Fog-Enabled Smart Health: Toward Cooperative and Secure Healthcare Service Provision
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise of smart health promotes ubiquitous healthcare services with the adoption of information and communication technologies. However, increasing demands of medical services require more computing and storage resources in proximity of medical users for intelligent sensing, processing, and analysis. Fog computing emerges to enable in situ data processing and service provision for smart health in proximity of medical users, exploiting a large number of small-scale servers. In this article, we investigate fog-enabled smart health toward cooperative and secure healthcare service provision. Specifically, we first introduce the overall infrastructure and some promising applications, including emergent healthcare service, health risk assessment, and healthcare notification. We then discuss the challenges of fog-enabled smart health from the perspectives of cooperation and security. A case study is presented to demonstrate efficient and secure health data sharing through Naive Bayes classification and attribute-based encryption with assistance from fog computing. Finally, by exploring interesting future directions, more attention can be attracted to this emerging area.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it