Improving the Schedulability of Real-Time Tasks Using Fog Computing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the significant communication delay to user tasks, the cloud is not ideal for executing real-time tasks with stringent deadlines. Fog computing consists of low computation capability fog nodes, or cloudlets located in proximity to the source of the data generation: the users. These cloudlets are ideal for executing tasks that have early deadlines. In this paper, we propose algorithms that schedule a set of real-time tasks on such an embedded-fog-cloud architecture. We consider hard, firm and soft tasks. The execution framework consists of embedded, fog and cloud processors. Tasks are scheduled on appropriate processors based on their deadline requirements. In general, hard real-time tasks are executed on embedded processors, firm real-time tasks on fog processors, and soft real-time tasks on cloud processors. We also propose a sufficient schedulability condition. Simulation results from the CERIT trace as well as test-bed results show that the proposed algorithms offer superior performance as compared to algorithms that do not employ fog processors. Employing an <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$Embedded-fog-cloud$</tex-math></inline-formula> architecture offers an improvement of 62.37 percent for real-time Success Ratio (SR) and 35 percent for Average Response Time as compared to scheduling tasks on the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$cloud$</tex-math></inline-formula> alone.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it