MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3140180964 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.03818

A Network-based Compute Reuse Architecture for IoT Applications

2021· preprint· en· W3140180964 on OpenAlexafffund
Boubakr Nour, Soumaya Cherkaoui

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArchitectureComputer scienceReuseInternet of ThingsComputer architectureDistributed computingComputer networkSoftware engineeringEmbedded systemEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tremendous advancements in the Internet of Things (IoT) increasingly involve computationally intensive services. These services often require more computation resources than can entirely be satisfied on local IoT devices. Cloud computing is traditionally used to provide unlimited computation resources at distant servers. However, such remote computation may not address the short-delay constraints that many of today's IoT applications require. Edge computing allows offloading computing close to end users to overcome computation and delay issues. Nonetheless, the edge servers may suffer from computing inefficiencies. Indeed, some IoT applications are invoked multiple times by multiple devices. These invocations are often used with the same or similar input data, which leads to the same computational output (results). Still, the edge server willfully executes all received redundant tasks. In this work, we investigate the use of the computation reuse concept at the edge server. We design a network-based computation reuse architecture for IoT applications. The architecture stores previously executed results and reuses them to satisfy newly arrived similar tasks instead of performing computation from scratch. By doing so, we eliminate redundant computation, optimize resource utilization, and decrease task completion time. We implemented the architecture and evaluated its performance both at the networking and application levels. From the networking perspective, we reach up to an 80\% reduction in task completion time and up to 60\% reduction in resource utilization. From the application perspective, we achieve up to 90\% computation correctness and accuracy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.121 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207