A Lifecycle for Engineering IoT Neural Network-based Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internet of Things (IoT) applications have been deployed in several domains, including health care, smart cities, and agriculture. Because of the complex static and dynamic variability of the environment in which these applications are deployed, machine learning-based approaches have been used to support the design of IoT applications. In particular, an emergent approach involves using neural networks to enable IoT devices to learn to adapt their behavior based on the dynamics of the environment. Designing IoT systems is already challenging because of the autonomy and concurrency inherent in distributed physical systems. Moreover, neural networks systems have particular characteristics, such as dynamism, adaptability, and generalization, that make it necessary to adapt the traditional software development lifecycle to satisfy the requirements of these systems. In this paper, we describe our proposed approach to support the engineering of IoT neural network-based systems. Our approach considers a lifecycle supporting the integration of IoT system development tasks with particular ANN tasks, as model requirements and feature engineering. In addition, the paper includes the provision of the application of the approach to a case study and conclusive remarks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it