A Greedy Scheduling Approach for Peripheral Mobile Intelligent Systems
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
Smart, pervasive devices have recently experienced accelerated technological development in the fields of hardware, software, and wireless connections. The promotion of various kinds of collaborative mobile computing requires an upgrade in network connectivity with wireless technologies, as well as enhanced peer-to-peer communication. Mobile computing also requires appropriate scheduling methods to speed up the implementation and processing of various computing applications by better managing network resources. Scheduling techniques are relevant to the modern architectural models that support the IoT paradigm, particularly smart collaborative mobile computing architectures at the network periphery. In this regard, load-balancing techniques have also become necessary to exploit all the available capabilities and thus the speed of implementation. However, since the problem of scheduling and load-balancing, which we addressed in this study, is known to be NP-hard, the heuristic approach is well justified. We thus designed and validated a greedy scheduling and load-balancing algorithm to improve the utilization of resources. We conducted a comparison study with the longest cloudlet fact processing (LCFP), shortest cloudlet fact processing (SCFP), and Min-Min heuristic algorithms. The choice of those three algorithms is based on the efficiency and simplicity of their mechanisms, as reported in the literature, for allocating tasks to devices. The simulation we conducted showed the superiority of our approach over those algorithms with respect to the overall completion time criterion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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