MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011855346 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.2981005

A Reliable Trust Computing Mechanism Based on Multisource Feedback and Fog Computing in Social Sensor Cloud

2020· article· en· W3011855346 on OpenAlexaff
Junbin Liang, Min Zhang, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangxi ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingOverhead (engineering)Edge computingWireless sensor networkNetwork layerComputer networkDistributed computingThe InternetComputer securityApplication layerLayer (electronics)World Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social sensor cloud (SSC) is combined with social network, wireless sensor network, cloud computing, and fog computing, which is currently a new type of Internet of Things (IoT). In order to provide a convenient, open, and highly reliable SSC services, the devices of fog computing are distributed at the edge of cloud computing. The devices of fog computing can independently process and store data, and feedback more quickly in SSC. The sensing layer of SSC faces different types of physical attacks and communication attacks, such as message forgery, message tampering, reply attacks, hidden data attacks, etc., lead to the lack of trust between social sensors and cloud data centers in SSC. Therefore, the trust evaluation between the sensing layer and the network layer is necessary. However, computing the reliability of the social sensor data in cloud data centers will generate a large amount of trust computing overhead, communication overhead, and communication delay, which hinder the widespread application of SSC services. To combat this issue, a reliable trust computing mechanism (RTCM) based on multisource feedback and fog computing fusion is proposed. First, a new metric is designed for the trust of social sensor nodes, and multisource feedback trust value collection is performed at the sensing layer to improve the detection of malicious feedback nodes. Second, the trust feedback information of the sensing layer is collected by the devices of fog computing, and the recommendation trust calculation is performed, which reduces the communication delay and computing overhead. Third, a fusion algorithm is designed to aggregate different types of feedback trust values, which overcomes the limitation of trust weights in artificial weighting and subjective weighting in traditional trust mechanisms. Theoretical analyses and simulation results show that the proposed trust computing mechanism has better computational efficiency and higher reliability compared with existing methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations80
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207