MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297006247 · doi:10.3390/s22197169

Interaction of Secure Cloud Network and Crowd Computing for Smart City Data Obfuscation

2022· article· en· W4297006247 on OpenAlexaff
T. Manikandan, Shajahan Basheer, Shitharth Selvarajan, Sara A. Althubiti, Fayadh Alenezi, Gautam Srivastava, Jerry Chun‐Wei Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Technologies in Various Fields
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersHøgskulen på Vestlandet
KeywordsObfuscationCloud computingComputer scienceEnergy consumptionDistributed computingComputer securityOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There can be many inherent issues in the process of managing cloud infrastructure and the platform of the cloud. The platform of the cloud manages cloud software and legality issues in making contracts. The platform also handles the process of managing cloud software services and legal contract-based segmentation. In this paper, we tackle these issues directly with some feasible solutions. For these constraints, the Averaged One-Dependence Estimators (AODE) classifier and the SELECT Applicable Only to Parallel Server (SELECT-APSL ASA) method are proposed to separate the data related to the place. ASA is made up of the AODE and SELECT Applicable Only to Parallel Server. The AODE classifier is used to separate the data from smart city data based on the hybrid data obfuscation technique. The data from the hybrid data obfuscation technique manages 50% of the raw data, and 50% of hospital data is masked using the proposed transmission. The analysis of energy consumption before the cryptosystem shows the total packet delivered by about 71.66% compared with existing algorithms. The analysis of energy consumption after cryptosystem assumption shows 47.34% consumption, compared to existing state-of-the-art algorithms. The average energy consumption before data obfuscation decreased by 2.47%, and the average energy consumption after data obfuscation was reduced by 9.90%. The analysis of the makespan time before data obfuscation decreased by 33.71%. Compared to existing state-of-the-art algorithms, the study of makespan time after data obfuscation decreased by 1.3%. These impressive results show the strength of our methodology.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Technologies in Various FieldsFrench-language works237,207