Failure prediction in the internet of things due to memory exhaustion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a technique to predict failures resulting from memory exhaustion in devices built for the modern Internet of Things (IoT). These devices can run general-purpose applications on the network edge for local data processing to reduce latency, bandwidth and infrastructure costs, and to address data safety and privacy concerns. Applications are, however, not optimized for all devices and could result in sudden and unexpected memory exhaustion failures because of limited available memory on those IoT devices. Proactive prediction of such failures, with sufficient lead time, allows for adaptation of the application or its safe termination. Our memory failure prediction technique for applications running on IoT devices uses k-Nearest-Neighbor (kNN) based machine learning models. We have evaluated our technique using two third-party applications and a real-world IoT simulation application on two different IoT platforms and on an Amazon EC2 t2.micro instance for both single and multitenancy use cases. Our results indicate that our technique significantly outperforms simpler threshold-based techniques: in our test applications, with 180 seconds of lead time, failures were accurately predicted with 88% recall at 74% precision for a single application failure and 76% recall at 71% precision for multitenancy failure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".