LeaD: Large-Scale Edge Cache Deployment Based on Spatio-Temporal WiFi Traffic Statistics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Widespread and large-scale WiFi systems have been deployed in many corporate locations, while the backhual capacity becomes the bottleneck in providing high-rate data services to a tremendous number of WiFi users. Mobile edge caching is a promising solution to relieve backhaul pressure and deliver quality services by proactively pushing contents to access points (APs). However, how to deploy cache in large-scale WiFi system is not well studied yet quite challenging since numerous APs can have heterogeneous traffic characteristics, and future traffic conditions are unknown ahead. In this paper, given the cache storage budget, we explore the cache deployment in a large-scale WiFi system, which contains 8,000 APs and serves more than 40,000 active users, to maximize the long-term caching gain. Specifically, we first collect two-month user association records and conduct intensive spatio-temporal analytics on WiFi traffic consumption, gaining two major observations. First, per AP traffic consumption varies in a rather wide range and the proportion of AP distributes evenly within the range, indicating that the cache size should be heterogeneously allocated in accordance to the underlying traffic demands. Second, compared to a single AP, the traffic consumption of a group of APs (clustered by physical locations) is more stable, which means that the short-term traffic statistics can be used to infer the future long-term traffic conditions. We then propose our cache deployment strategy, named LeaD (i.e., Large-scale WiFi Edge cAche Deployment), in which we first cluster large-scale APs into well-sized edge nodes, then conduct the stationary testing on edge level traffic consumption and sample sufficient traffic statistics in order to precisely characterize long-term traffic conditions, and finally devise the TEG (Traffic-wEighted Greedy) algorithm to solve the long-term caching gain maximization problem. Extensive trace-driven experiments are carried out, and the results demonstrate that LeaD is able to achieve the near-optimal caching performance and can outperform other benchmark strategies significantly.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".