MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952429811 · doi:10.3390/s19122804

Low-Power Distributed Data Flow Anomaly-Monitoring Technology for Industrial Internet of Things

2019· article· en· W2952429811 on OpenAlexaff
Weihong Han, Zhihong Tian, Zizhong Huang, Shudong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceAnomaly detectionCorrectnessOverhead (engineering)Context (archaeology)Data flow diagramWireless sensor networkReal-time computingBig dataDistributed computingInternet of ThingsData miningEmbedded systemDatabaseComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. In recent years, the industrial use of the internet of things (IoT) has been constantly growing and is now widespread. Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are a fundamental technology that has enabled such prevalent adoption of IoT in industry. WSNs can connect IoT sensors and monitor the working conditions of such sensors and of the overall environment, as well as detect unexpected system events in a timely and accurate manner. Monitoring large amounts of unstructured data generated by IoT devices and collected by the big-data analytics systems is a challenging task. Furthermore, detecting anomalies within the vast amount of data collected in real time by a centralized monitoring system is an even bigger challenge. In the context of the industrial use of the IoT, solutions for monitoring anomalies in distributed data flow need to be explored. In this paper, a low-power distributed data flow anomaly-monitoring model (LP-DDAM) is proposed to mitigate the communication overhead problem. As the data flow monitoring system is only interested in anomalies, which are rare, and the relationship among objects in terms of the size of their attribute values remains stable within any specific period of time, LP-DDAM integrates multiple objects as a complete set for processing, makes full use of the relationship among the objects, selects only one "representative" object for continuous monitoring, establishes certain constraints to ensure correctness, and reduces communication overheads by maintaining the overheads of constraints in exchange for a reduction in the number of monitored objects. Experiments on real data sets show that LP-DDAM can reduce communication overheads by approximately 70% when compared to an equivalent method that continuously monitors all objects under the same conditions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207