End-to-End Data Quality Assessment Using Trust for Data Shared IoT Deployments

Continued development of communication technologies has led to widespread Internet-of-Things (IoT) integration into various domains, including health, manufacturing, automotive, and precision agriculture. This has further led to the increased sharing of data among such domains to foster innovation. Most of these IoT deployments, however, are based on heterogeneous, pervasive sensors, which can lead to quality issues in the recorded data. This can lead to sharing of inaccurate or inconsistent data. There is a significant need to assess the quality of the collected data, should it be shared with multiple application domains, as inconsistencies in the data could have financial or health ramifications. This article builds on the recent research on trust metrics and presents a framework to integrate such metrics into the IoT data cycle for real-time data quality assessment. Critically, this article adopts a mechanism to facilitate end-user parameterization of a trust metric tailoring its use in the framework. Trust is a well-established metric that has been used to determine the validity of a piece or source of data in crowd-sourced or other unreliable data collection techniques such as that in IoT. The article further discusses how the trust-based framework eliminates the requirement for a gold standard and provides visibility into data quality assessment throughout the big data model. To qualify the use of trust as a measure of quality, an experiment is conducted using data collected from an IoT deployment of sensors to measure air quality in which low-cost sensors were colocated with a gold standard reference sensor. The calculated trust metric is compared with two well-understood metrics for data quality, root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE). A strong correlation between the trust metric and the comparison metrics shows that trust may be used as an indicative quality metric for data quality. The metric incorporates the additional benefit of its ability for use in low context scenarios, as opposed to RMSE and MAE, which require a reference for comparison.