Image classification on IoT edge devices: profiling and modeling

  • Salma Abdel Magid
  • Francesco Petrini
  • Behnam DezfouliEmail author


With the advent of powerful, low-cost IoT systems, processing data closer to where the data originates, known as edge computing, has become an increasingly viable option. In addition to lowering the cost of networking infrastructures, edge computing reduces edge-cloud delay, which is essential for mission-critical applications. In this paper, we show the feasibility and study the performance of image classification using IoT devices. Specifically, we explore the relationships between various factors of image classification algorithms that may affect energy consumption, such as dataset size, image resolution, algorithm type, algorithm phase, and device hardware. In order to provide a means of predicting the energy consumption of an edge device performing image classification, we investigate the usage of three machine learning algorithms using the data generated from our experiments. The performance as well as the trade-offs for using linear regression, Gaussian process, and random forests are discussed and validated. Our results indicate that the random forest model outperforms the two former algorithms, with an R-squared value of 0.95 and 0.79 for two different validation datasets. The random forest also served as a feature extraction mechanism which enabled us to identify which predictor variables influenced our model the most.


Edge and fog computing Machine learning Energy efficiency Accuracy 



This research has been partially supported by the Latimer Energy Lab and Santa Clara Valley Water District (Grant# SCWD02). This project involves the development of a flood monitoring system where Linux-based wireless systems, which rely on solar or battery power, capture images for analysis using ML to classify and report the debris carried by rivers and streams.


  1. 1.
    Hung, M.: Leading the IoT, Gartner insights on how to lead in a connected world. In: Gartner Reseach, pp. 1–29. (2018)
  2. 2.
    Kumar, A., Goyal, S., Varma, M.: Resource-efficient machine learning in 2 kb ram for the internet of things. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1935–1944 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Naha, R.K., Garg, S., Georgakopoulos, D., Jayaraman, P.P., Gao, L., Xiang, Y., Ranjan, R.: Fog computing: survey of trends, architectures, requirements, and research directions. IEEE Acess 6, 47980–48009 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ni, J., Zhang, K., Lin, X., Shen, X.S.: Securing fog computing for internet of things applications: challenges and solutions. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 20(1), 601–628 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin, J., Yu, W., Zhang, N., Yang, X., Zhang, H., Zhao, W.: A survey on internet of things: architecture, enabling technologies, security and privacy, and applications. IEEE Internet Things J. 4(5), 1125–1142 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wei, J.: How wearables intersect with the cloud and the internet of things: considerations for the developers of wearables. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 3(3), 53–56 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Metcalf, D., Milliard, S.T.J., Gomez, M., Schwartz, M.: Wearables and the internet of things for health: wearable, interconnected devices promise more efficient and comprehensive health care. IEEE Pulse 7(5), 35–39 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Amirtharaj, I., Groot, T., Dezfouli, B.: Profiling and improving the duty-cycling performance of linux-based iot devices. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 30, 1–29 (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications: the power of wireless cloud. (2013)
  10. 10.
    Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Hinton, G. E.: Imagenet Classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 1097–1105 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Szegedy, C., Liu, W., Jia, Y., Sermanet, P., Reed, S., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Vanhoucke, V., Rabinovich, A.: Going deeper with convolutions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1–9 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 770–778 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shafique, M., Theocharides, T., Bouganis, C.-S., Hanif, M.A., Khalid, F., Hafız, R., Rehman, S.: An overview of next-generation architectures for machine learning: roadmap, opportunities and challenges in the IoT era. In: Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition. IEEE, pp. 827–832 (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Cui, W., Kim, Y., Rosing, T.S.: Cross-platform machine learning characterization for task allocation in IoT ecosystems. In: IEEE 7th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC), pp. 1–7 (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carbajales, R.J., Zennaro, M., Pietrosemoli, E., Freitag, F.: Energy-efficient internet of things monitoring with low-capacity devices. In: IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things: 14–16 December, Milan, Italy: Proceedings. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), pp. 305–310 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lane, N. D., Bhattacharya S., Georgiev, P., Forlivesi, C., Kawsar, F.: An early resource characterization of deep learning on wearables, smartphones and internet-of-things devices. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Internet of Things Towards Applications. ACM, pp. 7–12 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Top 10 Open Source Linux and Android SBCs, Aug 2014.
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    BeagleBone Black Wireless.
  22. 22.
    Eclipse Foundation, Key Trends from the IoT Developer Survey, 2018.
  23. 23.
    Dang, D.: Reducing the Cost, Power and Size of Connectivity in IoT Designs, Feb, 2018.
  24. 24.
    Dezfouli, B., Amirtharaj, I., Li, C.-C.: EMPIOT: an energy measurement platform for wireless IoT devices. J. Netwk. Comput. Appl. 121, 135–148 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mahmud, M., Kaiser, M.S., Hussain, A., Vassanelli, S.: Applications of deep learning and reinforcement learning to biological data. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 29(6), 2063–2079 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manning, C., Raghavan, P., Schütze, H.: Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Harrell, F.E.: Ordinal Logistic Regression, in Regression modeling strategies, pp. 311–325. Springer, Berlin (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang, L.: Support Vector Machines: Theory and Applications, vol. 177. Springer, Berlin (2005)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., Duchesnay, E.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., Haffner, P., et al.: Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 86(11), 2278–2324 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xiao, H., Rasul, K., Vollgraf, R.: Fashion-mnist: a novel image dataset for benchmarking machine learning algorithms, arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.07747 (2017)
  32. 32.
    Krizhevsky, A.: Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images. University of Toronto, Technical Report (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kermany, D.S., Goldbaum, M., Cai, W., Valentim, C.C., Liang, H., Baxter, S.L., McKeown, A., Yang, G., Wu, X., Yan, F., et al.: Identifying medical diagnoses and treatable diseases by image-based deep learning. Cell 172(5), 1122–1131 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Huang, G.B., Ramesh, M., Berg, T., Learned-Miller, E.: labeled faces in the wild: a database for studying face recognition in unconstrained environments. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Technical Report, vol. 07–49 (October 2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wasserman, L.: All of Nonparametric Statistics. Springer, New York (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Griffiths, E., Assana, S., Whitehouse, K.: Privacy-preserving image processing with binocular thermal cameras. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1(4), 133:1–133:25 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Suter, Y., Rummel, C., Wiest, R., Reyes, M.: Fast and uncertainty-aware cerebral cortex morphometry estimation using random forest regression. In: International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI). IEEE, pp. 1052–1055 (2018)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Feng, Y., Wang, S.: A forecast for bicycle rental demand based on random forests and multiple linear regression. In: 16th International Conference Computer and Information Science (ICIS). IEEE, pp. 101–105 (2017)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Seber, G.A., Lee, A.J.: Linear Regression Analysis, vol. 329. Wiley, New York (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Griffin, G., Holub, A., Perona, P.: Caltech-256 object category dataset, California Institute of Technology, Technical Report 7694. (2007).
  41. 41.
    Mamaev, A.: Flowers Dataset, Reviewed Dataset from Kaggle.
  42. 42.
    James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R.: An Introduction to Statistical Learning. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Internet of Things Research Lab, Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSanta Clara UniversitySanta ClaraUSA

Personalised recommendations