Requirements for Energy Efficient Edge Computing: A Survey

  • Olli VäänänenEmail author
  • Timo Hämäläinen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11118)


Internet of Things is evolving heavily in these times. One of the major obstacle is energy consumption in the IoT devices (sensor nodes and wireless gateways). The IoT devices are often battery powered wireless devices and thus reducing the energy consumption in these devices is essential to lengthen the lifetime of the device without battery change. It is possible to lengthen battery lifetime by efficient but lightweight sensor data analysis in close proximity of the sensor. Performing part of the sensor data analysis in the end device can reduce the amount of data needed to transmit wirelessly. Transmitting data wirelessly is very energy consuming task. At the same time, the privacy and security should not be compromised. It requires effective but computationally lightweight encryption schemes. This survey goes thru many aspects to consider in edge and fog devices to minimize energy consumption and thus lengthen the device and the network lifetime.


IoT Edge computing Fog computing Sensor data compression 


  1. 1.
    Li, S., Xu, L.D., Zhao, S.: The Internet of Things: a survey. Inf. Syst. Front. 17(2), 243–259 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Montori, F., Contigiani, R., Bedogni, L.: Is WiFi suitable for energy efficient IoT deployments? a performance study. In: 2017 IEEE 3rd International Forum on Research and Technologies for Society and Industry (RTSI), Modena, pp. 1–5 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jayakumar, H., Raha, A., Kim, Y., Sutar, S., Lee, W.S., Raghunathan, V.: Energy-efficient system design for IoT devices. In: 2016 21st Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference (ASP-DAC), Macau, pp. 298–301 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stojkoska, B.R., Nikolovski, Z.: Data compression for energy efficient IoT solutions. In: 2017 25th Telecommunication Forum (TELFOR), Belgrade, pp. 1–4 (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bose, T., Bandyopadhyay, S., Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, A., Pal, A.: Signal characteristics on sensor data compression in IoT - an investigation. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Sensing, Communication and Networking (SECON Workshops), London, pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ying, B.: An energy-efficient compression algorithm for spatial data in wireless sensor networks. In: ICACT (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Satyanarayanan, M.: The emergence of edge computing. Computer 50(1), 30–39 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonomi, F., Milito, R., Zhu, J., Addepalli, S.: Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In: Proceedings of the First Edition of the MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing-MCC 2012, Helsinki, Finland, 17 August 2012, pp. 13–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jalali, F., Khodadustan, S., Gray, C., Hinton, K., Suits, F.: Greening IoT with fog: a survey. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Edge Computing (EDGE), Honolulu, HI, pp. 25–31 (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shi, W., Cao, J., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., Xu, L.: Edge computing: vision and challenges. IEEE Int. Things J. 3(5), 637–646 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Venkat Narayana Rao, T., Amer Khan, M.D., Maschendra, M., Kiran Kumar, M.: A paradigm shift from cloud to fog computing. IJCSET 5(11), 385–389 (2015). http://www.ijcset.netGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yigitoglu, E., Mohamed, M., Liu, L., Ludwig, H.: Foggy: a framework for continuous automated IoT application deployment in fog computing. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on AI and Mobile Services (AIMS), Honolulu, HI, pp. 38–45 (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morabito, R.: A performance evaluation of container technologies on Internet of Things devices. In: 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), San Francisco, CA, pp. 999–1000 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pahl, C., Helmer, S., Miori, L., Sanin, J., Lee, B.: A container-based edge cloud PaaS architecture based on raspberry Pi clusters. In: 2016 IEEE 4th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW), Vienna, pp. 117–124 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morabito, R.: Virtualization on Internet of Things edge devices with container technologies: a performance evaluation. IEEE Access 5, 8835–8850 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krishna, P.V., Obaidat, M.S., Nagaraju, D., Saritha, V.: CHSEO: an energy optimization approach for communication in the internet of things. In: GLOBECOM 2017 – 2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Singapore, pp. 1–6 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cho, Y., Kim, M., Woo, S.: Energy efficient IoT based on wireless sensor networks. In: 2018 20th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), Chuncheon-si, Gangwon-do, Korea (South), pp. 294–299 (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dargie, W., Poellabauer, C.: Fundamentals of Wireless Sensor Networks, Theory and Practise. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bhushan, B., Sahoo, G.: A comprehensive survey of secure and energy efficient routing protocols and data collection approaches in wireless sensor networks. In: 2017 International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication (ICSPC), Coimbatore, pp. 294–299 (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kumar, S., Verma, U.K., Sinha, D.: Performance analysis of LEACH and ENHANCED LEACH in WSN. In: 2016 International Conference on Circuit, Power and Computing Technologies (ICCPCT), Nagercoil, pp. 1–7 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morin, É., Maman, M., Guizzetti, R., Duda, A.: Comparison of the device lifetime in wireless networks for the internet of things. IEEE Access 5, 7097–7114 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schoellhammer, T., Osterwein, E., Greenstein, B., et al.: Lightweight temporal compression of microclimate datasets. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual IEEE International Conference on Local Computer Networks, pp. 516–524. IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tozlu, S.: Feasibility of Wi-Fi enabled sensors for Internet of Things. In: 2011 7th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, Istanbul, pp. 291–296 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    de Carvalho Silva, J., Rodrigues, J.J.P.C., Alberti, A.M., Solic, P., Aquino, A.L.L.: LoRaWAN — a low power WAN protocol for Internet of Things: a review and opportunities. In: 2017 2nd International Multidisciplinary Conference on Computer and Energy Science (SpliTech), Split, pp. 1–6 (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ayele, E.D., Hakkenberg, C., Meijers, J.P., Zhang, K., Meratnia, N., Havinga, P.J.M.: Performance analysis of LoRa radio for an indoor IoT applications. In: 2017 International Conference on Internet of Things for the Global Community (IoTGC), Funchal, pp. 1–8 (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Poursafar, N., Alahi, M.E.E., Mukhopadhyay, S.: Long-range wireless technologies for IoT applications: a review. In: 2017 Eleventh International Conference on Sensing Technology (ICST), Sydney, NSW, pp. 1–6 (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang, H., Fapojuwo, A.O.: A survey of enabling technologies of low power and long range machine-to-machine communications. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials 19(4), 2621–2639 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xu, J., Yao, J., Wang, L., Ming, Z., Wu, K., Chen, L.: Narrowband Internet of Things: evolutions, technologies and open issues. IEEE Int. Things J. 5(3), 1449–1462 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yassein, M.B., Shatnawi, M.Q., Aljwarneh, S., Al-Hatmi, R.: Internet of Things: survey and open issues of MQTT protocol. In: 2017 International Conference on Engineering and MIS (ICEMIS), Monastir, pp. 1–6 (2017)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bandyopadhyay, S., Bhattacharyya, A.: Lightweight Internet protocols for web enablement of sensors using constrained gateway devices. In: 2013 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), San Diego, CA, pp. 334–340 (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mun, D.H., Dinh, M.L., Kwon, Y.W.: An assessment of Internet of Things protocols for resource-constrained applications. In: 2016 IEEE 40th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), Atlanta, GA, pp. 555–560 (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Adnan, S.F.S., Isa, M.A.M., Hashim, H.: Analysis of asymmetric encryption scheme, AAβ performance on arm microcontroller. In: 2017 IEEE Symposium on Computer Applications and Industrial Electronics (ISCAIE), Langkawi, pp. 146–151 (2017)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Diro, A.A., Chilamkurti, N., Nam, Y.: Analysis of lightweight encryption scheme for fog-to-things communication. IEEE Access 6, 26820–26830 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ariffin, M.R.K., Asbullah, M.A., Abu, N.A., Mahad, Z.: A new efficient asymmetric cryptosystem based on the integer factorization problem of N = P^2.q. Malays. J. Math. Sci. 7(S), 19–37 (2012). Special Issue 3rd International Conference on Cryptography and Computer Security 2012, vol. 7, pp. 1–6 (2012)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Adnan, S.F.S., Isa, M.A.M., Hashim, H.: Energy analysis of the AAβ lightweight asymmetric encryption scheme on an embedded device. In: 2016 IEEE Industrial Electronics and Applications Conference (IEACon), Kota Kinabalu, pp. 116–122 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Industrial Engineering, School of TechnologyJAMK University of Applied SciencesJyväskyläFinland
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical Information TechnologyUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations