MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135453822 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3052082

Resource Provisioning in Edge Computing for Latency-Sensitive Applications

2021· article· en· W3135453822 on OpenAlexafffund
Amine Abouaomar, Soumaya Cherkaoui, Zoubeir Mlika, Abdellatif Kobbane

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTestbedEdge computingCloud computingDistributed computingMobile edge computingProvisioningEdge deviceLatency (audio)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer networkServerOperating systemArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-latency IoT applications, such as autonomous vehicles, augmented/virtual reality devices, and security applications, require high computation resources to make decisions on the fly. However, these kinds of applications cannot tolerate offloading their tasks to be processed on a cloud infrastructure due to the experienced latency. Therefore, edge computing (EC) is introduced to enable low latency by moving the tasks processing closer to the users at the edge of the network. The edge of the network is characterized by the heterogeneity of edge devices (EDs) forming it; thus, it is crucial to devise novel solutions that take into account the different physical resources of each ED. In this article, we propose a resource representation scheme, allowing each ED to expose its resource information to the supervisor of the edge node through the mobile EC application programming interfaces proposed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute. The information about the ED resource is exposed to the supervisor of the edge node each time a resource allocation is required. To this end, we leverage a Lyapunov optimization framework to dynamically allocate resources at the EDs. To test our proposed model, we performed intensive theoretical and experimental simulations on a testbed to validate the proposed scheme and its impact on different system's parameters. The simulations have shown that our proposed approach outperforms other benchmark approaches and provides low latency and optimal resource consumption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations88
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207