MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946122393 · doi:10.1504/ijbpim.2019.099874

Machine-to-infrastructure middleware platform for data management in IoT

2019· article· en· W2946122393 on OpenAlexaff
Richard K. Lomotey, Sumanth Sriramoju, Rita Orji

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Process Integration and Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInteroperabilityMiddleware (distributed applications)MQTTCloud computingCommunications protocolProtocol (science)Context (archaeology)Machine to machineOntologyDistributed computingInternet of ThingsComputer networkWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergent usage of network-based consumer devices has created an ecosystem for heterogeneous 'aware' and interconnected devices with unique IDs interacting with other machines/objects, infrastructure, and nature. This is called the internet of things (IoT), and it is inspired by smart devices with sensing and connectivity capability that can aid with data collection. While the data from sensors can give insightful enterprise information through analytics, it is needful to first and foremost create the IoT framework with automation support for machine-to-infrastructure (M2I) communication. However, there are only few research works that focus on enabling M2I communication though many studies are dedicated to machine-to-machine (M2M) communication. Key challenges in the IoT infrastructure design are multiple device semantics and protocol variations which can limit interoperability. This work proposes a middleware with both M2I and M2M capabilities which addresses these problems based on mapping techniques between the heterogeneous device semantics and providing a common interface for data exchanges via varied protocols. When a device is discoverable, our middleware uses enhanced environment-context ontology to match the appropriate communication protocol. This aids with pushing data from within-range sensors to a cloud-hosted infrastructure. The extensive experiments conducted on the proposed system show superiority over similar services.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business Process Integration and ManagementSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207