MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166532433 · doi:10.1109/rtcsa.2009.25

Integrating Preemption Threshold to Fixed Priority DVS Scheduling Algorithms

2009· article· en· W2166532433 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreemptionComputer scienceDynamic voltage scalingEnergy consumptionScheduling (production processes)AlgorithmEmbedded systemReal-time computingParallel computingOperating systemMathematical optimizationMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic voltage scaling (DVS) is an effective technique to reduce the energy consumption of CMOS powered embedded systems through software control. However, applying fixed priority DVS algorithms introduces increased number of preemptions, which, in turn results in extra time delay and energy cost. Effectively reducing the number of preemptions is therefore required. In this paper, we propose to integrate preemption threshold to fixed priority DVS scheduling algorithms to reduce such negative impact. Two preemption-aware algorithms ccFPPT and FPPT-WDA are studied. Performance evaluations in terms of both energy consumption and the number of preemptions are conducted among different fixed priority DVS algorithms, with or without preemption threshold. The experimental results show that our algorithms with preemption threshold can save up to 60\% number of preemptions and 20\% energy consumption over existing DVS algorithms.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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