MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FScaler: Automatic Resource Scaling of Containers in Fog Clusters Using Reinforcement Learning

2020· article· en· W3045904844 on OpenAlexaff
Hani Sami, Azzam Mourad, Hadi Otrok, Jamal Bentahar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFogReinforcement learningCloud computingDistributed computingLeverage (statistics)Fog computingWorkloadComputationContainer (type theory)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies leverage fog computing as a solution to overcome cloud delays, including computation, network, and data storage. Along with the increase in demands for computing resources in fog infrastructures, heterogeneous fog devices are used towards forming highly available clusters. Existing approaches support the use of heterogeneous fogs and enable dynamic updates and management of services through containerization and orchestration technologies. However, none of the existing works proposed a proactive solution to horizontally scale these resources based on the IoT workload fluctuations, in addition to deciding on proper placement of the scaled instances on fogs with minimal cost on the fly. An effective scaling results in improving the response time and avoid service instability on fog devices. Therefore, we propose in this work FScaler, a reinforcement learning agent that horizontally scales container's instances after studying user's demands, and schedules the placement of newly created instances based on defined cost functions after studying the change in resources availability. The environment of FScaler is modeled as an MDP to be solved by any RL algorithm. For this work, we study the efficiency of our MDP formulation by solving the problem using SARSA. Promising results are shown through testing using a real-life dataset presenting the variation of user's demands of a particular service and the change in resource availability over time.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207