MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950552779 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2019.2930367

Multipoint Synchronization for Fog-Controlled Internet of Things

2019· article· en· W2950552779 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard Olaniyan, Muthucumaru Maheswaran

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Time Synchronization Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersPetroleum Technology Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceAsynchronous communicationDistributed computingComputer networkScheduling (production processes)SynchronizerThe InternetScheduleCloud computingReal-time computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a fog-resident controller architecture for synchronizing the operations of large collections of Internet of Things (IoT), such as drones, Internet of Vehicles, etc. Synchronization in IoT is grouped into different classes, use cases identified and multipoint synchronous scheduling algorithms are developed to schedule tasks with varying timing requirements; strict (synchronous) and relaxed (asynchronous and local) onto a bunch of worker nodes that are coordinated by a fog resident controller in the presence of disconnections and worker failures. The algorithms use time-based or component-based redundancy to cope with failures and embed a publish-subscribe message update scheme to reduce the message overhead at the controller as the number of workers increase. The performance of the algorithms are evaluated using trace-driven experiments and practicability is shown by implementing the time-based redundancy synchronous scheduling algorithm in JAMScript-a polyglot programming platform for Cloud of Things and report initial findings.

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)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicNetwork Time Synchronization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207