MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735848540 · doi:10.1109/icnidc.2016.7974539

A computing offloading algorithm for F-RAN with limited capacity fronthaul

2016· article· en· W2735848540 on OpenAlexaff
Zexian Wu, Ke Wang, Hong Ji, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsC-RANComputer scienceRadio access networkCloud computingQuality of serviceLatency (audio)RanComputer networkUser equipmentThroughputDistributed computingReal-time computingAlgorithmWirelessBase stationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to alleviate heavy burden on the capacity-limited fronthaul of C-RAN, a fog computing based C-RAN(F-RAN) architecture has been proposed in recent years. In F-RAN, RRH receives the signal from mobile devices and decides part of tasks to be processed in fog part for computing offloading. With the purpose of offloading sampling signal in fronthaul and separating tasks from cloud part to be processed in fog part, we formulate the problem as a congestion game. And we propose a discrete distribution computing offloading algorithm (DDCO) for F-RAN to solve this game. The DDCO algorithm decides the latency-sensitive mobile to be computed in the fog part such that the fronthaul can be offloaded and Quality of Service (QoS) can be improved. The DDCO algorithm can also balance load in fronthaul in order to improve performance. With the DDCO algorithm, the network get larger throughput and reduce the burden in fronthaul when it achieve a Nash Equilibrium. Finally, we analyze the feasibility of the algorithm. Numerical result corroborate that the DDCO algorithm can well improve throughput compared with the traditional C-RAN network.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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