Abstract
Over the years, fog computing has emerged as a paradigm to complement the cloud computing in handling the delay sensitive IoT applications in a better manner. Using fog resources, better performance such as in-time service delivery, reduced network load, optimal energy usage etc. can be achieved. With such performance gain, users availing the IoT services are more satisfied. A well-known metric Quality of Experience (QoE), used to measure the satisfaction of IoT users, can be improved by enhancing the performance of the IoT applications. Fog computing is a geographically distributed paradigm and primary service of fog computing may not include the execution of offloaded tasks/applications from the IoT devices. This makes QoE aware placement of applications in fog computing a greater challenge. Since placement algorithm is itself a computational task and both IoT applications and fog nodes need a mediator fog node to execute the placement algorithm, the placement policy should be light weighted in terms of computational complexity. This work proposes a lightweight QoE aware application placement policy in fog computing using Modified TOPSIS that prioritizes the applications and fog instances based on their expectation and computational capability respectively for the placement. Modified TOPSIS inherits all the features of classical TOPSIS while it removes rank reversal problem of classical TOPSIS. Simulation experiments, for a comparative study, depict that the proposed model not only achieves the desired resource utilization, processing time, and reduced network congestion but reduces the application placement time also significantly compared to the state of art.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Elazhary H (2019) Internet of Things (IoT), mobile cloud, cloudlet, mobile IoT, IoT cloud, fog, mobile edge, and edge emerging computing paradigms: Disambiguation and research directions. J Netw Comput Appl 128:105–140
Mahmud R, Srirama SN, Ramamohanarao K, Buyya R (2019) Quality of Experience (QoE)-aware placement of applications in Fog computing environments. Journal of Parallel Distributed Computing 132:190–203
Wang N, Varghese B, Matthaiou M, Nikolopoulos DS (2017) ENORM: A framework for edge node resource management. IEEE transactions on services computing
Brunnström K, Beker SA, De Moor K, Dooms A, Egger S, Garcia MN, Hossfeld T, Jumisko-Pyykkö S, Keimel C, Larabi MC, Lawlor B (2013) Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience hal-00977812 f
Aazam M, St-Hilaire M, Lung CH, Lambadaris I (2016) MeFoRE: QoE based resource estimation at Fog to enhance QoS in IoT. In 2016 23rd IEEE International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT), pp 1–5
Hoβfeld T, Schatz R, Egger S (2011) SOS: The MOS is not enough!. In Third IEEE international workshop on quality of multimedia experience, pp 131–136
Li L, Rong M, Zhang G (2015) An internet of things QoE evaluation method based on multiple linear regression analysis. In 10th IEEE International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE), pp 925–928
Fiedler M, Hossfeld T, Tran-Gia P (2010) A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Netw 24(2):36–41
Senouci MA, Mushtaq MS, Hoceini S, Mellouk A (2016) TOPSIS-based dynamic approach for mobile network interface selection. Comput Netw 107:304–314
Venticinque S, Amato A (2019) A methodology for deployment of IoT application in fog. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 10(5):1955–1976
Casadei R, Fortino G, Pianini D, Russo W, Savaglio C, Viroli M (2019) A development approach for collective opportunistic Edge-of-Things services. Inf Sci 498:154–169
Yousefpour A, Ishigaki G, Gour R, Jue JP (2018) On reducing IoT service delay via fog offloading. IEEE Internet Things J 5(2):998–1010
Dong Y, Han C, Guo S (2018) Joint optimization of energy and QoE with fairness in Cooperative Fog Computing System. In IEEE International Conference on Networking, Architecture and Storage (NAS), pp 1–4
Soundarabai PB, Chellaiah PR (2018) Mechanisms Towards Enhanced Quality of Experience (QoE) in Fog Computing Environments. Springer, Fog Computing, pp 131–151
Skarlat O, Nardelli M, Schulte S, Dustdar S (2017) Towards qos-aware fog service placement. In 1st IEEE International conference on Fog and Edge Computing (ICFEC), pp 89–96
Lin Y, Shen H (2015) Cloud fog: Towards high quality of experience in cloud gaming. In 44th IEEE International Conference on Parallel Processing, pp 500–509
Brogi A, Forti S (2017) QoS-aware deployment of IoT applications through the fog. IEEE Internet Things J 4(5):1185–1192
Mahmud R, Kotagiri R, Buyya R (2018) Fog computing: A taxonomy, survey and future directions. Internet of everything. Springer, Berlin, pp 103–130
Behzadian M, Otaghsara SK, Yazdani M, Ignatius J (2012) A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Syst Appl 39(17):13051–13069
Guerrero C, Lera I, Juiz C (2019) Evaluation and efficiency comparison of evolutionary algorithms for service placement optimization in fog architectures. Futur Gener Comput Syst 97:131–144
Naas MI, Parvedy PR, Boukhobza J, Lemarchand L (2017) iFogStor: an IoT data placement strategy for fog infrastructure. In 1st IEEE International Conference on Fog and Edge Computing (ICFEC), pp. 97–104
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baranwal, G., Yadav, R. & Vidyarthi, D.P. QoE Aware IoT Application Placement in Fog Computing Using Modified-TOPSIS. Mobile Netw Appl 25, 1816–1832 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11036-020-01563-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11036-020-01563-x