Advertisement

Accuracy and availability modeling of social networks for Internet of Things event detection applications

  • Meghdad Aynehband
  • Mehdi HosseinzadehEmail author
  • Houman Zarrabi
  • Saeed Gorgin
Article

Abstract

As Social networks are widely used by the people around the world, if this infrastructure can be used for event detection systems like fire forest detection, the overall cost of the Internet of Thing event detection system cost may be considerably reduced. However, other parameters such as event detection accuracy and system availability may be affected as well. The present research investigates these parameters for famous social networks such as Instagram, Twitter and Facebook in different network sizes and server request submission limitations. A new web platform was implemented based on smart objects to produce the appropriate data for social network analysis tools such as NodeXL. A new simulator generated the data from the Drossel and Schwabl algorithm in various situations and types of social networks. Then the outputs created models by a multilayer perceptron artificial neural network for accuracy and availability. A cost analysis for each method was performed. The results showed that the produced models had good reliability and could be used to select the appropriate method before implementing the Internet of Things projects.

Keywords

Internet of things Social network Fire-forest algorithm Event detection System simulation 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Zhou, J., Cao, Z., Dong, X., & Vasilakos, A. V. (2017). Security and privacy for cloud-based IoT: Challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine, 55(1), 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G., & Nitti, M. (2012). The social internet of things (SIoT)—When social networks meet the internet of things: Concept, architecture and network characterization. Comput. Networks, 56(16), 3594–3608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2011). SIoT: Giving a social structure to the internet of things. IEEE Communications Letters, 15(11), 1193–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2011). Making things socialize in the Internet—Does it help our lives?. In Proceedings of ITU Kaleidosc. Fully Networked human ? Innovations for future networks and services (pp. 1–8).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ortiz, A. M., Hussein, D., Park, S., Han, S. N., & Crespi, N. (2014). The cluster between internet of things and social networks: Review and research challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1(3), 206–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Atzori, L., Carboni, D., & Iera, A. (2014). Smart things in the social loop: Paradigms, technologies, and potentials. Ad Hoc Networks, 18, 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, C., Cheng, C., & Ji, Y. (2012) Architecture design for social web of things. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on context discovery and data miningcontextdd’12 (p. 1).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ciortea, A., Boissier, O., Zimmermann, A., & Florea, A. M. (2013). Reconsidering the social web of things. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publicationUbiComp’13 Adjunct (pp. 1535–1544).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pintus, A., Carboni, D., & Piras, A. (2012). PARAIMPU: A platform for a social web of things. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference companion on World Wide Web - WWW’12 Companion (p. 401).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guinard, D., Fischer, M., & Trifa, V. (2010). Sharing using social networks in a composable Web of Things. In 2010 8th IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and communications workshops (PERCOM workshops) (pp. 702–707).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lequerica, I., Longaron, M., & Ruiz, P. (2010). Drive and share: Efficient provisioning of social networks in vehicular scenarios. IEEE Communications Magazine, 48(11), 90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mäkitalo, N. et al. (2012). Social devices: collaborative co-located interactions in a mobile cloud. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on mobile and ubiquitous multimediaMUM’12 (p. 1).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Console, L., et al. (2013). Interacting with social networks of intelligent things and people in the world of gastronomy. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 3(1), 1–38.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ceipidor, A. U., Medaglia, C., Volpi, V., Moroni, A., Sposato, S., & Tamburrano, M. (2011). Design and development of a social shopping experience in the IoT domain: The ShopLovers solution. In Proceedings of 19th international conference on software, telecommunications and computer networks (SoftCOM) (pp. 102–111).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vlacheas, P., et al. (2013). Enabling smart cities through a cognitive management framework for the internet of things. IEEE Communications Magazine, 51(6), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hussein, D., Han, S. N., Han, X., Lee, G. M., & Crespi, N. (2013). A framework for social device networking. In 2013 IEEE international conference on distributed computing in sensor systems (pp. 356–360).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nakamura, E. F., & Souza, E. L. (2010). Towards a flexible event-detection model for wireless sensor networks. In The IEEE symposium on computers and communications (pp. 459–462).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zeng, X., Garg, S. K., Strazdins, P., Jayaraman, P. P., Georgakopoulos, D., & Ranjan, R. (2017). IOTSim: A simulator for analysing IoT applications. Journal of Systems Architecture, 72, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kasnesis, P., Toumanidis, L., Kogias, D., Patrikakis, C. Z. & Venieris, I. S. (216). ASSIST: An agent-based SIoT simulator. In 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT) (pp. 353–358).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li, Z., Chen, R., Liu, L., & Min, G. (2016). Dynamic resource discovery based on preference and movement pattern similarity for large-scale social Internet of Things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 3(4), 581–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hasan, M., Orgun, M. A., & Schwitter, R. (2017). A survey on real-time event detection from the Twitter data stream. Journal of Information Science, 44(4), 443–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Atefeh, F., & Khreich, W. (2015). A survey of techniques for event detection in Twitter. Computational Intelligence, 31(1), 133–164.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yang, Y., Pierce, T. & Carbonell, J. (1998). A study of retrospective and on-line event detection. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrievalSIGIR’98 (pp. 28–36)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Metzler, D., Cai, C., & Hovy, E. (2012). Structured event retrieval over microblog archives. In Proc. 2012 Conf. North (pp. 646–655).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Popescu, A.-M., Pennacchiotti, M., & Paranjpe, D. (2011). Extracting events and event descriptions from Twitter. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference companion on World Wide WebWWW’11 (Vol. 1, pp. 105).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sankaranarayanan, J., Samet, H. Teitler, B. E., Lieberman, M. D., & Sperling, J. (2009) TwitterStand: News in Tweets. In Proceedings of 17th ACM SIGSPATIAL international conference on advances in geographic information systems.GIS’09 (p. 42).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li, C., Sun, A., & Datta, A. (2012). Twevent: Segment-based event detection from Tweets. Cikm (pp. 155–164).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jarvis, R. A., & Patrick, E. A. (1973). Clustering using a similarity measure based on shared near neighbors. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 22(11), 1025–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mathioudakis M., & Koudas, N. (2010). TwitterMonitor: Trend detection over the Twitter Stream. In Sigmod (pp. 5–7).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Alvanaki, F., Michel, S., Ramamritham, K., & Weikum, G. (2011). EnBlogue: Emergent topic detection in Web 2.0 streams. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data (pp. 1271–1274).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lin, J., Keogh, E., Wei, L., & Lonardi, S. (2007). Experiencing SAX: A novel symbolic representation of time series. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 15(2), 107–144.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stilo, G., & Velardi, P. (2016). Efficient temporal mining of micro-blog texts and its application to event discovery. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 30(2), 372–402.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Golsorkhtabaramiri, M., Hosseinzadeh, M., Reshadi, M., & Rahmani, A. M. (2015). A reader anti-collision protocol for RFID-enhanced wireless sensor networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 81(2), 893–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rostampour, S., Bagheri, N., Hosseinzadeh, M., & Khademzadeh, A. (2018). A scalable and lightweight grouping proof protocol for internet of things applications. The Journal of Supercomputing, 74(1), 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jabbarpour, M. R., Zarrabi, H., Khokhar, R. H., Shamshirband, S., & Choo, K. K. R. (2018). Applications of computational intelligence in vehicle traffic congestion problem: A survey. Soft Computing, 22(7), 2299–2320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Aynehband, M., & Moeinpoor, M. (2016). The use of remote control systems for autonomous domestic industry in adverse weather. International Journal of Novel Computer Science and Power Solutions, 1(1), 13–15.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Aynehband, M., Rahmani, A. M., & Setayeshi, S. (2011).COAST: Context-aware pervasive speech recognition system. In International symposium on wireless and pervasive computing, ISWPC 2011.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    “OAuth 2.0.” [Online]. Available: https://oauth.net/articles/authentication/.
  39. 39.
    Smith, M. A. et al. (2009). Analyzing (social media) networks with NodeXL. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on communities and technologiesC&T’09 (p. 255).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Casey, K. (2017). The Internet of Things on its edge. Dell Power More (p. 11).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Martinho, R., & Domingos, D. (2014). Quality of information and access cost of IoT resources in BPMN processes. Procedia Technology, 16, 737–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Singh, K. D., & Joshi, A. K. (2017) Cost effective open source wireless body sensor networking through zigBee. In 2017 International Conference on Communication and Signal Processing (ICCSP). IEEE.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSP.2017.8286491.
  43. 43.
    Abbasinezhad-Mood, D., & Nikooghadam, M. (2017). An ultra-lightweight and secure scheme for communications of smart meters and neighborhood gateways by utilization of an ARM Cortex-M microcontroller. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 3053, 6194–6205.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Drossel, B., & Schwabl, F. (1992). Self-organized critical forest-fire model. Physical Review Letters, 69(11), 1629–1632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nabaei, A., et al. (2018). Topologies and performance of intelligent algorithms: A comprehensive review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 49(1), 79–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meghdad Aynehband
    • 1
  • Mehdi Hosseinzadeh
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Houman Zarrabi
    • 4
  • Saeed Gorgin
    • 5
  1. 1.Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Health Management and Economics Research CenterIran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  3. 3.Computer ScienceUniversity of Human DevelopmentSulaymaniyahIraq
  4. 4.ICT Research InstituteTehranIran
  5. 5.Department of Electrical and Information TechnologyIranian Research Organization for Science and Technology (IROST)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations