A Survey on QoS Protocols for Mission-Critical Appli-

cations in Wireless Sensor Networks

Abstract. Wireless Sensor Network is an extremely important tool for closely

monitoring, understanding and controlling application processes to the end us-
ers. The main aim of installing Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) is to make
the real-time decision based on the data sensed by the sensor nodes. This con-
sidered being very challenging due to the highly resource-constrained, com-
municating capacities parameters as well as enormous volume of data generat-
ed by WSNs. In Real-time wireless sensor networks especially for critical ap-
plications like mission-critical monitoring as well as surveillance systems that
demands well-timed and reliable delivery of data, besides energy, Quality of
Services (QoS) routing i.e. requirement of message delivery timeliness is also
one of the key issues. Based on the type of application it is essential to grant
different levels of QoS in WSNs. In this paper QoS requirements for mission-
critical WSNs applications are highlighted and existing QoS aware protocols
to support such applications are discussed with their boundaries for specific
application domain.

1 Introduction

The main capability of WSN is to sense the environmental parameters and com-
municate it between sensor nodes deployed in a wide range of area. To achieve this
group of large number of small, low-cost sensor nodes are installed in the interested
area in an ad hoc fashion. These nodes communicate with each other wirelessly in
self-organized way after installation and send collected data to base station. Because
of constraints like limited power, bandwidth, memory etc. in sensor networks, energy
efficiency of nodes turn out to be an important parameter for design of efficient data
collection schemes for sensor networks.
WSN enables deployment of nodes in various crucial fields and applications such
as in agriculture, in wild life monitoring, in military surveillance, for industry con-
trol applications, environmental sensing, health care as well as for home automation
and home security etc. WSN have many applications areas as discussed above [1-4].
In health care applications, wireless devices are used for patient monitoring and
personal health care. In services such as streetlights, water municipals and electricity
grid etc. In remote monitoring covers wireless systems can be used in place of wired
systems to reduce cost of wiring and to permit various types of measurements. Re-
mote monitoring also includes Environmental monitoring of water, soil and air
monitoring, Industrial machine monitoring, Structural monitoring for various con-
structions, object tracking and in military. In all these applications, reliable and real-
time monitoring is the necessary requirement.

Fig. 1. Wireless Sensor Network

In sensor network, major part of energy of the sensors is required for the data
transmission. As sensor nodes life in WSN is based on energy remained in the node
so, reducing the energy utilization improves the network lifetime. In addition to
conserving the overall network energy, QoS is also an important measure to compute
the performance of the network in real time delay sensitive WSN applications [4-5].
In such applications supporting real-time QoS faces severe challenges due to the
wireless nature, restricted resources, less reliability of nodes, distributed architecture
along with dynamic network topology. As there is tradeoff between various applica-
tion necessities such as energy efficiency in addition to delay performance, systems
for offering real time QoS through guaranteed end-to-end delivery time, delay jitter
and additional required QoS metrics in WSNs are essential. Data transmission in
such critical applications demands both energy and QoS support for effective acces-
sibility of the collected measurements and efficient utilization of sensor resources.
Therefore, with the emergence of critical, multimedia and real-time applications,
QoS is an important issue in terms of two most important parameters time-sensitive
and reliable delivery of gathered information in WSNs. In this paper, research is
performed to concentrate on the issues in existing data transmission schemes consid-
ering the requirements of reliability and QoS guarantee in delay sensitive applica-
tions in WSNs.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 discusses various chal-
lenges in providing QoS in WSNs. In section 3 some QoS aware routing and MAC
protocols are reviewed. A comparative revision on some QoS aware routing proto-
cols, based on few important parameters in context of WSNs is also done. Section 4
discusses some issues need to attend in order to improve QoS in WSNs. Finally in
section 5 we present concluding remarks followed by some research directions in
critical WSN applications.
2 Quality of Service in WSNs

2.1 QoS Challenges in WSNs

In WSNs different layers demands different QoS requirements in order to improve

the throughput of the system [34].

Different application areas demand different kinds of QoS related to various lay-
ers. In order to support real time applications following are the main challenges in
QoS provisioning in WSNs. Amongst lots of WSNs applications with a range of QoS
requirements, most challenging application can be found in real-time WSNs [4, 5].
1) Resource constraints: It mainly involves energy constraints, bandwidth con-
straints, memory constraints, processing capability and transmission power
constraints.
2) Node Deployment: Sensor nodes can be deployment either randomly or by
pre-planned manner.
3) Topology changes: In WSN network topology rapidly changes due to the
sensor node mobility, link failures between nodes, faulty behavior of nodes
or due to energy reduction of nodes.
4) Data Redundancy: Redundant data transmission in the network leads to
network congestion. Data aggregation or data fusion mechanisms can be
used to decrease the redundancy.
5) Real-time traffic: In some critical applications such as security surveillance
and natural disaster monitoring, collected/sensed data must be reached to
the destination before its deadline. So, such type of significant data must be
handled by sufficient QoS mechanisms.
 Fig. 2. QoS associated with different layers
Amongst lots of WSNs applications with a range of QoS requirements, most chal-
lenging application can be found in real-time WSNs [4, 5]. Critical applications like
fire-monitoring, intruder-tracking and medical care are mostly used in real-time
WSNs. All this application includes high needs of bandwidth, delay guarantees and
delivery time. When an application forwards data, it makes use of the set of protocols
of the TCP/IP stack to transmit it from the source to the destination nodes. Each
layer of the stack is associated with some QoS parameters. Figure 2 point up QoS
requirements for basic five layers of TCP/IP model such as application layer,
transport layer, network layer, medium access control layer and physical layer.
In delay constrained real time applications in WSN, QoS guarantees can be con-
sidered as either providing a deterministic end-to-end delay bound or a probabilistic
delay guarantee should be provided. In deterministic approach, data arrived later
than its deadline is of no use or it can be considered as collapse of the system where-
as in probabilistic approach, some delay is acceptable. Hence, for supporting QoS in
such applications WSNs, either required a deterministic or probabilistic end-to-end
delay assurance. Also, based on the research issues, QoS protocols are again classi-
fied as soft and hard real time QoS protocols. So, choosing the best QoS protocol to
obtain better throughput depending on the requirements of the application is the
most important concern mission critical applications in WSN.

2.2 Data Delivery Models in WSNs

Various data delivery models used in WSN which are utilized in special applications
are shown in fig.3. Based on requirements of QoS parameters in different applica-
tions, there are three basic data delivery models found in the literature are: event
driven, query driven and continuous model. [33]
1) Event-driven model: For applications like interactive, delay-intolerant, mis-
sion-critical, event-driven model is used as these application requires detect-
ing the events and as a result takes an appropriate action as soon as possi-
ble. The accomplishment of these applications based on the efficient event
detection and delivery of notification of that event to the end user.
2) Query-driven model: In query-driven applications like query-specific-delay
tolerant, interactive applications and mission critical applications are con-
sidered. Here queries can be sent on demand to minimize the energy usage.
This model is alike to that of event-driven model. Only the difference is that
the data is drawn by the sink in query-driven whereas in the event driven
model, data is pressed to the sink. This data delivery model involves WSN
applications like environmental control or habitat monitoring.
3) Continuous model: In the continuous model, the sensor node sends the
gathered data to the sink continuously at a specified rate.
Applications requirements in all above three models are different. By making use of
these models we can include desired application specific functionalities in WSNs.
The characteristics of the application requirements are depend on following factors
shown in figure 3:
1) Interactivity: Application can be either interactive or not.
2) End -to-end: Application may need end to end performance or not.
3) Delay Tolerance: Application can be delay tolerant or not.
4) Criticality: Application can be mission critical or not.

Fig. 4. Data delivery models requirement for various application classes

3 Related Works

While developing real time applications over WSN, one should consider resource
constraints in addition to node and communication reliability to support time varying
network performance. In recent years, many QoS aware MAC and routing protocols
have been proposed for wireless sensor networks [7-19]. Many of these protocols
works on improving energy efficiency, considering energy of sensor nodes as a sig-
nificant resource. Besides, some additional challenges also caused due to the delay
constrained applications where both energy efficient and QoS aware routing is re-
quired in order to utilize the sensors efficiently and accessing the collected data suc-
cessfully within time bounds. In QoS provisioning, the MAC layer should provide
channel access delay (single-hop) guarantee whereas in network layer the routing
should bound the end-to-end (multi-hop) transmission time. Figure 4 shows classifi-
cation of various protocols in view of probabilistic or deterministic approaches.
 Fig. 4. Classification of QoS Protocols for WSN

In WSNs, MAC plays a key role in determining the channel access delay, utiliza-
tion and energy consumption. Data transport, delay and reliability are fundamental
performance objectives in mission-critical application scenarios [6]. Delay-aware
MAC protocols like S-MAC, T-MAC, B-MAC [7-9] only reduce delay to provide
best effort service but not RT guarantee. DMAC [10] and DB-MAC[11] protocols
are proposed for application-specific data gathering tree but are bounded to use in
general topology and even if latency is reduced but precise RT guarantee are not
offered by these protocols. In 2006, TDMA-based MAC protocol PEDAMACS [12]
is proposed by Ergen and Varaiya to achieve both energy efficiency with delay guar-
antee. It provides hard real time guarantee but, due to limitation of requirement of
powerful AP it cannot be used in variety of applications. For RT-WSNs, IEEE
802.15.4[13] protocol is developed with GTS mechanism for managing time critical
data so as to provide explicit QoS guarantees and is still developing to support hard
real time guarantee.
Even though, MAC layer provides RT guarantee, still packet deadline cannot be
achieved if no transmission delay bound is provided in the network layer. Therefore,
for RT-WSNs, routing protocols capable of providing deterministic or probabilistic
delay guarantee are preferential. SPEED [14] is a RT routing protocol proposed in
2003 to achieve soft end-to-end deadline guarantee by sustaining a desired delivery
speed in the network. MMSPEED [15] is an extension of SPEED which provides
service differentiation and probabilistic guarantee for data transmission delay in
addition to data reliability. By providing high link reliability MMSPEED meets both
reliability and timeliness requirements over SPEED. However, both in SPEED and
MMSPEED energy consumption of the network has not been taken into account.
Some other protocols like QoSMAC [16] can ensure message transfer delay and
reliability only at the node-to-node level. PriorityMAC protocol [32] is designed for
handling critical traffic in industrial wireless sensor and actuators networks by cate-
gorizing the traffic in four different classes based on their priorities considering 1 for
highest and 4 for lowest priority and traffic in each of the class uses its committed
access method to get access to the medium. Furthermore, Dwarf [17] can decrease
end-to-end delay and increase end-to-end reliability, while WirelessHART [18] can
only guarantee end-to-end delay but not end-to-end reliability. In further literature
GinMAC [19] ensures end-to-end guarantees of both delay and reliability while
simultaneously achieving energy efficiency.
In 2009, author proposed a routing protocol [20] to enhance the quality of service
of real-time packet delivery for WSN. As routing based on the two-hop velocity with
energy balancing method, this protocol achieved lower end-to-end deadline miss
ratio and higher efficiency of energy consumption. In [21], author proposes H-NAMe
which uses grouping approach to guarantee that no interference occur between over-
lapping clusters. This also eliminates collisions of hidden nodes in a single or several
clusters WSNs by using contention-based MAC protocols. Data aggregation protocol
Lump is proposed in 2010, which support QoS requirements of applications by giv-
ing priorities to packets for distinguished services and helps aggregation decisions
[22]. It uses a cross-layered design to reduce overheads in network processing and
applicable to a variety of applications.
In 2011, author proposed energy efficient QoS routing protocol EEQAR [23] to
manage both the energy efficiency and QoS the requirement. EEQAR protocol uses
cellular-topology scheme to form the cluster structure with reasonable energy con-
sumption to gain the enhanced performance. Also, QoS and network lifetime is high-
ly improved using EEQAR for multimedia sensor networks. Similar kind of protocol
QEMPAR [24] is proposed in the same era for providing QoS requirements in real-
time applications in WSNs. As the protocol utilize four main parameters of QoS, the
performance of the proposed algorithm is optimized in terms of end to end delay.
Here author also highlighted some architectural and other operational challenges for
managing the QoS data transmission in sensor networks as well as to enhance the
energy efficiency of the sensor nodes. In 2013, author proposed single-hop hybrid
cluster architecture which contains transmit only nodes as well as standard nodes
[25]. Here author also proposed a MAC layer protocol framework called RARE with
the purpose of managing the one hop hybrid cluster efficiently and reliably in a self
structured fashion in densely deployed area. This work brings reliable scheduling
scheme using transmit-only nodes as well as standard nodes. To minimize the num-
ber of sensors required to perform various tasks, energy-unaware task management
protocols may effect in uneven expenses of sensor energy by passing on irregular
workloads to the sensors. In this heavily loaded sensors may create energy holes
which may result in partitioning the network into incoherent parts. To overcome this
trouble and to enhance the network lifetime, in [26] author pro-posed two energy
aware task management protocols: where in combination centralized and distributed
protocols is used for improving lifetime of the network by balancing the load
amongst sensor nodes. Two stages are used in distributed approach to guess the max-
imum energy altogether between them. These protocols improves the network life-
time by utilizing the sensor nodes energy on event basis as well as controlling energy
gaps between the sensor nodes exist in identical region. Balancing the sensor nodes
energy utilization with no change in effective density of the sensor network is the key
benefit of this approach.
In [27], author proposed BCMN/A protocol to increase the network lifetime and
reduce network delay by using energy as well as delay efficient data aggregation
process both in intra as well as inter-cluster communication. A TDMA-based proto-
col (DGRAM) that gives significant delay guarantee with desired energy-efficiency is
proposed in [28]. This protocol is completely self configuring protocol in which
assignment of slots is done with no control messages exchanging. As, it does not
provide significant delay guarantee, it is not useful in a wide range of applications.

Thus, here some existing MAC and Network layer protocols designed with inten-
sion of providing reliable and timeliness data transmission in Wireless Sensor Net-
works are discussed. In addition some Cross layer solutions invented for providing
QoS in WSNs are also discussed. We elaborated on some of the existing solutions
with special focus on the techniques used to enhance the performance of delay
bounded wireless sensor networks considering reliability, delay, energy efficiency,
type of service as specific QoS parameter in order to find the technical issues for
providing energy efficient, QoS guarantee in WSN. Table 1 summarizes some QoS
features provided by various existing data transmission techniques in WSNs.

4 Research Directions

Efficient collection of data from different sensor nodes in the field and transmission
of the collected data to respective base station is one of the important responsibilities
of the sensor nodes. But due to limited sensor resources mainly the battery power,
key challenge here is to conserve the sensor node energy to maximize their existence
which leads to maximize the network lifetime which is most important and consider-
able factor in efficient data gathering schemes designing for wireless sensor net-
works. In addition, QoS is the most important issue in time-critical applications in
WSNs. Reliability along with timeliness is the significant parameter to be concern in
providing QoS in such applications. Reliability can be achieved using data redun-
dancy concept. But, it will affect timeliness factor as it introduces delay in transmis-
sion. So, optimum techniques should be launched which will take care of both pa-
rameters reliability and timeliness in QoS provisioning.
Presently, only some protocols address the dual objective of attain delay and re-
liability performance bounds, but only few of them can support mission-critical ap-
plications. Hence, it is essential to develop event based reliable transmission tech-
niques for mission-critical applications in wireless sensor networks. So, while de-
signing a QoS scheme, researchers must focus on event based reliable transmission
techniques to guarantee the delivery of crucial data in timely as well as reliable man-
ner which gives optimal performance in terms of reliability and delay considering
the growing needs of various time critical application domains.

Protocol Name Type Reliability Delay Energy RT Type Issues

 S-MAC,T- CSMA/CA No Decrease node-to- Duty Best effort No real time data
MAC,B-MAC based MAC node delay cycling delivery guarantee

D-MAC, CSMA/CA No Decrease overall Duty Best effort No delay guarantee

DBMAC based MAC end -to-end delay cycling

QoSMAC TDMA based Node-to node Node-to node delay Duty Soft RT No end-to-end delay
MAC +Routing guarantee guarantee cycling guarantee

Dual Mode TDMA based End-to-end End-to-end delay No Hard RT Only applicable when
MAC MAC guarantee guarantee load is low

PEDAMACS TDMA based No End-to-end delay Duty Hard RT Requires High power
MAC guarantee cycling AP, low scalability

IEEE 802.15.4 Slotted End-to-end End-to-end delay Moderate Best effort/ Need to improve
CSMA/CA guarantee guarantee Hard RT reliability

Gin-MAC TDMA based End-to-end End-to-end delay Duty Hard RT Low scalability
MAC guarantee guarantee cycling

Priority-MAC MAC Increase end- Decrease end -to- Yes Soft RT No collision avoidance
to-end end delay

SPEED MAC + Routing Soft end-to-end Soft end-to-end No Soft RT Energy metric not
guarantee delay guarantee considered
MAC + Routing Probabilistic Probabilistic end- No Soft RT Energy metric not
MMSPEED End-to-end to-end guarantee considered
guarantee
Dwarf MAC + Routing Increase end- Decrease end -to- Duty Soft RT More focus on reliabil-
to-end end delay cycling ity than delay parame-
ter
WirelessHART TDMA /FDMA End-to-end End-to-end delay Duty Soft RT More communication
MAC+Routing increase guarantee cycling overhead

SchedEx TDMA based End-to-end Decrease end -to- Duty Soft RT Guaranteeing reliabil-
MAC guarantee end delay cycling ity bounds effects
latency bounds

RPAR Routing End-to-end End-to-end delay Yes Soft RT No end to end delay &
increase decrease reliability guarantee

DEGRAM TDMA based No End-to-end delay Yes Soft RT No end to end reliabil-
MAC+Routing guarantee ity guarantee

BCMN/A Routing Overall Net- Overall Network Yes Soft RT Channel access delay
work increase delay decreases not considered

EA-QoS Routing Moderate End-to-end delay Yes Soft RT Channel access delay
increase guarantee not considered
QEMPAR Routing No Increase in latency Yes Soft RT Throughput affect due
to increased latency

Ergen Routing No End-to-end delay Yes Hard RT Channel access delay

guarantee not considered
Table 1. Comparison of various QoS Protocols in WSN
4 Conclusions

The mission-critical applications represent a new type of future WSN applications

where energy efficient operation is no longer the only design objective. These appli-
cations require data delivery boundaries both in time and reliability concern. This
paper discusses the existing reliable and QoS provisioning data transmission tech-
niques used in WSNs with different requirements and necessity for different ap-
proaches. This paper has discussed the requirements; challenges for sustaining QoS
in WSNs.

Current developments discussed in the paper indicate that there are still many is-
sues and challenges that need to be overcome. Considering the various application
domains of WSNs where QoS is the main concern for successful implementation of
WSNs in addition to reduce the energy consumption so as to increase the network
lifetime. So, provisioning of Quality of Service for successful and assured event
awareness in the network is the major requirement of many delay constraint and
mission critical WSN applications. To address this problem, it is necessary to dis-
cover most efficient solution for QoS provisioning in WSNs scheme which gives
reliability and timeliness in QoS guarantee in delay sensitive applications, in WSNs.
Thus it looked for a research in QoS provisioning which accomplishes both end-to-
end reliability as well as delay limitations in WSNs.

References

1. Al-Karaki, J.N.; Kamal, A.E. Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey.
IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2004, 11, 6-28.
2. Yanjun Li, Chung Shue Chen, Ye-Qiong Song, Zhi Wang. Real-time QoS support in wire-
less sensor networks: a survey. 7th IFAC International Conference on Fieldbuses & Net-
works in Industrial & Embedded Systems - FeT'2007, Nov 2007, Toulouse, France. 2007.
3. T. Arampatzis, J. Lygeros, and S. Manesis, “A survey of applications of wireless sensors
and wireless sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Symposium
on Intelligent Control (ISIC '05), pp. 719–724, June 2005.
4. D. Chen and P. K. Varshney, “QoS Support in Wireless Sensor Network: A Survey,” Pro-
ceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Wireless Networks (ICWN2004), Las
Vegas, Nevada, USA, June 2004.
5. Josip Balen, Drago Zagar, Goran Martinovic, “Quality of Service in Wireless Sensor Net-
works: A Survey and Related Patents”.
6. Petcharat Suriyachai, Utz Roedig, and Andrew Scott, “A Survey of MAC Protocols for
Mission-Critical Applications in Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE Communications Sur-
veys & Tutorials, Vol. 14, No. 2, Second Quarter 2012.
7. W. Ye, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin,”An energy-efficient MAC protocol for wireless sensor
networks,” in Proc. 21st Annu. Joint Conf. IEEE Computer and Communications Socie-
ties, New York, NY, USA, 2002, vol. 3, pp. 1567-1576.
8. T. v. Dam, and K. Langendoen, “An Adaptive Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Wireless
Sensor Networks,” in Proc. 1st ACM Conf.Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, Los An-
geles, CA, USA, 2003, pp. 171-180.
9. Polastre, J., J. Hill and D. Culler (2004). Versatile low power media access for wireless
sensor networks. In: Proc. ACM Sensys. pp. 95–107.
10. G. Lu, B. Krishnamachari, and C. S. Raghavendra, “An adaptive energy efficient and low-
latency MAC for data gathering in wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. 18th Int. Parallel
and Distributed Processing Symp., Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2004, pp. 224-231.
11. Bacco, G.D., T. Melodia and F. Cuomo (2004). A MAC protocol for delay-bounded appli-
cations in wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. Med Hoc-Net. pp. 208–220.
12. S. C. Ergen, P. Varaiya, “PEDAMACS: Power Efficient and Delay Aware Medium Access
Protocol for Sensor Networks,” IEEE Trans.Mobile Comput., vol.5, pp.920-930, Jul. 2006.
13. Seong-eun Yoo, Poh Kit Chong, Yoonmee Doh, Minh-Long Pham, Daeyoung Kim,
Eunchang Choi, and Jaedoo Huh, “Guaranteeing Real-Time Services for Industrial Wire-
less Sensor Networks With IEEE 802.15.4”, IEEE Transactions On Industrial Electronics,
Vol. 57, No. 11, Pp.3868-3876, November 2010.
14.Tian Hea, John A Stankovica, C. Lub, T. Abdelzahera, “SPEED: a stateless protocol for
real-time communication in sensor networks”. In:Proc. ICDCS. pp. 46–55.
15. E. Felemban, C.-G. Lee, and E. Ekici, “MMSPEED: Multipath Multi SPEED Protocol for
QoS Guarantee of Reliability and Timeliness in Wireless Sensor Networks,” IEEE Trans.
Mobile Comput., vol. 5, pp. 738-754, Jun. 2006.
16. P. Suriyachai, U. Roedig, and A. Scott, “Implementation of a MAC Protocol for QoS
Support in Wireless Sensor Networks,” in Proc. 1st Int. Workshop Information Quality and
Quality of Service for Pervasive Computing, in conjunction with 7th Annu. IEEE Int. Conf.
Pervasive Computing and Communications, Galveston, TX, USA, 2009, pp. 1-6.
17. M. Strasser, A. Meier, K. Langendoen, and P. Blum, “Dwarf: DelayaWAre Robust For-
warding for Energy-Constrained Wireless Sensor Networks,” in Proc. 3rd IEEE Int. Conf.
Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2007, pp. 64-81.
18. HART Communication Foundation, “WirelessHART Technology,” [Online]. Available:
http://www.hartcomm.org/protocol/wihart/ wireless_technology.html, Dec. 2009.
19. P. Suriyachai, J. Brown, and U. Roedig, “Time-Critical Data Delivery in Wireless Sensor
Networks,” in Proc. 6th IEEE Int. Conf. Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems, Santa
Barbara, CA, USA, 2010, pp. 216-229.
20. Yanjun Li, Chung Shue Chen, “Enhancing Real-Time Delivery in Wireless Sensor Net-
works With Two-Hop Information”, IEEE Transactions On Industrial Informatics, Vol. 5,
No. 2, May 2009, Pp-113-122.
21. Anis Koubâa, Ricardo Severino, Mário Alves, and Eduardo Tovar, “Improving Quality-of-
Service in Wireless Sensor Networks by Mitigating “Hidden-Node Collisions””, IEEE
Transactions On Industrial Informatics, Vol. 5, No. 3, August 2009, Pp-299-313.
22. Jongsoo Jeongt, Jaeseok Kimt, “A QoS-Aware Data Aggregation in Wireless Sensor Net-
works”, 12th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT)
Feb. 7-10, 2010.
23. Kai Lin, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues, “Energy Efficiency QoS Assurance Routing in Wireless
Multimedia Sensor Networks”, IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL, VOL.5, NO.4, DEC 2011.
24. S. Heikalabad, H. Rasouli, F.Nematy,N. Rahmani, “QEMPAR: QoS and Energy Aware
Multi-Path Routing Algorithm for Real-Time Applications in Wireless Sensor Networks”,
IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 8, Issue 1, January 2011.
25. Jia Zhao, Chunming Qiao, Raghuram S. Sudhaakar, Seokhoon Yoon, “Improve Efficiency
and Reliability in Single-Hop WSNs with Transmit-Only Nodes”, IEEE Transactions On
Parallel And Distributed Systems, Vol. 24, No. 3, March 2013.
26. Hady S. AbdelSalam, Stephan Olariu, “Toward Efficient Task Management in Wireless
Sensor Networks”, IEEE Transactions On Computers, Vol. 60, No. 11, November 2011.
27. Mianxiong Dong, Kaoru Ota, “Joint Optimization of Lifetime and Transport Delay under
Reliability Constraint Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
PARALLEL AND DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS, TPDS-2013-12-1250.
28. Chilukuri Shanti, Anirudha Sahoo, “ DGRAM: A Delay Guaranteed Routing and AC
Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MOBILE
COMPUTING, VOL. 9, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2010.
29. Long Cheng, Jianwei Niu, Jiannong Cao, Sajal K. Das, Yu Gu, “QoS Aware Geographic
Opportunistic Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE Transactions On Parallel And
Distributed Systems, Vol. 25, No. 7, July 2014.
30. Irfan Al-Anbagi, Melike Erol-Kantar ci, Hussein T. Mouftah, “A Survey on Cross-
layer Quality of Service Approaches in WSNs for Delay and Reliability-Aware Applica-
tions”, 10.1109/COMST.2014.2363950, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.
31. C. Lu, B. Blum, T. Abdelzaher, J. Stankovic, T. He, ‘‘RAP: A Real-Time Communication
Architecture for Large-Scale Wireless Sensor Networks,’’ in Proc. IEEE RTAS, 2002, pp.
55-66.
32. Wei Shen, Tingting Zhang, Filip Barac and Mikael Gidlund, “PriorityMAC: A Priority-
Enhanced MAC Protocol for Critical Traffic in Industrial Wireless Sensor and Actuator
Networks”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, VOL. 10, NO. 1,
FEBRUARY 2014.
33. S. Tilak, N.B. Abu-Ghazaleh, W. Heinzelman, A taxonomy of wireless Micro-sensor
network models, SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review
6(2)(2002) 28–36.
34. D. Chen and P. K. Varshney, “QoS Support in Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey”, in
the Proc. of the International Conference on Wireless Networks 2004 (ICWN’04), Las Ve-
gas, Nevada, USA, June 21-24, 2004.