Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fog computing is a paradigm of geographically distributed computing residing at the edge of the network. Fog computing is made up of fog nodes providing compute, storage and networking services to end users. In this thesis, we propose an exact model for the planning and design problem of fog networks. The model simultaneously determines the optimal location, the capacity and the number of fog node(s) as well as the interconnection between the installed fog nodes and the cloud, while minimizing the delay in the network and the amount of traffic going to the cloud. To address this multiobjective problem, three multiobjective optimization methods (weighted sum, hierarchical and trade-off) are evaluated. The CPLEX solver was used to optimize the model for the three methods with different problem sizes and the results are analyzed. The results show that, as the input size increases, the delay and the traffic also increase in a linear form; whereas the solution time increases in non-polynomial time. The weighted sum method was able to achieve the best trade-off results for the delay and the traffic, whereas the hierarchical method was able to return minimum delay but with worse traffic going to the cloud. As the model considers realistic edge device traffic parameters and constraints, it can be helpful in deploying fog networks in the current cloud computing architecture. v
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".