Energy-efficient geographic routing algorithm in event-driven wireless sensor networks using an enhanced TOPSIS approach


Abstract

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are a fundamental component of the Internet of Things (IoT), supporting a wide range of applications from environmental monitoring to structural health assessment. Among the different WSN paradigms, event-driven networks have gained increasing attention because they report data only when significant events occur, thereby reducing unnecessary communication and conserving energy. A critical aspect of these networks is geographic routing, where routing decisions are based on node locations rather than identifiers, reflecting the spatial relevance of detected events. However, conventional geographic routing algorithms face significant challenges, including workload imbalance, network congestion, and high energy consumption, which are particularly problematic given the limited power resources of sensor nodes. These limitations directly impact network lifetime, reliability, and overall performance, underscoring the need for more intelligent routing strategies. To address these issues, this study proposes a novel geographic routing algorithm that leverages the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), a widely recognized Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach. Unlike traditional shortest-path routing methods that primarily minimize hop count, the proposed algorithm introduces additional decision criteria to enhance energy efficiency, balance node workload, and reduce latency. Specifically, it selects the optimal forwarding node by considering multiple factors, including residual energy, hop distance, delivery ratio, and a newly defined Exclusive Routing Share (ERS) metric, which prevents network bottlenecks by identifying over-utilized nodes. This approach not only extends the network lifetime but also ensures more reliable and balanced data delivery throughout the network. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm was evaluated through extensive simulation experiments, comparing its performance against the benchmark Fault-Tolerant Routing (FTR) algorithm. Simulations were conducted under various network densities, event frequencies, and fault conditions to ensure a comprehensive assessment. The results demonstrate significant performance improvements: an average reduction of 15.4% in packet error rate, a 14.9% increase in network lifetime, and a 1.46% improvement in packet delivery ratio. These findings highlight the potential of the TOPSIS-based approach in optimizing routing decisions and mitigating common challenges in event-driven WSNs.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].