Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantifying Trust Perception to Enable Design for Connectivity in Cyber-Physical-Social Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Emotional Engineering, Vol. 8

Abstract

Cyber-physical systems possess highly integrated functions of data collection, data processing, communication, and control. Given their seamless integration with human society, they are also termed as cyber-physical-social systems (CPSS). The advanced capabilities and functions of CPSS rely on their highly networked working environment and deep interdependency. The effectiveness of their performance critically depends on what and how they share among each other. Designing a trustworthy CPSS network, which can work together collaboratively thus is important. To perform systems design, quantitative measures of trustworthiness are required. In this chapter, quantitative metrics of trustworthiness, including capability, benevolence, and integrity, are proposed based on a generic probabilistic graph model of CPSS networks. The proposed metrics can be calculated from either subjective perception or objective statistics of sensing, computing, and communication functions in CPSS networks. A design optimization framework based on the trustworthiness metrics is also demonstrated.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Akter S, D’Ambra J, Ray P (2011) Trustworthiness in mHealth information services: an assessment of a hierarchical model with mediating and moderating effects using partial least squares (PLS). J Assoc Inf Sci Technol (Wiley Online Library) 62(1):100–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Hamadi H, Chen R (2017) Trust-based decision making for health IoT systems. IEEE Internet Things J IEEE 4(5):1408–1419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Angelaki DE, Gu Y, DeAngelis GC (2009) Multisensory integration: psychophysics, neurophysiology, and computation. Curr Opin Neurobiol (Elsevier) 19(4):452–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barber KS, Kim J (2001) Belief revision process based on trust: agents evaluating reputation of information sources. In: Falcone R, Singh M, Tan Y-H (eds) Trust in Cyber-societies. Springer, pp 73–82

    Google Scholar 

  5. Beth T, Borcherding M, Klein B (1994) Valuation of trust in open networks. Computer security—ESORICS 94. Springer, pp 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen D et al (2011) TRM-IoT: a trust management model based on fuzzy reputation for internet of things. Comput Sci Inf Syst 8(4):1207–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen R, Bao F, Guo J (2016) Trust-based service management for social internet of things systems. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput (IEEE) 13(6):684–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen Z, Tian L, Lin C (2017) Trust model of wireless sensor networks and its application in data fusion. Sensors (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) 17(4):703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature (Nature Publishing Group) 415(6870):429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fuller MA et al (2010) Clarifying the integration of trust and TAM in e-commerce environments: implications for systems design and management. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 57(3):380–393 (IEEE)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Golbeck J, others (2008) Trust on the world wide web: a survey. Foundations and trends® in web science, vol 1, no 2. Now Publishers, Inc., pp 131–197

    Google Scholar 

  12. Govindan K, Mohapatra P (2012) Trust computations and trust dynamics in mobile adhoc networks: a survey. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 14(2):279–298 (IEEE)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Grabner-Kräuter S, Kaluscha EA (2003) Empirical research in on-line trust: a review and critical assessment. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 58(6):783–812 (Elsevier)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huynh TD, Jennings NR, Shadbolt NR (2006) An integrated trust and reputation model for open multi-agent systems. Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems 13(2):119–154 (Springer)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Keung SNLC, Griffiths N (2010) Trust and reputation. In: Agent-based service-oriented computing. Springer, London, pp 189–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-041-0_8

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kim H et al (2010) A trust evaluation model for QoS guarantee in cloud systems. Int J Grid Distrib Comput 3(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lee MKO, Turban E (2001) A trust model for consumer internet shopping. Int J Electron Commer (Taylor & Francis) 6(1):75–91

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lee S, Sherwood R, Bhattacharjee B (2003) Cooperative peer groups in NICE. In: INFOCOM 2003. twenty-second annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications. IEEE Societies, pp 1272–1282

    Google Scholar 

  19. Li X et al (2015) ‘Service operator-aware trust scheme for resource matchmaking across multiple clouds. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 26(5):1419–1429 IEEE

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li X, Zhou F, Du J (2013) ‘LDTS: A lightweight and dependable trust system for clustered wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 8(6):924–935 IEEE

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ma X, Lu H, Gan Z (2014) Improving recommendation accuracy by combining trust communities and collaborative filtering. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on conference on information and knowledge management, pp 1951–1954

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manag Rev 20(3):709–734 Academy of Management

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nitti M, Girau R, Atzori L (2014) Trustworthiness management in the social internet of things. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 26(5):1253–1266 IEEE

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. O’Doherty D, Jouili S, Van Roy P (2012) Towards trust inference from bipartite social networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGMOD workshop on databases and social networks, pp 13–18

    Google Scholar 

  25. Patel J et al (2005) A probabilistic trust model for handling inaccurate reputation sources. In: Herrmann P, Issarny V, Shiu S (eds) Trust management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 193–209

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Reddy VB, Venkataraman S, Negi A (2017) Communication and data trust for wireless sensor networks using D-S theory. IEEE Sens J 17(12):3921–3929 IEEE

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ruan Y, Durresi A (2016) ‘A survey of trust management systems for online social communities—Trust modeling, trust inference and attacks. Knowl-Based Syst 106:150–163 Elsevier

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sabater J, Sierra C (2002) Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems: part 1, pp 475–482

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sahoo RR et al (2016) A bio inspired and trust based approach for clustering in WSN. Nat Comput 15(3):423–434 Springer

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Saied YB et al (2013) Trust management system design for the internet of things: a context-aware and multi-service approach. Comput Secur 39:351–365 Elsevier

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang Y (2016) System resilience quantification for probabilistic design of internet-of-things architecture. In: ASME 2016 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, p V01BT02A011

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wang Y (2017) On social value of risk information in risk communication. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part B: Mech Eng (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) 3(4):41009

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wang Y (2018a) Resilience Quantification for probabilistic design of cyber-physical system networks. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part B (ASME) 4(3):31006

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wang Y (2018b) Trust based cyber-physical systems network design. In: ASME 2018 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, p V01AT02A037–V01AT02A037

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Y (2018) Trust quantification for networked cyber-physical systems. IEEE Internet Things J 5(3):2055–2070 IEEE

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wang Y (2018d) Trustworthiness in designing cyber-physical systems. In: Proceedings of 12th international symposium on tools and methods of competitive engineering (TMCE2018). Las Palmas, Gran Canaria

    Google Scholar 

  37. Yousafzai SY et al (2005) Strategies for building and communicating trust in electronic banking: a field experiment. Psychol Mark 22(2):181–201 Wiley Online Library

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yu B, Singh M (2000) A social mechanism of reputation management in electronic communities. In: Klusch M, Kerschberg L (eds) Cooperative information agents IV-the future of information agents in cyberspace. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 154–165

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  39. Yu B, Singh MP (2002) Distributed reputation management for electronic commerce. Comput Intell 18(4):535–549 Wiley Online Library

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Zhou P et al (2015) Toward energy-efficient trust system through watchdog optimization for WSNs. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur (IEEE) 10(3):613–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by National Science Foundation under grant CMMI-1663227.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgia Institute of Technology, 813 Ferst Drive NW, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0405, USA

    Yan Wang

Authors
  1. Yan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan Wang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

    Shuichi Fukuda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wang, Y. (2020). Quantifying Trust Perception to Enable Design for Connectivity in Cyber-Physical-Social Systems. In: Fukuda, S. (eds) Emotional Engineering, Vol. 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38360-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38360-2_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-38359-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-38360-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation