A Framework for Cooperative Resource Management in Mobile Cloud Computing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile cloud computing is an emerging technology to improve the quality of mobile services. In this paper, we consider the resource (i.e., radio and computing resources) sharing problem to support mobile applications in a mobile cloud computing environment. In such an environment, mobile cloud service providers can cooperate (i.e., form a coalition) to create a resource pool to share their own resources with each other. As a result, the resources can be better utilized and the revenue of the mobile cloud service providers can be increased. To maximize the benefit of the mobile cloud service providers, we propose a framework for resource allocation to the mobile applications, and revenue management and cooperation formation among service providers. For resource allocation to the mobile applications, we formulate and solve optimization models to obtain the optimal number of application instances that can be supported to maximize the revenue of the service providers while meeting the resource requirements of the mobile applications. For sharing the revenue generated from the resource pool (i.e., revenue management) among the cooperative mobile cloud service providers in a coalition, we apply the concepts of core and Shapley value from cooperative game theory as a solution. Based on the revenue shares, the mobile cloud service providers can decide whether to cooperate and share the resources in the resource pool or not. Also, the provider can optimize the decision on the amount of resources to contribute to the resource pool.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it