MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741692976 · doi:10.1109/mvt.2017.2667499

Fog Vehicular Computing: Augmentation of Fog Computing Using Vehicular Cloud Computing

2017· article· en· W2741692976 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehdi Sookhak, F. Richard Yu, Ying He, Hamid Talebian, Nader Sohrabi Safa, Nan Zhao, Muhammad Khurram Khan, Neeraj Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceEdge computingFog computingProvisioningDistributed computingMobile cloud computingMobile edge computingComputer networkContext (archaeology)Mobile computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fog computing has emerged as a promising solution for accommodating the surge of mobile traffic and reducing latency, both known to be inherent problems of cloud computing. Fog services, including computation, storage, and networking, are hosted in the vicinity of end users (edge of the network), and, as a result, reliable access is provisioned to delay-sensitive mobile applications. However, in some cases, the fog computing capacity is overwhelmed by the growing number of demands from patrons, particularly during peak hours, and this can subsequently result in acute performance degradation. In this article, we address this problem by proposing a new concept called fog vehicular computing (FVC) to augment the computation and storage power of fog computing. We also design a comprehensive architecture for FVC and present a number of salient applications. The result of implementation clearly shows the effectiveness of the proposed architecture. Finally, some open issues and envisioned directions are discussed for future research in the context of FVC.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations192
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Vehicular Technology MagazineSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207