MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414833988 · doi:10.1002/rob.70063

Internet of Robotic Things Evolution, Standards and Data Interoperability Best Practices for the Next Generation of Artificial Intelligence‐Powered Systems

2025· article· en· W4414833988 on OpenAlexaff
Amélie Gyrard, Edison Pignaton de Freitas, Martín Serrano, Howard Li, Paulo Gonçalves, João Quintas, Ovidiu Vermesan, Alberto Olivares‐Alarcos, Antonio Kung, Filippo Cavallo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Automated Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityReuseRobotRoboticsCloud computingAutomationOntologyThe InternetSituation awareness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Internet of Robotic Things (IoRT) represents the rise of a new paradigm enabling robots to serve not only as autonomous units but also as intelligent interconnected entities that can interact, collaborate, and share information through the edge, cloud and other data networks. IoRT is a technological progress and the fusion of Robotics with the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and edge‐Computing, IoRT can benefit from the next‐generation spatial web, Web 4.0 (the intelligent immersive knowledge Web), by enhancing data processing, situational awareness, and integration with immersive technologies, software‐defined automation (SDA), and spatial computing technologies. Semantic Web and Web 4.0 technologies are becoming common in robotics projects for exchanging data and enabling data set interoperability. The main challenge is to upgrade how robotic things interact with each other and their environment in a more situation‐aware fashion, enabling IoRT situation‐aware capabilities. This paper reviews the definition of IoRT considering the latest developments in sensor technology and data management systems and uses a novel survey methodology to find, classify, and reuse robotic expertise and present it to the community and engineering experts. The survey is shared through the LOV4IoT‐Robotics ontology catalog, which is available online. This catalog demonstrates how best practices for data sharing and data set interoperability are also used to extract robotic knowledge semi‐automatically. A set of relevant semantic‐enabled projects designed by domain experts that focused on extracting robotic knowledge was included.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0120.019
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.165
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field RoboticsSame topicRobotics and Automated SystemsFrench-language works237,207