[Firebug-cvs] firebug/doc/spie2004 spie.bib,1.1,1.2 spie_2004.tex,1.5,1.6

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Update of /cvsroot/firebug/firebug/doc/spie2004
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv8970

Modified Files:
	spie.bib spie_2004.tex 
Log Message:

Index: spie.bib
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/firebug/firebug/doc/spie2004/spie.bib,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -C2 -d -r1.1 -r1.2
*** spie.bib	20 Nov 2003 17:56:36 -0000	1.1
--- spie.bib	26 Nov 2003 04:07:56 -0000	1.2
***************
*** 95,100 ****
--- 95,135 ----
  }

+ @inproceedings{cerpa:a2001,
+   author = "Alberto Cerpa and Jeremy Elson and Deborah Estrin
+ and Lewis Girod and Michael Hamilton and Jerry Zhao",
+   title = "Habitat monitoring: Application driver for wireless
+ commmunications technology",
+   booktitle = "ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Data Communications in 
+ Latin America and the Caribbean",
+   address = "Costa Rica",
+   month = Apr,
+   year = 2001,
+   url = "http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cerpa01habitat.html"
+ }

+ @InProceedings{juang:p2002,
+   author = {P. Juang and H. Oki and Y. Wang and
+ M. Martonosi and L. Peh and D. Rubenstein},
+   title = {Energy-Efficient Computing for Wildlife Tracking: 
+ Design Tradeoffs and Early Experiences with ZebraNet},
+   booktitle = {Proceedings ASPLOS-X, San Jose, CA},
+   OPTcrossref =  {},
+   OPTkey = 	 {},
+   OPTpages = 	 {},
+   month = 	 {Oct},
+   year = 	 {2002},
+   OPTeditor = 	 {},
+   OPTvolume = 	 {},
+   OPTnumber = 	 {},
+   OPTseries = 	 {},
+   OPTaddress = 	 {},
+   OPTmonth = 	 {},
+   OPTorganization = {},
+   OPTpublisher = {},
+   OPTnote = 	 {},
+   OPTannote = 	 {}
+ }

+   
  @InProceedings{mehta:v2002,
    author = 	 {V. Mehta and M. {El Zarki}},
***************
*** 195,198 ****
--- 230,255 ----
    OPTannote = 	 {}
  }
+ 
+ @InProceedings{zhao:j2003,
+   author = 	 {J. Zhao and R. Govindan},  
+   title = 	 {Understanding Packet Delivery 
+ Performance In Dense Wireless Sensor Networks},
+   booktitle = 	 {Proceedings of ACM SenSys 2003},
+   OPTcrossref =  {},
+   OPTkey = 	 {},
+   OPTpages = 	 {},
+   year = 	 {2003},
+   OPTeditor = 	 {},
+   OPTvolume = 	 {},
+   OPTnumber = 	 {},
+   OPTseries = 	 {},
+   address = 	 {Los Angeles, CA},
+   month = 	 {November 5-7},
+   OPTorganization = {},
+   OPTpublisher = {},
+   OPTnote = 	 {},
+   OPTannote = 	 {}
+ }
+ 

  @InProceedings{woo:a2003,

Index: spie_2004.tex
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/firebug/firebug/doc/spie2004/spie_2004.tex,v
retrieving revision 1.5
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -C2 -d -r1.5 -r1.6
*** spie_2004.tex	22 Nov 2003 01:06:46 -0000	1.5
--- spie_2004.tex	26 Nov 2003 04:07:56 -0000	1.6
***************
*** 1,9 ****
  \documentclass[]{spie}

! \input{comment}
  \usepackage{graphicx}
  \usepackage{chicago}
  \usepackage{url}
- \usepackage{draftcopy}

  \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0in}
--- 1,8 ----
  \documentclass[]{spie}

! 
  \usepackage{graphicx}
  \usepackage{chicago}
  \usepackage{url}

  \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0in}
***************
*** 13,17 ****

! \newcommand{\blast}{{\sc Blast}}

--- 12,16 ----

! \newcommand{\blast}{BLAST}

***************
*** 27,30 ****
--- 26,37 ----
  \supit{b}Affiliation2, Address, City, Country
  }
+ 
+ %\author{M. M. Chen\thanks{Graduate student, 
+ %Dept. of Civil and Env. Eng., UC Berkeley}, 
+ %A. Sharma\thanks{EECS}, D. M. Doolin\thanks{%
+ %Post-doctoral researcher, Dept. of Civ. and Env. Eng., 
+ %UC Berkeley}, S. Glaser, N. Sitar}
+ %\date{\today}
+ %\maketitle 
  \authorinfo{Further author information: (Send correspondence to A.A.A.)\\A.A.A.: E-mail: aa...@tb..., Telephone: 1 505 123 1234\\  B.B.A.: E-mail: bb...@cm..., Telephone: +33 (0)1 98 76 54 32}

***************
*** 102,109 ****
--- 109,145 ----

+ \subsection{Previous work using \blast/Mica2}
+ 
+ One paragraph of Alec's work~\cite{woo:a2003}, 
+ and anyone else's work using \blast/Mica2.
+ 
+ 
  \subsection{Previous work with outdoor sensors}

+ Section Outline:
+ 
+ \begin{itemize}
+ 
+ \item Outdoor applications for wireless sensor networks - habitat monitoring, 
+ environment monitoring, etc.
+ 
+ \item Signal strength issues and localization issues
+ 
+ \item large scale empirical study using wireless sensors
+ 
  %\input{spie_reviews}

+ \paragraph{Lundquist et al.}~\cite{lundquist:jd2003}
+ have deployed a prototype network of meterological and 
+ hydrological sensors in the Yosemite National Park,
+ traversing elevation zones from 1,200 to 3,700 m. Their 
+ current system of use is a low-cost low power data logger 
+ that will log, record and wirelessly transmit data from 
+ several meteorological and hydrological sensors. It is powered
+ by a small batter pack and its 32MB of memory is adequate to
+ store several months of data (while logging measurements at 
+ three-minute intervals. They look to add the communications 
+ element using a combination of radio, cell-phone and satellite 
+ transmissions. 

***************
*** 179,184 ****
  theoretical analysis of it.

- 
- 
  The basic idea of their algorithm is as follows. 
  Each node communicates with its neighbors
--- 215,218 ----
***************
*** 197,202 ****
  number of nodes goes to infinity, is shown.

- 
- 

  \paragraph{West et al.}~\citeyear{west:b2001}
--- 231,234 ----
***************
*** 214,219 ****
  than 1 meter, the range severely degraded.

- 
- 
  Some of the suggestions that they make to 
  expand current sensor network implementations 
--- 246,249 ----
***************
*** 247,252 ****
  their position.

- 
- 
  They employ two techniques for associating signal 
  strength measurements to distance. Both techniques 
--- 277,280 ----
***************
*** 262,267 ****
  strength received.

- 
- 
  The measurements for both these approaches were 
  collected outdoors with very little interference, 
--- 290,293 ----
***************
*** 283,288 ****
  nodes to be in radio proximity of every other node.

- 
- 
  The ``scatternet'' tree is rooted at a network hub, which 
  executes most of the scatternet algorithm to build routes for
--- 309,312 ----
***************
*** 299,303 ****

- 
  The complexity of building the tree increases 
  exponentially with the number of nodes, which the authors
--- 323,326 ----
***************
*** 312,317 ****
--- 335,351 ----
  network.

+ Some missing but necessary items, needed to be included
+ in related works are:

+ \begin{itemize}

+ \item Habitat monitoring: Application drivers for wireless 
+ communication technology
+ 
+ \item Energy-Efficient Computing for Wildlife Tracking: 
+ Design Tradeofs and Early Experiences with ZebraNet
+ 
+ \item Mainwaring paper
+ \end{itemize}

  \subsection{Pr\'ecis}
***************
*** 324,328 ****
  \begin{figure}
  \begin{center}
! \includegraphics{figs/sysarch.eps}
  \caption{Schematic of Firebug system architecture.
  This is a placeholder figure, change to reflect current 
--- 358,362 ----
  \begin{figure}
  \begin{center}
! \includegraphics{images/sysarch.eps}
  \caption{Schematic of Firebug system architecture.
  This is a placeholder figure, change to reflect current 
***************
*** 332,335 ****
--- 366,370 ----
  \end{figure}

+ \section{Protocols}

***************
*** 410,414 ****
  \section{Methodology}

- 
  This presents an outline of field experiments on a
  soft-deployment of a sensor network in the Claremont
--- 445,448 ----
***************
*** 418,422 ****
  of sight, smooth terrain.

- 
  Testing sensor networks in an outdoor setting has
  been attempted mostly in scenarios dealing with
--- 452,455 ----
***************
*** 440,450 ****
  \subsection{Mote variability test}

- Mechanical deployment of motes will most likely
- result in motes located at different heights from 
- the ground surface, which may affect the transmission 
- range.  In turn, the transmission range influences the 
- areal extent of the network, thus the number of motes
- required to obtain a certain coverage density.
- 
  Due to manufacturing processes, 
  each mote has slightly different transmission and 
--- 473,476 ----
***************
*** 472,515 ****
  \section{Results}

! 
! 
! \subsection{Ground level transmission}
! 
! 
! Our first experiment investigated the range of 
! motes located on the ground in optimal terrain:
! a nearly level, grassy field located on the 
! University of California, Berkeley, campus.
! The field has a slight dip to the west and 
! contains a broad shallow depression approximately
! 80 meters across.  The base station was deployed 
! at one end of the field, and motes were deployed 
! along a Keson survey tape at 5 meter increments.
! 
! 

  \begin{figure}
  \begin{center}
! \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{figs/turfrange.eps}
! \caption{Reception distances for motes transmitting from 
! ground level to a mote receiving at ground level.}
! \label{fig:turfrange}
  \end{center}
  \end{figure}

  \section{Discussion}

- 
- 
  Interpret all the data from the previous section here.
  Say what is important and why it's important.

- The results indicate that height above the 
- ground is an important factor in packet 
- reception capability.  
- 

  \section{Summary and conclusions}
--- 498,529 ----
  \section{Results}

! Put all the data from all the experiments here.

  \begin{figure}
  \begin{center}
! \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{tempfig.eps}
! \caption{Reception probability of links in a network 
! of line topology.}
! \label{fig:linetopo}
  \end{center}
  \end{figure}

+ The first set of experiments measured the success rate
+ for packet transmission for several sizes of networks
+ with line topologies, in several different terrains.
+ The networks consisted of 1,2,4 and 8 nodes, spaced 
+ equally, in open, brushy, and forested terrain.  
+ Motes from the Mica2 and Dust platforms were tested.

+ The results indicate that height above the 
+ ground is an important factor in packet 
+ reception capability.  

  \section{Discussion}

  Interpret all the data from the previous section here.
  Say what is important and why it's important.

  \section{Summary and conclusions}
***************
*** 524,530 ****
  \bibliographystyle{spiebib}

- 
- \begin{comment}
- 
  \appendix

--- 538,541 ----
***************
*** 785,790 ****
  \end{center}
  \end{table}
- \end{comment}

! \end{document}
\ No newline at end of file
--- 796,801 ----
  \end{center}
  \end{table}

! 
! \end{document}