Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A new QoC parameter and corresponding context inconsistency elimination algorithms for sensed contexts and non-sensed contexts

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the key products of ubiquitous computing, context-aware systems have been widely used in many fields such as digital home, smart healthcare and so on. However, in the face of the typical application environment formed by multiple sensors and intelligent devices, the inconsistency of contexts that hinders the normal operation of the systems has become an inevitable and urgent problem that needs to be resolved. In this paper, we propose a new quality of context (QoC) parameter relevance to enrich the comprehensive assessment of the context quality. Moreover, on this basis, we put forward novel context inconsistency elimination algorithms that use multiple QoC parameters and Dempster-Shafer theory to solve the inconsistency problem of sensed contexts and non-sensed contexts, respectively. Experimental analyses from multiple dimensions fully show that the proposed algorithms have obvious advantages over the other algorithms in terms of accuracy, stability, and robustness.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Espinilla M, Villarreal V, McChesney L (2019) Ubiquitous computing and ambient intelligence-UCAmI. Sensors 19(18):4034–4037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chahuara P, Portet F, Vacher M (2017) Context-aware decision making under uncertainty for voice-based control of smart home. Expert Syst Appl 75:63–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. You I, Choi J, Choi C, Kim P (2014) Intelligent healthcare service based on context inference using smart device. Soft Comput 18(12):2577–2586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mitra K, Zaslavsky A, Ahlund C (2015) Context-aware QoE modelling, measurement, and prediction in mobile computing systems. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 14(5):920–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nazario DC, Dantas MAR, de Macedo DDJ (2018) An e-health study case environment enhanced by the utilization of a quality of context paradigm. In: Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on computers and communications, pp 1221–1226

  6. Chen CH, Ye CY, Jacobsen HA (2011) Hybrid context inconsistency resolution for context-aware services. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and communications, pp 10–19

  7. Zheng D, Wang J, Kerong B (2013) A QoC based method for reliable fusion of uncertain pervasive contexts. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on high performance computing and communications, embedded and ubiquitous computing, pp 2311–2316

  8. Zheng D, Wang J, Kerong B (2014) Research of QoC based management for complex sensor networks applications. In: Proceedings of IEEE 12th international conference on dependable, autonomic and secure computing, pp 435–440

  9. McAllister D, Sun CE, Vouk M (1990) Reliability of voting in fault tolerant software systems for small output-spaces. IEEE Trans Reliab 39(5):524–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Manzoor A, Truong HL, Dustdar S (2008) On the evaluation of quality of context. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European conference on smart sensing and context, pp 140–153

  11. Lee BH, Kim DH (2012) Efficient context-aware selection based on user feedback. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 58(3):978–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu HJ, Wang LT, Xiong HL, Du ZF, Xie ZG (2014) Effective context inconsistency elimination algorithm based on feedback and reliability distribution for IOV. China Commun 11(10):16–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ji MY, Xu HJ, Wang LT, Dang J, Xu ZZ, Fang HT (2016) Approach of measuring PoC of context using limited self-feedback in context-aware systems. IET Wirelss Sensor Systems 6(5):158–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Al-Shargabi AA, Siewe F (2013) Resolving context conflicts using association rules (RCCAR) to improve quality of context-aware systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on computer science and education, pp 1450–1455

  15. Al-Shargabi AA (2015) A multi-layer framework for quality of context in context-aware systems. Dissertation, De Montfort University

  16. Wu HD, Siegel M, Stiefellhagen R, Yang J (2002) Sensor fusion using Dempster-Shafer theory. In: Proceedings of IEEE instrumentation and measurement technology conference, pp 7–12

  17. Li DB, Deng Y (2019) A new correlation coefficient based on generalized information quality. IEEE Access 7:1754110–175419

    Google Scholar 

  18. Boulkaboul S, Djenouri D (2020) DFIOT: data fusion for internet of thing. Journal of Network and System Management 28:1136–1160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. An J, Hu M, Fu L, Zhan JW (2019) A novel fuzzy approach for combining uncertain conflict evidences in the Dempster-Shafer theory. IEEE Access 7:7481–7501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhao GZ, Chen AG, Lu GX, Liu W (2020) Data fusion algorithm based on fuzzy sets and D-S theory of evidence. Tsinghua Sci Technol 25(1):12–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Manzoor A, Truong HL, Dustdar S (2009) Quality aware context information aggregation system for pervasive environments. In: Proceedings of international conference on advanced information networking and applications workshops, pp 266–271

  22. Al-Shargabi AA, Siewe F, Zahary AT (2017) Quality of context in context-aware systems. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Context-aware System Application 4(12):1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Chen M, Xu HJ, Xiong HL, Pan LL, Du BZ, Li FF (2020) A new overall quality indicator OQoc and the corresponding context inconsistency elimination algorithm based on OQoc and Dempster-Shafer theory. Soft Comput 24:10829–10841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jiang W, Zhan J (2017) A modified combination rule in generalized evidence theory. Appl Intell 46:630–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Li P, Wei CP (2019) An emergency decision-making method based on D-S evidence theory for probabilistic linguistic term sets. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 37:101178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Song YF, Wang XD, Zhu JW, Lei L (2018) Sensor dynamic reliability evaluation based on evidence theory and intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Appl Intell 48(11):3950–3962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Anagnostopoulos C, Kolomvatsos K (2018) Predictive intelligence to the edge through approximate collaborative context reasoning. Appl Intell 48:966–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hua B (2009) Fusion of uncertain information using vague sets and Dempster-Shafer theories. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on information reuse and integration, pp 17–22

  29. Dey AK, Salber D, Abowd GD (2001) A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Hum-Comput Interact 16(2-4):97–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Buchholz T, Kupper A, Schiffers M (2003) Quality of context information: what it is and why we need it. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop of the HP open view university association, pp 1–14

  31. Krause M, Hochstatter I (2005) Challenges in modelling and using quality of context (QoC). In: Proceedings of international workshop on mobile agents for telecommunication applications, pp 324–333

  32. Manzoor A, Truong HL, Dustdar S (2014) Quality of context: models and applications for context-aware systems in pervasive environments. Knowl Eng Rev 29(2):154–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Al-Shargabi AA, Siewe F (2018) A multi-layer framework for quality of context in ubiquitous context-aware systems. International Journal of Pervasive Computing and Communications 14(2):165–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Manzoor A, Truong HL, Dustdar S (2009) Using quality of context to resolve conflicts in context-aware systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on quality of contex, pp 144– 155

  35. Filho JB, Miron AD, Saton I, Gensel J, Martin H (2010) Modeling and measuring quality of context information in pervasive environments. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE international conference on advanced information networking and applications, pp 690–697

  36. Abid Z, Chabridon S (2011) A fine-grain approach for evaluating the quality of context. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and conmmunications workshops, pp 444–449

  37. Nazario DC, Dantas MAR, Todesco JL (2014) Context management: toward assessing quality of context parameters in a ubiquitous assisted environment. J Inf Syst Technol Manag 11(3):569–590

    Google Scholar 

  38. Nazario DC, Campos PJ, Inacio EC, Dantas MAR (2017) Quality of context evaluating approach in AAL environment using IoT technology. In: Proceedings of IEEE 30th international symposium on computer-based medical systems, pp 558– 563

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province of China (ZR2020MF139), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFC0831001), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61771292, 61401253), and the Key Research and Development Program of Shandong Province of China (2017GGX201003).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Qingdao, 266237, China

    Shidi Fan, Hongji Xu, Hailiang Xiong, Min Chen, Qiang Liu, Qinghua Xing & Tiankuo Li

Authors
  1. Shidi Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hongji Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hailiang Xiong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Min Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qiang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Qinghua Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tiankuo Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hongji Xu or Hailiang Xiong.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interests

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Human and Animals Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fan, S., Xu, H., Xiong, H. et al. A new QoC parameter and corresponding context inconsistency elimination algorithms for sensed contexts and non-sensed contexts. Appl Intell 52, 681–698 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02226-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02226-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation