Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract— Radio frequency identification (RFID) is an emerg- GHz, have a range in the order of 10 m. Active tags require a power
ing technology for automatic object identification. An RFID source (e.g., a battery) for data transmission and have a larger range
system consists of a set of readers and several objects, with (> 100 m).
each object equipped with a small chip, called a tag. In In an RFID system, packet collisions may occur during the
this paper, we consider the anonymous cardinality estimation interrogation of a reader. This type of packet collision is called
problem in an RFID system consisting of several readers. To a tag-to-tag collision. Tree-walking and ALOHA-based protocols
achieve complete system coverage and increase the accuracy of are two kinds of tag-to-tag anti-collision protocols proposed in the
measurement, multiple readers with overlapping interrogation literature [5]–[12]. For RFID systems with multiple readers, other
zones are deployed. We study the problem under two different types of collisions (e.g., reader-to-tag and reader-to-reader collisions)
circumstances. First, we assume that the readers cannot perform may occur during the interrogations of various readers [13]. Several
interrogations synchronously. This models the case when the anti-collision interrogation techniques have been proposed for RFID
readers are not equipped with accurate clocks or synchronization systems with multiple readers in the literature [14]–[17]. A framed-
imposes a high overhead. Under such condition, we propose an slotted ALOHA-based tag anti-collision scheme has also been stan-
asynchronous exclusive estimator to estimate the number of tags dardized by EPCglobal in [18]. This allows each tag to randomly
that are exclusively located in the zone of a selected reader. select a time slot and transmit its ID. The performance of this scheme
By using this estimator, we propose an asynchronous multiple- has been studied extensively recently [19], [20].
reader cardinality estimation (A-MRCE) algorithm. In the second Tag estimation is widely used as a preliminary phase in ALOHA-
scenario, we assume that readers can perform interrogations syn- based interrogation techniques [21]–[23]. Readers can adjust the
chronously. We propose a synchronous exclusive estimator and frame size based on the estimation of tag population. Another
a synchronous multiple-reader cardinality estimation (S-MRCE) application of tag estimation techniques, which has recently received
algorithm to estimate the total number of tags. For the exclusive attention, is the anonymous tracking of objects [24], [25]. In order to
estimators, we show that they are asymptotically unbiased and preserve the privacy and anonymity of the tag users, it may not be
we derive upper bounds on the variance of error. We validate necessary to identify each individual user in some RFID applications.
our analytical model via simulations. Results show that although Instead, the goal is to estimate the total number of tags (or users) in
the A-MRCE algorithm enjoys the asynchronous operation of the system. This is called the cardinality estimation (or tag population
the readers, it performs worse than the S-MRCE algorithm in estimation) problem in RFID systems. The potential applications
terms of estimation error. Compared to the enhanced zero-based include estimating the number of attendants in large exhibitions and
(EZB) and lottery frame (LoF) algorithms, the variance of the conferences when each attendant is equipped with an RFID tag, and
estimation error for both A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms urban traffic monitoring at streets and intersections when cars are
increases linearly with the number of readers, while it increases equipped with RFID tags.
exponentially for EZB and LoF algorithms. In [24], Kodialam et al. proposed the zero-based and collision-
Keywords: RFID systems, cardinality estimation, multiple reader. based tag estimation techniques using a framed-slotted ALOHA
model with a single reader. In [25], they extended their work
by introducing the enhanced-zero based (EZB) estimator, which
I. I NTRODUCTION is an asymptotically unbiased estimator. Using this technique, the
Radio frequency identification (RFID) systems are increasingly mean and variance of the estimation error approach zero when the
being deployed as automated identification systems. These systems estimation process is repeated multiple times. Although the EZB
are expected to play an important role in various applications such algorithm can also be used for RFID systems with multiple readers,
as warehouse and supply chain management, object tracking, and the variance of estimation error increases exponentially with the
patients’ monitoring in health care facilities [1]–[3]. An RFID sys- number of readers. In [22], Qian et al. proposed the lottery frame
tem consists of a set of readers and several objects. Each object (LoF) scheme, which is a replicate-insensitive estimation protocol.
is equipped with a small computer chip, called tag. Using these LoF applies the hash functions with geometric distribution to tag IDs
inexpensive tags, every object can be uniquely identified. RFID tags to select the time slots for transmission.
can be categorized into passive and active tags. A passive tag uses For large scale RFID systems, it is necessary to deploy multiple
backscatter modulation, and its transmission power is derived from readers with overlapped interrogation zones to fully cover the area
the signal of the interrogating reader [2], [4]. Passive tags can operate and achieve a high accuracy in the estimation. Consequently, a tag
in different frequency bands. Low-frequency tags operate in the 124- can be within the interrogation zone of several readers simultaneously.
135 kHz band and have an operating range of up to 0.5 m. Ultra For tracking applications, which require privacy and anonymity of the
high frequency tags, which operate at either 860-960 MHz or 2.45 users, each tag only transmits a portion of its ID to the reader when it
is being queried. Thus, readers cannot identify uniquely the individual
Manuscript received Mar. 15, 2010; revised Aug. 31, 2010; accepted Jan tags. Thus, those tags which are within the range of multiple readers
31, 2011. This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering may be counted multiple times. We call this problem the multiple
Research Council (NSERC) of Canada. Part of this paper was presented at the
IEEE Global Communications Conference (Globecom), Honolulu, HI, Dec. counting problem. This motivates us to propose estimation algorithms
2009. The review of this paper was coordinated by Prof. Jianhua Lu. which are capable of estimating the number of tags in such systems.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineer- We study the problem in two different conditions. First, we assume
ing, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada, that readers cannot perform interrogation synchronously. We develop
e-mail: {vahids, vincentw}@ece.ubc.ca. an asynchronous multiple-reader cardinality estimation (A-MRCE)
2
vrm , m = 1, . . . , M . Using the EZB algorithm, the number of tags Algorithm 1 A-MRCE Algorithm executed at reader r ∈ R.
within the zone of reader r can be estimated as [25]: 1: Upon receiving parameters p, q, and f from the controller,
! reader r performs M interrogation processes
M
X m using seed values q.
ñr = −f /p ln t /M f . (2) 2: Reader r sends its location info and the interrogation vectors
m=1
vr1 , . . . , vrM to the controller.
It is shown in [25] and [27] that the estimation error is asymptoti-
cally normal and unbiased. The variance of the estimation error is
σn2 r = f exp(pnr /f ) − (1 + p2 nr /f ) /(M p2 ). We will use this The maximum likelihood (ML) estimate of nr\W is the value that
estimator in both A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms. maximizes the log-likelihood function as follows:
ñM
r\W = arg max ln L z; nr\W , nW
III. A SYNCHRONOUS M ULTIPLE R EADER C ARDINALITY nr\W
E STIMATION ( M
)
M X (z m − µz )2
= arg max − ln σz2 − . (6)
In some practical cases, it may not be possible for the readers nr\W 2 m=1
2σz2
to perform interrogations in a synchronous manner. This models
the case when the readers are not equipped with accurate clocks In practice, nW is not given and an estimation should be used
or synchronization imposes a high overhead. Under such condition, instead. Let ñM
W denote the estimation of nW using M interrogation
we develop an asynchronous multiple reader cardinality estimation vectors. By taking the derivative of (6) and equating it to zero, we
(A-MRCE) algorithm. The A-MRCE algorithm is used to estimate can find the closed form expression for the ML estimator. For large
the total number of tags while readers perform interrogations inde- values of M (e.g., M > 10) and f (e.g., f > 100), the exclusive
pendently and forward the information to a central controller. The estimator in (6) can be approximated as
A-MRCE algorithm implements (1) using asynchronous exclusive ( M
)
1 X m
estimator described in the following subsection. M
ñr\W ≈ nr\W µz −
z =0
M m=1
PM m M !
A. Asynchronous Exclusive Estimator f m=1 z pñW
= − ln 1 − exp . (7)
p Mf f
The asynchronous exclusive estimator is used to estimate the
number of tags within the zone of a particular reader excluding Eq. (7) is the asynchronous exclusive estimator. In the next sub-
the tags shared with some other readers, while readers perform section, we explain how nW can be estimated. The inaccuracy in
interrogations independently. It facilitates implementation of equation estimation of nr\W comes from the random nature of samples taken
(1). Consider reader r and a set of readers W ⊆ Hr . Let nr\W denote from the system and also the error in estimation of nW . The following
the number of tags within the zone of reader r that do not belong theorem characterizes the error of the estimator in (7).
to any of the readers in set W (i.e., |Tr \ ∪w∈W Tw |). Given the Theorem 2: Given the error in estimation of nW follows a normal
number of tags within the zone of readers in W, nW , we propose distribution, for large values of M and f , the error in estimation of
an asynchronous exclusive estimator to estimate nr\W . nr\W using (7) has a normal distribution. Moreover, this estimator
Consider a time slot which is non-empty in vector vr . This is asymptotically unbiased if the mean of error in estimation of nW
indicates that one or more tags within the range of reader r has chosen approaches zero for large values of M . The variance of error is
that time slot. If this time slot is empty in vw for any w ∈ W, it bounded by
ensures that none of the tags within the range of readers in W has ! 2
chosen that slot. Let variable Z denote the number of time slots which 2 1 2p nr\W + nW σz
are nonempty in vr and empty in P vw , ∀ w Q∈ W. That is, given reader σnr\W (M ) ≤ exp
p2 f M
r ∈ R and set W, we have Z = fl=1 vrl w∈W (1 − vw l
). The time 2
pnr\W
slots, which are non-empty in vr and empty in vw , are chosen by
+ exp − 1 σn2 W (M ), (8)
a subset of tags in the set {Tr \{∪w∈W Tw }}. This suggests that the f
variable Z can be used to estimate nr\W . The following theorem
characterizes the distribution of variable Z. where σn2 r\W (M ) and σn2 W (M ) are the variance of errors in
Theorem 1: The random variable Z has a normal distribution with estimation of nr\W and nW using M independent set of interrogation
mean µz and variance σz2 for large values of f , nr\W and nW : vectors, respectively.
The proof of Theorem 2 is given in Appendix B. We will compare
σn2 r\W (M ) and its upper bound in Section V.
pn
µz = f 1 − exp − r\W f
exp − pnfW . (3)
B. A-MRCE Algorithm
p2 nW
σz2 = µz 1 − µz /f 1 + We now present the A-MRCE algorithm to estimate the total
f number of tags in an RFID system with multiple readers. The A-
2p
MRCE algorithm is a centralized algorithm. The controller is a cen-
− p2 nr\W exp − (nr\W + nW ) . (4) tralized unit which is responsible to estimate the total number of tags
f
The proof of Theorem 1 is given in Appendix A. By using the in the system. Each reader performs interrogations individually and
interrogation vectors vr1 , . . . , vrM , and vw 1 M
, . . . , vw , ∀ w ∈ W, transmits its interrogation vectors to the controller. The controller uses
one can obtain M samples of the random variable Z, namely these vectors to estimate the number of tags. The A-MRCE algorithm,
z 1 , . . . , z M . Let zdenote a vector composed of all the samples (i.e., which is shown in Algorithms 1 and 2, implements equation (1)
z = z 1 , . . . , z M ). From Theorem 1, the likelihood function of z using the single reader and the asynchronous exclusive estimators.
given nr\W and nW is Algorithm 1 shows part of the A-MRCE algorithm performed by a
reader r ∈ R. Algorithm 2 shows part of the A-MRCE algorithm
M performed by the controller. When the algorithm is invoked, the
(z m − µz )2
Y 1 controller informs the persistence probability p, frame size f , and
L z; nr\W , nW = √ exp − . (5)
m=1
2πσz2 2σz2 a set of M random seeds q (i.e., |q| = M ) to all the readers.
4
Algorithm 2 A-MRCE Algorithm executed at the controller. procedure, the first level of the estimation is obtained by using the
1: Input: Set of readers R, neighboring set of reader r, Hr , and asynchronous exclusive estimator which has an error with normal
the interrogation vectors of reader r, ∀r ∈ R. distribution and zero mean. Based on Theorem 2, the next levels
2: Initialization: Set Ñ := 0, and Γ := {} have also an estimation error with normal distribution and zero mean.
3: while Γ 6= R Consequently, the estimation of nW has a normal distribution with
4: Select a reader r randomly from the set R\Γ. zero mean.
5: Set W := Γ ∩ Hr . We now describe how to determine the estimation error for the
6: if W = {} A-MRCE algorithm. The value of Ñ obtained by the A-MRCE
7: Calculate ñr using (2). algorithm is composed of several estimations from the single reader
8: Set Ñ := Ñ + ñr . and the asynchronous exclusive estimators. All the readers contribute
9: else to the estimation of Ñ . Since different terms for Ñ are from
10: Calculate ñW using (2) if |W| = 1 or using A-MRCE either single reader or asynchronous exclusive estimators, they have
algorithm if |W| > 1. asymptotically normal distributions with zero mean. Therefore, Ñ
11: Calculate ñr\W using asynchronous exclusive estimator has asymptotically normal distribution with zero mean. In general,
(7). different terms of Ñ are not independent. However, the summation
12: Set Ñ := Ñ + ñr\W . of the variance of error of these terms can give an upper bound for
13: end if the variance of the error for A-MRCE algorithm. The summation of
14: Set Γ := Γ ∪ {r}. the variances depends on the order that readers are selected in the
15: end while algorithm (Step 4 of algorithm 2).
For pure random selection of the readers (Step 4 of Algorithm
2), we calculate the expected value of the summation of variances
over different runs of the algorithm. For reader r ∈ R with |Hr |
Each reader r ∈ R then performs M interrogation processes and neighbors, let Qr denote the power set of Hr . The power set of a set
sends the interrogation vectors (vr1 , . . . , vrM ) to the controller. The is the set of all subsets of that set. In different runs of the A-MRCE
readers also inform the controller about their location by sending the algorithm, the number of tags within the zone of reader r may appear
location information to the controller. Hr is the set of readers whose in various forms in Ñ . For example, it can be either Ñ := Ñ + ñr or
interrogation vectors overlap with the interrogation zone of reader
Ñ := Ñ + ñr\W for any W ∈ Qr . For set W ∈ Qr , the probability
r. Based on the interrogation range of each reader and its location,
Hr , which is the set of neighboring readers of reader r can also be that Ñ contains ñr\W is equal to the probability that only readers in
determined. The readers may encounter reader-to-tag and reader-to- set W from the neighbors of r are selected before reader r within the
reader collision during their interrogations. To avoid the collision, algorithm run. Assuming that the reader selection is purely random,
several techniques have been proposed in the literature [13]–[17] for this probability is equal to the probability that among reader r and
RFID systems with multiple readers. However, it is not the focus its neighbors (i.e., Hr ), readers in set W are selected before reader
of this paper and we assume that the readers employ one of these r. The probability that any subset of neighbors of r with cardinality
techniques to perform interrogations. |W| are selected by the algorithm before reader r is 1/(|H1 | + 1)
After receiving the required information (interrogation vectors and and the number of such subsets is |H |W|
r|
. Let Pnr\W denote the
location information) from all the readers, the controller estimates probability that nr\W appears in Ñ . This probability can be written
the total number of tags using asynchronous exclusive estimator by as
invoking Algorithm 2. Algorithm 2 is equivalent to applying equation 1
(1) iteratively to estimate the total number of tags. Steps 4 − 14 Pnr\W = . (9)
denote one iteration of the algorithm. At each iteration, the algorithm (|Hr | + 1) |H|W|
r|
selects a reader r randomly from the readers which have not been Therefore, when the reader r is selected within the algorithm run,
selected yet (i.e., R\Γ). Then, the controller calculates the number with probability Pnr\W we have W = Γ ∩ Hr , ∀ W ∈ Qr . The
of tags within the range of the selected reader which have not already
expected value for the summation of variances of errors in Ñ gives
been counted and adds it to Ñ . The set W denotes the set of neighbors 2
an upper bound on the variance of estimation error σasyn :
of reader r which has been selected by the algorithm in the previous
iterations (i.e., the tags within the range of the readers in the set W 2
X X 2
σasyn ≤ Pnr\W σnr\W . (10)
have been counted till now). If this set is empty, the algorithm uses r∈R W∈Qr
the single reader estimator in (2) to calculate ñr and adds this number
to the current estimation of the total number of tags Ñ (Steps 6−9). IV. S YNCHRONOUS M ULTIPLE R EADER C ARDINALITY
If the set W is non-empty, then the algorithm uses the asynchronous
exclusive estimator to calculate ñr\W . To do so, the asynchronous E STIMATION (S-MRCE)
exclusive estimator requires the value of ñW . If the set W has only We proposed the A-MRCE algorithm in the previous section
one member, then ñW can be calculated using single reader estimator based on the assumption that readers cannot be synchronized for
in (2). Otherwise, the controller invokes the A-MRCE algorithm interrogations. In this section, we consider the case that readers
(Algorithm 2) again to estimate the number of tags within the range have the ability to be synchronized for interrogations (e.g., they are
of readers in the set W. This shows a recursive operation of the A- equipped with accurate clocks). We develop a synchronous multiple
MRCE algorithm. We notice that since the controller already has the reader cardinality estimation (S-MRCE) algorithm, which is suitable
interrogation vectors of all the readers including those in set W, it for RFID systems with multiple synchronized readers. The readers
does not need to ask the readers to perform interrogations again. operate synchronously in a sense that they start interrogation at certain
times and perform interrogations periodically one after another. We
first propose a synchronous exclusive estimator, which is a building
C. Estimation Error and Discussion block of the S-MRCE algorithm.
To estimate ñr\W , the asynchronous exclusive estimator uses
the estimation of nW . Therefore, the A-MRCE algorithm needs to
calculate ñW . If the set W has one element, then the single reader A. Synchronous Exclusive Estimator
estimator can be used and the estimation error in estimating nW has a The synchronous exclusive estimator is developed to estimate
normal distribution with zero mean. If the set W has more than one nr\W for W ⊆ Hr using interrogation vectors obtained from
reader, the algorithm is invoked again to estimate nW . This gives synchronous operation of the readers. The main idea behind the
a recursive operation of the A-MRCE algorithm. In the recursive operation of the synchronous exclusive estimator is the use of
5
different seed values for different tags in one interrogation. In fact, Algorithm 3 S-MRCE Algorithm to calculate the total
the reader performs interrogation while the shared tags (i.e., the tags number of tags in the system.
in Tr ∩{∪w∈W Tw }) and the tags which are exclusively located within 1: The controller sends the parameters p, f , vector q, and random
the range of the reader have different seed values. Consider reader slot numbers {s1 , . . . , s|R| } to all readers.
r, the set of readers W ⊆ Hr , and the vector vr obtained from 2: for k = 0, . . . , |R| − 1
the interrogation of tags within the range of r using seed value q. 3: if sr = k,
Also, consider vector ur obtained from the interrogation of tags in 4: Reader r starts periodic interrogation process using seed
Tr while the tags in Tr \{∪w∈W Tw }) use seed value q and the tags vector q.
in Tr ∩ {∪w∈W Tw } use seed value q ′ . Since the tags select the same 5: end if
slot whenever they are interrogated with the same seed value, vectors 6: end for
vr and ur have common information about nr\W . The difference 7: for r ∈ R
between these two vectors comes from the shared tags, which have 8: Reader r calculates ñr using (2) and calculates ñr\W using
been interrogated with different seed values. The number of slots with synchronous exclusive estimator (13).
at least one transmission in either vr or ur represents the existence 9: Reader r sends the estimated value ñr\W to the controller.
of a tag in set Tr while the tags in Tr ∩ {∪w∈W Tw } are counted 10: end for
twice. Let Y denote the number of time slots which are nonempty 11: The controller sums up the received value from all readers to
either P reader r ∈ R and set W, we have
in vr or ur . That is, given find the estimation of N .
Y = fl=1 vrl + ulr − vrl ulr . The samples of random variable Y
can be used to estimate the value of nr\W . The following theorem
characterizes the distribution of variable Y .
Theorem 3: The random variable Y has a normal distribution with Equation (14) can be approximated as
mean µy and variance σy2 for large values of f , nr , and nr\W as: 2
µ′y p2
Isyn (nr\W ) ≈ = , (15)
µy = f (1 − exp (−pν/f )) , (11) σz2 f (1 − (1 + p2 ν) exp (−pν/f ))
σy2 = f exp (−pν/f ) 1 − (1 + p2 ν) exp (−pν/f ) , where µ′y denotes the derivative of µy with respect to nr\W . Now,
(12)
where ν = (2nr − nr\W ). we consider the error in estimation of nr . Similar to the estimation
The proof is similar to the proof given in [28] for the occu- error of asynchronous exclusive estimator, the error generated from
pancy problem and we omit it due to the lack of space. Using M inaccurate estimation of nr and the error from the random samples
different pairs of seed values for the tags in Tr \{∪w∈W Tw } and have different signs. Therefore, the summation of the variance of
Tr ∩ {∪w∈W Tw }, M different samples of random variable Y can be these two errors gives an upper bound on the variance of estimation
obtained, namely y 1 , . .. , y M . Let y denote the vector of all samples error for synchronous exclusive estimator. Since the term nr in (13)
(i.e., y = y 1 , . . . , y M ). The likelihood function of nr\W using y is has coefficient two, its variance has coefficient four in the summation
similar to that obtained in (5) if the mean and variance of variable Z is of variances:
replaced by variable Y . The ML estimate of nr\W with M different σn2 r\W (M ) ≤ M Isyn (nr\W )
−1
+ 4σn2 r . (16)
samples can be obtained by taking derivative from the likelihood
function and equating it to zero similar to the approach used for (6).
For large values of M (e.g., M > 10) and f (e.g., f > 100), the B. S-MRCE Algorithm
synchronous exclusive estimator can be approximated as We now present the S-MRCE algorithm to estimate the total
(
M
) number of tags in a system covered by multiple readers. On contrary
1 X m
M
n̂r\W ≈ nr\W µy −
y =0 to the A-MRCE algorithm, the S-MRCE algorithm is a distributed
M m=1 approach while readers perform interrogation and estimate the num-
PM m
! ber of tags individually. Then, they transmit their estimation to the
f m=1 y controller. The controller just sums up those numbers to obtain the
= 2nr + ln 1 − , (13)
p Mf estimation of the total number of tags. The computation load of
estimation is at the reader’s side. The S-MRCE algorithm implements
where n̂M r\W denotes the estimation of nr\W using the synchronous (1) using the synchronous exclusive estimator. Algorithm 3 shows the
exclusive estimator with M samples. When using the synchronous S-MRCE algorithm. In this algorithm, all the readers are assumed to
exclusive estimator, we use an estimation of nr . This estimation is be synchronized with a central clock.
obtained using the single reader estimator which is asymptotically We divide the system time into several time periods and each
P m
unbiased.PFor m of M , m y /M converges to µy and
large values reader is assigned a period number. Each reader performs an inter-
ln 1 − m y /(M f ) converges to −p/f ν. Since the error in rogation within the assigned period. To prevent collision between
the estimation of nr approaches zero, the synchronous exclusive neighboring readers, we use a scheduling algorithm based on graph
estimator is asymptotically unbiased. Since it is an ML estimator, coloring [30]. We assign different colors to various readers such
the error distribution is asymptotically normal [29]. The error in the that two neighboring readers are not assigned the same color. The
estimation of nr is also asymptotically normal and is added to the chromatic number of the system is the minimum number of colors
error generated from the random samples taken from the system. needed to color all the readers. Let C denote the chromatic number
Assume that there is no error in estimation of nr . In this case, the of our system. The colors are interpreted as different time periods of
error in n̂Mr\W originates from the second term in (13). Since the
the system. This provides a time division multiple access method for
synchronous exclusive estimator is an ML estimator, the variance of interrogation of all the readers. There are C interrogation periods
error can be approximated using the Cramer-Rao bound [29]. The assigned to the readers. Let sr denote the period number which
Fisher information for this exclusive estimator can be written as is assigned to the reader r. Each period is long enough for an
2 interrogation process. At the beginning, the controller informs the
Isyn (nr\W ) = Ey|nr\W ∂
ln L(y; nr\W ) persistence probability p, frame size f , the random seed vector
∂nr\W
q = (q1 , . . . , qM ), where qi 6= qj , ∀ i, j, and the slot number to
all the readers (Step 1). We call the C slots together an interrogation
( 2 )
2
∂
QM 1 ( y m −µy )
= Ey|nr\W ∂n
ln m=1 √ 2 exp − 2σ 2 . round. Within an interrogation round, all the readers perform the
r\W 2πσy y
interrogation once. To estimate the number of tags, all the readers
(14) perform interrogation twice in two consecutive rounds. In the first
6
100 n = 1000
r
r1 r5 r10 n = 750
90 r
n = 500
r
80
60
r3 r7 r8 50
40
30
(b)
20
Fig. 2. Network topologies: (a) Three readers, and (b) Ten readers. 10
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Number of interrogations M
round, all the readers announce their seed value and then perform
interrogation. In the second round, however, the readers just perform (a)
the interrogation and do not announce the seed value. For the reader 10
r, the first interrogation results in measuring interrogation vector vr n = 1000
r
while all the tags within range of reader r are interrogated with the 9 n = 750
r
same seed value. In the second interrogation, the reader r measures 8
n = 500
r
vector ur while the tags in the range of reader r which are in the
180 10000
Upper Bound − n =750
r Actual number of tags
160 9000
Simulation − n =750 Syn. Exclusive Estimator − p = 0.5
r
Upper Bound − n =500 8000 Syn. Exclusive Estimator − p = 1
r
140 Asyn. Exclusive Estimator − p = 0.5
Simulation − n =500
60 3000
40 2000
20 1000
0
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Number of Tags, n
r
Number of Interrogations, M
Fig. 6. The mean of estimation error for varying number of tags, asyn-
Fig. 4. Standard deviation of estimation error for different number of chronous and synchronous exclusive estimators.
interrogations M when using an asynchronous exclusive estimator.
400 70
Upper Bound − n =2000 Syn. Exclusive Estimator
r
350 Simulation − n =2000 Asyn. Exclusive Estimator
r
60
Upper Bound − n =1000
r
30
150
20
100
50 10
0 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Number of Interrogations, M Persistence Probability, p
Fig. 5. Standard deviation of estimation error for different number of Fig. 7. Operational range of asynchronous and synchronous exclusive
interrogations M when using the synchronous exclusive estimator. estimators for varying persistence probabilities.
40 120
A−MRCE − Upper Bound
n = 750
35 r A−MRCE − Simulation
n = 500 100 S−MRCE − Upper Bound
r
20 60
15
40
10
20
5
0 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Persistence Probability p Total Number of Tags N
(a)
Fig. 9. Comparison of A-MRCE and S-MRCE in terms of standard deviation
40 of error.
n = 2000
r
35
n = 1000
r
30 n = 750
r to estimate the number of tags for systems with multiple readers.
Standard Deviation of Error
n = 500
r
To achieve that, the interrogation vectors of all the readers in the
25 n = 250
r
system are merged using slot-wise and operator. The resulting vector
is similar to a vector obtained by a single reader interrogating all the
20 tags in the system. Therefore, this vector can be used as an input
for the EZB or LoF algorithm to estimate the total number of tags
15
in the system. We compare these algorithms for a system with three
10
readers and ten readers separately.
First, we compare the mean and variance of estimation error of A-
5 MRCE, S-MRCE, LoF, and EZB algorithms for various interrogation
times for an RFID system with three readers shown in Fig 2 (a). The
0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 number of tags within the range of each reader is 750. Figs. 10 (a)
Persistence Probability p and (b) show the mean and standard deviation of error in estimating
the total number of tags versus the interrogation time, respectively.
(b)
The interrogation time is defined as the number of time slots that each
Fig. 8. Standard deviation of error for varying persistence probabilities: (a) reader requires to perform interrogation. The frame size for A-MRCE,
asynchronous exclusive estimator, (b) synchronous exclusive estimator. S-MRCE, and EZB algorithms is set to 500 while it is set to 16 for
LoF. We vary the number of interrogations for various algorithms
(change M and the number of hash functions) and determine the
mean and variance of estimation error. Fig. 10 (a) shows that LoF
B. Performance Evaluation for A-MRCE and S-MRCE Algo- algorithm has a lower mean of estimation error compared to other
rithms algorithms for the same interrogation times. Then, LoF has a wider
In this section, we first investigate the performance of the A-MRCE operational range compared to other schemes. However, as Fig. 10 (b)
and S-MRCE algorithms for a system with ten readers shown in Fig. 2 shows, the variance of estimation error is higher in LoF compared to
(b). The interrogation zone of each reader has a range equal to 15 m. other algorithms.
The tags are randomly deployed within the interrogation zone of the Next, we consider the system in Fig. 2 (b). The number of
readers. We set the frame size f to be 500 time slots, the persistence tags within the zone of different readers is nr = 500. The frame
probability p to 1, and M to 50. Then, we increase the total number of size f is set to 500 time slots for A-MRCE, S-MRCE, and EZB
tags in the system from 500 to 5000 with steps of 500. These numbers algorithms while the frame size of the LoF is set to 16. The number
are chosen such that the single reader and exclusive estimators work of interrogations M is set to 20 for A-MRCE and EZB algorithms
in their operational range (i.e., the mean of estimation error is zero). and it is set to 10 for S-MRCE algorithm. We use 600 various hash
Fig. 9 shows the standard deviation of error for the A-MRCE and functions for the LoF algorithm. We notice that under this setting,
S-MRCE algorithms and compares the analytical results obtained in the readers in all the algorithms have the same interrogation time.
(10) and (17) with the simulation results. The simulation results are We also mention that the mean of estimation error is close to zero
averaged over 1000 iterations. As we expect, the analytical values for all the estimators under this setting. At the beginning, we only
provide upper bounds on the simulation results for both algorithms. consider reader 1 for the simulations. Then, we add the reader one by
In the worst case, the analytical results are 40% and 30% higher one to the system and investigate the performance of the algorithms
than the simulation results. As Fig. 9 shows, the standard deviation in the presence of different number of readers. Fig. 11 shows the
of error is negligible compared to the actual number of tags in the standard deviation of the estimation error for the total number of
system, which proves the accuracy of the algorithms. Moreover, it tags for various number of readers. It can be seen that the standard
can be seen that the S-MRCE algorithm outperforms the A-MRCE deviation of error in the A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms grows
algorithm substantially in terms of estimation error. However, we linearly with the number of readers while it increases exponentially
notice that S-MRCE is not suitable for cases when readers cannot in LoF and EZB algorithms. In the presence of multiple readers, EZB
perform synchronously in the system. and LoF algorithms merge the interrogation vectors of several readers
Next, we compare the A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms with to obtain one interrogation vector. For a fixed number of tags within
two other algorithms: the lottery frame (LoF) [22] and EZB [25] the range of the readers, increasing the number of readers would
algorithms. Both EZB and LoF algorithms can also be extended linearly increase the total number of tags in the system. Since both
9
40
EZB [25] 200
EZB [25]
A−MRCE
35 S−MRCE 180 LoF [22]
LoF [22] A−MRCE
30 160 S−MRCE
140
25
120
20
100
15 80
60
10
40
5
20
0 0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Number of Time Slots Number of Readers
(a)
Fig. 11. Comparing the standard deviation of estimation error for A-MRCE,
250 S-MRCE, EZB [25], and LoF [22] algorithms.
LoF [22]
EZB [25]
A−MRCE
Standard Deviation of Estimation Error
200 S−MRCE
linearly with the number of readers while it increases exponentially
for EZB [25] and LoF [22] algorithms. For future work, one can
150
study the problem of choosing the design parameters f and p based
on the initial estimation of the number of tags and study the trade
off between the variance of estimation error and interrogation time.
100
A PPENDIX
50
A. Proof of Theorem 1
Let φz and ψz denote the event that z predetermined slots are
nonempty in vr and empty in vw , ∀ w ∈ W, respectively. Let θz
0 denote the event that both events φz and ψz occur. We have P(θz ) =
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Number of Time Slots P (φz ∩ ψz ) = P(φz | ψz )P(ψz ), where
(b) nr\W
X
Fig. 10. Comparing different algorithms in terms of interrogation time P(φz | ψz ) = (P(φz | t tags pick these z slots)
(number of time slots), (a) mean of estimation error, and (b) standard deviation t=0
of estimation error. ×P ( t tags pick these z slots | ψz )) .
The condition on observed ψz affects the upper bound of the
summation. The probability that z time slots are non-empty if t tags
algorithms use the merged interrogation vector for estimation and the choose them is as follows [31, p. 92]:
variance of the estimation error for either EZB and LoF algorithms
increases exponentially with the number of tags, the variance of z
! t
EZB and LoF algorithms increases exponentially as the number of X k z z
P(φz | t tags pick these z slots) = (−1) 1− .
readers linearly increases. However, for the A-MRCE and S-MRCE k f
k=0
algorithms, whenever a reader is added to the system, only the error
of the exclusive estimator which is used to estimate the tags within We also have
range of that reader is added to the total error. Therefore, the increase
P ( t tags pick these z slots | ψz )
in the error is linear as the number of readers increases linearly. !
t (nr\W −t)
nr\W pz pz
= 1− .
VI. C ONCLUSIONS t f f
In this paper, we studied the problem of anonymous cardinality Hence, we have
estimation in RFID systems with multiple readers. We proposed nr\W ! !
z t
two ML estimators, namely an asynchronous exclusive estimator X X kk z nr\W
and a synchronous exclusive estimator, to estimate the number of P(φz ) = (−1) 1−
t=0 k=0
f k t
tags which are exclusively located within the zone of a reader. We t (nr\W −t)
showed that these estimators are asymptotically unbiased and we pz pz
derived upper bounds on the variance of estimation error. We pro- 1−
f f
posed the A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms which can accurately z
! nr\W
estimate the tag population anonymously using the query replies of X z pk
= (−1)k 1− .
different readers and exclusive estimators. We derived the probability
k=0
k f
density function of the estimation error and showed that it can be
approximated as a normal distribution with zero mean. The accuracy Therefore, we can write P(θz ) as
of the model and the approximations are validated via simulations. n z ! n
pz w X
For performance comparisons, results showed that the variance of k z pk r\W
P(θz ) = 1 − (−1) 1− .
estimation error for A-MRCE and S-MRCE algorithms increase f k=0
k f
10
Let Sz denote the summation of probability of all possible occur- derived from the same vectors vr and vw . However, the error of
rences of z events in a frame. This is equal to Sz = fz P (θz ). Let these two variables are not in the same direction. If the error of eM
z
Pz denote the probability of having exactly z slots nonempty in vr is positive, it means that in these vectors, the tags are spread such
and empty in vw , ∀ w ∈ W. This probability can be calculated using that the number of empty slots in vectors vw , which overlap with
[31, p. 96] as follows: non-empty slots, is higher than the expected value. In this case, the
f
! estimate of nW , which is obtained from those vectors, should be
X m−z m less than its expected value. Therefore, the error of eMn is positive.
Pz = (−1) Sm In general, the summation of variances for these two terms gives an
m=z
z
upper bound for the variance of error as follows:
f
! !
m−z m f
X
= (−1) P (θm ). (18) 1 2p nr\W + nW
! 2
σz
m=z
z m σn2 r\W = exp
p2 f M
Equation (18) shows that this problem is similar to the occupancy 2
pnr\W
problem investigated in [27]. It is shown in [27], [28] that the + exp − 1 σn2 W .
distribution for the occupancy problem is asymptotically normal. f
Using a similar approach, we can show that Z has a normal
distribution for large values of f and nr . To calculate the mean and
variance of Z, we use the approach presented in [28]. We define an
auxiliary random variable Xi which takes values from {0, 1}. Xi is R EFERENCES
equal to one if the ith time slot is non-emptyP in vr and empty in
vw , ∀w ∈ W. Therefore, we have Z = fi=1 Xi . The mean and [1] R. Want, “An introduction to RFID technology,” IEEE Pervasive Com-
variance of variable Z can be obtained using this auxiliary variable puting, vol. 5, pp. 25 – 33, Jan./Mar. 2006.
as follows: [2] S. Ahson and M. Ilyas, RFID Handbook: Applications, Technology,
hP i Security, and Privacy. CRC Press, 2008.
f [3] P.-Y. Chen, W.-T. Chen, Y.-C. Tseng, and C.-F. Huang, “Providing group
µz = E[Z] = E i=1 Xi = f P1
tour guide by RFIDs and wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Trans. on
pnr\W
pnW Wireless Commun., vol. 8, pp. 3059–3067, June 2009.
≈ f 1 − exp − exp − . [4] A. Bletsas, S. Siachalou, and J. N. Sahalos, “Anti-collision backscatter
f f
2 sensor networks,” IEEE Trans. on Wireless Commun., vol. 8, pp. 5018–
Pf 5029, Oct. 2009.
σz2 = E i=1 Xi − µ2z
[5] D. Shih, R. Sun, D. Yen, and S. Huang, “Taxonomy and survey of
Pf 2 hP
f Pf i RFID anti-collision protocols,” Computer Communications, vol. 29, pp.
= i=1 E Xi + 2E i=1 j=i+1 Xi Xj 2150–2166, July 2006.
[6] J. Myung and W. Lee, “Adaptive splitting protocols for RFID tag
= f P1 + f (f − 1)P2 − µ2z collision arbitration,” in Proc. of ACM MobiHoc, Florence, Italy, May
2
≈ µz 1 − µfz 1 + p nf W 2006.
[7] C. Floerkemeier, “Bayesian transmission strategy for framed Aloha
2p based RFID protocols,” in Proc. of IEEE Int’l Conf. on RFID, Grapevine,
−p2 nr\W exp − (nr\W + nW ) . TX, Mar. 2007.
f
[8] Y.-C. Ko, S. Roy, J. R. Smith, H.-W. Lee, and C.-H. Cho, “An enhanced
dynamic RFID multiple access protocol for fast inventory,” in Proc. of
B. Proof of Theorem 2 IEEE Globecom, Washington, DC, Nov. 2007.
zm [9] J. S. Choi, H. Lee, D. W. Engels, and R. Elmasri, “Robust and dynamic
P
We replace mM and ñW by µz +eM M
z and nW +en , respectively bin slotted anti-collision algorithms in RFID systems,” in Proc. of IEEE
M M
while ez and en are random variables. Since variable Z has a Int’l Conf. on RFID, Las Vegas, NV, Apr. 2008.
normal distribution, variable eM
z is a normal random variable with [10] H. Koh, S. Yun, and H. Kim, “Sidewalk: A RFID tag anti-collision
zero mean and variance σz2 /M . Moreover, it is assumed that ñW algorithm exploiting sequential arrangements of tags,” in Proc. of IEEE
is a normal random variable and the estimation is asymptotically ICC, Beijing, China, May 2008.
unbiased. Therefore, eM
n is a normal random variable with zero mean.
[11] J.-B. Eom, T.-J. Lee, R. Rietman, and A. Yener, “Efficient framed-slotted
For large values of f and M , the variance of eM M
z and en approaches
Aloha algorithm with pilot frame and binary selection for anti-collision
zero and we have of RFID tags,” IEEE Commun. Letters, vol. 12, pp. 861–863, Nov. 2008.
[12] C.-H. Quan, J.-C. Choi, G.-Y. Choi, and C.-W. Lee, “The Slotted-LBT:
ñr\W A RFID reader medium access scheme in dense reader environments,”
P m in Proc. of IEEE Int’l Conf. on RFID, Las Vegas, NV, Apr. 2008.
f z pñW [13] A. H. Mohsenian-Rad, V. Shah-Mansouri, V. W. Wong, and R. Schober,
= − ln 1 − m exp
p Mf f “Distributed channel selection and randomized interrogation algorithms
M
p(nW +eM
for RFID systems,” IEEE Trans. on Wireless Communications, vol. 9,
(µz +ez ) n )
= − fp ln 1 − f
exp f
pp. 1402 – 1413, Apr. 2010.
[14] J. Waldrop, D. W. Engels, and S. E. Sarma, “Colorwave: An anticollision
M algorithm for the reader collision problem,” in Proc. of IEEE ICC,
(µz +ez )
pnW
≈ − fp ln 1 − M
f
1 + p/f e n exp f Anchorage, AK, May 2003.
M M
[15] Z. Zhou, H. Gupta, S. R. Das, and X. Zhu, “Slotted scheduled tag access
e +µ p/f e
≈ − fp ln 1 − µfz exp pnfW − z z
f
n
exp pnfW in multi-reader RFID systems,” in Proc. of IEEE Int’l Conf. on Networks
Protocols (ICNP), Beijing, China, Sept. 2007.
eM /p+µz /f eM
≈ − fp ln 1 − µfz exp pnfW − z n exp pnW
pnW f
[16] J. Ho, D. W. Engels, and S. E. Sarma, “HiQ: A hierarchical Q-learning
1−µz /f exp f algorithm to solve the reader collision problem,” in Proc. Int’l Symp. on
Applications and Internet Workshops, Phoenix, AZ, Jan. 2006.
M p ( W r\W )
n +n
pn
e M r\W
≈ nr\W − zp exp f
− e n exp f
− 1 . [17] Y. Tanaka and I. Sasase, “Interference avoidance algorithms for pas-
sive RFID systems using contention-based transmit abortion,” IEICE
Trans. on Commun., vol. E90-B, pp. 3170–3180, Nov. 2007.
Since both variables eM
z and eMn are normal random variables, [18] EPCglobal, “EPC Radio-Frequency Identity Protocols Class-1
variable ñW is a normal random variable for large values of M . Generation-2 UHF RFID Protocol for Communications at 860
Moreover, the mean of error approaches zero for large values of M . MHz-960 MHz Version 1.2,” May 2008. [Online]. Available:
Variables eM M
z and en are dependent in general since they are both http://www.epcglobalinc.org/standards/uhfc1g2
11