Unifying Futures and Spot Market: Overbooking-Enabled Resource Trading in Mobile Edge Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Securing necessary resources for edge computing processes via effective resource trading becomes a critical technique in supporting computation-intensive mobile applications. Conventional onsite spot trading could facilitate this paradigm with proper incentives, which, however, incurs excessive decision-making latency/energy consumption, and further leads to underutilization of dynamic resources. Motivated by this, a hybrid market unifying futures and spot is proposed to facilitate resource trading among an edge server (seller) and multiple smart devices (buyers) by encouraging some buyers to sign a forward contract with seller in advance, while leaving the remaining buyers to compete for available resources with spot trading. Specifically, overbooking is adopted to achieve substantial utilization and profit advantages owing to dynamic resource demands. By integrating overbooking into futures market, mutually beneficial and risk-tolerable forward contracts with appropriate overbooking rate can be achieved relying on analyzing historical statistics associated with future resource demand and communication quality, which are determined by an alternative optimization-based negotiation scheme. Besides, spot trading problem is studied via considering uniform/differential pricing rules, for which two bilateral negotiation schemes are proposed by addressing both non-convex optimization and knapsack problems. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed mechanism achieves mutually beneficial player’s utilities, while outperforming baseline methods on critical indicators, e.g., decision-making latency, resource usage, etc.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".