Open Access

ARTICLE

Evaluation of IoT Measurement Solutions from a Metrology Perspective

Donatien Koulla Moulla^1,2,*, Ernest Mnkandla¹, Alain Abran³

1 School of Computing, University of South Africa, Johannesburg, 1709, South Africa
2 Department of Fundamental Sciences, University of Maroua, Maroua, 46, Cameroun
3 Department of Software Engineering and Information Technology, École de Technologie Supérieure, Montréal, H3C 1K3, Canada

* Corresponding Author: Donatien Koulla Moulla. Email:

Computer Systems Science and Engineering 2023, 47(2), 2455-2479. https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2023.039736

Received 13 February 2023; Accepted 08 May 2023; Issue published 28 July 2023

Abstract

To professionally plan and manage the development and evolution of the Internet of Things (IoT), researchers have proposed several IoT performance measurement solutions. IoT performance measurement solutions can be very valuable for managing the development and evolution of IoT systems, as they provide insights into performance issues, resource optimization, predictive maintenance, security, reliability, and user experience. However, there are several issues that can impact the accuracy and reliability of IoT performance measurements, including lack of standardization, complexity of IoT systems, scalability, data privacy, and security. While previous studies proposed several IoT measurement solutions in the literature, they did not evaluate any individual one to figure out their respective measurement strengths and weaknesses. This study provides a novel scheme for the evaluation of proposed IoT measurement solutions using a metrology-coverage evaluation based on evaluation theory, metrology principles, and software measurement best practices. This evaluation approach was employed for 12 IoT measure categories and 158 IoT measurement solutions identified in a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) from 2010 to 2021. The metrology coverage of these IoT measurement solutions was analyzed from four perspectives: across IoT categories, within each study, improvement over time, and implications for IoT practitioners and researchers. The criteria in this metrology-coverage evaluation allowed for the identification of strengths and weaknesses in the theoretical and empirical definitions of the proposed IoT measurement solutions. We found that the metrological coverage varies significantly across IoT measurement solution categories and did not show improvement over the 2010–2021 timeframe. Detailed findings can help practitioners understand the limitations of the proposed measurement solutions and choose those with stronger designs. These evaluation results can also be used by researchers to improve current IoT measurement solution designs and suggest new solutions with a stronger metrology base.

---

Keywords

---