![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Return to Session 9. Mobility in agents, sensors and services Sensor Networks need the ability to be dynamically programmed efficiently. Several frameworks have been developed for this purpose largely falling into one of three classes: i) user-guided code updates, ii) database model, and iii) agent-based model. Even though the agent-based model is being touted to bring increased efficiency in terms of energy consumed, its advantage has not been clearly articulated by the relevant sensor network literature. We identify a suitable application to showcase the advantages of autonomously mobile code and analyze the generic solutions offered by the three different classes of frameworks to show that indeed an agent-based approach can bring considerable energy savings for some application scenarios. ![]() ©2006 Association for Computing Machinery |