MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548349436 · doi:10.1145/2989275.2989286

On Developing Smart Transportation Applications in Fog Computing Paradigm

2016· article· en· W2548349436 on OpenAlexafffund
Nam Ky Giang, Victor C. M. Leung, Rodger Lea

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCloud computingVehicular ad hoc networkComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Intelligent transportation systemEdge computingFog computingWireless ad hoc networkDistributed computingSmart cityComputer networkComputer securityTelecommunicationsInternet of ThingsEngineeringTransport engineeringWirelessOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart Transportation applications by nature are examples of Vehicular Ad-hoc Network (VANETs) applications where mobile vehicles, roadside units and transportation infrastructure interplay with one another to provide value added services. While there are abundant researches that focused on the communication aspect of such Mobile Ad-hoc Networks, there are few research bodies that target the development of VANET applications. Among the popular VANET applications, a dominant direction is to leverage Cloud infrastructure to execute and deliver applications and services. Recent studies showed that Cloud Computing is not sufficient for many VANET applications due to the mobility of vehicles and the latency sensitive requirements they impose. To this end, Fog Computing has been proposed to leverage computation infrastructure that is closer to the network edge to compliment Cloud Computing in providing latency-sensitive applications and services. However, applications development in Fog environment is much more challenging than in the Cloud due to the distributed nature of Fog systems. In this paper, we investigate how Smart Transportation applications are developed following Fog Computing approach, their challenges and possible mitigation from the state of the arts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207