Advertisement

Semantic Techniques to Support IoT Interoperability

Chapter
  • 90 Downloads
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 941)

Abstract

Smart devices and sensors have reached a very high level of pervasiveness: we are practically surrounded by intelligent items, which continuously communicate with each other and collect information. One of the most challenging issues regarding the use of such sensors regards the possibility to seamlessly make them interoperate to reach a specific goal. This objective could be difficult to achieve, due to the lack of a universally accepted standard for sensor communications. In this paper, we present a prototype tool for the analysis of sensors’ API that, through a semantic graph representation, tries to overcome the possible interoperability issues that may arise in a sensor network, and provides instrument to support sensors’ orchestration and management.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has received funding from the University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli V:ALERE research programme under the SSCeGov (Semantic, Secure and Law Compliant e-Government Processes) project.

References

  1. 1.
    Alaya, M.B., Banouar, Y., Monteil, T., Chassot, C., Drira, K.: OM2M: extensible ETSI-compliant M2M service platform with self-configuration capability. Procedia Comput. Sci. 32, 1079–1086 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali, S., Khusro, S., Ullah, I., Khan, A., Khan, I.: SmartOntoSensor: ontology for semantic interpretation of smartphone sensors data for context-aware applications. J. Sens. 2017 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avancha, S., Patel, C., Joshi, A.: Ontology-driven adaptive sensor networks. In: The First Annual International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Networking and Services, 2004. MOBIQUITOUS 2004, pp. 194–202 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antoniou, G., Van Harmelen, F.: Web ontology language: OWL. In: Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 67–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bajaj, G., Agarwal, R., Singh, P., Georgantas, N., Issarny, V.: A study of existing ontologies in the IoT-domain. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.00112 (2017)
  6. 6.
    Compton, M., Barnaghi, P., Bermudez, L., GarcíA-Castro, R., Corcho, O., Cox, S., Graybeal, J., Hauswirth, M., Henson, C., Herzog, A., et al.: The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensor network incubator group. J. Web Semant. 17, 25–32 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Datta, S.K., Bonnet, C.: Smart M2M gateway based architecture for M2M device and endpoint management. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings), and IEEE Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing (CPSCom), pp. 61–68. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Di Martino, B., Esposito, A., Cretella, G.: Semantic representation of cloud patterns and services with automated reasoning to support cloud application portability. IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput. 5(4), 765–779 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Di Martino, B., Esposito, A., Maisto, S.A., Nacchia, S.: A semantic IoT framework to support RESTful devices’ API interoperability. In: 2017 IEEE 14th International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC), pp. 78–83. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Janowicz, K., Haller, A., Cox, S.J.D., Le Phuoc, D., Lefrançois, M.: SOSA: a lightweight ontology for sensors, observations, samples, and actuators. J. Web Semant. 56, 1–10 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kubler, S., Främling, K., Zaslavsky, A.: IoT platforms initiative. Digitising the Industry Internet of Things Connecting the Physical, Digital and Virtual Worlds, pp. 265–292 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leitner, S.-H., Mahnke, W.: OPC UA-service-oriented architecture for industrial applications. ABB Corp. Res. Center 48, 61–66 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin, D., Burstein, M., Hobbs, J., Lassila, O., McDermott, D., McIlraith, S., Narayanan, S., Paolucci, M., Parsia, B., Payne, T., et al.: OWL-S: semantic markup for web services. W3C Member Submission 22(4) (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mahnke, W., Leitner, S.-H., Damm, M.: OPC Unified Architecture. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    The European (EC-FP7) ICT strep project “mOSAIC—open-source API and platform for multiple clouds”. Call: FP7-ICT-2009-5 Objective: ICT-2009.1.2 (Software Services and Cloud)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nachabe, L., Girod-Genet, M., El Hassan, B.: Unified data model for wireless sensor network. IEEE Sens. J. 15(7), 3657–3667 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pardo-Castellote, G.: OMG data-distribution service: architectural overview. In: 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops, 2003. Proceedings, pp. 200–206. IEEE (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversity of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”Aversa (CE)Italy
  2. 2.Asia UniversityTaichungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations