Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engappai

Optimized sugeno fuzzy clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks MARK
⁎
Mohammad Shokouhifar , Ali Jalali
Department of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University G.C., Tehran, Iran

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: Clustering is the most common approach to achieve energy efficiency in wireless sensor networks. The existing
Wireless sensor networks clustering techniques exhibit some drawbacks which limit their usage for practical networks. First, cluster heads
Clustering are typically selected among all sensor nodes within the network, and consequently, unbalanced clusters may be
Fuzzy c-means (FCM) generated. Second, the controllable parameters are defined manually. Third, the protocol is not adjusted and
Sugeno fuzzy inference system
tuned based on application specifications. In this paper, we propose an adaptive fuzzy clustering protocol
Artificial bee colony (ABC)
(named LEACH-SF), in order to overcome the mentioned drawbacks. In LEACH-SF, fuzzy c-means algorithm is
used to cluster all sensor nodes into balanced clusters, and then appropriate cluster heads are selected via
Sugeno fuzzy inference system. The fuzzy inputs of the Sugeno fuzzy inference system include the residual
energy, the distance from sink, and the distance from cluster centroid. Unlike the existing fuzzy-based routing
protocols in which the fuzzy rule base table is defined manually, we utilize artificial bee colony algorithm to
adjust the fuzzy rules of LEACH-SF. The fitness function of the algorithm is defined to prolong the network
lifetime, based on the application specifications. In other words, LEACH-SF not only prolongs the lifetime, but
also is applicable to any kind of application. Simulations over 10 heterogeneous wireless sensor networks show
that LEACH-SF outperforms the existing cluster-based routing protocols.

1. Introduction energy consumption of nodes and maximize the network lifetime

Wireless sensor network (WSN) is a rapidly evolving technological
platform with tremendous applications in several domains such as
military, agriculture, structural monitoring, health monitoring, home
networks, etc (Akyildiz et al., 2002). A WSN consists of a number of
small-size low-power sensor nodes capable of detecting physical
phenomena, which are constrained in energy supply, processing power,
and bandwidth. Because WSNs usually are deployed in open and
unprotected areas, they are vulnerable to various types of attacks
(Wang et al., 2011). Self-organizing nature, limited bandwidth, dis-
tributed operations via wireless communications, multi-hop traffic
forwarding, and dependency on other sensor nodes are such character-
istics of WSNs that expose it to many security attacks. Therefore,
information security should be considered during the design of WSNs
(Alrajeh et al., 2013). Many security solutions have been proposed such
as authentication, key exchange, and secure routing or security
mechanisms for specific attacks. Comprehensive review of security
mechanisms and intrusion detection systems can be seen in (Alrajeh
et al., 2013; Butun et al., 2014).
Sensor nodes may be applied in inaccessible or dangerous environ-
ments, where the power supplies could not be replaced or recharged
easily (Yick et al., 2008). Thus, it is highly required to minimize the
(Shokouhifar and Jalali, 2015). Lifetime in WSNs can be defined via
different criteria based on application specifications, e.g., first node
dies (FND), half node die (HND), last node dies (LND), etc. Attea and
Khalil (2011). In heterogeneous WSNs with different data packets, the
most important criterion is FND, as perishing of even one node may
result irreparable damages. However, perishing of some nodes is not
critical in homogeneous WSNs (Shokouhifar and Jalali, 2015).
In WSNs, a routing protocol is required when a node cannot send
its data packet directly to the base station, and has to rely on the
assistance of intermediate nodes to forward its packet (Attea and
Khalil, 2011). Based on the network structure adopted, the existing
routing protocols can be categorized into flat, hierarchical, and loca-
tion-based (Ming and Wong, 2007). In flat routing, all nodes have the
same functionality and they work together to sense and route
(Intanagonwiwat et al., 2000). Hierarchical routing techniques divide
the network into distinguished clusters. The most famous and attrac-
tive hierarchical protocol is low energy adaptive clustering hierarchy
(LEACH) (Heinzelman et al., 2000). In location-based approaches, the
information about the location of sensor nodes is used to generate the
routing path (Xu et al., 2001).
Clustering is an effective approach to reduce the energy consump-
tion in WSNs (Vlajic and Xia, 2006). Cluster-based protocols segment a

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: m_shokouhifar@sbu.ac.ir (M. Shokouhifar), a_jalali@sbu.ac.ir (A. Jalali).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2017.01.007
Received 21 July 2015; Received in revised form 19 October 2016; Accepted 11 January 2017
Available online 19 January 2017
0952-1976/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
network into non-overlapping clusters, each of them contains a cluster
head (CH), acts as a gateway between its members and the base station
(sink). Generally, clustering consists of two phases: setup and steady
state (Heinzelman et al., 2000). In the setup phase, CHs are selected
and clusters are formed. In steady state phase, each member node
transmits its data packet to the corresponding CH, and then, the CH
sends the gathered data to the base station.
1.1. Our contribution
In this paper, we propose a new centralized cluster-based routing
protocol based on Sugeno fuzzy inference system (named LEACH-SF).
In the cluster-based protocols in the literature, CHs are typically
selected among all sensor nodes, and then, clusters are formed by
simply assigning each node to the nearest CH. The main drawback is to
generate an inappropriate distribution of CHs over the network.
However, in LEACH-SF, an overall clustering is firstly performed on
all nodes to form balanced clusters, and then, proper CHs are selected.
The main contributions in this paper can be summarized as follows:
• An optimized Sugeno fuzzy clustering algorithm is proposed as an
efficient application specific routing protocol in WSNs.
• Fuzzy c-means algorithm is utilized to form balanced clusters over
the network.
• Sugeno fuzzy inference system is used to select the appropriate CHs
and form clusters.
• We utilize artificial bee colony algorithm to optimize the fuzzy rules
in order to prolong the network lifetime, based on the application
specifications.
• These Sugeno fuzzy rules should be adaptively tuned in order to
prolong the network lifetime, once before LEACH-SF operates for
the each application.
• We present an efficient encoding scheme to represent feasible
solutions, and design a weighted average multi-objective fitness
function to optimize the Sugeno fuzzy rules of LEACH-SF. The
fitness function of the ABC algorithm can be defined based on the
application specifications.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 briefly
reviews cluster-based routing protocols in WSNs. In Section 3, the
proposed LEACH-SF protocol is introduced in details. The optimiza-
tion procedure of LEACH-SF using artificial bee colony algorithm is
presented in Section 4. The network model is addressed in Section 5.
Section 6 presents the simulation results and comparison with the
existing techniques. Finally, Section 7 concludes the paper with some
future directions.
2. Literature review
2.1. Classical methods
Cluster-based routing protocols can be distinguished by how the
CHs would be elected. LEACH (Heinzelman et al., 2000) is the first
cluster-based protocol. It uses stochastic self-election which means that
nodes make autonomous decisions to be CHs without centralized
control. At the every round in LEACH, each node chooses a random
number in the range of [0,1]. If the random number of node n is
smaller than T (n ), it becomes a CH in the current round. The threshold
T (n ) is calculated according to Eq. (1), in which, p is the desired
percentage of CHs, r is the current round number, and G is the set of
nodes which have not been CH in the last 1/ p rounds.
⎧ p
if n∈G
⎪ effective manner. Moreover, fuzzy logic has comparatively more
T (n ) = ⎨ 1 − p × (rmod (1 / P ))
⎪ flexibility than crisp logic. On the other hand, fuzzy inference system
⎩ 0 otherwise (1)
When a node has been selected as a CH, it broadcasts an
17
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
advertisement message to inform the rest of nodes that it is a new
CH in the current round. Once each non-CH node receives the
advertisement messages from all CHs, it chooses the nearest CH based
on the signal strength of the received messages. After cluster forming
process, each CH creates a time scheduling based on the TDMA method
which assigns a time slot for each non-CH node to send its data to the
corresponding CH. When each CH receives the data packets of all
member nodes, it aggregates them and forwards to the sink. The
residual energy of nodes is not taken into account for CH-election in
LEACH protocol. On the other hand, if a node with lower residual
energy decides to become a CH, it would be rapidly dead. Considering
the residual energy of nodes, LEACH-C (Heinzelman et al., 2002) and
LEACH-EP (Jia et al., 2010), two extensions of LEACH have been
proposed, in which, an energy factor is also takes into account.
LEACH-C (Heinzelman et al., 2002) is the centralized version of
LEACH, in which, the sink is responsible to select the CHs. At the
beginning of every round, all nodes send information about their
location and residual energy to the base station. The base station
selects some nodes as CHs from the set of nodes whose their residual
energy is higher than the average energy of all nodes. This selection is
done via simulated annealing. Then, the base station broadcasts the
IDs of the CHs in the network to inform them that are the current CHs.
The rest of the LEACH-C process is quite similar to that of the LEACH.
LEACH-EP (Jia et al., 2010) is another centralized energy-aware
extension of LEACH protocol. In LEACH-EP, the nodes with more
energy have more opportunities to serve as CH. Energy-based thresh-
old TEP (n ) for node n in LEACH-EP is calculated according to Eq. (2), in
which, p is the desired percentage of nodes to be CHs, E (n ) is the
current residual energy of node n , and Ech_av is the average residual
energy of CHs in the previous round.
⎧ p × E (n) if E (n ) ≥ 0. 5×E
⎪ Ech _av ch _av
TEP (n ) = ⎨
⎪ 0
⎩ if E (n ) < 0. 5×Ech _av (2)
Recently, evolutionary algorithms (EAs) have begun to attract
attention from researchers to develop cluster-based routing protocols
in WSNs (Shokouhifar and Jalali, 2015; Attea and Khalil, 2011; Kuila
and Jana, 2014; Mudundi and Ali, 2007; Sengupta et al., 2013;
Hussain et al., 2007a, 2007b; Shakshuki and Malik, 2009;
Shokouhifar and Hassanzadeh, 2014). The main aim is to dynamically
cluster the sensor nodes in setup phase via EA in such a way that the
energy consumption is minimized and clustering criteria are optimized.
For N sensor nodes, there are totally 2N −1 different solutions, where in
each solution, each node can be either selected as a CH or not.
Therefore, clustering in WSNs is an NP-hard problem. EAs have been
applied successfully to a variety of NP-hard problems, and especially in
the context of clustered routing in WSNs. Although these approaches
outperform other attractive routing protocols in prolonging the net-
work lifetime, making a precise inspection, one can see that one
common drawback emerges. Since EA should be performed online in
the setup phase in the each round, these approaches increase an extra
overhead and delay to transmit data packets.
2.2. Fuzzy methods
Because of the uncertainties occurring in the WSN environments,
many clustering-based protocols make use of fuzzy systems for
clustering (Gupta et al., 2005; Mamdani and Assilian, 1975; Ran
et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2008; Lee and Cheng, 2012; Zhang et al., 2014;
Zahedi et al., 2016; Sert et al., 2015). By using fuzzy input/output
variables, uncertainties inherent in the WSN nature are handled in an
can achieve a better combination of the input parameters to obtain the
optimal output.
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
Gupta et al. (2005) proposed a fuzzy based CH-selection approach.
In the design of the fuzzy system, three variables (residual energy,
centrality and concentration) are designed as fuzzy inputs. This
approach, similar to LEACH, has two main phases: setup phase and
steady state phase. The only difference with LEACH is in the setup
phase, where the base station calculates the fuzzy chances of nodes to
be CHs. This method utilizes the Mamdani fuzzy inference system
(Mamdani and Assilian, 1975). At the every round, the nodes with the
maximum fuzzy chances are selected as the current CHs.
LEACH-FL (Ran et al., 2010) is an improved version of the LEACH
protocol which utilizes fuzzy logic to select CHs. It has a similar
mechanism to Gupta et al. (2005), however, three fuzzy input variables
are used: residual energy, distance from the sink, and node density.
The clustering procedure in LEACH-FL is centralized, in such a way
that all calculations for CH-selection are utilized in a processor located
in the base station. Although this method has the same defect of the
protocol presented in Gupta et al. (2005), it offers better results.
CHEF (Kim et al., 2008) is another fuzzy based clustering algo-
rithm. Unlike Gupta et al. (2005) and Ran et al. (2010), CHEF does not
need sink to collect the information of all nodes. It uses a distributed
local CH-election mechanism based on the fuzzy logic. At the every
round, each node generates a random number between 0 and 1. If the
random number of the node is smaller than a pre-specified threshold,
the node calculates its chance to be a CH via the fuzzy system. In the
design of the fuzzy inference system, two variables are considered as
fuzzy inputs: residual energy and local distance. Once each node
advertises its candidate message, it waits for receiving the messages
from the other nodes within its vicinity. If the chance of the node is
greater than the others, it becomes a CH and advertises a message to
the other nodes that it is a CH in the current round. The other phases in
CHEF are similar to those of in the LEACH protocol.
LEACH-ERE (Lee and Cheng, 2012) is similar to CHEF, except in
the determining the chance of nodes to be CHs in the pre-specified
threshold and in the maximum distance in the vicinity. The cluster
forming procedure in LEACH-ERE is distributed and there is no need
to centralized calculations in the base station. At the every round, each
node generates a random number. If the random number is greater
than the pre-specified threshold, the node becomes a candidate. Then,
the node calculates its chance using fuzzy system and broadcasts the
obtained value along with the candidate message. The residual energy
and the expected residual energy are considered as the fuzzy inputs. At
the every round, the consumed energy of all nodes in case of becoming
CHs are calculated. These values are subtracted from the actual
residual energy of nodes and the expected residual energy of nodes
are estimated. In other words, the intention to be CH is used to
estimate the energy dissipation of each node.
CRT2FLACO (Zhang et al., 2014) is a combined clustering ap-
proach based on type-2 fuzzy logic and ant colony optimization. It uses
type-2 Mamdani fuzzy inference system to calculate the probability of
nodes to be selected as CHs. Here, three fuzzy input variables are
considered: the residual energy, the number of neighbor nodes, and the
distance from the base station. In this approach, the selected CHs are
linked to the base station via a multi-hop routing based on ant colony
optimization.
SIF (Zahedi et al., 2016) is a swarm intelligence based fuzzy
clustering technique which adopt Mamdani fuzzy inference system
for appropriate CH-selection process. This approach utilizes three fuzzy
input variables: residual energy, global distance to the sink and local
distance to the cluster centroid. For each cluster, those nodes which
have the residual energy higher than a threshold, are selected as
candidate nodes for that cluster. Then, one node is selected as CH via
the Mamdani fuzzy system.
MOFCA (Sert et al., 2015) is a multi-objective fuzzy clustering
algorithm. This technique selects the CHs via energy-based fuzzy
competition among tentative CHs which were initially determined
using a probabilistic model. Three fuzzy input variables are defined
18
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
in MOFCA: residual energy, distance from the sink, and node density.
This method is distributed, and thus, uses local decisions to determine
the node competition radius and select tentative and final CHs.
The proposed LEACH-SF algorithm is different from the existing
classical and fuzzy cluster-based routing protocols with the following
respects:
1) The proposed LEACH-SF algorithm can prolong the network life-
time based on the specifications of the network for any application.
Whereas the performance of the existing techniques may be high
but cannot adapt with new applications.
2) In LEACH-SF, balanced clusters are formed and then an appro-
priate CH is selected within each cluster. Therefore not only
balanced clusters are generated, but also precise number of CHs
can be controlled. Whereas in the other clustering approaches, CHs
are typically selected among all nodes, and consequently, unba-
lanced clusters may be generated.
3) We present a Sugeno fuzzy clustering algorithm for CH selection in
WSNs. Whereas Mamdani inference system is mainly used in the
existing fuzzy-based approaches.
4) The fuzzy rules of LEACH-SF can be adaptively optimized based on
the application specifications. Whereas fuzzy rules of the existing
fuzzy methods are defined manually.
5) The iteratively-based optimization algorithm is performed to tune
LEACH-SF only once before the network operation. Whereas the
existing EAs are typically applied for the CH selection at the setup
phase of every round. Therefore, extra delay is generated in the data
transmission phase.
3. Sugeno fuzzy clustering algorithm (LEACH-SF)
3.1. Overall operation of LEACH-SF
The operation of the proposed LEACH-SF protocol in the every
round can be separated into setup phase and steady state phase. The
steady phase is quite similar to that of in the original LEACH protocol.
The difference is in the setup phase, where unlike LEACH, sink needs
to collect the information about the residual energy and location of
nodes, to select CHs via the Sugeno fuzzy model. The CH selection
procedure in LEACH-SF is centralized, in such a way that all calcula-
tions for clustering is utilized in the sink. During the setup phase, at
first Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) is performed on all nodes. Then, an impact
factor (IF) is calculated via the proposed Sugeno fuzzy model for the
every node within each cluster. IFs are defined in the range of [0,1],
and represent the goodness of nodes for becoming CH. The larger IF,
the more priority to be a CH. After calculation of IFs in the each cluster,
the node with the maximum IF is selected as the CH of that cluster.
After selection of CHs, the base station broadcasts an advertisement
message to the selected CHs. Then, each CH informs to all its member
nodes that it is the CH of them in the current round. Each CH creates a
TDMA telling each non-CH node when it can transmit its data packet.
During the steady state phase, each member node sends its data to the
corresponding CH, and then, the CH aggregates the gathered data and
transmits to the sink.
3.2. Cluster forming
FCM (Bezdek, 1981) is an efficient fuzzy clustering algorithm.
Unlike traditional clustering techniques such as c-means and k-means,
FCM considers a degree of belonging each instance to each cluster. The
aim is to minimize the sum of distances between each instance and its
cluster centroid. In WSNs, there are N nodes which should be clusters
into M groups. Each node has two features which are the two-
dimensional coordinate of the node. Therefore, the dimension of each
feature vector is 2. Input instance matrix is x={x1, x2 , …xi , …xN }T of
dimension N × 2 . Also, the matrix of cluster centers is
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
C ={c1, c2 , …cj , …cM }T of dimension M × 2 . The objective function of
FCM can be formulated as (Shokouhifar and Farokhi, 2010)
N M
OF = ∑i =1 ∑ j =1 Uijq × d (xi , cj )
where xi is the coordinate of node i , cj is the coordinate of the cluster
centroid j , and q is the fuzziness degree which has a value greater than
1. Moreover, Uij is the membership of node i to the cluster j , where
M
Uij∈[0,1], and ∑ j =1 Uij =1. Also, d (xi, cj ) measures the dissimilarity
betweenxi andcj , popularly defined via Euclidian distance. In order to
minimize the objective function, partial derivation OF with respect to
Uij and cj should be consequtively performed using Eqs. (4) and (5). To
terminate the algorithm, an ending criterion such as Uij (t )−Uij (t − 1) <ε
is used, where t is the current iteration, and ε is a positive number
around zero (e.g., 0.001). After termination of the algorithm, each node
is assigned to the cluster with the maximum fuzzy membership.
M
⎛ d (xi , cj ) ⎞2/(1− q )
Uij = ∑ ⎜⎝ ⎟
r =1
d (xi , cr ) ⎠
N
∑i =1 (Uijq × xi )
cj = N Low, Medium, and High. After fuzzification, the Sugeno fuzzy inference
∑i =1 Uijq
3.3. Cluster-head selection
Fuzzy logic (Zadeh, 1965) tries to model our decision making, and
is able to provide accurate results based on uncertain and vague
information. The most popular fuzzy inference models are Mamdani
(Mamdani and Assilian, 1975) and Sugeno (Takagi and Sugeno, 1985).
Generally, each model can be represented as “If antecedence then
consequence”. The antecedence is the same for all fuzzy models, but the
consequence has different forms for each model.
In this paper, Sugeno fuzzy model is employed in LEACH-SF to
select appropriate CHs. In the design of the fuzzy model, three
variables are considered as fuzzy inputs: residual energy, distance
from the sink, and distance from the cluster centroid. The residual
energy (first input) is the most important variable which directly affects
the lifetime. If a node with low residual energy decides to become a CH,
it would be rapidly dead. The higher residual energy, the more priority
for the node to be a CH. The distance between a CH and the sink
(second input) determines the energy consumption of the CH. The
distance between a CH and the cluster centroid (third input) is also
important, because the shorter the distance from the cluster centroid,
the smaller the summation of intra-cluster distances. We considered
these input variables to avoid selecting low energy nodes (first input),
to minimize the total energy consumption of CH nodes (second input),
and to minimize the total energy consumption of non-CH nodes (third
input).
A typical Sugeno fuzzy rule with three inputs x1, x2 and x3, and one
output y can be shown as “If x1=a and x 2=b and x3=c, then y = f (x1, x 2, x3)”,
where a , b and c are the membership function of the corresponding
inputs. In the Sugeno fuzzy model, f is a crisp function, very often a
polynomial function of the input variables as
f (x1, x2 , x3) = px1 + qx2 + rx3 + s
Fig. 1. Flowchart of cluster head selection procedure in LEACH-SF.
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
The CH-selection procedure in LEACH-SF, as seen in Fig. 1,
includes four parts: normalizer, fuzzifier, Sugeno fuzzy inference
engine, and defuzzifier. As mentioned above, in LEACH-SF, three
(3) input variables are considered for each node n : the residual energy,
E (n ), the distance from the sink, D (n ), and the distance from the
cluster centroid, d (n ). The aim of LEACH-SF is to calculate the impact
factor of the node n to be a CH, IF (n ), based on the three input
variables. Due to the different ranges of each variable in each cluster
and to make them applicable for any circumstance, the crisp input
variables should be normalized between 0 and 1 as
xi − min(x )
Normalized (xi ) =
max(x ) − min(x ) (7)
where xi is the crisp value of the input variable x for the node i . Also,
min (x ) and max (x ) are the minimum and the maximum value of the
variable among all nodes within the cluster of node i .
Fuzzifier converts the normalized inputs to linguistic fuzzy variables
(4) using the membership functions. The membership functions for input
variables can be seen in Fig. 2. The fuzzy sets used for fuzzification of
each input variable can be divided into three membership functions:
(5)
engine processes the predetermined fuzzy rules optimized via ABC, in
such a way that some rules are fired based on the input fuzzy variables.
So, the fuzzy output for the each fired rule is calculated. Finally,
defuzzifier aggregates the fuzzy outputs and converts to a single crisp
value Z (n ).
The final impact factor of the node n can be calculated as
⎧ Z (n ) if E (n ) ≥ t × 1 ∑ N E (i )
⎪ e N i =1
IF (n ) = ⎨
⎪ 0 if E (n ) < te× 1 ∑ N E (i )
⎩ N i =1 (8)
where N is the number of alive sensor nodes, E (n ) is the residual
energy of node n , D (n ) is the distance between node n and sink, d (n ) is
the distance between noden and its cluster centroid, and te is a
threshold parameter to determine whether node n is a candidate node
to be a CH or not. The Sugeno fuzzy rule base table applied in LEACH-
SF can be seen in Fig. 3.
According to the range of E , D , and d for the node n , some of the
fuzzy rules fires. Then, “weighted average” defuzzification method
(Ross, 2004) is used to generate the final crisp output Z (n ) from the
aggregation of the fired outputs yk (n ), k = 1,2, ..,27, according to Eq.
(9), in which, wk is the minimum value (or multiple) of the member-
ships of the three inputs E , D , and d to the corresponding membership
functions within the Rule k .
27
∑k =1 (wk × yk )
Z (n ) = 27
∑k =1 wk (9)
In the given fuzzy system, the number of fuzzy memberships for the
each input is 3 (Low, Medium, and High). So, the number of fuzzy if-
then rules is 3×3×3=27, where each rule has 4 constant parameters ( pk ,
qk , rk , and sk ). Therefore, the total number of controllable parameters in
the fuzzy system is 4×27=108. These parameters should be optimized
(6)
via artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm (Karaboga and Basturk, 2007).
19
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
Fig. 2. Membership functions for input variables in LEACH-SF.
3.4. Time complexity analysis
Time complexity of the different phases of the proposed clustering
algorithm can be summarized in Table 1. The cluster forming
procedure via FCM has a time complexity of O(N×M 2×IFCM), where
N is the number of sensor nodes, M is the desired number of clusters,
and IFCM is the number of FCM iterations. Moreover, time complexity
of the cluster-head selection via the Sugeno fuzzy system is
O(N×NRules), where NRules is the number of fuzzy rules. The
automatic rule-tuning via ABC has a time complexity of
O(PopABC×IABC×TCFitness), where PopABC is the population size
of ABC, IABC is the number of ABC iterations, and TCFitness is the
time complexity of the fitness function for one solution, i.e., an artificial
bee. To evaluate a solution, a network simulation should be completely
performed until LND. Therefore, TCFitness can be expressed as
O(N×M 2×IFCM×LND). It should be emphasized that the rule-tuning
procedure is performed offline only once before the main network
operation, and consequently, it adds no delay neither to the setup
phase nor to the steady state phase.
4. Automatic rule-tuning via ABC
Generally, the rules of fuzzy inference systems are manually defined
by an expert. Since proper selection of fuzzy rules is of major
importance during the design of fuzzy systems, we perform an
automatic rule-tuning procedure to optimize the Sugeno fuzzy rules
of LEACH-SF. The rule-tuning procedure can be utilized via such
optimization algorithms as heuristic, metaheuristic, evolutionary and
swarm intelligence algorithms. In this paper, we apply ABC algorithm
mainly because of its simplicity and good local- and global-search
ability. ABC is as simple as particle swarm optimization (PSO) and
differential evolution (DE), and uses only common control parameters
such as colony size and maximum cycle number. It does not need to set
external parameters and was confirmed to obtain better function
optimization results than PSO and DE. Moreover, ABC can effectively
search the whole search-space through its local and global search
mechanisms (Karaboga and Basturk, 2008).
In ABC, the position of each point in the search space corresponds
to a food source (a feasible solution), and its nectar corresponds to the
fitness value of the solution. A bee colony consists of three kinds of
Fig. 3. The Sugeno fuzzy rule base table in LEACH-SF.
20
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
Table 1
Time complexity analysis for LEACH-SF.
Phase Time complexity
Cluster forming via FCM algorithm O (N×M 2×IFCM)
Cluster-head selection via Sugeno O (N×NRules)
fuzzy system
Fitness function evaluation for each O(N×M 2×IFCM×LND)
artificial bee
Rule-tuning via ABC algorithm O(PopABC×IABC×N×M 2×IFCM×LND)
bees: employed bees, onlooker bees and scout bees (Sabet et al., 2013).
In order to optimize the fuzzy rules of LEACH-SF via ABC algorithm,
the initial population of employed bees is randomly generated within
the predetermined boundary range of the optimization variables. Then,
two overall steps are consequently done, until the maximum number of
iterations reached: fitness evaluation and population updating. To
evaluate the fitness of an artificial bee, the WSN is simulated via
LEACH-SF protocol with the corresponding Sugeno fuzzy rules deter-
mined by the bee. The population updating consists of three phases:
employed phase, onlooker phase, and scout phase. At the every
iteration, the global best solution should be updated (by comparing
the current best solution with the best solution found so far). The
overall flowchart of the ABC-based optimization procedure of LEACH-
SF can be seen in Fig. 4.
4.1. Problem representation
As mentioned above, there are 108 controllable parameters in
LEACH-SF, including pk , qk , rk , and sk (k= 1,2,3,…,27). Tuning these
parameters is the most important issue to operate LEACH-SF effi-
ciently, based on the application specifications and the lifetime defini-
tion. Since the residual energy has a positive impact for a node to
become a CH, the each pk is considered to be optimized in the range of
[0,1]. Also, each qk and rk are optimized in the range of [−1,0], as the
both distance-based fuzzy inputs (the distance from sink, and the
distance from cluster centroid) have the negative impacts. Finally, the
range of [−1,1] is used for the each bias sk . As seen in Fig. 5, a feasible
solution in ABC algorithm can be represented as a string of length 108.
4.2. Generation of initial population
At the first step, the initial population of employed bees is randomly
generated. In order to construct an initial solution, a uniform random
number is generated for the each optimization variable, within the
predetermined boundary range of that variable. Then, the two follow-
ing steps are consequently done, until the maximum number of
iterations of ABC has been reached: fitness evaluation of the current
population, and population updating.
4.3. Fitness evaluation
After all bees have constructed their solutions, they come back to
the hive and share their information with the other bees. The fitness
value of the each bee is evaluated according to the proposed fitness
function according to Eq. (10). In this way, each bee should firstly be
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
Fig. 4. Overall flowchart of the proposed ABC-based optimization procedure of LEACH-SF protocol.
Fig. 5. A feasible solution to optimize the Sugeno fuzzy rules of LEACH-SF.
decoded to extract its corresponding parameters ( pk , qk , rk , and sk ).
Then, the WSN is simulated for the each bee, using LEACH-SF
protocol, with the corresponding Sugeno fuzzy rules. Finally, the
obtained network lifetime is calculated and the fitness value is
evaluated. The proposed multi-objective fitness function and its con-
straints can be formulated as follows:
Maximize:
fitness = w1 × FND + w2 × HND + w3 × LND
Subject to:
0 ≤ pk ≤1 , −1 ≤ qk≤0 , −1 ≤ rk≤0 , −1 ≤ sk ≤1 , the probability of changing in the each optimization variable. Pchange is
k =1, 2…,27
3
0 ≤ wl ≤ 1 , ∑l =1 wl = 1, l = 1, 2, 3
where w1 to w3 are three constant weights to adjust the relative
importance of the objective terms (FND, HND, and LND). As men-
tioned above, the fitness function should be defined based on the
application specifications (e.g., FND, HND, LND, etc.). For example, in
healthcare monitoring only FND is important, and we should set w1=1,
w2=w3=0 .
4.4. Population updating
In the every iteration of ABC, each employed bee is moved onto her
previously visited food source environment (in the previous iteration),
to explore a new food source in the neighborhood area of the present
one. If the nectar amount (fitness value) of the new solution is higher,
the bee forgets the previous one and memorizes the new one. The
employed bee whose food source has been abandoned will become a
scout bee. It is controlled by a parameter called limit. The scout bee
caries out random searching the whole search space to discover a new
solution. After that all employed bees construct their solutions, they
come back into the hive and share their information about the quality
of the food sources with onlookers waiting in the hive. The more nectar
the food source contains, the larger probability the onlooker will choose
it. The probability of an employed bee to be selected by onlookers is
calculated via Eq. (13), in which, Pg is the probability of the gth
employed bee to be chosen by the onlookers, and E is the total number
of employed bees. Also, β is a constant parameter adjusts the selection
type. The larger β , the more probability for selecting the employed bee
with more fitness. After an onlooker selects an employed bee, she then
goes onto the food source area of the employed bee, in order to explore
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
a new food source within the neighborhood area.
( fitnessg ) β
Pg = E
∑ f =1 ( fitnessf ) β (13)
In order to neighborhood search (for both employed and onlooker
phases) in traditional ABC algorithm, one optimization variable is
randomly selected among all variables. Then, the current value of the
selected variable is replaced with a uniform random value within the
allowable boundary range of that variable. However, it is better to start
with global search and ending the algorithm with a local search
mechanism. In order to improve the investigation of the search space
and increase the convergence speed in ABC algorithm, an adaptive
(10)
neighborhood search strategy is introduced. It enables ABC algorithm
to search the neighborhood area via a hybrid global-local search
mechanism. In this way, the parameter Pchange is proposed to adjust
(11) considered to be decreased linearly from Pmax to Pmin during execute
algorithm, as follows:
(12) t
Pchange (t ) = Pmax + ×(Pmax −Pmin )
max _iter (14)
where Pchange (t ) is the probability for changing the value of each
optimization variable in the current iteration t , and max_iter is the
maximum number of iterations. The larger Pchange , the more optimiza-
tion variables would be changed.
5. Network communication model
In the every round, the sensor nodes sense the environment and
send the obtained information to the sink. The sink is responsible for
receiving the data from nodes, and then sending this information to the
end user. All nodes have the same capabilities of sensing, processing,
and communicating. Each node can communicates directly with the
sink and with other nodes. All nodes are equipped with GPS devices, so
they are aware of their own location as well as the location of sink. The
sink is stationary static and has no energy constraint. The first order
radio communication (Heinzelman et al., 2002) is used to model the
dissipated energy. In this model, a radio dissipates Eelec×l , to run either
the transmitter or the receiver circuitry. The energy consumption for
transmitting an l -bit data packet with distanced can be formulated as
Eq. (15). Depending on the transmission distance, the free space or
multi-path fading channel model is used for the transmitter amplifier,
as seen in the right term of Eq. (15). Also, the energy consumption to
receive an l -bit data packet is calculated according to Eq. (16).
⎧
⎪ l × Eelec + l × εfs × d
2 if d ≤ d 0
ETX (l , d )=⎨
⎪ 4
⎩ l × Eelec + l × εmp × d if d > d 0 (15)
21
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25

ERX (l ) = l × Eelec (16) Table 3

Setting the controllable parameters of ABC.
where Eelec is the dissipated energy (per bit) in either transmitter or
receiver circuit, and depends on such electronic factors as digital Parameter Value
coding, modulation, filtering, and spreading of the signal. The amplifier
Iterations 50
parameter used for free space and multipath environment is εfs and εamp Population 20
respectively. The distance threshold d 0 is defined as d 0= εfs / εamp . Number of employed bees 10
Number of onlooker bees 10
limit 0.7
6. Performance evaluation β in Eq. (13) 6
Pmax in Eq. (14) 0.2
6.1. Simulation settings Pmin in Eq. (14) 0.01

In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed LEACH-SF 100

clustering algorithm, we compare it against the original LEACH 90

LEACH
LEACH-DT
protocol (Heinzelman et al., 2000), the distance-aware LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE
80 LEACH-FL
protocol (Kang and Nguyen, 2012), the energy-aware ASLPR protocol ASLPR
70
(Shokouhifar and Jalali, 2015), the distributed fuzzy-based LEACH-

Number of Alive Sensors

LEACH-SF

ERE protocol (Lee and Cheng, 2012), and the centralized fuzzy-based 60

LEACH-FL protocol (Ran et al., 2010), in terms of the network lifetime 50

(FND, HND, LND), round history of dead nodes, intra-cluster dis- 40
tances, and the number of data packets received in the base station.
30
The routing mechanism in ASLPR, LEACH-FL, and LEACH-SF is
centralized, in such that the CH-selection procedure is utilized in a 20

processor located in the sink. However, LEACH, LEACH-DT, and 10

LEACH-ERE use stochastic self-election mechanism. On the other 0

0 500 1000 1500
hand, each node makes autonomous decision to be CH, without any Rounds
centralized control. It is expected that centralized protocols achieve
Fig. 6. Number of alive sensor nodes versus rounds, for WSN #1.
better performance than local ones to prolong the network lifetime.
However, given a certain WSN, a centralized protocol encounters 100
higher computational complexity, delay and overhead than a local LEACH
90 LEACH-DT
protocol. LEACH-ERE
80
In the existing cluster-based protocols, CHs are selected among all LEACH-FL
ASLPR
nodes, which may generate inappropriate distribution of CHs over the 70
Number of Alive Sensors

LEACH-SF
network. In order to form balanced clusters in LEACH-SF (unlike the 60

previous protocols), an overall clustering is firstly performed via FCM, 50

and then, a CH is selected within the each cluster. In order to
40
demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach to form
balanced clusters, the maximum and standard deviation of intra- 30

cluster distances are used to compare the mentioned algorithms. The 20

standard deviation (STD) of intra-cluster distances can be expressed as 10

M N 0
1 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
STDcl = ∑ ∑ (xi aij − cj )2 Rounds
N j =1 i =1 (17)
Fig. 7. Number of alive sensor nodes versus rounds, for WSN #2.
where aij is a binary parameter determining whether the node i belongs
to cluster j or not. As mentioned above, the fuzzy rules of the LEACH-SF clustering
In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the LEACH-SF, algorithm should be tuned based on the application specifications and
simulation results of the proposed are compared with those of the lifetime definition, once before LEACH-SF operates. Typically, the
other protocols for 10 different heterogeneous topographical areas, network is not valid after HND. Therefore, the weights of the fitness
each composed of 100 sensor nodes randomly deployed in a topological function in Eq. (10) were set to w1= 0.7, w2= 0.3 and w3=0 , because FND
area of dimension 150 m×150 m. The base station is located at the is the most important factor, HND has less importance, and LND is not
center of the network. All sensors have the same initial energy. Table 2 important. The value of threshold parameter in Eq. (8) was set to
presents the network details. In order to tune the controllable para- te= 0.9. Unlike the previous protocols, the precise number of clusters
meters of ABC, different values were tested and the best ones were can be set in LEACH-SF. We use the optimal number of clusters
chosen. Parameter settings for ABC can be summarized in Table 3. according to Heinzelman et al. (2000). As mentioned above, we should
tune LEACH-SF via ABC algorithm, to prolong the defined network
Table 2 lifetime, once before it operates. However, the obtained simulation
Network details. results show that there is no major variance for the each controllable
parameter, optimized in the different runs of ABC in the different
Parameter Value
WSNs.
Initial energy 1J
Eelec 50 nJ/bit 6.2. Simulation results
εfs 100 pJ/bit/m2
εmp 0.013 pJ/bit/m4
In order to capture the performance of the compared clustering
Data packet size 4000 bit
Control packet size 50 bit techniques, Figs. 6 and 7 statistically qualify them for network lifetime
in WSN #1 and WSN #2. These figures depict the total number of alive

22
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25

Table 4
Maximum and standard deviation of intra-cluster distances (on average), in the each round.

WSN # LEACH LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE LEACH-FL ASLPR LEACH-SF

Max STD Max STD Max STD Max STD Max STD Max STD

1 49 11.8 55.2 14.8 50.5 12 44.2 10.6 37.4 9.3 24.6 8.2
2 53.2 11.5 56.5 13.7 52.4 11.5 42.6 11.3 35.4 10.1 26.2 8.4
3 50.5 11 53.1 14.2 54 12.3 43.9 10.8 36.3 10 25.9 9.1
4 49.5 10.8 52.4 13.3 49.5 10.9 42.9 11 34.8 9.6 23.2 8
5 56.3 12.4 55.8 14.7 52 12.1 47.4 12.4 40.1 11 27.3 9.3
6 50.4 12.3 54.9 15.3 50.4 11.7 46.6 11.4 38.2 9.9 26.9 8.4
7 51.8 11.6 53.8 15 57.3 12.5 48 12.5 38.6 9.5 23.9 8.8
8 53.4 12.4 55.5 13.7 54.3 11.9 46.2 10.1 41.3 10.4 27.5 10.2
9 52.9 11.5 56 15.2 54.9 12.4 46.3 9.9 35.3 10.1 23.4 8.3
10 48.5 10.9 53.7 13.8 50.4 11.9 44.7 10.5 36.6 9.7 25.3 9.1
Average 51.6 11.6 54.7 14.4 52.6 12 45.3 11 37.4 10 25.4 8.8

Table 5
Network lifetime in FND and HND.

WSN # LEACH LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE LEACH-FL ASLPR LEACH-SF

FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND

1 616 819 811 994 863 1147 1219 1304 1332 1372 1367 1437
2 640 816 837 1000 871 1176 1226 1326 1372 1384 1424 1452
3 620 806 819 1004 868 1158 1231 1320 1348 1377 1394 1442
4 647 830 846 1023 875 1182 1236 1332 1375 1386 1435 1449
5 597 806 802 989 857 1115 1197 1293 1312 1358 1360 1417
6 623 848 834 1010 879 1188 1210 1306 1338 1385 1389 1430
7 610 792 795 966 823 1117 1182 1285 1290 1378 1345 1362
8 632 836 829 1022 888 1202 1232 1320 1349 1412 1365 1435
9 680 827 855 1017 912 1215 1222 1367 1402 1476 1425 1458
10 636 825 844 1021 883 1189 1230 1385 1367 1440 1417 1456
Average 630.1 820.5 827.2 1004.6 871.9 1168.9 1218.5 1323.8 1348.5 1396.8 1392.1 1433.8

Table 6
Round history of dead nodes (on average) for 10 WSNs.

% Dead nodes LEACH LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE LEACH-FL ASLPR LEACH-SF

1 (FND) 630.1 827.2 871.9 1218.5 1348.5 1392.1

10 687.3 879.6 948.3 1272.3 1357.7 1407.5
20 734.7 911 1032.3 1291 1369.2 1413.2
30 776.4 953.3 1083.7 1307.7 1375.8 1420
40 790.1 975.9 1117 1316.7 1386.2 1427.4
50 (HND) 820.5 1004.6 1168.9 1323.8 1396.8 1433.8
60 834 1032.3 1196.2 1332.5 1400.1 1441.8
70 868.5 1064.2 1221.6 1340.2 1403.6 1450.3
80 893.1 1089.8 1280 1351.3 1406.3 1459
90 931 1163 1332.2 1360 1409 1466.7
100 (LND) 983.4 1265.2 1384.9 1368.1 1411.3 1472.2

Table 7
Total number of data packets received in sink, until the network lifetime.

WSN # LEACH LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE LEACH-FL ASLPR LEACH-SF

FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND FND HND

1 61600 78239 81100 96187 86300 108938 121900 129481 133200 136633 136700 143274
2 64000 77893 83700 96583 87100 110918 122600 131537 137200 138153 142400 144786
3 62000 77910 81900 95789 86800 106397 123100 131032 134800 137120 139400 143902
4 64700 78329 84600 97328 87500 109380 123600 129890 137500 139222 143500 146290
5 59700 76771 80200 96020 85700 106936 119700 128379 131200 135550 136000 142029
6 62300 78709 83400 97355 87900 110849 121000 128364 133800 136489 138900 144987
7 61000 76989 79500 93459 82300 10478 118200 125490 129000 138028 134500 137523
8 63200 78280 82900 97271 88800 111294 123200 130488 134900 136890 136500 141034
9 68000 81289 85500 98178 91200 110679 122200 130829 140200 143967 142500 146092
10 63600 78378 84400 96250 88300 106874 123000 129380 136700 138339 141700 146783
Average 63010 78278.7 82720 96442 87190 99274.3 121850 129487 134850 138039.1 139210 143870

23
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25

Table 8
CPU running time.

Phase LEACH LEACH-DT LEACH-ERE LEACH-FL ASLPR LEACH-SF

Online clustering (in milliseconds) 0.4 0.5 1.7 1.2 1.4 0.8
Offline rule-tuning (in minutes) N/A N/A N/A N/A 178 145

Fig. 8. Effect of the network dimension on FND for different clustering techniques.

Fig. 9. Effect of the number of nodes on FND for different clustering techniques.

Fig. 10. Effect of the sink location on FND for different clustering techniques.

sensor nodes versus rounds. Additionally, quantitative results are
included summarizing the maximum and STD of intra-cluster dis-
tances, on average in the each round (Table 4), the network lifetime in
terms of FND and HND (Table 5), the round history of dead nodes
(Table 6), and the total data packets received in the sink before lifetime
arrivals (Table 7). In these tables, the best values are given in bold.
Moreover, comparison of the CPU running time of the clustering
procedure (online clustering) and the rule-tuning algorithm (offline
rule-tuning) on average for all WSNs can be summarized in Table 8.
It can be concluded from Table 3 that LEACH-SF forms balanced
clusters. As seen, LEACH-SF performs the smallest maximum and STD
of intra-cluster distances as compared with the other approaches. Since

24
M. Shokouhifar, A. Jalali
the clusters are formed via the FCM algorithm in LEACH-SF, the
number of member nodes has not much different between the different
clusters. It is notable that the load of a CH node depends on the
number of member nodes in its cluster. Therefore, the little bit
difference in the number of member nodes within the different clusters
means that the load is properly distributed among all clusters.
Figs. 6 and 7 shows that LEACH-SF is more stable than the other
protocols, because node deaths begin later and continue linearly until
all sensor nodes die. Moreover, the results in Tables 4–7 clearly
illustrate the positive impact of the proposed routing protocol.
According to Table 5, the gain in stable region of LEACH-SF until
FND is 121%, 68%, 60%, 14%, and 3%, as compared with LEACH,
LEACH-DT, LEACH-ERE, LEACH-FL, and ASLPR, respectively.
In order to capture the performance of the compared protocols for
different WSNs, three scenarios are given. In the first scenario, five
WSNs with different dimensions, each composed of 100 sensor nodes
are applied. Fig. 8 illustrates the effect of dimensional variation on the
FND network lifetime. As it was expected from the network commu-
nication model in Eq. (15), the larger the topological area, less lifetime
is obtained. The second scenario captures the FND versus different
number of nodes in five WSNs of dimension 150 m×150 m. It can be
seen in Fig. 9 that the number of nodes does not have so much effect on
the network lifetime, because each additional sensor has own power
supply component and can assist other nodes to distribute the loads of
CHs. The location of sink was fixed at the center of each network in all
above simulations. In the third scenario, the effect of sink location on
the FND is evaluated. To achieve this purpose, sink is located at the
center, inside, border, corner, and outside of the network in five WSNs,
each composed of 100 sensor nodes randomly deployed in a topological
area of dimension 150 m×150 m. The results in Fig. 10 clearly show
that the best performance is achieved when sink is located at the center
of the network. The larger distance of sink from the network centroid
results in larger average distance between CHs and sink, and conse-
quently, more energy consumption in overall.
7. Conclusion
In this paper, we have proposed an energy-efficient cluster-based
routing protocol (named LEACH-SF) to form balanced clusters and
prolong the network lifetime in WSNs. In LEACH-SF, balanced clusters
are formed via fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm, and then, an
optimized Sugeno fuzzy system is applied to select the proper cluster
heads. Local information of sensor nodes (the residual energy, the
distance from the sink and the distance from the cluster centroid) are
used as the fuzzy input variables of the Sugeno fuzzy model. Since
tuning the fuzzy rules within the fuzzy system is the most important
issue and has a key role in the operation of LEACH-SF, an artificial bee
colony algorithm is utilized to optimize the Sugeno fuzzy rules. The
optimization procedure should be performed once before LEACH-SF
operates. Simulation results show that LEACH-SF can efficiently form
balance clusters and maximize network lifetime. LEACH-SF outper-
forms the exiting classical and fuzzy-based clustering algorithms in
terms of minimizing the intra-cluster distances, maximizing the net-
work lifetime, and maximizing the number of received data packets in
the base station. The proposed clustering technique was designed for
the networks with stationary sensor nodes. As a future work, it can be
extended for handling mobile sensor nodes. In LEACH-SF, cluster
heads directly communicate with the base station. We plan to extend it
with multi-hop routing in order to cope with large topological areas.
References
Akyildiz, I.F., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Cayirci, E., 2002. Wireless sensor
networks: a survey. Comput. Netw. 38 (4), 393–422.
Alrajeh, N.A., Khan, S., Shams, B., 2013. Intrusion detection systems in wireless sensor
networks: a review. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 9 (5), 1–7.
25
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 60 (2017) 16–25
Attea, B.A., Khalil, E.A., 2011. A new evolutionary based routing protocol for clustered
heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Appl. Soft Comput. 12 (7), 1950–1957.
Bezdek, J.C., 1981. Pattern Recognition With Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms.
Plenum Press, New York.
Butun, I., Morgera, S.D., Sankar, R., 2014. A survey of intrusion detection systems in
wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 16 (1), 266–282.
Gupta I., Riordan D., Sampalli S., 2005. Cluster-head election using fuzzy logic for
wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on
Communication Networks and Services Research. pp. 255–60.
Heinzelman W., Chandrakasan A., Balakrishnan H., 2000. Energy-efficient
communication protocol for wireless microsensor networks. In: Proceedings of the
33rd International Conference on System Science, Hawaii, USA. pp. 1–10.
Heinzelman, W.B., Chandrakasan, A.P., Balakrishnan, H., 2002. An application-specific
protocol architecture for wireless microsensor networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel.
Commun., 660–670.
Hussain, S., Matin, A.W., Islam, O., 2007a. Genetic algorithm for hierarchical wireless
sensor networks. J. Netw. 2 (7), 87–97.
Hussain, S., Islam, O., Matin, A.W., 2007. Genetic algorithm for energy efficient clusters
in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on
Information Technology: New Generations, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 147–154.
Intanagonwiwat C., Govindan R., Estrin D., 2000. Directed diffusion: a scalable and
robust communication paradigm for sensor networks. In: Proceedings of ACM
MobiCom, Boston, USA. p. 56–67.
Jia J., He Z., Kuang J., Mu Y., 2010. An energy consumption balanced clustering
algorithm for wireless sensor network. In: Proceedings of IEEE conferences.
Kang, S.H., Nguyen, T., 2012. Distance based thresholds for cluster head selection in
wireless sensor networks. IEEE Commun. Lett. 16 (9), 1396–1399.
Karaboga, D., Basturk, B., 2007. A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical
function optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. J. Glob. Optim. 39 (3),
459–471.
Karaboga, D., Basturk, B., 2008. On the performance of artificial bee colony (ABC)
algorithm. Appl. Soft Comput. 8 (1), 687–697.
Kim J., Park S., Han Y., Chung T., 2008. CHEF: cluster head election mechanism using
fuzzy logic in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceeding of the 10th International
Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, pp. 654-659.
Kuila, P., Jana, P.K., 2014. Energy efficient clustering and routing algorithms for wireless
sensor networks: particle swarm optimization approach. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 33,
127–140.
Lee, J.S., Cheng, W.L., 2012. Fuzzy-logic-based clustering approach for wireless sensor
networks using energy predication. IEEE Sens. J. 12, 2891–2897.
Mamdani, E.H., Assilian, S., 1975. An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy
logic controller. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 7, 1–13.
Ming, L.Y., Wong, V.W.S., 2007. An energy-efficient multipath routing protocol for
wireless sensor networks. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 20 (7), 747–766.
Mudundi S., Ali H., 2007. A new robust genetic algorithm for dynamic cluster formation
in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of Wireless and Optical
Communications, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ran, G., Zhang, H., Gong, S., 2010. Improving on LEACH protocol of wireless sensor
networks using fuzzy logic. J. inf. Comput.. J. inf. Comput. Sci 7, 767–775.
Ross, T.J. Fuzzy logic with engineering applications, second edition, 2004, John Wiely &
Sons Ltd, USA
Sabet, S., Shokouhifar, M., Farokhi, F., 2013. A discrete artificial bee colony for multiple
Knapsack problem. Int. J. Reason.-Based Intell. Syst. 5 (2), 88–95.
Sengupta, S., Das, S., Nasir, M.D., Panigrahi, B.K., 2013. Multi-objective node
deployment in WSNs: In search of an optimal trade-off among coverage, lifetime,
energy consumption, and connectivity. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 26 (1), 405–416.
Sert, S.A., Bagci, H., Yazici, A., 2015. MOFCA: multi-objective fuzzy clustering algorithm
for wireless sensor networks. Appl. Soft Comput. 30, 151–165.
Shakshuki, E.M., Malik, H., 2009. Multi-agent-based clustering approach to wireless
sensor networks. Int. J. Wirel. Mob. Comput. 3 (3), 165–176.
Shokouhifar M., Farokhi F., 2010. An artificial bee colony optimization for feature subset
selection using supervised fuzzy c-means algorithm. In: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Information Security and Artificial Intelligence (ISAI
2010). pp. 427-432.
Shokouhifar, M., Hassanzadeh, A., 2014. An energy efficient routing protocol in wireless
sensor networks using genetic algorithm. Adv. Environ. Biol. 8 (21), 86–93.
Shokouhifar, M., Jalali, A., 2015. A new evolutionary based application specific routing
protocol for clustered wireless sensor networks. AEU-Int. J. Electron. Commun. 69
(1), 432–441.
Takagi, T., Sugeno, M., 1985. Fuzzy identification of systems and its applications to
modeling and control. IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. 15 (1), 116–132.
Vlajic N., Xia D., 2006. Wireless sensor networks: to cluster or not to cluster. In:
Proceedings of the International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and
Multimedia Networks. pp. 258–268.
Wang, S.S., Yan, K.Q., Wang, S.C., Liu, C.W., 2011. An integrated intrusion detection
system for cluster-based wireless sensor networks. Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (12),
15234–15243.
Xu Y., Govindan R., Estrin D., 2001. Geographical and energy aware routing: a recursive
data dissemination protocol for wireless sensor networks. In: Technical Report
UCLA/CSD-TR-01-0023, UCLA Computer Science Department.
Yick, J., Mukherjee, B., Ghosal, D., 2008. Wireless sensor network survey. Comput. Netw.
52, 2292–2330.
Zadeh, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control. 8, 338–353.
Zahedi, Z.M., Akbari, R., Shokouhifar, M., Safaei, F., Jalali, A., 2016. Swarm intelligence
based fuzzy routing protocol for clustered wireless sensor networks. Expert Syst.
Appl. 55, 313–328.
Zhang Q., Sun Z., Zhang F., 2014. A clustering routing protocol for wireless sensor
networks based on type-2 fuzzy logic and ACO. In Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Fuzzy Systems. pp. 1060–1067.