Exploiting autonomy in a User-IoT system collaborative trust model

References

• Hemmati A, Rahmani AM. The internet of autonomous things applications: a taxonomy, technologies, and future directions. Internet Things. 2022;20:100635. doi: 10.1016/j.iot.2022.100635
   Google Scholar
• Kyriazis D, Varvarigou T. Smart, autonomous and reliable internet of things. Procedia Comput Sci. 2013;21:442–448. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.059
   Google Scholar
• Castelfranchi C, Falcone R. From automaticity to autonomy: the frontier of artificial agents. In: Agent autonomy. Boston, MA: Springer; 2003. p. 103–136.
   Google Scholar
• Castelfranchi C. Social power: A point missed in multi-agent, DAI and HCI. Decentralized AI. 1990;1:33–46.
   Google Scholar
• Michailidis IT, Kapoutsis AC, Korkas CD, et al. Embedding autonomy in large-scale IoT ecosystems using CAO and L4G-CAO. Discover Internet Things. 2021;1(1):1–22. doi: 10.1007/s43926-021-00003-w
   Google Scholar
• Shneiderman B. Human-Centered AI. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Miranda J, Mäkitalo N, Garcia-Alonso J, et al. From the internet of things to the internet of people. IEEE Internet Comput. 2015;19(2):40–47. doi: 10.1109/MIC.2015.24
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashraf QM, Habaebi MH. Introducing autonomy in internet of things. In: Recent advances in computer science. Athens, Greece: WSEAS Publishing; 2015. p. 215–221.
   Google Scholar
• Constantinides E, Kahlert M, de Vries SA. The relevance of technological autonomy in the acceptance of IoT services in retail. In: 2nd International Conference on Internet of Things, Data and Cloud Computing, Cambridge: ACM Digital Library; ICC 2017. 2017 Mar. doi:10.1145/3018896.3018906
   Google Scholar
• Xu A, Dudek G. Optimo: online probabilistic trust inference model for asymmetric human-robot collaborations. In: 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). Portland, Oregon: IEEE; 2015 Mar. p. 221–228.
   Google Scholar
• Falcone R, Sapienza A. On the users' acceptance of IoT systems: a theoretical approach. Information. 2018;9(3):53. doi: 10.3390/info9030053
   Google Scholar
• Sifakis J. System design in the Era of IoT – meeting the autonomy challenge. preprint arXiv:1806.09846, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Lei L, Tan Y, Zheng K, et al. Deep reinforcement learning for autonomous internet of things: model, applications and challenges. IEEE Commun Surveys Tutorials. 2020;22(3):1722–1760. doi: 10.1109/COMST.9739
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valero CI, Gravina S, Ciuffetti A, et al. EBASI: IoT-based emotion and behaviour recognition system against elderly people social isolation. In: International Symposium on Intelligent and Distributed Computing. Cham: Springer; 2022. p. 3–13.
   Google Scholar
• Mincolelli G, Imbesi S, Marchi M. Design for the active ageing and autonomy: the role of industrial design in the development of the ‘Habitat’ IOT project. In: International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics. Cham: Springer; 2017 July. p. 88–97.
   Google Scholar
• Sapienza A, Falcone R. An autonomy-based collaborative trust model for user-IoT systems interaction. In: Intelligent distributed computing XV. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2023. p. 178–187.
   Google Scholar
• Falcone R, Castelfranchi C. The human in the loop of a delegated agent: the theory of adjustable social autonomy. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans. 2001;31(5):406–418. doi: 10.1109/3468.952715
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falcone R, Castelfranchi C. Levels of delegation and levels of adoption as the basis for adjustable autonomy. In: Congress of the italian association for artificial intelligence. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 1999 Sep. p. 273–284.
   Google Scholar
• Kowalski J, Biele C, Krzysztofek K. Smart home technology as a creator of a super-empowered user. In: International conference on intelligent human systems integration. Cham: Springer; 2019 Feb. p. 175–180.
   Google Scholar
• Liu X, Datta A, Rzadca K, et al. Stereotrust: a group based personalized trust model. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. New York, NY: ACM; 2009 Nov. p. 7–16.
   Google Scholar
• Burnett C, Norman TJ, Sycara K. Stereotypical trust and bias in dynamic multiagent systems. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol (TIST). 2013;4(2):26. doi:10.1145/2438653.2438661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falcone R, Sapienza A, Castelfranchi C. Recommendation of categories in an agents world: the role of (not) local communicative environments. In: 2015 13th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST). New York City: IEEE; 2015 July. p. 7–13.
   Google Scholar
• Resnick P, Zeckhauser R. Trust among strangers in internet transactions: empirical analysis of eBay's reputation system. In: The economics of the internet and E-commerce. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2002. p. 127157.
   Google Scholar
• Sun L, Jiao L, Wang Y, et al. An adaptive group-based reputation system in peer-to-peer networks. In: International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2005 Dec. p. 651–659.
   Google Scholar
• Teacy WL, Luck M, Rogers A, et al. An efficient and versatile approach to trust and reputation using hierarchical bayesian modelling. Artif Intell. 2012;193:149–185. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2012.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapienza A, Cantucci F, Falcone R. Modeling interaction in human–machine systems: a trust and trustworthiness approach. Automation. 2022;3(2):242–257. doi: 10.3390/automation3020012
   Google Scholar
• Sapienza A, Falcone R. Evaluating agents' trustworthiness within virtual societies in case of no direct experience. Cogn Syst Res. 2020;64:164–173. doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2020.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortino G, Fotia L, Messina F, et al. Grouping IoT devices by trust and meritocracy. In: 2021 International Conference on Cyber-Physical Social Intelligence (ICCSI). Beijing: IEEE; 2021 Dec. p. 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Ba-hutair MN, Bouguettaya A, Neiat AG. Multi-perspective trust management framework for crowdsourced IoT services. IEEE Trans Services Comput. 2021;15:2396–2409. doi: 10.1109/TSC.2021.3052219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelfranchi C, Falcone R. Trust theory: a socio-cognitive and computational model. Vol. 18. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Przegalinska A. Wearable technologies in organizations: privacy, efficiency and autonomy in work. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Wilensky U. NetLogo. Evanston, IL: Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling, Northwestern University; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Nikou S. Factors driving the adoption of smart home technology: an empirical assessment. Telematics Inform. 2019;45:101283. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2019.101283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn C, Lucke D. Supporting the digital transformation: a low-threshold approach for manufacturing related higher education and employee training. Procedia CIRP. 2021;104:647–652. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.109
   Google Scholar
• Janiesch C, Fischer M, Winkelmann A, et al. Specifying autonomy in the internet of things: the autonomy model and notation. Inform Syst E-Business Manag. 2019;17(1):159–194. doi: 10.1007/s10257-018-0379-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar