Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An ANFIS-based compatibility scorecard for IoT integration in websites

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cyber-physical systems and Internet of Things (IoT) form two different levels of the vertical digital integration. Integration of websites with IoT-connected devices has compelled creation of new web design and development strategies where websites are designed keeping in mind the permutations of smart devices. The design should be seamless across different devices and the website design company or web designer should be well informed and aware of the different considerations for design with IoT interactions. In this work, we expound the effectiveness of IoT integration in website design. To realize an IoT-powered IT ecosystem as an essential technology for improving customer experience, a strength–weakness–opportunity–threat analysis is done. Further, with an intent to apprehend the integration support that an existing GUI front end may provide to a smart device, an ANFIS model is proposed to determine the compatibility of an e-commerce website for integration with IoT devices. A dataset of 600 e-commerce websites from .com domain is used to train and test the learning model. Seven features (page loading speed, broken links, browser compatibility, resolution, total size, privacy and security, and interface and typography) which impact the compatibility of IoT integration in websites have been used. Evaluation criteria for assigning score to each feature has been identified. Finally, the compatibility score, the IoTScoresite which evaluates the websites’ integration capabilities and support to IoT devices is generated by adding all the feature scores. The preliminary results generated using the prediction model clearly determine the worthiness of website for IoT integration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. www.Statista.com.

  2. www.gtmetrix.com.

  3. www.deadlinkchecker.com/.

  4. www.ssllabs.com.

References

  1. Atzori L, Iera A, Morabito G (2010) The Internet of Things: a survey. Comput Netw 54(15):2787–2805

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Gubbi J, Buyya R, Marusic S, Palaniswami M (2013) Internet of Things (IoT): a vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Gener Comput Syst 29(7):1645–1660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sachdeva N, Dhir R, Kumar A (2016) Empirical analysis of machine learning techniques for context aware recommender systems in the environment of IoT. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Information Communication Technology and Computing. ACM, p 39

  4. Bonomi F, Milito R, Zhu J, Addepalli S (2012) Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In: Proceedings of the First Edition of the MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing. ACM, pp 13–16

  5. Jabbar S, Khan M, Silva BN, Han K (2018) A REST-based industrial web of things’ framework for smart warehousing. J Supercomput 74(9):4419–4433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Guinard D, Trifa V (2009) Towards the web of things: web mashups for embedded devices. In: Workshop on Mashups, Enterprise Mashups and Lightweight Composition on the Web (MEM 2009), in proceedings of WWW (International World Wide Web Conferences), Madrid, Spain, vol 15

  7. Wang KH, Chen CM, Fang W, Wu TY (2018) On the security of a new ultra-lightweight authentication protocol in IoT environment for RFID tags. J Supercomput 74(1):65–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Duyne DKV, Landay J, Hong JI (2002) The design of sites: patterns, principles, and processes for crafting a customer-centered Web experience. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co. Inc, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kumar A, Gupta D (2018) Paradigm shift from conventional software quality models to web based quality models. Int J Hybrid Intell Syst 14(3):167–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Abrahami Y, Shalev ZS, Marcus A, Ohana T, Kaufman A, Blumenfeld UA, Weiner S, Nagar S, Geva A, Wixcom Ltd (2019) Custom back-end functionality in an online website building environment. U.S. Patent Application 10/209,966

  11. Haghi M, Thurow K, Stoll R (2017) Wearable devices in medical internet of things: scientific research and commercially available devices. Healthc Inform Res 23(1):4–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dong L, FutureWei Technologies Inc (2019) User oriented IoT data discovery and retrieval in ICN networks. U.S. Patent Application 10/193,805

  13. Xu B, Da Xu L, Cai H, Xie C, Hu J, Bu F (2014) Ubiquitous data accessing method in IoT-based information system for emergency medical services. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 10(2):1578–1586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. https://readwrite.com/2019/04/26/how-website-design-integrates-with-the-internet-of-things-iot/. Retreived 17 June 2019

  15. Jang JS (1993) ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 23(3):665–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee I, Lee K (2015) The Internet of Things (IoT): applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises. Bus Horiz 58(4):431–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gigli M, Koo SG (2011) Internet of Things: services and applications categorization. Adv Internet Things 1(2):27–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Doukas C, Maglogiannis I (2012) Bringing IoT and cloud computing towards pervasive healthcare. In: 2012 Sixth International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing. IEEE, pp 922–926

  19. Zhao JC, Zhang JF, Feng Y, Guo JX (2010) The study and application of the IoT technology in agriculture. In: 2010 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology, vol 2, pp 462–465. IEEE

  20. Giang NK, Blackstock M, Lea R, Leung VC (2015) Developing IoT applications in the fog: a distributed dataflow approach. In: 2015 5th International Conference on the Internet of Things (IOT). IEEE, pp 155–162

  21. Castellani AP, Gheda M, Bui N, Rossi M, Zorzi M (2011) Web Services for the Internet of Things through CoAP and EXI. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC). IEEE, pp 1–6

  22. Yu X, Roy SK, Quazi A, Nguyen B, Han Y (2017) Internet entrepreneurship and “the sharing of information” in an Internet-of-Things context: the role of interactivity, stickiness, e-satisfaction and word-of-mouth in online SMEs’ websites. Internet Res 27(1):74–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Loiacono ET, Watson RT, Goodhue DL (2002) WebQual: a measure of website quality. Mark Theory Appl 13(3):432–438

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hartmann J, De Angeli A, Sutcliffe A (2008) Framing the user experience: information biases on website quality judgement. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference of Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 2008. ACM, pp 855–864

  25. Bhatia MPS, Kumar A (2007) Contextual proximity based term-weighting for improved web information retrieval. In: International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. Springer, pp 267–278

  26. Sobecki J, Żatuchin D (2009) Knowledge and data processing in a process of website quality evaluation. In: New challenges in computational collective intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 51–61

  27. Schubert P, Selz D (1999) Web assessment-measuring the effectiveness of electronic commerce sites going beyond traditional marketing paradigms. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers, Track 5, pp 10

  28. Selz D, Schubert P (1998) Web assessment—a model for the evaluation and the assessment of successful electronic commerce applications. In: Proceedings of Thirty-First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 1998, vol 4. IEEE, pp 222–231

  29. Schubert P, Dettling W (2002) Extended Web assessment method (EWAM)-evaluation of e-commerce applications from the customer’s viewpoint. In: Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, Hawaii, 2002. IEEE, p 10

  30. Kumar A, Arora A (2019) A filter-wrapper based feature selection for optimized website quality prediction. In: 2019 Amity International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AICAI). IEEE, pp 284–291

  31. Tavallali P, Yazdi M, Khosravi MR (2017) An efficient training procedure for Viola–Jones face detector. In: 2017 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI). IEEE, pp 828–831

  32. Tavallali P, Yazdi M (2015) Robust skin detector based on AdaBoost and statistical luminance features. In: 2015 International Congress on Technology, Communication and Knowledge (ICTCK). IEEE, pp 98–103

  33. Carreira-Perpinán MA, Tavallali P (2018) Alternating optimization of decision trees, with application to learning sparse oblique trees. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, (NeurIPS 2018), vol 31, pp 1211–1221

  34. Kumar A, Dabas V, Hooda P (2018) Text classification algorithms for mining unstructured data: a SWOT analysis. Int J Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-017-0072-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Yao X (1999) Evolving artificial neural networks. Proc IEEE 87(9):1423–1447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cybenko G (1989) Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math Control Signals Syst 2(4):303–314

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Schmidhuber J (2015) Deep learning in neural networks: an overview. Neural Netw 61:85–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/fuzzy-inference-system. Retreived 14 May 2019

  39. Nedeljkovic I (2004) Image classification based on fuzzy logic. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 34(30):3–7

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kumar A, Sharma A (2019) Systematic literature review of fuzzy logic based text summarization. Iranian J Fuzzy Syst 16(5):45–59

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Sugeno M (1985) An introductory survey of fuzzy control. Inf Sci 36(1–2):59–83

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Barnes S, Vidgen R (2000) WebQual: an exploration of website quality. In: ECIS 2000 Proceedings, p 74

  43. Bernard M (2000) Mills M (2000) So, what size and type of font should I use on my website. Usability News 2(2):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  44. Al-Hmouz A, Shen J, Al-Hmouz R, Yan J (2012) Modeling and simulation of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) for mobile learning. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 5:226–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pathak J, Vidyarthi N, Summers SL (2005) A fuzzy-based algorithm for auditors to detect elements of fraud in settled insurance claims. Manag Audit J 20(6):632–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Raja P, Pahat B (2016) A review of training methods of ANFIS for applications in business and economics. Int J u-and e-Service Sci Technol 9(7):165–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Hashemi SY, Aliee FS (2018) Dynamic and comprehensive trust model for IoT and its integration into RPL. J Supercomput 75:3555–3584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Barnaghi P, Sheth A, Singh V, Hauswirth M (2015) Physical-cyber-social computing: looking back, looking forward. IEEE Internet Comput 19(3):7–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Atzori L, Iera A, Morabito G (2014) From “smart objects” to “social objects”: the next evolutionary step of the internet of things. IEEE Commun Mag 52(1):97–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Hahanov V (2018) Cyber physical computing for IoT-driven services. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  51. Sheth A (2016) Internet of things to smart IoT through semantic, cognitive, and perceptual computing. IEEE Intell Syst 31(2):108–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Tavallali P, Yazdi M, Khosravi MR (2019) Robust cascaded skin detector based on AdaBoost. Multimed Tools Appl 78(2):2599–2620

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Delhi Technological University, Delhi, India

    Akshi Kumar & Anshika Arora

Authors
  1. Akshi Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anshika Arora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akshi Kumar.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, A., Arora, A. An ANFIS-based compatibility scorecard for IoT integration in websites. J Supercomput 76, 2568–2596 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-019-03026-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-019-03026-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation