skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

coSense: The Collaborative Sensing Middleware for the Internet-of-Things

Published:25 November 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We present coSense—the collaborative, fault-tolerant, and adaptive sensing middleware for the Internet-of-Things (IoT). By actively harnessing the greatest asset of the IoT, the sheer number of devices, coSense is able to provide easy data acquisition with quality-of-service-based data cleaning by combining unsupervised learning and information fusion. It can also greatly improve sensor accuracy and fault tolerance to produce measurements specifically tailored for modern data-driven IoT empowered applications. In this article, we focus on the general concepts behind coSense and evaluate the accuracy gain based on a real-world dataset.

References

  1. Furqan Alam, Rashid Mehmood, Iyad Katib, Nasser N. Albogami, and Aiiad Albeshri. 2017. Special section on trends and advances for ambient intelligence with Internet of Things (IOT) systems, data fusion and IoT for smart ubiquitous environments: A survey. IEEE Access 5 (2017), 9533--9554. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2697839Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Archana Barde and Sweta Jain. 2018. A survey of multi-sensor data fusion in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Internet of Things and Connected Technologies (ICIoTCT ’18). DOI:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3167286Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Abder Rezak Benaskeur. 2002. Consistent fusion of correlated data sources. IECON Proceedings (Industrial Electronics Conference) 4 (2002), 2652--2656. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2002.1182812Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. João B. Borges Neto, Thiago H. Silva, Renato Martins Assunção, Raquel A. F. Mini, and Antonio A. F. Loureiro. 2015. Sensing in the collaborative Internet of Things. Sensors (Switzerland) 15, 3 (2015), 6607--6632. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/s150306607Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Thomas Clouqueur, Parameswaran Ramanathan, Kewal K. Saluja, and Kuang-Ching Wang. 2001. Value-fusion versus decision-fusion for fault-tolerance in collaborative target detection in sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information Fusion.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Daniel Ioan Curiac, Constantin Volosencu, Dan Pescaru, Lucian Jurca, and Alexa Doboli. 2009. Redundancy and its applications in wireless sensor networks: A survey. WSEAS Transactions on Computers 8, 4 (2009), 705--714. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Giuseppe D’Aniello, Matteo Gaeta, and Tzung-Pei Hong. 2017. Effective quality-aware sensor data management. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence 2, 1 (2017), 65--77. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/tetci.2017.2782800Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Geetika Dhand and S. S. Tyagi. 2016. Data aggregation techniques in WSN:Survey. Procedia Computer Science 92 (2016), 378--384. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.07.393Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Jeff Frolik, Mohamed Abdelrahman, and Parameshwaran Kandasamy. 2001. A confidence-based approach to the self-validation, fusion and reconstruction of quasi-redundant sensor data. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 50, 6 (2001), 1761--1769. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/19.982977Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Yong Gao, Kui Wu, and Fulu Li. 2003. Analysis on the redundancy of wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (WSNA’03).108--114. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/941365.941366 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Gartner. n.d. IoT Device Estimate. Retrieved September 10, 2020 from https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2018-11-07-gartner-identifies-top-10-strategic-iot-technologies-and-trends.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Paulo Jesus, Carlos Baquero, and Paulo Sergio Almeida. 2015. A survey of distributed data aggregation algorithms. IEEE Communications Surveys 8 Tutorials 17, 1 (2015), 381--404. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2014.2354398Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM). 2008. JCGM 200 :2008: International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms(VIM). International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-2241(85)90006-5Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Manish Kumar, Devendra P. Garg, and Randy A. Zachery. 2006. A generalized approach for inconsistency detection in data fusion from multiple sensors. In Proceedings of the 2006 American Control Conference. 2078--2083. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/acc.2006.1656526Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Xiao Ling, Jiahai Yang, Dan Wang, Jinfeng Chen, and Liyao Li. 2017. Fast community detection in large weighted networks using GraphX in the cloud. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications, the 14th IEEE International Conference on Smart City and the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS’16). 1--8. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/HPCC-SmartCity-DSS.2016.0012Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Keith Marzullo. 1990. Tolerating failures of continuous-valued sensors. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 8, 4 (Nov. 1990), 284--304. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/128733.128735 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Keith Ansel Marzullo. 1984. Maintaining the Time in a Distributed System: An Example of a Loosely-Coupled Distributed Service (Synchronization, Fault-Tolerance, Debugging). Ph.D. Dissertation. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Eduardo F. Nakamura, Antonio A. F. Loureiro, and Alejandro C. Frery. 2007. Information fusion for wireless sensor networks: Methods, models, and classificiations. ACM Computing Surveys 39, 3 (2007), 9--es. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1267070.1267073 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. M. E. J. Newman. 2004. Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. Physical Review E: Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics 69, 6 (2004), 5. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.066133 arxiv:cond-mat/0408263Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. M. E. J. Newman. 2006. Modularity and community structure in networks. PNAS 103, 23 (2006), 8577--8582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. M. E. J. Newman and M. Girvan. 2003. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E 69 (2003), 026113. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Stephan Schmeisser and Gregor Schiele. 2017. Adaptive aggregation of redundant sensor data in the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI’16). 1387--1388. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCI.2016.0262Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ulrich Schmid and Klaus Schossmaier. 2001. How to reconcile fault-tolerant interval intersection with the Lipschitz condition. Distributed Computing 14, 2 (2001), 101--111. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00008927 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Hiroaki Shiokawa, Yasuhiro Fujiwara, and Makoto Onizuka. 2013. Fast algorithm for modularity-based graph clustering. In Proceedings of the 27th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’13). 1170--1176. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-2834 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Hiroaki Shiokawa, Yasuhiro Fujiwara, and Makoto Onizuka. 2015. SCAN++: Efficient algorithm for finding clusters, hubs and outliers on large-scale graphs. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 11 (2015), 1178--1189. http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol8/p1178-shiokawa.pdf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Tony Sun, Ling-Jyh Chen, Chih-Chieh Han, and Mario Gerla. 2005. Reliable sensor networks for planet exploration. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Conference on Networking, Sensing, and Control. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 816--821. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNSC.2005.1461295Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Ya Xu, John Heidemann, and Deborah Estrin. 2001. Geography-informed energy conservation for ad hoc routing. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom’01). ACM, New York, NY, 70--84. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/381677.381685 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Juanjuan Zhao, Yongxing Liu, Yongqiang Cheng, Yan Qiang, and Xiaolong Zhang. 2014. Multisensor data fusion for wildfire warning. In Proceedings of the 2014 10th International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Networks (MSN’14). 46--53. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MSN.2014.13 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. coSense: The Collaborative Sensing Middleware for the Internet-of-Things

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM/IMS Transactions on Data Science
          ACM/IMS Transactions on Data Science  Volume 1, Issue 4
          Special Issue on Retrieving and Learning from IoT Data and Regular Papers
          November 2020
          148 pages
          ISSN:2691-1922
          DOI:10.1145/3439709
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 25 November 2020
          • Online AM: 7 May 2020
          • Accepted: 1 April 2020
          • Revised: 1 March 2020
          • Received: 1 August 2019
          Published in tds Volume 1, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)78
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)22

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!