skip to main content
10.1145/2991561.2991575acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiotConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

CEML: Mixing and moving complex event processing and machine learning to the edge of the network for IoT applications

Published:07 November 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a growing field which is expected to generate and collect data everywhere at any time. Highly scalable cloud analytics systems are frequently being used to handle this data explosion. However, the ubiquitous nature of the IoT data imposes new technical and non-technical requirements which are difficult to address with a cloud deployment. To solve these problems, we need a new set of development technologies such as Distributed Data Mining and Ubiquitous Data Mining targeted and optimized towards IoT applications. In this paper, we present the Complex Event Machine Learning framework which proposes a set of tools for automatic distributed machine learning in (near-) real-time, automatic continuous evaluation tools, and automatic rules management for deployment of rules. These features are implemented for a deployment at the edge of the network instead of the cloud. We evaluate and validate our approach with a well-known classification problem.

References

  1. 2010. Growing Pains: Bandwidth on the Internet. Technical Report. Internet Society. 20 pages. http://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/Growing%20Pains-%20Bandwidth%20on%20the%20Internet.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2011. More than 50 billion connected devices. Technical Report 284 23-3149 Uen. Telefonaktiebolaget L. M. Ericsson. 12 pages. http://www.ericsson.com/openarticle/mwc-connected-devices_1686565587_cGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2014. MQTT Version 3.1.1. (2014). http://docs.oasis-open.org/mqtt/mqtt/v3.1.1/mqtt-v3.1.1.html Accessed: March, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Charu C Aggarwal. 2007. Data streams: models and algorithms. Vol. 31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Christophe Andrieu, Nando De Freitas, Arnaud Doucet, and Michael I Jordan. 2003. An introduction to MCMC for machine learning. Machine learning 50, 1-2 (2003), 5--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Plamen Angelov, Dimitar Filev, and Nikola Kasabov. 2008. Guest Editorial: Evolving Fuzzy Systems: preface to the special section. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 16, 6 (2008), 1390--1392. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dario Bonino, Maria Teresa Delgado Alizo, Alexandr Alapetite, Thomas Gilbert, Mathias Axling, Helene Udsen, Jose Angel Carvajal Soto, and Maurizio Spirito. 2015. ALMANAC: Internet of Things for Smart Cities. In The 3rd International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud2015). IEEE. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Danah Boyd and Kate Craford. 2011. Six Provocations for Big Data. A Decade in Internet Time: Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet and Society (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Michael C Burl, Charless Fowlkes, Joe Roden, Andre Stechert, and Saleem Mukhtar. 1999. Diamond Eye: A distributed architecture for image data mining. In AeroSense'99. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 197--206.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. José Ángel Carvajal Soto, Otilia Werner-Kytölä, Marco Jahn, Jaroslav Pullmann, Dario Bonino, Claudio Pastrone, and Maurizio Spirito. 2016. Towards a Federation of Smart City Services. Proceeding of International Conference on Recent Advances in Computer Systems (2016).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Carvajal Soto, José Ángel. 2015. LinkSmart IoT Learning Agent. (2015). https://linksmart.eu/redmine/projects/iot-data-processing-agentGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Gianpaolo Cugola and Alessandro Margara. 2012. Processing flows of information: From data stream to complex event processing. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 44, 3 (2012), 15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. A Philip Dawid. 1984. Present position and potential developments: Some personal views: Statistical theory: The prequential approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) (1984), 278--292.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Espertech Inc. 2006. Esper. (2006). http://www.espertech.com/ Accessed: March, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dave Evans. 2011. The Internet of Things: How the Next Evolution of the Internet Is Changing Everything. Technical Report. Cisco Systems, Inc. 10 pages. http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/ac79/docs/innov/IoT_IBSG_0411FINAL.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mohamed Gaber, Shonali Krishnaswamy, and Arkady Zaslavsky. 2004. Ubiquitous data stream mining. In Proceedings of Current Research and Future Directions Workshop Proceedings, held in conjunction with the Eighth Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Mohamed Medhat Gaber, Shonali Krishnaswamy, and Arkady Zaslavsky. 2005a. Advanced Methods for Knowledge Discovery from Complex Data. London, Chapter On-board Mining of Data Streams in Sensor Networks, 307--335.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Mohamed Medhat Gaber, Arkady Zaslavsky, and Shonali Krishnaswamy. 2005b. Mining Data Streams: A Review. SIGMOD Rec. 34, 2 (June 2005), 18--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Joao Gama. 2010. Knowledge discovery from data streams. CRC Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Manyika James, Michael Chui, Brad Brown, Jacques Bughin, Richard Dobbs, Charles Roxburgh, and Angela Hung Byers. 2011. Report: Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. Technical Report. McKinsey Global Institute. 156 pages. http://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/Business%20Technology/Our%20Insights/Big%20data%20The%20next%20frontier%20for%20innovation/MGI_big_data_full_report.ashxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Stephen Kaisler, Frank Armour, Juan Antonio Espinosa, and William Money. 2013. Big data: Issues and challenges moving forward. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, 995--1004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hillol Kargupta, Byung-Hoon Park, Sweta Pittie, Lei Liu, Deepali Kushraj, and Kakali Sarkar. 2002. MobiMine: Monitoring the stock market from a PDA. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 3, 2 (2002), 37--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Stamatis Karnouskos. 2011. Cyber-Physical Systems in the SmartGrid. In 2011 9th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN). IEEE, 20--23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Machine Learning Group at the University of Waikato. 1993. Weka. (1993). http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/ Accessed: March, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Aapo Markkanen. 2015. IoT Analytics Today and in 2020. Technical Report. Allied Business Intelligence, Inc. 10 pages. http://www.sigma-software.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ABI_Research_IoT-Analytics-Today-and-in-2020.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Open Geospatial Consortium. 2015. OGC SensorThings API. (2015). https://ogc-iot.github.io/ogc-iot-api/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Byung-Hoon Park and Hillol Kargupta. 2002a. Distributed Data Mining: Algorithms, Systems, and Applications. Oxford Internet Institute's, 341--358.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Byung-Hoon Park and Hillol Kargupta. 2002b. Distributed data mining: Algorithms, systems, and applications. (2002).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Davy Preuveneers and Yolande Berbers. 2014. SAMURAI: A Streaming Multi-tenant Context-Management Architecture for Intelligent and Scalable Internet of Things Applications. In Intelligent Environments (IE), 2014 International Conference on. IEEE, 226--233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Project Coordinator: Elisabeth Ilie-Zudor. 2016. EXCELL Project. (2016). http://excell-project.eu/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Project Coordinator: Markus Eisenhauer. 2013. IMPReSS Project. (2013). http://impress-project.eu/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Project Coordinator: Maurizio Spirito. 2013. ALMANAC Project. (2013). http://almanac-project.eu/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Burr Settles. 2009. Active Learning Literature Survey. Computer Sciences Technical Report 1648. University of Wisconsin--Madison.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. skymind. 2016. Deep Learning 4j. (2016). http://deeplearning4j.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Stephen V. Stehman. 1997. Selecting and interpreting measures of thematic classification accuracy. Remote Sensing of Environment 62, 1 (1997), 77--89. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(97)00083-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Nadeem Ahmed Syed, Syed Huan, Liu Kah, and Kay Sung. 1999. Incremental learning with support vector machines. (1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Steve Tanner, Mohammad Alshayeb, E Criswell, M Iyer, A McDowell, M McEniry, and K Regner. 2002. EVE: On-board process planning and execution. In Earth Science Technology Conference, Pasadena, CA, Vol. 39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. UC Irvine Machine Learning Repository. 1936. Iris Data Set. (1936). https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Iris Accessed: December, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Ina Wagner. 1999. Ethical issues of healthcare in the information society. Opinion of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies No. 13, 30 July 1999. (1999). http://aei.pitt.edu/43228/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. EMC Digital Universe with Research & Analysis by IDC. 2014. The Digital Universe of Opportunities: Rich Data and the Increasing Value of the Internet of Thingss. Technical Report. http://www.emc.com/leadership/digital-universe/2014iview/digital-universe-of-opportunities-vernon-turner.htmGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. WSO2. 2015. WSO2 Complex Event Processor. (2015). http://wso2.com/products/complex-event-processor/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Indre Zliobaite, Albert Bifet, Bernhard Pfahringer, and Graham Holmes. 2014. Active learning with drifting streaming data. Neural Networks and Learning Systems, IEEE Transactions on 25, 1 (2014), 27--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. CEML: Mixing and moving complex event processing and machine learning to the edge of the network for IoT applications
          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            IoT '16: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Internet of Things
            November 2016
            186 pages
            ISBN:9781450348140
            DOI:10.1145/2991561

            Copyright © 2016 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 7 November 2016

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate28of84submissions,33%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader