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
Edge computing is the next Internet frontier that will leverage computing resources located near users, sensors, and data stores to provide more responsive services. Therefore, it is envisioned that a large-scale, geographically dispersed, and resource-rich distributed system will emerge and play a key role in the future Internet. However, given the loosely coupled nature of such complex systems, their operational conditions are expected to change significantly over time. In this context, the performance characteristics of such systems will need to be captured rapidly, which is referred to as performance benchmarking, for application deployment, resource orchestration, and adaptive decision-making. Edge performance benchmarking is a nascent research avenue that has started gaining momentum over the past five years. This article first reviews articles published over the past three decades to trace the history of performance benchmarking from tightly coupled to loosely coupled systems. It then systematically classifies previous research to identify the system under test, techniques analyzed, and benchmark runtime in edge performance benchmarking.
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 | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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