MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1672417386 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2014.2333665

Energy-Efficient Scheduling in Green Vehicular Infrastructure With Multiple Roadside Units

2014· article· en· W1672417386 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Khezrian, T.D. Todd, George Karakostas, Morteza Azimifar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline algorithmScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceUpper and lower boundsApproximation algorithmGreedy algorithmMathematical optimizationScheduleTelecommunications linkLinear programmingInteger programmingProvisioningAlgorithmMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose low-complexity algorithms for downlink traffic scheduling in green vehicular roadside infrastructure. In multiple roadside unit (RSU) deployments, the energy provisioning of the RSUs may differ, and it is therefore desirable to balance RSU usage from a normalized min-max energy viewpoint. This paper considers both splittable RSU assignment (SRA) and unsplittable RSU asssignment (URA) scheduling. An offline integer linear programming bound is first derived for normalized min-max RSU energy usage. We then show that in the SRA case, there is a polynomial complexity 2-approximation bound for the normalized min-max energy schedule. This paper then proposes several online scheduling algorithms. The first is a greedy online algorithm that makes simple RSU selections, followed by minimum-energy time slot assignments. A normalized min-max algorithm is then proposed [2-approximation online algorithm (TOAA)], which is an online version of the 2-approximation bound. Two algorithms are then introduced based on a potential function scheduling approach. The 1-objective algorithm uses an objective based on normalized min-max energy, and we show that it has an upper bounded worst-case competitive ratio performance. The 2-objective algorithm uses the same approach but incorporates a total-energy secondary objective as well. Results from a variety of experiments show that the proposed scheduling algorithms perform well. In particular, we find that in the SRA case, the TOAA algorithm performs very close to the lower bound but at the expense of having to reassign time slots whenever a new vehicle arrives. In the URA case, our low-complexity 1-objective algorithm performs better than the others over a wide range of traffic conditions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.172 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207