Smart application-aware IoT data collection
- 13 Downloads
We present and experimentally evaluate procedures for efficient IoT data collection while achieving target requirements in terms of data accuracy, response time, energy, and privacy protection. Different strategies are considered because different IoT applications can have different requirements. Specifically, the accuracy-driven strategy adjusts the time period between consecutive measurements following an additive increase and multiplicative decrease (AIMD) scheme based on a target data accuracy, while the time-driven strategy adjusts the time period between measurement requests to achieve delay less than a given maximum delay between consecutive measurements. The energy-driven strategy considers both the data accuracy and the energy costs for the corresponding measurements. Finally, the privacy-driven strategy adds noise to measurements using differential privacy techniques. The experimental evaluation involves real temperature, humidity, and ozone (O3) measurements obtained from three testbeds through the FIESTA-IoT platform. Our results show that the AIMD adaptation of the measurement period is robust to different types of measurements from different testbeds, without having any tuning parameters. Also, the experimental results show the trade-offs between the target data accuracy and the number of measurements and between the target data accuracy and the corresponding energy costs. For the privacy-driven strategy, the results show that the addition of noise to the sensor measurements using differential privacy has a negligible effect on the aggregate statistics.
KeywordsData accuracy Adaptive data collection Differential privacy Testbed experiments
This work was supported in part by the EU FIESTA-IoT project (Grant Agreement number: 643943 / H2020-ICT-2014-1) through the Open Call 3 Experiment “BeSmart: Smart IoT Data Collection” and by the Athens University of Economics and Business Research Center.
- 3.Erlingsson U, Pihur V, Korolova A (2014) RAPPOR: randomized aggregatable privacy-preserving ordinal response. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications securityGoogle Scholar
- 4.Chu D, Deshpande A, Hellerstein, J, Hong W (2006) Approximate data collection in sensor networks using probabilistic models. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICDEGoogle Scholar
- 5.Deshpande A, Guestrin C, Madden S, Hellerstein J, Hong W (2004) Model-driven data acquisition in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of VLDBGoogle Scholar
- 6.Jain A, Chang E, Wang Y.-F (2004) Adaptive stream resource management using Kalman filters. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGMODGoogle Scholar
- 7.Han Q, Mehrotra S, Venkatasubramanian N (2004) Energy efficient data collection in distributed sensor environments. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICDCSGoogle Scholar
- 9.Tang X, Xu J (2008) Adaptive data collection strategies for lifetime-constrained wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 19(6):721–734Google Scholar
- 10.Gedik B, Liu L, Yu PS (2007) ASAP: an adaptive sampling approach to data collection in sensor networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 18(12):1766–1783Google Scholar
- 11.Liu C, Wu K, Pei J (2007) an energy-efficient data collection framework for wireless sensor networks by exploiting spatiotemporal correlation. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 18(7):1010–1023 (2007)Google Scholar
- 13.Riahi M, Papaioannou T, Trummer I, Aberer (2013) Utility-driven data acquisition in participatory sensing. In: International conference on extending database technology: advances in database technology (EDBT)Google Scholar
- 15.Andres M, Bordenabe N, Chatzikokolakis K, Palamidessi C (2013) Geo-indistinguishability: differential privacy for location-based systems. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications securityGoogle Scholar
- 16.Fink GA (2016) Differentially private distributed sensing. In: Proceeding of 3rd IEEE world forum on internet of things (WF-IoT) (2016)Google Scholar