Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background
Research Questions & Aim
Methodology
Background and Related Works
Data Collection
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol (Amqp)
Benchmarking Methodology
Data Distribution (Buffer Distribution)
Messaging Protocol (Size, Time, Processing)
Proposed Benchmarking Methodology
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Embedded Systems

Performance Evaluation of IoT Platforms in Green ICT Applications

Profile image of Daniyal QureshiDaniyal Qureshi

2018

Abstract

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 ...

Related papers

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
Green IoT: Current Scenario Future Prospects
Aayush Kumar

December 2020

Demands of world's whole population for insubstantial products has thus prompted the need of effective utilization of materials and assets. As huge changes in society have been impacted for good by the advancement in Information and Communication Technology, their use has a negative effect on the environment and human wellbeing. The reason being, our society is in a deep need of a greener future where there is judicial use of resources along with minimal use of non-renewable resources. This will eventually decrease the pollution & promote lesser power consumption. Green Internet of Things takes one of the main parts while in transit to make a sustainable & green spot for living. We investigate and talk about how the different empowering advancements, (for example, the Internet, smart objects, sensors, and so forth) can be effectively implemented to accomplish a green IoT. Moreover, we likewise audit different IoT applications, standardization and projects which are at present un...

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
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
Guest Editorial Special Issue on Green Internet of Things: Challenges and Future Opportunities—Part I
Venkatesha Prasad

IEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking, 2021

View PDFchevron_right
ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES CHALLENGES OF GREEN INTERNET OF THINGS (IOT) TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE ERA OF INDUSTRY 4.0
Joyece Jane

Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2022

The extensive adoption of the Internet of Things (IoT) has increased the carbon footprint on a large scale across the globe. To handle this challenge, scholars and policymakers are making efforts to propose novel energy-efficient solutions to provide a desirable environment for green-IoT (G-IoT). Additionally, further research is required to analyze the G-IoT-related challenges to elucidate the difficulties of its implementation for researchers. Moreover, the G-IoT requirements have been considered in different network levels, namely software, hardware, architecture, communication. To present a comprehensive framework to identify the challenges of G-IoT, a survey using literature review and expert's opinion is carried. Total 23 challenges are taken to evaluate and implement G-IoT technologies towards sustainable development achievements (SDA). Consequently, this article aims to rank and evaluate the challenges to implement the G-IoT towards the SDA. An integrated approach is proposed with stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) and additive ratio assessment (ARAS) under Pythagorean fuzzy sets. As a result, an machine-to-machine (M2M) standardization protocol with a weight value of 0.0508 has the first rank, followed by adaptation to natural energy sources with a weight value of 0.0479, information security and privacy protection with a weight value of 0.0469, and internet protocol version-6 (IPv6) for low-end devices with weight 0.0467. To validate the proposed method, sensitivity analysis and comparison using existing methods have been conducted.

View PDFchevron_right
Assessing Versatility of a Generic End-to-End Platform for IoT Ecosystem Applications
Francesco Bellotti

Sensors, 2022

Availability of efficient development tools for data-rich IoT applications is becoming ever more important. Such tools should support cross-platform deployment and seamless and effective applicability in a variety of domains. In this view, we assessed the versatility of an edge-to-cloud system featuring Measurify, a framework for managing smart things. The framework exposes to developers a set of measurement-oriented resources that can be used in different contexts. The tool has been assessed in the development of end-to-end IoT applications in six Electronic and Information Technologies Engineering BSc theses that have highlighted the potential of such a system, both from a didactic and a professional point of view. The main design abstractions of the system (i.e., generic sensor configuration, simple language with chainable operations for processing data on the edge, seamless WiFi/GSM communication) allowed developers to be productive and focus on the application requirements and the high-level design choices needed to define the edge system (microcontroller and its sensors), avoiding the large set-up times necessary to start a solution from scratch. The experience also highlighted some usability issues that will be addressed in an upcoming release of the system.

View PDFchevron_right
An Integration of IoT, IoC, and IoE towards Building a Green Society
Mohammad Maqbool Waris

Scientific Programming

Energy waste altogether adds to expanded expenses in the car fabricating industry, which is liable to energy use limitations and tax assessment from national and global strategy creators and confinements and charges from national energy suppliers. This checking is essential for energy sparing since it empowers organizations to roll out operational improvements to diminish energy utilization and expenses. The primary test to energy observation is the need to incorporate assembling and energy checking and control gadgets that help diverse correspondence conventions and are generally dispersed over a wide region. One of the most significant challenges in the advancement of the Internet of Things (IoT) has been the powering of billions of connected devices. Evaluation of digital services considering an energy impression of the Internet normally requires models of the energy intensity of the Internet. A typical way to deal with the display of the energy intensity is to consolidate assess...

View PDFchevron_right
Futuristic investigative study of IoT/Green IoT as a driving force for sustainable development
Sandeep Dalal

Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 2021

Background/Objectives: Current wave of technological innovations like IoT/Green IoT (G-IoT) has opened doors for new possibilities that must be explored for achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDG's) designed by United Nations. The main objective of the study is to propose an inference regarding potential role of IoT in achieving the target of sustainable development worldwide. Methods/Statistical analysis: An Online survey among the IoT industry experts, researchers, faculty members and educationists working in the area of IoT of 'A' grade state university in India has been conducted using 'Google Forms Questionnaire' to gain an insight into significance of G-IoT for sustainable development. The number of survey participants were around 300. Findings: The study attempts to track the gaps, challenges and obstacles in attaining the target of SDG's. The major findings of the paper depict the significance of IoT in achieving the SDG's as 84% respondents believes that that Green IoT/ Green ICT technologies can act as a game changer in accomplishing sustainable development and growth of green economy. Major areas where we can take advantage of these technologies include productive and efficient utilization of raw materials along with preserving natural resources and minimizing the emission of greenhouse gases and other wastes. Novelty/Applications: A sustainable environment around the world demands the planned and organized usage of IoT and G-IoT concept towards constructing/developing the goods and services for enhancing renewable energy sources, energy-conserving computing, management of power sources, green metrics, assessment tools and methodologies have potential to significantly transform the traditional development into sustainable development.

View PDFchevron_right
Evaluating the (ir)relevance of IoT solutions with respect to environmental limits based on LCA and backcasting studies
Louis Golard

2023

View PDFchevron_right

References (56)

  1. One should keep in mind while availing the services: • Solution Lifetime • Community/Customer Service • Vendor Lock In/Exit REFERENCES
  2. Klimova, A., Rondeau, E., Andersson, K., Porras, J., Rybin, A.V., and Zaslavsky, A. (2016). An international Master's program in green ICT as a contribution to sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 135, pp. 223-239.
  3. D. Evans, "The Internet of things: How the next evolution of the Internet is changing everything", CISCO, 2011.
  4. Gartner, 'Gartner Says 6.4 Billion Connected "Things" Will Be in Use in 2016, Up 30 Percent From 2015'. Available: http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3165317
  5. K Rose, S Eldridge, L Chapin, "THE INTERNET OF THINGS: AN OVERVIEW", The Internet Society, 2015, pp. 9-17.
  6. Ericsson. (2011, February) More than 50 billion connected devices. Available: http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/whitepapers/wp-50-billions.pdf
  7. M. Weiser, "The Computer of the 21st Century", Scientific American, vol. 265, no. 3, Sept 1991, pp. 66-75.
  8. Ala Al-Fuqaha, Mohsen Guizani, Mehdi Mohammadi, Mohammed Aledhari, and Moussa Ayyash. Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 17(4):2347-2376, 2015.
  9. Floerkemeier, C., Langheinrich, M., Fleisch, E., Mattern, F., Sarma, S.E.: (eds.) The Internet of Things. First International Conference, IOT 2008, LNCS 4952, Springer (2008).
  10. P. Magrassi, "Why a Universal RFID Infrastructure Would Be a Good Thing", Gartner research report G00106518, 2 May 2002.
  11. Survey of IoT adopters conducted by Oxford Economics, sponsored by Verizon, 2015.
  12. André B Bondi. Characteristics of scalability and their impact on performance. In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Software and performance, pages 195-203. ACM, 2000.
  13. Žarko, Ivana Podnar, et al. "Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions for the Internet of Things." (2015).
  14. Gonzalez, R.C., Woods, R.E., Digital Image Processing, 3rd edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., USA, 2002.
  15. Hamouz, M., Kittler, J., Kamarainen, J.-K., Paalanen, P., Kälviäinen, H., Matas, J., Feature-based Affine-invariant Localization of Faces, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), Vol. 27, No. 9, September 2005, pp. 1490-1495.
  16. Frans Berkhout and Julia Hertin. Impacts of information and communication technologies on environmental sustainability: Speculations and evidence. 2001.
  17. Graham Hubbard. Measuring organizational performance: beyond the triple bottom line. Business strategy and the environment, 18(3):177-191, 2009.
  18. M. Weiser, "The Computer of the 21st Century", Scientific American, vol. 265, no. 3, Sept 1991, pp. 66-75.
  19. Floerkemeier, C., Langheinrich, M., Fleisch, E., Mattern, F., Sarma, S.E.: (eds.) The Internet of Things. First International Conference, IOT 2008, LNCS 4952, Springer (2008).
  20. Molly Webb et al. Smart 2020: Enabling the low carbon economy in the information age The Climate Group. London, 1(1):1-1, 2008.
  21. Shancang Li, Li Da Xu, and Shanshan Zhao. The internet of things: a survey. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(2):243-259, 2015.
  22. M. A. Razzaque, M. Milojevic-Jevric, A. Palade and S. Clarke, "Middleware for Internet of Things: A Survey," in IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 70-95, Feb. 2016.
  23. Ghofrane Fersi. Middleware for internet of things: a study. In Distributed Computing in
  24. Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2015 International Conference on, pages 230-235. IEEE, 2015.
  25. Jayavardhana Gubbi, Rajkumar Buyya, Slaven Marusic, and Marimuthu Palaniswami. Internet of things (iot): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future generation computer systems, 29(7):1645-1660, 2013.
  26. Hasan Derhamy, Jens Eliasson, Jerker Delsing, and Peter Priller. A survey of commercial frameworks for the internet of things. In Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA), 2015 IEEE 20th Conference on, pages 1-8. IEEE, 2015.
  27. Soldatos, John, et al. "Openiot: Open source internet-of-things in the cloud." Interoperability and open-source solutions for the internet of things. Springer, Cham, 2015.
  28. Kefalakis, Nikos, et al. "A visual paradigm for IoT solutions development." Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions for the Internet of Things. Springer, Cham, 2015. 26-45.
  29. Hromic, Hugo, et al. "Real time analysis of sensor data for the internet of things by means of clustering and event processing." Communications (ICC), 2015 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2015.
  30. KAA Platform, Available at: https://www.kaaproject.org/
  31. KAA Architecture, Available at: https://docs.kaaproject.org/display/KAA/Kaa+IoT+Platform+Home
  32. Atzori, Luigi, Antonio Iera, and Giacomo Morabito. "The internet of things: A survey." Computer networks 54.15 (2010): 2787-2805.
  33. Karagiannis, Vasileios, et al. "A survey on application layer protocols for the internet of things." Transaction on IoT and Cloud Computing 3.1 (2015): 11-17.
  34. David J Lilja. Measuring computer performance: a practitioner's guide. Cambridge university press, 2005.
  35. Brendan Gregg. Systems Performance: Enterprise and the Cloud. Pearson Education 2013.
  36. Darrell M West. E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public administration review, 64(1):15-27, 2004.
  37. Nambiar, Raghunath, and Meikel Poess. "Performance evaluation and benchmarking", Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2009.
  38. Raghunath Nambiar and Meikel Poess, "Industry Standards for the Analytics Era: TPC Roadmap" Cisco Systems, Inc., 275 East Tasman Drive, San Jose, CA 95134, USA, Sep 2017.
  39. Attila Klenik and Andr´as Pataricza, "Performance Analysis of Critical Services",
  40. Li, Ling, Shancang Li, and Shanshan Zhao. "QoS-aware scheduling of services- oriented internet of things." IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 10.2 (2014): 1497-1505.
  41. Mangold, Stefan, et al. "Analysis of IEEE 802.11 e for QoS support in wireless LANs." IEEE wireless communications10.6 (2003): 40-50.
  42. Yassein, Muneer Bani, and Mohammed Q. Shatnawi. "Application layer protocols for the Internet of things: A survey." Engineering & MIS (ICEMIS), International Conference on. IEEE, 2016.
  43. Collina, Matteo, et al. "Internet of Things application layer protocol analysis over error and delay prone links." Advanced Satellite Multimedia Systems Conference and the 13th Signal Processing for pace Communications Workshop (ASMS/SPSC), 2014 7th. IEEE, 2014.
  44. Chen, Yuang, and Thomas Kunz. "Performance evaluation of IoT protocols under a constrained wireless access network." Selected Topics in Mobile & Wireless Networking (MoWNeT), 2016 International Conference on. IEEE, 2016.
  45. J. Gao, P. Pattabhiraman, X. Bai and W. T. Tsai, "SaaS performance and scalability evaluation in clouds," Proceedings of 2011 IEEE 6th International Symposium on Service Oriented System (SOSE), Irvine, CA, 2011, pp. 61-71.
  46. Vandikas, Konstantinos, and Vlasios Tsiatsis. "Performance evaluation of an IoT platform." Next Generation Mobile Apps, Services and Technologies (NGMAST), 2014 Eighth International Conference on. IEEE, 2014.
  47. C. Savaglio, G., Fortino, M., Zhou, "Towards interoperable, cognitive and autonomic IoT systems: An agent-based approach," in: Internet of Things, 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on. IEEE, pp. 58-63, 2016.
  48. G. Fortino, et al., "Towards Multi-layer Interoperability of Heterogeneous IoT Platforms: The INTER-IoT Approach," Integration, Interconnection, and Interoperability of IoT Systems. Springer, 199-232, 2018.
  49. Klenik, Attila, and Andras Pataricza. "Performance analysis of critical services." Future IoT Technologies (Future IoT), 2018 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2018.
  50. Ishaq et al., "IETF standardization in the field of the Internet of Things (IoT): A survey," J. Sens. Actuator Netw., vol. 2, pp. 235-287, 2013.
  51. Molly Webb et al. Smart 2020: Enabling the low carbon economy in the information age. The Climate Group. London, 1(1):1-1, 2008.
  52. G. Fortino, et al., "Towards Multi-layer Interoperability of Heterogeneous IoT Platforms: The INTER-IoT Approach," Integration, Interconnection, and Interoperability of IoT Systems. Springer, 199-232, 2018.
  53. Arkady Zaslavsky, et al. "Openiot: Open source internet-of-things in the cloud." Interoperability and open-source solutions for the internet of things. Springer, Cham, 2015. 13-25.
  54. H. Derhamy, J. Eliasson, J. Delsing, and P. Priller, 'A survey of commercial frameworks for the Internet of Things', in <i>Proceedings of 2015 IEEE 20th International Conference on Emerging Technologies &#38; Factory Automation (ETFA 2015) : Luxembourg, 8-11 Sept. 2015.
  55. Ghofrane Fersi. Middleware for internet of things: a study. In Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2015 International Conference on, pages 230-235. IEEE, 2015.
  56. Calbimonte, Jean-Paul, et al. "XGSN: An Open-source Semantic Sensing Middleware for the Web of Things." TC/SSN@ ISWC. 2014.

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
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
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
Evaluating IoT Platforms: An Approach Using the COPRAS Method
Sciforce Publications

Satyanarayana Ballamudi, 2025

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. .

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Computer Science
  • IOT platform
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved