Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4218/etrij.2018-0059

Exploring the dynamic knowledge structure of studies on the Internet of things: Keyword analysis  

Yoon, Young Seog (School of Business and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Science and Technology)
Zo, Hangjung (School of Business and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Science and Technology)
Choi, Munkee (School of Business and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Science and Technology)
Lee, Donghyun (Department of Business Administration, Korea Polytechnic University)
Lee, Hyun-woo (Broadcasting & Media Research Laboratory, Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute)
Publication Information
ETRI Journal / v.40, no.6, 2018 , pp. 745-758 More about this Journal
Abstract
A wide range of studies in various disciplines has focused on the Internet of Things (IoT) and cyber-physical systems (CPS). However, it is necessary to summarize the current status and to establish future directions because each study has its own individual goals independent of the completion of all IoT applications. The absence of a comprehensive understanding of IoT and CPS has disrupted an efficient resource allocation. To assess changes in the knowledge structure and emerging technologies, this study explores the dynamic research trends in IoT by analyzing bibliographic data. We retrieved 54,237 keywords in 12,600 IoT studies from the Scopus database, and conducted keyword frequency, co-occurrence, and growth-rate analyses. The analysis results reveal how IoT technologies have been developed and how they are connected to each other. We also show that such technologies have diverged and converged simultaneously, and that the emerging keywords of trust, smart home, cloud, authentication, context-aware, and big data have been extracted. We also unveil that the CPS is directly involved in network, security, management, cloud, big data, system, industry, architecture, and the Internet.
Keywords
IoT; keyword; co-occurrence; knowledge structure; emerging technology;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 K. Ashton, That 'internet of things' thing, RFiD J. 22 (2009), no. 7, 97-114.
2 R. Baheti and H. Gill, Cyber-physical systems, Impact Cont. Technol. 12 (2011), 161-166.
3 L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito, Understanding the internet of things: Definition, potentials, and societal role of a fast evolving paradigm, Ad Hoc Netw. 56 (2017), no. Sup. C, 122-140.   DOI
4 L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito, The internet of things: A survey, Comput. Netw. 54 (2010), no. 15, 2787-2805.   DOI
5 A. M. Ortiz et al., The cluster between internet of things and social networks: Review and research challenges, IEEE Internet Things J. 1 (2014), no. 3, 206-215.   DOI
6 A. Al-Fuqaha et al., Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications, IEEE Commun. Surveys Tutor 17 (2015), no. 4, 2347-2376.   DOI
7 H.-D. Ma, Internet of things: Objectives and scientific challenges, J. Comput. Sci. Technol. 26 (2011), no. 6, 919-924.   DOI
8 B. N. Green, C. D. Johnson, and A. Adams, Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade, J. Chiropr. Med. 5 (2006), no. 3, 101-117.   DOI
9 D. Rotolo, D. Hicks, and B. R. Martin, What is an emerging technology?, Res. Policy 44 (2015), no. 10, 1827-1843.   DOI
10 M. Halaweh, Emerging technology: What is it?, J. Technol. Manag. Innovation 8 (2013), no. 3, 108-115.
11 A. Koubaa and B. Andersson, A vision of cyber-physical internet, Int. Workshop Real-Time Netw. (RTN'09), Dublin, Ireland, June 2009, pp. 1-6.
12 F. Xia et al., Internet of things, Int. J. Commun Syst 25, (2012), no. 9, 1101-1102.   DOI
13 ITU-T, Itu-T Standard Y.2060, 2012.
14 A. Bassi and G. Horn, Internet of things in 2020: A roadmap for the future, Working Group RFID of the ETP EPoSS, Version 1.1, 2008, pp. 97-114.
15 Z.-K. Zhang et al., IoT security: Ongoing challenges and research opportunities, IEEE Int. Conf. Serv.-Oriented Comput. Applicat. Matsue, Japan, Nov. 2014, pp. 230-234.
16 S. Madakam, R. Ramaswamy, and S. Tripathi, Internet of things (IoT): A literature review, J. Comput. Commun. 3 (2015), no. 5, 164-173.   DOI
17 V. Gunes et al., A survey on concepts, applications, and challenges in cyber-physical systems, Trans. Internet Inform. Syst. 8 (2014), no. 12, 4242-4268.
18 R. R. Rajkumar et al., Cyber-physical systems: The next computing revolution, Proc. Design Autom. Conf., Anaheim, CA, USA, June 13-18, pp. 731-736.
19 J. Lee, B. Bagheri, and H.-A. Kao, A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems, Manuf. Lett. 3 (2015), 18-23.   DOI
20 E. A. Lee, Cyber-physical systems - are computing foundations adequate, Position Paper NSF Workshop Cyber-Phys. Syst.: Res. Motivation, Tech. Roadmap, Austin, TX, USA, 16-17, Oct. 2006, pp. 1-9.
21 J. Gubbi et al., Internet of things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions, Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 29 (2013), no. 7, 1645-1660.   DOI
22 H. Shah Ahsanul, A. Syed Mahfuzul, and R. Mustafizur, Review of cyber-physical system in healthcare, Int. J. Distrib. Sensor Netw. 10 (2014), no. 4, pp. 217415:1-217415:20.
23 H.-N. Su and P.-C. Lee, Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in technology foresight, Scientometrics 85 (2010), no. 1, 65-79.   DOI
24 M. Farooq et al., A review on internet of things (IoT), Int. J. Comput. Applicat. 113 (2015), no. 1, 1-7.
25 J. A. Collins and B. C. Fauser, Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005.
26 M. Oraee et al., Collaboration in bim-based construction networks: A bibliometric-qualitative literature review, Int. J. Project Manag. 35 (2017), no. 7, 1288-1301.   DOI
27 J. Choi and Y.-S. Hwang, Patent keyword network analysis for improving technology development efficiency, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 83 (2014), 170-182.   DOI
28 Z. Hu, S. Fang, and T. Liang, Empirical study of constructing a knowledge organization system of patent documents using topic modeling, Scientometrics 100 (2014), no. 3, 787-799.   DOI
29 G. Kim and J. Bae, A novel approach to forecast promising technology through patent analysis, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 117 (2017), 228-237.   DOI
30 S. Lee et al., Using patent information for designing new product and technology: Keyword based technology roadmapping, R&D Manag. 38 (2008), no. 2, 169-188.   DOI
31 S. Lee, B. Yoon, and Y. Park, An approach to discovering new technology opportunities: Keyword-based patent map approach, Technovation 29 (2009), no. 6, 481-497.   DOI
32 I. Park et al., Exploring promising technology in ICT sector using patent network and promising index based on patent information, ETRI J. 38 (2016), no. 2, 405-415.   DOI
33 K. Song, K. Kim, and S. Lee, Identifying promising technologies using patents: A retrospective feature analysis and a prospective needs analysis on outlier patents, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 128 (2017), 118-132.
34 B.-N. Yan, T.-S. Lee, and T.-P. Lee, Mapping the intellectual structure of the internet of things (Iot) field (2000-2014): A co-word analysis, Scientometrics 105 (2015), no. 2, 1285-1300.   DOI
35 C. F. Mela, J. Roos, and Y. Deng, A keyword history of marketing science, Marketing Sci. 32 (2013), no. 1, 8-18.   DOI
36 B. Fahimnia, J. Sarkis, and H. Davarzani, Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis, Int. J. Production Economics 162 (2015), 101-114.   DOI
37 B. Cheng et al., Research on e-learning in the workplace 2000- 2012: A bibliometric analysis of the literature, Educational Res. Rev. 11 (2014), 56-72.   DOI
38 M. E. Falagas et al., Comparison of scimago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor, FASEB J. 22 (2008), no. 8, 2623-2628.   DOI
39 L. Heilig and S. Voss, A scientometric analysis of cloud computing literature, IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput. 2 (2014), no. 3, 266-278.   DOI
40 D. Mishra et al., Vision, applications and future challenges of internet of things: A bibliometric study of the recent literature, Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 116 (2016), no. 7, 1331-1355.   DOI
41 G. Mulligan, The internet of things: Here now and coming soon, IEEE Internet Comput. 14 (2010), no. 1, 35-36.
42 P. Berkhin, A survey of clustering data mining techniques, Grouping Multidimensional Data, ed., Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2006, pp. 25-71.
43 M. Callon, J. P. Courtial, and F. Laville, Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry, Scientometrics 22 (1991), no. 1, 155-205.   DOI
44 N. J. Van Eck and L. Waltman, Software survey: Vosviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping, Scientometrics 84 (2010), no. 2, 523-538.   DOI
45 B. Yoon, S. Lee, and G. Lee, Development and application of a keyword-based knowledge map for effective R&D planning, Scientometrics 85 (2010), no. 3, 803-820.   DOI
46 H. Peters and A. F. van Raan, Co-word-based science maps of chemical engineering. Part I: Representations by direct multidimensional scaling, Res. Policy 22 (1993), no. 1, 23-45.   DOI
47 Y. Ding, G. G. Chowdhury, and S. Foo, Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis, Inform. Process. Manag. 37 (2001), no. 6, 817-842.   DOI
48 A. Abbasi, L. Hossain, and L. Leydesdorff, Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks, J. Informetrics 6 (2012), no. 3, 403-412.   DOI
49 M. E. Newman, A measure of betweenness centrality based on random walks, Soc. Netw. 27 (2005), no. 1, 39-54.   DOI