Advertisement

Taxonomy of Edge Computing: Challenges, Opportunities, and Data Reduction Methods

  • Kusumlata Jain
  • Smaranika Mohapatra
Chapter
Part of the EAI/Springer Innovations in Communication and Computing book series (EAISICC)

Abstract

The Internet of Things (IoT) is expected to grow faster than any other category of connected devices. IoT allows any device with an on-and-off switch to connect to the internet—a concept that has the ability to greatly change our lives and work. These modern systems collect inherently complex data streams due to the volume, velocity, value, variety, variability, and veracity of data, which leads to incremental growth in data traffic on networks and in the cloud. To fulfill the requirements of IoT, including geodistribution, low latency, location awareness, and mobility support, a new paradigm is proposed: edge computing. In edge computing, substantial computing and storage resources are placed at the edge of the network in mobile devices or sensors. The term “edge” is taken from network diagrams; normally, the edge of a network diagram represents the point at which data traffic enters or leaves the workable network. Using the concept of edge computing, an organization can shift huge amounts of data into processed data near the data origin, which helps to reduce data traffic in the network’s central repository (called the “cloud”). Edge computing uses a variety of data reduction techniques close to the data source at the network edge, including data pre-processing, local storage, and filtering. This approach can prevent some critical issues, such as I/O bottlenecks, storage and bandwidth limitations, data traffic increments, and high energy costs. A major advantage of edge computing is improvement of the request-response delay to milliseconds. Edge computing also supports security and network challenges. However, two major obstacles exist toward achieving the benefit of network-edge computing. First, the most efficient algorithms for data reduction in time series (one of the most common types of data in IoT) were developed to work posteriori upon big datasets, but they cannot make decisions for each incoming data item. Secondly, the state of the art lacks systems that can apply any of the possible data reduction methods without adding significant delays or major reconfigurations. Edge computing has also inherited some of the challenges of cloud computing, including data abstraction, naming, and programmability. This chapter presents a detailed taxonomic discussion of edge computing, along with its challenges, opportunities, and data reduction methods.

Keywords

Taxonomy IoT Cloud Computing Edge Computing Data Reduction Techniques 

References

  1. 1.
    A. Al-Fuqaha, M. Guizani, M. Mohammadi, M. Aledhari, M. Ayyash, Internet of things: a survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor 17, 2347–2376 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    CISCO, The Internet of Things How the Next Evolution of the Internet Is Changing Everything, White Pap. (2011). http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/ac79/docs/innov/IoT_IBSG_0411FINAL.pdf
  3. 3.
    M. Chiang, T. Zhang, Fog and IoT: an overview of research opportunities. IEEE Internet Things J. 3, 854–864 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ericsson Inc, Ceo to shareholders: 50 billion connections 2020, p. 1, (2010). Available at: http://www.ericsson.com/thecompany/press/releases/2010/04/1403231
  5. 5.
    Cisco global cloud index: Forecast and methodology, 2014–2019 white paper. (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oculus, Oculus Rift helmet: next generation virtual reality. (2016). Available at: https://www3.oculus.com/en-us/rift/. 2
  7. 7.
    Google, Nest IoT devices. (2016). Available at: https://nest.com/.3
  8. 8.
    D. Evans, The Internet of Things: how the next evolution of the Internet is changing everything. CISCO White Paper, vol. 1, pp. 1–11, 2011.10Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. Wortmann, K. Flüchter, Internet of Things. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 57(3), 221–224 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    A. Brogi, S. Forti, QoS-aware deployment of IoT applications through the fog. IEEE Internet Things J. 4, 1185–1192 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boeing 787s to Create Half a Terabyte of data Per Flight, Says Virgin Atlantic. Accessed on 7 Dec 2016 [Online], Available : https://datafloq.com/read/self-driving-cars-create-2-petabytes-data-annually/172
  13. 13.
    Self-Driving Cars Will Create 2Petabytes of Data, What are the Big\Data Opportunities for the Car Industry? Accessed on 7 Dec 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/data/boeing-787s-create-half-terabyte-of-data-per-flight says-virgin-atlantic-3433595/
  14. 14.
    M. Satyanarayanan, P. Bahl, R. Caceres, N. Davies, The case for VM-base cloudlets in mobile computing. Pervasive Comput. 8, 14–23 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ETSI, Mobile-edge Computing Introductory Technical White Paper, White Paper, Mobile-edge Computing Industry Initiative, (2014). https://portal.etsi.org/portals/0/tbpages/mec/docs/mobile-edge_computing_–_introductory_technical_white_paper_v1
  16. 16.
    Y.C. Hu, M. Patel, D. Sabella, N. Sprecher, V. Young, Mobile Edge Computing a Key Technology towards 5G, (2015). http://10.3.200.202/cache/8/03/etsi.org/6e14a9668574b8b935111768d9f6e501/etsi_wp11_mec_a_key_technology_towards_5g.pdf
  17. 17.
    ETSI GS MEC 001, Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) Terminology V1.1.1, (2016). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC001v010101p.pdf
  18. 18.
    ETSI GS MEC 002, Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) Technical Requirements V1.1.1, (2016). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/002/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC002v010101p.pdf
  19. 19.
    ETSI GS MEC 003, Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) Framework and Reference Architecture V1.1.1, (2016). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/003/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC003v010101p.pdf
  20. 20.
    ETSI GS MEC-IEG 004, Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) Service Scenarios V1.1.1, (2015). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MEC/001_099/004/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC003v010101p.pdf
  21. 21.
    ETSI GS MEC-IEG 005, Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) Proof of Concept FrameworkV1.1.1,(2015). http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MECIEG/001_099/005/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC-IEG005v010101p.pdf
  22. 22.
    ETSI GS MEC-IEG 006: Mobile Edge Computing Market Acceleration MEC Metrics Best Practice and Guidelines V1.1.1, (2017) http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/MECIEG/001_099/006/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC-IEG006v010101p.pdf
  23. 23.
    T. Taleb, S. Dutta, A. Ksentini, M. Iqbal, H. Flinck, Mobile edge computing potential in making cities smarter. IEEE Commun. Mag. 55, 38–43 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Open Fog Consortium, [Online]. https://www.openfogconsortium.org/
  25. 25.
    OpenFog Consortium Architecture Working Group, OpenFog Architecture Overview White Paper, https://www.openfogconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/OpenFog-Architecture-Overview-WP-2-2016.pdf
  26. 26.
    Q. Shen, L. Huang, G. Zhang, J. Gong, Policy Control and Traffic Aggregation for M2M Services in Mobile Networks. in International Conference on Mechatronic Sciences, Electric Engineering, and Computer (MEC ’13), pp. 3391–3395 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cisco. Krikkit open source software, Feb 2014. http://eclipse.org/proposals/technology.krikkit/
  28. 28.
    H. Zou, Y. Yu, W. Tang, H.-W. M. Chen. FlexAnalytics: a flexible data analytics framework for big data applications with IO performance improvement. Big Data Res. J. 1, 4–13 (2014). Special Issue on Scalable Computing for Big DataCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    R. Willett, A. Martin, R. Nowak. Backcasting: adaptive sampling for sensor networks. in Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on Information processing in sensor networks. ACM, pp. 124–133. (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. Jain, E.Y. Chang, Adaptive sampling for sensor networks. in Proceeedings of the 1st international workshop on Data management for sensor networks: in conjunction with VLDB 2004. ACM, pp. 10–16, (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    S. Li, L. Da Xu, X. Wang, Compressed sensing signal and data acquisition in wireless sensor networks and internet of things. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 9(4), 2177–2186 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    X.-Y. Liu, Y. Zhu, L. Kong, Y.G. Cong Liu, A.V. Vasilakos, M.-Y. Wu, CDC: Compressive data collection for wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distributed Syst 26(8), 2188–2197 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    F. Al-Turjman, Fog-based caching in software-defined information-centric networks. Comput Electr Eng J 69(1), 54–67 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    B.A. Bash, J.W. Byers, J. Considine. Approximately uniform random sampling in sensor networks. in Proceeedings of the 1st international workshop on Data management for sensor networks: in conjunction with VLDB 2004. ACM, pp. 32–39, (2004)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    S. Lin, B. Arai, D. Gunopulos, G. Das, Region sampling: Continuous Adaptive Sampling on Sensor Networks, IEEE 24th International Conference on Data Engineering, (2008), https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4497488/
  36. 36.
    N. Kimura, S. Latifi, A survey on data compression in wireless sensor networks. in International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC’05)-Volume II, Vol. 2. IEEE, 8–13, (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Z. Huang, W. Lu, K. Yi, Y. Liu, Sampling based algorithms for quantile computation in sensor networks. in Proceedings of the 2011 international conference on Management of data – SIGMOD ‘11. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 745. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1145/1989323.1989401
  38. 38.
    K.-W. Fan, S. Liu, P. Sinha, Structure-free data aggregation in sensor networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 6(8), 929–942 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    A. Papageorgiou, B. Cheng, E. Kovacs, Real-time data reduction at the network edge of Internet-of-Things systems. in 2015 11th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM). IEEE, pp. 284–291. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/CNSM.2015.7367373
  40. 40.
    K.B. Pratt, E. Fink, Search for patterns in compressed time series. Int. J. Image Graph. 2, 89–106 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    J.W. Patty, E.M. Penn, Analyzing big data: social choice and measurement. Polit. Sci. Polit. 48(01), 95–101 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    M. Trovati, Reduced topologically real-world networks: a big-data approach. Int. J. Distrib. Syst. Technol. (IJDST) 6(2), 13–27 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    M. Trovati, N. Bessis, An influence assessment method based on co-occurrence for topologically reduced big data sets. in Soft Computing, pp. 1–10, (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    B. Jalali, M.H. Asghari, The anamorphic stretch transform: putting the squeeze on “big data”. Opt. Photonics News 25(2), 24–31 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    B. Di Martino et al., Big data (lost) in the cloud. Int. J. Big Data Intell. 1(1–2), 3–17 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    P. Jiang et al., An intelligent information forwarder for healthcare big data systems with distributed wearable sensors. IEEE Syst. J. 99, 1–9 (2014)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    2015 11th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM) in [Real-Time Data Reduction at the Network Edge of Internet-of-Things Systems Apostolos Papageorgiou, Bin Cheng, Erno Kovacs ¨ NEC Laboratories Europe Heidelberg, Germany apostolos.papageorgiou@neclab.eu, bin.cheng@neclab.eu, ernoe.kovacs@neclab.eu]Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    M.H. Rehman, P.P. Jayaraman, S.R. Malik, A.R. Khan, M.M. Gaber, RedEdge: A Novel Architecture for BigData Processing in Mobile Edge Computing Environments. J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 6(3), 17 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan6030017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    D.Y. Kim, S. Kim, J.H. Park, A combined network control approach for the edge cloud and LPWAN-based IoT services. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.4406
  50. 50.
    C. Yang et al., A spatiotemporal compression based approach for efficient big data processing on Cloud. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 80(8), 1563–1583 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    K. Ackermann, S.D. Angus, A resource efficient big data analysis method for the social sciences: the case of global IP activity. Procedia Comput. Sci. 29, 2360–2369 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    B.H. Brinkmann et al., Large-scale electrophysiology acquisition, compression, encryption, and storage of big data. J. Neurosci. Methods 180(1), 185–192 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    M. Weinstein et al., Analyzing big data with dynamic quantum clustering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1310.2700, (2013)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    A. Cichocki, Era of big data processing: a new approach via tensor networks and tensor decompositions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1403.2048, (2014)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    L. Zhang et al., Named data networking (NDN) project. Xerox Palo Alto Res. Center, Palo Alto, CA, USA, Tech. Rep. NDN-0001, (2010)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    D. Raychaudhuri, K. Nagaraja, A. Venkataramani, MobilityFirst: a robust and trustworthy mobility-centric architecture for the future Internet. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Comput. Commun. Rev. 16(3), 2–13 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    F. DaCosta, Rethinking the Internet of Things: A Scalable Approach to Connecting Everything (ApressOpen, New York, NY, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kusumlata Jain
    • 1
    • 2
  • Smaranika Mohapatra
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science & EngineeringMaharishi Arvind Institute of Engineering & TechnologyJaipurIndia
  2. 2.Rajasthan Technical UniversityKotaIndia

Personalised recommendations