MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592910900 · doi:10.1109/mcom.2018.1700018

When IoT Keeps People in the Loop: A Path Towards a New Global Utility

2018· article· en· W2592910900 on OpenAlexaff
Vitaly Petrov, Konstantin Mikhaylov, Dmitri Moltchanov, Sergey Andreev, Gábor Fodor, Johan Torsner, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu, Markku Juntti, Yevgeni Koucheryavy

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInternet of ThingsCommoditizationContext (archaeology)WirelessPath (computing)Data scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Distributed computingTelecommunicationsComputer securityComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the IoT has made significant progress supporting individual machine-type applications, it is only recently that the importance of people as an integral component of the overall IoT infrastructure has started to be fully recognized. Several powerful concepts have emerged to facilitate this vision, whether involving the human context whenever required or directly impacting user behavior and decisions. As these become the stepping stones to develop the IoT into a novel people-centric utility, this article outlines a path to realize this decisive transformation. We begin by reviewing the latest progress in human-aware wireless networking, then classify the attractive human-machine applications and summarize the enabling IoT radio technologies. We continue with a unique system-level performance characterization of a representative urban IoT scenario and quantify the benefits of keeping people in the loop on various levels. Our comprehensive numerical results confirm the significant gains that have been made available with tighter user involvement, and also corroborate the development of efficient incentivization mechanisms, thereby opening the door to future commoditization of the global people-centric IoT utility.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications MagazineSame topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207