ABSTRACT Noise (from different sources), data dimension, and fading can have dramatic effects on the performance of wireless sensor networks and the decisions made at the fusion center. Any of these parameters alone or their combined result can affect the final outcome of a wireless sensor network. As such, total elimination of these parameters could also be damaging to the final outcome, as it may result in removing useful information that can benefit the decision making process. Several efforts have been made to find the optimal balance between which parameters, where, and how to remove them. For the most part, experts in the field agree that it is more beneficial to remove noise and/or compress data at the node level. We have developed computationally low power, low bandwidth, and low cost filters that will remove the noise and compress the data so that a decision can be made at the node level. This wavelet-based method is guaranteed to converge to a stationary point for both uncorrelated and correlated sensor data. This is mainly stressed so that the low power, low bandwidth, and low computational overhead of the wireless sensor network node constraints are met while fused datasets can still be used to make reliable decisions.
Cite this paper
E. Sheybani, "Adaptive Wavelet Filtering for Data Enhancement in Wireless Sensor Networks," Journal of Sensor Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, 2012, pp. 82-86. doi: 10.4236/jst.2012.22012.
 P. Closas, E. Calvo, J. A. Fernandez-Rubio and A. Pages-Zamora, “Coupling Noise Effect in Self-Synchronizing Wireless Sensor Networks,” IEEE 8th Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications, Helsinki, 17-20 June 2007, pp. 1-5.
 H. Yamamoto and T. Ohtsuki, “Wireless Sensor Networks with Local Fusion,” Global Telecommunications Conference, St. Louis, 28 November-2 December 2005, pp. 5-9.
 S. H. Son, S. R. Kulkarni, S. C. Schwartz and M. Roan, “Communication-Estimation Tradeoffs in Wireless Sensor Networks,” IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, Philadelphia, 18-23 March 2005, pp. 1065-1068.
 A. Abdallah and W. Wolf, “Analysis of Distributed Noise Canceling,” The 2nd International Conference on Distributed Frameworks for Multimedia Applications, Pulau Pinang, 14-17 May 2006, pp. 1-7.
 I. D. Schizas, G. B. Giannakis and Z. Q. Luo, “Optimal Dimensionality Reduction for Multi-Sensor Fusion in the Presence of Fading and Noise,” IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Toulouse, 14-19 May 2006, 4 p.
 L. Pescosolido, S. Barbarossa and G. Scutari, “Average Consensus Algorithms Robust against Channel Noise,” IEEE 9th Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications, Recife, 6-9 July 2008, pp. 261-265.
 J. Liang and T. W. Parks, “A Translation Invariant Wavelet Representation Algorithm with Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol. 44, No. 2, 1996, pp. 225-232. doi:10.1109/78.485919
 I. Cohen, S. Raz and D. Malah, “Shift-Invariant Adaptive Trigonometric Decomposition,” Proceedings 4th European Conference on Speech, Communication, Technology, Madrid, 18-21 September 1995, pp. 247-250.
 I. Cohen, S. Raz and D. Malah, “Orthonormal Shift-Invariant Adaptive Local Trigonometric Decomposition,” Signal Processing, Vol. 57, No. 1, 1997, pp. 43-64.
 I. Cohen, S. Raz and D. Malah, “Orthonormal Shift-Invariant Wavelet Packet Decomposition and Representation,” Signal Processing, Vol. 57, No. 3, 1997, pp. 251-270.
 S. Mallat, “Zero-Crossings of a Wavelet Transform,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 37, No. 4, 1991, pp. 1019-1033. doi:10.1109/18.86995
 S. G. Mallat and S. Zhang, “Characterization of Signals from Multiscale Edges,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis Machine Intelligence, Vol. 14, No. 7, 1992, pp. 710-732.