MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952695922 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2019.2923226

Cross-Layer Cloud Offloading With Quality of Service Guarantees in Fog-RANs

2019· article· en· W2952695922 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammed S. Al-Abiad, Md. Jahangir Hossain, Sameh Sorour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingQuality of serviceComputer networkLinear network codingEdge deviceRadio access networkMicroservicesDistributed computingBase stationOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fog radio access networks (F-RANs) have recently been postulated as an innovative solution to improve the fronthaul capacities of cloud base stations (CBSs). This architecture extends the CBS service by involving enhanced remote radio heads (eRRHs), which can pre-store and transmit popular files at the network edge (i.e., close to the end users). This is referred to as caching, and it allows the offloading of CBS resources, e.g., time and frequency. Recent works have been proposed to use rate-aware network coding in order to exploit the previously downloaded popular files at the users’ devices. As such, the CBS offloading is maximized. However, the users’ achieved Quality of Service (QoS), and the standard F-RANs physical-layer resource optimization have not received any attention to date. This paper proposes use of an innovative cross-layer network coding (CLNC) to address the above-mentioned issues. The proposed CLNC scheme is not only aware of different users’ rates but also controls the rates by jointly optimizing coding combinations, users-eRRHs/power zones (PZs) assignments, and transmission power in the PZs. Using a graph theoretical representation, we formulate the joint cross-layer CBS offloading and QoS guarantee problem and show its NP-hardness. Joint and iterative heuristic approaches are then developed to solve this problem using greedy vertex search and coloring techniques. The proposed approaches are finally validated and tested against the existing algorithms in the literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207