MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777060404 · doi:10.1109/spawc.2017.8227713

Multiple access computational offloading with computation constraints

2017· article· en· W2777060404 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Salmani, Timothy N. Davidson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational resourceComputational complexity theoryMobile cloud computingCloud computingDistributed computingLatency (audio)Mobile deviceResource allocationWirelessComputationEfficient energy useMobile computingComputer networkAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shared computational resources provided by the mobile cloud computing paradigm offer the opportunity for mobile devices to reduce the energy expended, or the latency incurred, in performing significant computational tasks. To maximize their impact, cloud computing systems must jointly optimize the allocation of the computational and radio resources. We consider a scenario in which two mobile users access a finite computational resource through a single wireless access point. The resources to be allocated are the fractions of the computational resource allocated to each user, and the users' transmission powers and data rates. The key constraints are the size of the computational resource and the region of rates that can be achieved by the chosen multiple access scheme. In this paper a quasi-closed-form solution is obtained to a problem in which the computational fractions, powers and rates are optimized so as to minimize the energy required to offload tasks with specified latency constraints. In doing so, it is shown that by exploiting the fundamental capabilities of the multiple access channel, rather than just the rates of a particular multiple access scheme, the energy required to offload the tasks can be substantially reduced.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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