Hindawi

Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Volume 2023, Article ID 5143620, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/5143620

Research Article
Nonlinear Energy Optimization in the Wireless Sensor
Network through NN-LEACH

Avinash Bhagat ,1 Manmohan Sharma ,1 Ajay Shriram Kushwaha ,2

Shilpa Sharma ,3 and Hussien Sobahi Mohammed 4
1
School of Computer Application, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India
2
School of CS & IT, Jain (Deemed-to-be-University), Bangalore, Karnataka, India
3
School of Computer Science & Engineering, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India
4
University of Gezira, Wad Medani, Sudan

Correspondence should be addressed to Hussien Sobahi Mohammed; [email protected]

Received 27 June 2022; Revised 20 August 2022; Accepted 6 April 2023; Published 30 April 2023

Academic Editor: A. M. Bastos Pereira

Copyright © 2023 Avinash Bhagat et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
Researchers have developed a range of methods and strategies to decrease wireless sensor network energy consumption. Mote
clustering is one of the competent topological control approaches to boost the networks’ energy efciency, scalability, and
performance. Energy is dissipated during the cluster creation, cluster head selection, routing from the head and base stations of the
cluster, and data aggregation—clustering and routing emphasis on the stability and the longevity of the network. Tis research
work provides the optimization technique for the wireless sensor network to optimize the energy through NN-LEACH. Te main
goal is to extend network life and reduce power consumption by clustering and routing sensor nodes using the two-step NN-
LEACH protocol, which is suggested. An additional goal might be to establish the appropriate course of action for the suggested
approach for this network.

1. Introduction to Wireless Sensor Networks infuence the whole system, but it did not work. Many
energy-saving models consider sending and receiving data,
Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) ofer huge potential to ignoring other factors. Most contemporary energy reduction
improve people’s lives and study the environment using models ignore rest parameters [5].
sensor nodes. Te key obstacle in using these motes is in-
dependent and low-powered devices with small batteries. 2. Literature Review
According to the NSF, new technologies lower motes and
sensor arrays’ cost, size, and weight. Integration approaches Te energy-efcient routing algorithm is categorized as
reduce distance barriers by increasing performance and communication architecture, network structure, reliable
longevity while decreasing size [1]. WSNs are typically routing, and topology-based routing [6]. Tese protocols
hidden and rely on small batteries for power. Changing might be fat or hierarchical [7]. In the WSN, fat routing
batteries is not an option. Managing the power requirements algorithms do comparable responsibilities. Smaller networks
of a wireless sensor network is difcult. Contrary to popular frequently use these networks. Algorithms such as SPIN and
belief, energy consumption is not determining network directed difusion are examples of balanced routing algo-
efciency [2, 3]. Figure 1 shows the example of the wireless rithms. Te cluster head rotates to balance the energy
sensor network [4]. consumed. Te hierarchical routing algorithm’s architecture
Researchers focused on layer-based components, is efcient and scalable. Each network mote receives the data
expecting that changes in one layer would immediately via the SPIN protocol. Te data of each node are comparable
2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Internet

Sink Node
Wireless Sensor Network

User

Nodes

Figure 1: Example of wireless sensor network [4].

Table 1: Analysis of successors of LEACH [16].

Year LEACH variants Cluster types Level of complexity Delay in transmission Energy efciency Overhead Scalability
2000 LEACH Distributed Low Less Moderate Higher Lower
2002 LEACH-C single hop Centralized Low Less Highly efcient Less Lower
2002 LEACH DCHS Distributed Moderate Less Highly efcient Higher Lower
2003 LEACH B Distributed Moderate Less Highly efcient Higher Lower
2005 LEACH S Distributed High Less Very high Higher Moderate
2006 LEACH B- TL Distributed Lower Less Highly efcient Less Lower
2006 LEACH M Distributed High Less Highly efcient Higher Higher
2007 LEACH E Distributed Extreme Less Highly efcient Higher Lower
2008 LEACH-TB Distributed Extreme Less Moderate Higher Moderate
2008 LEACH-ME Distributed Extreme Higher Moderate Higher Higher
2010 LEACH-U Distributed Extreme Less Highly efcient Less Lower
2010 LEACH-C multihop Distributed Extreme Higher Highly efcient Higher Lower
2010 LEACH D Distributed High Less Very high Higher Very high
2011 LEACH-GA Distributed High Less Highly efcient Higher Lower
2011 LEACH-FZ Distributed Extreme Higher Highly efcient Higher Higher
2012 LEACH-FL Distributed Extreme Less Lower Less Higher
2012 LEACH-MR Distributed High Higher Highly efcient Less Lower
2012 LEACH-CELL Distributed Extreme Less Moderate Very high Very high
2013 LEACH-EP Distributed Extreme Less Very high Higher Lower
2013 LEACH-I Distributed High Less Highly efcient Moderate Lower
2014 LEACH-SAGA Distributed High Less Highly efcient Moderate Higher
2015 LEACH-V Distributed High Less Very high Higher Lower
2019 LEACH-MG Distributed Complex Less Moderate Very high Very high
2020 LEACH-MW Adaptive Low Less Lower Very high Very high
2021 LEACH-ESO Distributed Extreme Less Highly efcient Moderate Lower
2022 LEACH-IACO Adaptive Extreme Less Highly efcient Very high Very high

to those of its neighbor’s. Tis protocol disseminates in- T-LEACH [15] are all based on LEACH. LEACH and its
formation to all motes when the user does not require data to derivatives aim to improve energy efciency through cov-
be transferred between motes. erage, data aggregation, data protection minimal latency,
In 2000, Heinzelman et al. [8] introduced the frst hi- resilience, and scalability, and the main goal of these al-
erarchical method, LEACH (“low energy adaptive clustering gorithms is to save energy. Table 1 compares various LEACH
hierarchy”). A strategy for geographically segmenting variants.
a system into smaller cells is suggested by Naghibi and Barati
[9]. Each cell can contain both single-hop and multihop 3. Network Model
cells. A novel EGPRM is being used to collect data from
sensor nodes using two portable sinks. EECS [10], HEED Te nodes are chosen at random. Te starting energy of
[11], PEGASIS [12], TEEN [13], LEACH-IACO [14], and a node is E0. Te MS moves along the y-axis. We know that
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3

START

Initialize

Ant colony start from source node

Ant s-colony 1 Ant s-colony 2 Ant s-colony 3

ant11 ant12 .....ant1n ant21 ant22 .....ant2n ant31 ant32 .....ant3n

Ant s-colony 1 arrive Ant s-colony 2 arrive Ant s-colony 3 arrive

destination nodes destination nodes destination nodes

Particle 1 Particle 2 Particle 3

P11 P12 ..... P1n P21 P22 ..... P2n P31 P32 ..... P3n

Velocity update Velocity update Velocity update

Position update Position update Position update

Pheromone update Pheromone update Pheromone update

No
END?

YES

STOP

Figure 2: Flowchart of hybrid ACO/PSO.

the base station has unlimited power and that sensor nodes 3.2. Task Ordination. In this phase, frstly, RNs are selected.
and sinks are everywhere. Now, we have setup and steady Initially, all nodes are assumed to be normal nodes. Every
phases. hub themselves choose whether they meet RN condition or
not. To become a rendezvous hub, the hubs must fulfl
a requirement. Te situation representing RN is specifed
3.1. Step-Up Phase. Te setup phase is divided into three
below the following equation:
stages: the Task Presentation (TP), the Selection of cluster
yw y
head (CH), and rendezvous node (RN). Clustering, i.e., (1 + Rx) < � yy < � w (1 − Rx). (1)
creating clusters and election of the cluster head are carried 2 2
out during the next part of the setup phase [17, 18]. After the Following points are needed to be considered to get the
cluster formation, the last stage is known as scheduling (S). cluster head using the method of HNN:
In the entire scheduling phase, the message is disseminated
from the cluster head to every cluster member. Every node (a) Prepare weights Txy � 􏽐M−1 c c c
c�0 ix iy x ≠ y, where ix is
itself arranges their organization in the period of element of class c exemplar
transmission. (b) Put on input to the desired outputs z � i
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Table 2: Final results for 1st, 10th, and all motes.

Number of rounds
LEACH [8] Optimized LEACH [17] Proposed improved LEACH
Motes 1st 25% All 1st 25% All 1st 25% All
mote motes motes mote motes motes mote motes motes
dead dead dead dead dead dead dead dead dead
100 70 92 222 74 95 232 86 106 241
120 73 100 222 78 104 233 81 105 243
140 70 90 220 75 95 233 80 108 244
160 73 96 224 79 100 234 79 102 243
180 69 92 224 75 95 234 79 105 242
200 65 99 223 71 101 233 83 109 244
220 68 93 224 72 96 233 73 106 244
240 67 93 222 71 97 232 76 114 242
260 72 95 223 76 101 235 73 109 243
280 67 94 224 72 97 235 69 103 244
300 63 95 222 68 99 234 75 106 243
320 67 91 223 72 94 233 71 105 243
340 67 91 224 71 95 235 81 110 244
360 64 94 225 69 97 234 66 105 245
380 62 94 225 67 96 234 79 111 244
400 62 94 224 67 97 235 80 115 245

First Mote Dead

100
90
80
70
60
Rounds

50
40
30
20
10
0
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(a)
Figure 3: Continued.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5

25% Motes Dead

140

120

100

80
Rounds

60

40

20

0
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(b)
All Motes Dead
250
245
240
235
Rounds

230
225
220
215
210
205
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(c)
Figure 3: Continued.
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Remaining Energy (J)

0.1
0.09
0.08
0.07
Energy 0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
400 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(d)
Packets Received by Elected Cluster Head
250

200

150
Packets

100

50

0
400 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(e)
Figure 3: Continued.
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7

Packets Received at Base Station

30

25

Number of Packets 20

15

10

0
400 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100
Nodes

LEACH
Optimized LEACH
Proposed Improved LEACH
(f )

Figure 3: Comparing LEACH, optimized and improved LEACH: (a) frst node dead, (b) 25% nodes dead, (c) all nodes’ dead, (d) residual
energy, (e) packets received by the elected cluster head, and (f ) packets received at the base station.

Table 3: Simulations results for energy remaining, data/communication packets received by the elected cluster head and fnally packets
received at the base station.
LEACH [8] Optimized LEACH [16] Proposed improved LEACH
Packets Packets Packets
Motes Energy Packets Energy Packets Energy Packets
received received received
remained received remained received remained received
by elected by elected by elected
(J) at the BS (J) at the BS (J) at the BS
CH CH CH
100 0.08 213 22 0.08 215 24 0.09 237 27
120 0.07 182 19 0.07 186 21 0.07 196 22
140 0.06 156 16 0.06 157 18 0.07 172 20
160 0.05 136 14 0.05 139 16 0.06 149 17
180 0.05 119 12 0.05 121 14 0.04 133 15
200 0.04 108 12 0.04 110 13 0.04 121 14
220 0.03 97 11 0.04 100 12 0.05 109 13
240 0.04 89 10 0.04 91 11 0.04 101 12
260 0.03 83 9 0.03 86 10 0.03 94 11
280 0.03 76 9 0.03 79 9 0.03 86 10
300 0.01 72 8 0.01 74 9 0.02 81 9
320 0.02 65 8 0.02 68 8 0.03 75 9
340 0.02 62 7 0.02 65 8 0.03 72 8
360 0.02 58 7 0.02 62 7 0.02 68 8
380 0.02 58 6 0.02 58 7 0.02 64 8
400 0.02 60 7 0.02 58 8 0.02 66 9

(c) Recapitulate unless the system converges 3.4. Proposed PSO (Particle Swarm Optimization).
z+y � fh (􏽐N−1 −
x�0 Txy zx , where fh is hard restraint Consider a situation where birds are randomly put in an area
with only a piece of food to seek. Te birds do not know
3.3. Ant Colony Optimization (ACO). WSN performance is where food is. Tey just know food distance. Te easiest way
mainly measured via routing. Routing is a method of moving to obtain food is to follow the bird to it. A particle is a bird.
data from one place to another. While routing, two ideas are Te particles have a ftness function and a velocity that can
defned [17]. Te frst is optimum routing, where the be computed. Every particle updates the “best” two values,
quickest path is found using various methods, and the pbest and gbest. Lesser particles update their locations and
second is internetwork, where packets are transmitted. velocity using equations (2) and (3).
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering

velocity[] � veell[] + c1 ∗ ran() ∗ (perbest[] − present[]) the specifed population. Proposed LEACH also has higher
residual energy and sends more packets to the base station
+ c2 ∗ ran() ∗ (glbest[] − present[]), and cluster head. All of these factors lower energy usage and
(2) so extend network lifetime. Te number of packets trans-
mitted from the cluster head to the base station determines
pre[] � per[] + vel[]. (3) performance. Te WSN lifetime can be balanced extended
by the NN-LEACH algorithm that has been presented. In
three diferent network settings, experimental results
3.5. Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm. In the last demonstrate that NN-LEACH surpasses its competitors
several years, EAs (evolutionary algorithms) t have evolved GAECH, GCA, EAERP, and LEACH. Most real-time ap-
to solve mono-objective, multi-even-handed, and multi- plications can beneft from the performance gain when the
target enhancement concerns in a precise order [18]. Despite base station is removed from the network. In the best-case
explicit eforts to combine various mono-target de- scenario, where the base station is not linked to the network,
velopmental and nondevelopmental calculations, there are NN-LEACH exhibits a signifcantly longer lifetime than its
few studies that include all three types of enhancement equivalent. Additionally, we discovered that LEACH opti-
concerns. Te Pareto technique is used to segment the in- mization reduces energy use by distributing it evenly among
coming population into subpopulations [19, 20]. Figure 2 clusters by 5%.
shows the fowchart of hybrid ACO/PSO.
4. Simulations Data Availability
Te data used to support the fndings of this study are
Simulation is carried out using MATLAB for easy results
available upon request.
computation. Te limit limiting the framework’s display has
been disregarded. For reproduction, we dissect fndings by
several nodes and then by region. Conflicts of Interest
Case 1: the proposed NN-LEACH is compared with Te authors declare that they have no conficts of interest.
existing RZ-LEACH and ACO-RZLEACH based on the
node scalability by a varying number of motes and References
adjusting of the threshold values of various parameters
such as alive nodes, dead nodes, the packet sent to BS, [1] J. Liu, C. Sun, and Y. Lai, “A data transmission approach based
packet sent to CHs, and energy remained. on ant colony optimization and threshold proxy re-
encryption in WSNs,” Journal of Artifcial Intelligence and
Case 2: in this case, the adaptability issue is considered Technology, 2021.
for the organization’s difering size for the consistent [2] E. Dixit and V. Jindal, “IEESEP: an intelligent energy efcient
number of hubs (n = 100). Te presentation of the stable election routing protocol in air pollution monitoring
present framework has been contrasted and existing WSNs,” Neural Computing & Applications, vol. 34, no. 13,
one for the accompanying local sizes, for example, 50 m pp. 10989–11013, 2022.
by 50 m, 100 m by 100 m, . . ., to 500 m by 500 m against [3] W. Kim, M. M. Umar, S. Khan, and M. A. Khan, “Novel
the number of rounds. scoring for energy-efcient routing in multi-sensored net-
works,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 4, p. 1673, 2022.
[4] M. El Barachi, A. Kadiwal, R. Glitho, F. Khendek, and
5. Results Comparison of Leach and R. Dssouli, “A presence-based architecture for the integration
Optimized Leach of the sensing capabilities of wireless sensor networks in the IP
multimedia subsystem,” in Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE
Te proposed hybrid model is compared to the basic LEACH Wireless Communications and Networking Conference,
[8] and the optimized LEACH [17] with node scalability. pp. 3116–3121, Las Vegas, NV, USA, March 2008.
Table 2 shows the simulation model’s initial settings. Motes [5] A. Yektaparast, F. Nabavi, and A. Sarmast, “An improvement
placed randomly in the area of interest. As demonstrated in on LEACH (Cell-LEACH),” in Proceedings of the 14th In-
Figure 3, assuming that all of the nodes have the same initial ternational Conference on Advanced Communication Tech-
energy level (0.3 J), the energy optimization of the enhanced nology (ICACT), pp. 992–996, PyeongChang, Korea (South),
LEACH is compared to LEACH and optimized LEACH. February 2012.
Packets sent from the cluster head to the base station and [6] N. A. Pantazis, S. A. Nikolidakis, and D. D. Vergados,
“Energy-efcient routing protocols in wireless sensor net-
residual energy are observed after round numbers 100, 120,
works: a survey,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. 15, no. 2,
140, . . ., 400 (0 : 3 J), and we compare their leftover energy in pp. 551–591, 2013.
Figure 3. Table 3 shows the simulations results for energy [7] A. Choudhary, S. Kumar, and H. Sharma, “Study and analysis
remaining, data/communication packets and fnally packets. of hierarchical routing protocols in wireless sensor networks,”
Applied Information Processing Systems: Proceedings of ICCET
6. Conclusion 2021, pp. 461–474, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2022.
[8] W. R. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan,
As shown in the graphs of Figure 3, LEACH has better “Energy-efcient communication protocol for wireless
outcomes in terms of initial, tenth, and whole nodes dead for microsensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9

Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 1,

p. 10, Maui, HI, USA, January 2000.
[9] M. Naghibi and H. Barati, “EGRPM: energy efcient geo-
graphic routing protocol based on mobile sink in wireless
sensor networks,” Sustainable Computing: Informatics and
Systems, vol. 25, p. 100377, 2020.
[10] M. Ye, C. Li, G. Chen, and J. Wu, “EECS: an energy efcient
clustering scheme in wireless sensor networks,” in Proceedings
of the PCCC 2005. 24th IEEE International Performance,
Computing, and Communications Conference, pp. 535–540,
Phoenix, AZ, USA, April 2005.
[11] C.-H. Lin and M.-J. Tsai, “A comment on ‘HEED: a hybrid,
energy-efcient, distributed clustering approach for ad hoc
sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing,
vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 1471-1472, 2006.
[12] S. Lindsey and C. S. Raghavendra, “PEGASIS: power-efcient
gathering in sensor information systems,” in Proceedings of
the IEEE Aerospace Conference, vol. 3, pp. 3–1125, Big Sky,
MT, USA, March 2002.
[13] Y. Ge, S. Wang, and J. Ma, “Optimization on TEEN routing
protocol in cognitive wireless sensor network,” EURASIP
Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking,
vol. 2018, 2018.
[14] M. Soni, N. R. Nayak, A. Kalra, S. Degadwala, N. K. Singh, and
S. Singh, “Energy efcient multi-tasking for edge computing
using federated learning,” International Journal of Pervasive
Computing and Communications, 2022.
[15] J. Hong, J. Kook, S. Lee, D. Kwon, and S. Yi, “T-LEACH: the
method of threshold-based cluster head replacement for
wireless sensor networks,” Information Systems Frontiers,
vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 513–521, 2009.
[16] J. Bhola, M. Shabaz, G. Dhiman, S. Vimal, P. Subbulakshmi,
and S. K. Soni, “Performance evaluation of multilayer clus-
tering network using distributed energy efcient clustering
with enhanced threshold protocol,” Wireless Personal Com-
munications, vol. 126, no. 3, pp. 2175–2189, 2021.
[17] A. Gupta and L. K. Awasthi, “Security issues in cross-
organizational peer-to-peer applications and some solu-
tions,” in Communications in Computer and Information
Science, pp. 422–433, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2009.
[18] L. Sathish Kumar, S. Ahmad, S. Routray et al., “Modern
energy optimization approach for efcient data communi-
cation in IoT-based wireless sensor networks,” Wireless
Communications and Mobile Computing, vol. 2022, Article ID
7901587, 13 pages, 2022.
[19] M. Shabaz and U. Garg, “Shabaz–urvashi link prediction
(sulp): a novel approach to predict future friends in a social
network,” Journal of Creative Communications, vol. 16, no. 1,
pp. 27–44, 2020.
[20] P. A. Deepshikha and Varsha, “Enhanced NN based RZ leach
using hybrid ACO/PSO based routing for WSNs,” in Pro-
ceedings of the 2017 8th International Conference on Com-
puting, Communication and Networking Technologies
(ICCCNT), pp. 1–7, Delhi, India, July 2017.