MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321497314 · doi:10.3390/app13052778

Honesty-Based Social Technique to Enhance Cooperation in Social Internet of Things

2023· article· en· W4321497314 on OpenAlexaff
Shad Muhammad, Muhammad Muneer Umar, Shafiullah Khan, Nabil Alrajeh, Emad A. Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsSelfishnessHonestyComputer scienceInternet privacyNetwork packetPerspective (graphical)Social network (sociolinguistics)Computer securityThe InternetWorld Wide WebSocial psychologyArtificial intelligencePsychologySocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Social Internet of Things (SIoT) can be seen as integrating the social networking concept into the Internet of Things (IoT). Such networks enable different devices to form social relationships among themselves depending on pre-programmed rules and the preferences of their owners. When SIoT devices encounter one another on the spur of the moment, they seek out each other’s assistance. The connectivity of such smart objects reveals new horizons for innovative applications empowering objects with cognizance. This enables smart objects to socialize with each other based on mutual interests and social aspects. Trust building in social networks has provided a new perspective for providing services to providers based on relationships like human ones. However, the connected IoT nodes in the community may show a lack of interest in forwarding packets in the network communication to save their resources, such as battery, energy, bandwidth, and memory. This act of selfishness can highly degrade the performance of the network. To enhance the cooperation among nodes in the network a novel technique is needed to improve the performance of the network. In this article, we address the issue of the selfishness of the nodes through the formation of a credible community based on honesty. A social process is used to form communities and select heads in these communities. The selected community heads having social attributes prove effective in determining the social behavior of the nodes as honest or selfish. Unlike other schemes, the dishonest nodes are isolated in a separate domain, and they are given several chances to rejoin the community after increasing their honesty levels. The proposed social technique was simulated using MATLAB and compared with existing schemes to show its effectiveness. Our proposed technique outperforms the existing techniques in terms of throughput, overhead, packet delivery ratio (PDR), and packet-delivery latency.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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