MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800139263 · doi:10.1109/tcc.2018.2844379

Price-Based Resource Allocation for Edge Computing: A Market Equilibrium Approach

2018· preprint· en· W2800139263 on OpenAlexafffund
Duong Tung Nguyen, Long Bao Le, Vijay K. Bhargava

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationRevenueProfit (economics)Resource allocationEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionConvex optimizationOperations researchRegular polygonMicroeconomicsEconomicsComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emerging edge computing paradigm promises to deliver superior user experience and enable a wide range of Internet of Things (IoT) applications. In this paper, we propose a new market-based framework for efficiently allocating resources of heterogeneous capacity-limited edge nodes (EN) to multiple competing services at the network edge. By properly pricing the geographically distributed ENs, the proposed framework generates a market equilibrium (ME) solution that not only maximizes the edge computing resource utilization but also allocates optimal resource bundles to the services given their budget constraints. When the utility of a service is defined as the maximum revenue that the service can achieve from its resource allotment, the equilibrium can be computed centrally by solving the Eisenberg-Gale (EG) convex program. We further show that the equilibrium allocation is Pareto-optimal and satisfies desired fairness properties including sharing incentive, proportionality, and envy-freeness. Also, two distributed algorithms, which efficiently converge to an ME, are introduced. When each service aims to maximize its net profit (i.e., revenue minus cost) instead of the revenue, we derive a novel convex optimization problem and rigorously prove that its solution is exactly an ME. Extensive numerical results are presented to validate the effectiveness of the proposed techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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