Virtual sensor as a service: a new multicriteria QoS-aware cloud service composition for IoT applications

  • Mina Emami Khansari
  • Saeed Sharifian
  • Seyed Ahmad Motamedi
Article

Abstract

A large number of connected devices made Internet of Things (IoT). IoT devices may provide the same service but with different quality parameters such as high availability, cost and delay. Nowadays cloud infrastructures provide an entry point for discovery, selection, fusion and consuming such distributed IoT services. Hence, a new kind of middleware service should be devised in cloud to select and compose the required services based on the end user quality of service requirements. This new kind of cloud service for IoT is named as virtual sensor. In this paper, we propose an architecture for such a virtual sensor service in cloud and propose a multi-objective metaheuristic algorithm for sensor-service selection and composition in cloud middleware. In particular, a quantum-inspired genetic algorithm-based approach is used to address the problem. Simulations with sample IoT workflows were conducted to evaluate efficiency and performance of the proposed method. Our proposed approach for selection and composition of IoT services yields about 60% improvement in overall quality of service of the virtual sensor compared to rival algorithms.

Keywords

Virtual sensor Cloud services IoT Multi-objective QoS QGA 

References

  1. 1.
    Atzori L, Iera A, Morabito G (2010) The Internet of Things: a survey. Comput Netw ACM 54(15):2787–2805.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010 CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borgia E (2014) The Internet of Things vision: key features, applications and open issues. Comput Commun 54:1–31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2014.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen G, Huang J, Cheng B, Chen J (2015) A social network based approach for IoT device management and service composition. In: Services, 2015 IEEE World Congress on, 27 June–2 July.  https://doi.org/10.1109/services.2015.9
  4. 4.
    Shah P, Habib M, Sajjad T, Umar M, Babar M (2017) Applications and challenges faced by Internet of Things: a survey. In: Future Intelligent Vehicular Technologies, International Conference on, 15 September, Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 185, pp 182–188.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51207-5_18
  5. 5.
    Guinard D, Trifa V, Karnouskos S, Spiess P, Savio D (2010) Interacting with the SOA-based Internet of Things: discovery, query, selection, and on-demand provisioning of web services. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 3(3):223–235.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2010.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gomes P et al (2016) A QoC-aware discovery service for the Internet of Things. In: Ubiquitous Computing and Ambient Intelligence, International Conference on, 29 November–2 December, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1007, pp 344–355.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48799-1_39
  7. 7.
    Yachir A, Amirat Y, Chibani A, Badache N (2016) Event-aware framework for dynamic services discovery and selection in the context of ambient intelligence and Internet of Things. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 13(1):85–102.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2015.2499792 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rapti E, Houstis C, Houstis E, Karageorgos A (2016) A bio-inspired service discovery and selection approach for IoT applications. In: Services Computing (SCC), IEEE International Conference on, 27 June–2 July.  https://doi.org/10.1109/scc.2016.126
  9. 9.
    Rapti E, Karageorgos A, Houstis C, Houstis E (2016) decentralized service discovery and selection in Internet of Things applications based on artificial potential fields. SOCA 11(1):75–86.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11761-016-0198-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Cremene M, Suciu M, Pallez D, Dumitrescu D (2015) Comparative analysis of multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for QoS-aware web service composition. Appl Soft Comput 39:124–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.11.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    New NHW, Bao J, Cui G (2014) Flexible user-centric service selection algorithm for Internet of Things services. J China Univ Posts Telecommun 21:64–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1005-8885(14)60510-0 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jin X, Chun S, Jung J, Lee K (2016) A fast and scalable approach for IoT service selection based on a physical service model. Inf Syst Front.  https://doi.org/10.11007/s10796-016-9650-1 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yin X, Yang J (2014) Shortest paths based web service selection in the Internet of Things. J Sens.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/958350
  15. 15.
    Urbieta A et al (2017) Press: adaptive and context-aware service composition for IoT-based smart cities. Future Gener Comput Syst.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2016.12.038 Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li C, Yanpei L, Youlong L (2016) Efficient service selection approach for mobile devices in mobile cloud. J Supercomput 72:2197–2220.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-016-1720-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Somu N, Kirthivasan K, Sriram VSS (2017) A rough set-based hypergraph trust measure parameter selection technique for cloud service selection. J Supercomput 73:4535–4559.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-2032-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang W, Sun H, Liu X, Guo X (2014) An incremental tensor factorization approach for web service recommendation. In: Data mining workshop (ICDMW), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, 14 December.  https://doi.org/10.1109/icdmw.2014.176
  19. 19.
    Wang Y, Vassileva J (2007) A review on trust and reputation for web service selection. In: Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), 27th International Conference on, 22–29 June.  https://doi.org/10.1109/icdcsw.2007.16
  20. 20.
    Wang D, Yang Y, Mi Z (2015) A genetic-based approach to web service composition in geo-distributed cloud environment. Comput Electr Eng 43:129–141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2014.10.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Borzsony S, Kossman D, Stocker K (2001) The skyline operator. In: Data Engineering, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on, 421–430.  https://doi.org/10.1109/icde.2001.914855
  22. 22.
    Karimi MB, Isazadeh A, Rahmani AM (2017) QoS-aware service composition in cloud computing using data mining techniques and genetic algorithm. J Supercomput 73:1387–1415.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-016-1814-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhi-peng G, Jian C, Xue-song Q, Luo-ming M (2009) QoE/QoS driven simulated annealing-based genetic algorithm for web services selection. J China Univ Posts Telecommun 16(1):102–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1005-8885(08)60347-7 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liu J et al (2014) A cooperative evolution for QoS-driven IoT service composition. Automatika 54(4):438–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yang Z, Li D (2014) IoT information service composition driven by user requirement. In: Computational Science and Engineering, 17th IEEE International Conference on, 19–21 December.  https://doi.org/10.1109/cse.2014.280
  26. 26.
    Ming Z, Yan M (2013) QoS-aware computational method for IoT composite service. J China Univ Posts Telecommun 20(1):35–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1005-8885(13)60252-6 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yang C, Shen W, Lin T, Wang X (2016) IoT-enabled dynamic service selection acroos multiple manufacturing clouds. Manuf Lett 7:22–25.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2015.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chen I, Guo J, Bao F (2014) Trust management for service composition in SOA-based IoT systems. In: Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), IEEE 2014, 6–9 April.  https://doi.org/10.1109/wcnc.2014.6953138
  29. 29.
    Ansari W, Alamri A, Hassan M, Shoaib M (2013) A survey on sensor-cloud: architecture, applications and approaches. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 9(2):18.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/917923 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cavalcante E et al (2016) On the interplay of Internet of Things and cloud computing: a systematic mapping study. Comput Commun 89:17–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2016.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Guijarro L, Pla V, Vidal JR, Naldi M (2017) Game theoretical analysis of service provision for the Internet of Things based on sensor virtualization: selected areas in communication. IEEE J.  https://doi.org/10.1109/jsac.2017.2672239 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Botta A, Donato W, Persico V, Pescape A (2016) Integration of cloud computing and Internet of Things: a survey. Future Gener Comput Syst 56:684–700.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2015.09.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cho J, Ko H, Ko I (2016) Adaptive service selection according to the service density in multiple QoS aspects. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 9(6):883–894.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2015.2428251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Macaulay T (2017) Availability and reliability requirements in the IoT. RIoT Control Chap 8:141–155.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-419971-2.00008-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Malossini A, Blanzieri E, Calarco T (2012) Quantum genetic optimization. IEEE Trans Evolutionary Comput 12(2):231–241.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2007.905006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang H, Liu J, Zhi J, Fu C (2013) The improvement of quantum genetic algorithm and its application on function optimization. Math Probl Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/730749 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringAmirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations