed to solve the
problems of static networks. Later researchers started realizing
that dynamicity exists in almost all the networks. For example,
even in Internet data trafc patterns, applications and users
are all changing dynamically. In Mobile ad-hoc networks
nodes mobility, environmental conditions and network scal-
ability changes dynamically. Previously, dynamic behaviors
were treated as fault in the networks. For instance, self-
stabilization algorithms that were devised for static network are
guaranteed to work only when the changes in the network stop
to occur [1]. Recently, these dynamic behaviors are commonly
modeled as characteristics of networks as the changes to
the networks never stop. For example, Harary [2] mentions
that bandwidth changes are characterized as changes in edge-
weights, topology changes as addition or deletion of edges,
computing power change as change in node-weight and crashes
or recoveries of nodes entails all the basic changes in dynamic
graph. The models for static networks are not appropriate
for dynamic networks. Similarly algorithms and techniques
devised for static networks cannot apply to dynamic networks.
Therefore, research efforts have been carried out to model
dynamic characteristics of networks and proposed algorithms
and techniques to handle them.
But there is a huge diversity of dynamic networks. Almost
all the real world networks are dynamic networks. Harary [2]
classies the dynamic networks as a dynamic graph model
G(V, E, f, g) with changes in any of these four parameters.
Based on this Bilgin [3] gave a huge list of prominent real
world networks and some of the ndings in them. The research
efforts in different areas of dynamic networks apparently
seem to be unrelated to each other but actually they are the
parts of the same concept domain. Casteigts [4] investigated
Delay Tolerant Networks, Opportunistic-Mobility Networks
and Real-World Complex Networks as three different areas
of dynamic networks and showed that one and the same
concept is identied by different names in these different
areas. For example, it showed that the terms temporal distance,
reachability time, information latency, and temporal proximity
refer to the same concept. Similarly, the terms schedule-
conforming path, temporal path and time-respecting path all
refer to a single concept of journey. Therefore, it is very
important to integrate the works of researchers in different
areas in a common pool. In this paper we put our efforts to
achieve this objective.
We hope to provide a systematic and unied framework for
researchers to build the understanding of open challenges in
the dynamic networks. It will help them to work in the context
of the state of the art while avoiding duplications of the work
2
due to lack of mutual familiarity among the researchers of
different areas. The paper highlights the problems that are need
to be solved and the problems that have already been solved
satisfactorily.
First, in section II, we introduce some main models that are
commonly used by the researchers in their areas to study the
dynamic characteristics of networks. We throw some light on
the use of these models to formulate and analyze the problems
arising in maintaining the communication over the dynamic
networks. We also discuss their use to develop algorithms and
techniques and evaluation of their performance in different
scenarios.
In section III, we discuss algorithms for some important
problems that are signicant for particular areas and may be-
come signicant for other areas. In this section, state of the art
algorithmic techniques and analysis techniques are categorized
by problem domains. We highlight how different researchers
use their own specic approaches to model, analyze and solve
specic problems in their own areas. Finally, the paper ends
with concluding remarks and future directions.
II. MODELS
A. Adversarial Models
In these models dynamicity in network metrics is controlled
by adversary. For example, adversary decides the arrival and
departure of nodes, arrival rate of packets and fault and
recoveries in the edges etc. Adaptive worst case adversary,
oblivious worst case adversary and random graph adversary
are mentioned as three types of adversaries. These adversaries
are used to change the required network metrics to analyze
the network behavior, formulate the problem and then develop
the algorithms and techniques to tackle them. The algorithms
performance and efciency is also analyzed by letting the
adversary to change the network metrics in different ways.
Usually, the adversary is used to control the input dynamics
like packet injection rate etc. Therefore, most of the discussion
in the literature is on Adversarial Queuing Models for packet
routing. The same models are also used for load balancing.
We refer our interesting reader to [7] for detail discussion of
Adversarial Queuing Models for load balancing. Our detail
discussion on load balancing algorithms is in section III-
A. Therefore, we specically discuss these models in the
context of packet routing in this section We specically discuss
adversarial queing models in this section
1) Adversarial Queuing Models: Packet routing is one of
the central tasks of networking. In dynamic networks this
task becomes more challenging than static networks due to
frequent changes in topology, in edges and their capacities,
nodes mobility and dynamicity in packet arrival rates and
their locations. Still high throughput, low latency, contention
resolution, low computation overhead and network stability
are our desirable goals. We nd that in research much of the
attention has been paid to queuing of packets, which is one of
the most important aspects of packet routing. When multiple
packets are required to use a nite capacity edge, they get
queued in a buffer. Then the core job is to forward and discard
the packets with some order. For example, packet is forwarded
using one of the following greedy protocols.
FIFO(First In First Out).
SIS(Shortest in System), the packet that is injected last will
sent rst.
LIS(Longest in System), the packet that is injected rst will
sent rst.
NTS(Nearest To Go), the packet that is nearest to its nal
destination will sent rst.
FTS(Furtherst To Go), the packet that is furthest away from
its nal destination will sent rst.
Similarly, packets are discarded using the schemes like tail
drop and RED (Random Early Detection).
To decide on which protocol and scheme should be used,
the networks dynamic behavior and characteristics are studied,
analyzed and parameterized widely by adversarial queuing
models. In these models adversary plays a central role of
packet injections with different rates and on different locations.
It may control edges faults and recoveries and other networks
characteristics depending on assumptions and constraints use
for it in a particular model. In these models worst case analyses
on queue sizes and latencies are done to nd nite upper
bounds on queues and delays for network stability. Initially,
the worst case analyses related to static routing problems
were tried for dynamic routing. For this the static routing
algorithms were periodically run and packets stored for given
run were used as input for next run. But this approach results
in inefcient utilization of network resources and large packet
delays. So, better dynamic algorithms were needed.
A rst model for dynamic routing to analyze queue sizes
and delays in worst case was developed by Cruz [5]. But
the most signicant work done in this direction is done by
Bedoin [6] because in his framework he replaced probabilistic
assumptions by worst case inputs. All the previous works
assume probabilistic assumptions for packet generation and
delivery. Queuing theory approaches used in these works
assume packet generation process as Poisson or Bernoulli
process with random destinations. They assume packets time to
pass through an edge as exponentially distributed but actually
this time is a constant. These assumptions arises a lot of
technical difculties to adopt queuing theory approaches for
continuous packet injections. Furthermore, as the network
trafc complexity increases more and more these assumptions
become more and more unrealistic. Bedoin [6] model provided
a general robust framework with as few assumptions about
network trafc as possible. Bedoin [6] captures the stability
results of Cruz [5] and also laid the foundation of further
research. We encourage and refer our reader to [5], [6], [12]
for detail motivation of adversarial queuing models. Reader
can also refer to [13], [14] for details of further work. Most of
our discussion is based on them. We discuss them with brevity
as following.
In Bedoin [6] model, a network is a directed graph. The
time evolution of this network is a game between a protocol
and an adversary. The adversary injects packets on various
nodes along with specifying the paths they need to traverse
before they are absorbed at each time step. The constraint on
adversary is that for s consecutive steps with packet injection
rate of 1, it can inject at most (s(1)) packets or requests.
3
TABLE I. SUMMARY OF MODELS
Model Salient features Applications Comments
Adversarial Model
All nodes are under one administration Queuing models for : Makes both deterministic and probablistic assump-
tions
Dynamics are controlled by adversary packet routing [5], [6] Considerations: buffer sizes, packet delays,
throughputs
Dynamics through external inuences load balancing [7] Focus: forwarding
Constrain on adversary for meaningful analysis
e.g packet injection kept below certain rate
Stochastic model
All nodes are under one administration [8] Network evolution Analysis of ties and breaks of links between nodes
Dynamics are described by probabilistic processes Makes only probabilistic assumptions
Constrained on process parameters e.g mean rate of packet
arrival
[9] Load balancing Considerations: capturing topology changes
Game theoretic model
Nodes are independent agents [10] for topology control Non-cooperative game
Dynamics through their interactions At least one equilibrium
Stability due to Nash Equilibrium Considerations: acheive efciency and network
connectivity in presence of selsh nodes
[11] for security problems Non-cooperative game between a node and in-
truder
Considerations: enhance intrusion detection sys-
tem (IDS) performance to detect intruders
During each time step one packet can traverse an edge e. If two
or more packets want to use the edge then protocol decides
the packet to use the edge and put the remaining packets in
a queue at the tail of edge e. The purpose of this is to prove
the stability of various protocols against various adversaries. A
protocol is said to be stable against an adversary if there exist
a constant C ( which may depends on underlying network and
its load) then the number of unabsorbed packets in the system
must not be more than C for all the time. The result of this
model showed that
1. All greedy protocols are stable in a tree or a DAG for every
deterministic adversary with packet packing rate of at most
one.
2. FIFO and LIS are unstable against deterministic adversaries
on single paths with atmost packet packing rate of 1 in a
directed cyclic graph network with number of nodes greater
than or equal to 3.
3. FTG is stable against every adversary with injection rate of
atmost one in directed graph.
4. LIS which fails for injection rate less than or equal to 1, is
stable for injection rate of 1 is less or equal to 1, for
greater than 0 in directed cyclic graph.
5. All greedy protocols are stable against every adversary for
packet packing rate is less than or equal to 1/2- in directed
cyclic graph.
6. For arbitrary directed graph LIS is stable against every
deterministic adversary for injection rate less than or equal
to 1-, a greater than 0, whose packet injections consist of
single shortest path.
The work is further extended by Andrews [12]. Andrews [12]
solved many unresolved problems in Bedoin work [6]. Bedoin
[6] Main concern is stability. Andrews [12] work not only
focused the stability but it further evaluates the performance of
stable systems by using maximum queue size and maximum
end-end delay as parameters. It also gives the examples of
protocols that are universally stable and protocols that are
universally unstable. In Bedoin [6] work the questions about
protocols universal instability are unanswered. In Andrews [12]
adversary is characterized by a pair (b, r), where b greater
than or equal to 1 is a natural number and r greater than 0
and less than 1. For an interval I, an adversary can inject
large number of packets with an upper bound of (r | I | +b).
These restrictions on the adversary are more realistic and are
derived from bucket-based techniques that are used for trafc
shaping in packet switching networks. Also, this adversary is
more powerful because of its bursty nature of packet injection.
Andrews [12] work shows the following result.
1. Simple greedy protocols FTG, LTS, LIS and SIS are
universally stable. Although they are stable, in worst case FTG,
NTS and SIS may require queues and delays of exponential
size. The best upper bound on queue and delay size for LIS
is also exponential.
2. FIFO, LIFO, NTG and FFS are not universally stable.
3. The n-node ring having maximum queue size and maximum
delay linear in n, are universally stable.
4. There is a simple distributed randomized greedy protocol
having polylograthimic bound on its queue size and delay size
is universally stable.
Borodin [6] and Andrews [12] work is related to non-adaptive
path routing in which entire path of the packet is specied
by adversary before it crosses the rst edge. The non-adaptive
approach hinders the packets to dynamically adapt to conges-
tions and faults in their paths. In this approach, contention
resolution protocols cannot alter the packet path. Aiello [14]
used and extended the work of Borodin [6], Andrews [12] and
many others to adaptive path routing. In this approach, smaller
delays and higher throughputs can be achieved by enabling the
contention resolution protocol on intermediate nodes to reroute
the packets. Aiello [14] used the same adversaries as used in
[6] with polynomial bounds on queue sizes and delay sizes.
Furthermore, they use distributed and deterministic algorithms.
We refer our interested reader to [14] for details. Also, some
4
signicant results have also shown in Goel [13] work which
is also the extension of Borodin [6] and Andrews [12] works.
B. Stochastic Models
In this approach network dynamics are described as stochas-
tic processes. For example, crashes and recoveries of edges
are described as probability distribution . In this section we
discuss how different models are designed to analyse network
dynamicity as probabilistic processes.
1) Stochastic actor based models for dynamic networks:
Stochastic actor-based models are used for network dynamicity
which can model various inuences on network changes. For
example stochastic actor-based models addresses the problem
of dynamicity in social networks where relation or ties ran-
domly breaks and formed between different communities or
friends or actors which continuously change the network state.
The current network structure is a constraint in these networks.
The actors tend to achieve their goals under this constraint.
Because of the actors activities along with purposeful changes,
there are some random changes incorporated in the networks
and we need a model to determine some parameters from
the observed data. These parameters help to fuse a theory
in a statistical model [15]. This network model represents
stochastically dependences of the creation and termination of
network ties. The tie changes made by the network actors are
determined probabilistically by a function called the objective
function. These models help in estimating parameters which
expresses these inuences and also acts as a tool to test the
corresponding hypotheses [16]. Stochastic actor-based models
are proposed for longitudinal network data. These models are
based on two different approaches Loglinear approach and
Markov approach. The Loglinear approach based model is a
generalization of the well-known p1- model [17]. The ability
to choose the others, the ability to be chosen by the others
and the ability to make a reciprocated relationship these are
the set of parameters in this approach. The time parameter
in this approach is discrete. The Markov based models are
based on the Markov process. The process is said to be a
Markov process if at given point in the time the conditional
distribution of the future is only a function of the present only.
It is not a function of the past. All relevant information can be
assumed to be in the present state of network. In this approach,
the time parameter is continuous. The change rate parameters
of the Loglinear approach depends on the length of the time
interval (discrete time parameter) and are abundant as compare
to the Markov approach where the change rate parameters are
independent of the time interval (continuous time parameter)
[18].
2) Stochastic Block models : The stochastic block models
can be proposed to be a family of approaches to capture
similarities in behavior of subset of nodes to those in the
other set having similar pattern of ties [8]. Dynamic stochastic
block models give a broad representation of many complex
phenomena in dynamic networks. For example the link state
in a dynamic network changes continuously as nodes are
added or removed. These models address the issue of link
state prediction when the link states among the nodes are
continuously changing.
The stochastic block models determine edges with proba-
bilities and divide the nodes of a network in different classes.
The network is observed at multiple steps in time instead of
observing at a single point. In a priori modeling mode the
task is determining the edge probabilities matrix while the class
membership vectors are already known whereas in a posteriori
modeling mode both are to be determined [19].
State-space stochastic block model for dynamic networks
represents the dynamic network by a series of snapshots de-
rived from the unobserved time-varying network states. These
snapshots of network are modeled with the help of stochastic
block models. The state space model combines static model
of individual snapshot and the temporal model of evolution
of state [20]. By using the central limit theorem one can
determine the near optimal tting procedure of the state space
model in online mode. By using extended Kalman lter the
state tracking can be achieved with local search strategy [21].
Dynamic stochastic block model based on Bayesian approach
is another stochastic block model that has been used in social
network analysis quit successfully [22]. This model nds
communities in dynamic social networking and evaluates them.
This model uses Bayesian treatment instead of point estimation
to estimate parameters that are used to calculate the posterior
distribution of those parameters that are unknown. One of
the approaches to analyze dynamic communities of social
networking consists of two steps. Step one includes applying
static analysis on the snapshot of a social network and then in
second step communities are evaluated to nd the changes in
communities in time [23]. But data is noisy in real world and
an unstable community structure may result due to the step
approach. This model addresses the issue mentioned earlier
and presents a unied probabilistic framework to analyze and
evaluate the communities simultaneously.
3) Stochastic differentiable models for link distribution:
The dynamicity of network cause changes in the ow of
data and the load is distributed dynamically. Dynamic net-
work loading is presented as a stochastic differentiable model
based on nite capacity queuing theory. The possible outcome
of this model is distribution of queuing lengths and gives
a differentiable mapping for dynamic demand on dynamic
queuing length. This model addresses the time dependent and
congestion dependent ow of given travel demand in a given
network of transportation. This problem is known as dynamic
network load.
The node model is dened with the help of following terms.
Arrival rate, which shows the ow that enters the queue from
the upstream. Service rate shows the ow that leaves the queue
from downstream at most. Queue capacity shows how many
entities t in queue [9].
Node model has parameters such as Link index that is
numbered in direction of ow consecutively from one, Time
interval index, Inow to a link during a time interval, Outow
from a link during the time interval, The ow capacity of
node at downstream link during a time interval and Number
of entities in the start of the time interval in a link. Finite
capacity queuing model [24], Dynamic queuing model and Full
link model are examples of link models.
5
C. Game Theoretic Models
Game theory is widely used for problem formulation, de-
sign of algorithms and analysis of dynamic networks. Game
theoretic approach is different from above two approaches in a
sense that here nodes are independent agents and dynamicity
of network is inuenced by their mutual interaction. We dis-
cuss different models that are designed by modeling network
dynamics using this approach [25].
Game theory is a mathematical study that is used to model
conicting and cooperative games between rational entities.
Game theory is used as a tool to nd the best action for
an individual decision maker when we have two or more
decision makers each having different individual objective to
achieve while using the similar resources in a system. The
game theory nds an outcome that is optimal for the entire
individual decision maker. In short to present a simple game
theoretic model we will make a few simple assumptions. There
must be at least two players in a game and each of them will
have two or more than two individual or sequences of choices.
The game for every player may lead in a win, a loss or a draw
as an end state. Each individual player has a numerical payoff
or utility for each possible outcome in the game. The nature
of a player or a decision maker is rational and select a choice
that result in a greater payoff for it [11].
There are two main classes of games in game theory. The
cooperative game is theoretic game in which the players inter-
act each other in different ways and gives different outcomes
because of the different combinations of players. The players
in such a game work together for achieving largest possible
total payoff. The non-cooperative games there is a detailed
static model of the moves that a player can make and try to
maximize its payoff without caring the other nodes.
1) Game theoretic models for topology control : For dy-
namic ad-hoc networks to satisfy connectivity topology control
is one of the main issues. These are multi-hop networks where
nodes have to serve their power resources to other nodes in
order to establish connectivity. But nodes sometimes act selsh
because they are limited in energy and try to minimize power
consumption. Game theoretic models can be used to achieve
energy efcient and connected network in presence of selsh
nodes. This game theoretic model assumes this scenario as a
non-cooperative game which differs from work done in [26],
because of the best response algorithm and potential game
theory it uses. In this model the nodes have to decide its
transmission power level according to transmission level of
all other nodes in current topology state as compared to other
existing models and algorithms which assign nodal power
level just to achieve connectivity which may lead to unfair
assignment of power level and inefcient use of resources.
This information is assumed to be provided by network layer.
The model is divided into a game theoretic framework for
(topology formation such as discovery of neighbor, information
exchange and topology formation) and the topology control
games which models establishing a connected topology and
minimizing the individual transmission cost. In game theoretic
framework the existence of link depends on the required
transmit power from one node to other. One of the crucial
steps in this framework is the neighborhood formation in which
each node broadcast neighbor request message with maximum
transmitting power and then collects the responses from the
receivers. The best response algorithm helps to make a network
topology dynamic based on local information. A node selects
its transmit level given the transmit levels of all the other
nodes and maximize its utility function i.e the benets a node
achieve being a part of the topology. The performance matrix
might be quality of service (QoS) issues such as quality of
connectivity, packet loss etc [27]. The topology control games
uses the convergence properties of potential game and posses
at least one Nash equilibrium. The Nash equilibrium steady
state topology preserves the connectivity which needs to be
energy efcient too [10].
2) Game theoretic models for security problems : Nodes
of mobile ad-hoc networks have to prevent the occurrence of
attacks of the intruders and other malicious activities because
of the lack of centralized authentication and security. These
networks are used for military and disaster relief purposes
therefore security is a main concern in these types of net-
works. Intrusion detection is more guaranteed than intrusion
prevention in such networks because when intrusion occurs it
cannot be prevented. The intrusion detection can be modeled
as a game theoretic model in which the game is between an
individual node and an attacker as a basic signaling game
which is a multi-stage dynamic non-cooperative game with
incomplete information. It is a type of non-cooperative game
in which some players or nodes have their private information
called type of player before the game begins. A player is
assumed to know its private information with certainty. In
this game the objective of an attacker is send a malicious
message to the target node through an attack node. If the
malicious message reaches the target node then the intrusion
is not detected and when such message is intercepted then
the intruding node is blocked. The rate of false alarm is
performance matrix for such model. This model assumes that
the attacking node attacks only single node at a time. In this
model the sender node may be a regular node or it can be an
attacker. The intruder detection system of the receiving nodes
has prior belief with some probability that any other node is a
regular or an attacking node. This model uses Byes theorem to
nd posterior probability of the attacking node which can be
used as prior belief by the receiving node next time. For the
receiver node the choice of the strategy should be based upon
the prior belief of the receiving node so that it can maximize
the payoff by minimizing the rate of false alarm. The theorem
is recursive in nature so nodes periodically update its posterior
belief of the other nodes as independent observations as result
the false alarm rates will reduce with time [11] .
III. ALGORITHMS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PROBLEM
DOMAINS
A. Load Balancing Algorithms
With emergence of largely distributed systems, the part of
managing resources is also one of the most important issues.
Dynamic nature of a network also leads to this problem that
6
TABLE II. SUMMARY OF LOAD BALANCING ALGORITHMS
Algorithms Type Reference Comments
Gradient Model Algorithm Asynchronous Neighbor
Diffusion
H. Wille and P.
Reeves [28]
This algorithm involves the map of less loaded processing entities
which is used to distribute tasks among highly loaded and less loaded
entities.
Receiver (Sender) initiated Diffusion Algorithm Asynchronous Neighbor
Diffusion
H. Wille and P.
Reeves [28]
This algorithm uses only near neighbor information for balancing load
asynchronously.
Dimension Exchange Method Synchronous Neighbor
Diffusion
H. Wille and P.
Reeves [28], C. Xu
et al [29]
This algorithm works by balancing small domains synchronously and
then combining all domains to make overall system stable.
Generalized Dimension Exchange Algorithm Synchronous Neighbor
Diffusion
C. Xu and F. Lau
[30]
This algorithm works by coloring the edges of a graph and dimension
is dened by colors. Finally balancing the colored edges dimensions.
Tree walking Algorithm Synchronous Parallel W. Shu and M. Wu
[31], M. Wu [32]
This algorithm works by collecting global information of tree like
structured network and calculating average load. After that it calculates
quota and then distributes tasks.
Cube walking Algorithm Synchronous Parallel M. Wu [32] This algorithm collects global information of cube like structured
network and calculates average load and exchanges tasks among
entities.
Mesh walking Algorithm Synchronous Parallel M. Wu [32] This algorithm uses global information of a mesh network and
averages load for tasks distribution.
Modied Cube walking Algorithm Synchronous Parallel K. Nam et al. [32] This algorithm constructs a new topology in order to distribute tasks
in short paths to reduce communication overhead.
Direct Dimension Exchange Synchronous Parallel M. Wu and W. Shu
[33]
This algorithm makes task distribution faster than original DEM by
calculating average load in all dimensions.
resources should be managed in this way that all the commu-
nicating entities within network share their tasks of computing
fairly. Load balancing is a paradigm of efciently managing
computing tasks among the processing entities evenly in order
to achieve resources utilization efciency, more throughputs,
less response time and avoidance of overloading on a single
entity.
Since the evolution of parallel processing, load balancing
techniques are powerfully studied in different styles. Pre-
viously, load sharing techniques were proposed for static
networks with xed and centralized architectures where every
entity was aware of computing time of tasks already and
these tasks can be distributed among entities [34]. This type
was referred as static load balancing. After that, distributed
and decentralized systems became popular for their adaptive
nature in which load of tasks computation can be changed
dynamically and unequal load on different processing ele-
ments. In order to make system efcient, entities are required
to share their current load information to other neighborhood
entities to share their load distribution. So, dynamic load
balancing techniques became part of an extensive research.
Many load balancing algorithms have been proposed for
dynamic networks and every researcher has categorized load
balancing in different terminologies. For example WanYeon
Lee et al. have categorized load balancing algorithms into
three types: Asynchronous neighbor diffusion, synchronous
neighbor diffusion and synchronous parallel load balancing
algorithms [34]. An example algorithm is discussed below and
some algorithms are discussed in summary table.
1) Enhancement Weighted Clustering Algorithm: This al-
gorithm was proposed by A. Rahman et al. for the purpose of
making some improvements in weighted clustering algorithm
to improve load balancing and stability. One of the principles
of this algorithm is that a cluster head is adaptively selected
on the basis of nodes movement or change in relative dis-
tance between nodes and cluster head [35]. This procedure
of selecting cluster head goes on repeating until all nodes
become part of a cluster or cluster head. In order to achieve
load balancing, number of mobile nodes is already dened
that a cluster can cover. If a cluster contains too large number
of nodes, there would be less number of clusters resulting in
lower throughput and if a cluster contains too small number of
nodes then there would be large number of clusters resulting in
higher end to end delay. Therefore, size of cluster is already
dened and procedure of selecting cluster head is repeated
if cluster size is exceeded. Distance between nodes is also a
factor of affecting communication. Larger distance results in
transmitting information with more power which leads to more
consumption of battery. Another factor is mobility of nodes.
More the nodes are mobile leaving one cluster joining others,
more the network unstable is.
The procedure of this algorithm contains some simple steps.
First of all, location of each node is determined throughout
the network. Secondly distance of every node within the
transmission range of each other is determined. Cluster head
is selected on the basis of principles discussed above. Nodes
position is updated and velocity is calculated by the formula
based on random movement of nodes after some unit time.
B. Mobility based Algorithms
Most of the networks, which are being deployed currently,
are designed by considering an important issue of scalability.
This consideration of scalability issue in network planning
makes convenient to add more entities in an already deployed
network according to the requirements instead of changing the
whole network. In large scale networks, some applications are
engaged with mobility of entities. For example, mobile ad-
hoc networks and intelligent transportation systems consist of
mobile nodes. So this issue of moving nodes, in which nodes
communicating to each other may go far out of their ranges
and their links may break, leads to the dynamic nature of a
network.
Various approaches have been proposed in order to make
7
TABLE III. SUMMARY OF MOBILITY BASED ALGORITHMS
Algorithms Type Reference Comments
Lowest ID cluster Algorithm Single Metric M. Gerla and
J. T. Tsai [36]
In this algorithm, a node with minimum id is selected as a cluster
head and other nodes who can hear cluster head and are of greater id,
become part of its cluster.
Highest Connectivity Clustering Algorithm Single Metric M. Gerla and
J. T. Tsai [36]
In this algorithm, degree of each node is calculated on the basis of
distance and the node with highest degree or maximum number of
neighbor nodes is selected as cluster head.
K-CONID Algorithm Single Metric G. Chen et al.
[37]
This algorithm is combination of Lowest Id and highest connectivity
algorithms. It uses connectivity of cluster heads as rst criterion and
lowest id as second criterion.
Mobility based D-Hop clustering Algorithm Single Metric I. Er and W.
Seah [38]
This algorithm divides network into d hop clusters to make it exible
and selects cluster heads on the basis of stabilization.
Distributed Clustering Algorithm Multiple
Metrics
S. Basagni
[32]
In this algorithm, any or all of the following parameters can be used to
elect nodes as cluster heads: Ideal degree, mobility and transmission
and battery power.
A Weighted Clustering Algorithm Multiple
Metrics
M. Chatterjee
et al [39]
In this algorithm, any or all of the following parameters can be used to
elect nodes as cluster heads: Ideal degree, mobility and transmission
and battery power.
Vote based Clustering Algorithm Multiple
Metrics
F. Li et al. [40] This algorithm uses the concept of vote in which location information
and remaining battery information is used for electing cluster heads.
Connectivity, Energy and Mobility driven Weighted Clustering Algorithm Multiple
Metrics
F. D. Tolba et
al. [41]
In this algorithm, different combination of metrics like best transmis-
sion range, battery energy, node degree etc.
communication effective and the most popular scheme is clus-
tering. Following the dynamically changing network topology,
clusters are also made on dynamic basis by choosing cluster
heads. Normally, clustering based algorithms are classied into
two categories: Single metric based clustering and multiple
metrics based clustering [42]. Some example algorithms are
discussed below and some are discussed in summary table.
1) A Distributed Clustering Algorithm: The distributed
clustering algorithm was proposed by Thibault Bernard et
al. mainly to create and maintain clusters in large networks
regarding mobility of nodes [43]. This algorithm has actually
token based working to build clusters of nodes which are
discovered and maintaining their expansion. This algorithm is
mobility adaptive in a sense that it re-computes the cluster after
change in topology due to movement of nodes. This algorithm
has a parameter m that denes the size of cluster which is
greater than m nodes.
Procedure of this algorithm is started by initiating a token
from one or several nodes in order to build clusters. One
token is associated to one cluster and circulate in random walk
fashion. First of all, token adds free nodes to a cluster. For
example, if token discovers a node, makes it part of its own
cluster. This is called collect mechanism. If token discovers a
node which is already part of another token cluster then two
cases can occur. Either this token is transported back to its
own cluster or the dissolution mechanism is followed in order
to delete clusters if size m is not reached by that cluster. After
this mechanism, division mechanism is followed if the clusters
are grown and become divisible. This cluster is then divided
into smaller stable clusters.
2) (,t)-Cluster Algorithm: (, t) cluster algorithm [44]
was proposed by A. Bruce Mcdonald et al. (, t) cluster
algorithm forms a basis for making clusters which are mobility
adaptive and in these clusters there is a mutual probability
of path availability between all the nodes specifying the
time interval of t. The major requirements considered for
dynamic algorithms are have a stable topology and minimize
the computational complexity. This algorithm is event driven
Fig. 1. Convergence of Algorithm.
and species that which nodes, part of their own clusters,
disseminate information. Hard state and soft state, both events
are categorized in (, t) cluster algorithm. In hard state events,
activation and deactivation of nodes, activation of links and
failure of links are included. Soft states of algorithm includes
a timer called timer which tells the maximum time of path
availability to destination with probability greater than or equal
to . Topological changes requirements according to the re-
evaluation of clusters expire the . timer. Algorithm continu-
ously monitors the (, t) criteria to be satised. Convergence
of this algorithm is shown in gure 3 [44].
3) MOBIC Algorithm: MOBIC algorithm was proposed by
P. Basu et al. This algorithm is based on a metric which is ratio
between the received power levels of successive transmissions
measured at any node from all its neighboring nodes [42].
This helps in formation of stable clusters and choosing cluster
heads.
Algorithm starts by sending HELLO messages from each
node and their neighbors receive these messages. All the nodes
compute the mobility metric by measuring the received power
levels of two successive HELLO messages from each neighbor.
This mobility metric is broadcasted to neighbor nodes after
every broadcast interval period and this is stored in neighbor
table of node with a timeout period. The node having the
lowest value of mobility metric declares itself cluster head
otherwise a cluster member. If two nodes have same mobility
metric, their cluster head decision is made on the basis of
8
Fig. 2. Local Periodic Update Messages.
Fig. 3. Path Extension and Reduction.
Lowest-ID algorithm in which node with lowest ID becomes
cluster head. If two cluster heads come into the range of
each other due to mobility, re-clustering does not happen
for a specic time interval. After expiration of that time, re-
clustering is triggered and node with lower mobility metric, is
selected cluster head.
4) The PTH Algorithm : The PTH algorithm was proposed
by F. El Ali et al. to solve the problem of path maintaining in
dynamic networks [45]. This algorithm works by doing some
local adjustments because in dynamic networks, information
of the global network is unusable. Source and destination start
a direct communication but when they move apart from each
other then PTH algorithm takes action which maintains path
from source to destination by using neighbor nodes of the
broken links to disseminate information.
PTH algorithm basically follows three mechanisms. First
one is Local periodic update, second is path reduction and third
is path extension. Local periodic update mechanism is related
to the changes in neighborhood like nodes or links failures.
These messages regarding the status and path are periodically
sent. In these messages, information specifying the current
sender and receiver is also sent with the help of ags as shown
in gure 1 [45]. Main purpose of these messages is to inform
local nodes about the current states of paths. According to this
information, receiver nodes may also change their information
respectively.
Path extension mechanism deals with link breaking. When-
ever nodes move apart from each other, their links are bro-
ken. When a node sends some periodic messages, it expects
acknowledgment and if it receives ack it means receiver has
received message. But if ack is not received, message with
uncertainty ag is sent to neighbors in order to propose for
recovering path. Path reduction mechanism deals with the
reduction of paths whenever possible. Path reducing nodes can
be either the part of already built path or its neighbors. When
neighbor sees the communication of other nodes and thinks it
can reduce the path by relaying information instead of other
intermediate nodes, it proposes for new reduced path. Path
extension and reduction is shown in gure 2 [45].
C. Routing based Algorithms
In dynamic networks, changes frequently happen in form
of topology change, link breakage etc which are unpredictable
in nature. Due to this unstable nature of a network, efcient
routing becomes an important issue. Many routing techniques
have been proposed according to problem domains but not
a single technique is a compound solution of all problems.
There is always tradeoff between network performance and the
requirement in applications. Many researchers have classied
routing based algorithms into different types. Some have
categorized on shortest paths basis and some have categorized
on optimal parameter basis. So, some of the devised algorithms
for routing in dynamic networks are discussed here briey and
some are discussed in summary table.
1) Regular and Uniform Ants Algorithms: Regular and
uniform ants algorithms were proposed by Devika Suramanian
et al. [57]. These algorithms were basically presented as
adaptive to the topological and link cost changes of a network.
Ant algorithms are actually inspired from the actions of natural
ants to nd shortest paths for their food sources using fewer
computations after exploring the network. These algorithms are
suitable for highly dynamic networks because routing overhead
is independent of changes in link states, cost etc.
Ant algorithms mainly work on three principles. One is the
exploration of network, second is making probabilistic for-
warding tables and third is probabilistically updating forward-
ing tables [57]. Each host in the network initiates a message,
specifying the link cost from generator to receiver, which is
sent to another randomly chosen host. This cost is incremented
each time when message is forwarded to other hosts. These
messages are called ants which explore the network. When
messages reach destination nally, overall backward cost is
computed from destination to source. Other algorithms like
link state algorithms and distance vector algorithms make
forwarding tables which are deterministic but ant algorithms
make their forwarding tables which are probabilistic. For
example, a router maintains its table for a message which is
destined for router d, by keeping its route from neighbors and
probability for each route. It forwards message to neighbors
also with probability which is useful for choosing alternate
paths. Ants probabilistically update tables of each router which
comes in traversing path from source to destination. Cost at
each router is updated from reverse path to source information.
Table updating rules are taken from [58].
In regular ants algorithm, ants follow the discovered route.
If a more suitable non congested path is discovered then new
ants will be routed from that path. This will nally converge to
a single shortest path. Regular ants algorithm also requires path
cost symmetry which means cost from source s to destination d
is same as d to s. Therefore this algorithm is mostly suitable for
telephone networks. On the other hand, uniform ants explore
paths on the basis of equal probabilities. Uniform ants are
simpler than regular ants and are multipath nodes. In uniform
ant structure, time to live eld is also species after which
it is terminated. It also does not need destinations because
knowledge of every host of network is not always useful for
each node. This algorithm is suitable also for data networks.
9
TABLE IV. SUMMARY OF ROUTING ALGORITHMS
Algorithms Type Reference Comments
Caching and Multipath Routing Algorithm Shortest Path A. C. Valera
and K.G. Seah
[46]
This algorithm uses cooperative packet caching and uses shortest paths. It
also reduces the chances of packet failure and reduces end to end delay.
Opportunistic Routing Algorithm Shortest Path H. Dubois-
Ferriere et al.
[47]
This algorithm assigns a group of relays to a node in order to minimize cost
to reach destination.
Routing/Scheduling Backpressure Algorithm Shortest Path and
Throughput optimal
Li Ying et al.
[48]
This algorithm chooses set of shortest optimal paths for source to reach to
destination as well as shows the stability in network.
DSDV, WRP, GSR and CGSR Routing Algorithms Table driven (Proactive) Kapil Vyas et
al. [49]
These algorithms perform routing of data by pre dened routes. Tables are
maintained by collecting the information of whole network.
AODV, DSR, TORA, ABR and SSR Routing Algorithms On Demand (Reactive) Kapil Vyas et
al. [49]
These algorithms make routes to destinations on demand whenever there is
request.
ZRP, ZHLS Routing Algorithms Hybrid Marwa
Altayeb
and and Imad
Mahgoub [50]
These algorithms are combination of reactive and proactive routing algo-
rithms.
TABLE V. SUMMARY OF ENERGY BALANCING ALGORITHMS
Algorithms Type Reference Comments
Multipath and Energy aware ondemand source routing (MEA-DSR) Algorithm Load
Distribution
S. Chettibi et al.
[51]
In this algorithm, routes are discovered by keeping residual
energy of nodes into consideration.
Energy aware multipath routing Algorithm Load
Distribution
Meng Li et al.
[52]
This algorithm shares information among physical layer,
mac layer and network layer and utilizes resources like
energy and bandwidth efciently.
Power aware on demand source routing Algorithm Load
Distribution
Morteza Malki
[53]
In this algorithm, routes are maintained also on the basis of
energy and these routes can be made invalid due to energy
depletion.
Dynamic Path Switching Algorithm Sleep/Power
down
Giampaolo
Bella [54]
This algorithm switches the overloaded nodes to sleep due
to energy depletion and chooses suitable nodes to play their
role.
Battery energy efcient Algorithm Transmission
Power Control
Carla F. Chi-
asserini et al.
[55]
This algorithm selects the routes for transmission on the
basis of lowest transmission energy to avoid inefciency of
batteries.
Power aware routing Algorithm Transmission
Power Control
Vinay Rishiwal
et al. [56]
This algorithm establishes less congested route between
source and destination and improves network lifetime by
minimizing power consumption.
2) Regular and Uniform Ants Algorithms: Q-routing al-
gorithm was proposed by Justin A. Boyan et al. [59]. This
algorithm is based on learning of packet routing policy that
makes this algorithm balanced in reducing the number of
hops to minimum with the probability of congestion. Different
routing decisions are performed in order to gather information
about which decision minimizes the delay in delivery among
many routing policies. Routing policy guides a node to send
packet to its neighborhood node through which it can be
reached to its nal destination as early as possible. The
performance of this decision is measured by the total delivery
time of packet, so this is measured when packet is reached
to its nal destination. Q-routing algorithm uses only local
information instead of having the global knowledge of whole
network. As this algorithm is based on continual learning, thats
why this is suitable for unpredictably changing connections
and load in a network.
D. Energy balancing Algorithms
Dynamic networks consisting of large number of entities
are mostly those in which there is no centralized continuous
power source for network components. These entities have
limited power resources in form of DC batteries. Replacement
of batteries of each node after a short period of time is
impossible. Therefore in order to improve network lifetime
by minimizing the energy consumption, many algorithms are
suggested. These algorithms are normally classied into three
types: Load distribution, sleep/power down and transmission
power control [60]. An example algorithm is discussed below
and some of the algorithms are discussed in summary table.
1) An Energy Balanced Dynamic Topology Control Algo-
rithm: This algorithm was developed by Xiaoyu Chu et al.
[61]. Energy balanced dynamic topology control (EBTC) algo-
rithm takes original energy of transmission and reception, into
consideration for the purpose of increasing lifetime. In EBTC
algorithm, a node tries to minimize its energy consumption as
well as tries to balance energy of all other nodes equally. In
the start of EBTC algorithm, each node broadcasts information
of its current energy level at maximum transmission power.
After having information of neighbors, nodes calculate
weights of edges. Now the collect data phase starts in which
all local information is broadcasted by each node to build
up its own graph. When information is received, local graph
is constructed by using the algorithm Construct Local Graph
(CLG) [62].
Now Directed Local Spanning Sub-graph (DLSS) algorithm
[62] is used to minimize the topology according to the weight
assignments. After construction of sub-graph, having only
bidirectional links in sub-graph is not necessary. In EBTC
10
algorithm, edges are removed which do not have reverse links
in order to minimize the interference among transmission.
Now updated neighbor information is broadcasted and edges
without reverse links are removed and their transmission power
is considered smallest only necessary to maintain connectivity.
IV. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we surveyed different areas of dynamic
networks and discussed different models, algorithms and tech-
niques use to deal effectively with the challenges arise due to
dynamicity in these networks. We have seen how adversarial,
stochastic and game-theoretic models are used to study and
analyze the different problems due to dynamicity of network
and then their use to evaluate the performance of proposed
algorithms and techniques to solve these problems. We then
discussed state of the art algorithmic techniques for some
illustrative problem domains of dynamic networks such as
load-balancing algorithms, mobility based algorithms, energy
balanced algorithms, routing and path maintaining algorithms.
As the network architectures are evolving to meet the needs
of new services new problems are arising. This paper presents
common platform for researchers working in one area of
dynamic network to get insight in handling the same problem
in other areas of dynamic networks. In addition, it also high-
lighted the natural differences in different dynamic networks to
analyze and modify the algorithms use in one type of dynamic
network to apply it in other type accordingly.
V. FUTURE WORK
As new applications and services are adding increasingly
to the networks, the network architectures are becoming more
complex and new problems are arising day by day. Therefore,
it requires to extend this exploration of diversity of dynamic
networks to nd out more of commonalities and natural
differences among them and nding out more of their new
problem domains and their proposed models, algorithms and
techniques.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Dolev, Self-stabilization. The MIT press, 2000.
[2] F. Harary and G. Gupta, Dynamic graph models, Mathematical and
Computer Modelling, vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 7987, 1997.
[3] C. C. Bilgin and B. Yener, Dynamic network evolution: Models,
clustering, anomaly detection, IEEE Networks, 2006.
[4] A. Casteigts, P. Flocchini, W. Quattrociocchi, and N. Santoro, Time-
varying graphs and dynamic networks, in Ad-hoc, Mobile, and Wireless
Networks. Springer, 2011, pp. 346359.
[5] R. L. Cruz, A calculus for network delay. i. network elements in
isolation, Information Theory, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 37, no. 1,
pp. 114131, 1991.
[6] A. Borodin, J. Kleinberg, P. Raghavan, M. Sudan, and D. P. Williamson,
Adversarial queueing theory, in Proceedings of the twenty-eighth
annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. ACM, 1996, pp.
376385.
[7] A. Anagnostopoulos, A. Kirsch, and E. Upfal, Load balancing in
arbitrary network topologies with stochastic adversarial input, SIAM
Journal on Computing, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 616639, 2005.
[8] C. DuBois, C. T. Butts, and P. Smyth, Stochastic blockmodeling of
relational event dynamics, A, A, vol. 1, p. 0.
[9] C. Osorio, G. Fl otter od, and M. Bierlaire, Dynamic network loading:
A stochastic differentiable model that derives link state distributions,
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 17, pp. 364381, 2011.
[10] R. S. Komali, Game-theoretic analysis of topology control, Ph.D.
dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2008.
[11] A. Patcha and J.-M. Park, A game theoretic formulation for intrusion
detection in mobile ad hoc networks. IJ Network Security, vol. 2, no. 2,
pp. 131137, 2006.
[12] M. Andrews, B. Awerbuch, A. Fern andez, T. Leighton, Z. Liu, and
J. Kleinberg, Universal-stability results and performance bounds for
greedy contention-resolution protocols, Journal of the ACM (JACM),
vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 3969, 2001.
[13] A. Goel, Stability of networks and protocols in the adversarial queue-
ing model for packet routing, Networks, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 219224,
2001.
[14] W. Aiello, E. Kushilevitz, R. Ostrovsky, and A. Ros en, Adaptive packet
routing for bursty adversarial trafc, in Proceedings of the thirtieth
annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. ACM, 1998, pp.
359368.
[15] T. A. Snijders, Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change,
Journal of mathematical sociology, vol. 21, no. 1-2, pp. 149172, 1996.
[16] T. A. Snijders, G. G. Van de Bunt, and C. E. Steglich, Introduction to
stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics, Social networks,
vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 4460, 2010.
[17] P. W. Holland and S. Leinhardt, An exponential family of probability
distributions for directed graphs, Journal of the american Statistical
association, vol. 76, no. 373, pp. 3350, 1981.
[18] G. G. Van de Bunt and P. Groenewegen, An actor-oriented dynamic
network approach the case of interorganizational network evolution,
Organizational Research Methods, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 463482, 2007.
[19] K. S. Xu and A. O. Hero III, Dynamic stochastic blockmodels:
Statistical models for time-evolving networks, in Social Computing,
Behavioral-Cultural Modeling and Prediction. Springer, 2013, pp.
201210.
[20] P. W. Holland, K. B. Laskey, and S. Leinhardt, Stochastic blockmodels:
First steps, Social networks, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 109137, 1983.
[21] S. S. Haykin et al., Kalman ltering and neural networks. Wiley
Online Library, 2001.
[22] P. W. Holland and S. Leinhardt, Local structure in social networks,
Sociological methodology, vol. 7, pp. 145, 1976.
[23] M. E. Newman and M. Girvan, Finding and evaluating community
structure in networks, Physical review E, vol. 69, no. 2, p. 026113,
2004.
[24] C. Osorio and M. Bierlaire, A multi-model algorithm for the optimiza-
tion of congested networks, in European Transport Conference, 2009,
2009.
[25] M. J. Osborne, A course in game theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1994.
[26] S. Eidenbenz, V. Kumar, and S. Zust, Equilibria in topology control
games for ad hoc networks, Mobile Networks and Applications, vol. 11,
no. 2, pp. 143159, 2006.
[27] J. E. Wieselthier, G. D. Nguyen, and A. Ephremides, On the con-
struction of energy-efcient broadcast and multicast trees in wireless
networks, in INFOCOM 2000. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of
the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE,
vol. 2. IEEE, 2000, pp. 585594.
[28] M. H. Willebeek-LeMair and A. P. Reeves, Strategies for dynamic
load balancing on highly parallel computers, Parallel and Distributed
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 979993, 1993.
[29] B. Hess, C. Kutzner, D. Van Der Spoel, and E. Lindahl, Gromacs 4:
Algorithms for highly efcient, load-balanced, and scalable molecular
11
simulation, Journal of chemical theory and computation, vol. 4, no. 3,
pp. 435447, 2008.
[30] C.-Z. Xu and F. C. M. Lau, Analysis of the generalized dimension
exchange method for dynamic load balancing, Journal of Parallel and
Distributed Computing, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 385393, 1992.
[31] W. Shu and M.-Y. Wu, Runtime incremental parallel scheduling (rips)
on distributed memory computers, Parallel and Distributed Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 637649, 1996.
[32] M.-Y. Wu, On runtime parallel scheduling for processor load balanc-
ing, Parallel and Distributed Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 8,
no. 2, pp. 173186, 1997.
[33] C.-Z. Xu and F. C. Lau, The generalized dimension exchange method
for load balancing in i k/i-ary i n/i-cubes and variants, Journal
of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 7285, 1995.
[34] W. Y. Lee, S. J. Hong, J. Kim, and S. Lee, Dynamic load balancing for
switch-based networks, Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing,
vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 286298, 2003.
[35] A. R. H. Hussein, S. Yousef, and O. Arabiyat, A load-balancing and
weighted clustering algorithm in mobile ad-hoc network.
[36] L. M. Correia, Mobile broadband multimedia networks: techniques,
models and tools for 4G. Access Online via Elsevier, 2010.
[37] F. G. Nocetti, J. S. Gonzalez, and I. Stojmenovic, Connectivity based
k-hop clustering in wireless networks, Telecommunication systems,
vol. 22, no. 1-4, pp. 205220, 2003.
[38] I. I. Er and W. K. G. Seah, Mobility-based d-hop clustering algorithm
for mobile ad hoc networks, in Wireless Communications and Net-
working Conference, 2004. WCNC. 2004 IEEE, vol. 4. IEEE, 2004,
pp. 23592364.
[39] S. Basagni, Distributed clustering for ad hoc networks, in Parallel Ar-
chitectures, Algorithms, and Networks, 1999.(I-SPAN99) Proceedings.
Fourth InternationalSymposium on. IEEE, 1999, pp. 310315.
[40] F. Li, S. Zhang, X. Wang, X. Xue, and H. Shen, Vote-based clustering
algorithm in mobile ad hoc networks, in Information Networking. Net-
working Technologies for Broadband and Mobile Networks. Springer,
2004, pp. 1323.
[41] F. D. Tolba, D. Magoni, and P. Lorenz, Connectivity, energy and
mobility driven clustering algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks, in
Global Telecommunications Conference, 2007. GLOBECOM07. IEEE.
IEEE, 2007, pp. 27862790.
[42] P. Basu, N. Khan, and T. D. Little, A mobility based metric for
clustering in mobile ad hoc networks, in Distributed Computing
Systems Workshop, 2001 International Conference on. IEEE, 2001,
pp. 413418.
[43] T. Bernard, A. Bui, L. Pilard, and D. Sohier, A distributed clustering
algorithm for dynamic networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:1011.2953,
2010.
[44] A. B. McDonald and T. F. Znati, A mobility-based framework for
adaptive clustering in wireless ad hoc networks, Selected Areas in
Communications, IEEE Journal on, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 14661487, 1999.
[45] F. El Ali, B. Ducourthial et al., A distributed algorithm for path
maintaining in dynamic networks, Proceeding of DYNAM, 2011.
[46] A. C. Valera, W. K. G. Seah, and S. Rao, Improving protocol
robustness in ad hoc networks through cooperative packet caching and
shortest multipath routing, Mobile Computing, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 443457, 2005.
[47] H. Dubois-Ferri` ere, M. Grossglauser, and M. Vetterli, Valuable detours:
Least-cost anypath routing, Networking, IEEE/ACM Transactions on,
vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 333346, 2011.
[48] L. Ying, S. Shakkottai, A. Reddy, and S. Liu, On combining shortest-
path and back-pressure routing over multihop wireless networks,
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 841
854, 2011.
[49] K. Vyas, M. H. Gupta, and H. Pathak, Algorithm and its application
on mobile ad hoc network survey.
[50] F. Li and Y. Wang, Routing in vehicular ad hoc networks: A survey,
Vehicular Technology Magazine, IEEE, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1222, 2007.
[51] S. Chettibi and M. Benmohamed, A multipath energy-aware on
demand source routing protocol for mobile ad-hoc networks, arXiv
preprint arXiv:0902.4572, 2009.
[52] M. Li, L. Zhang, V. O. Li, X. Shan, and Y. Ren, An energy-aware
multipath routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks, ACM Sigcomm
Asia, vol. 5, pp. 1012, 2005.
[53] M. Maleki, K. Dantu, and M. Pedram, Power-aware source routing
protocol for mobile ad hoc networks, in Low Power Electronics
and Design, 2002. ISLPED02. Proceedings of the 2002 International
Symposium on. IEEE, 2002, pp. 7275.
[54] G. Bella, G. Costantino, J. Crowcroft, and S. Riccobene, Enhancing dsr
maintainance with power awareness, Computer Standards & Interfaces,
2012.
[55] C.-F. Chiasserini, I. Chlamtac, P. Monti, and A. Nucci, Energy efcient
design of wireless ad hoc networks, in NETWORKING 2002: Network-
ing Technologies, Services, and Protocols; Performance of Computer
and Communication Networks; Mobile and Wireless Communications.
Springer, 2006, pp. 376386.
[56] V. Rishiwal, M. Yadav, and S. Verma, Power aware routing to support
real time trafc in mobile adhoc networks, in Emerging Trends in
Engineering and Technology, 2008. ICETET08. First International
Conference on. IEEE, 2008, pp. 223227.
[57] D. Subramanian, P. Druschel, and J. Chen, Ants and reinforcement
learning: A case study in routing in dynamic networks, in IJCAI (2).
Citeseer, 1997, pp. 832839.
[58] R. Schoonderwoerd, O. E. Holland, J. L. Bruten, and L. J. Rothkrantz,
Ant-based load balancing in telecommunications networks, Adaptive
behavior, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 169207, 1997.
[59] J. A. Boyan and M. L. Littman, Packet routing in dynamically changing
networks: A reinforcement learning approach, Advances in neural
information processing systems, pp. 671671, 1994.
[60] K. Sharma and V. Sharma, Energy efcient power aware multipath
dynamic source routinga survey, International Journal, vol. 3, no. 5,
2013.
[61] X. Chu and H. Sethu, An energy balanced dynamic topology
control algorithm for improved network lifetime, arXiv preprint
arXiv:1309.3284, 2013.
[62] N. Li and J. C. Hou, Localized topology control algorithms for het-
erogeneous wireless networks, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking
(TON), vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 13131324, 2005.
Muhammad Nohman Javed Muhammad Nohman
Javed, MS student at the Electrical Engineering
Department of SEECS, NUST.
12
Manan Saif Manan Saif, MS student at the Electrical
Engineering Department of SEECS, NUST.
Sikandar Afridi Sikandar Afridi, MS student at
the Electrical Engineering Department of SEECS,
NUST.
Junaid Qadir Junaid Qadir, Assistant Professor at
the Electrical Engineering Department of SEECS,
NUST.