Enhancing IoT Data Integration: A Unified Interoperability Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Industries have been racing to integrate Internet of Things (IoT) devices into their systems and make full use of their readings, as these devices give a glimpse into the current state of particular entities. This is enormously insightful for real-time querying in the industries’ domains and areas of interest. However, the heterogeneous nature of the generated IoT data poses a bottleneck, slowing down the collaboration between IoT systems. This work aims to provide an effective solution for cooperation between IoT systems by introducing a simplified yet efficient data unification framework that is capable of integrating different heterogeneous data in a simpler manner than previously proposed approaches. In addition, we provide a qualitative comparison between our data unification framework and other popular approaches in collaborative IoT systems, such as IoTivity, SensorML (Sensor Model Language), and SenSquare. We conducted an interoperability test on our data unification framework across various scenarios. The results indicate that our framework enhances the optimization of different sensor profiles by an average of 88% compared to state-of-the-art solutions. Furthermore, through interoperability testing, our solution has demonstrated its ability to function efficiently across diverse domains and use cases, thereby establishing its reliability.
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 | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".