MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225161347 · doi:10.1145/3530815

Heterogeneous Network Access and Fusion in Smart Factory: A Survey

2022· review· en· W4225161347 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Xia, C.-S. Jiang, Jiafu Wan, Jiong Jin, Victor C. M. Leung, Miguel Martínez-García

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Computing Surveys · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHeterogeneous networkQuality of serviceFactory (object-oriented programming)Computer networkWireless networkTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the continuous expansion of the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and the increasing connectivity among the various intelligent devices or systems, the control of access and fusion in smart factory networks has significantly gained importance. However, the contradiction between the high Quality of Service (QoS) requirements of massive data and the limited network bandwidth and the heterogeneous network is becoming deeper and deeper. The heterogeneity of smart factory networks brings many challenges to unified access and fusion, real-time transmission, and centralized control and management. This article provides a survey on heterogeneous networks in smart factories. We first study and discuss the heterogeneity of smart factory networks, and then discuss the existing mainstream wired and wireless network technologies, as well as promising future technologies, including 5G, OLE for Process Control Unified Architecture (OPC UA), and Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN). In addition, we also analyze current heterogeneous network fusion architecture and discuss the enabling technologies of heterogeneous network fusion in view of the shortcoming of the current solutions. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of open challenges and future research directions towards the effective realization of the smart factory.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations56
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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