MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047554376 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.12657182.v2

The Next Generation Internet of Things Architecture Towards Distributed Intelligence: Reviews, Applications, and Research Challenges

2020· article· en· W3047554376 on OpenAlexaff
Rasit Eskicioglu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceScalabilityRaw dataInteroperabilityEdge computingDistributed computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionArchitectureBig dataThe InternetWorld Wide WebTelecommunicationsDatabaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing the implication of growing data generated by the Internet of Things (IoT) brings the focus toward extracting knowledge from sensors’ raw data. In the current cloud computing architecture, all the IoT raw data is transmitted to the cloud for processing, storage, and control things. Nevertheless, the scenario of sending all raw data to the cloud is inefficient as it wastes the bandwidth and increases the network load. This problem can be solved by Providing IoT Gateway at the edge layer with the required intelligence to gain the Knowledge from raw data to decide to actuate or offload complicated tasks to the cloud. This collaboration between cloud and edge called distributed intelligence. This work highlights the distributed intelligence concept in IoT. It presents a deep investigation of distributed intelligence between cloud and edge layers under IoT architecture, with an emphasis on its vision, applications, and research challenges. This work aims to bring the attention of IoT specialists to distributed intelligence and its role to deduce current IoT challenges such as availability, mobility, energy efficiency, security, scalability, interoperability, and reliability.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.127 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207