| Literature DB >> 36210992 |
Ahmed A H Abdellatif1,2, Aman Singh2,3, Abdulaziz Aldribi2,4, Arturo Ortega-Mansilla3,5,6, Muhammad Ibrahim7.
Abstract
Fog-assisted and IoT-enabled smart healthcare system with rapid response rates is the major area of concern now a days. Dynamic and heterogeneous fog networks are difficult to manage and a considerable amount of overhead could be realized while managing ever increasing load on foglets. Fog computing plays a vital role in managing ever increasing processing demands from diverse IoT-based applications. Smart healthcare systems work with the assistance of sensor-based devices and automatic data collection and processing can speed up overall system functionality. In the proposed work, a novel framework for smart health care is presented where a series of activities are performed with prime objective of reducing latency and execution time. Principal component analysis is used for feature reduction and support vector machines with radial basis function kernel is used for classification purpose. Workload optimization on the fog nodes is implemented using genetic algorithm. Data collection process also involves preprocessing as a leading step for generating cleaner data. Amalgamation of intelligent and optimization techniques in the presented framework certainly improves the efficiency of the overall system. Experimental results reveal that proposed work outperforms the existing fog-assisted smart healthcare systems in terms of latency, execution time, overall system accuracy, and system stability.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36210992 PMCID: PMC9536960 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4174805
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Three-tier mechanism of fog computing [1].
Strengths and limitations of related work.
| Presented work | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|
| HealthFog [ | Enhancement in Quality of service and prediction accuracy | (i) It could only work on single domain of diseases. |
| (ii) Proposed architecture is designed for one application area only | ||
| STPH [ | Efficient medical services | (i) Higher computational complexity |
| (ii) Lack of medical offering system | ||
| HAAL-NBFA [ | (i) Implementation of safe-fail module | Proposed framework can monitor limited set of diseases |
| (ii) Minimum feature selection | ||
| Fog-BBN [ | Provides assistance for remote patient health monitoring | (i) Event severity level checking is missing |
| (ii) Requirement of real time alert generation | ||
| Fog-Smart Office [ | Severity Index calculation which reflects the impact of various activities in smart office environment | (i) Transmission of varied types of events in a common and adaptable format |
| (ii) Lesser network load efficiency | ||
| Fog-CPE [ | Minimization of time delay | Bi-directional coordination is missing |
| Tri-Fog [ | (i) Elimination of faulty data | (i) Proposed system does not work on specific set of diseases |
| (ii) Removal of redundant data | ||
| (iii) Data processing using various attributes |
Figure 2Overview of the proposed system.
Layer-wise functionalities and techniques.
| Layer | Functionalities | Techniques/Resources |
|---|---|---|
| IoT layer | (i) Data collection | (i)Biomedical sensors |
| (ii) Data Preprocessing | (ii) Noise removal and data cleaning | |
| (iii) Dimensionality reduction | (iii) Principal component analysis | |
| Fog layer | (i) Task classification | (i) Support vector machines |
| (ii) Workload optimization | (ii) Genetic algorithm | |
| Cloud layer | (i) Analysis of critical tasks | (i) VMs, PMs |
Software and hardware description.
| Software/Hardware | Description |
|---|---|
| Simulation tool | iFogSim |
| Simulator Version | 3.0.3 |
| Operating system | Windows 10 |
| Programming Language | Java |
| JDK version | Java SE 12 |
| IDE | Eclipse IDE 2021-03 |
| Database | MySQL 8.0.24 |
Experimental settings.
| Parameter | Sub-parameter | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Number of users | 100 | |
| Count of biomedical sensors | 10 | |
| Count of fog nodes | 10 | |
| Fog node configuration | Storage | 2 GB |
| Bandwidth | 1500 KBs | |
| Resource cost | 3.0-2.5 | |
| Memory cost | 0.5-0.4 |
Figure 3iFogSim simulation snapshot.
Figure 4Latency comparison.
Figure 5Comparison of execution time.
Figure 6Overall system accuracy.
Figure 7Comparison of system stability.
Results summary.
| Parameter | Fog-BBN | Fog-CPE | Fog-Smart Office | Tri-Fog Health | Proposed Work |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency (ms) | 7.8 | 9.98 | 11.2 | 3.44 | 2.5 |
| Execution Time (ms) | 7.8 | 9.98 | 11.2 | 2.52 | 1.94 |
| System Accuracy (%) | 72.4 | 68.8 | 64.6 | 95.44 | 97.9 |
| System Stability (%) | 78.8 | 76 | 67 | 97 | 98.5 |