MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210957019 · doi:10.3390/s21217124

Internet of Things Based Contact Tracing Systems

2021· review· en· W3210957019 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Hu, Philippe Lamontagne

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityComputer scienceArchitectureInternet of ThingsContact tracingKey (lock)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TracingThe InternetData scienceWireless sensor networkComputer securityDistributed computingInfectious disease (medical specialty)World Wide WebComputer networkMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly threatened the health and well-being of humanity. Contact tracing (CT) as an important non-pharmaceutical intervention is essential to containing the spread of such an infectious disease. However, current CT solutions are fragmented with limited use of sensing and computing technologies in a scalable framework. These issues can be well addressed with the use of the Internet of Things (IoT) technologies. Therefore, we need to overview the principle, motivation, and architecture for a generic IoT-based CT system (IoT-CTS). A novel architecture for IoT-CTS solutions is proposed with the consideration of peer-to-peer and object-to-peer contact events, as well as the discussion on key topics, such as an overview of applicable sensors for CT needs arising from the COVID-19 transmission methods. The proposed IoT-CTS architecture aims to holistically utilize essential sensing mechanisms with the analysis of widely adopted privacy-preserving techniques. With the use of generic peer-to-peer and object-to-peer sensors based on proximity and environment sensing mechanisms, the infectious cases with self-directed strategies can be effectively reduced. Some open research directions are presented in the end.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207