MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066416459 · doi:10.1109/infcomw.2014.6849264

Energy Compensated Cloud Assistance in mobile cloud computing

2014· article· en· W2066416459 on OpenAlexaff
Jaya Prakash Champati, Ben Liang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceMobile deviceLyapunov optimizationTask (project management)Mobile cloud computingEnergy (signal processing)Construct (python library)Optimization problemCompensation (psychology)Distributed computingEnergy consumptionComputer networkAlgorithmOperating systemEngineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the scenario where a mobile device requires assistance from nearby devices to forward its computational tasks to a cloud server. We incentivize cooperation by allowing helper devices to conserve computational energy by offloading their own tasks to the source device's cloud, as compensation for the communication energy lost during task forwarding. We formulate an optimization problem with the objective of minimizing the cloud cost incurred by the source device due to tasks offloaded from helper devices, subject to no energy loss at the helper devices. We observe that this problem cannot be solved using a standard Lyapunov optimization approach. Instead, we construct an alternate problem that follows the standard form but has the same optimal objective value as the original problem. The resultant Energy Compensated Cloud Assistance (ECCA) algorithm does not require any statistics of the system and can be implemented distributively.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207