Do We Really Need a Priori Link Quality Estimation?

Vasilis Vasilopoulos, Daniele Puccinelli, Marco Zuñiga *

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceedings/Edited volumeConference contributionScientificpeer-review


Traditionally, link quality estimation (LQE) has been viewed as an a priori step in sensor network routing protocols because it filters out unreliable links before data transmission. Recent results, however, show that protocols can perform well without a priori LQE. Because getting rid of LQE seems rather counter-intuitive, the aim of this work is to look deeper into the behavior of LQE-free protocols. Our results, based on one of the state-of-the-art LQE-free protocols, show two interesting insights. First, LQE-free protocols manage to choose links that are slightly better than the ones obtained with a priori LQE methods. Second, in traditional protocols, the effort needed to identify good links accounts, on average, for roughly half of the energy consumption of nodes, depending on the nodes' active period and on the inter-packet interval. By eliminating this overhead, LQE-free protocols can save a significant amount of energy compared to standard approaches.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationReal-World Wireless Sensor Networks
Subtitle of host publicationProceedings of the 5th International Workshop, REALWSN 2013
EditorsK. Langendoen, W. Hu, F. Ferrari, M. Zimmerling, L. Mottola
Place of PublicationCham
Number of pages15
ISBN (Electronic)978-3-319-03071-5
ISBN (Print)978-3-319-03070-8
Publication statusPublished - 2014
Event5th International Workshop on Real-World Wireless Sensor Networks, REALWSN 2013 - Como, Italy
Duration: 19 Sep 201320 Sep 2013

Publication series

NameLecture Notes in Electrical Engineering
ISSN (Print)1876-1100
ISSN (Electronic)1876-1119


Conference5th International Workshop on Real-World Wireless Sensor Networks, REALWSN 2013


Dive into the research topics of 'Do We Really Need a Priori Link Quality Estimation?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this