Challenges in Integration of Heterogeneous Internet of Things

Noaman, Muhammad; Khan, Muhammad Sohail; Abrar, Muhammad Faisal; Ali, Sikandar; Alvi, Atif; Saleem, Muhammad Asif

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8626882

Scientific Programming

On this page

Abstract Introduction Literature Review Analysis and Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Intelligent Mobile Edge Computing for Smart Internet of Things: Architecture, Algorithm, and Application

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 8626882 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8626882

Challenges in Integration of Heterogeneous Internet of Things

Muhammad Noaman,¹Muhammad Sohail Khan,¹Muhammad Faisal Abrar,²Sikandar Ali,³Atif Alvi,⁴and Muhammad Asif Saleem⁵

Academic Editor: Xu Zhang

Received12 Dec 2021

Revised11 May 2022

Accepted28 Jun 2022

Published16 Aug 2022

Abstract

Internet of Things (IoT) is considered the upcoming industrial and academic revolution in the technological world having billions of things and devices connected to the Internet. These connected devices are heterogeneous. They have different standards and technologies which communicate through different protocols. Therefore, the implementation of IoT on a large scale is difficult due to these heterogeneity challenges. This motivated us to overcome the scaling problem of IoT by identifying the challenges from the literature and providing solutions. This study is based on the identification of the heterogeneous challenges with solutions via a systematic literature review. A total of 81 primary sources were selected. After extracting and synthesizing the data, we identified 14 different IoT heterogeneity challenges. Some of the identified challenges are “heterogeneity of devices,” “heterogeneity in formats of data,” “heterogeneity in communication,” and “interoperability issue due to heterogeneity.” The identified challenges have been analyzed from digital libraries and timeframe perspectives. Furthermore, we have found a total of 81 solutions for those challenges, with at least 5 unique solutions for each challenge. In the future, we will categorize the challenges and prioritize the solutions by using a multi-criteria decision-making problem.

1. Motivation

IoT is the expansion of current Internet services to provide connectivity to each object of this world. IoT has become the most prominent technology across the globe. It is an emerging technology that is under development process where everyone is trying to interpret it according to their needs. The implementation and interpretation of IoT face some serious challenges like security, virtualization, and heterogeneity. Heterogeneity itself is a multifaceted challenge hindering the large-scale implementation of IoT vision. It is due to these challenges that so far only limited implementations of IoT systems have become a reality. This motivated us to perform a systematic literature review to identify those IoT heterogeneity challenges and their solutions. Another contribution of this study is conducting a depth analysis of those challenges using the chi-square test based on digital libraries and timeframe.

2. Introduction

In today’s technological world, IoT is considered an important advancement among the trending technologies. The term IoT can be simply defined as the devices that can be connected with sources of the Internet [1]. In past years, these devices have been constantly growing. Reference [2] reported that around 500 billion devices will be connected to the Internet by 2030. In the physical as well as in the virtual world, these IoT devices will further interconnect with other devices in a large number, which will give new birth to the forms of interaction. This will enable us to connect all objects of our surroundings in every corner of the world in a single period. These objects can be sensors, smartphones, automobiles, industrial robots, refrigerators, thermostats, tablets, etc. The IoT is widespread in both academia and industry. It is producing business opportunities in multiple fields of industrial markets, in both public and private sectors in a very broad range. The industrial revolution of IoT will have billions of heterogeneous devices on the Internet of Things in the near future.

At the other extreme, the IoT vision of a large-scale implementation faces serious challenges across many dimensions. One of the main obstructions in IoT is its inclination toward heterogeneity, and the heterogeneous nature might be in form of protocols, device data format, communication capabilities of the devices, technologies, hardware, etc. [3, 4]. It is due to these types of challenges that so far only limited implementations of IoT systems have become a reality. For IoT to evolve toward its vision of global implementation, these obstructions need to be reduced on different levels. To activate and provide the service, devices must be connected to the Internet. The identification of heterogeneity-based challenges that exist at different levels is needed, and the current solutions adopted and/or implemented by different studies for handling heterogeneity in IoT systems need to be highlighted. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic literature review to identify those IoT heterogeneity challenges and find out the solutions implemented by different studies to handle IoT heterogeneity challenges. The significance of this study is that it will provide the identification and analysis of heterogeneity challenges in IoT systems and provide a summary of different studies that implemented various solutions to handle the heterogeneity of IoT systems. Another significant contribution is that it will provide a future direction to researchers to make a better stand-alone architecture aiming to tackle the heterogeneity challenges at different levels of IoT systems. As a result, IoT systems can be utilized and implemented in a wide range of industrial fields.

The organization of this paper is as follows: Section 3 presents a literature review related to IoT history, challenges, and heterogeneity concerns. Section 4 explains the research methodology used to achieve the objectives of this research. Section 5 provides the result and discussion of IoT heterogeneity challenges and the solutions to those challenges found in this study. Section 6 concludes this review and suggests future work.

3. Literature Review

Because of the broad and complex nature of IoT, it has not yet got a single unique definition that is acceptable to the whole global community of users. Many researchers, practitioners, academicians, developers, and corporate people have defined IoT in their terms, but the credit must be attributed to Kevin Ashton, an expert on digital innovation who for the first time used and defined it. According to [5], IoT could be nicely defined as follows: a very comprehensive and accessible network of intelligent devices which can act and react in accord with situations; self-organize; share information, data, and resources; and be subject to change in the environment.

IoT is growing and maturing day by day. It is the latest, most fine, and excellent concept in information technology. It is a new paradigmatic shift in information technological advancement. The expression “Internet of Things,” concisely shortened to IoT, is comprised of two words, “Internet” and “Things.” Internet uses a standard set of Internet protocols (TCP/IP) to connect and serve a large number of users around the globe [6, 7]. It is a global system of interconnected computer networks. Internet is interconnected networks that includes a large number of local to regional commercial networks that may be private, government-owned, public, or academic networks. These networks are connected through a wide range of electronic, wireless, and optical network technologies [8]. The Internet is generally defined as a global network that connects millions of computers. About 190 states of the world are linked through the Internet that constantly shares data, opinions, and news [9]. According to [10], there is an estimated 5,080,388,142 Internet users around the world. This large sum of users indicates that about 40% of the world’s total population uses the Internet.

The word “Things” in the “Internet of Things” can be any object or person identifiable in the real world. Daily necessities include electronic devices that we come across as well as daily used advanced technological items like equipment and gadgets. In the near future, other certain everyday objects are expected to connect with the Internet, which will lead to a period of extreme expansion of the Internet known as the Internet of Things. IoT system is based on devices to sense, actuate, control, and monitor activities [11]. IoT devices that are connected to other devices and applications can exchange data with each other, they may receive information from some other IoT devices. To process data, they may send the data either to centralized serves locally or it may send data for processing to cloud.

The National Intelligence Council (NIC) of the United Nations (UN) has considered IoT as one of the six “Disruptive Civil Technologies” [12]. In this respect, we can list many fields that are already benefiting from the services of different architectural forms of IoT like transportation, e-governance, smart city, smart health, life support, education, retail, logistics, agriculture, automation, manufacturing of industrial products, and management of businesses.

Ericsson [13] and Evans [14] have conducted surveys and estimated that the use of the Internet will further increase, grow, and be boosted tenfold in the coming days. According to their estimation, about 50 billion devices would have connected by 2020. This expected number of new Internet devices shall be supposedly called constricted devices [15]. These devices are small in size, are enclosed in nature, and have a low cost. They are specifically designed for the purpose of executing specific tasks like monitoring the physical environment. IoT devices are limited in terms of communication capabilities, processing power, and energy consumption due to their low cost. That is why these constrained devices are very heterogeneous in terms of their essential communication protocols, device data formats, and technologies.

Due to the heterogeneity of IoT, devices on the market nowadays have diversity in communication protocols, methods of network connectivity, and resulting models of application. It is not feasible to support such kinds of diversities in IoT, because developers typically lack the proper resources required to have a grip on the specifics of the constrained devices and network [16]. The main objective is to decrease, hide, or eradicate such a broad range of diversity of the technologies, applications models, and protocols from the users of IoT [17]. Because of the heterogeneous nature of IoT, it is one of the newly emerging research areas which has robust potential to bring a paradigm shift in the understanding of fundamental computer science principles and standards of our future living [18]. The demand for constrained IoT devices is expected to increase; this problem is expected to get worse in the future. Therefore, there will be a need to improve the integration of a large number of constrained devices in IoT. In this study, we have performed SLR aiming to identify the heterogeneity challenges and provide a summary of the solutions adopted for those challenges.

4. Research Methodology

A systematic literature review (SLR) methodology is adopted to identify the heterogeneity challenges in IoT systems, hindering a global IoT vision, and to find solutions to the identified heterogeneity challenges.

4.1. Research Questions

The first step of a systematic literature review is to define research questions. The research questions of this study are mentioned in Table 1.

4.2. Search String

The second phase of a systematic literature review is to find relevant studies on the research topic. We identified digital libraries in which primary search was carried out: IEEE Xplore, SpringerLink, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and ACM. We then defined a set of keywords related to our research topic: “Internet of Things,” “IoT,” “heterogeneity,” “heterogeneous,” and “challenges.” Finally, search strings were defined and used to collect published articles related to the research topic. Search strings are provided in Table 2.

4.3. Study Selection

The research selection process is to perform search in digital libraries based on the tollgate approach considering the search strings. Figure 1 shows a selection of articles using the tollgate approach.

In snowballing process, we selected 9 papers from journals (IEEE TMC, TPDS, JSAC, ToN, TWC) and conferences (SIGCOMM, MobiCom, MobiSys, INFOCOM), the content of which is analyzed and discussed in Section.

Initially, 3854 papers were selected by applying search protocol to the selected digital libraries. A selection process has been applied based on keywords, titles, duplication removal, abstracts, and full text of selected papers. We excluded the papers of the following types:(1)Studies published in sources other than conferences, journals, patents, and technical reports(2)Research papers not published in the English language(3)Studies published before 2010(4)Studies that are not related to the defined search strings

To evaluate the quality of the included research papers, we assessed the following aspects:(1)The study provides information about any challenge related to IoT heterogeneity(2)The study represents a clear solution to the identified challenge of heterogeneity(3)The published study is from a stable and recognized publication source

Figure 2 shows a summary of paper selection based on digital libraries, and Figure 3 shows the paper selection on a yearly basis.

5. Analysis and Discussion

In this section, we have discussed the results relevant to our RQs. For the analysis, we used the linear chi-square test of association. For categorical values of predictor and outcome variables, the chi-square test is counted as more significant than other statistical tests. To answer RQ1, identified challenges/critical issues through the SLR are presented in Table 3. We have found a significant difference in heterogeneity challenges.

We set an occurrence percentage threshold of 30%. Accordingly, “Heterogeneity of devices,” “heterogeneity in formats of data,” and “heterogeneity in communication” are the most critical identified challenges.

5.1. Comparison of Challenges Based on Digital Libraries

Table 4 shows the analysis of the identified challenges based on digital libraries. We have Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, SpringerLink, ScienceDirect, and ACM as digital libraries. From the analysis, we have found the following:(1)Heterogeneity in communication is critical in Google Scholar and SpringerLink(2)Heterogeneity of devices is critical in Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, and SpringerLink(3)Heterogeneity in formats of data is critical in ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, and IEEE Xplore(4)Interoperability issue is critical in ACM and SpringerLink

5.2. Comparison of Challenges Based on Timeframe

Table 5 shows the analysis of the identified challenges based on timeframe. We have divided the duration into two timeframes: Timeframe I from 2011 to 2016 and Timeframe II from 2017 to 2021. From the analysis, we have found the following:

Heterogeneity in communication is critical in Timeframe I from 2011 to 2016 as shown in Table 5.(1)Heterogeneity of devices is critical in Timeframe I and Timeframe II(2)Heterogeneity in formats of data is critical in Timeframe I and Timeframe II

5.3. Proposed Solutions

To answer RQ2, solutions to the identified challenges are presented in Table 6. We have found a total of 81 solutions for those challenges, with at least 5 unique solutions for each challenge.

6. Conclusion and Future Work

This research is a systematic literature review that reviews the literature in the domain of IoT heterogeneity. The review has been implemented using a systematic methodology to select different studies addressing the challenges faced by heterogeneous IoT. To conduct this study, a total of 81 research papers that are published in different digital libraries from 2011 to 2021 were selected. For analysis purposes, we divided this duration into two timeframes. One is from 2011 to 2016, and the other is from 2017 to 2021. In this SLR, we have identified 14 different heterogeneity challenges that need to be addressed to implement IoT on a large scale. Challenges with occurrence percentage of more than 30% are defined as the most critical ones. In this study, we analyze the occurrence of those challenges based on digital libraries as well as timeframe. In this analysis, we found out that some challenges were more critical in the earlier timeframe than in the recent timeframe.

We also found out that some challenges are still critical in both timeframes. After identifying those challenges, we found at least 5 solutions for each identified challenge. The summary of those solutions is given in Table 6. In future work, we want to categorize the challenges and prioritize the solutions by using a multi-criteria decision-making problem.

Data Availability

The data collected during the data collection phase will be provided by the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

References

I. Within and C. Farook, “IoT generic frameworks: what needs to improve,” in Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Smart Computing & Communications (ICSCC), pp. 1–5, IEEE, Sarawak, Malaysia, June 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
A. H. Mohd Aman, E. Yadegaridehkordi, Z. S. Attarbashi, R. Hassan, and Y.-J. Park, “A survey on trend and classification of internet of things reviews,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 111763–111782, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. C. Yacchirema Vargas and C. E. Palau Salvador, “Smart IoT gateway for heterogeneous devices interoperability,” IEEE Latin America Transactions, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 3900–3906, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Pazos, M. Müller, M. Aeberli, and N. Ouerhani, “ConnectOpen-automatic integration of IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 640–644, IEEE, Milan, Italy, December 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Madakam, R. Ramaswamy, S. Tripathi, and V. Lake, “Internet of things (IoT): a literature review,” Journal of Computer and Communications, vol. 03, no. 05, pp. 164–173, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Huang, B. Lv, Y. Wu, Y. Chen, and X. Shen, “Dynamic admission control and resource allocation for mobile edge computing enabled small cell network,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1964–1973, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Chen, F. Zhao, Y. Lu, and X. Chen, “Dynamic task offloading for mobile edge computing with hybrid energy supply,” Tsinghua Science and Technology, vol. 10, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Nunberg, The Advent of the Internet, 12th April, Courses, 2012.
“Internet,” 1996, V. Beal, https://www.webopedia.com/definitions/internet/.
View at: Google Scholar
I. L. Stats, “Internet world Statistics,” 2021, https://www.internetlivestats.com/.
View at: Google Scholar
X. Zhang, H. Chen, Y. Zhao et al., “Improving cloud gaming experience through mobile edge computing,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 178–183, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. P. Ray, “A survey on Internet of Things architectures,” Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 291–319, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Ericsson, More than 50 Billion Connected Devices—Taking Connected Devices to Mass Market and Profitability, 2011, Technology report.
D. Evans, “The internet of things: How the next evolution of the internet is changing everything 2011,” 2015, http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac79/docs/innov/IoTIBSG0411FINAL.pdf.
View at: Google Scholar
F. Van den Abeele, J. Hoebeke, I. Moerman, and P. Demeester, “Integration of heterogeneous devices and communication models via the cloud in the constrained internet of things,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 2015, no. 10, pp. 1–16, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Huang, C. Zhang, and J. Zhang, “A multi-queue approach of energy efficient task Scheduling for sensor Hubs,” Chinese Journal of Electronics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 242–247, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zhang, Z. Qi, G. Min, W. Miao, Q. Fan, and Z. Ma, “Cooperative edge Caching based on Temporal Convolutional networks,” IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 2093–2105, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Qiu, N. Chen, K. Li, M. Atiquzzaman, and W. Zhao, “How can heterogeneous internet of things build our future: a survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 2011–2027, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M.-M. Moazzami, G. Xing, D. Mashima, W.-P. Chen, and U. Herberg, “SPOT: a smartphone-based platform to tackle heterogeneity in smart-home IoT systems,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 514–519, IEEE, Reston, VA, USA, December 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Herrero, “6LoWPAN fragmentation in the context of IoT based media real time communication,” Internet Technology Letters, vol. 3, no. 2, p. e144, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Wang, X. Liu, Y. Yao, Y. Pan, Z. Chi, and T. Zhu, “Crf: Coexistent routing and flooding using wifi packets in heterogeneous iot networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2019-IEEE conference on computer communications, pp. 19–27, IEEE, Paris, France, May 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. An, Q. Lin, P. Li, and L. Yang, “General-purpose deep tracking platform across protocols for the internet of things,” in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, pp. 94–106, ACM, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
E. M. Torroglosa-Garcia, J. M. A. Calero, J. B. Bernabe, and A. Skarmeta, “Enabling roaming across heterogeneous IoT wireless networks: LoRaWAN MEETS 5G,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 103164–103180, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Le, N. Achir, and K. Boussetta, “Fog computing architecture with heterogeneous Internet of Things technologies,” in Proceedings of the 2019 10th International Conference on Networks of the Future (NoF), pp. 130–133, IEEE, Rome, Italy, October 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
E. De Poorter, I. Moerman, and P. Demeester, “Support for heterogeneous dynamic network environments through a reconfigurable network service platform,” in Proceedings of the 2011 1st International Symposium on Access Spaces (ISAS), pp. 174–179, IEEE, Yokohama, Japan, June 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Sood, K. K. Karmakar, S. Yu, V. Varadharajan, S. R. Pokhrel, and Y. Xiang, “Alleviating heterogeneity in SDN-IoT networks to Maintain QoS and Enhance security,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 5964–5975, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Aloi, G. Caliciuri, G. Fortino et al., “Enabling IoT interoperability through opportunistic smartphone-based mobile gateways,” Journal of Network and Computer Applications, vol. 81, pp. 74–84, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Al Ridhawi, M. Aloqaily, A. Boukerche, and Y. Jaraweh, “A blockchain-based decentralized composition solution for iot services,” in Proceedings of the Icc 2020-2020 ieee international conference on communications (icc), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Dublin, Ireland, June 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
I. Bedhief, M. Kassar, and T. Aguili, “SDN-based architecture challenging the IoT heterogeneity,” in Proceedings of the 2016 3rd Smart Cloud Networks & Systems (SCNS), pp. 1–3, IEEE, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, December 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Pham, Y. Lim, and Y. Tan, “Management architecture for heterogeneous IoT devices in home network,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 5th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics, pp. 1–5, IEEE, Kyoto, Japan, October 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Oniga, L. Denis, V. Dadarlat, and A. Munteanu, “Message-based communication for heterogeneous internet of things systems,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 861, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. D. C. Silva, J. J. P. C. Rodrigues, K. Saleem, S. A. Kozlov, and R. A. L. Rabelo, “M4DN.IoT-A networks and devices management platform for internet of things,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 53305–53313, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Qin, G. Denker, C. Giannelli, P. Bellavista, and N. Venkatasubramanian, “A software defined networking architecture for the internet-of-things,” in Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE network operations and management symposium (NOMS), pp. 1–9, IEEE, Krakow, Poland, May 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Huang, J. Zhu, and L. Zhang, “An SDN_based management framework for IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 25th IET Irish Signals & Systems Conference 2014 and 2014 China-Ireland International Conference on Information and Communications Technologies (ISSC 2014/CIICT 2014), pp. 175–179, IET, Limerick, June 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
J. S. Kumar and M. A. Zaveri, “Hierarchical clustering for dynamic and heterogeneous internet of things,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 93, pp. 276–282, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Desai, K. Nagegowda, and T. Ninikrishna, “A framework for integrating IoT and SDN using proposed OF-enabled management device,” in Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Circuit, Power and Computing Technologies (ICCPCT), pp. 1–4, IEEE, Nagercoil, India, March 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Bernal Bernabe, J. L. Hernandez Ramos, and A. F. Skarmeta Gomez, “TACIoT: multidimensional trust-aware access control system for the Internet of Things,” Soft Computing, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 1763–1779, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Xu, W. Jin, and D. H. Kim, “Knowledge-based edge computing framework based on CoAP and HTTP for enabling heterogeneous connectivity,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 329–344, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Xia, Z. Yao, Y. Li, and S. Mao, “Online distributed offloading and computing resource management with energy harvesting for heterogeneous MEC-enabled IoT,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 6743–6757, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Yang, C. Ma, B. Jiang, G. Ding, G. Zheng, and H. Wang, “Joint optimization in cached-enabled heterogeneous network for efficient industrial IoT,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 831–844, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Jiang, Z. Xiao, Z. Li, J. Xu, F. Zeng, and D. Wang, “An energy-efficient framework for internet of things underlaying heterogeneous small cell networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 31–43, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Theodorou, G. Violettas, P. Valsamas, S. Petridou, and L. Mamatas, “A multi-protocol software-defined networking solution for the Internet of Things,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 42–48, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Gascon-Samson, M. Rafiuzzaman, and K. Pattabiraman, “Thingsjs: towards a flexible and self-adaptable middleware for dynamic and heterogeneous iot environments,” in Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Middleware and Applications for the Internet of Things, pp. 11–16, December 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Sarkar, A. U. Nambi, R. V. Prasad, A. Rahim, R. Neisse, and G. Baldini, “DIAT: a scalable distributed architecture for IoT,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 230–239, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Gyory and M. Chuah, “IoTOne: Integrated platform for heterogeneous IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), pp. 783–787, IEEE, Silicon Valley, CA, USA, January 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Pamboris, C. Kozis, and H. Herodotou, “Cuttlefish: a flexible and lightweight middleware for combining heterogeneous IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 17th Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Las Vegas, NV, USA, January 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Mesmoudi, M. Lamnaour, Y. El Khamlichi, A. Tahiri, A. Touhafi, and A. Braeken, “A middleware based on service oriented architecture for heterogeneity issues within the internet of things (MSOAH-IoT),” Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 1108–1116, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Essameldin and K. A. Harras, “The hive: an edge-based middleware solution for resource sharing in the internet of things,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Experiences with the Design and Implementation of Smart Objects, pp. 13–18, ACM, October 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. Chi, Y. Li, H. Sun, Y. Yao, and T. Zhu, “Concurrent cross-technology communication among heterogeneous IoT devices,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 932–947, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Cimmino, M. Poveda-Villalón, and R. García-Castro, “ewot: a semantic interoperability approach for heterogeneous iot ecosystems based on the web of things,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 822, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Hong, “A resource-oriented middleware framework for heterogeneous internet of things,” in Proceedings of the 2012 international conference on cloud and service computing, pp. 12–16, IEEE, Shanghai, China, November 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Famaey, R. Berkvens, G. Ergeerts et al., “Flexible multimodal sub-gigahertz communication for heterogeneous internet of things applications,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 146–153, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Suman, T. Perumal, N. Mustapha, and R. Yaakob, “Device Verification and Compatibility for heterogeneous semantic IoT systems,” in Proceedings of the 2019 4th International Conference and Workshops on Recent Advances and Innovations in Engineering (ICRAIE), pp. 1–3, IEEE, Kedah, Malaysia, November 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Luo, L. Yin, C. Li et al., “A lightweight privacy-preserving communication protocol for heterogeneous IoT environment,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 67192–67204, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Chen, E. Cañete, D. Garrido, M. Díaz, and K. Piotrowski, “PICO: a platform independent communications middleware for heterogeneous devices in smart grids,” Computer Standards & Interfaces, vol. 65, pp. 1–14, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. Novo, “Blockchain meets IoT: an architecture for scalable access management in IoT,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1184–1195, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Dalipi, F. Van den Abeele, I. Ishaq, I. Moerman, and J. Hoebeke, “EC-IoT: an easy configuration framework for constrained IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 159–164, IEEE, Reston, VA, USA, December 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Košťál, P. Helebrandt, M. Belluš, M. Ries, and I. Kotuliak, “Management and monitoring of IoT devices using blockchain,” Sensors, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 856, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Javed, A. Malhi, T. Kinnunen, and K. Framling, “Scalable IoT platform for heterogeneous devices in smart environments,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 211973–211985, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Fan, Q. Chai, L. Xu, and D. Guo, “DIAM-IoT: a decentralized identity and access management framework for internet of things,” in Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Symposium on Blockchain and Secure Critical Infrastructure, pp. 186–191, ACM, October 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
A. M. Nagib and H. S. Hamza, “SIGHTED: a framework for semantic integration of heterogeneous sensor data on the internet of things,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 83, pp. 529–536, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. S. Pramukantoro, W. Yahya, G. Arganata, A. Bhawiyuga, and A. Basuki, “Topic based IoT data storage framework for heterogeneous sensor data,” in Proceedings of the 2017 11th International Conference on Telecommunication Systems Services and Applications (TSSA), pp. 1–4, IEEE, Lombok, Indonesia, October 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. Ding, Q. Yang, and H. Wu, “Massive heterogeneous sensor data management in the Internet of Things,” in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Internet of Things and 4th International Conference on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing, pp. 100–108, IEEE, Dalian, China, October 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Ramadhan, F. I. Indikawati, J. Kwon, and B. Koo, “MusQ: a Multi-store query system for iot data using a datalog-like language,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 58032–58056, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Corral-Plaza, I. Medina-Bulo, G. Ortiz, J. Boubeta-Puig, and User Group, “A stream processing architecture for heterogeneous data sources in the Internet of Things,” Computer Standards & Interfaces, vol. 70, p. 103426, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. D. Al-Otaibi, “Distributed multi-party security computation framework for heterogeneous internet of things (IoT) devices,” Soft Computing, vol. 25, no. 18, pp. 12131–12144, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Dukkipati, Y. Zhang, and L. C. Cheng, “Decentralized, blockchain based access control framework for the heterogeneous internet of things,” in Proceedings of the Third ACM Workshop on Attribute-Based Access Control, pp. 61–69, ACM, March 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Misra, A. Mukherjee, A. Roy, N. Saurabh, Y. Rahulamathavan, and M. Rajarajan, “Blockchain at the edge: Performance of resource-constrained IoT networks,” IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 174–183, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Ghayyur, P. Pappachan, G. Wang, S. Mehrotra, and N. Venkatasubramanian, “Designing privacy preserving data sharing middleware for internet of things,” in Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Data: Acquisition To Analysis, pp. 1–6, ACM, November 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
M. S. Islam, H. Verma, L. Khan, and M. Kantarcioglu, “Secure real-time heterogeneous iot data management system,” in Proceedings of the 2019 First IEEE International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems and Applications (TPS-ISA), pp. 228–235, IEEE, Los Angeles, CA, USA, December 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Sicari, C. Cappiello, F. De Pellegrini, D. Miorandi, and A. Coen-Porisini, “A security-and quality-aware system architecture for Internet of Things,” Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 665–677, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. Kandi, H. Lakhlef, A. Bouabdallah, and Y. Challal, “An efficient multi-Group Key management protocol for heterogeneous IoT devices,” in Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Marrakesh, Morocco, April 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Yu, X. Zhang, P. Huang, and L. Guo, “Secure authentication in cross-technology communication for heterogeneous IoT,” in Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN), pp. 1-2, IEEE, Newark, NJ, USA, November 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Xiong, Y. Wu, C. Jin, and S. Kumari, “Efficient and privacy-preserving authentication protocol for heterogeneous systems in IIoT,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 11713–11724, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhang, Y. Han, and J. Wen, “SMER: a secure method of exchanging resources in heterogeneous internet of things,” Frontiers of Computer Science, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 1198–1209, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Marin, M. P. Pawlowski, and A. Jara, “Optimized ECC implementation for secure communication between heterogeneous IoT devices,” Sensors, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 21478–21499, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Liu, A. Ren, L. Zhang, R. Sun, X. Du, and M. Guizani, “A novel secure authentication scheme for heterogeneous internet of things,” in Proceedings of the ICC 2019-2019 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Shanghai, China, May 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Sasirekha, S. Swamynathan, and S. Suganya, “An ECC-based algorithm to handle secure communication between heterogeneous IoT devices,” Advances in Electronics, Communication and Computing, Springer, Singapore, pp. 351–362, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N.-N. Dao, T. V. Phan, U. Sa’ad et al., “Securing heterogeneous iot with intelligent ddos attack behavior learning,” IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 1974–1983, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Mostafa, “Blockchain-based distributed authentication Mechanism for internet-of-things devices,” in Proceedings of the 2020 9th International Conference on Software and Information Engineering (ICSIE), pp. 159–164, November 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Kazmi, M. Serrano, and A. Lenis, “Smart governance of heterogeneous internet of things for smart cities,” in Proceedings of the 2018 12th International Conference on Sensing Technology (ICST), pp. 58–64, IEEE, Limerick, Ireland, December 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Conzon, M. R. A. Rashid, X. Tao, A. Soriano, R. Nicholson, and E. Ferrera, “BRAIN-IoT: model-based framework for dependable sensing and actuation in intelligent decentralized IoT Systems,” in Proceedings of the 2019 4th International Conference on Computing, Communications and Security (ICCCS), pp. 1–8, IEEE, Rome, Italy, October 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Kazmi, Z. Jan, A. Zappa, and M. Serrano, “Overcoming the heterogeneity in the internet of things for smart cities,” International Workshop on Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions, Springer, Cham, pp. 20–35, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
R. A. Deshmukh, D. Jayakody, A. Schneider, and V. Damjanovic-Behrendt, “Data spine: a federated interoperability enabler for heterogeneous IoT platform ecosystems,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 12, p. 4010, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Saatkamp, U. Breitenbücher, F. Leymann, and M. Wurster, “Generic driver injection for automated IoT application deployments,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, pp. 320–329, ACM, Salzburg, Austria, December 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
S. K. Roy, S. Misra, and N. S. Raghuwanshi, “SensPnP: Seamless integration of heterogeneous sensors with IoT devices,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 205–214, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Tseng, L. Wong, S. Otoum, M. Aloqaily, and J. B. Othman, “Blockchain for managing heterogeneous internet of things: a perspective architecture,” IEEE network, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 16–23, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. C. Olivieri and G. Rizzo, “Scalable approaches to integration in heterogeneous IoT and M2M scenarios,” in Proceedings of the 2015 9th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 358–363, IEEE, Santa Catarina, Brazil, July 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
F. Montori, L. Bedogni, and L. Bononi, “On the integration of heterogeneous data sources for the collaborative Internet of Things,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 2nd International Forum on Research and Technologies for Society and Industry Leveraging a better tomorrow (RTSI), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Bologna, Italy, September 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Alulema, J. Criado, L. Iribarne, A. J. Fernández-García, and R. Ayala, “A model-driven engineering approach for the service integration of IoT systems,” Cluster Computing, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1937–1954, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Hwang, J. An, A. Aziz, J. Kim, S. Jeong, and J. Song, “Interworking models of smart city with heterogeneous internet of things standards,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 74–79, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S.-R. Oh and Y.-G. Kim, “AFaaS: Authorization framework as a service for Internet of Things based on interoperable OAuth,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 16, no. 2, Article ID 155014772090638, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. A. Tran, D. Tran, L. G. Nguyen, Q. T. Ha, V. Tong, and A. Mellouk, “SHIOT: a novel SDN-based framework for the heterogeneous internet of things,” Informatica, vol. 42, no. 3, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Skrbic, D. Radovanovic, S. Tomovic, L. Lazovic, Z. Zecevic, and I. Radusinovic, “A decentralized platform for heterogeneous IoT networks management,” in Proceedings of the 2018 23rd International Scientific-Professional Conference on Information Technology (IT), pp. 1–4, IEEE, Zabljak, Montenegro, February 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Huang, B. Lv, Y. Wu, Y. Chen, and X. Shen, “Dynamic admission control and resource allocation for mobile edge computing enabled small cell network,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1964–1973, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Grace, J. Barbosa, B. Pickering, and M. Surridge, “Taming the interoperability challenges of complex iot systems,” in Proceedings of the 1st ACM Workshop on Middleware for Context-Aware Applications in the IoT, pp. 1–6, ACM, Bordeaux, France, December 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
M. A. Abbasi, Z. A. Memon, N. M. Durrani, W. Haider, K. Laeeq, and G. A. Mallah, “A multi-layer trust-based middleware framework for handling interoperability issues in heterogeneous IoTs,” Cluster Computing, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2133–2160, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Grace, B. Pickering, and M. Surridge, “Model-driven interoperability: engineering heterogeneous IoT systems,” Annals of telecommunications, vol. 71, no. 3-4, pp. 141–150, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Muhammad Noaman et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

1839

Downloads

750

Citations