IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/harjfk/rwp18-009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Internet of Things and Information Fusion: Who Talks to Who?

Author

Listed:
  • Saghafian, Soroush

    (Harvard University)

  • Tomlin, Brian

    (Dartmouth College)

  • Biller, Stephan

    (IBM Technology)

Abstract

The promised operational benefits of the Internet of Things (IoT) are predicated on the notion that better decisions will be enabled through a multitude of autonomous sensors (often deployed by different firms) providing real-time knowledge of the state of things. This knowledge will be imperfect, however, due to sensor quality limitations. A sensor can improve its estimation quality by soliciting a state estimate from other sensors operating in its general environment. Target selection (choosing from which other sensors to solicit estimates) is challenging because sensors may not know the underlying inference models or qualities of sensors deployed by other firms. This lack of trust (or familiarity) in others’ inference models creates noise in the received estimate, but trust builds and noise reduces over time the more a sensor targets any given sensor. We characterize the initial and long run information sharing network for an arbitrary collection of sensors operating in an autoregressive environment. The state of the environment plays a key role in mediating quality and trust in target selection. When qualities are known and asymmetric, target selection is based on a deterministic rule that incorporates qualities, trusts, and state. Furthermore, each sensor eventually settles on a constant target set in all future periods, but this long run target set is sample path dependent and also varies by sensor. When qualities are unknown, a deterministic target selection rule may be suboptimal, and sensors may not settle on a constant target set. Moreover, the inherent targeting trade-off between quality and trust is influenced by a sensor’s ambiguity attitude. Our findings shed light on the evolution of inter-firm sensor communication over time, and this is important for predicting and understanding the inter-firm connectedness and relationships that will arise as a result of the IoT.

Suggested Citation

  • Saghafian, Soroush & Tomlin, Brian & Biller, Stephan, 2018. "The Internet of Things and Information Fusion: Who Talks to Who?," Working Paper Series rwp18-009, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp18-009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1635
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palm, F. & Zellner, A., 1991. "To combine or not to combine? issues of combining forecasts," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1991022, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    2. Kenneth Wallis, 2011. "Combining forecasts - forty years later," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1-2), pages 33-41.
    3. , & , & ,, 2014. "Dynamics of information exchange in endogenous social networks," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), January.
    4. Erick Delage & Shie Mannor, 2010. "Percentile Optimization for Markov Decision Processes with Parameter Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 203-213, February.
    5. Jayashankar M. Swaminathan & Sridhar R. Tayur, 2003. "Models for Supply Chains in E-Business," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1387-1406, October.
    6. Marshall Fisher & Ananth Raman, 1996. "Reducing the Cost of Demand Uncertainty Through Accurate Response to Early Sales," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 87-99, February.
    7. Alison Hubbard Ashton & Robert H. Ashton, 1985. "Aggregating Subjective Forecasts: Some Empirical Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(12), pages 1499-1508, December.
    8. Vishal Gaur & Saravanan Kesavan & Ananth Raman & Marshall L. Fisher, 2007. "Estimating Demand Uncertainty Using Judgmental Forecasts," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 480-491, April.
    9. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    10. Simchi-Levi, David, 2010. "Operation Rules: Delivering Customer Value through Flexible Operations," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262525151, April.
    11. Robert L. Winkler & Robert T. Clemen, 2004. "Multiple Experts vs. Multiple Methods: Combining Correlation Assessments," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 167-176, September.
    12. Soroush Saghafian & Brian Tomlin, 2016. "The Newsvendor under Demand Ambiguity: Combining Data with Moment and Tail Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 167-185, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Subodha Kumar & Rakesh R. Mallipeddi, 2022. "Impact of cybersecurity on operations and supply chain management: Emerging trends and future research directions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4488-4500, December.
    2. Gerry Tsoukalas & Brett Hemenway Falk, 2020. "Token-Weighted Crowdsourcing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3843-3859, September.
    3. Tava Lennon Olsen & Brian Tomlin, 2020. "Industry 4.0: Opportunities and Challenges for Operations Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 113-122, January.
    4. van Staden, Heletjé E. & Boute, Robert N., 2021. "The effect of multi-sensor data on condition-based maintenance policies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(2), pages 585-600.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anil Gaba & Dana G. Popescu & Zhi Chen, 2019. "Assessing Uncertainty from Point Forecasts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 90-106, January.
    2. Boylan, John E. & Babai, M. Zied, 2022. "Estimating the cumulative distribution function of lead-time demand using bootstrapping with and without replacement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:6:p:607-621 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Chloe Kim Glaeser & Marshall Fisher & Xuanming Su, 2019. "Optimal Retail Location: Empirical Methodology and Application to Practice," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 86-102, January.
    5. Pennings, Clint L.P. & van Dalen, Jan & Rook, Laurens, 2019. "Coordinating judgmental forecasting: Coping with intentional biases," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 46-56.
    6. Christoph Diermann & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2017. "Case Article—Canyon Bicycles: Judgmental Demand Forecasting in Direct Sales," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 58-62, January.
    7. Mabel C. Chou & Geoffrey A. Chua & Huan Zheng, 2014. "On the Performance of Sparse Process Structures in Partial Postponement Production Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 348-365, April.
    8. Biyu He & Franklin Dexter & Alex Macario & Stefanos Zenios, 2012. "The Timing of Staffing Decisions in Hospital Operating Rooms: Incorporating Workload Heterogeneity into the Newsvendor Problem," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 99-114, January.
    9. Wang, Charles X. & Webster, Scott & Zhang, Sidong, 2014. "Robust price-setting newsvendor model with interval market size and consumer willingness-to-pay," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 100-112.
    10. Saghafian, Soroush, 2018. "Ambiguous partially observable Markov decision processes: Structural results and applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 1-35.
    11. Bajgiran, Amirsaman H. & Mardikoraem, Mahsa & Soofi, Ehsan S., 2021. "Maximum entropy distributions with quantile information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(1), pages 196-209.
    12. João F. Caldeira & Guilherme V. Moura & Francisco J. Nogales & André A. P. Santos, 2017. "Combining Multivariate Volatility Forecasts: An Economic-Based Approach," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 247-285.
    13. Anh Ninh, 2021. "Robust newsvendor problems with compound Poisson demands," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 302(1), pages 327-338, July.
    14. Post, Thomas & Hanewald, Katja, 2013. "Longevity risk, subjective survival expectations, and individual saving behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 200-220.
    15. van Eekelen, Wouter, 2023. "Distributionally robust views on queues and related stochastic models," Other publications TiSEM 9b99fc05-9d68-48eb-ae8c-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2010-040 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Bai, Qingguo & Xu, Jianteng & Gong, Yeming & Chauhan, Satyaveer S., 2022. "Robust decisions for regulated sustainable manufacturing with partial demand information: Mandatory emission capacity versus emission tax," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 874-893.
    18. Christopher W. Karvetski & David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2020. "Improving Probability Judgment in Intelligence Analysis: From Structured Analysis to Statistical Aggregation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1040-1057, May.
    19. Nowotarski, Jakub & Liu, Bidong & Weron, Rafał & Hong, Tao, 2016. "Improving short term load forecast accuracy via combining sister forecasts," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 40-49.
    20. Karthik Natarajan & Melvyn Sim & Joline Uichanco, 2018. "Asymmetry and Ambiguity in Newsvendor Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3146-3167, July.
    21. Serel, Dogan A., 2009. "Optimal ordering and pricing in a quick response system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 700-714, October.
    22. David R. Mandel & Christopher W. Karvetski & Mandeep K. Dhami, 2018. "Boosting intelligence analysts’ judgment accuracy: What works, what fails?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(6), pages 607-621, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:harjfk:rwp18-009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ksharus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.