A Survey on Trustworthy Edge Intelligence: From Security and Reliability to Transparency and Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edge Intelligence (EI) integrates Edge Computing (EC) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to push the capabilities of AI to the network edge for real-time, efficient and secure intelligent decision-making and computation. However, EI faces various challenges due to resource constraints, heterogeneous network environments, and diverse service requirements of different applications, which together affect the trustworthiness of EI in the eyes of stakeholders. This survey comprehensively summarizes the characteristics, architecture, technologies, and solutions of trustworthy EI. Specifically, we first emphasize the need for trustworthy EI in the context of the trend toward large models. We then provide an initial definition of trustworthy EI, explore its key characteristics and give a multi-layered architecture for trustworthy EI. Then, we present enabling technologies for trustworthy EI systems. Subsequently, we summarize several important issues that hinder the achievement of trustworthy EI and provide an in-depth literature review of the state-of-the-art solutions for realizing the trustworthiness of EI. Finally, we discuss the corresponding research challenges and open issues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".