Next Article in Journal
Double Image Encryption System Using a Nonlinear Joint Transform Correlator in the Fourier Domain
Previous Article in Journal
Editorial for the Special Issue on Electronics for Sensors II
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

At the Confluence of Artificial Intelligence and Edge Computing in IoT-Based Applications: A Review and New Perspectives

1
LabSTIC Laboratory, Department of Computer Science, 8 Mai 1945 University. P.O. Box 401, Guelma 24000, Algeria
2
ICAR-CNR, Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking, National Research Council of Italy, Via P. Bucci 8/9C, 87036 Rende, CS, Italy
3
DIMES, University of Calabria, Via P. Bucci 41C, 87036 Rende, CS, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2023, 23(3), 1639; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031639
Submission received: 30 December 2022 / Revised: 25 January 2023 / Accepted: 26 January 2023 / Published: 2 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Internet of Things)

Abstract

:
Given its advantages in low latency, fast response, context-aware services, mobility, and privacy preservation, edge computing has emerged as the key support for intelligent applications and 5G/6G Internet of things (IoT) networks. This technology extends the cloud by providing intermediate services at the edge of the network and improving the quality of service for latency-sensitive applications. Many AI-based solutions with machine learning, deep learning, and swarm intelligence have exhibited the high potential to perform intelligent cognitive sensing, intelligent network management, big data analytics, and security enhancement for edge-based smart applications. Despite its many benefits, there are still concerns about the required capabilities of intelligent edge computing to deal with the computational complexity of machine learning techniques for big IoT data analytics. Resource constraints of edge computing, distributed computing, efficient orchestration, and synchronization of resources are all factors that require attention for quality of service improvement and cost-effective development of edge-based smart applications. In this context, this paper aims to explore the confluence of AI and edge in many application domains in order to leverage the potential of the existing research around these factors and identify new perspectives. The confluence of edge computing and AI improves the quality of user experience in emergency situations, such as in the Internet of vehicles, where critical inaccuracies or delays can lead to damage and accidents. These are the same factors that most studies have used to evaluate the success of an edge-based application. In this review, we first provide an in-depth analysis of the state of the art of AI in edge-based applications with a focus on eight application areas: smart agriculture, smart environment, smart grid, smart healthcare, smart industry, smart education, smart transportation, and security and privacy. Then, we present a qualitative comparison that emphasizes the main objective of the confluence, the roles and the use of artificial intelligence at the network edge, and the key enabling technologies for edge analytics. Then, open challenges, future research directions, and perspectives are identified and discussed. Finally, some conclusions are drawn.

1. Introduction

The adoption of new emerging technologies such as the Internet of things (IoT), wireless sensor networks (WSNs), cloud/edge computing, and 5G/6G communication networks in various fields (such as healthcare, agriculture, education, transportation, etc.), can bring many opportunities in improving people’s quality of life, thereby building intelligent systems that deliver high-quality, innovative services to the consumers. In the IoT environment, a large number of interconnected devices, such as sensors, mobiles, etc., lead to voluminous, heterogeneous, highly noisy, spatiotemporal-correlated and real-time data streams that need intelligent learning for efficient data analysis and meaningful insight extraction [1]. The success of any intelligent application can be attributed to the quality of the data collected, the effectiveness of data processing, storage, retrieval process, and the degree of accuracy and robustness of the data analysis results.
In conventional IoT solutions, the large amount of IoT data generated by the IoT devices is uploaded to the cloud via a wide area network (WAN) for further analysis to provide end-user feedback [2]. As the number of devices increases immensely, the communication costs, bandwidth, and latency become more expensive, which makes it unsuitable for real-time and time-sensitive applications. Furthermore, IoT has structured and unstructured, heterogeneous data that require advanced tools for its management. Fortunately, AI provides powerful tools for extracting valuable information to make accurate decisions in real-time [3]. Bringing AI closer to the edge offers a promising solution for achieving high system performance and improving quality of service (QoS) and quality of experience (QoE) for delay-sensitive applications.
Many AI-based solutions integrating machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and swarm intelligence (SI) have revealed a strong beneficial power to IoT applications in intelligent sensing [4], network management [5], resource management [6], big data analysis [7], and security system improvement [8]. New opportunities have emerged by adapting AI technologies to address the diverse characteristics of big IoT data features including volume, variety, velocity, veracity, and variability. DL models generate high-level abstraction and actionable insights that provide feedback through IoT systems to enhance their services [7]. The limitations of big data processing in the cloud and IoT systems, such as poor scalability, security issues, task allocation, fault tolerance, and low performance in conventional computing frameworks, can be resolved in a promising way by bioinspired computing [9].
Cloud-based infrastructures are considered the best suited to provide the needs of services and resources. Nevertheless, sending the massive data generated to the cloud poses some challenges, such as high latency, network congestion, and privacy issues. Fortunately, edge computing has emerged as a promising paradigm that enables computation at a location closer to the data source, which decreases the workload to the cloud, reduces latency, and improves privacy and the quality of service of smart applications and the user experience.
Edge computing is a distributed computing paradigm that extends cloud services to the edge of the network by deploying computational capabilities and storage between the terminal and the cloud devices. It addresses the limitations of cloud-based architecture by reducing bandwidth consumption, improving response time, and providing mobility and context-aware services. Fog computing, mist, cloudlet, and mobile edge computing (MEC), are all solutions belonging to the wider concept of edge computing [10].
The integration of edge computing along with artificial intelligence has the potential to gather, store, and process large amounts of IoT data, maximize the potential for rapid, real-time data analysis and decision-making, and deliver a variety of decentralized, low-latency, reliable, intelligent, and time-sensitive application services. Given the feature of resource-constrained and dynamic changes in edge computing, AI-based ML is considered the most suitable solution to maximize resource utilization, offload, and schedule computational tasks adaptively, dynamically, in real-time, and on-demand at the edge nodes, and meet application requirements in terms of time sensitivity and energy efficiency during computational task-sharing [11,12].
Several review papers have investigated the integration of AI in edge-based applications. In [13], Haddaji et al. present a comprehensive survey of AI techniques for security challenges in the Internet of vehicles (IoV). In this work, the authors evaluate the impact of AI on security in IoV. However, authors did not consider the enabling technologies and big data analytics. In [14], Laroui et al. cover the various use cases of IoT with edge and fog computing, job scheduling in edge computing, merging software-defined networking (SDN) and network function virtualization (NFV) with edge computing, security and privacy effort, and blockchain in edge computing. However, the authors did not consider the application of AI with the enabling technologies in smart applications. In addition, Chang et al. explore in [3] the combination of IoT and AI by using edge computing and the cloud. The authors focus on seven representative IoT application scenarios and specifically examine the techniques that enable the effective and efficient deployment of AI models. However, the authors did not consider the use of techniques of AI and the purpose and opportunities of applying AI in edge-based applications scenarios. On the other hand, Deng et al. concentrate in [15] on developing inference and training frameworks, by adapting models and hardware acceleration to support AI. Unfortunately, the authors did not consider the confluence of AI and edge computing in the different application domains of IoT. In [16], Xu et al. investigate the concept of edge intelligence from four axes: edge caching, edge training, edge inference, and edge offloading. In this review, the authors did not cover the confluence of AI and edge computing in the different application domains of IoT. In [17], the authors review ML techniques that are associated with three aspects of fog computing: management of resources, accuracy, and security. However, the authors did not consider the key enabling technologies for the deployment of AI models. In [18], the authors analyze the role of AI algorithms and the challenges of the application of these algorithms for resource management. However, the authors did not consider the key enabling technologies for the deployment of AI models. The authors in [19] provide a systematic review of nature-inspired approaches for resource management (task allocation, task scheduling, offloading) in cloud and edge computing. However, they do not address big data analytics.
In contrast to these reviews, our work investigates the confluence of AI and edge in many application domains by using different characteristics: AI, big data analytics, resource management, smart application, and enabling technologies. Table 1 shows a comparison of the existing surveys with our work. This table summarizes whether the corresponding surveys considered or not the characteristics used for the comparison.
Edge computing has become a promising solution for time-sensitive applications. However, the distributed, heterogeneous, and resource-constrained characteristics of edge computing pose many challenges and limitations in the design of on-device, distributed, and parallel computing in the edge infrastructure. This motivates us to write this review with a focus on exploring the proposed AI-based algorithms and their applicability in edge-based applications, investigating how AI can be used in edge-based IoT applications and how the confluence of edge and AI can improve QoS/QoE for many application domains, and highlighting the latest research and new technologies around this confluence.
In this paper we considered several points, which can be summarized as follows.
  • We reviewed 114 related papers that have been published from 2019 to present.
  • To help readers understand the value and potential of implementing edge-based IoT infrastructure and to address cloud-based applications issues, we present an in-depth analysis of the state of the art of edge-based applications focusing on eight application areas: smart agriculture, smart environment, smart grid, smart healthcare, smart industry, smart education, smart transportation, and security and privacy.
  • We present a qualitative comparison of related works in the eight aforementioned application areas. In this comparison we used eight characteristics: use case (the scope of application of AI for each application area), AI role (the potential of AI use), AI technique (AI-related algorithms), the used dataset, AI placement (on edge, cloud, or edge/cloud), employed technologies (technologies for running AI at the edge), the platform used for the implementation, and performance metrics. Three other columns are used to illustrate: the main contributions, benefits of edge-AI, and drawbacks of the reviewed works.
  • We present a critical analysis of the presented state of the art by (1) exploring the current difficulties and limitations associated with the development and implementation of AI models and (2) investigating how AI can be used to overcome the difficulties presented by massive data in IoT systems and to improve the effectiveness of services on decentralized edge platforms.
  • Based on the synthetic results, we suggest future trends for addressing the challenges of edge-based application deployment regarding big data analytics, scalability, resource management, security and privacy, and ultralow latency requirement.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we review and qualitatively compare intelligent edge-based related works in eight application areas (i.e., smart agriculture, smart environment, smart grid, smart healthcare, smart industry, smart education, smart transportation, and security and privacy). Then, in Section 3, we present a discussion of the related works presented in Section 2. After that, we present in Section 4 current issues and future trends. We conclude the paper in Section 5. Figure 1 illustrates a schematic overview of the paper’s organization structure.

2. Artificial Intelligence in Edge-Based IoT Applications: Literature Review

Artificial intelligence techniques such as DL, ML, and bioinspired algorithms in IoT-based applications are necessary to manage the amount of data generated by various IoT devices, to process and analyze these data and, hence, to transform them into insights and be able to retrieve the knowledge required to make predictions, monitor, and make decisions.
In this section, we review the recent works on intelligent edge-based IoT applications. Furthermore, we present a qualitative comparison of the existing works in eight different application areas: smart agriculture, smart environment, smart grid, smart healthcare, smart industry, smart education, smart transportation, and security and privacy. The qualitative comparison is structured in tables by using several important characteristics: use case, main contributions, AI role, AI algorithm, dataset, AI placement, employed technologies, platforms and tools, performance metrics, benefits of the AI-Edge, and drawbacks. Table 2 shows the categorization of the reviewed works according to their application domain.

2.1. Smart Environment

Intelligent environmental monitoring aims to establish a full system that incorporates several types of sensors and IoT devices designed to measure various indications of the environment, such as temperature, humidity, and the concentration of pollutants in the air or the water. The integration of artificial intelligence and edge computing is essential to meet the requirements related to the complexity and the huge amount of environmental data that can be collected in this context. In the following, we first review and classify related works into four categories: air-quality monitoring (Section 2.1.1), water-quality monitoring (Section 2.1.2), smart water management (Section 2.1.3), and underwater monitoring (Section 2.1.4); then, we qualitatively compare these related works according to the aforementioned characteristics (see Table 3).

2.1.1. Air Quality Monitoring (AQM)

For the optimal utilization of cloud resources and the improvement of computational power, a distributed fog computing framework for air-quality monitoring was developed in [23] by applying data preprocessing and clustering techniques to identify outliers on the fog layer by using the K-means algorithm and feeding only the relevant information to the cloud for the classification phase. This approach achieves 95% accuracy with SVM compared to a multilayer perceptron (MLP), decision tree (DT), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), and naive Bayes (NB), and reduces the amount of data sent to the cloud still improving the response time.
In order to improve the computational efficiency and model performance of the environmental monitoring system considering regional characteristics when distributing various site monitoring models, the authors in [22] proposed a new framework called federated region-learning based on edge computing for PM2:5 air-quality monitoring. The authors first applied a regionalization algorithm that divides the monitoring locations into a set of subregions, each designed by microclouds in which the regional model is selected by the model that has the highest accuracy and, subsequently, the global model is aggregated by using two types of aggregation strategies to target the different bandwidth requirements better. The evaluation of the platform has been tried by using recurrent neural networks (RNNs) and convolutional neural networks (CNNs). It has been proven that the FRL approach improves the computational efficiency compared to the centralized training mode and normal federated learning (FL) [2].
In [24], Wardana et al. designed a distributed short-term air-quality prediction system for hourly PM2.5 concentrations based on a hybrid deep learning model composed of 1D CNN and long short-term memory networks (CNN-LSTM). They conceived an efficient posttraining quantization method to optimize the LSTM model and make it usable by resource-constrained edge devices wherein a one-dimensional CNN is used as a feature extractor. Through the results, the authors claim that the model has proven its performance in reducing execution time and latency.
In order to ensure privacy and reduce network traffic, the authors in [20] designed an efficient collaborative edge/cloud framework to predict the future concentration of fine particles in an individual space by selecting the best predictive model for the local edge based on its characteristics. The edge selects from the cloud the model with the highest correlation for a specific factor instead of choosing the model with the best performance. The performance of the system is validated with the LSTM algorithm for indoor PM10 and PM2.5 status prediction.
For efficient data generation and data privacy preservation for PM2.5 predictions, Putra et al. in [21] proposed a federated compressed learning based on an edge computing framework for massive-scale WSNs. This approach used compressed sensing techniques at the sensor level to reduce network data traffic. Then, at the fog layer, the data is trained distributively. After that, the global model is constituted by aggregating the local training models at the cloud layer. The evaluation is performed by using LSTM for PM2.5 concentration prediction and shows the efficiency of the compression sensing in reducing the data at the computation efficiency of the proposed model.

2.1.2. Water Quality Monitoring (WQM)

In order to continuously monitor water quality in a distributed manner by using low-cost, cost-effective sensors, the authors of [25] developed an on-board sensor classifier for the detection of water pollutants. First, they used principal component analysis (PCA) algorithm to simplify and transform the original sensed data into a 3D space. Then, an adaptive classification scheme is employed on the transformed space to distinguish the contaminants by using a simple geometric model, the paramaters of which are learned by using a generational evolutionary algorithm (EA).
Authors in [26] developed a soft sensor model for real-time water-quality monitoring through intelligence at the edge to estimate the value of the biological oxygen demand. An edge/cloud platform is designed wherein the instance-based learning (IBK) algorithm is selected after a comparative study between different ML algorithms.
In [27], the authors proposed an online water-quality monitoring and early warning model based on edge computing. The authors proposed an improved backpropagation neural network (BPNN) by using a hybrid optimization method based on the Nelder–Mead simplex method and cuckoo search algorithm to optimize the weight and deviation of the BPNN.

2.1.3. Smart Water Management (SWM)

In [28], the authors designed an efficient framework for water conservation based on blockchain technologies, soft computing, and machine learning. At the edge nodes (house nodes) a feed-forward neural network (FFNN) trained by symbiotic organism search is used to forecast the water consumption of each house. Then, the forecast value is compared to the historical value obtained by using a randomized probability distribution model for neural networks called the mixture density network (MDN). Based on these two calculated values, an incentive system is prepared in the blockchain to assign a good incentive to houses using less water than the historical value and applies a penalty to houses using more water than expected. Several factors were used such as (i) the number of people, (ii) the average income of the family, (iii) the profession of the members, and (iv) previous water demands. Results show the effectiveness of the approach for optimal water management.

2.1.4. Underwater Monitoring (UWM)

Regarding marine environment monitoring, Yang et al. designed in [29] a fog/cloud-based framework for the effective management of ocean data and real-time monitoring of the marine environment. They introduced a fog layer to support data processing by using a numerical gradient-based method for data cleaning and an improved algorithm based on the evidence theory. This latter is used for multisensory information fusion with the aim of reducing the data volume and improving the data quality. In the cloud layer, a predictive model with BPNN is implemented. Authors argue that the framework can improve the efficiency of data use, improve the processing speed of ocean data and reduce the time delay. In [30], Lu et al. introduced a cognitive ocean network called motor anomaly detection system and detection of marine organisms. The proposed system consists of two methods: the first is deployed in the edge layer by using deep reinforcement learning and Raspberry Pi to prevent the default of underwater vehicles, and the second is deployed in the fog layer to detect marine organisms by using YOLO-based underwater method. Kwon et al. proposed in [32] a distributed DL approach based on federated learning with underwater IoT devices in the ocean environment. They used a multiagent deep deterministic policy gradient based on reinforcement learning (RL) to solve the problem of joint cell association and resource allocation in a way that improves the DL throughput of underwater IoT devices in underwater FL.
Regarding seawater quality prediction, Sun et al. developed in [31] a multivariate prediction model supported by edge computing for seawater quality assessment based on the combination of a PCA and relevance vector machine (RVM). Results show that the proposed model has higher prediction ability and less time consumption than other approaches.

2.2. Smart Grid

The integration of new technologies, such as IoT and artificial intelligence, into the power grid system allows (1) the design of a smart decision system support by developing an electricity distribution network. This offers the possibility of remotely measuring the state of the energy usage status online and thus enables the control of energy consumption and its further adjustment to the consumers’ energy needs. It also allows (2) the identification of abnormal behaviors in the consumption or production of electrical energy, and (3) the prediction of future electricity demand and energy consumption in an intelligent way based on the data acquired by the smart meters.
In this section, we present the recent works that use AI in edge-based smart grids and classify them into three categories: load/demand forecasting (Section 2.2.1), demand-side management (Section 2.2.2), and load-anomaly detection (Section 2.2.3). Moreover, we qualitatively compare the presented related works in Table 4.

2.2.1. Load/Demand Forecasting (LDF)

Taïk and Cherkaoui proposed in [33] an edge-based, short-term individual load-forecasting framework. They used a distributed computation that uses an FL approach with the aim of addressing the challenges presented by the stochastic nature of consumption profiles and privacy in the smart grid. The realized simulations show that the approach outperforms the centralized model in terms of reducing the network load while preserving the privacy of the consumption data. This work does not solve the problem of detecting anomalies in the power consumption profile, which affects the accuracy of the model.
The authors in [34] proposed an edge-based short-term load-forecasting framework that uses an FL approach to enhance the prediction performance and reduce prediction errors. They proposed to group energy customers into similar users based on socioeconomic aspects or consumption similarities by using clustering techniques. This grouping of users is efficient, more effective than other trivial privacy-preserving schemes, and more adaptable to rapidly changing consumption patterns. In comparison with the centralized system, the proposed approach is more efficient in terms of model learning time, scalability, and inherently privacy-friendly alternatives. Furthermore, the communication overhead is reduced when energy-consumption measurements are recorded at a fine granularity.
Li et al. proposed in [35] a fog computing-based incremental learning for real-time day-ahead prediction of building energy demands. In order to choose the most suitable incremental machine learning model to address the high-speed real-time requirements of fog computing and generate good and fast edge intelligence, the authors compared two incremental learning algorithms, namely the swarm decision table (SDT) and the classical decision Hoeffding tree. Both combined with swarm feature selection to deal with the complexity of aggregated IoT and select only the significant features for efficient incremental machine learning. Results show the effectiveness of the proposed model.
Li et al. also proposed in [36] a fog computing-based platform for real-time prediction of electricity demand. First, a clustering algorithm is used to categorize users based on their total electricity consumption. Then, according to the characteristic of users’ historical electricity consumption, a predictive model using XGBoost or ARMA was selected. The accuracy of the proposed approach is 20% higher in comparison to classical models.
In [37], Rabie et al. proposed a fog-based framework for accurate and fast electrical load forecasting in smart grids. First, a data summarization is performed on the collected data by applying several rules enabling the fog to send only the relevant data to the cloud by using fuzzy rank combined with a wrapper feature selection method and outlier detection. Then, an NB classifier is used to train the model and evaluate feature selection-based data processing techniques. Results show the effectiveness of the fog-based framework for accurate and fast load forecasting.
Table 4. Qualitative comparison of smart grid related works.
Table 4. Qualitative comparison of smart grid related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart gridLDF[33]Short-term energy consumption forecastingPredictionLSTMPecan Street Inc’s Dataport siteEdge, cloudFederated learningPython, TensorFlow Federated 0.4.0 Tensorflow 1.13.1 backendRMSE, MAPEHigh accuracyHeterogeneous data unsolved
[34]Short-term energy consumption forecastingPrediction, classificationLSTM, K-meansEnergy company UK Power NetworksEdge device, cloudFederated learningPython, TensorFlowRMSE, training timeHigh accuracy, heterogeneous data solvedPrivacy still low
[35]Day-ahead prediction of building energy demandsPrediction, Feature selectionAnt-bee, cuckoo, elephant, flower, genetic harmony, PSO, rhino, wolf, DT, HTOrnl-research-house-3Edge server (Raspberry Pi)Low-cost modelKeras, PythonAccuracy, time, speed, MAEHigh accuracy, low training timeLow interpretability
[36]Short-term electricity demandPrediction, classificationXGBoost, K-meansTianchi under licenseEdge server (PC)Low-cost modelNot mentionedTraining time, accuracy, cross-entropy lossHigh accuracyData distribution unsolved
[37]Short-term electricity demandOutlier detection, Feature selection, predictionNB, wrapper FS, Filter FSEUNITE datasetFog nodes MatlabAccuracy, error, precision, sensitivity/recallHigh accuracy, reliability, resilience, stabilityHigh complexity of model
[38]Online short-term energy predictiondata preprocessing, predictionDNNReal-world datasetEdge server, edge devices, cloudCollaborative learningNot mentionedFlexibility, accuracyFlexibility, high accuracy, dynamic data, IoT addressed, real-time predictionLess scalability
[39]Load forecasting for optimal energy managementPredictionCNNIHEPC datasetEdge devices/TensorFlow, KerasMAPE, RMSELow complexityHeterogeneous data, uncertainties, privacy is not addressed
[40]Online short-term residential load forecastingPredictionSTNOhta-AMPds datasetsEdge deviceLow-cost model-reservoir computingNot mentionedRMSE, MAELow complexity, high accuracyHeterogeneity not addressed
D.S.M[41]Demand-side managementResource managementRLReal-world datasetEdge server (Raspberry Pi)Real implementationNot mentioned/Less scalability
[42]Demand-side managementClassificationLDAREFIT projectEdge serverLow-cost modelNot mentionedMAPE, RMSE
[43]Managing prosumers over wireless networksData preprocessing, predictionLSTMPecan Street Inc.’s Dataport siteEdge serverFederated learningTensorFlowRMSE, data transmittedHeterogeneous data addressed, high accuracy low-communication costSingle-point failure not addressed
LAD[44]Detection of anomalous power consumption at householdpredictionGBR, RFR, LR, SVRIHEPC datasetEdge server, fog/Not mentionedMAPE, RMSELoad reductionCommunication cost still high
[45]Anomaly detection in smart-meter dataresource allocation, classificationSDA, GA, kNNIHEPC datasetEdge server/Not mentionedAccuracy, execution time, energy consumption
[46]Electric energy fraud detectionDimensionality reduction, predictionDTR, LRD1C databaseEdge server Raspberry Pi modelNot mentionedMAPE
[47]Anomaly detection consumption smart gridClassificationDNN, HDBSC K-means, KNNMidwest regionEdge server, Raspberry Pi/Not mentionedTesting time, frequency, model sizeLow complexity, high accuracy
[48]Energy theft detectionFeature-extraction classificationVAE-GAN, K-meansGEF Com 2012 public datasetEdge server/Not mentionedROC curve, running efficiencyAdaptive model, high accuracy-
[49] Energy theft detection Classification (SGCC) dataset Edge devices Federated learning Flower RMSE, log loss accuracy, precision F-measure Privacy Low accuracy compared with the centralized model
Luo et al. proposed in [38] a short-term energy prediction-based edge computing platform. It consists of four stages: (1) data acquisition and fusion performed on edge nodes to support redundant multisource heterogeneous IoT by using a semantic information model, (2) event data generating stage performed in the routing nodes to deal with the weak semantics of IoT data, (3) local aggregation performed on edge nodes in order to aggregate data based on its spatiotemporal semantics, and (4) a prediction model built in the central server by using an online deep neural network model which updates the prediction model in real time over the stream of data instances to accommodate the changes in the IoT environment.
The uthors of [39] proposed a short-term energy consumption forecasting model named Energy-Net, optimized for the deployment on resources constrained devices. Energy-Net uses a deep learning approach that exploits the spatial and temporal learning capability for the prediction of energy consumption.
In [40], the authors proposed a framework based on edge computing for short-term residential electricity demand forecasting by using online learning and reservoir computing by state network architecture to avoid high computational costs considering the nonlinear and dynamic behavior of demand time series improve the accuracy of the prediction model by continuously tracking the dynamically changing demand characteristics.

2.2.2. Demand-Side Management (DSM)

Cicirelli et al. proposed in [41] an edge-based energy management system to reduce the energy cost of daily household appliances. They proposed a load appliance scheduling algorithm that exploits reinforcement learning. It takes into account time variable profiles regarding energy cost, production of energy, and energy consumption of the appliances. The approach is validated through the implementation of a real-world use case that shows convincing results.
Tom et al. used in [42] a fog-based IoT architecture to design a smart energy management system and build a solution for demand reduction of individual houses in a locality during peak hours. They used autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) to predict consumer utilization by studying consumers’ daily usage patterns and a discriminant analysis to find the appliances playing a significant role.
Taik et al. proposed in [43] a multilevel prodecision framework based on federated learning for intelligent decision-making in energy markets. It prioritizes individual prosumer decisions supported by the 5G wireless network for rapid coordination between community members. Each prosumer forecasts energy production and consumption to make proactive business decisions taking into account collective-level demands. The result achieves high accuracy for different energy resources with low communication costs.

2.2.3. Load Anomaly Detection (LAD)

For providing real-time anomaly detection for solving big data issues in the power consumption domain, Jaiswal et al. [44] proposed a hierarchically distributed fog computing architecture for smart meter data analysis in households by using an ensemble method consisting of four lightweight regression models: linear regression (LR), support vector regression (SVR), random forest regression (RFR), gradient boosting regression (GBR).
Liu et al. designed a distributed fog computing platform for detecting smart meter data anomalies [45]. They used a stacked denoising autoencoder and KNN classifier deployed on the fog nodes. At the same time, an adaptive elitist GA is used to optimize the required computational task for supporting the model in the fog nodes and minimizing the communication cost.
Olivares–Rojas et al. proposed a detection of electric energy fraud supported by edge computing [46]. First, a dimensionality reduction by the PCA algorithm is used. Then, prediction techniques based on previously established patterns of energy consumption/production by LR, DT, neural networks, and MLP are performed.
Utomo and Hsiung developed in [47] a multitiered solution for efficient and fast real-time anomaly detection. They use a clustering model based on the combination of the K-means and hierarchical density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise (HDBSCAN) for data reduction. Then, the oversampling mechanism SMOTE is used to cover the imbalanced dataset. The authors compare support vector regression (SVR), KNN, and DNN to choose the best detector anomalies classifier.
In [48], Zhang et al. proposed a framework supported by the edge for energy theft detection. The detection passes through three stages: (1) feature learning based on load profile for energy consumption analysis is implemented by using VAE-GAN, (2) k-means clustering is used to determine the representative features of normal load profiles, and (3) abnormality degree is calculated by using a threshold-based abnormality detector.
In [49], the authors proposed a federated voting classifier for energy theft detection. The authors used a majority voting for the three classifiers (i.e., RF, KNN, and bagging classifier (BG)). Results show the effectiveness of the model compared to the centralized cloud model in terms of privacy.

2.3. Smart Agriculture

The integration of IoT technologies and edge computing creates great opportunities for the agricultural field. It makes up a support system that is able to monitor, capture and analyze information about crops and livestock in real time. It may include early plant disease prevention, better soil monitoring and management, livestock management, and reduction of environmental impacts by climate change prediction. The use of artificial intelligence improves the production process, maintains the highest levels of crop quality, and reduces costs and waste.
In this Section, we review and classify related works into five categories: weather prediction (Section 2.3.1), livestock management (Section 2.3.2), smart irrigation (Section 2.3.3), crop monitoring and disease detection (Section 2.3.4), and monitoring the health status of agriculture machines (Section 2.3.5); then, we qualitatively compare them in Table 5 according to the aforementioned characteristics.

2.3.1. Weather Prediction (WP)

Guillén et al. consider in their work [50] the construction of an automated decision-making framework for precision agriculture. In such problems, constraints including low-bandwidth connectivity and energy consumption must be addressed. To this end, the authors proposed an edge-based platform for the early identification of frost on crops by estimating the low temperatures through an LSTM model on edge devices. This helps farmers to obtain a temperature prediction in real time. The proposed model is evaluated in terms of performance and power consumption of edge devices.
In [51], Kaur and Sood proposed a framework for drought forecasting. At the fog layer, a dimensionality reduction method based on PCA is used, although the classification of drought severity is performed on the cloud layer by using ANN with genetic algorithms (GA). After a fixed interval of time, the predicted values of drought severity are used by the ARIMA model for future drought forecasting.

2.3.2. Livestock Management (LM)

The authors of [52] suggested strategies for offloading computation from cloud to fog to assist the huge quantity of multimedia data from IoT devices in smart agriculture. They process more deep learning tasks at the fog layer by assigning the maximum number of layers on each fog node with the aim to (1) reduce the amount of data transferred to the cloud, (2) utilize resources efficiently, and (3) reduce network congestion. The authors show, through experiments, that the proposed strategies had satisfactory results in terms of bandwidth, number of deep learning tasks for each node, and the data volume transferred to the cloud compared with existing methods.
For accurate and early detection of lameness in smart dairy farming, Taneja et al. developed in [53] an application based on fog/cloud computing to collect activity data, monitor the cattle in real time, and identify lame cattle at an early stage. They employed a K-means algorithm at the fog layer for data processing, and classification was done on the cloud by using the KNN algorithm. Results show that the application can detect lameness three days before it can be visually captured by the farmer with high accuracy and minimal communication cost.

2.3.3. Smart Irrigation (SI)

To improve irrigation water, Cordeiro et al. have proposed in [54] a fog-based framework for soil moisture forecasting. First, a KNN data imputation is used for the missing values to increase data reliability. Subsequently, an LSTM is used for the prediction by employing a small single-board computer.
In [55], authors proposed a low-cost intelligent irrigation system based on edge computing to forecast environmental factors. They used an LSTM/gated recurrent units (GRU)-based model for a comparative analysis by using many frameworks. Results show the reliability of LSTM and GRU for the prediction of environmental factors.

2.3.4. Crop Monitoring and Disease Detection (CMDD)

Identifying crop diseases is one of the most difficult tasks in smart agriculture. We present below some recent and relevant related works.
A timely detection on crops to stop diseases from spreading was presented in [56]. The authors proposed a model named deep leaf, a coffee plant disease detector based on edge computing. It detects the main biotic stresses affecting crops. The proposed model uses a dynamic compression algorithm based on K-means for the reduction of a model footprint to reduce the complexity of the CNN model and run it on devices with limited hardware capabilities.
Likewise, the authors of [57] proposed an IoT monitoring framework for detecting tomato diseases. First, a pretraining model is constructed on the cloud by using VGG networks. Then, in order to fit the model on embedded mobile platforms, a depth-wise separable convolutional network is used to reduce the parameters of the model and calculation of model feature extractor. The experimental results show that the framework can accurately detect crop diseases in less time.
Zhang and Li proposed in [58] an adaptive sensing strategy for the crop life cycle based on edge computing. First, the growth stage of the crop is divided by the Gath–Geva fuzzy clustering for the sensing nodes. Then, data-driven algorithms are used in the edge server to extract and optimize the key parameters corresponding to the growth stage in order to increase the data values by reducing redundancy and improving the correlations between the sensing data. Finally, a neural network-based crop growth stage prediction model is performed.

2.3.5. Monitoring the Health Status of Agriculture Machines (MHSAM)

Gupta et al. proposed in [59] an edge-based framework for agriculture vehicle health monitoring by using ANN. To decrease the model’s complexity in terms of computing and develop a lightweight one that can be deployed on a smartphone, two levels of optimization using a genetic algorithm for ANN are conducted.
In [60], Rajakumar et al. proposed a framework to identify the health condition of the vehicles. They design a fault-detection algorithm by using a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) on smartphones. The authors used the Levy flight optimization algorithm (LFOA) to optimize the network structure of the DCNN, minimize the number of neurons in the DCNN hidden layer, minimize the number of input features from the audio recordings, and enhance the classification accuracy.

2.4. Smart Education

Smart education is defined as the integration of IoT devices with learning that can establish location information, motion sensing, and visual recognition tools. IoT devices in combination with other technologies such as artificial intelligence and cloud computing are used to evaluate educators’ engagement and skills and improve the teaching and learning expertise in the field. Using edge computing in smart education: (1) reduces the delay, (2) improves the level of service delivery for learners by protecting information transmitted, (3) and guarantees that every communication process is managed effectively [134]. In this section, we review and classify related works into two categories: student engagement monitoring (Section 2.4.1) and skill assessment ( Section 2.4.2); then, we present a qualitative comparison of related works in Table 6.

2.4.1. Student Engagement Monitoring (SEM)

Umarale et al. proposed in [61] an edge computing-based deep learning technique for detecting and identifying the attention level of learners within online learning sessions. They employed, on edge devices, a lightweight CNN model that uses facial image data to determine the attention level. The output is further processed on the cloud to derive an attention average of the participants. Then, the attention average is reported to the host, helping the teachers to obtain information about the students’ performances and further helping them identify the students who were inattentive during the session.
Li et al. designed in [63] a real-time intervention system for negative emotional contagion in the classroom based on edge computing infrastructure. The system integrates an emotional contagion model with a deep learning algorithm. To achieve multiperson emotional recognition, an embedded device is used to process images to recognize the emotions of all the students in the classroom and locate the source of the negative emotion to take real-time intervention actions through visual emotion identification.
In [64] Preuveneers et al. introduced a learning management system for engagement monitoring by using a collaborative edge-cloud framework. They combine FL with secure multiparty computation to process users’ behavior data to analyze student involvement and increase the online learning system to the next level.
In [62] to enhance students’ independence in resolving difficult engineering problems and boost their marketability, authors created an experimental open-source distance learning platform based on edge computing and artificial intelligence that is well-suited for distance learning.
The authors in [65] proposed a framework for monitoring student stress and generating real-time alerts to predict student stress. The authors used Visual Geometry Group (VGG16) for facial expression, bi-LSTM for speech texture analysis, and multinomial NB techniques to generate emotion scores and classify stress events as normal or abnormal.

2.4.2. Skill Assessment (SA)

Sood and Singh proposed in [66] an e-learning framework with multiple functional aspects. The proposed framework helps in enhancing the skill set of students. The first aspect is that of monitoring the academic skill data of learners in order to classify their employability at the early stage of graduation. The second aspect consists of skill-set assessment based on clustering to improve their required skill set through e-learning. Finally, an adaptive resource usage elasticity prediction is made. Experimental results show that the proposed approach achieves 96.45% accuracy of classification.
By utilizing the information gathered by IoT devices to make smart decisions about the quality of education and the academic environment, Ahanger et al. [67] developed an intelligent framework based on hybrid cloud/fog infrastructure for education quality assessment. They proposed a model based on the Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) for decision modeling based on the education quality scale determined by classification at the fog layer. Results show the effectiveness and reliability of the model with good accuracy about the quality of education access compared to the most recent decision models.
The authors of [68] presented a particle swarm optimization (PSO)-driven edge computing method that might aid in the cooperation and optimization of various ideological and political course resources in a mobile edge computing 5G network for intelligent education assessment on ideology and politics. The authors define the optimization issue as reducing the worst-case energy consumption in task offloading, as well as the decision-making and resource allocation of task offloading supported by edge caching. The outcomes of the experiment show that the suggested method achieves a high level of experience and energy conservation.

2.5. Smart Industry

Edge computing and AI play an effective part in the automation of large-scale industrial processes by providing efficient distribution of applications and an intelligent deployment strategy that provides ideal service delivery to users and customers. For the intelligent industry, fast and real-time detection of machine malfunction and preservation of product quality are very important. In addition to providing high-quality commercial operations in the industrial sector, the management of product provides suitable actions to prevent wastage of the products and high service delivery, whereas in the field of the finance industry, by constructing a smart financial technology application, banks and financial institutions may provide quality services to their consumers via individualized virtual supervision [69]. We first review and classify related works into four categories: financial industry (Section 2.5.1), commercial industries (Section 2.5.2), machine malfunction monitoring (Section 2.5.3), and product quality monitoring and prediction (Section 2.5.4); then, we present a qualitative comparison of related works in Table 7.

2.5.1. Financial Industry (FI)

Manusami et al. developed in [69] designed a ranking-based strategy to classify financial tasks arriving at the edge according to their priority as risky and nonrisky tasks. So as to minimize network energy consumption, the ranked financial tasks are assigned to appropriate computing devices for further analysis by using a service-deployment mechanism based on a perfect matching theorem in graph theory. Subsequently, SVM is used to analyze the ranked tasks at the edge networks for immediate prediction and detection of fraud.
An early warning model for financial risk prediction of the enterprise based on MEC is proposed in [70]. The authors used an optimized BPNN with an edge service preloading optimization model which is applied based on the information obtained about the geographical information related to points of interest and BPNN. Then, according to the user’s location feature vector, the probability of the user’s next service is predicted. Results show that the service preloading optimization based on the geographic information points and BPNN improves the response speed.

2.5.2. Commercial Industries (CI)

In [71], Neelakantam et al. designed a fog computing framework for product demand forecasting and decision-making. They used PCA and K-means for clustering products based on product demand and grouped products into three categories, namely, low, medium, and high demand. Then, the reinforcement learning model is used for product distribution decision-making.

2.5.3. Machine Malfunction Monitoring (MMM)

The authors in [72] proposed a framework based on fog computing to analyze and classify the machine sounds in order to monitor and identify the malfunctioning machines. To extract the important features of the audio signal, the authors used linear prediction coefficients (LPC) and melfrequency cepstral coefficients (MFCC). Then, they used supervised machine learning models (such as RF, SVM, AdaBoost Classifier, and MLP) to detect and classify the malfunctioning machine sounds as normal and abnormal. These models showed their performance in detecting low-level sound from the audio signal and enhancing the service time.
Syafrudin et al. proposed in [73] an edge-based fault detection by using density-based spatial clustering for outlier detection and for covering the imbalanced data issue. The oversampling SMOTE method is used, whereby an RF algorithm is applied in prediction. The proposed method achieves higher accuracy and fast fault detection.
In [74], Fawwaz and Chung proposed an edge-cloud framework for real-time fault detection based on combined LSTM-AE algorithms. This handles both multivariate time series and noisy data. First, a novel correlation and redundancy-aware feature selection (CRFS) approach by a genetic algorithm is implemented. Then, a pretrained model is conducted on the cloud with the combination of LTSM and AE. Secondly, the pretrained model is transferred to the edge for real-time fault detection. Experimental results show the effectiveness of the model by achieving shorter detection times, better accuracy, and more robust performance in the presence of noisy data.
Park et al. [75] developed a model for real-time machine fault detection in smart manufacturing. A lightweight LSTM is developed for an edge device and a Raspberry Pi for implementation. Results show that the model outperforms the existing models.
Li et al. [76] designed collaborative fog-cloud computing for inspection manufacturing by using CNN with offloading strategies. These latter offload the low layer of CNN to the fog nodes. For fast detecting defects in a product and identifying its degree, an early exit strategy is used. The proposed method reduces the data transmitted to the cloud and hence can perform real-time detection.

2.5.4. Product quality monitoring and prediction (PQMP)

Feng et al. [77] proposed an edge-based assembly quality prediction in an industrial IoT environment. They used an RF for feature selection while the SMOTE–Adaboost method with jointly optimized hyperparameters was used for imbalanced classification. The experimental findings demonstrate that, in terms of predicting assembly quality, the suggested technique is more accurate than existing classification methods.
In [78], the authors proposed a fog-based framework for tool wear monitoring and prediction. First, the authors used both CNN and LSTM to extract tool wear temporal features on fog nodes. Then, a bidirectional LSTM model (BiLSTM) is performed on the cloud for tool wear prediction based on the features extracted by the MCLSTM model. Results show the effectiveness of the model in terms of high monitoring accuracy and low response latency.
For real-time and efficient processing tasks in smart production lines, Wang and Li [79] proposed a hybrid heuristic algorithm, an improved particle swarm optimization (IPSO) algorithm, and the improved ant colony optimization (IACO) for task scheduling in fog computing in order to solve the problem of end devices with low computational power and significant energy use.

2.6. Smart Healthcare

IoT, AI, and edge computing paradigms are considered major keys to the new revolution in healthcare by providing an intelligent system that aims at improving the quality of care services such as (i) remote physical patient monitoring, and (ii) automatic diagnosis and detection of diseases at early stages. In this section, we present the existing recent works in intelligent edge-based healthcare applications. In particular, we review and classify related works into five different categories: diet health management (Section 2.6.1), ambient assisted living (Section 2.6.2), human activity recognition (Section 2.6.3), location-based disease prediction (Section 2.6.4), and disease diagnosis (Section 2.6.5; then, we qualitatively compare them in Table 8.

2.6.1. Diet Health Management (DHM)

One of the main reasons for health damage is an unhealthy diet. To tackle the automation of dietary assessment, authors in [80] proposed a food-recognition model with a deep residual convolutional neural network, which determines whether the food photos include enough vegetables. In order to make predictions on a mobile device without connecting to a cloud server, the authors quantized the network weights of the proposed model by using posttraining quantization methods into low-bit fixed-point representations.
Likewise, Liu et al. [81] proposed a DL-based food recognition for assessing diets. Taking into account the limited computation resources and low battery life on mobile devices, the preprocessing and segmentation of food images have been performed on edge devices (smartphones). At the same time, the classification with a pretrained GoogLeNet model for feature extraction and softmax classifier was done on a cloud server. The model exceeds other works in terms of accuracy, with a quicker response time and reduced energy use, according to experimental results.

2.6.2. Ambient Assisted Living (AAL)

For accurate and timely fall detection, the authors of [82] developed an intelligent system based on fog/cloud computing architecture. The cloud data analysis resources are used to train the hybrid DL model (GRU/LSTM), whereas the DL model inference is implemented on a fog smart gateway for real-time fall detection and alert notification to caregivers’ smartphones. To overcome the complex challenges of resource limitations on the fog for DL inference, an efficient and automatic deployment is performed by using virtualization technologies. Results show how well the system works for providing quick, precise responses and enhancing customer service.
For elderly patients with chronic disease monitoring, Hassan et al. proposed in [83] a fog/cloud framework. A firefly algorithm (FA) was used to optimize the NB classifier by selecting the minimal features that yield the highest accuracy. The framework collected data from the elderly patient by using ambient and biological sensors, fused the data into contextual states, and utilized context-aware algorithms to forecast the patient’s health status in real time. The introduced framework includes a five-phase classification method to handle huge datasets that are unbalanced as a result of elderly patients being followed for an extended period of time.
In [84], authors proposed a framework for real-time fall incident monitoring by using ML algorithms based on fog computing. First, they used linear discriminant analysis (LDA) to reduce the dimensionality of extracted features. Then, they employed SVM and KNN for classification.
Divya et al. [85] proposed a fall detection framework. It consists of four layers: edge devices, mist, fog, and cloud. The edge consists of a smart camera, which deploys a compressed DNN model for fall detection. Basic data filtering and rule-based decision-making are handled by the mist. Images are transmitted to the cloud storage only when a fall is detected, and the edge detection output is only delivered to the higher fog layer if a fall is observed. Xtreme gradient boosting and RF methods are used to build the model in the cloud.
The authors of [86] designed a cloud/edge-based federated learning framework for in-home health monitoring named FedHome. The authors used a lightweight convolutional generative autoencoder to deal with the unbalanced and non-ID distribution health monitoring data with high accuracy in predictions.

2.6.3. Human Activity Recognition (HAR)

The authors of [87] introduced a light DL framework that uses SMOTE to solve the problem of imbalance labels and implemented a CNN embedding feature (CNNEF) to understand abnormal human activities through the sensor data in edge nodes to predict the user’s behavior, detect anomalous activities, and offer more accurate, efficient, and real-time services. Then, the extracted high-level embedding features from CNNEF are given to the classical ML algorithms, such as logistic regression, KNN, DT, NB, RF, and SVM.
A brand-new DL-based human activity recognition framework for edge computing termed DL-HAR was suggested in [88]. The proposed framework seeks to accelerate decision-making. It employs a DL algorithm to cut down on communication with the cloud servers, cutting down on potential delays and round trips. In order to detect the activity time-series data coming from sensors or smartphone devices, the framework first trains the DRNN model on the server side because of its high capacity and then transmits the image of the learned DRNN model to Docker containers on Raspberry Pi3 edge devices.
In [89], the authors proposed an edge-based framework for human activity recognition designed for wearable edge devices. The authors design an energy-efficient solution by using an adaptive CNN that selects a portion of the baseline architecture to use during the inference phase instead of using the full architecture.
The authors of [90] proposed a blockchain based on a fog monitoring system to identify human activities as an interface of e-healthcare services. The proposed framework categorizes and classifies the video frames based on patient activities by using the SVM algorithm. Videos of various human activities are retrieved by using a multiclass cooperative categorization approach to increase the activity classification accuracy in video features, which are then processed into action vocabulary for efficiency and accuracy. In a similar manner, an SVM based on the error-correction output codes (ECOC) architecture is used to classify activities.
A Bayesian deep learning network, which aids in inferring and accurately identifying various physical data acquired from individuals to track their physical activities, was examined by the authors of [91] by utilizing edge computing. The effectiveness of this wearable Internet of things system with multimedia technology is then assessed by using the results of some experiments and analyzed in terms of accuracy, efficiency, mean residual error, delay, and energy consumption.
In order to anticipate health conditions in real-time based on an individual’s physical postures, the authors of the paper in [92] developed a fog/cloud system. In this study, they use the continuous time series policy to store anticipated activity ratings on the cloud and give future health references to accredited medical professionals. The physical abnormality that is predicted and the level of health severity are closely correlated with the issuance of the warning. Clear benefits of fog analytics over cloud-based monitoring systems include an improvement in the recognition rate of up to 46.45% for 40 FPS and 45.72% for 30 FPS. By attaining high activity prediction accuracy and low latency, the computed results demonstrate why the proposed fog analytics monitoring system is preferable to other cloud-based monitoring solutions.

2.6.4. Location-Based Disease Prediction (LDP)

Ahanger et al. developed in [93] a fog/cloud framework to forecast COVID-19 cases, employ user-held devices, and track the disease’s spread. First, to identify contaminated individuals and areas, the authors used fuzzy C-mean classification. Then, in order to predict the possibility of COVID-19 symptoms in the geographical patterns, the authors used a temporal recurrent neural network. The self-organization mapping (SOM) method is used to present data on geolocations for COVID-19 dynamical behavior over spatial–temporal domains.
The authors of [94] proposed a fog-cloud framework for remote diagnosis of ENCPH spread based on the patient’s health symptoms and the surrounding environment. The fog layer analyzes a patient’s category based on parameters from health-related data by using a fuzzy C-Means classifier. At the same time, the prediction model based on spatiotemporal domains that use T-RNN is used to manage the medical resources. A SOM technique is used for outbreak geographic visualization.
A novel fog computing-based e-Healthcare framework was presented by Majumdar et al. in [95] to monitor KFD-infected patients throughout the early stages of infection and manage the disease epidemic. A new extremal optimization tailored neural network classification technique has been created by employing the hybridization of the extremal optimization with the feed-forward neural network in order to guarantee a high prediction rate. A location-based alert system has also been recommended to give each KFD-infected user’s location information based on their GPS location as well as the locations of risky areas as soon as possible in order to prevent the epidemic.
A fog-assisted cloud-supported healthcare system was created by Vijayakumar et al. in [96] for the real-time identification and prevention of illnesses spread by mosquitoes. The categorization of illnesses spread by mosquitoes has been done based on symptoms. The registered user is divided into infected and uninfected groups by using a fuzzy KNN algorithm. Social network data is examined to identify risky regions. Alert messages have been sent to registered users in an attempt to avoid an epidemic so they may stay away from risky locations.
The authors of [97] designed an edge-cloud collaborative learning framework for the local diagnosis of COVID-19 by using the VGG16 algorithm. The authors used a clustering federated learning approach in order to solve the heterogeneity and the divergence in the data distribution.
Singh et al. developed in [98] a fog-based QoS framework to monitor the state of health of citizens and prevent and ensure safety from COVID-19. The fog layer provides real-time processing of users’ health data in order to predict COVID-19 infection. The unique patient identification, which is made up of patient data and geographical information, is then transferred to the cloud layer for further processing when the diagnosis is positive. The results of the experiments show that the proposed model is very efficient for remote diagnosis of COVID-19 infection and may be utilized as a time-saving substitute for labor-intensive clinical diagnostic procedures.
Singh et al. developed in [99] a collaborative edge/cloud framework for remotely diagnosing COVID-19. For the purpose of easy deployment on low-powered mobile devices and devices and quick diagnosis, they used an optimized DL model inspired by the MobileNet V2 model architecture. The model was first trained on the cloud; then its backup was sent to edge devices to perform the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection. Finally, when the diagnosis is positive, the unique patient identifier composed of patient information and location information is sent to the cloud layer for further action. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed model is very effective for remote diagnosis of COVID-19 infection and can be used as an efficient alternative to time-consuming clinical diagnostic tests.
In [100], the authors proposed an intelligent health monitoring framework, iCovidCare for the prediction of coronavirus disease based on an ensemble RF model. First, a rule-based approach is employed at the local device to diagnose the coronavirus disease based on the temperature sensor data. Then at the cloud server, the feature selection, and fusion are applied for COVID-19 disease prediction.

2.6.5. Disease Diagnosis (DD)

In order to achieve an early and accurate diagnosis and detection of lung cancer while maintaining privacy, low latency, and mobility, Prabukumar et al. developed in [101] a fog-based system for the diagnosis of lung nodules. First, fuzzy hybrid C-Means and region-growth segmentation algorithms were used for image segmentation and feature extraction. Then, cuckoo search and SVM were used for feature selection and classification, respectively.
A paradigm for intelligent patient monitoring of cardiomyopathy patients by using sensors and wearable technology is presented by the authors in [102]. By relocating sensors in the monitored region, a fuzzy Harris hawks optimizer (FHHO) is first utilized to expand the coverage of monitored patients, and then a wearable sensing data optimization (WSDO) algorithm is employed for heart rate detection. The experimental findings show that the optimized model is successful in terms of the number of sensors used, accuracy, and response time, as well as sufficient patient coverage.
A real-time smart remote monitoring system for patients with chronic illnesses was suggested by the authors in [103]. Four layers make up the suggested framework: the sensing layer for data collection, the edge device layer for offline preprocessing, the edge server layer, and the cloud layer for further online operations. For the purpose of forecasting the patient’s health status in dispersed emergency occurrences, the offline classification techniques are trained in the cloud. The whale optimization algorithm (WOA) and NB are used in the suggested technique to choose a small collection of features with a high level of accuracy.
The authors of [104] proposed an ensemble approach based on data fusion in fog computing by using medical data from body sensor networks (BSNs) for heart disease prediction. For their classification technique, they included a number of temporal and frequency domain characteristics into a kernel RF ensemble. To create higher quality data that is input to the ensembles for heart disease prediction, data from many sensors is fused.
The authors of [105] proposed an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system model for Parkinson’s disease prediction. The fog takes a prominent role in feature extraction from IoT sensors and provides the principal functions. Then, the parameters of the model are adjusted through grey wolf optimization (GWO) and PSO. Results show that the proposed model succeeds in predicting Parkinson’s disease with good accuracy.
Shynu et al. developed in [106] a fog computing-based framework for disease prediction. First, for the protection and effective data storage and data sharing, a blockchain in the fog nodes is used. The patient data for patients with diabetes and cardiovascular disease are then initially grouped by using a rule-based clustering method. Finally, a feature selection-based adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system is used to predict diabetes and cardiovascular illnesses (FS-ANFIS).
In order to provide low-latency responses in identifying emergency situations for cardiac patients, Cheikhrouhou et al. proposed in [107] a remote cardiac patient monitoring based on hybrid fog-cloud architecture for analyzing ECG signals captured from IoT wearable devices. Results show that the proposed approach based on a one-dimensional CNN approach for arrhythmia cardiovascular disease detection could achieve an accuracy of 99% with 25% improvement in the overall response time.
Similarly, for real-time physiological data analysis, the authors in [109] designed a framework for health monitoring based on fog computing. The system consists of three layers. The first is the wearable layer wherein an RK-PCA is used to eliminate erroneous data. A fog layer, which consists of an onlooker node is used to eliminate redundant data generated by wearable devices and health status prediction. Then fog nodes for health status detection. Finally, there is a cloud layer for data storage. In addition, a multiobjective optimization algorithm is used to solve fog overloading in smart healthcare applications. Experimental results show the stability of the system compared to the cloud-based approach, while less latency, execution time, a high detection accuracy are improved.
In [108], the authors proposed a deep learning model to be supported by edge computing and investigated it in the diagnosis for identification of heart disease from the data collected by using IoMT devices. The proposed effective training scheme for DNN (ETS-DNN) model incorporates a modified hybrid water wave optimization technique to tune the parameters of the DNN structure.
To improve the detection of impending hypoglycemia, the authors of [110] developed an embedded deep-edge learning model by using evidential regression and attention-based recurrent neural network for real-time blood glucose.

2.7. Smart Transportation:

The use of IoT and AI technologies in the transportation field consists of collecting information about vehicles, drivers, and roads with the objective of creating a real-time traffic management system by performing traffic road condition monitoring, detecting events in real time for traffic safety, and preventing perturbations that impact on traffic flow and parking availability.
In this Section, we review and classify related works into three categories: smart parking management (Section 2.7.1), traffic monitoring/prediction (Section 2.7.2), and intelligent transportation management (Section 2.7.3); then, we qualitatively compare them in Table 9.

2.7.1. Smart Parking Management (SPM)

The authors of [111] suggested an edge computing-based shared bicycle system, with a hybrid ML model (SOM-RT) and a self-organizing mapping network to assemble the original samples in the form of clusters, and each cluster was built as an RT to forecast the necessary number of bikes at each station. Experiments outperformed other methods in terms of prediction accuracy and generalization.
The authors of [112] developed a camera-based object-detection solution for parking surveillance. They used a single-shot multibox detector (SSD) and background-based detection method in pipeline at the edge to reduce the data transmission volume and ensure efficient updates, whereas the detection results are combined on the server to perform parking occupancy detection in extreme lighting conditions and occlusion conditions with a tracking algorithm for vehicle tracking in parking garages.
In [113], Huang et al. created the fedparking federated learning framework for the management of parked vehicle-assisted edge computing (PVEC). Fedparking uses federated learning with LSTM to estimate parking space. Fedparking enables many parking lot operators to jointly develop a model to forecast the availability of free parking spots in a parking lot in real time for traffic management. For PVEC, they utilized an incentive system. A multiagent deep reinforcement learning strategy was utilized to progressively attain the Stackelberg equilibrium in a distributed yet privacy-preserving way while taking into account the dynamic vehicle arrivals and time-varying parking capacity limitations. High convergence accuracy is obtained by this method.

2.7.2. Traffic Monitoring/Prediction (TMP)

To solve the dynamic traffic changes issue in smart transportation for accurate traffic prediction and for identifying the abnormal situation in real time, the authors of [114] proposed a model for collaborative optimization of intelligent transportation systems. Installing monitoring sites at various traffic crossings allows for data collection from each intersection. The DBN-SVR approach is used to anticipate traffic conditions and predict the overall traffic flow of the road network. Advanced computer technology was employed to process the information signals produced by the crossings after the model was used to determine the traffic flow of a few chosen intersections.
For accurate real-time traffic flow prediction, a framework named AAtt-DHSTNet based on fog computing is proposed in [115]. The authors used an aggregation method based on an attention mechanism to eliminate redundant data acquired by sensors in overlap regions, along with a spatial and temporal correlation-based DHSTNet model, which dynamically manages spatial and temporal correlations through CNN and LSTM models.
For real-time urban traffic prediction, a short-term traffic flow prediction model based on edge computing is introduced in [116]. The authors used a smooth support vector machine optimized by a chaotic particle swarm optimization algorithm.
The authors of [117] proposed a federated learning approach to predict the number of vehicles in an area. First, they used clustering to group participants. Then, they trained a global model for each cluster. They used a joint-announcement protocol in the model aggregation mechanism to reduce the communication overhead of the algorithm.
In [118], the authors proposed an edge computing-based graph representation learning approach for short and long traffic flow prediction. The authors used a federated learning approach. Each model at the edge consists of three components: (1) recurrent long-term capture network (RLCN) module, (2) attentive mechanism federated network (AMFN) module, and (3) semantic capture network (SCN) module for spatiotemporal information in each area. The authors used an additive homomorphic encryption approach based on vertical federated learning (VFL) to share the model.

2.7.3. Intelligent Transportation Management (ITM)

In [121], the authors introduced a system based on edge/cloud computing for real-time driver distraction detection by using a custom DCNN model and a VGG16 (namely, visual geometry group-16)-based model.
A driving behavior evaluation technique built on a vehicle edge-cloud architecture is taken into account by Xu et al. in the work at [119]. When a car is operating on the road, its telematics box transmits data displaying the autopilot/driver behaviors to the edge networks. The driving behavior evaluation model built by the cloud server is used by the edge networks, which then communicate the behavior rankings back to the cars. The driving behavior evaluation model is continually trained and optimized on the cloud server by using vehicle data, and the model is periodically sent to the edge networks for updates. The suggested scheme’s robustness and feasibility are demonstrated by experimental findings.
A methodology for diagnosing railway faults based on edge and cloud collaboration is created in [120]. The model first uses a SAES-DNN for the fault recognition method on the cloud. Then, for a real-time fault diagnosis, a transfer learning strategy is used to assign the task on the edge.

2.8. Security and Privacy in Edge-Based Applications

With the recent exponential sophistication of attacks and unauthorized access and in order to ensure and improve the privacy and security of edge-based IoT applications, putting an AI-based solution at the edge of the network is necessary.
In this section, we review and classify AI-based security solutions at the network edge for IoT-based applications into three categories: those that provide early detection of malware and intrusions before the data is delivered to the cloud (Section 2.8.1), unauthorized access solutions (Section 2.8.2), and privacy-preserving solutions to help keep sensitive information safe during data sharing (Section 2.8.3); then, we compare them in Table 10.

2.8.1. Privacy Preservation (PP)

Kumar et al. [122] suggested two techniques for privacy preservation: blockchain and deep learning implemented on the fog nodes in the Collaborative Intelligent Transportation System. The blockchain and the smart contract-based module are used at the first level to support the exchange of nonmutable data. The deep learning module LSTM-AE is used to encode the C-ITS data into a novel format to prevent attacks. Finally, an attention-based RNN is employed for attack detection.
Similar to this, Kumar et al. [123] proposed an integrated safe privacy-preserving architecture for smart agricultural drones that integrates blockchain and DL methods. The framework uses two levels of privacy. A blockchain-based ePoW and smart contracts are included in the first level, and an SAE approach to transform data into a new encrypted format is included in the second level. It uses a stacked short-term memory (SLSTM) anomaly detection engine.
Authors in [124] proposed a model based on differential privacy, called differential privacy fuzzy convolution neural network framework (DP-FCNN). First, they used the addition of noise to protect sensitive information by using a fuzzy CNN with a Laplace mechanism, then secured data storage, and encryption with a lightweight encryption algorithm named PICCOLO before uploading it to the cloud.
To prevent leakage of users’ privacy-sensitive data, authors in [135] proposed a federated learning with a blockchain-based crowdsourcing framework. The authors used differential privacy to protect the privacy of customers’ data. The model updates are accountable for preventing malicious customers or manufacturers from using the blockchain.

2.8.2. Authentication and Authorization (AA)

The authors of [8] presented a DL-based physical layer authentication strategy that takes advantage of channel state information to improve the security of MEC systems by spotting spoofing attacks in wireless networks. The DL-based multiuser authentication method put forward in this research can successfully distinguish between trustworthy edge nodes, malicious edge nodes, and attackers, greatly enhancing the security of MEC systems in the IoT.
In order to achieve high efficiency and the most effective use of computing resources, the study in [125] presents an effective implicit authentication system called edge computing-based mobile device implicit authentication (EDIA). The gait data from the built-in sensors are processed in an optimum manner, and the model is based on the concatenation of CNN and LSTM. By transforming the gait signal into an image, data preprocessing is utilized to extract the characteristics of the signal in a two-dimensional space. A hybrid approach using CNN and LSTM is used for user authentication, with CNN serving as a feature extractor and LSTM serving as a classifier. The technique of authentication also achieves excellent authentication accuracy with modest datasets, demonstrating that the model is appropriate for mobile devices with limited battery and processing resources.

2.8.3. Intrusion Detection (ID)

Samy et al. proposed in [126] a distributed fog framework for IoT cyberattacks by using the LSTM model. First, with the aim of achieving the scalability of the system, a clustering-based mechanism is applied to the fog nodes to balance the network load and increase network scalability and secure the exchanged traffic between the fog and the cloud. The proposed framework has proven its effectiveness in terms of response time with a high detection accuracy compared to cloud-based attack detection systems.
In [127] authors proposed a fog-based framework for the detection of attacks by using a hybrid DL model CNN-LSTM with the use of centralized controller SDN to reduce computation overhead with a highly cost-effective dynamic.
In [128] an IDS is proposed based on the DL approach by using AE and isolation forest (IF) in a fog environment. After identifying the attack and separating it from data from regular network traffic, AE uses an isolation forest to find the outlier data points.
The authors of [129] proposed a lightweight algorithm for resource-constrained mobile devices for attack detection by using a stacked AE, mutual information (MI), and wrapper for feature extraction and SVM for the detection.
In [130], Huong et al. proposed an IoT platform that uses edge and cloud computing for attack detection based on multilayer classification and federated learning. A feature extraction-based PCA coupled with an optimized neural network is implemented for a low-complexity model and good accuracy. However, there is a limitation in the model, which consists of the imbalanced distribution of the data on fog nodes. This limitation decreases the accuracy of detection for some types of cyberattacks.
In [131], Gavel et al. designed a fog-based model for intrusion detection in an IoT network. The model is based on a combination of the Kalman filter and the salp swarm algorithm. First, the Kalman filter is used as a data fusion technique that reduces the redundant data at the fog node. Then, the salp swarm algorithm is used to select the optimum number of features. Finally, the features selected are used to train the model using the kELM classifier. Results achieve highly reduced data, and high detection accuracy with reduced computation time.
An investigator digital forensic algorithm was proposed in [132] to detect and categorize advanced persistent and Shamoon attacks in a fog environment. The model consists of two steps. The first one allows the extraction of the relevant features and the prediction of the best-weighted features with FPSO (frequencies PSO). In the second step, these latter are clustered by using K-means and classified with the KNN.
The authors of [133] introduced a threat detection model at the edge layer based on multikernel SVM. A feature selection module based on GWO is applied to minimize the computational costs of the proposed model by selecting the relevant features. The proposed model achieved high accuracy and outperforms DNN and fuzzy-based IoT malware-hunting techniques. Moreover, it significantly reduces the computational cost and training time.

3. Discussions of Related Works: Findings and Insights

In this section, we discuss the works reviewed in Section 2 through different points: (1) the relevance of integrating AI and edge computing in IoT-based applications (Section 3.1); (2) AI technologies (Section 3.2); (3) AI use at the network edge (Section 3.3); (4) enabling technologies and strategies that provide analytic services at the edge (Section 3.4); (5) platforms and software tools (Section 3.5); (6) performance metrics (Section 3.6); and (7) the convergence of AI-edge with other technologies (Section 3.7).

3.1. The Relevance of Integrating AI and Edge Computing in IoT-Based Applications

The chart in Figure 2 shows a statistical distribution of the domains considered in this review, which means that smart healthcare is the most studied domain, whereas the distribution in the other domains is almost equal except for smart education, which is the lesser one with 6% of the total number of studies.
From the reviewed works, we have drawn several conclusions considering the benefits of the integration of AI and the edge in the eight reviewed domains (see Table 11).

3.2. AI Technologies

Figure 3 shows the classification of the different AI techniques used in the reviewed works. Although Figure 4 shows the percentage of the use of convolutional ML and deep learning algorithms in the reviewed works.

3.3. AI Use at the Network Edge

We show in Figure 5 a categorization, which summarizes the use of the AI at the edge of the network. The AI is used for (1) data preprocessing (aggregation, filtering, imputation, and reduction), (2) data analytics (prediction, classification, visualization, and decision-making), (3) resources management (task scheduling, and load balancing), and (4) intelligent sensing (data collection, and data transmission).

3.4. Enabling Technologies and Strategies that Provide Analytic Services at the Edge

We conclude from the reviewed works that most of the research studies considered lightweight models with 37% of the total number of reviewed works. The second considered technologies are the transfer learning and federated learning with 25% and 15%, respectively. Whereas, approximately 12% and 9% of the studied related works considered hardware and software optimizations and preprocessing at the edge, respectively. Unfortunately, only 2% of the reviewed works considered DNN splitting and early exit. Figure 6 shows the distribution of these enabling technologies from the reviewed works.

3.5. Platforms and Software Tools

For edge-based applications, many simulators are used, such as iFogSim and YAFS. However, for distributed data management at the edge, many big data analytic platforms are used, such as Apache, Spark, and HDFS. Many libraries are proposed for deep learning implementation, such as TensorFlow, Keras, and Caffe. However, with the purpose of enabling deep learning inference at the edge, the lightweight library TensorFlow light is used. Figure 7 shows the platforms used in the reviewed papers.

3.6. Performance Metrics

As depicted in Figure 8, the used metrics are low latency, accuracy, training/ inference time, data transmission rate, throughput, stability, mobility, security and privacy, scalability, memory usage, reliability, training time, and bandwidth management. As shown in Figure 8, the most used metrics in the reviewed works are accuracy and low latency. Then, security and privacy, and training time were moderately used. However, a weak use considered the other metrics.

3.7. The Convergence of AI-Edge with Other Technologies

Blockchain provides ultrasecurity mechanisms by using cryptographic algorithms [136]. Blockchain is a decentralized ledger system where digital files are grouped into blocks, such as transaction lists or contractual agreements, and stored in a distributed database blockchain smart contract is leveraged to generate a global model by averaging the sum of locally trained models submitted by users. In this federated way, source data are supposed to maintain security and privacy. Due to its distinctive characteristics, such as decentralization, immutability, and traceability, the authors of [137] provide appealing solutions for FL-based intelligent edge computing. FL can be implemented by using decentralized data ledgers rather than a central server, reducing the chance of single-point failures. Any update events and user actions are transparently tracked by all network entities.

4. Open Issues and Future Directions

Many factors impact the performance of edge-based smart applications: IoT data quality, 5V IoT data features, heterogeneity, dynamicity of the edge computing, and its resource constrained. Below, we discuss and present the major issues related to the design and implementation of edge analytics, and we present future directions. As depicted in Figure 9, the major issues revealed from the reviewed works are (1) big data analytic issues (Section 4.1), (2) scalability (Section 4.2), (3) resource management (Section 4.3), (4) security and privacy (Section 4.4), and (5) ultralow latency requirement (Section 4.5).

4.1. Big Data Analytic Issues

With the goal of transforming information into actionable insights and retrieving the necessary knowledge for robust decision-making support and a reliable QoS; various issues arise for big IoT data analytics in edge-based applications. The different issues are discussed in detail below:
  • With regard to data quality issues, the collected IoT data may include irrelevant, redundant, and missing data due to IoT network issues such as failure of devices, less coverage, the overlapping area of redundancy that cause high energy consumption and affect the limited power capabilities of IoT devices. All of these features may reduce the accuracy of the model while increasing the execution time and the computational complexity of the analysis. The authors of [54,57,102,138] used AI for spatial and temporal redundancy, data imputation, sensing coverage, and pipeline data preprocessing at the edge, respectively. However, not all of them consider the mobility, dynamic, and heterogeneity feature of an edge environment. The solutions based on (1) dynamic network management, (2) lightweight AI data fusion at the network edge, and (3) quality-aware, energy-efficient data management and data reduction at the network edges are still open issues. AI and 6G/5G are recommended solutions for efficient 3D coverage and intelligent sensing.
  • With regard to analytical learning model choices to deal with IoT big data characteristics, we find the following.
    • Spatio-temporal correlated data issue: Large-scale distributed geographic systems, such as large-scale environmental monitoring and city-wide traffic flow prediction, where data is captured from different geographic locations in continuous time, require the handling of the complex correlation between space–time dependency. Graph-based deep learning is considered a promising solution to handle the spatiotemporal correlation issues [139,140].
    • Nonstationary, dynamic, and nonlinear IoT time series data: It is difficult for classical methods to extract effective features from the collected IoT data due to the nonstationary, dynamic, and nonlinear IoT data, such as in electric power systems. To this end, selecting a suitable model to deal with IoT data characteristics and in order to solve the problems associated with dynamic IoT data, it is desirable to develop an online/incremental learning model that can be further improved to become more flexible and adapt more quickly to changes in the IoT environment. Reservoir computing is used in [40] to deal with this problem. Retraining the deep learning model is still a problem due to the limited recourse constraint of the edge.
    • Generalized, adaptability, and tradeoff between training/inference time and accuracy in ML models are also still challenges to be considered.
    • Limited available dataset, multiclass classification, and imbalanced data set are also challenges to be considered.
    • Frameworks and simulators: To support real-time analysis and development of fog computing, the authors of [141] developed modular simulation models for service migration, dynamic distributed cluster formation, and microservice orchestration for edge/fog computing based on real-world datasets. In [142], the authors proposed a multilayer fog deployment framework for job scheduling and big data processing in an industrial environment.
  • With regard to device computation, we find the following.
    • Hardware and software optimization challenges: In the literature, many hardware platforms capable of accelerating DL execution are used like server-class central processing units (CPUs), and graphics processing units (GPUs). As an innovative solution and to enhance the efficiency of computing in edge devices. Hardware implementation is designed as an integrated solution to the neural network in [143].
    • Model compression challenges: Many solutions emphasize employing quantization and compression methods to address the limited hardware requirements of an edge device and compress CNN. The quantization requires careful tuning or retraining of the model, which can take a long time and affect the accuracy of the model. Other solutions use dynamic compression with an effort to reduce model complexity and eliminate redundant components, such as in [56]. Others formulate CNN model compression as a multiobjective optimization problem with three functional objectives: reducing the size, improving classification accuracy of the DCNN, which is related to the reliability of the model, and minimizing the number of neurons in the hidden layer using the Lévy flight optimization algorithm (LFOA) [59]. This model suffers from high complexity in training time. One of the future directions could be the combination of dynamic compression with quantization for more accuracy [56].
  • With regard to distributed and parallel computing, we find the following.
    • Federated learning:
      Communication overhead: FL involves sharing the model parameters instead of the data. Transmitting complex models from large numbers of clients to centralized aggregators generates a massive load of traffic, which makes communication overhead. The iterative and nonoptimized methods of communication between the server and the clients are the main factors for increasing the communication overhead. Decreasing the communication frequency at each round is also essential to improve the efficiency of the algorithm considering the bandwidth cost. As a solution, authors in [144] proposed federated particle swarm optimization (FedPSO) for transmitting score values instead of large weights, which reduces the overall traffic in the network communication. Moreover, authors in [145] proposed a framework called COMET, in which clients can use heterogeneous models. It uses knowledge distillation to transfer its knowledge to other customers with similar data distributions.
      Fault tolerance: Reliability and fault tolerance means the whole system architecture should be able to provide services even if any node (server) on any level fails [146]. Leveraging peer-to-peer FL updates model in the coordination of training can eliminate the single point of failure that may be inherent in an aggregator-based approach [33]. Authors in [147] proposed a decentralized learning variant of the P2P gossip averaging method with batch normalization (BN), adaptation for P2P architectures. BN layers accelerate the convergence of the nondistributed deep learning models.
      The unbalanced and not independent and identically distributed (Non-IID) data: Non-IID data on the local devices (divergence in the data distribution) can significantly decrease learning performance. Many solutions proposed to solve this problem, such as model selection, and clustering are reported in [20,116].
    • With regard to DNN splitting, its advantage is that, compared with model compression, it will not lose accuracy. However, it will create many caching and communication costs because tasks should be transferred between the edge nodes to reach the appropriate nodes with low delay and sufficient resources [148]. Early exit is used by [76] to overcome the limitation, but choosing the point of early exit is still inconvenient. Other problems are related to heterogeneous node failure, and many solutions in the literature are proposed, such as RoofSplit [148], which is used to overcome the limitation of communication cost. SplitPlace is used for mobility. Therefore, developing a heterogeneous, parallel, and collaborative architecture for edge data processing for various DL services will be helpful. Other solutions still need to be developed.

4.2. Scalability

Edge computing has a scalability problem when high-volume IoT devices require processing at the edge. Inadequate distribution of computation across multiple resource-constrained nodes affects the scalability of the system. In the works reviewed above, few works considered the scalability problem in edge-based applications. For example, in Samy et al. [126], clustering of fog nodes to balance the network load is used to increase scalability. Autoscaling is a solution that aims to optimize the use of resources [149]. However, the edge-computing environment is very dynamic which impacts the availability of nodes in a distributed edge-based infrastructure, so the load on each node may change continuously. Therefore, the scaling of processing services must be dynamic. Recent work has studied online machine learning for autoscaling, such as the one in [150], in which the authors present an autoscaling subsystem for container-based processing services. However, it will be interesting and promising to design dynamic autoscaling to ensure the scalability of the system with high QoS performance.

4.3. Resource Management

Edge computing is a resource constraint. Task scheduling and load-balancing tasks across fog nodes are crucial to improve the quality of service of IoT-based applications, including response time and improving the usage of fog nodes. In the distributed architecture of edge-based applications, different edge servers or fog nodes are shared to perform the processing of the collected data. The load imbalance among the edge servers affects the stability of the system. Many works, such as [109], propose dealing with resource-management issues. However, none of them consider heterogeneous and dynamic node distribution. Dynamic load balance is an efficient solution, such as in the study in [151], in which authors proposed a network traffic-based dynamic load balancing approach to optimize the overall network performance.

4.4. Security and Privacy

The security problems of edge nodes are more important than those of servers because they are placed at the edge of the networks, closer to the attackers. Therefore, an authentication security mechanism must be developed. The use of machine learning in adding noise for differential privacy is a promising solution for improving the security and processing time of the system. For example, in the reviewed works, DL-based physical layer authentication approaches can distinguish multiple legitimate edge nodes from malicious nodes and attackers. Moreover, DL is used for encoding data into a new format that prevents inference attacks from gaining knowledge relative to original datasets.

4.5. Ultralow Latency Requirement

The need for ultralow service requires to introduce tactile 5G [152]. For example, authors in [153] proposed a solution for ultralow latency based on machine learning and network slicing.

5. Conclusions

This paper attempts to provide a review of edge computing-based applications with a focus on the fusion of AI and edge computing while offering discussions on future research directions related to AI and edge computing convergence. We started with a review of existing recent works in eight different IoT-based application areas, and we qualitatively compared them through tables by using several characteristics (use case, reference, contribution, AI role at the edge, AI algorithm, dataset, AI placement, employed technology, platform, metrics, benefits AI-Edge, and drawbacks). Then, we discussed the related works to distinguish what was already done and used for the convergence of AI and edge. After that, we presented issues and open challenges that serve as guidelines for future work.
This review is limited to aspects related to the confluence of AI and Edge in eight application areas from a global perspective for the purpose of big data analytics at the edge. In this sense, this article focuses only on papers that deal with edge learning in distributed edge-based architecture. It only touches on task and resource management and the different feature challenges of edge in a limited way.

Author Contributions

Authors have contributed to the manuscript as follows: Conceptualization, O.Z. and A.B.; formal analysis, O.Z. and A.B., writing—original draft preparation, A.G. and M.N.K.; writing—review and editing, O.Z. and A.G.; supervision, G.F. and H.S.; funding acquisition, G.F. and A.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work has been partially supported by the Italian MIUR, PRIN 2017 Project “Fluidware” (CUP H24I17000070001), under the framework of MLSysOps, Research and Innovation action-Horizon Europe Project, Grant Agreement #101092912, funded by the European Union, and by European Union - NextGenerationEU - National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza, PNRR) - Project: “SoBigData.it - Strengthening the Italian RI for Social Mining and Big Data Analytics” - Prot. IR0000013 - Avviso n. 3264 del 28/12/2021.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mohammadi, M.; Al-Fuqaha, A.; Sorour, S.; Guizani, M. Deep Learning for IoT Big Data and Streaming Analytics: A Survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2018, 20, 2923–2960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhou, Z.; Chen, X.; Li, E.; Zeng, L.; Luo, K.; Zhang, J. Edge Intelligence: Paving the Last Mile of Artificial Intelligence with Edge Computing. Proc. IEEE 2019, 107, 1738–1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chang, Z.; Liu, S.; Xiong, X.; Cai, Z.; Tu, G. A Survey of Recent Advances in Edge-Computing-Powered Artificial Intelligence of Things. IEEE IoT J. 2021, 8, 13849–13875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Osifeko, M.O.; Hancke, G.P. Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Cognitive Sensing in Future IoT: State-of-the-Art, Potentials, and Challenges. J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 2020, 9, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhang, W.; Wang, J.; Han, G.; Huang, S.; Feng, Y.; Shu, L. A Data Set Accuracy Weighted Random Forest Algorithm for IoT Fault Detection Based on Edge Computing and Blockchain. IEEE IoT J. 2021, 8, 2354–2363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rafique, H.; Shah, M.A.; Islam, S.U.; Maqsood, T.; Khan, S.; Maple, C. A Novel Bio-Inspired Hybrid Algorithm (NBIHA) for Efficient Resource Management in Fog Computing. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 115760–115773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Li, W.; Chai, Y.; Khan, F.; Jan, S.R.U.; Verma, S.; Menon, V.G.; Kavita; Li, X. A Comprehensive Survey on Machine Learning-Based Big Data Analytics for IoT-Enabled Smart Healthcare System. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2021, 26, 234–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liao, R.F.; Wen, H.; Wu, J.; Pan, F.; Xu, A.; Song, H.; Xie, F.; Jiang, Y.; Cao, M. Security enhancement for mobile edge computing through physical layer authentication. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 116390–116401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Torre-Bastida, A.I.; Díaz-de Arcaya, J.; Osaba, E.; Muhammad, K.; Camacho, D.; Del Ser, J. Bio-inspired computation for big data fusion, storage, processing, learning and visualization: State of the art and future directions. Neural Comput. Appl. 2021, 9, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ren, J.; Zhang, D.; He, S.; Zhang, Y.; Li, T. A survey on end-edge-cloud orchestrated network computing paradigms: Transparent computing, mobile edge computing, fog computing, and cloudlet. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 2019, 52, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Bajaj, K.; Sharma, B.; Singh, R. Implementation analysis of IoT-based offloading frameworks on cloud/edge computing for sensor generated big data. Complex Intell. Syst. 2022, 8, 3641–3658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Saeik, F.; Avgeris, M.; Spatharakis, D.; Santi, N.; Dechouniotis, D.; Violos, J.; Leivadeas, A.; Athanasopoulos, N.; Mitton, N.; Papavassiliou, S. Task offloading in Edge and Cloud Computing: A survey on mathematical, artificial intelligence and control theory solutions. Comput. Netw. 2021, 195, 108177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Haddaji, A.; Ayed, S.; Fourati, L.C. Artificial Intelligence techniques to mitigate cyber-attacks within vehicular networks: Survey. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2022, 104, 108460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Laroui, M.; Nour, B.; Moungla, H.; Cherif, M.A.; Afifi, H.; Guizani, M. Edge and fog computing for IoT: A survey on current research activities & future directions. Comput. Commun. 2021, 180, 210–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Deng, S.; Member, S.; Zhao, H.; Fang, W.; Yin, J. Edge Intelligence: The Confluence of Edge Computing and Artificial Intelligence. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 7, 7457–7469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xu, D.; Li, T.; Li, Y.; Su, X.; Tarkoma, S.; Jiang, T.; Crowcroft, J.; Hui, P. Edge Intelligence: Architectures, Challenges, and Applications. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2003.12172. [Google Scholar]
  17. Abdulkareem, K.H.; Mohammed, M.A.; Gunasekaran, S.S.; Al-Mhiqani, M.N.; Mutlag, A.A.; Mostafa, S.A.; Ali, N.S.; Ibrahim, D.A. A review of fog computing and machine learning: Concepts, applications, challenges, and open issues. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 153123–153140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Iftikhar, S.; Gill, S.S.; Song, C.; Xu, M.; Aslanpour, M.S.; Toosi, A.N.; Du, J.; Wu, H.; Ghosh, S.; Chowdhury, D.; et al. AI-based fog and edge computing: A systematic review, taxonomy and future directions. Internet Things 2023, 21, 100674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Asim, M.; Wang, Y.; Wang, K.; Huang, P.Q. A Review on Computational Intelligence Techniques in Cloud and Edge Computing. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. Intell. 2020, 4, 742–763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Moon, J.; Kum, S.; Lee, S. A heterogeneous IoT data analysis framework with collaboration of edge-cloud computing: Focusing on indoor PM10 and PM2.5 status prediction. Sensors 2019, 19, 3038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Putra, K.T.; Chen, H.-C.; Prayitno; Ogiela, M.R.; Chou, C.-L.; Weng, C.-E.; Shae, Z.-Y. Federated Compressed Learning Edge Computing Framework with Ensuring Data Privacy for PM2.5 Prediction in Smart City Sensing Applications. Sensors 2021, 21, 4586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gao, Y.; Liu, L.; Hu, B.; Lei, T.; Ma, H. Federated Region-Learning for Environment Sensing in Edge Computing System. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 2020, 7, 2192–2204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ahmed, M.; Mumtaz, R.; Zaidi, S.M.H.; Hafeez, M.; Zaidi, S.A.R.; Ahmad, M. Distributed fog computing for internet of things (Iot) based ambient data processing and analysis. Electronics 2020, 9, 1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wardana, I.N.K.; Gardner, J.W.; Fahmy, S.A. Optimising deep learning at the edge for accurate hourly air quality prediction. Sensors 2021, 21, 1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. De Stefano, C.; Ferrigno, L.; Fontanella, F.; Gerevini, L.; Scotto di Freca, A. A novel PCA-based approach for building on-board sensor classifiers for water contaminant detection. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 2020, 135, 375–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Pattnaik, B.S.; Pattanayak, A.S.; Udgata, S.K.; Panda, A.K. Machine learning based soft sensor model for BOD estimation using intelligence at edge. Complex Intell. Syst. 2021, 7, 961–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ren, J.; Zhu, Q.; Wang, C. Edge Computing for Water Quality Monitoring Systems. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022, 2022, 5056606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Thakur, T.; Mehra, A.; Hassija, V.; Chamola, V.; Srinivas, R.; Gupta, K.K.; Singh, A.P. Smart water conservation through a machine learning and blockchain-enabled decentralized edge computing network. Appl. Soft Comput. 2021, 106, 107274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yang, J.; Wen, J.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, B.; Wang, H.; Song, H. Fog-Based Marine Environmental Information Monitoring Toward Ocean of Things. IEEE IoT J. 2020, 7, 4238–4247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lu, H.; Wang, D.; Li, Y.; Li, J.; Li, X.; Kim, H.; Serikawa, S.; Humar, I. CONet: A Cognitive Ocean Network. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2019, 26, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sun, X.; Wang, X.; Cai, D.; Li, Z.; Gao, Y.; Wang, X. Multivariate Seawater Quality Prediction Based on PCA-RVM Supported by Edge Computing towards Smart Ocean. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 54506–54513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kwon, D.; Jeon, J.; Park, S.; Kim, J.; Cho, S. Multiagent DDPG-Based Deep Learning for Smart Ocean Federated Learning IoT Networks. IEEE IoT J. 2020, 7, 9895–9903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Taik, A.; Cherkaoui, S. Electrical Load Forecasting Using Edge Computing and Federated Learning. In Proceedings of the ICC 2020—2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Dublin, Ireland, 7–11 June 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Savi, M.; Olivadese, F. Short-Term Energy Consumption Forecasting at the Edge: A Federated Learning Approach. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 95949–95969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, T.; Fong, S.; Li, X.; Lu, Z.; Gandomi, A.H. Swarm Decision Table and Ensemble Search Methods in Fog Computing Environment: Case of Day-Ahead Prediction of Building Energy Demands Using IoT Sensors. IEEE IoT J. 2020, 7, 2321–2342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, C.; Zheng, X.; Yang, Z.; Kuang, L. Predicting Short-Term Electricity Demand by Combining the Advantages of ARMA and XGBoost in Fog Computing Environment. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2018, 2018, 5018053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Rabie, A.H.; Ali, S.H.; Saleh, A.I.; Ali, H.A. A fog based load forecasting strategy based on multi-ensemble classification for smart grids. J. Ambient Intell. Hum. Comput. 2020, 11, 209–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Luo, H.; Cai, H.; Yu, H.; Sun, Y.; Bi, Z.; Jiang, L. A short-term energy prediction system based on edge computing for smart city. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 101, 444–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Abdel-Basset, M.; Hawash, H.; Chakrabortty, R.K.; Ryan, M. Energy-Net: A Deep Learning Approach for Smart Energy Management in IoT-Based Smart Cities. IEEE IoT J. 2021, 8, 12422–12435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Fujimoto, Y.; Fujita, M.; Hayashi, Y. Deep reservoir architecture for short-term residential load forecasting: An online learning scheme for edge computing. Appl. Energy 2021, 298, 117176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Cicirelli, F.; Gentile, A.F.; Greco, E.; Guerrieri, A.; Spezzano, G.; Vinci, A. An Energy Management System at the Edge based on Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE/ACM 24th International Symposium on Distributed Simulation and Real Time Applications (DS-RT), Prague, Czech Republic, 14–16 September 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tom, R.J.; Sankaranarayanan, S.; Rodrigues, J.J. Smart Energy Management and Demand Reduction by Consumers and Utilities in an IoT-Fog-Based Power Distribution System. IEEE IoT J. 2019, 6, 7386–7394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Taïk, A.; Member, S.; Nour, B.; Cherkaoui, S.; Member, S. Empowering Prosumer Communities in Smart Grid with Wireless Communications and Federated Edge Learning. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2021, 28, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Jaiswal, R.; Chakravorty, A.; Rong, C. Distributed Fog Computing Architecture for Real-Time Anomaly Detection in Smart Meter Data. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Big Data Computing Service and Applications (BigDataService), Oxford, UK, 3–6 August 2020; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Scarpiniti, M.; Baccarelli, E.; Momenzadeh, A.; Uncini, A. SmartFog: Training the Fog for the energy-saving analytics of Smart-Meter data. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Olivares-Rojas, J.C.; Reyes-Archundia, E.; Rodriiguez-Maya, N.E.; Gutierrez-Gnecchi, J.A.; Molina-Moreno, I.; Cerda-Jacobo, J. Machine Learning Model for the Detection of Electric Energy Fraud using an Edge-Fog Computing Architecture. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Engineering Veracruz (ICEV), Boca del Rio, Mexico, 26–29 October 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Utomo, D.; Hsiung, P.A. A multitiered solution for anomaly detection in edge computing for smart meters. Sensors 2020, 20, 5159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhang, Y.; Ai, Q.; Wang, H.; Li, Z.; Zhou, X. Energy theft detection in an edge data center using threshold-based abnormality detector. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 121, 106162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ashraf, M.M.; Waqas, M.; Abbas, G.; Baker, T.; Abbas, Z.H.; Alasmary, H. FedDP: A Privacy-Protecting Theft Detection Scheme in Smart Grids Using Federated Learning. Energies 2022, 15, 6241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Guillén, M.A.; Llanes, A.; Imbernón, B.; Martínez-España, R.; Bueno-Crespo, A.; Cano, J.C.; Cecilia, J.M. Performance evaluation of edge-computing platforms for the prediction of low temperatures in agriculture using deep learning. J. Supercomput. 2021, 77, 818–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kaur, A.; Sood, S.K. Cloud-Fog based framework for drought prediction and forecasting using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 2020, 32, 273–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lee, K.; Silva, B.N.; Han, K. Deep learning entrusted to fog nodes (DLEFN) based smart agriculture. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Taneja, M.; Byabazaire, J.; Jalodia, N.; Davy, A.; Olariu, C.; Malone, P. Machine learning based fog computing assisted data-driven approach for early lameness detection in dairy cattle. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2020, 171, 105286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Cordeiro, M.; Markert, C.; Araújo, S.S.; Campos, N.G.; Gondim, R.S.; da Silva, T.L.C.; da Rocha, A.R. Towards Smart Farming: Fog-enabled intelligent irrigation system using deep neural networks. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2022, 129, 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Dahane, A.; Benameur, R.; Kechar, B. An IoT low-cost smart farming for enhancing irrigation efficiency of smallholders farmers. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2022, 127, 3173–3210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. De Vita, F.; Nocera, G.; Bruneo, D.; Tomaselli, V.; Giacalone, D.; Das, S.K. Porting deep neural networks on the edge via dynamic K-means compression: A case study of plant disease detection. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 2021, 75, 101437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gu, M.; Li, K.C.; Li, Z.; Han, Q.; Fan, W. Recognition of crop diseases based on depthwise separable convolution in edge computing. Sensors 2020, 20, 4091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zhang, R.; Li, X. Edge Computing Driven Data Sensing Strategy in the Entire Crop Lifecycle for Smart Agriculture. Sensors 2021, 21, 7502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Gupta, N.; Khosravy, M.; Patel, N.; Dey, N.; Gupta, S.; Darbari, H.; Crespo, R.G. Economic data analytic AI technique on IoT edge devices for health monitoring of agriculture machines. Appl. Intell. 2020, 50, 3990–4016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rajakumar, M.P.; Ramya, J.; Maheswari, B.U. Health monitoring and fault prediction using a lightweight deep convolutional neural network optimized by Levy flight optimization algorithm. Neural Comput. Appl. 2021, 33, 12513–12534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Umarale, D.; Sodhani, S.; Akhelikar, A.; Koshy, R. Attention Detection of Participants during Digital Learning Sessions using Edge Computing. SSRN Electron. J. 2021, 575–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hou, C.; Hua, L.; Lin, Y.; Zhang, J.; Liu, G.; Xiao, Y. Application and exploration of artificial intelligence and edge computing in long-distance education on mobile network. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2021, 26, 2164–2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, J.; Shi, D.; Tumnark, P.; Xu, H. A system for real-time intervention in negative emotional contagion in a smart classroom deployed under edge computing service infrastructure. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 2020, 13, 1706–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Preuveneers, D.; Garofalo, G.; Joosen, W. Cloud and edge based data analytics for privacy-preserving multi-modal engagement monitoring in the classroom. Inf. Syst. Front. 2021, 23, 151–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Singh, M.; Bharti, S.; Kaur, H.; Arora, V.; Saini, M.; Kaur, M.; Singh, J. A facial and vocal expression based comprehensive framework for real-time student stress monitoring in an IoT-Fog-Cloud environment. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 63177–63188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sood, S.K.; Singh, K.D. Optical fog-assisted smart learning framework to enhance students’ employability in engineering education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2019, 27, 1030–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ahanger, T.A.; Tariq, U.; Ibrahim, A.; Ullah, I.; Bouteraa, Y. ANFIS-inspired smart framework for education quality assessment. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 175306–175318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ma, R.; Chen, X. Intelligent education evaluation mechanism on ideology and politics with 5G: PSO-driven edge computing approach. Wirel. Netw. 2022, 29, 685–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Munusamy, A.; Adhikari, M.; Balasubramanian, V.; Khan, M.A.; Menon, V.G.; Rawat, D.; Srirama, S.N. Service Deployment Strategy for Predictive Analysis of FinTech IoT Applications in Edge Networks. IEEE IoT J. 2021, 10, 2131–2140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zeng, H. Influences of mobile edge computing-based service preloading on the early-warning of financial risks. J. Supercomput. 2022, 78, 11621–11639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Neelakantam, G.; Onthoni, D.D.; Sahoo, P.K. Fog computing enabled locality based product demand prediction and decision making using reinforcement learning. Electronics 2021, 10, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bv, N.; Guddeti, R.M.R. Fog-based Intelligent Machine Malfunction Monitoring System for Industry 4.0. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 17, 7923–7932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Syafrudin, M.; Fitriyani, N.L.; Alfian, G.; Rhee, J. An affordable fast early warning system for edge computing in assembly line. Appl. Sci. 2018, 9, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Fawwaz, D.Z.; Chung, S.H. Real-time and robust hydraulic system fault detection via edge computing. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Park, D.; Kim, S.; An, Y.; Jung, J.Y. Lired: A light-weight real-time fault detection system for edge computing using LSTM recurrent neural networks. Sensors 2018, 18, 2110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Li, L.; Ota, K.; Dong, M. Deep Learning for Smart Industry: Efficient Manufacture Inspection System with Fog Computing. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 14, 4665–4673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Feng, Y.; Wang, T.; Hu, B.; Yang, C.; Tan, J. An integrated method for high-dimensional imbalanced assembly quality prediction supported by edge computing. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 71279–71290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Qiao, H.; Wang, T.; Wang, P. A tool wear monitoring and prediction system based on multiscale deep learning models and fog computing. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 108, 2367–2384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wang, J.; Li, D. Task scheduling based on a hybrid heuristic algorithm for smart production line with fog computing. Sensors 2019, 19, 1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Tan, R.E.N.Z.; Chew, X.; Khaw, K.W.A.H. Quantized Deep Residual Convolutional Neural Network for Image-Based Dietary Assessment. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 111875–111888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Liu, C.; Cao, Y.; Member, S.; Luo, Y.; Chen, G. A New Deep Learning-Based Food Recognition System for Dietary Assessment on An Edge Computing Service Infrastructure. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 2018, 11, 249–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sarabia-jácome, D.; Usach, R.; Esteve, M. Internet of Things Highly-efficient fog-based deep learning AAL fall detection system. Internet Things 2020, 11, 100185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Hassan, M.K.; El, A.I.; Mahmoud, D.; Amany, M.B.; Mohamed, M.S.; Gunasekaran, M. EoT-driven hybrid ambient assisted living framework with naı ¨ ve Bayes – firefly algorithm. Neural Comput. Appl. 2018, 31, 1275–1300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Attaoui, A.E.; Largo, S.; Kaissari, S.; Benba, A.; Jilbab, A.; Bourouhou, A. Machine learning-based edge-computing on a multi-level architecture of WSN and IoT for real-time fall detection. IET Wirel. Sens. Syst. 2020, 10, 320–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Divya, V.; Sri, R.L. Intelligent Real-Time Multimodal Fall Detection in Fog Infrastructure Using Ensemble Learning. In Challenges and Trends in Multimodal Fall Detection for Healthcare; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Wu, Q.; Chen, X.; Member, S.; Zhou, Z.; Zhang, J. FedHome: Cloud-Edge based Personalized Federated Learning for In-Home Health Monitoring. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.07450v1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Zhou, Y.; Han, M.; He, J.S.; Liu, L.; Xu, X.; Gao, X. Abnormal Activity Detection in Edge Computing: A Transfer Learning Approach. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), Big Island, HI, USA, 17–20 February 2020; pp. 107–111. [Google Scholar]
  88. Gumaei, A.; Al-rakhami, M.; Alsalman, H.; Mizanur, S. DL-HAR: Deep Learning-Based Human Activity Recognition Framework for Edge Computing. CMC-Comput. Mater. Contin. 2020, 65, 1033–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rashid, N.; Member, S.; Demirel, B.U. AHAR: Adaptive CNN for Energy-efficient Human Activity Recognition in Low-power Edge Devices. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2102.01875v1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Islam, N.; Faheem, Y.; Ud, I.; Talha, M.; Guizani, M. A blockchain-based fog computing framework for activity recognition as an application to e-Healthcare services. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 100, 569–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Manogaran, G.; Shakeel, P.M.; Fouad, H.; Nam, Y.; Baskar, S. Wearable IoT Smart-Log Patch: An Edge Computing-Based Bayesian Deep Learning Network System for Multi Access Physical Monitoring System. Sensors 2019, 19, 3030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Manocha, A.; Kumar, G.; Bhatia, M.; Sharma, A. Video-assisted smart health monitoring for affliction determination based on fog analytics. J. Biomed. Inform. 2020, 109, 103513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ahanger, T.A.; Tariq, U.; Nusir, M.; Aldaej, A.; Ullah, I.; Sulman, A. A novel IoT–fog–cloud-based healthcare system for monitoring and predicting COVID-19 outspread. J. Supercomput. 2021, 78, 1783–1806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Bhatia, M.; Kumari, S. A Novel IoT-Fog-Cloud-based Healthcare System for Monitoring and Preventing Encephalitis. Cogn. Comput. 2021, 14, 1609–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Majumdar, A.; Debnath, T.; Sood, S.K.; Baishnab, K.L. Kyasanur Forest Disease Classification Framework Using Novel Extremal Optimization Tuned Neural Network in Fog Computing Environment. J. Med. Syst. 2018, 42, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Vijayakumar, V.; Malathi, D.; Subramaniyaswamy, V.; Saravanan, P.; Logesh, R. Fog computing-based intelligent healthcare system for the detection and prevention of mosquito-borne diseases. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 100, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Qayyum, A.; Ahmad, K.; Ahsan, M.A.; Al-fuqaha, A.; Qadir, J. Collaborative Federated Learning for Healthcare: Multi-Modal COVID-19 Diagnosis at the Edge. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2101.07511v1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Singh, P.; Kaur, R. An integrated fog and Artificial Intelligence smart health framework to predict and prevent COVID-19. Glob. Transit. 2020, 2, 283–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Singh, V.K.; Kolekar, M.H. Deep learning empowered COVID-19 diagnosis using chest CT scan images for collaborative edge-cloud computing platform. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2021, 81, 3–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Adhikari, M.; Munusamy, A. iCovidCare: Intelligent Health Monitoring Framework for COVID-19 using Ensemble Random Forest in Edge Networks Internet of Things iCovidCare: Intelligent health monitoring framework for COVID-19 using ensemble random forest in edge networks. Internet Things 2021, 14, 100385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Prabukumar, M.; Agilandeeswari, L.; Ganesan, K. An intelligent lung cancer diagnosis system using cuckoo search optimization and support vector machine classifier. J. Ambient Intell. Hum. Comput. 2019, 10, 267–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Ding, W.; Member, S.; Abdel-basset, M.; Eldrandaly, K.A.; Abdel-fatah, L.; Albuquerque, V.H.C.D.; Member, S. Smart Supervision of Cardiomyopathy Based on Fuzzy Harris Hawks Optimizer and Wearable Sensing Data Optimization: A New Model. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2020, 51, 4944–4958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Hassan, M.K.; Desouky, A.I.E.; Elghamrawy, S.M.; Sarhan, A.M. A Hybrid Real-time remote monitoring framework with NB-WOA algorithm for patients with chronic diseases. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 93, 77–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Muzammal, M.; Talat, R.; Hassan, A.; Pirbhulal, S. A multi-sensor data fusion enabled ensemble approach for medical data from body sensor networks. Inf. Fusion 2020, 53, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. El-Hasnony, I.M.; Barakat, S.I.; Mostafa, R.R. Optimized ANFIS model using hybrid metaheuristic algorithms for Parkinson’s disease prediction in IoT environment. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 119252–119270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Shynu, P.G.; Menon, V.G.; Member, S. Blockchain-Based Secure Healthcare Application for Diabetic-Cardio Disease Prediction in Fog Computing. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 45706–45720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Cheikhrouhou, O. One-Dimensional CNN Approach for ECG Arrhythmia Analysis in Fog-Cloud Environments. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 103513–103523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Pustokhina, I.V.; Pustokhin, D.A.; Gupta, D.; Khanna, A.; Shankar, K. An Effective Training Scheme for Deep Neural Network in Edge Computing Enabled Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 107112–107123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Ijaz, M.; Li, G.; Wang, H.; El-Sherbeeny, A.M.; Moro Awelisah, Y.; Lin, L.; Koubaa, A.; Noor, A. Intelligent fog-enabled smart healthcare system for wearable physiological parameter detection. Electronics 2020, 9, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zhu, T.; Kuang, L.; Daniels, J.; Herrero, P.; Li, K.; Georgiou, P. IoMT-Enabled Real-time Blood Glucose Prediction with Deep Learning and Edge Computing. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022; Early Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Xu, T.; Han, G.; Qi, X.; Du, J.; Lin, C.; Shu, L. A Hybrid Machine Learning Model for Demand Prediction of Edge-Computing-Based Bike-Sharing System Using Internet of Things. IEEE Iot J. 2020, 7, 7345–7356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Ke, R.; Zhuang, Y.; Pu, Z.; Wang, Y. A Smart, Efficient, and Reliable Parking Surveillance System with Edge Artificial Intelligence on IoT Devices. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2021, 22, 4962–4974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  113. Huang, X.; Li, P.; Yu, R.; Wu, Y.; Xie, K.; Xie, S. FedParking: A Federated Learning Based Parking Space Estimation with Parked Vehicle Assisted Edge Computing. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70, 9355–9368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Yan, G.; Qin, Q. The Application of Edge Computing Technology in the Collaborative Optimization of Intelligent Transportation System Based on Information Physical Fusion. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 153264–153272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Ali, A.; Zhu, Y.; Zakarya, M. A data aggregation based approach to exploit dynamic spatio-temporal correlations for citywide crowd flows prediction in fog computing. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2021, 80, 31401–31433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Liu, Y.; Member, S.; Yu, J.J.Q.; Kang, J.; Niyato, D.; Zhang, S. Privacy-Preserving Traffic Flow Prediction: A Federated Learning Approach. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 7, 7751–7763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Liu, F.; Ma, X.; An, X.; Liang, G. Urban Traffic Flow Prediction Model with CPSO/SSVM Algorithm under the Edge Computing Framework. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2020, 2020, 8871998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Yuan, X.; Chen, J.; Yang, J.; Zhang, N.; Yang, T.; Han, T.; Taherkordi, A. FedSTN: Graph Representation Driven Federated Learning for Edge Computing Enabled Urban Traffic Flow Prediction. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2022; Early Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Xun, Y.; Qin, J.; Liu, J.; Qin, J.; Liu, J. Deep Learning Enhanced Driving Behavior Evaluation Based on Vehicle-Edge-Cloud Architecture. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70, 6172–6177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Zhang, K.; Huang, W.; Hou, X.; Xu, J.; Su, R. A Fault Diagnosis and Visualization Method for High-Speed Train Based on Edge and Cloud Collaboration. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Gumaei, A.; Al-Rakhami, M.; Hassan, M.M.; Alamri, A.; Alhussein, M.; Razzaque, M.A.; Fortino, G. A deep learning-based driver distraction identification framework over edge cloud. Neural Comput. Appl. 2020, 1, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Kumar, R.; Kumar, P.; Tripathi, R.; Gupta, G.P.; Kumar, N.; Hassan, M.M. A Privacy-Preserving-Based Secure Framework Using Blockchain-Enabled Deep-Learning in Cooperative Intelligent Transport System. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2021, 23, 16492–16503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Kumar, R.; Kumar, P.; Tripathi, R.; Gupta, G.P.; Gadekallu, T.R.; Srivastava, G. SP2F: A secured privacy-preserving framework for smart agricultural Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Comput. Netw. 2021, 187, 107819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Sharma, J.; Kim, D.; Lee, A.; Seo, D. On differential privacy-based framework for enhancing user data privacy in mobile edge computing environment. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 38107–38118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Zeng, X.; Zhang, X.; Yang, S.; Shi, Z.; Chi, C. Gait-Based Implicit Authentication Using Edge Computing and Deep Learning for Mobile Devices. Sensors 2021, 21, 4592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Samy, A. Fog-Based Attack Detection Framework for Internet of Things Using Deep Learning. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 74571–74585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Ullah, I.; Raza, B.; Ali, S.; Abbasi, I.A.; Baseer, S.; Irshad, A. Software Defined Network Enabled Fog-to-Things Hybrid Deep Learning Driven Cyber Threat Detection System. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2021, 2021, 6136670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Sadaf, K.; Sultana, J. Intrusion Detection Based on Autoencoder and Isolation Forest in Fog Computing. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 167059–167068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Lee, S.J.; Yoo, P.D.; Member, S.; Asyhari, A.T.; Member, S.; Jhi, Y.; Chermak, L.; Yeun, C.Y.; Member, S. IMPACT: Impersonation attack detection via edge computing using deep autoencoder and feature abstraction. IEEE Access 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Huong, T.T.; Bac, T.P.; Long, D.M.; Thang, B.D.; Luong, T.D.; Binh, N.T.; Phuc, T.K. LocKedge: Low-Complexity Cyberattack Detection in IoT Edge Computing. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 29696–29710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Gavel, S.; Raghuvanshi, A.S.; Tiwari, S. Distributed intrusion detection scheme using dual-axis dimensionality reduction for Internet of things (IoT). J. Supercomput. 2021, 77, 10488–10511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Hwaitat, A.K.; Manaseer, S.; Al-Sayyed, R.M.; Almaiah, M.A.; Almomani, O. An investigator digital forensics frequencies particle swarm optimization for detection and classification of APT attack in fog computing environment (IDF-FPSO). J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2020, 98, 937–952. [Google Scholar]
  133. Haddadpajouh, H.; Mohtadi, A.; Dehghantanaha, A.; Karimipour, H.; Lin, X.; Choo, K.K.R. A Multikernel and Metaheuristic Feature Selection Approach for IoT Malware Threat Hunting in the Edge Layer. IEEE IoT J. 2021, 8, 4540–4547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Adel, A. Utilizing technologies of fog computing in educational IoT systems: Privacy, security, and agility perspective. J. Big Data 2020, 7, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Liu, H.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, P.; Zhou, X.; Shao, X.; Pu, G.; Zhang, Y. Blockchain and Federated Learning for Collaborative Intrusion Detection in Vehicular Edge Computing. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2021, 70, 6073–6084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Gupta, R.; Reebadiya, D.; Tanwar, S.; Kumar, N.; Guizani, M. When blockchain meets edge intelligence: Trusted and security solutions for consumers. IEEE Netw. 2021, 35, 272–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Nguyen, D.C.; Ding, M.; Pham, Q.V.; Pathirana, P.N.; Le, L.B.; Seneviratne, A.; Li, J.; Niyato, D.; Poor, H.V. Federated learning meets blockchain in edge computing: Opportunities and challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 12806–12825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Alwateer, M.; Almars, A.M.; Areed, K.N.; Elhosseini, M.A.; Haikal, A.Y.; Badawy, M. Ambient Healthcare Approach with Hybrid Whale Optimization Algorithm and Naïve Bayes Classifier. Sensors 2021, 21, 4579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Li, Y.; Xie, S.; Wan, Z.; Lv, H.; Song, H.; Lv, Z. Graph-powered learning methods in the Internet of Things: A survey. Mach. Learn. Appl. 2023, 11, 100441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Jiang, W. Graph-based deep learning for communication networks: A survey. Comput. Commun. 2021, 185, 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Mahmud, R.; Pallewatta, S.; Goudarzi, M.; Buyya, R. Ifogsim2: An extended ifogsim simulator for mobility, clustering, and microservice management in edge and fog computing environments. J. Syst. Softw. 2022, 190, 111351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Qayyum, T.; Trabelsi, Z.; Waqar Malik, A.; Hayawi, K. Mobility-aware hierarchical fog computing framework for Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT). J. Cloud Comput. 2022, 11, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Li, C.; Zhang, K.; Li, Y.; Shang, J.; Zhang, X.; Qian, L. ANNA: Accelerating Neural Network Accelerator through software-hardware co-design for vertical applications in edge systems. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2023, 140, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Qolomany, B.; Ahmad, K.; Al-Fuqaha, A.; Qadir, J. Particle Swarm Optimized Federated Learning for Industrial IoT and Smart City Services. In Proceedings of the GLOBECOM 2020—2020 IEEE Global Communications Conference, Taipei, Taiwan, 7–11 December 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Cho, Y.J.; Wang, J.; Chirvolu, T.; Joshi, G. Communication-Efficient and Model-Heterogeneous Personalized Federated Learning via Clustered Knowledge Transfer. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 2023; Early Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Grover, J.; Garimella, R.M. Reliable and fault-tolerant IoT-edge architecture. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE SENSORS, New Delhi, India, 28–31 October 2018; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  147. Mertens, J.; Galluccio, L.; Morabito, G. Federated learning through model gossiping in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom), Bucharest, Romania, 24–28 May 2021; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  148. Huang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Shao, X.; Li, X.; Ji, H. RoofSplit: An edge computing framework with heterogeneous nodes collaboration considering optimal CNN model splitting. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2023, 140, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Babar, M.; Khan, M.S. ScalEdge: A framework for scalable edge computing in Internet of things–based smart systems. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2021, 17, 15501477211035332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. da Silva, T.P.; Neto, A.R.; Batista, T.V.; Delicato, F.C.; Pires, P.F.; Lopes, F. Online machine learning for auto-scaling in the edge computing. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 2022, 87, 101722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Agrawal, N. Dynamic load balancing assisted optimized access control mechanism for edge-fog-cloud network in Internet of Things environment. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2021, 33, e6440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Adhikari, M.; Ambigavathi, M.; Menon, V.G.; Hammoudeh, M. R andom F orest for D ata A ggregation to M onitor and P redict COVID-19 U sing E dge N etworks. IEEE Internet Things Mag. 2021, 4, 40–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Domeke, A.; Cimoli, B.; Monroy, I.T. Integration of Network Slicing and Machine Learning into Edge Networks for Low-Latency Services in 5G and beyond Systems. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 6617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. A schematic overview of the paper organization structure.
Figure 1. A schematic overview of the paper organization structure.
Sensors 23 01639 g001
Figure 2. A statistic distribution of the domains considered in this review.
Figure 2. A statistic distribution of the domains considered in this review.
Sensors 23 01639 g002
Figure 3. Categorization of AI technologies.
Figure 3. Categorization of AI technologies.
Sensors 23 01639 g003
Figure 4. Percentage of the use of the convolutional ML and deep learning algorithms in the reviewed works.
Figure 4. Percentage of the use of the convolutional ML and deep learning algorithms in the reviewed works.
Sensors 23 01639 g004
Figure 5. AI use.
Figure 5. AI use.
Sensors 23 01639 g005
Figure 6. Enabling technologies.
Figure 6. Enabling technologies.
Sensors 23 01639 g006
Figure 7. Platforms and software tools.
Figure 7. Platforms and software tools.
Sensors 23 01639 g007
Figure 8. Performance metrics.
Figure 8. Performance metrics.
Sensors 23 01639 g008
Figure 9. Open issues.
Figure 9. Open issues.
Sensors 23 01639 g009
Table 1. Qualitative comparison of related works.
Table 1. Qualitative comparison of related works.
YearReferenceAI CategoryBig Data AnalyticsResource ManagementKey Enabling TechnologiesApplication Domains
2021[14]NoNoYesNoYes
2022[13]YesNoNoNoIoV
2021[3]YesNoYesYesyes
2020[15]yesNoYesYesNO
2020[16]YesYesYesYesNo
2019[17]YesYesYesNoYes
2020[19]YesNoYesNoNo
2022[18]YesNoYesNoYes
2023Our paperYesYesYesYesYes
Table 2. Taxonomy of the reviewed works.
Table 2. Taxonomy of the reviewed works.
AI-edge based
applications
Smart
environment
AQM[20,21,22,23,24]
WQM[25,26,27]
SWM[28]
UM[29,30,31,32]
Smart
grid
LDF[33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40]
DSM[41,42,43]
LAD[44,45,46,47,48,49]
Smart
agriculture
WP[50,51]
LM[52,53]
SI[54,55]
CMDD[56,57,58]
MHSAM[59,60]
Smart
education
SEM[61,62,63,64,65]
SA[66,67,68]
Smart
industry
FI[69,70]
CI[71]
MMM[72,73,74,75,76]
PQMP[77,78,79]
Smart
healthcare
DHM[80,81]
AAL[82,83,84,85,86]
HAR[87,88,89,90,91,92]
LDP[93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100]
DD[101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110]
Smart
transport
SPM[111,112,113]
TMP[114,115,116,117,118]
ITM[119,120,121]
Security
and
privacy
PP[122,123,124]
AA[8,125]
ID[126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133]
Table 3. Qualitative comparison of smart environment-related works.
Table 3. Qualitative comparison of smart environment-related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart environmentAQM[20]Predicting of futureindoor status of PM10 and PM2.5PredictionLSTMData from Seoul, KoreaEdge device, cloudFederated learningTensorFlowKerasRMSEMinimize load Hight accuracyDoes not consider all factors in prediction
[21]Green energy-based wireless sensing network for air-quality monitoringPredictionLSTMAirbox system datasetEdge device, cloudFederated learningNot mentionedMAE-loss RMSEEnergy thresholdsaving, ratio error rateCommunication efficiencyPreserving data privacy Low computational complexitySlightly lower accuracy
[22]Location awareenvironment sensingPredictionk-means, LSTM, CNN (ResNet)WA dataset Outdoor image datasetsEdge device, cloudDistributedcomputing clusterFederated learningAccuracy, avg. sum of squared errors, silhouette coefficientHigh accuracyHomogeneous nodes only considered
[23]Distributed data analysis for air predictionPreprocessingK-means SVM, MLP, DT, KNN, NBU.S. Pollution Data KaggleEdge devices, cloudDistributed computingIFogSim toolkit-YAFS-AccuracyPrecision recallF1-ScoreData reductionLow response time reductionNot consider mobility of nodes
[24]On-device air-quality predictionPredictionCNN, LSTMDataset from University of California–Irvine (UCI) Machine Learning Repository pageEdge devices(RPi3B+, RPi4B)Posttraining quantization Hardware acceleratorTensorFlow LiteRMSE, MAEexecution timeLow-complexity model latencyAccuracy degradation
WQM[25]Onboard sensor classifier for the detection of contaminants in waterClassificationEA PCAReal-world datasetEdge device (sensors)Low-cost modelNot mentionedAccuracy F-score TP TN FP FNHigh accuracyLow accuracy for unlabeled data
[27] Online water-quality monitoring Prediction BPNN Real-world dataset Edge gateway Low-cost model Not mentioned Data transmission response time Low-complexity model accuracy, data transmission reduction Accuracy needs to improved
WQM[26]Real-time water- quality monitoringPreprocessing predictionPCA LR MLP SVM SMO Lazy-IBK, KStar RF RTData of sewage water-treatment plant of the institute, data collected from river GangaEdge device (Raspberry Pi)Transfer learningPython, WekaCorrelation coefficient MAE RMSE-RAE RRSE Edge response timeLess response timeCommunication cost not considered
SWM[28]Smart water saving and distributionPredictionDecision makingFFN MDNReal-world datasetEdge serverSofT computing blockchainPythonMSE accuracyEffective decision-makingAccuracy needs to be enhanced
Smart environmentUM[29]Reduce data and improve data quality or underwaterData (fusion, reduction)BPNN evidence theoryWestern Pacific measurement informationFog gateway CloudEdge preprocessingNot mentionedTime consumption Redundant data volume R, MAE, MSE SMAPELow communication costHigh accuracyHigh delay
[30]Real anomaly detection errors in underwater vehiclesNetwork management, data reduction classification, decision-makingYULO (CNN), RLReal-world datasetEdge device (Raspberry Pi) Fog gatewayHardware accelerator, pretrained CNNNot mentionedAccuracy, latency, recallHigh accuracy, less latencyAccuracy degraded
[31]Low delay for Seawater quality predictionData reductionPredictionPCA RVMReal-world datasetMobile edge computingLow-cost modelNot mentionedCD MAE RMSEHigher prediction Low time consumptionHigh-cost model
[32]Downlink throughput performance enhancementResource allocation ClassificationDRL DNNReal-world datasetEdge device (IoUT devices)Federated learningNot mentionedDownlink throughput channel usage Convergence rateLow complexity
Table 5. Qualitative comparison of smart agriculture related works.
Table 5. Qualitative comparison of smart agriculture related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart agricultureWP[50]Timely prediction of frost in cropsPredictionLSTMReal-world datasetEdge device (Nvidia Jetson)Hardware acceleratorTensorFlow 1.10.1 Keras 2.2.4Power consumption, execution time, RMSE, MAE, memory usage, PCC R2Less execution timeLess scalability complexity of model causes overlearning and slightly increased error
[51]Drought predictionFeature extractionANN, PCA, GADrought attribute datasetFog gateway, cloudPreprocessing edgeMatlab Amazon EC2Accuracy sensitivity specificity, precision, F-measureReduction of load to cloud High accuracyHigh Communication cost
LM[52]Livestock surveillanceFeature extractionCNNGoogle ImageNet PixabayEdge device (Nvidia Tegra) CloudSplitting DNNCaffeAccuracy Reduction rateLoad reduction High accuracyHigh communication cost
[53]Early lameness detection in dairy cattleFeature extractionK-means, KNNReal-world datasetFog gateway (PC), cloudEdge preprocessingPythonReduction rate AccuracyHigh accuracyHigh communication cost
SI[54]Prediction models of soil moistureMissing-data imputation, predictionGDR, LSTM, BiLSTMCoconut, Cashew datasetsSingle-board computer (Raspberry Pi 4 Model B)Hardware acceleratorTensorFlowCPU RAM usage, MAEData quality improvement High accuracyAccuracy must be improved
[55] Intelligent irrigation system Prediction LSTM GRU Historical Hourly Weather Data 2012–2017 Edge devices Hardware accelerator/software Pytorch, TensorFlow, TensorFlow Lite RMSE, MSE, MAE Reliability Overhead computation
CMDD[56]Timely diagnosis of crop diseasePredictionCNNReal-world datasetEdge device (STM32F746G-disco board)QuantizationTensorFlow LiteAccuracy, memory usage, inference time, energy consumptionHigh accuracy Low memory usageAccuracy may degrade
[57]Timely recognition of crop DiseasesClassificationCNNReal-world datasetMobile edge deviceTransfer learningPythonAccuracyHigh accuracy Less recognition timeHigh computational cost
CMDD[58]Intelligent sensing in the entire crop life cyclePreprocessing network managementFuzzy Gath–Geva clustering, Tkagi–Sugneo-fuzzy neural network, KNN, BPNNReal-world datasetEdge serverNot mentionedAFE CC accuracy Sensing time, communication rateData collection times reduction Less energy consumption Sensed data quality improvement High accuracy
MHSM[59]Timely vehicle health monitoringPredictionANN GANot mentionedSmartphoneLightweight modelMATLAB 2019bAccuracy, ROC curve, misclassification rate, MSEHigh accuracyComplexity reduction still recommended
[60]Vehicle health recognitionClassificationDCNN Levy flightReal-world datasetSmartphoneLightweight DLNot mentionedAccuracy ROC, precision recall, F1-scoreLow complexityHigh training time
Table 6. Qualitative comparison of smart education related works.
Table 6. Qualitative comparison of smart education related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart educationS. engagement monitoring[61]Attention detection of participantsCNNPrediction(DAiSEE)Edge ( pc)Pretrained modelPythonAccuracy-Accuracy needs to improve
[62]Improve long-distance educationClassificationResNet-50Fer2013 emotion datasetMobile edge computingHardware accelerator/Confusion matrix accuracyHigh accuracyAccuracy needs to improve
[63]Real-time intervention in negative emotional contagion in a smart classroomClassificationCNNFer2013 emotion datasetEdge preprocessingHardware acceleratorJavaScript, TensorFlow, OpenCVAccuracyLess response timeAccuracy needs to improve
[64]Multimodal engagement analysisPredictionDLReal-world dataEdge server (PC)/JIFF, JavaScript library, TensorFlowAverage performance impact on edge device /serverScalabilityComputational overhead
[65] Student stress monitoring and real-time alert generating Prediction VGG16, BiLSTM, NB Real-world data Kaggle dataset Fog cloud Cloud training Not mentioned Specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, F-measure High accuracy Eliminate historical record
Skill assessment[66]Monitors the academic/skill of students for timely employability classification of graduation.Resource managementK-means, PCA, KNNReal-world datasetFog nodes/iFogSim toolkitMean absolute percentage error (MAPE)ScalabilityProcessing overhead
[67]Education quality evaluation ANFIS Bayesian belief network (BBN)Environmental datasets, staff-related dataset, physical dataset, students’ academic-related historical datasetRaspberry Pi v3 is/WekaPrecision, specificity, sensitivity, BBM, accuracy, RMSE, MASStability, reliabilityAccuracy needs to be improved
[68]Ideology and politics education evaluation in 5GResource management data cachingPSOEdge devicesNot mentioned-/Energy consumption, latencyScalability, low energy consumption, low latency-
Table 7. Qualitative comparison of smart industry related works.
Table 7. Qualitative comparison of smart industry related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart IndustryFI[69]Financial data analysisPredictionSVM(Credit card fraud, credit card risk, Customer Churn, Insurance Claim) datasetEdge devices, cloudLow-cost model task offloadingSimulator (Not mentioned )Task assignment over delay power consumption precision recall F1-scoreHigh accuracyCommunication overhead
[70] Early-warning of financial risks Prediction BPNN Real-world dataset MEC Quantization HARDWARE-CPU Matlab Accuracy, hit rate Less response time Accuracy needs improvement
C.I[71]Locality-based product demand prediction and decision makingFeature selection, classification, decision-makingRL, PCA, K-meansKaggle open dataEdge device (GPU NVIDIA-SMI)Low-cost modelScikit-learn PythonClustering score maximum/average cumulative reward execution timeOutperform others existing methodsStability not tested
MMM[72]Machine malfunction monitoringRF SVM Adab LR MlP(MIMII datasetFog (controller unit (ICU)/Microdata center)Hardware acceleratorLightweight modelNot mentionedTime complexity, accuracy, precision, FScoreResponse time reduction
[73]Abnormal events detection during assembly line productionOutlier detection predictionRF, DBSCANReal-world datasetEdge devices (Raspberry Pi)Low-cost modelMongoDB PythonAccuracy recall F1-score precisionHigh accuracyDynamic of IoT data not addressed
[74]Fault detection in a hydraulic systemData reduction classificationLSTM, AE, GAReal-world datasetEdge serverTransfer learningTensorFlowComplexity DL accuracy detection time, data reductionReduction of load to cloud Low detection time Robust to noisy dataCommunication overhead
Smart IndustryMM[75]Faults of machine detectionClassificationLSTMReal-world datasetEdge device (Raspberry Pi)Lightweight modelKeras PythonAccuracyLow-cost model Short fault detectionMemory usage overhead
[76]Fast manufacture inspectionFeature extraction classificationCNNReal-world datasetFog gatewayEarly exit-DNN splittingNot mentionedROC curve running efficiencyHigh accuracyHigh communication cost
PQMP[77]Fast prediction of assembly qualityFeature selection, predictionRF AdaboostReal-world datasetEdge server (PC)Transfer learningPythonAccuracyEfficacy flexibility complexity reductionOnline learning not improved
[78]Fast tool wear monitoring and predictionFeature extraction classificationCNN LSTM BiLSTMReal-world datasetEdge server (PC)Transfer learningPython TensorFlowResponse time, network bandwidth, data transmission RMSE MAPEHigh monitoring accuracy, low-cost model, low response latencyAccuracy loss
[79]Scheduling tasks production for smart production lineTask scheduling, resource allocationPSO, ACONot mentionedFog gateway-MatlabCompletion time, energy consumption, reliabilitySolves the problem of limited computing resources, high energy consumption, real-time/efficient processingDoes not consider heterogeneity of IoT devices.
Table 8. Qualitative comparison of smart healthcare-related works.
Table 8. Qualitative comparison of smart healthcare-related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart healthcareDHM[80]Food recognitionClassification StorageDRCNNFood 101ImageSmartphoneQuantization, GPU acceleratorTensorFlow LiteAccuracy loss values, computational powerLow response timeLoss of accuracy over time
[81]Food recognitionClassification preprocessingGoogLeNetUEC-256 UEC-100 Food-101SmartphonePretrained CNNCaffeResponse time, accuracy, computational powerLow response timeLoss of accuracy over time
AAL[82]Accurate and timely fall detectionClassificationLSTM/GRUSisFall datasetIoT, gateway (fog)VirtualizationDocker HDFS-Apache Kafka-MongoDB TensorflowAccuracy, sensitivity, precision, inferenceScalability, flexibilityMemory consumption needs to be optimized Mobility not considered
[83]Online/offline monitoring elderly patients suffering from chronic diseasePredictionNB-FAVital signs, behavioral data environmental dataCloud, edgeTransfer learningWeka, classifier, Spark jobAccuracy, sensitivity, precision, inference timeAccurate, fault-tolerant, fast decisionsHigh computational cost
[84]Real-time fall detectionPreprocessing, predictionLDA KNN SVMSisFall datasetsRaspberry Pi 3 B +Real-time testLow-cost modelResponse timeHigh accuracy, low response timeAccuracy and generalization still improved
[85]Multimodal fall detectionPredictionPCA linear regression MLPSisFall data setMist, fog, cloud, edgeNot mentionedLow-cost modelCC, MAE RMSE, RAE, RRSE response timeHigh accuracy, less inference timeGeneralization needs to be solved
[86]Real-time in-home health monitoringPredictionGCAEMobiAct datasetCloud, edgeFederated learningNot mentionedAccuracy communication rounds scalabilityHeterogeneity of data and communication cost solvedData privacy issues
Smart healthcareHAR[87]Real-time abnormal human activitiesPredictionPCA -CNNUniMiB DATASETEdge deviceTransfer learningPython 3.6Process timeLow energy consumption, less computational costLack of security
[88]Real-time, human activity recognitionPredictionDRNNWISDM datasetRaspberry Pi3 (edge devices)VirtualizationTensorFlowAccuracy F1-score recognition timeLess recognition time, high accuracyHigh computational cost
[89]Energy-efficient, human-activity recognitionTraining, predictionCNNOpportunity dataset, w-HAR datasetEdge devicesTransfer learningNot mentionedAccuracy, precision, recall, weighted, F1-scoreLess memory overhead, high accuracyStability not tested
[90]Human activity recognitionclassificationSVMKTH Dataset Hollywood2 Action DatasetEdge/cloudTransfer learning BlockchainTensorFlowAccuracyHigh accuracy multiclass classificationLess scalability
[91]Multiaccess physical monitoring systemClassificationBDNReal-world datasetWearable IoTTransfer learningNot mentionedAccuracy data transmission time RMSELess energy consumption, high accuracyLack of data privacy, less scalability
[92]Physical instance-based irregularity recognitionClassificationCNN LSTMNTU RGB datasetFog nodesTransfer learningPython-Pillow, OpenCV, Numpy librariesRate of latency analysisHigh accuracy, less latencyEnvironmental changes and model generalization not considered
Smart healthcareLDP[93]Monitoring and predicting COVID-19 outspreadPrediction visualisationFCM T-RNN SOM-Fog nodesMATLAB-IfogsimPreprocessingLatency time, response delay, accuracy, precisionreliability, high accuracyLack of security
[94]Location-aware monitoring and preventing encephalitisPrediction visualisationFCM- T-RNN, SOMCloud, edgeUCI-repository dataPreprocessingMATLABLatency time, response delay, accuracy, precisionReliability, high accuracy, location aware, data managementLack of security
[95]Early detection of Kyasanur forest disease and control the disease outbreakClassificationANNKFD datasetFog/cloudLightweight modelNot mentionedAccuracy, sensitivity, specificity, RMSE MAEHigh accuracyHigh computational cost
[96]Continuous monitoring and early detection of mosquito-borne diseaseClassificationFNN, SNA graphUCI-repository dataFog nodeLightweight modelNot mentionedAccuracy, sensitivity, specificityHigh accuracyData integrity and security not considered
[97]Automatic diagnosis of COVID-19ClassificationK-MEANS -VGG16X-ray ultrasound datasetsEdge devicesPretrained modelTensorFlowRMSE, MAECope with data heterogeneityLess accuracy, lack of security
[99]Remote COVID-19 diagnosisclassificationRF GAN GNBGenerated datasetFog nodesOpen-source language R iFogSimAccuracy response time, recallHigh accuracyHigh energy consumption, lack of security
Smart healthcareLDP[99]Remote COVID-19 diagnosisClassificationMobile-Net V2Chest CT scan image datasetTransfer learningEdge devicesTensorFlowSensitivity specificity precision F1-scoreHigh accuracy, less responseNot tested for large datasets, accuracy needs to be improved
[100]Low delay in prediction of health status of COVID-19 patientsPreprocessing predictioneRFCOVID-19 datasetEdge devicesLightweight modelTensorFlowTraining time, accuracy, precision, recall, MAE, RMSEHigh accuracyHigh computational cost
DD[101]Early lung cancer diagnosisPreprocessing, feature selection ClassificationFCM, CS, SVM(ELCAP) datasetFog nodesLightweight modelMATLAB 2013aAccuracy, sensitivity, specificity, MCC, F-measure, ROC curves, computational costLess training time, high accuracyHigh cost of model for fog implementation
[102]Intelligent monitoring of cardiomyopathy patientsIntelligent sensingFHHO, FLReal-world datasetFog nodesNot mentionedExecution time, accuracy, precision, recall, F-measureHigh accuracy, low time costLack of security, high energy consumption
[103]Real-time monitoring patients with chronic diseasesClassificationNB-WOAClinical dataset, Physio Bank-MIMIC II databaseFog nodes, cloudTransfer learningWeka, SparkAccuracy, recall, precisionHigher accuracy, high response timeHigh complexity of model, lack of security
[104]Early heart disease predictiondata fusion predictionCFS, KRFUCI repository dataFog nodesLightweight modelAccuracy, training time, scalabilityScalability, accuracyQuality of the data depends on the number of sensors, improved accuracy is required
Smart healthcareDD[105]Early detection of Parkinson’s DiseasePredictionANFIS GWO PSOUCI University of CaliforniaFog nodesDistributed computingTensorFlowRMSE, MAEHigh accuracyLack of security
[106]Diabetic cardio disease predictionPredictionRule-based clustering, CRA, ANFIS(Heart disease, diabetes) datasetEdge devicesBlockchainJavaPurity NMI accuracy execution timeEfficient grouping medical data, high accuracy, secure data sharing, good training with uncertaintyLow accuracy
[107]Remote cardiac patient monitoringClassification1D-CNNMIT-BIH ArrhythmiaFog nodes (single-board computer), cloudTransfer learningNot mentionedRMSE MAE CPU usage accuracy loss recall precision F1-scoreHigh accuracy, low computational overhead, low resource usage, low response timeScalability not considered
[108]Timely disease diagnosis of health conditionsData preprocessing classificationAE HMWWOUCI-repository dataEdge devicesLightweight modelNot mentionedLatency, F-measure time complexity sensitivityHigh sensitivity, improved accuracy Minimum time complexity and latency scalabilitySmall dataset used for evaluation, lack of data protection
[109]Real-time physiological parameter detectionPreprocessing prediction, load balancingRK-PCA HMM MoSHO SpikQ-NetUCI repository dataEdge devices, fog nodesLightweight modeliFogSimExecution, time accuracy, latencyStability, scalability, low execution, time, low latency, low complexityLack of security
[110] Real-time blood glucose Prediction GRU (OhioT1DM ABC4D ARISES) datasets Edge device (Smartphone) Hardware accelerator TensorFlow Lite RMSE, MSE Low energy consumption, good training with uncertainty Less sensitivity
Table 9. Qualitative comparison of smart transportation-related works.
Table 9. Qualitative comparison of smart transportation-related works.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Smart transportationSPM[111]Real-time prediction Bike charging at each stationReduce load to cloudPredictionRT SOMKaggle competition, London shared bike dataMECLightweight model (ML)Not mentionedRMSE RMSLEHigh accuracy GeneralizationMultivariate data not supported security
[112]Real-time parking occupancy surveillance Reduce load to cloudClassificationMobile-net SSD, BG, SORTMIO-TCDEdge device Raspberry Pi 3B,Transfer learningTensorFlow LiteAccuracyFlexibility Reliability Online and high accuracyAccuracy needs to be enhanced (=95),security
[113]Privacy preserving Parking space estimationPrediction, decision makingLSTM DRL Game theoryBirmingham parking datasetFog nodesFederated learningNot mentionedMSEComputation offloading in nonstatic environment, improve security, flexibility, high accuracyLess convergence speed
T.M.P[115]Timely citywide traffic prediction, context data managementData aggregationCNN, LTSMBeijing taxicabs data NYC bike dataFog nodesTransfer learningIFogSimComplexity, training time, prediction time, accuracyReduce network congestion,increase energy efficiency, less training/prediction timesCloud inference, non-real-time prediction
[114]Forecast the overall traffic, adjust the redirected flowPredictionDBN-SVRCaltrans PeMSFog nodes/MATLABScalability, processing time, accuracyScalability, securityAccuracy needs to be enhanced
[116]Privacy preservation Traffic flow predictionPredictionGRU, k-meansPeMS databaseEdge nodesFederated learningNot mentionedMAE, MSE, RMSE, MAPELow communication overheadStatistical heterogeneity solved, high accuracySpatiotemporal correlation not solved
[117]Timely traffic flow predictionPredictionSVM PSOGuiyang City datasetFog nodesLightweight MLMatlab 2014aMSELow time overhead, faster processing, adaptability, good predictionModel complexity high
[118] Spatial traffic flow prediction Prediction GCNs TaxiBJ TaxiNYC dataset Edge nodes Federated learning Not mentioned RMSE, MSE, MAPE High accuracy Less scalability
ITM[88]Driver distraction identificationpredictionVGG1-CNN -k-meansKaggle’s state farm, distracted driver challengeEdge deviceRaspberry PiTransfer learningKERASAccuracy, precision, recall, F1-scoreHigh accuracySecurityless scalability
[119]Driving behavior evaluationPredictionCNN-LSTMToN UCI knowledge discovery, archive databaseFog nodesTransfer learningTensorFlowAccuracy-loss curvesHigh accuracy, generalizationLess scalability, security
[120]Real-time fault diagnosisPredictionSAES-DNN, knowledge graphsToN UCI knowledge, discovery archive databaseEdge deviceNVIDIA Jetson TX2Transfer learningPythonLoss rate accuracyHigh accuracyModel complexity, accuracy degraded for largedataset
Table 10. Qualitative comparison of security and privacy in edge-based applications.
Table 10. Qualitative comparison of security and privacy in edge-based applications.
Use CaseRefContributionAI Role
(At the Edge)
AI AlgorithmDatasetAI PlacementEmployed
Technology
PlatformMetricsBenefits
AI-Edge
Drawbacks
Security and privacy in
edge-based applications
PP[122]Privacy-preserving-based secure C-ITSData encoding, predictionLSTM-AE, RNNToN-IoT/CICIDS-2017Fog nodesTransfer learningTensorFlow library, KerasFAR-Accuracy-DR-PR, F1Low communication overhead, low computation overhead, privacy preservationLess scalability
[123]Privacy-preserving-based secure smart agricultureData encoding, PredictionSAE, LSTMToN-IoT, IoT BotnetFog nodesTransfer learningTensorFlow library, Keras-FAR-Accuracy-DR-PR, F1Privacy preservationLess scalability
[124]Improve the privacy of the user dataclassification, adding noiseFCNNToN UCI knowledge discovery Archive databaseFog nodesTransfer learningJava Development toolkit (JDK) version 1.8, WekaScalability, processing time, accuracyHigher scalability and efficiencyFault tolerance
AA[8]Enhance the security of MECClassificationDNNNot mentionedMECTransfer learningNot mentionedComputational cost, convergence speedHigh convergence speed, low computational overhead
[125]Gait-based authentication to enhance security of mobile devicesFeature extraction-classificationCNN-LSTMMatteo Gadaleta et al. datasetEdge node/mobileTransfer learningNot mentionedComplexity, accuracyHigh accuracyEnergy consumption, memory not tested, limited dataset
Security and privacy in edge-based applicationsID[126]Distributed attack detection for IoT networksPredictionGRU-LSTM-CNN-DNNNSL-KDDCloud, edgeFederated learningTensorFlowF1-score recall, detection timeLow response time, high accuracy, multiclass classification, scalabilityDifficult retraining model at fog
[127]Real-time intrusion detectionPredictionLSTM, GRU, CNNCIDDS-01Fog nodesTransfer learning, SDNPythonAccuracy, precision, recall, F1-scoreLow accuracy, low response time, accuracy time, scalability
[128]Real-time intrusion detectionAE, IFNSL-KDDFog, cloudTransfer learningPythonAccuracy, precision, recall, F-measure valueHigh accuracy
[129]Low-cost intrusion-detection systemClassificationSAE, mutual information (MI), C4.8 wrapperAegean WiFi Intrusion Dataset (AWID)Edge deviceLightweight modelNot mentionedFAR, accuracy, DR-PR, F1, MCC, TTBHigh accuracyGeneralization not approved
[130]Real-time intrusion detectionClassificationDNN, PCABoT-IoT data setEdge gateway (Raspberry Pi)-CloudCentralized, federated learningPythonCPU usage, RAM usage, precision, F1-score, complexityHigh accuracy, low complexityGeneralization not approved
[131]Real-time intrusion detectionClassificationSalp, LSTMNSL-KDD, KYOTO, CICIDSCICIDS (AWS)Fog gatewayLow-cost modelMATLABAccuracyHigh accuracy, computational complexity
[132]Shamoon attack detectionClassification, feature extractionK-means, KNN, PSOShamoon attack datasetFog nodesLightweight modelNot mentionedAccuracyLow computational cost
[133]Real-time attack detectionClassification, feature extractionSVM, GWOOpcode datasetEdge server (PC)/TensorFlowComputation timeHigh accuracy, high convergence
Table 11. The benefits of the integration of AI and edge in the eight reviewed domains.
Table 11. The benefits of the integration of AI and edge in the eight reviewed domains.
DomainBenefits of AI-Edge
Smart healthcareReduces latency and provides location-aware and real-time healthcare services.
Smart gridProvides effective distribution and forecasting of energy
Smart agricultureProvides powerful monitoring systems to help speed up the diagnosis and analysis of plants’ health conditions. Moreover, it helps to solve the problem of connectivity, monitor the statutes of the machine, and identify the fault in the machine in a timely manner
Smart environmentImproves data quality, reduces computational modeling complexity, and improves the mining efficiency of ocean big data. For air-quality monitoring, considering regional characteristics when distributing various site-monitoring models enhances the performance of monitoring
Security and privacyIncreases security and privacy by adding noise and encryption to data, and distinguishing legitimate edge nodes from malicious nodes and attackers
Smart industryProvides immediate services to customers with minimal delays and errors; it also helps in detecting the credit risks of legitimate customers and detecting and preventing fraudulent activity
Smart transportationManages real-time parking, traffic flow prediction, and supports intelligent mobility decisions
Smart educationImproves online and real-time course management services, addresses poor portability of the experience, and improves distance learning
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bourechak, A.; Zedadra, O.; Kouahla, M.N.; Guerrieri, A.; Seridi, H.; Fortino, G. At the Confluence of Artificial Intelligence and Edge Computing in IoT-Based Applications: A Review and New Perspectives. Sensors 2023, 23, 1639. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031639

AMA Style

Bourechak A, Zedadra O, Kouahla MN, Guerrieri A, Seridi H, Fortino G. At the Confluence of Artificial Intelligence and Edge Computing in IoT-Based Applications: A Review and New Perspectives. Sensors. 2023; 23(3):1639. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031639

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bourechak, Amira, Ouarda Zedadra, Mohamed Nadjib Kouahla, Antonio Guerrieri, Hamid Seridi, and Giancarlo Fortino. 2023. "At the Confluence of Artificial Intelligence and Edge Computing in IoT-Based Applications: A Review and New Perspectives" Sensors 23, no. 3: 1639. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031639

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop