Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Material and Methods
Analysis and Discussion
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence

Evaluating IoT Platforms: An Approach Using the COPRAS Method

Profile image of Sciforce PublicationsSciforce Publications

2025, Satyanarayana Ballamudi

Abstract

IoT platforms act as technological frameworks that provide the foundation for connecting and managing Internet of Things devices and applications. These platforms offer a wide range of services and tools that streamline the development, deployment, and operation of IoT solutions. They enable seamless integration and communication between IoT devices, facilitate data collection and analysis, provide device management capabilities, and facilitate the creation of IoT applications. By offering a centralized and scalable infrastructure, IoT platforms play a crucial role in empowering organizations and developers to fully harness the potential of the IoT, leading to the creation of innovative and efficient IoT solutions. Research dedicated to "the selection of IoT platforms plays a crucial role in the industry". "With the increasing number of IoT applications", the importance of making the right platform choice becomes critical for successful implementation. The research provides valuable insights that aid organizations and developers "in making informed decisions when selecting an IoT platform that aligns with their specific requirements". By leveraging this knowledge, stakeholders can ensure that they choose the most suitable platform to meet their needs effectively. "The objective of this research paper is to tackle the evaluation of IoT platforms" by approaching it as a problem of multicriteria decision making (MCDM) due to its complexity involving multiple factors. To accomplish this goal, the research develops a system for creating evaluation criteria, facilitating the comprehensive assessment of IoT platforms. In the ranking based on the COPRAS method, Google Cloud IoT emerged as the top-ranked platform, demonstrating its superior performance and highest utility. Amazon AWS IoT Core closely followed in the second position, showcasing its strong performance and positive attributes. Microsoft Azure IoT Hub secured the third rank, highlighting its competitive performance compared to other platforms. ThingWorx obtained the fourth rank, indicating its relatively good performance according to the COPRAS method. Particle ranked fifth, positioning its performance in the middle range among the evaluated platforms. Oracle IoT obtained the sixth rank, suggesting its performance was relatively lower compared to other platforms. IBM Watson IoT received the seventh rank, indicating its relatively weaker performance in the evaluation. These rankings offer valuable insights for decisionmaking and platform selection, enabling stakeholders to evaluate the overall performance and relative positions of the IoT platforms based on the COPRAS method. .

Related papers

Enhanced European Internet of Things (IoT) Platform Assessment Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Teejay Low

Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, 2021

The current most established IoT platform assessment standard called CREATE-IoT is missing essential KPIs that cover both technical and business aspects. These new KPIs would enhance this standard and improve the quality of assessment outcomes, which eventually would encourage more IoT platform deployments worldwide and open more technology-related jobs that will drive the global economy upward. Through experiences in studying IoT platform technical architecture and business model, this paper formulates and adds 22 unique new KPIs to this standard that initially consists of 198 KPIs. Or conclusively, 11.11% of distinct enhancement has been made. Thus, now this enhanced version of CREATE-IoT assessment standard may cover more IoT platform elements than before.

View PDFchevron_right
Performance Evaluation of an IoT Platform
Duc-Tai Le

2017

Accompanying the Internet of Things (IoT) is a demand of advanced applications and services utilizing the potential of the IoT environment. Monitoring the environment for a provision of context-aware services to the human beings is one of the new trends in our future life. The IoTivity Cloud is one of the most notable open-source platform bringing an opportunity to collect, analyze, and interpret a huge amount of data available in the IoT environment. Based on the IoTivity Cloud, we aim to develop a novel platform for comprehensive monitoring of a future network, which facilitates on-demand data collection to enable the network behavior prediction and the quality of user experience maintenance. In consideration of performance evaluation of the monitoring platform, this paper presents results of a preliminary test on the data acquisition/supply process in the IoTivity Cloud.

View PDFchevron_right
A Comprehensive Framework for Analyzing IoT Platforms: A Smart City Industrial Experience
Dr. Mahdi Fahmideh

Smart Cities

The compliance of IoT platforms to quality is paramount to achieve users’ satisfaction. Currently, we do not have a comprehensive set of guidelines to appraise and select the most suitable IoT platform architectures that meet relevant criteria. This paper is a tentative response to this critical knowledge gap where we adopted the design science research approach to develop a novel evaluation framework. Our research, on the one hand, stimulates an unbiased competition among IoT platform providers and, on the other hand, establishes a solid foundation for IoT platform consumers to make informed decisions in this multiplicity. The application of the framework is illustrated in example scenarios. Moreover, lessons learned from applying design science research are shared.

View PDFchevron_right
Classification and evaluation of IoT brokers: A methodology
Antonio Abelem

International Journal of Network Management, 2020

Since the term Internet of Things (IoT) was coined by Kevin Ashton in 1999, a number of middleware platforms have been developed to cope with important challenges such as the integration of different technologies. In this context of heterogeneous technologies, IoT message brokers become critical elements for the proper function of smart systems and wireless sensor networks (WSN) infrastructures. There are several evaluations made on IoT messaging middleware performance. Nevertheless, most of them ignore crucial aspects of the IoT context that also need to be included, such as reliability and other qualitative aspects. Thus, in this article, we propose a methodology for classification and evaluation of IoT brokers to help the scientific community and technology industry on evaluating them according to their interests, without leaving out important aspects for the context of smart environments. Our methodology bases its qualitative evaluations on the ISO/IEC 25000 (SQuaRE) set of standards, and its quantitative evaluations on Jain's process for performance evaluation. We developed a case study to illustrate our proposal with 12 different open source brokers, validating the feasibility of our methodological approach.

View PDFchevron_right
A Study on Internet of Things Performance Evaluation
Zahra Ahmadi

2020

In recurrent years, Internet of Things (IoT) being a scheme of interrelated computing devices that are provided with unique identifiers and with the ability to transfer data over a network without requiring human-tocomputer or even human-to-human interaction, there are common example of IoTs that include Smart technologies like Nest Smart Home, Kisi Smart Lock, canary security systems, mirrors, bags, watches, gloves, tracking systems among others, IoTs have emerged in the computing arenas. Due to this increased usage of IoTs in some aspects, its performance has not been focused on per the current studies. In this paper, we present a detailed comprehensive study on the main performance of IoTs. The main IoTs have been further examined and analyzed, like a case, for example, IoT security, IoT congestion control, IoT flow control, IoT energy consumption efficiency in different aspects of the computing. The summarized table of the IoT performance evaluation can be used by researchers in...

View PDFchevron_right
Systematic Literature Review of Iot Metrics
Ernest Mnkandla

Applied Computer Science

The Internet of Things (IoT) touches almost every aspect of modern society and has changed the way people live, work, travel and, do business. Because of its importance, it is essential to ensure that an IoT system is performing well, as desired and expected, and that this can be assessed and managed with an adequate set of IoT performance metrics. The aim of this study was to systematically inventory and classifies recent studies that have investigated IoT metrics. We conducted a literature review based on studies published between January 2010 and December 2021 using a set of five research questions (RQs) on the current knowledge bases for IoT metrics. A total of 158 IoT metrics were identified and classified into 12 categories according to the different parts and aspects of an IoT system. To cover the overall performance of an IoT system, the 12 categories were organized into an ontology. The findings results show that the category of network metrics was the most discussed in 43...

View PDFchevron_right
A Methodology for Classification and Evaluation of IoT Brokers
Antonio Abelem

2019

Since the term Internet of Things (IoT) was coined by Kevin Ashton on 1999, a bundle of middleware platforms has been developed to cope with important challenges such as the integration of different technologies. Is in this context of heterogeneous technologies that IoT message brokers become key elements for the proper function of smart systems and wireless sensor networks (WSN) infrastructures. This article proposes a methodology for classification and evaluation of brokers by using qualitative analysis, so to help in the selection of the more suitable brokers according to the given scenario and needs. The methodology uses the quality reference model described on the ISO/IEC 25010 normative from the SQuaRE set of standards published by the ISO/IEC conjunction. In the implementation case we developed the proposal with 9 different open source brokers so to validate the applicability and feasibility of our methodology.

View PDFchevron_right
Performance Evaluation of IoT Platforms in Green ICT Applications
Daniyal qureshi

2018

With the advent of the Internet of Things (IoT), its deployment and applications have grown exponentially in the past decade. This growth has had led scientists and stakeholders to the prediction t ...

View PDFchevron_right
Scalable IoT platforms
Stefan Hill

2019

In today's world the internet is connecting not only people but things. The computing concept of the "Internet of Things (IoT)"describes the idea to connect everyday physical objects to the internet. IoT platforms provide the backbone for applications in areas like Smart Home, Connected Vehicles and Industrial IoT. In this thesis, we explore the question of the best IoT platform with a focus on reliability, scalability and heterogeneity. To answer this question, we search the market for IoT platforms, prototypes and proposals, examine them based on our comparison model and rate the platforms in a five star system. The criteria for the parts of the comparison model include replication, availability, authentication and authorization, encryption, security incidents and audits, development and market longevity for reliability, hosting, Edge and Fog Computing, limits of the infrastructure and network and load balancing for scalability, device restrictions, messaging and dev...

View PDFchevron_right
Study of Various Internet of Things Platforms
bhumi nakhuva

International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Survey, 2015

Internet of Things is a technological revolution which provides the vision of connected world of Things. Devices, people and systems are connected with one another in such a way that they can communicate with each other over Internet. So the form of communication from human-human is now turned into humanhuman, human-things and things-things. Variety of platforms are now a days available that can support entire development to deployment of IoT applications and systems. In this paper, we will first start with the introduction of IoT platforms as well as IoT middleware and then will discuss various IoT platforms, compare various IoT platforms and will end up with the conclusion.

View PDFchevron_right

References (40)

  1. Varadharajan, Vijay, and Udaya Tupakula. "Security as a service model for cloud environment." IEEE Transactions on network and Service management 11, no. 1 (2014): 60- 75.
  2. Noor, Talal H., Quan Z. Sheng, Sherali Zeadally, and Jian Yu. "Trust management of services in cloud environments: Obstacles and solutions." ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 46, no. 1 (2013): 1-30.
  3. Grozev, Nikolay, and Rajkumar Buyya. "Performance modelling and simulation of three-tier applications in cloud and multi-cloud environments." The Computer Journal 58, no. 1 (2015): 1-22.
  4. Xu, Baomin, Chunyan Zhao, Enzhao Hu, and Bin Hu. "Job scheduling algorithm based on Berger model in cloud environment." Advances Engineering Software 42, no. 7 (2011): 419-425.
  5. Hussein, Mohamed K., Mohamed H. Mousa, and Mohamed A. Alqarni. "A placement architecture for a container as a service (CaaS) in a cloud environment." Journal of Cloud Computing 8 (2019): 1-15.
  6. Kaliski Jr, Burton S., and Wayne Pauley. "Toward risk assessment as a service in cloud environments." In 2nd USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud 10). 2010.
  7. Stewart, Craig A., Timothy M. Cockerill, Ian Foster, David Hancock, Nirav Merchant, Edwin Skidmore, Daniel Stanzione et al. "Jetstream: a self-provisioned, scalable science and engineering cloud environment." In Proceedings of the 2015 XSEDE Conference: Scientific Advancements Enabled by Enhanced Cyberinfrastructure, pp. 1-8. 2015.
  8. Sakr, Sherif, Anna Liu, Daniel M. Batista, and Mohammad Alomari. "A survey of large scale data management approaches in cloud environments." IEEE communications surveys & tutorials 13, no. 3 (2011): 311-336.
  9. Dubey, Kalka, Mohit Kumar, and Subhash Chander Sharma. "Modified HEFT algorithm for task scheduling in cloud environment." Procedia Computer Science 125 (2018): 725-732.
  10. Ghoshal, Devarshi, Richard Shane Canon, and Lavanya Ramakrishnan. "I/o performance of virtualized cloud environments." In Proceedings of the second international workshop on Data intensive computing in the clouds, pp. 71-80. 2011.
  11. Abirami, S. P., and Shalini Ramanathan. "Linear scheduling strategy for resource allocation in cloud environment." International Journal on Cloud Computing: Services and Architecture (IJCCSA) 2, no. 1 (2012): 9-17.
  12. Xiong, Pengcheng, Yun Chi, Shenghuo Zhu, Hyun Jin Moon, Calton Pu, and Hakan Hacigümüş. "Intelligent management of virtualized resources for database systems in cloud environment." In 2011 IEEE 27th International Conference on Data Engineering, pp. 87-98. IEEE, 2011.
  13. Vignesh, V., K. Sendhil Kumar, and N. Jaisankar. "Resource management and scheduling in cloud environment." International journal of scientific and research publications 3, no. 6 (2013): 1-6.
  14. Namasudra, Suyel. "Fast and secure data accessing by using DNA computing for the cloud environment." IEEE Transactions on Services Computing 15, no. 4 (2020): 2289-2300.
  15. Lorido-Botran, Tania, Jose Miguel-Alonso, and Jose A. Lozano. "A review of auto-scaling techniques for elastic applications in cloud environments." Journal of grid computing 12 (2014): 559-592.
  16. He, Sijin, Li Guo, Moustafa Ghanem, and Yike Guo. "Improving resource utilisation in the cloud environment using multivariate probabilistic models." In 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Cloud Computing, pp. 574-581. IEEE, 2012.
  17. Xing, Tianyi, Dijiang Huang, Le Xu, Chun-Jen Chung, and Pankaj Khatkar. "Snortflow: A openflow-based intrusion prevention system in cloud environment." In 2013 second GENI research and educational experiment workshop, pp. 89-92. IEEE, 2013.
  18. Kaur, Harleen, M. Afshar Alam, Roshan Jameel, Ashish Kumar Mourya, and Victor Chang. "A proposed solution and future direction for blockchain-based heterogeneous medicare data in cloud environment." Journal of medical systems 42 (2018): 1-11.
  19. Toosi, Adel Nadjaran, Rodrigo N. Calheiros, and Rajkumar Buyya. "Interconnected cloud computing environments: Challenges, taxonomy, and survey." ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 47, no. 1 (2014): 1-47.
  20. Kaur, Harleen, M. Afshar Alam, Roshan Jameel, Ashish Kumar Mourya, and Victor Chang. "A proposed solution and future direction for blockchain-based heterogeneous medicare data in cloud environment." Journal of medical systems 42 (2018): 1-11.
  21. Organ, Arzu, and Engin Yalçın. "Performance evaluation of research assistants by COPRAS method." European Scientific Journal 12, no. 10 (2016): 102-109.
  22. Kundakcı, Nilsen, and A. Işık. "Integration of MACBETH and COPRAS methods to select air compressor for a textile company." Decision Science Letters 5, no. 3 (2016): 381- 394.
  23. Addressing Supply Chain Administration Challenges in the Construction Industry: A TOPSIS-Based Evaluation Approach by Vijay Kumar Adari, REST Publisher, 2023. ISBN: 978-81-948459-4-2.
  24. Zagorskas, Jurgis, Marija Burinskienė, Edmundas Zavadskas, and Zenonas Turskis. "Urbanistic assessment of city compactness on the basis of GIS applying the COPRAS method." Ekologija 53 (2007). Zagorskas, Jurgis, Marija Burinskienė, Edmundas Zavadskas, and Zenonas Turskis. "Urbanistic assessment of city compactness on the basis of GIS applying the COPRAS method." Ekologija 53 (2007).
  25. Kustiyahningsih, Yeni, and Ismy Qorry Aini. "Integration of FAHP and COPRAS method for new student admission decision making." In 2020 Third International Conference on Vocational Education and Electrical Engineering (ICVEE), pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2020.
  26. Özbek, Aşir, and Emel Erol. "Ranking of factoring companies in accordance with ARAS and methods." International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences 7, no. 2 (2017): 105-116.
  27. Keshavarz Ghorabaee, Mehdi, Maghsoud Amiri, Jamshid Salehi Sadaghiani, and Golnoosh Hassani Goodarzi. "Multiple criteria group decision-making for supplier selection based on COPRAS method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets." The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 75 (2014): 1115-1130.
  28. Zheng, Yuanhang, Zeshui Xu, Yue He, and Huchang Liao. "Severity assessment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic COPRAS method." Applied Soft Computing 69 (2018): 60-71.
  29. VimalaSaravanan, Chinnasami Sivaji, Sathiyaraj Chinnasamy, and Chandrasekar Raja. "Using the COPRAS Methodology Cancer with a solution." Computer Science, Engineering and Technology 1, no. 1 (2023): 36-45.
  30. Esbouei, Saber Khalili, and Abdolhamid Safaei Ghadikolaei. "Applying FAHP and COPRAS methods for evaluating financial performance." International Journal of Managment, IT and Engineering 3, no. 11 (2013): 10-22.
  31. Ayrim, Yelda, Kumru Didem Atalay, and Gülin Feryal Can. "A new stochastic MCDM approach based on COPRAS." International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 17, no. 03 (2018): 857-882.
  32. Roy, Jagannath, Haresh Kumar Sharma, Samarjit Kar, Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, and Jonas Saparauskas. "An extended COPRAS model for multi-criteria decision- making problems and its application in web-based hotel evaluation and selection." Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja 32, no. 1 (2019): 219-253.
  33. Dorfeshan, Yahya, and S. Meysam Mousavi. "A group TOPSIS-COPRAS methodology with Pythagorean fuzzy sets considering weights of experts for project critical path problem." Journal of intelligent & fuzzy systems 36, no. 2 (2019): 1375-1387.
  34. Bitarafan, Mahdi, S. Hashemkhani Zolfani, Sh Lale Arefi, and Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas. "Evaluating the construction methods of cold-formed steel structures in reconstructing the areas damaged in natural crises, using the methods AHP and COPRAS-G." Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 12 (2012): 360-367.
  35. Hashemkhani Zolfani, Sarfaraz, Nahid Rezaeiniya, Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, and Zenonas Turskis. "Forest roads locating based on AHP and COPRAS-G methods: an empirical study based on Iran." (2011).
  36. Bitarafan, Mahdi, S. Hashemkhani Zolfani, Sh Lale Arefi, and Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas. "Evaluating the construction methods of cold-formed steel structures in reconstructing the areas damaged in natural crises, using the methods AHP and COPRAS-G." Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 12 (2012): 360-367.
  37. Rajareega, S., and J. Vimala. "Operations on complex intuitionistic fuzzy soft lattice ordered group and CIFS- COPRAS method for equipment selection process." Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 41, no. 5 (2021): 5709- 5718.
  38. Adali, Esra Aytac, and Ayģegül Tuş Işık. "Air conditioner selection problem with COPRAS and ARAS methods." Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 5, no. 2 (2016): 124- 138.
  39. Beena, Mary John, and C. Sudha Kartha. "Fabrication and characterization of dye sensitized polymer films for holographic applications." PhD diss., Department of Physics, 2008.
  40. Amudha, M., M. Ramachandran, Chinnasami Sivaji, M. Gowri, and R. Gayathri. "Evaluation of COPRAS MCDM method with fuzzy approach." Data analytics and artificial intelligence 1, no. 1 (2021): 15-23.

Related papers

Comparing apples and oranges in IoT context: a deep dive into methods for comparing IoT platforms
Rob Bemthuis

IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2020

Many researchers try to make a comparison between various IoT platforms based on specific requirements. However, none of the reviewed studies proposed a thorough analysis of the variety of comparative methods. Since there is a lack of comparison frameworks for IoT platforms, individuals or companies have difficulties when selecting a suitable IoT platform matching their associated business requirements. In order to support this selection process, a set of functional and non-functional requirements is identified. A framework containing methods in selecting an IoT platform is presented. The methodology is based on statistical and visualization techniques to recommend a suitable IoT platform. Five IoT platforms: Azure, AWS, SaS, ThingWorx, and Kaa IoT are studied to evaluate the performance of the framework. Different comparison methods are proposed, and multi-criteria decision analysis method was applied by using an Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP). One of the methods clusters the functional requirements and compares the IoT platforms based on their ability in supporting a specific requirement or not. Kmeans clustering was applied to determine the clusters of functional requirements. The comparison was made based on hierarchical level of requirements per main requirement. The other methods use the following statistical tests: Error Bar test, One-way Anova Test, and Tukey's Honest Significant Difference Test. Based on the selected requirements, an approach is suggested which IoT platform can be used.

View PDFchevron_right
An effective model for Selection of the best IoT platform: A critical review of challenges and solutions
mahmoud zaher

The process of making an informed decision on which Internet of Things (IoT) platform to choose is an extremely important one in the modern world. The choice procedure is made more difficult as a result of (a) the vast number of IoT platforms that are offered on the market for IoT applications and (b) the wide diversity of functions and solutions that are provided by these platforms. In this article, the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies for selecting the specific Internet of Things platform are taken into consideration. The TOPSIS method is used in this paper to select the best IoT platform. TOPSIS method is a common MCDM method. TOPSIS method used the idea of the best and cost criteria to compute the distance from it. During the IoT platform choice procedures, relevant aspects, such as the stability, consistency, protection, and privacy of IoT platforms, are regarded to be the most significant ones for making decisions.

View PDFchevron_right
A framework for evaluating Internet-of-Things platforms: Application provider viewpoint
Pasi Tyrväinen

2014 IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), 2014

Widespread adoption of Internet of Things (IoT) applications assumes a sustainable ecosystem of firms creating, distributing, and using these applications. Such an ecosystem often forms around a platform that implements commonly used functionality and offers it to the members of the ecosystem for creating applications and services. In IoT, such a platform may be materialized in a form of a cloud platform that supports the management of connected devices, and the development and use of the applications based on them. A number of cloud platforms targeting IoT applications are available in the market; to prosper, they need to assist the providers of the IoT applications in designing and developing the applications, as well as in deploying and operating the application software. In this paper, a framework for evaluating the IoT platforms from the perspective of how widely they cover the potential needs of the application providers is introduced. Based on the framework, the maturity of the available IoT platforms is evaluated, by using the publicly available information about the platforms' features and supporting services. As the results of this initial analysis suggest, none of the platforms today offers the comprehensive support. This can be seen as a factor contributing to a slow adaption of the IoT platforms, and therefore to the slower-than-expected takeoff of the IoT ecosystem in general.

View PDFchevron_right
Selection of IoT Platform with Multi-Criteria Analysis: Defining Criteria and Experts to Interview
Alberto Ochoa Zezzatti

Research in Computing Science, 2019

Industry 4.0 is having a great impact in all industries. This is not a unique product, but is composed of several technologies. IoT is a key intelligent factor that allows factories to act intelligently. By adding sensors and actuators to the objects, the object becomes intelligent because it can interact with people, other objects, generate data, generate transactions and react to the environment data. Currently there are very varied implementation options offered by several companies, and this imposes a new challenge to companies that want to implement IoT in their processes. The decision processes that companies must follow should not be free will or by hunches, since this contradicts a methodology and would make the decision process unrepeatable and unjustifiable. Decisions must be supported by methods that consider pros and cons of plural points of view that affect the decision process. With a wide range of IoT platforms, which are not directly comparable to each other, it seems that Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) can be useful to help companies make a decision on what platform to implement, depending on the circumstances prevailing in each company at the time to make the choice. This article shows the complexity of selecting an IoT platform and provides the key decision criteria that must be taken into account when evaluating IoT Platforms alternatives.

View PDFchevron_right
Performance Analysis of IoT Cloud-based Platforms using Quality of Service Metrics
Peter Dibal

International Journal of Wireless and Microwave Technologies

There are several IoT platforms providing a variety of services for different applications. Finding the optimal fit between application and platform is challenging since it is hard to evaluate the effects of minor platform changes. Several websites offer reviews based on user ratings to guide potential users in their selection. Unfortunately, review data are subjective and sometimes conflictingindicating that they are not objective enough for a fair judgment. Scientific papers are known to be the reliable sources of authentic information based on evidence-based research. However, literature revealed that though a lot of work has been done on theoretical comparative analysis of IoT platforms based on their features, functions, architectures, security, communication protocols, analytics, scalability, etc., empirical studies based on measurable metrics such as response time, throughput, and technical efficiency, that objectively characterize user experience seem to be lacking. In an attempt to fill this gap, this study used web analytic tools to gather data on the performance of some selected IoT cloud platforms. Descriptive and inferential statistical models were used to analyze the gathered data to provide a technical ground for the performance evaluation of the selected IoT platforms. Results showed that the platforms performed differently in the key performance metrics (KPM) used. No platform emerged best in all the KPMs. Users' choice will therefore be based on metrics that are most relevant to their applications. It is believed that this work will provide companies and other users with quantitative evidence to corroborate social media data and thereby give a better insight into the performance of IoT platforms. It will also help vendors to improve on their quality of service (QoS).

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Machine Learning
  • Data sciences
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved