Unraveling the Challenges for the Application of Fog Computing in Different Realms: A Multifaceted Study

  • John Paul MartinEmail author
  • A. Kandasamy
  • K. Chandrasekaran
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 771)


Fog computing is an emerging paradigm that deals with distributing data and computation at intermediate layers between the cloud and the edge. Cloud computing was introduced to support the increasing computing requirements of users. Later, it was observed that end users experienced a delay involved in uploading the large amounts of data to the cloud for processing. Such a seemingly centralized approach did not provide a good user experience. To overcome this limitation, processing capability was incorporated in devices at the edge. This led to the rise of edge computing. This paradigm suffered because edge devices had limited capability in terms of computing resources and storage requirements. Relying on these edge devices alone was not sufficient. Thus, a paradigm was needed without the delay in uploading to the cloud and without the resource availability constraints. This is where fog computing came into existence. This abstract paradigm involves the establishment of fog nodes at different levels between the edge and the cloud. Fog nodes can be different entities, such as personal computers (PCs). There are different realms where fog computing may be applied, such as vehicular networks and the Internet of Things. In all realms, resource management decisions will vary based on the environmental conditions. This chapter attempts to classify the various approaches for managing resources in the fog environment based on their application realm, and to identify future research directions.


  1. 1.
    Ahmed, A., and E. Ahmed. 2016. A survey on mobile edge computing. In IEEE 10th International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Control (ISCO), 1–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arkian, H.R., A. Diyanat, and A. Pourkhalili. 2017. Mist: Fog-based data analytics scheme with cost-efficient resource provisioning for iot crowdsensing applications. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 82: 152–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barcelo, M., A. Correa, J. Llorca, A.M. Tulino, J.L. Vicario, and A. Morell. 2016. Iot-cloud service optimization in next generation smart environments. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 34 (12): 4077–4090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byers, C.C. 2015. Fog computing distributing data and intelligence for resiliency and scale necessary for iot the internet of things.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, X., and L. Wang. 2017. Exploring fog computing-based adaptive vehicular data scheduling policies through a compositional formal methodpepa. IEEE Communications Letters 21 (4): 745–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dao, N.N., J. Lee, D.N. Vu, J. Paek, J. Kim, S. Cho, K.S. Chung, and C. Keum. 2017. Adaptive resource balancing for serviceability maximization in fog radio access networks. IEEE Access 5: 14548–14559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dastjerdi, A.V., and R. Buyya. 2016. Fog computing: helping the internet of things realize its potential. Computer 49 (8): 112–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Datta, S.K., C. Bonnet, and J. Haerri. 2015. Fog computing architecture to enable consumer centric internet of things services. In IEEE International Symposium on Consumer Electronics (ISCE), 1–2.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deng, R., R. Lu, C. Lai, T.H. Luan, and H. Liang. 2016. Optimal workload allocation in fog-cloud computing toward balanced delay and power consumption. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 3 (6): 1171–1181.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Do, C.T., N.H. Tran, C. Pham, M.G.R. Alam, J.H. Son, and C.S. Hong. 2015. A proximal algorithm for joint resource allocation and minimizing carbon footprint in geo-distributed fog computing. In IEEE International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN), 324–329.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fernando, N., S.W. Loke, and W. Rahayu. 2013. Mobile cloud computing: a survey. Future Generation Computer Systems 29 (1): 84–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gu, L., D. Zeng, S. Guo, A. Barnawi, and Y. Xiang. 2017. Cost efficient resource management in fog computing supported medical cyber-physical system. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing 5 (1): 108–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    He, Z., Z. Cai, J. Yu, X. Wang, Y. Sun, and Y. Li. 2017. Cost-efficient strategies for restraining rumor spreading in mobile social networks. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 66 (3): 2789–2800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jingtao, S., L. Fuhong, Z. Xianwei, and L. Xing. 2015. Steiner tree based optimal resource caching scheme in fog computing. China Communications 12 (8): 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan, S., S. Parkinson, and Y. Qin. 2017. Fog computing security: a review of current applications and security solutions. Journal of Cloud Computing 6 (1): 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Networking, C.V. 2017. Ciscoglobal cloud index: forecast and methodology, 2015–2020. white paperGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ni, L., J. Zhang, C. Jiang, C. Yan, and K. Yu. 2017. Resource allocation strategy in fog computing based on priced timed petri nets. IEEE Internet of Things Journal.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ning, H., H. Liu, J. Ma, L.T. Yang, and R. Huang. 2016. Cybermatics: cyber-physical-social-thinking hyperspace based science and technology. Future Generation Computer Systems 56: 504–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peng, M., and K. Zhang. 2016. Recent advances in fog radio access networks: performance analysis and radio resource allocation. IEEE Access 4: 5003–5009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Qiu, T., R. Qiao, and D. Wu. 2017. Eabs: An event-aware backpressure scheduling scheme for emergency internet of things. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tordera, E.M., X. Masip-Bruin, J. García-Almiñana, A. Jukan, G.J. Ren, and J. Zhu. 2017. Do we all really know what a fog node is? current trends towards an open definition. Computer Communications.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang, W., Q. Wang, and K. Sohraby. 2017. Multimedia sensing as a service (msaas): Exploring resource saving potentials of at cloud-edge iot and fogs. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 4 (2): 487–495.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weinhardt, C., A. Anandasivam, B. Blau, N. Borissov, T. Meinl, W. Michalk, and J. Stößer. 2009. Cloud computing-a classification, business models, and research directions. Business and Information Systems Engineering 1 (5): 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wen, Z., R. Yang, P. Garraghan, T. Lin, J. Xu, and M. Rovatsos. 2017. Fog orchestration for internet of things services. IEEE Internet Computing 21 (2): 16–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zeng, D., L. Gu, S. Guo, Z. Cheng, and S. Yu. 2016. Joint optimization of task scheduling and image placement in fog computing supported software-defined embedded system. IEEE Transactions on Computers 65 (12): 3702–3712.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang, Y., D. Niyato, and P. Wang. 2015. Offloading in mobile cloudlet systems with intermittent connectivity. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 14 (12): 2516–2529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhu, J., D.S. Chan, M.S. Prabhu, P. Natarajan, H. Hu, and F. Bonomi. 2013. Improving web sites performance using edge servers in fog computing architecture. IEEE 7th International Symposium on Service Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), 320–323.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Paul Martin
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Kandasamy
    • 1
  • K. Chandrasekaran
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematical and Computational SciencesNational Institute of TechnologyMangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologyMangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations