Resource allocation mechanism for media handling services in cloud multimedia conferencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multimedia conferencing is the conversational exchange of multimedia content between multiple parties. It has a wide range of applications (e.g., Massively Multiplayer Online Games (MMOGs) and distance learning). Media handling services (e.g., video mixing, transcoding, and compressing) are critical to multimedia conferencing. However, efficient resource usage and scalability still remain important challenges. Unfortunately, the cloud-based approaches proposed so far have several deficiencies in terms of efficiency in resource usage and scaling, while meeting Quality of Service (QoS) requirements. This paper proposes a solution which optimizes resource allocation and scales in terms of the number of participants while guaranteeing QoS. Moreover, our solution composes different media handling services to support the participants' demands. We formulate the resource allocation problem mathematically as an Integer Linear Programming (ILP) problem and design a heuristic for it. We evaluate our proposed solution for different numbers of participants and different participants' geographical distributions. Simulation results show that our resource allocation mechanism can compose the media handling services and allocate the required resources in an optimal manner while honoring the QoS in terms of end-to-end delay.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".