MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1513171864 · doi:10.1109/wimob.2005.1512919

Energy-aware task allocation over MANETs

2006· article· en· W1513171864 on OpenAlexaff
Waleed Alsalih, Selim G. Akl, Hossam S. Hassanein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpportunistic and Delay-Tolerant Networks
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMobile deviceEnergy consumptionDistributed computingHeuristicMobile computingSet (abstract data type)Energy (signal processing)Mobile ad hoc networkTask (project management)Greedy algorithmWirelessComputer networkAlgorithmOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the emergence of mobile computing, reducing energy consumption of battery-operated computing devices has become a very active research area. The widespread popularity of mobile computing devices, such as laptops, handheld devices and cell phones, motivates this research area. Several hardware based techniques have been proposed; this has led to more energy-efficient systems. Nevertheless, it is presumed in the literature of energy-aware design that software based techniques have the potential to reduce energy demand and contribute to solve the problem. In this paper, we look into the problem of distributing computational tasks amongst a set of mobile computing devices in a mobile wireless ad hoc network (MANET) in such a way that reduces the total consumed energy. In such a distributed environment, the assignment of computational tasks to different devices plays a vital role in energy conservation. The main contributions of this paper are formulating a novel energy-aware allocation problem and proposing a heuristic-based greedy algorithm to solve it approximately. Our allocation algorithm assigns a set of computational tasks, which may communicate with each other, into a set of heterogeneous processors in such a way that minimizes the total consumed energy. Experiments show that our algorithm is near-optimal in most of the tested benchmarks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOpportunistic and Delay-Tolerant NetworksFrench-language works237,207