CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Access Control and TrustIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingBlockchain Technology Applications and Security

Agent-Based Trust and Reputation Model in Smart IoT Environments

Open access
Al-Shamaileh, Mohammad, Anthony, Patricia, Charters, Stuart·2024·Technologies
DOI 10.3390/technologies12110208
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The Internet of Things (IoT) enables smart devices to connect, share and exchange data with each other through the internet. Since an IoT environment is open and dynamic, IoT participants may need to collaborate with unknown entities with no proven track record. To ensure successful collaboration among these entities, it is important to establish a mechanism that ensures all entities operate in a trustworthy manner. We present a trust and reputation model that can be used to select the best service provider in an IoT environment. Our proposed model, IoT-CADM (Comprehensive Agent-based Decision-making Model for IoT) is an agent-based decentralised trust and reputation model that can be used to select the best service provider for a particular service based on multi-context quality of service. IoT-CADM is developed using a smart multi-agent IoT environment where information about entities is collected and evaluated using a trust and reputation algorithm. We evaluated the performance of the proposed model against some other well-known models in a simulated smart factory supply chain system. Our experimental results showed that the proposed IoT-CADM achieved the best performance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/technologies12110208

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A compromised device or agent can falsify telemetry or defame honest participants, manipulating collective trust scores to steer decisions.

    “A compromised device or agent can falsify telemetry or defame honest participants, manipulating collective trust scores to steer decisions (Al-Shamaileh et al. (2024)).”

    From Open Challenges in Multi-Agent Security: Towards Secure Systems of Interacting AI Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Al-Shamaileh et al. (2024)

    Section 4.1 (Experimental Setup) says dishonest agents can use bad-mouthing attacks to damage honest agents’ trust levels and reputations, reducing their chances of being selected for service. Section 3.1 links trust scores to decisions about which agents to collaborate with. Our copy does not establish the separate claim that compromised devices or agents falsify telemetry. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 52 · Cited by 7

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Maddar, H.; Kammoun, W.; Youssef, H. Effective distributed trust management model for Internet of Things. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 126, 321-334. [CrossRef] · DOI
  2. Abdul-Rahman, A.; Hailes, S. Supporting trust in virtual communities. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, 4-7 January 2000.
  3. Caminha, J.; Perkusich, A.; Perkusich, M. A Smart Trust Management Method to Detect On-Off Attacks in the Internet of Things. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2018, 2018, 6063456. [CrossRef] · DOI
  4. Guo, J.; Chen, I.-R.; Tsai, J.J.P. A survey of trust computation models for service management in internet of things systems. Comput. Commun. 2017, 97, 1-14. [CrossRef] · DOI
  5. Alshehri, M.D.; Hussain, F.K.; Hussain, O.K. Clustering-Driven Intelligent Trust Management Methodology for the Internet of Things (CITM-IoT). Mob. Netw. Appl. 2018, 23, 419-431. [CrossRef] · DOI
  6. Sun, G.; Li, J.; Dai, J.; Song, Z.; Lang, F. Feature selection for IoT based on maximal information coefficient. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 89, 606-616. [CrossRef] · DOI
  7. Yu, Y.; Jia, Z.; Tao, W.; Xue, B.; Lee, C. An Efficient Trust Evaluation Scheme for Node Behavior Detection in the Internet of Things. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2017, 93, 571-587. [CrossRef] · DOI
  8. Kowshalya, A.M.; Valarmathi, M.L. Trust Management in the Social Internet of Things. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2017, 96, 2681-2691. [CrossRef] · DOI
  9. Ben Saied, Y.; Olivereau, A.; Zeghlache, D.; Laurent, M. Trust management system design for the Internet of Things: A context- aware and multi-service approach. Comput. Secur. 2013, 39, 351-365. [CrossRef] · DOI
  10. Copigneaux, B. Semi-autonomous, context-aware, agent using behaviour modelling and reputation systems to authorize data operation in the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Seoul, Republic of Korea, 6-8 March 2014; pp. 411-416.
  11. Sabater, J. EVALUATING THE ReGreT SYSTEM. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2004, 18, 797-813. [CrossRef] · DOI
  12. Majd, E.; Balakrishnan, V. A reputation-oriented trust model for multi-agent environments. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 1380-1396. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. Hwang, C.-L.; Yoon, K. (Eds.) Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making. In Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications A State-of-the-Art Survey; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1981; pp. 58-191.
  14. Jøsang, A.; Ismail, R.; Boyd, C. A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service provision. Decis. Support Syst. 2007, 43, 618-644. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  15. Ahmed, A.I.A.; Ab Hamid, S.H.; Gani, A.; Khan, S.; Khan, M.K. Trust and reputation for Internet of Things: Fundamentals, taxonomy, and open research challenges. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2019, 145, 102409. [CrossRef] · DOI
  16. Wu, F.; Li, H.-H.; Kuo, Y.-H. Reputation evaluation for choosing a trustworthy counterparty in C2C e-commerce. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2011, 10, 428-436. [CrossRef] · DOI
  17. Khosravifar, B.; Bentahar, J.; Gomrokchi, M.; Alam, R. CRM: An efficient trust and reputation model for agent computing. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2012, 30, 1-16. [CrossRef] · DOI
  18. Ruan, Y.; Durresi, A.; Uslu, S. Trust Assessment for Internet of Things in Multi-access Edge Computing. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 32nd International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA), Krakow, Poland, 16-18 May 2018.
  19. Guo, J.; Wang, H.; Liu, W.; Huang, G.; Gui, J.; Zhang, S. A lightweight verifiable trust based data collection approach for sensor-cloud systems. J. Syst. Arch. 2021, 119, 102219. [CrossRef] · DOI
  20. Zhou, Z.; Wang, M.; Yang, C.-N.; Fu, Z.; Sun, X.; Wu, Q.J. Blockchain-based decentralized reputation system in E-commerce environment. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2021, 124, 155-167. [CrossRef] · DOI
  21. Alhandi, S.A.; Kamaludin, H.; Alduais, N.A.M. Trust Evaluation Model in IoT Environment: A Comprehensive Survey. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 11165-11182. [CrossRef] · DOI
  22. Ardagna, C.A.; Damiani, E.; De Capitani di Vimercati, S.; Samarati, P. Trust Management. In Security, Privacy, and Trust in Modern Data Management; Petković, M., Jonker, W., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 103-117.
  23. Shayesteh, B.; Hakami, V.; Akbari, A. A trust management scheme for IoT-enabled environmental health/accessibility monitoring services. Int. J. Inf. Secur. 2020, 19, 93-110. [CrossRef] · DOI
  24. Lenard, T.; Collen, A.; Benyahya, M.; Nijdam, N.A.; Genge, B. Exploring Trust Modeling and Management Techniques in the Context of Distributed Wireless Networks: A Literature Review. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 106803-106832. [CrossRef] · DOI
  25. Fortino, G.; Fotia, L.; Messina, F.; Rosaci, D.; Sarne, G.M.L. Trust and Reputation in the Internet of Things: State-of-the-Art and Research Challenges. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 60117-60125. [CrossRef] · DOI
  26. Yan, Z.; Zhang, P.; Vasilakos, A.V. A survey on trust management for Internet of Things. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2014, 42, 120-134. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  27. Chen, J.; Tian, Z.; Cui, X.; Yin, L.; Wang, X. Trust architecture and reputation evaluation for internet of things. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2018, 10, 3099-3107. [CrossRef] · DOI
  28. Baharloo, N.; Bentahar, J.; Alwhishi, G.; Drawel, N.; Pedrycz, W. Verifying trust over IoT-ad hoc network-based applications under uncertainty. Ad. Hoc. Netw. 2024, 154, 103380. [CrossRef] · DOI
  29. Chen, G.; Zeng, F.; Zhang, J.; Lu, T.; Shen, J.; Shu, W. An adaptive trust model based on recommendation filtering algorithm for the Internet of Things systems. Comput. Netw. 2021, 190, 107952. [CrossRef] · DOI
  30. Saidi, A. Trust evaluation method for Wireless Sensor Networks based on behavioral similarity and similarity coefficient. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Networking and Advanced Systems (ICNAS), Annaba, Algeria, 27-28 October 2021; pp. 1-6.
  31. Narang, N.; Kar, S. A hybrid trust management framework for a multi-service social IoT network. Comput. Commun. 2021, 171, 61-79. [CrossRef] · DOI
  32. Latif, R. ConTrust: A Novel Context-Dependent Trust Management Model in Social Internet of Things. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 46526-46537. [CrossRef] · DOI
  33. Zhang, S.; Cao, D.; Ning, Z. A decentralized and reliable trust measurement for edge computing enabled Internet of Things. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2022, 34, e7238. [CrossRef] · DOI
  34. Wang, T.; Luo, H.; Jia, W.; Liu, A.; Xie, M. MTES: An Intelligent Trust Evaluation Scheme in Sensor-Cloud-Enabled Industrial Internet of Things. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 16, 2054-2062. [CrossRef] · DOI
  35. Tong, Z.; Ye, F.; Mei, J.; Liu, B.; Li, K. A novel task offloading algorithm based on an integrated trust mechanism in mobile edge computing. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 2022, 169, 185-198. [CrossRef] · DOI
  36. Altaf, A.; Abbas, H.; Iqbal, F.; Khan, F.A.; Rubab, S.; Derhab, A. Context-oriented trust computation model for industrial Internet of Things. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2021, 92, 107123. [CrossRef] · DOI
  37. Din, I.U.; Awan, K.A.; Almogren, A.; Kim, B.-S. ShareTrust: Centralized trust management mechanism for trustworthy resource sharing in industrial Internet of Things. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2022, 100, 108013. [CrossRef] · DOI
  38. Ouyang, Y.; Zeng, Z.; Li, X.; Wang, T.; Liu, X. A verifiable trust evaluation mechanism for ultra-reliable applications in 5G and beyond networks. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 2021, 77, 103519. [CrossRef] · DOI
  39. Bhor, H.N.; Kalla, M. TRUST-based features for detecting the intruders in the Internet of Things network using deep learning. Comput. Intell. 2021, 38, 438-462. [CrossRef] · DOI
  40. Awan, K.A.; Din, I.U.; Almogren, A.; Rodrigues, J.J. AutoTrust: A privacy-enhanced trust-based intrusion detection approach for internet of smart things. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2022, 137, 288-301. [CrossRef] · DOI
  41. Magdich, R.; Jemal, H.; Ben Ayed, M. A resilient Trust Management framework towards trust related attacks in the Social Internet of Things. Comput. Commun. 2022, 191, 92-107. [CrossRef] · DOI
  42. Jabeen, F.; Khan, Z.; Hamid, Z.; Rehman, Z.; Khan, A. Adaptive and survivable trust management for Internet of Things systems. IET Inf. Secur. 2021, 15, 375-394. [CrossRef] · DOI
  43. Shehada, D.; Gawanmeh, A.; Yeun, C.Y.; Zemerly, M.J. Fog-based distributed trust and reputation management system for internet of things. J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inf. Sci. 2021, 34, 8637-8646. [CrossRef] · DOI
  44. Ren, J.; Qin, T. A novel multidimensional trust evaluation and fusion mechanism in fog-based Internet of Things. Comput. Networks 2022, 217, 109354. [CrossRef] · DOI
  45. Pinyol, I.; Sabater-Mir, J. Computational trust and reputation models for open multi-agent systems: A review. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2011, 40, 1-25. [CrossRef] · DOI
  46. Zeynalvand, L.; Luo, T.; Zhang, J. COBRA: Context-Aware Bernoulli Neural Networks for Reputation Assessment. arXiv 2019, arXiv:1912.08446. [CrossRef] · DOI
  47. Xu, X.; Bessis, N.; Cao, J. An Autonomic Agent Trust Model for IoT systems. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2013, 21, 107-113. [CrossRef] · DOI
  48. Azad, M.A.; Bag, S.; Hao, F.; Salah, K. M2M-REP: Reputation system for machines in the internet of things. Comput. Secur. 2018, 79, 1-16. [CrossRef] · DOI
  49. Ponnambalam, S.G.; Janardhanan, M.N.; Rishwaraj, G. Trust-based decision-making framework for multiagent system. Soft Comput. 2021, 25, 7559-7575. [CrossRef] · DOI
  50. Fortino, G.; Messina, F.; Rosaci, D.; Sarne, G.M.L.; Savaglio, C. A Trust-Based Team Formation Framework for Mobile Intelligence in Smart Factories. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2020, 16, 6133-6142. [CrossRef] · DOI
  51. Abdi, H.; Williams, L.J. Principal component analysis. WIREs Comput. Stat. 2010, 2, 433-459.
  52. CrossRef · DOI · Paper page

Authors
Al-Shamaileh, M., Anthony, P., & Charters, S.
Affiliations
Lincoln University (NZ)
Corresponding author
Anthony, Patricia
ORCID
Venue
Technologies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-10-22
Volume
12
Issue
11
Pages
208
ISSN
2227-7080 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/technologies12110208
OpenAlex
W4403648417
Cited by
7
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lincoln University Research Archive (Lincoln University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Lincoln University Open Access Fund
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
Keywords
Internet of Things, multi-agent systems, service provider selection, quality of service

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review