Balancing the NEEDS vs. the WANTS in the Internet of Things

Dr. Prasant Misra W: https://sites.google.com/site/prasantmisra

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this presentation and on the following slides are solely those of the presenter and not necessarily those of the organization that he works for.

IoT 101

8/26/2016 2

History of Computing

1960 - 70

1980 - 90

2000 -10 and beyond

Year

Size

8/26/2016 3

Trend-I: Data/Device Proliferation (by Moore’s Law)

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) Medical Devices

Industrial Systems Portable Smart Devices RFID

http://www.onethatmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Internet-of-Things-why.png

Fixed/Mobile Leaf/Edge

8/26/2016 4

Trend-I: Data/Device Proliferation (by Moore’s Law)

“Information technology (IT) is on the verge of another revolution. Driven by the increasing capabilities and ever declining costs of computing and communications devices, IT is being embedded into a growing range of physical devices linked together through networks and will become ever more pervasive as the component technologies become smaller, faster, and cheaper. “ “These changes are sometimes obvious—in pagers and Internet-enabled cell phones, for example—but often IT is buried inside larger (or smaller) systems in ways that are not easily visible to end users. These networked systems of embedded computers, …, have the potential to change radically the way people interact with their environment by linking together a range of devices and sensors that will allow information to be collected, shared, and processed in unprecedented ways. The range of applications continues to expand with continued research and development.”

Committee on Networked Systems Council of Embedded Computers, National Research Council

8/26/2016 5

Trend-II: Integration at Scale (Isolation has cost !!!)

(World Wide) Sensor Web (Feng Zhao)

Future Combat Systems

Ubiquitous embedded devices • Large scale network embedded systems • Seamless integration with the physical environment

Complex system with global integration

8/26/2016 6

Trend-III: Evolution: Man vs. Machine

The exponential proliferation of embedded devices (afforded by Moore’s Law) is not matched by a corresponding increase in human ability to consume information !

Increase autonomy (i.e., decrease the dependence on humans)

8/26/2016 7

Confluence of Trends

Distributed, Information

Distillation and Control Systems of Embedded Devices

Trend-1:

Data & Device Proliferation

Trend-3: Autonomy

Trend-2: Integration at

Scale

8/26/2016 8

Confluence of Technologies

CPS

Trend-1:

Sensing & Actuation

Trend-3: Computation,

Control Trend-2:

Communication

A cyber-physical system (CPS) refers to a tightly integrated system that is engineered with a collection of technologies, and is designed to drive an application in a principled manner.

8/26/2016 9

Looks very familiar …. What is new in the functional definition/characterization of CPS ?

Enormous SCALE : both in space and time

Functional Blocks of CPS

Functional Blocks of CPS

Enormous SCALE : both in space and time 8/26/2016 11

Casting CPS Technology into Application Requirement Use Case: Adaptive Lighting in Road Tunnels

Problem: Control the tunnel lighting levels in a manner that ensures continuity of light conditions from the outside to the inside (or vice-versa) such that drivers do not perceive the tunnel as too bright or dark.

Solution: Design a system that is able to account for the change in light intensity (i.e., detect physical conditions and interpret), and adjust the illumination levels of the tunnel lamps (i.e., respond) till a point along the length of the tunnel where this change is indiscernible to the drivers (i.e., reason and control in an optimal manner).

CPS and IoT : Are they the SAME ?

C1 C2 Cn

P1 P2 Pn

CPS

Internet

Cyb

er

wo

rld

P

hys

ical

wo

rld

NoT

IoT = CPS + People ‘in-the-loop’ (that act as sensors, actuators, controllers)

IoT = CPS + Hybrid (tight and loose) sense of control 8/26/2016 13

IoT : Past Mistakes, Future Opportunities

8/26/2016 14

IoT: Vision and Value Proposition

Vision: Build a ubiquitous society where everyone (“people”) and everything (“systems, machines, equipment and devices") is immersively connected.

Value Proposition: Connected “Things” will provide utility to “People” Digital shadow of “People” will provide value to the “Enterprise”

8/26/2016 15

IoT : As of TODAY …

8/26/2016 16

Industrial

Environment Location

Smart Cities

SCADA @ “SCALE”

8/26/2016 17

Connected Universe

8/26/2016 18

Many Underpinning !!!

8/26/2016 19

War of Standards

Category Assumption

System Scale Hundreds of devices (tightly coupled)

Device Cost $5-500

Connectivity Always available

Data Collection Centralized (Cloud based)

Data Analysis Centralized (Cloud based)

Data Search Centralized (Cloud based)

Control Centralized (Cloud based)

Ecosystem Closed ( a single vendor owns the platform, Cloud services, data and other pieces of the ecosystem)

Data Sharing Closed / Mechanisms are highly cumbersome

Data Ownership Operator / Vendor-centric

8/26/2016 20

Many Assumptions

IoT : INTROSPECTION …

8/26/2016 21

Reality

Thousands of devices in immediate vicinity, and millions more further out

$0.01-3

Intermittent (never a guarantee)

Centralized + Distributed

Centralized + Distributed

Centralized + Distributed

Centralized + Distributed

Open (without vendor lock-in)

Open (seamless flow between apps)

User-centric

Category Assumption

System Scale Hundreds of devices

Device Cost $5-500

Connectivity Always available

Data Collection Centralized

Data Analysis Centralized

Data Search Centralized

Control Centralized

Ecosystem Closed

Data Sharing Closed

Data Ownership Operator-centric

8/26/2016 22

A Reality Check

8/26/2016 23

Human and Device Proxemics

Smartphones: A well qualified (featureful and low cost)

Edge / IoT Gateway device Inevitably carried by people People take care of charging … reduced

energy worries

IoT : Design Paradigms

8/26/2016 24

Application

Sensors & Actuators

Analytics & Logic

Networking

We need Rs 50-100 sensors & “lots" of them

We don’t have good coverage. Everybody has their own standard. Is this really from my sensor ?

What does 25.6 mean ? Why is everything only partially correlated ?

Data mules Sensor/Network as a Service Big-Little Data

Complex Event Processing Model Driven Analytics

Plug-and-Play - USB for IoT

8/26/2016 25

IoT Design Paradigms : A Possibility

Human-centric rather than Thing-centric

People are the Sensor/Network

Manage an immersive system with more emphasis on locality rather than centrality

Humans become part of the ecosystem (will acts a data sources/respond to control)

Human-Things interaction spans Virtual and Physical worlds

“Big-Little” Data

Device Cloud vs. Conventional Cloud

Distributed data and Peer-to-Peer Federation

Provide information security and ownership

Identify, locate, authenticate, control access, and audit the data source

Analytics from the Edge to the Cloud

Leverage local processing capabilities (in addition to Cloud infra) to minimize

latency, bandwidth, energy

Bring the Network to the Sensor

Simplify networking

Piggyback on existing and widely adopted standards and techniques

8/26/2016 26

IoPT Design Paradigms

How “Low” can we go ?

Reusable devices and sensors used in novel ways vs.

Custom solutions with cutting edge capabilities

Whose “Data” is it anyways ?

Transparency in data ownership, sharing and usage

Data brokering for clear returns on data investment

When “good enough” is enough ?

Cheap sensors -> Questionable data;

Humans -> Difficult to model;

Physical systems -> Complex;

Data privacy -> Limit data availability

Decision making has to be probabilistic

Systems should not fail in absence of perfect behavior

Context determines Action

Context binds People and Things to a common scope, given their uncertainties

8/26/2016 27

IoPT Design Paradigms

Huge hidden costs of execution: Cultural awareness and user centric design Communications and infrastructure

Economics and Execution

Building for the real world Hostile environments, Limited power, Failed networks, “Big-Little” data

Managing channel, deployment and support at scale OTA, Replacement, Service, etc.,

Security No physical boundary or firewall Non intuitive attack surfaces – re-think the model

Metrics & monetization Opportunity for nano-payment to facilitate shared information eco-systems

Key issue: Who owns the data ?

This technology gives you the ability to look more broadly, deeply and over extended periods of time at the physical world and our interactions with it than ever before.

8/26/2016 28

IoPT: Challenges for Translation

One Simple Example …

LBS: From Commercial Flop to Pervasive “on-the-go” Service

8/26/2016 29

Commercial Flop -> Pervasive “On-the-Go” Service

8/26/2016 30

The Evolution of LBS (E911-Recent Past)

8/26/2016 31

The “Big Bang” of LBS

Event How did it help ?

LBS: Reactive -> Proactive Requires less user attention

LBS: Self -> Cross-referencing User has better access control for privacy protection

LBS: Single -> Multi Target Development of community spirit

LBS: Content -> Application Oriented

Richer “man-machine” interaction

LBS: Operator ->User centric Individual “Data” ownership and management Decentralized positioning More peer-peer interaction Reduced privacy concerns

Giving more control to the “user” was pivotal to the success of LBS !!!

8/26/2016 32

The “Big Bang” of LBS: Lessons Learnt

Is the Internet of Things disruptive? OR

Are they repackaging known technologies and making them a little better?

8/26/2016 33

What is your take ?

8/26/2016 34

References

P. Misra, Y. Simmhan, J. Warrior, “Towards a practical architecture for the next generation Internet of Things” [http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.00797]

P. Misra, Y. Simmhan, J. Warrior, “Towards a practical architecture for Internet of Things: An India-centric View”, IEEE IoT Newsletter, Jan 2015

• P. Misra, L. Mottola, S. Raza, S. Duquennoy, N. Tsiftes, J. Hoglund, and T. Voigt, “Supporting Cyber-Physical Systems with Wireless Sensor Networks: An Outlook of Software and Services”, Special Issue on Cyber Physical Systems, Journal of the Indian Institute of Science, 93(3):441-462, Sep. 2013

• P. Bellavista, A. Küpper and S. Helal, "Location-Based Services: Back to the Future" in IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 85-89, April-June 2008.

Other info graphics from the web !!!