MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794838781 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2019.2908403

Joint Communication, Computation, Caching, and Control in Big Data Multi-Access Edge Computing

2019· preprint· en· W2794838781 on OpenAlexaff
Anselme Ndikumana, Nguyen H. Tran, Tai Manh Ho, Zhu Han, Walid Saad, Dusit Niyato, Choong Seon Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingServerEdge computingDistributed computingOverhead (engineering)Upper and lower boundsOptimization problemComputation offloadingMobile edge computingComputationBandwidth (computing)Computer networkEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionAlgorithmOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC) has been recently introduced to supplement cloud computing by deploying MEC servers to the network edge so as to reduce the network delay and alleviate the load on cloud data centers. However, compared to the resourceful cloud, MEC server has limited resources. When each MEC server operates independently, it cannot handle all computational and big data demands stemming from users devices. Consequently, the MEC server cannot provide significant gains in overhead reduction of data exchange between users devices and remote cloud. Therefore, joint Computing, Caching, Communication, and Control (4C) at the edge with MEC server collaboration is needed. To address these challenges, in this paper, the problem of joint 4C in big data MEC is formulated as an optimization problem whose goal is to jointly optimize a linear combination of the bandwidth consumption and network latency. However, the formulated problem is shown to be non-convex. As a result, a proximal upper bound problem of the original formulated problem is proposed. To solve the proximal upper bound problem, the block successive upper bound minimization method is applied. Simulation results show that the proposed approach satisfies computation deadlines and minimizes bandwidth consumption and network latency.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity
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 score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207