Search

As the adoption of Federated Learning (FL) in the manufacturing industry grows and systems get increasingly complex, a need to inspect their behavior arises. Stakeholders of the FL process want a more transparent system to understand the current state and analyze how its performance changed over time. However, current representation approaches are often not designed for industrial applications and do not cover the entire FL model lifecycle. We propose the Lifecycle Dashboard, which considers the different requirements and perspectives of industrial stakeholders by visualizing information from the FL server. In addition, our representation approach is generic enough to be applied to different use cases and industries. We evaluate the Lifecycle Dashboard in a semi-structured expert interview, show improvements in the understandability of FL systems, and discuss possible use cases in the industry.

The two articles in this special section represent ongoing Internet of Things applications in the context of Europe trying to make solutions usable to people in daily times.

The articles in this special section illustrates the wide range of ways in which pervasive fabrication technologies can contribute to producing physical artifacts that fulfill user needs in a more tailored and customized way than today’s mass production does. At the same time, they provide a glimpse of the future, where technology-informed and technology enabled making can address physical needs individually.

Computing evolution has brought about multiple paradigm shifts in how we use technologies. In the living laboratory that is modern life, our ability to design and control the computers and computing power of the future will require an ability to program systems and applications in situ and in vivo.

Advances in digital fabrication have simultaneously created new capabilities while reinforcing outdated workflows that constrain how, and by whom, these fabrication tools are used. In this paper, we investigate how a new class of hybrid-controlled machines can collaborate with novice and expert users alike to yield a more lucid making experience. We demonstrate these ideas through our system, Turn-by-Wire. By combining the capabilities of a traditional lathe with haptic input controllers that modulate both position and force, we detail a series of novel interaction metaphors that invite a more fluid making process spanning digital, model-centric, computer control, and embodied, adaptive, human control. We evaluate our system through a user study and discuss how these concepts generalize to other fabrication tools.

Web and semantic technologies will form the foundation for ecosystems of machines that interact with each other and with people as never before.

Production processes in factories increasingly involve dynamic interactions between individual manufacturing devices that allow processes to evolve and enable rapid reconfigurations for the mass-customization of products. When participating machines start to be aware of their own functionality, processes can even be dynamically reconfigured at run time. We propose a system that supports operators within such environments by enabling them to directly observe which devices interact with each other and what data is transmitted between them at any given moment, using computer-mediated reality technology. We demonstrate the application of this system in a goal-driven manufacturing use case and discuss its applicability to the monitoring of smart environments in users’ homes.

This article introduces the Open Semantic Framework (OSF), a one-stop shop for creating and deploying semantic applications as well as their lifecycle management. The authors discuss how the OSF supports knowledge acquisition into semantic knowledge models via novel interface technologies, manages these models internally within core ontologies and pluggable knowledge packs, and provides moderated access to them via a REST API and prefabricated SPARQL queries. As an example of OSF's usage in a practical scenario, the authors show how it can increase worker safety in industrial settings by mitigating workplace safety hazards through the automatic insertion of safety-relevant actions directly in the workflow, based on a model of applicable workplace safety law and regulation. By facilitating the creation, integration, and provisioning of knowledge, the OSF represents an important step on the way to integrating knowledge models worldwide, enabling semantic applications globally to "stand on the shoulders of giants."

Social and socially-enabled applications have established themselves as a large and important set of scenarios that make sense in personal as well as in enterprise settings. However, it is still not clear how to best promote an open and extensible ecosystem of social applications. This makes it hard to design and implement applications that are good SOA citizens and can participate in an open and growing set of social interactions. Our work presents an architecture and implementation based on Activity Streams, which uses and slightly extends the format to work as a foundation for a SOA that allows applications to bridge vertical silos in the Internet of Things. In this paper, we discuss the application of our architecture in several different domains and our findings from mashing up applications across silos using Activity Streams. In addition to demonstrating the feasibility of this approach, we believe that our work can serve as illustration and guidance in the ongoing effort to standardize the next version of Activity Streams.

We present a pilot study, which investigates the role of activity data visualization in the context of interaction and communication with health coaches. The data is obtained from commercially available wearable wellness sensors such as Basis Watch, or Lumo Back. We studied how interface design's ability to synthesize and flexibly display data from wearable sensors help participants to understand their daily wellness related physical condition and activities. We also investigated how the interface enhances the communication between users and their health coaches. We discuss the implications for the design.

Day by day Internet of Things (IoT) has gained a great attention from research community because of the importance of IoT technology in human life. IoT is a smart system which consists of different type of sensors and real world application connected with each other through internet via wired or wireless network structure. The IoT makes the world smart in every aspects means IoT gives the information regarding the surrounding condition of things with the help of technology i.e. smart home, smart cities, smart transportation, smart industries, smart agriculture and smart environment etc. In this paper we study a different concept of IoT, various applications, Issues regarding IoT and Future Scope of IoT which will give the appropriate guidance and motivation to the research community to do the research in this field., {"references":["1.\tSaini, Harpreet Singh, and R. D. Daruwala. \"Human Machine Interface in Internet Of Things system.\" In Computing Communication Control and automation (ICCUBEA), 2016 International Conference on, pp. 1-4. IEEE, 2016. 2.\thttps://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2016/08/10-youtube-videos-explaining-the-real-world-applications-of-internet-of-things-iot/ 3.\tKhan, Faraz. \"Future scope and possibilities in Internet of Things.\" In InInternational Conference on Advances in Engineering Science and Management, vol. 310. 2015. 4.\tVyas, Daiwat A., Dvijesh Bhatt, and Dhaval Jha. \"IoT: Trends, Challenges and Future Scope.\" (2015): 186-197. 5.\tMs. Yogita Pundir, Ms. Nancy Sharma, Dr. Yaduvir Singh, \"Internet of Things (IoT) : Challenges and Future Directions\" International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 960-963, March 2016. 6.\tChase, Jim. \"The evolution of the internet of things.\" Texas Instruments, September 2013. 7.\tZeinab, Kamal Aldein Mohammed, and Sayed Ali Ahmed Elmustafa. \"Internet of Things Applications, Challenges and Related Future Technologies.\" World Scientific News, Vol. 2, No. 67, pp. 126-148, 2017. 8.\tWu, Miao, Ting-Jie Lu, Fei-Yang Ling, Jing Sun, and Hui-Ying Du. \"Research on the architecture of Internet of things.\" In 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), pp. 479-484, 2010. 9.\tUckelmann, Dieter, Mark Harrison, and Florian Michahelles. \"An architectural approach towards the future internet of things.\" In Architecting the internet of things, pp. 1-24. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. 10.\tSarma, Amardeo C., and João Girão. \"Identities in the future internet of things.\" Wireless personal communications, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 353-363, 2009. 11.\tHernández-Muñoz, José M., Jesús Bernat Vercher, Luis Muñoz, José A. Galache, Mirko Presser, Luis A. Hernández Gómez, and Jan Pettersson. \"Smart cities at the forefront of the future internet.\" In The Future Internet Assembly, pp. 447-462. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. 12.\tGluhak, Alexander, Srdjan Krco, Michele Nati, Dennis Pfisterer, Nathalie Mitton, and Tahiry Razafindralambo. \"A survey on facilities for experimental internet of things research.\" IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol. 49, No. 11, 2011. 13.\tAgrawal, Sarita, and Manik Lal Das. \"Internet of Things—A paradigm shift of future Internet applications.\" In IEEE International Conference on Nirma University Engineering (NUiCONE), pp. 1-7, 2011. 14.\tAtzori, Luigi, Antonio Iera, and Giacomo Morabito. \"The internet of things: A survey.\" Computer networks, Vol. 54, No. 15, pp. 2787-2805, 2010. 15.\tBotta, Alessio, Walter De Donato, Valerio Persico, and Antonio Pescapé. \"Integration of cloud computing and internet of things: a survey.\" Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 56, pp. 684-700, 2016. 16.\tBandyopadhyay, Soma, Munmun Sengupta, Souvik Maiti, and Subhajit Dutta. \"Role of middleware for internet of things: A study.\" International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Survey, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 94-105, 2011. 17.\tSingh, Dhananjay, Gaurav Tripathi, and Antonio J. Jara. \"A survey of Internet-of-Things: Future vision, architecture, challenges and services.\" In IEEE International world forum on Internet of things (WF-IoT) , pp. 287-292, 2014. 18.\tBandyopadhyay, Soma, Munmun Sengupta, Souvik Maiti, and Subhajit Dutta. \"A survey of middleware for internet of things.\" In Recent trends in wireless and mobile networks, pp. 288-296. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. 19.\tPatton, Mark, Eric Gross, Ryan Chinn, Samantha Forbis, Leon Walker, and Hsinchun Chen. \"Uninvited connections: a study of vulnerable devices on the internet of things (IoT).\" In IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics Conference (JISIC), pp. 232-235, 2014. 20.\tDatta, Soumya Kanti, Rui Pedro Ferreira Da Costa, and Christian Bonnet. \"Resource discovery in Internet of Things: Current trends and future standardization aspects.\" In IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 542-547, 2015. 21.\tRazzaque, Mohammad Abdur, Marija Milojevic-Jevric, Andrei Palade, and Siobhán Clarke. \"Middleware for internet of things: a survey.\" IEEE Internet of Things Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 70-95, 2016."]}