Advertisement

Efficient Resource Discovery and Sharing Framework for Fog Computing in Healthcare 4.0

  • Nitin ShuklaEmail author
  • Charu Gandhi
Chapter
  • 1 Downloads
Part of the Signals and Communication Technology book series (SCT)

Abstract

Nowadays, healthcare industry is leveraging the technical innovations for providing better facilities to the patients. A number of high quality medical devices are available to record a patient’s health based on numerous parameters. Such sensor-based health monitoring devices generate high volume of data which is analyzed to provide the appropriate treatment. Such monitoring requires the storage and analysis of data on a remote cloud. Though cloud-based services provide efficient storage, they suffer from the delays incurred while sending the data and retrieving the analysis. Fog computing has proven to be an efficient solution to this problem. A fog node can be considered as an edge node, network device, healthcare equipment, etc., having a limited computation power. These devices are located in proximity to the sensor nodes. Fog nodes can be used to perform data analysis in a distributed manner without adding network delay. However, without any proper infrastructure, it is difficult to identify a fog node having sufficient resources to analyze a set of data. This problem can be addressed by using publish/subscribe paradigm over distributed hash tables (DHTs). Publish/subscribe system provides an event triggered approach which can be used to identify a fog node capable to service a data processing request. Further, a DHT is a peer-to-peer overlay network which is used for efficient resource sharing among the peer nodes. In this chapter, a DHT-based peer-to-peer network of fog nodes is proposed. The objective of the proposed networking infrastructure is to create an overlay of physical fog nodes to provide efficient resource discovery. It is achieved by using publish/subscribe communication and peer-to-peer overlays enabling the nodes to share their computation capabilities with each other.

Keywords

Healthcare 4.0 Fog computing Cloud computing Publish/subscribe DHT Data analytics 

References

  1. 1.
    Aekaterinidis, I., & Triantafillou, P. (2006). Pastrystrings: A comprehensive content-based publish/subscribe DHT network. In International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (vol. 6, p. 23)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atlam, H., Walters, R., & Wills, G. (2018). Fog computing and the internet of things: A review. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 2(2), 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonomi, F., Milito, R., Zhu, J., & Addepalli, S. (2012). Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In Proceedings of the First Edition of the MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing (pp. 13–16). New York: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buford, J. F., & Yu, H. (2010). Peer-to-peer networking and applications: synopsis and research directions. In Handbook of peer-to-peer networking (pp. 3–45). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cao, Y., Chen, S., Hou, P., & Brown, D. (2015). Fast: A fog computing assisted distributed analytics system to monitor fall for stroke mitigation. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Architecture and Storage (NAS) (pp. 2–11). Piscataway: IEEE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carlsson, B., Gustavsson, R. (2001). The rise and fall of napster-an evolutionary approach. In International Computer Science Conference on Active Media Technology (pp. 347–354). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eugster, P. T., Felber, P. A., Guerraoui, R., & Kermarrec, A. M. (2003). The many faces of publish/subscribe. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 35(2), 114–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gia, T. N., Jiang, M., Rahmani, A. M., Westerlund, T., Liljeberg, P., & Tenhunen, H. (2015). Fog computing in healthcare internet of things: A case study on ECG feature extraction. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing (pp. 356–363). Piscataway: IEEE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gupta, A., Sahin, O. D., Agrawal, D., & Abbadi, A. E. (2004). Meghdoot: Content-based publish/subscribe over p2p networks. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Conference on Middleware (pp. 254–273). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gupta, H., Vahid Dastjerdi, A., Ghosh, S. K., & Buyya, R. (2017). iFogSim: A toolkit for modeling and simulation of resource management techniques in the internet of things, edge and fog computing environments. Software: Practice and Experience, 47(9), 1275–1296.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hao, Z., Novak, E., Yi, S., & Li, Q.: Challenges and software architecture for fog computing. IEEE Internet Computing, 21(2), 44–53 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hathaliya, J. J., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2019). Securing electronics healthcare records in healthcare 4.0: A biometric-based approach. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 76, 398–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kraemer, F. A., Braten, A. E., Tamkittikhun, N., & Palma, D. (2017). Fog computing in healthcare–a review and discussion. IEEE Access, 5, 9206–9222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2018). Fog computing for healthcare 4.0 environment: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 72, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Parizi, R. M., & Choo, K. K. R. (2019). Fog data analytics: A taxonomy and process model. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 128, 90–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liang, J., Kumar, R., & Ross, K. (2004). The kazaa overlay: A measurement study. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Annual Computer Communications Workshop (pp. 17–20). Citeseer.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, Y., Fieldsend, J. E., & Min, G. (2017). A framework of fog computing: Architecture, challenges, and optimization. IEEE Access, 5, 25445–25454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mehmood, M., Javaid, N., Akram, J., Abbasi, S. H., Rahman, A., & Saeed, F. (2018). Efficient resource distribution in cloud and fog computing. In International Conference on Network-Based Information Systems (pp. 209–221). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naha, R. K., Garg, S., Georgakopoulos, D., Jayaraman, P. P., Gao, L., Xiang, Y., et al. (2018). Fog computing: Survey of trends, architectures, requirements, and research directions. IEEE Access, 6, 47980–48009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paul, A., Pinjari, H., Hong, W. H., Seo, H. C., & Rho, S. (2018). Fog computing-based IoT for health monitoring system. Journal of Sensors, 2018. Article ID 1386470.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pietzuch, P. R., & Bacon, J. M. (2002). Hermes: A distributed event-based middleware architecture. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops, 2002 (pp. 611–618). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Prasad, V. K., Bhavsar, M. D., & Tanwar, S. (2019). Influence of monitoring: Fog and edge computing. Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience, 20(2), 365–376.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., Karp, R., & Shenker, S. (2001). A scalable content-addressable network (vol. 31). New York: ACM.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ripeanu, M. (2001). Peer-to-peer architecture case study: Gnutella network. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, 2001 (pp. 99–100). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rowstron, A., & Druschel, P. (2001). Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location, and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms and Open Distributed Processing (pp. 329–350). Berlin: Springer.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rowstron, A., Kermarrec, A. M., Castro, M., & Druschel, P. (2001). Scribe: The design of a large-scale event notification infrastructure. In International workshop on networked group communication (pp. 30–43). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shen, G., Yanga, M., & Zhang, B. (2018). Ballistocardiogram-based heart rate variation monitoring using unsupervised. In Transdisciplinary Engineering Methods for Social Innovation of Industry 4.0. Proceedings of the 25th ISPE Inc. International Conference on Transdisciplinary Engineering, July 3–6 (vol. 7, p. 320). IOS Press, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashoek, M. F., & Balakrishnan, H. (2001). Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 31(4), 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tanwar, S., Vora, J., Kaneriya, S., & Tyagi, S. (2017). Fog-based enhanced safety management system for miners. In 2017 3rd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication & Automation (ICACCA) (Fall) (pp. 1–6). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tanwar, S., Vora, J., Kaneriya, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Sharma, V., et al. (2019). Human arthritis analysis in fog computing environment using Bayesian network classifier and thread protocol. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 9(1), 88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tuli, S., Basumatary, N., Gill, S. S., Kahani, M., Arya, R.C., Wander, G.S., et al. (2020). HealthFog: An ensemble deep learning based smart healthcare system for automatic diagnosis of heart diseases in integrated IoT and fog computing environments. Future Generation Computer Systems, 104, 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tuli, S., Mahmud, R., Tuli, S., & Buyya, R. (2019). Fogbus: A blockchain-based lightweight framework for edge and fog computing. Journal of Systems and Software, 154, 22–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vaquero, L. M., Rodero-Merino, L. (2014). Finding your way in the fog: Towards a comprehensive definition of fog computing. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 44(5), 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vora, J., DevMurari, P., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Obaidat, M.S. (2018). Blind signatures based secured e-healthcare system. In 2018 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 1–5). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vora, J., Italiya, P., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Obaidat, M.S., et al. (2018). Ensuring privacy and security in e-health records. In 2018 International Conference on Computer, Information and Telecommunication Systems (CITS) (pp. 1–5). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vora, J., Nayyar, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Obaidat, M.S., et al. (2018). BHEEM: A blockchain-based framework for securing electronic health records. In 2018 IEEE GLOBECOM workshops (GC Wkshps) (pp. 1–6). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vora, J., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Rodrigues, J.J. (2017). FAAL: Fog computing-based patient monitoring system for ambient assisted living. In 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on E-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom) (pp. 1–6). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yi, S., Hao, Z., Qin, Z., & Li, Q. (2015). Fog computing: Platform and applications. In 2015 Third IEEE workshop on hot topics in web systems and technologies (HotWeb) (pp. 73–78). Piscataway: IEEE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhao, B. Y., Kubiatowicz, J., & Joseph, A. D., et al. (2001). Tapestry: An infrastructure for fault-tolerant wide-area location and routing. Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringJaypee Institute of Information TechnologyNoidaIndia

Personalised recommendations