Data Exchange Interoperability in IoT Ecosystem for Smart Parking and EV Charging
2. System and Data Exchange Interoperability
- “The ability of a set of communicating entities to (i) exchange specified state data and (ii) operate on that state data according to specified, agreed-upon, operational semantics” .
- “The ability of systems, units, or forces to provide services to and accept services from other systems, units, or forces, and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together” .
2.1. Communication Level Interoperability
2.1.1. Technology Level Interoperability
2.1.2. Interface Level Interoperability
2.2. Data Level Interoperability
2.2.1. Syntactic Level Interoperability
2.2.2. Semantic Level Interoperability
3. Overview of bIoTope System
3.1. bIoTope Project and Ecosystem
3.2. O-MI: Open API
3.3. O-DF: Data Model for Things in IoT
3.4. bIoTope Marketplace: IoTBnB
4. Proof-Of-Concept: Smart EV Charging
4.1. EV Charging Service: Scenario and Requirements
4.2. From EV Chargers to Their Discovery through IoTBnB
4.3. UI for EV Charging Service
4.4. Data Model for EV Charging Service
- node1 was easily able to manage the load when 1 user/s was created (i.e., a throughput equal to 0.013 Mb/s); as each user generated only one request, the server needed to handle only one frame per user at a time (i.e., a traffic load—request + response—equal to 1924 bytes). When the number of users was increased to 10 and 25 users/s, the measured throughput was approximately 0.03 Mb/s, that is, less than the theoretical throughput (around 0.15 Mb/s). In addition, the error rate was significant with 10 users/s, and 100% with 25 users/s. In those specific cases, the server was not able to manage the load. This could be explained by the fact that (i) the server could not manage the backlog (this especially might have been the case, since the server needed to send another HTTP request to the OpenDataSoft platform), (ii) the service could have been unavailable at that time, or even (iii) the university infrastructure could have limited the authorized bandwidth. Overall, node1 was able to manage a maximum throughput of around 0.013 Mb/s. Note that the version of the node itself is an old version, which is not even available on Github (version 0.9.2).
- node2 was able to manage the load with a user creation rate of 1 and 10 users/s (i.e., a throughput equal to 0.13 and 1.3 Mb/s). Beyond that (i.e., with 25, 50 and 100 users/s), the measured throughput was stagnant at the same value. This means that the maximum throughput this O-MI node can handle is around 1.3 Mb/s. Let us note that in these specific cases, (i) the error rate was very low (less than 1% at 25 users/s, and less than 7% beyond), and (ii) the total traffic load was 15966 bytes (more than 13,000 bytes to retrieve and to send back in the response), i.e., 8 times higher than in node1.
Conflicts of Interest
- Treese, W. The Open Market Internet Index for 11 November 1995. Available online: http://treese.org (accessed on 2 September 2017).
- Huvio, E.; Grönvall, J.; Främling, K. Tracking and tracing parcels using a distributed computing approach. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference for Nordic Researchers in Logistics (NOFOMA’ 2002), Trondheim, Norway, 12–14 June 2002; pp. 29–43. [Google Scholar]
- Bellavista, P.; Cardone, G.; Corradi, A.; Foscini, L. Convergence of MANET and WSN in IoT urban scenarios. IEEE Sens. J. 2013, 13, 3558–3567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaffers, H.; Komninos, N.; Pallot, M.; Trousse, B.; Nilsson, M.; Oliveira, A. Smart cities and the future internet: Towards cooperation frameworks for open innovation. In The Future Internet; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 431–446. [Google Scholar]
- Giffinger, R.; Fertner, C.; Kramar, H.; Kalasek, R.; Pichler-Milanović, N.; Meijers, E. Smart Cities: Ranking of Europe and Medium-Sized Cities. Available online: http://www.smart-cities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf (accessed on 26 November 2018).
- Ahlgren, B.; Hidell, M.; Ngai, E.C. Internet of Things for Smart Cities: Interoperability and Open Data. IEEE Int. Comput. 2016, 20, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuff, D.; Hansen, M.; Kang, J. Urban sensing: Out of the woods. Commun. ACM 2008, 51, 24–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pike Research. On Smart Cities. 2017. Available online: http://smartcitiescouncil.com/tags/pike-research (accessed on 2 September 2017).
- Hertzke, P.; Müller, N.; Schenk, S.; Wu, T. The Global Electric-Vehicle Market Is Amped up and on the Rise. May 2018. Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/the-global-electric-vehicle-market-is-amped-up-and-on-the-rise (accessed on 25 November 2018).
- Perujo, A.; Thiel, C.; Nemry, F. Electric Vehicles in an Urban Context: Environmental Benefits and Techno-Economic Barriers. In Electric Vehicles: The Benefits and Barriers; Soylu, S., Ed.; Intech: London, UK, 2011; Available online: https://www.intechopen.com/books/electric-vehicles-the-benefits-and-barriers/electric-vehicles-in-an-urban-context-environmental-benefits-and-techno-economic-barriers (accessed on 26 November 2018).[Green Version]
- Pieltain, L.; Gómez, T.; Cossent, R.; Mateo, C.; Frías, P. Assessment of the impact of plug-in electric vehicles on distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2011, 26, 206–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lam, A.Y.; Leung, Y.W.; Chu, X. Electric vehicle charging station placement: Formulation, complexity, and solutions. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2014, 5, 2846–2856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mal, S.; Chattopadhyay, A.; Yang, A.; Gadh, R. Electric vehicle smart charging and vehicle-to-grid operation. Int. J. Parallel Emerg. Distrib. Syst. 2013, 27, 249–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosseinpour, S.; Chen, R.; Tang, H. Barriers to the wide adoption of electric vehicles: A literature review-based discussion. In Proceedings of the 2015 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Portland, OR, USA, 2–6 August 2015; pp. 2329–2336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- She, Z.Y.; Sun, Q.; Ma, J.J.; Xie, B.C. What are the barriers to widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles? A survey of public perception in Tianjin, China. Transp. Policy 2017, 56, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkins, A.J. Electric Cars Still Face a Big Hurdle: The Charging System. 3 October 2018. Available online: https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/3/17933134/ev-charging-station-network-infrastrcuture-tesla (accessed on 25 November 2018).
- Hernandez-Munoz, J.; Vercher, J.; Munoz, L.; Galache, J. Smart Cities at the forefront of the future Internet. In The Future Internet; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 447–462. [Google Scholar]
- Mulligan, C.E.; Olsson, M. Architectural implications of smart city business models: An evolutionary perspective. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2013, 51, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zorzi, M.; Gluhak, A.; Lange, S.; Bassi, A. From today’s intranet of things to a future internet of things: A wireless and mobility-related view. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2010, 17, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubler, S.; Yoo, M.J.; Cassagnes, C.; Främling, K.; Kiritsis, D.; Skilton, M. Opportunity to leverage information-as-an-asset in the IoT—The road ahead. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud, Rome, Italy, 24–26 August 2015; pp. 64–71. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, S.; Yu, L.; Cheng, B. An event-driven service provisioning mechanism for IoT (Internet of Things) system interaction. IEEE Access 2016, 4, 5038–5051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karpenko, A.; Kinnunen, T.; Främling, K.; Dave, B. Open IoT Ecosystem for Smart EV Charging. In Proceedings of the 2018 Global Internet of Things Summit (GIoTS), Bilbao, Spain, 4–7 June 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berre, A.-J.; Elvesæter, B.; Figay, N.; Guglielmina, C.; Johnsen, S.G.; Karlsen, D.; Knothe, T.; Lippe, S. The athena interoperability framework. In Enterprise Interoperability II; Springer: London, UK, 2007; pp. 569–580. [Google Scholar]
- Geraci, A.; Katki, F.; McMonegal, L.; Meyer, B.; Lane, J.; Wilson, P.; Radatz, J.; Yee, M.; Porteous, H.; Springsteel, F. IEEE Standard Computer Dictionary: Compilation of IEEE Standard Computer Glossaries; IEEE Press: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Morris, E.; Levine, L.; Meyers, C.; Place, P.; Plakosh, D. System of Systems Interoperability (SOSI); Technical Report; Carnegie-Mellon Univ Pittsburgh PA Software Engineering INST: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Staff, J.C.O. Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms; Military Bookshop: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Perumal, T.; Ramli, A.R.; Leong, C.Y.; Mansor, S.; Samsudin, K. Interoperability among heterogeneous systems in smart home environment. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Signal Image Technology and Internet Based Systems, Bali, Indonesia, 30 November–3 December 2008; pp. 177–186. [Google Scholar]
- Järvinen, H. Web Technology Based Smart Home Interoperability; Aalto University: Espoo, Finland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Kubicek, H.; Cimander, R.; Scholl, H.J. Layers of interoperability. In Organizational Interoperability in E-Government; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 85–96. [Google Scholar]
- Kubler, S.; Madhikermi, M.; Buda, A.; Främling, K. QLM messaging standards: Introduction & comparison with existing messaging protocols. In Service Orientation in Holonic and Multi-Agent Manufacturing and Robotics; Borangiu, T., Trentesaux, D., Thomas, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; Volume 544. [Google Scholar]
- Kubler, S.; Robert, J.; Hefnawy, A.; Främling, K.; Cherifi, A.; Bouras, C. Open IoT Ecosystem for Sporting Event Management. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 7064–7079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Främling, K.; Kubler, S.; Buda, A. Universal messaging standards for the IoT from a lifecycle management perspective. IEEE Int. Things J. 2014, 1, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubler, S.; Främling, K.; Buda, A. A standardized approach to deal with firewall and mobility policies in the IoT. Pervas. Mob. Comput. 2015, 20, 100–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubler, S.; Främling, K.; Derigent, W. P2P data synchronization for product lifecycle management. Comput. Ind. 2015, 66, 82–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Open Group. Open Data Format (O-DF), an Open Group Internet of Things (IoT) Standard, 2014. Available online: http://www.opengroup.org/iot/odf/ (accessed on 10 December 2017).
- BIoTope Documentation. D2.4 Biotope SOS Reference Platform Specification v.1.0; BIoTope Documentation: Espoo, Finland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Kolbe, N.; Robert, J.; Kubler, S.; Traon, Y.L. Proficient: Productivity Tool for Semantic Interoperability in an Open IoT Ecosystem. In Proceedings of the 14th EAI International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems: Computing, Networking and Services, Melbourne, Australia, 7–10 November 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|Total Users||Node 1||Node 2|
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Karpenko, A.; Kinnunen, T.; Madhikermi, M.; Robert, J.; Främling, K.; Dave, B.; Nurminen, A. Data Exchange Interoperability in IoT Ecosystem for Smart Parking and EV Charging. Sensors 2018, 18, 4404. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18124404
Karpenko A, Kinnunen T, Madhikermi M, Robert J, Främling K, Dave B, Nurminen A. Data Exchange Interoperability in IoT Ecosystem for Smart Parking and EV Charging. Sensors. 2018; 18(12):4404. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18124404Chicago/Turabian Style
Karpenko, Anastasiia, Tuomas Kinnunen, Manik Madhikermi, Jeremy Robert, Kary Främling, Bhargav Dave, and Antti Nurminen. 2018. "Data Exchange Interoperability in IoT Ecosystem for Smart Parking and EV Charging" Sensors 18, no. 12: 4404. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18124404